Death Proof (2007)

(Image from IMP Awards)


Death Proof (2007)

'Death Proof' is Quentin Tarantino's half of the 'Grindhouse' double bill, with the other half being Robert Rodriguez's Planet Terror. Tonally it comes across as more 'serious' than 'Planet Terror', and features a lot of the witty, verbose dialogue and character exchanges that Tarantino is famous for. The story is about a stunt man, Stuntman Mike (Kurt Russel), a serial killer who uses his specially rigged 'death proof' stunt car to kill women. Significant portions of the film are devoted to introducing Stuntman Mike's victims - in fact I'd say the majority of the film focuses on the women - who are played by a selection of luscious ladies including Rosario Dawson, Rose McGowan, Sydney Poitier, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, and stuntwoman Zoe Bell as herself. Quentin Tarantino also has a bit part as a bartender.

The character exchanges are fun but seem to go on for a bit (this is the standalone international version, which is about 25 minutes longer than the original 'double bill' cut). I didn't much care for the semi serious tone of what is essentially meant to be a B-movie - the quality of the film is just too high for it to be a real grindhouse flick, and most of the actors are, ironically, too good in their roles. Kurt Russell is the exception, it must be said, because he seems to relish going over the top as the sadistic stuntman. Zoe Bell is also a laugh and terrific in the action scenes where she is obviously doing her own (dangerous) stunts.

Overall, it's not as fun as Planet Terror but still quite different and worth a watch, especially for fans of Tarantino's work. I'm not that big a fan of the guy to be honest, and this isn't one of his best efforts, but it's still fairly enjoyable stuff.

The Proposition (2005)

(Image from IMP Awards)


The Proposition (2005)

Apart from the fact that it was a western set in Australia, I knew very little about this film, and was thus pleasantly surprised by it - it's not often I go into a film cold these days. The story, set in late 18th century Australia, starts off with criminal Charlie Burns (Guy Pearce) and brother Mike (Richard Wilson) being captured by Captain Stanley (Ray Winston). Stanley offers Charlie a proposition - find and kill the leader of the 'Burns gang', eldest brother Arthur (Danny Huston), or youngster Mike dies within 9 days. The Burns gang has committed heinous crimes and are despised by the townspeople, and Arthur is now a recluse who hides away in the mountains. Charlie sets off to find Arthur, and Captain Stanley takes Mike back into town as a prisoner but faces hostility from the townsfolk, who are impatient and want swift retribution. Stanley's wife Martha (Emily Watson) - who like her husband is from England and foreign to the harsh outback - begins to get involved in proceedings despite his attempts to keep her sheltered and safe because her friend was murdered by the Burns gang.

The opening scene lulls you into thinking that the film might be predictable, but the story veers into unexpected territory early on. Expectations are subverted, and I'd go so far as to say that Ray Winston's Stanley is the real star of the film, and not Pierce. The story becomes more about his efforts to protect his wife from the ugliness of his job while dealing with the hostility of his own men and the town, who become restless with the waiting and angered by rumours that Stanley has cut a deal and intends to let the prisoner go. Meanwhile, in the secondary narrative thread Charlie heads off into the mountains in search of his brother, ostensibly to kill him, but there is some ambiguity about his intentions, possibly even ambivalence. Characters in this film aren't straightforward and predictable, with most being multi faceted and interesting, and in the case of Arthur, downright frightening.

There are aspects relating to racial tensions between the whites and aboriginals in the story, but this is secondary to the primary themes of family, loyalty, and (sometimes perverse) justice. The film is stark and uncompromising in its depiction of cruelty and brutality, as bleak as the harsh outback where much of the action takes place. Pearce is fine in his role, but it's Ray Winstone who shines as a character whose depiction transitions from loathsome to dignified and decent; Emily Watson is also excellent as the out of place wife becoming acclimatized to the harsh new world she finds herself in. There are plenty of other very good performances in the mix, including John Hurt as a bounty hunter, and Danny Huston's portrayal of Arthur. There's not much action in the film, but there is some cringe inducing violence that might put off the squeamish.

'The Proposition' is an excellent film, one that, despite having a lot going on, develops its storylines to culminate in a fitting, if slightly predictable, climax. It's a fine blend of character drama and tension, a film that creates an oppressively atmospheric setting. Director John Hillcoat's next film is an adaptation of Cormac McCarthy's 'The Road', which I hear is also very bleak and stark; based on this evidence, he seems the right man for the job (though, to be fair early word on that film has been mixed).

Veronica Mars - Season 3 (2006-2007)

(Image from Wikipedia)


Veronica Mars - Season 3 (2006-2007)

I've given a fair account of the first and second seasons of this detective drama series, and since much of what was said in those reviews still applies, this review is going to be quick.

Time moves on, and Veronica Mars (Kristen Bell) and her pals are all out of school and (a tad conveniently) still together in Neptune, attending the nearby Hearst College. This season sees a departure from the earlier structure of having one ongoing mystery throughout and instead features mini mysteries that each last about a quarter of the season. I found this to be an improvement over the sometimes contrived season long mystery that often felt artificially dragged out and often lost focus. The heart of the show remains the relationship between Veronica and her father Keith (Enrico Colantoni), and the scenes between them are as terrific as ever. Her on again off again relationship with bad boy Logan (Jason Dohring) is interesting at times but becomes repetitive and forgettable after a while.

The mysteries themselves are fairly well done, but it's the characters and dialogue that make this show, and this season sees a slight dip in form. The acerbic banter isn't as prevalent, and while our heroes go through tough times the show feels a bit more light hearted. Some of the cynicism and edginess is missing. The supporting cast is also expanded and as a result characters wind up a little thin, and keep dipping in and out of the show sporadically.

Still, these aren't drastic changes, and overall the final season of 'Vernoica Mars' is still very good. Stylish, well acted, and well written... it's a shame it got cancelled, but on the plus side I suppose it didn't end up growing long in the tooth either - though, in this show's case it could have grown with the character, as a brief concept clip for future seasons showing Veronica as a rookie at the FBI demonstrated (sadly the clip doesn't seem to have the charm of the show). Who knows, perhaps someday 'Vernoica Mars' can return, reborn as a drama set in the adult world?

3:10 to Yuma (2007)

(Image from IMP Awards)


3:10 to Yuma (2007)

Russel Crowe plays charismatic criminal legend Ben Wade and Christian Bale the poor, grim rancher Dan Evans who helps escort the captured Wade to the 3:10 train to Yuma in this western action film. As the story begins, we find Evans desperate to keep his farm from being taken away - this desperation leads to him volunteering, for a tidy sum of money, to join a small group on what seems to be a fools errand trying to escort Wade; it's a fools errand because they are being chased by Wade's terrifying gang of cutthroats who are hellbent on rescuing their boss. Evans' group are slowly picked apart on the journey by various threats, including Wade himself, who regards the whole escapade with wry amusement. Evans leaves his family behind at his ranch, but his elder son William - who is somewhat ashamed of his father and idolizes Wade - sneaks out after the group and winds up joining them mid mission. Consequently there's some family bonding and friendships are forged amidst the shoot outs and horse chases.

'3:10 to Yuma' is a pretty good film but seems to just miss the mark of being really good or even great in virtually all departments. Many of its major story beats are predictable and don't really generate much suspense, and the script doesn't fully succeed in selling the grudging camaraderie between Wade and Evans. There's also something a bit unbelievable about the whole thing - Wade seems capable of walking all over these guys at any moment and is ridiculously cocky, but the escort group don't take even the most basic precautions to protect themselves; as a result it's a little hard to sympathize with them when they start being killed. The whole father son thing had the potential to resonate but never really gets there.

The same missing of the mark is true of the scattered action scenes, which are fun but are also over the top and unconvincing, especially the final shootout which makes little sense and never makes you feel like anything's at stake. The performances of the two stars are solid - the naturally charismatic Crowe just cruises along while Bale is as reliable as ever in creating a somber and grim hero possessing quiet dignity - but the real highlight is the supporting role played by Ben Foster as Wade's cold, ruthless, unwaveringly loyal and effortlessly cool second in command Charlie Prince. Logan Lerman does a decent job as Evans' son William. Virtually everyone else is given little to do and is thus forgettable.

Despite all of my complaints, the whole thing comes together very well and is a fine piece of entertainment that's well above average. The story is compelling, the characters are interesting, the action scenes are, overall, fairly exciting, and the performances are good all things considered. It's just that the whole time I was watching it I was thinking that it really could have been better. Still, well worth a watch, and I loved the ending, which has some badass moments.

Shoot 'Em Up (2007)

(Image from IMP Awards)


Shoot 'Em Up (2007)

I'm a fan of Clive Owen, an actor who I think has an interesting and varied filmography; he tends to bring a cocky presence to all of his films (except, perhaps, Children of Men), and in 'Shoot 'Em Up' he really gets to crank that persona up to 11! Owen plays 'Smith', a man who at the start of the film reluctantly gets caught up in a shoot out, one in which he gets to deliver a baby amidst a hail of bullets! These opening scenes prepare you for what to expect from the film, which just continuously escalates its madness level. Entrusted with taking care of the baby, Smith turns to a lactating prostitute (yes, really) named DQ (Monica Bellucci) for help while running from the villainous decent family man Hertz (Paul Giamatti), who represents a group with a vested interest in killing the baby. Hertz always arrives on the scene with a seemingly endless army of thugs who obligingly provide target practice for the uber badass and completely unstoppable Smith.

Seriously, the action in here is so over the top that words cannot do it justice - if the baby delivery shootout sounds over the top, wait till you see the shootout / sex scene combo! This really is a live action cartoon, a fact alluded to by the completely overt references to Smith being Bugs Bunny (he eats carrots all the time, and in one scene says 'What's up doc?'). In between quarreling with DQ and dodging the scheming Hertz, Smith triest to find out why the baby is important enough for someone to expend so much effort to kill him. The revelation, when it finally arrives, is as fittingly goofy as everything else in the film!

Owen is great in the role, naturally. He's angry, violent, and completely badass. Monica Bellucci is sleazier than I've ever seen her, but still hot, and does a decent job in a fairly crude role. Paul Giamatti is every bit Owen's equal, the intellectual Elmer Fudd to Owen's arrogant Bugs (tell me you don't see it, go on!), and his calm scheming is every bit as enjoyable as watching him lose his cool every time Smith slips through his fingers.

The film is generally on overdrive all the way through, and is very much in the vein of Crank in that it is unabashedly crude, violent, and made purely for thrills. If you're not hooked within the first 10 minutes, then I can safely say it's not for you. The trailer, if I recall correctly, was a fair representation of the final film. There's nothing brilliant about 'Shoot 'Em Up' but it's quite good at doing what it says on the tin, and worth seeing if you're into this burgeoning sub-genre of insane action! I for one dug it, it's one of those films where I found myself grinning the whole way through!

The Dark Knight (2008)

(Image from IMP Awards)


The Dark Knight (2008)

After smashing virtually every significant box office record known to man or bat, 'The Dark Knight' wasted little time in establishing itself as the biggest film of the year. Director Christopher Nolan's follow up to his excellent 'Batman Begins' is a phenomenon not just in terms of raking in the moola but also in terms of critical cred, with the Rotten Tomatoes review aggregator giving it a 94% fresh rating. So, does this cinematic behemoth live up to all of the hype and expectation? Well, sort of - there are some caveats.

Set a year after the events in 'Begins', 'Dark Knight' establishes early on that Batman (Christian Bale) has spent that time cleaning up much of Gotham City. He has teamed up with Detective Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman), who now heads his own special hand picked unit within the Police Department, and together they've been cracking down on organized crime. Meanwhile Gotham's dashing new District Attorney, Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart), proves to be an unlikely ally, a man who really is as noble and virtuous as his nickname, the 'White Knight', suggests. As these three men slowly tighten the noose around the remnants of the criminal underworld, billionaire Bruce Wayne begins to believe that he can soon retire Batman for good and leave the city in the capable hands of Gordon and Dent. He hopes to reunite with his old flame Rachel Dawes (Maggie Gyllenhaal), despite the minor fact that she is - to his chagrin - with Dent. Of course, this wouldn't be much of a story if things went according to plan, and the unexpected and rapid rise to power of a twisted criminal psycopath calling himself the Joker (Heath Ledger) acts as the spanner in the works; the Joker's intelligence and ruthlessness make him a deadly foe, and he sets about systematically bringing Gotham City to its knees.

That summary only skims the intricate plot as there are so many little substories and characters in the mix that it's a minor miracle the film manages to stay as coherent as it does. It's an incredibly layered story that touches on every conceivable aspect of Gotham society. In many ways 'Dark Knight' is less a superhero film and more a crime thriller that just happens to take place in Gotham City and feature Batman and the Joker as major characters. This is made evident right from the opening scene that depicts a thrilling bank robbery that would have been just as at home in a non superhero film (and apparently it was inspired by Michael Mann's 'Heat').

Also made evident from the outset is the unrestrained brutality and capriciousness that permeates the film - anyone who thought the first one was dark is in for a surprise. Nolan's decision to keep things reality based continues, with far out technology and over the top action set pieces making themselves felt only sparingly. Unfortunately, there are a couple of techie elements that are completely over the top (one involving mobile phones that comes across as a clumsy commentary on privacy rights) that they take you right out of the film, sort of like the first film's moisture vapourizer device. Fortunately the focus is almost always on character, drama, and plot, the film's true strengths, and not faux technology. Also worth noting is that the city of Gotham is, for perhaps the first time, realistic instead of stylized, which also helps instill a sense of this being a conventional drama and not a comic book tale.

Which brings me to one of my problems with the film - the fight scenes. While they flow naturally as an integral part of the story, the hand to hand combat scenes that crop up quite regularly are surprisingly mediocre. It's almost like Nolan had to meet a quota of fisticuffs and threw in repetitive scenes of Batman punching people to meet it. Even the vehicular combat scenes are sometimes a tad underwhelming. This is a relatively minor quibble however, as much of the build up and action is tense and thrilling, but a noticeable one nonetheless.

A dark atmosphere enshrouds the entire film, from the lighting to the production design right down to the dour expression on Christian Bale's chiseled visage, but as the death toll rises and hope fades for our heroes the script still manages to throw in a few comedic quips here and there, and while not all of them work they do prevent the whole enterprise from becoming a frown fest. Another aspect worthy of praise is how even minor characters are well drawn out and memorable, a combination of good casting and writing. The main characters are infused with surprising amounts of depth given how busy the film is in general, and their individual storylines bring to the fore the film's themes of hope and sacrifice in the face of overwhelming corruption and anarchy, as well as playing around with the concept of duality (in one case, quite literally). The story deals directly with the concept of good being overwhelmed by evil, but manages to make situations murky and complex instead of clear cut, although I can't help but question some of Batman's views on his right to use any means he deems necessary!

The plot twists and turns, which brings me to another problem - the excess of schemes! The film is a tad too long and could have done without quite so many overly clever schemes by the Joker; the excess cheapens the effect and by the end one almost feels completely unsurprised when the Joker 'surprises' everyone for the umpteenth time. It's to the film's credit then that the Joker's final scheme is still gripping despite the fact that everyone knew one was coming.

The performance everyone's been talking about is that of the late Heath Ledger as the Clown Prince of Crime, and it really is phenomenal. Ledger is almost unrecognizable, and not just because of the makeup. At no point does the Joker seem like anything less than an unhinged maniac ready to go off, but at the same time he manages to appear both brilliant and disturbingly likable (or maybe that's just me). You can call it showy, but everything from the odd mannerisms to the sneering voice are absolutely spot on, and I think it's hard to argue against the notion that this is the definitive live action incarnation of the character; it's easy to see why some are calling Ledger's Joker one of the all time great villains of cinema.

While ostensibly the star of the film, Christian Bale is much more subdued than the others around him; don't get me wrong, he's pretty good in the dual role of Batman and Bruce Wayne, but both of those characters are overshadowed by the Joker, Dent, and even Gordon. And, there is something a little off about his face as Batman - he looks a little chunky, and there's something odd about the way his mouth hangs open when he talks! Gary Oldman makes the most of a supporting role to make Gordon an upright, tough and resourceful policeman pushed to his limits by the madness around him, while Aron Eckhart uses the natural charisma that made him such a likable sleezebag in 'Thank You For Smoking' to good effect to make Harvey Dent believable despite being impossibly noble. The four principal actors head a cast that also includes the likes of Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine, Maggie Gyllenhaal and many others, all of whom do solid work.

There are some other minor quibbles that I ought to raise - the gruff voice of Batman works at times but seems strangely out of place at others; the music is decent if unmemorable, though the disconcerting music that accompanies the Joker is a memorable highlight; and the plot, with all its twists and turns, might not hold up under close scrutiny during repeat viewings. These are relatively minor flaws in an otherwise very good film, easily one of the best superhero films yet made and a worthy successor to 'Batman Begins' that improves upon it in nearly every way. It's one of those rarities that manages to satisfy as an action film without being dumbed down and without sacrificing character or thematic depth. It's not the masterpiece that some seem to be calling it, but it is very good, and well worth any movie fan's time!

Crank (2006)

(Image from IMP Awards)


Crank (2006)

'Crank' is an improbably entertaining movie. It's as high concept as it gets - professional assassin Chev Chelios (Jason Statham) is injected with a poison by gangster Verona (Jose Pablo Cantillo) that will kill him slowly; it is also debilitating unless he keeps his adrenaline level high. The story that ensues is basically a race to find a cure and take revenge, with Chev being hyper and excited the whole time and doing insane things to maintain enough adrenaline in his system to keep the poison at bay. Also along for the ride are Chev's girlfriend Eve (Amy Smart) and his snide doctor, Doc Miles (Dwight Yoakam).

Much like its protagonist, the film has a surfeit of adrenaline flowing through it from start to finish. The outrageous plot is not half bad given that it's basically designed to get Chev from one ludicrous scenario to the next. It features lean storytelling that is fully committed to its premise; it's also completely irreverent, with a hero who is a remorseless, amoral killer willing to do whatever it takes to survive. And while the movie is action packed and full of violence - there are car chases and shootouts aplenty - it is also very funny, with a darkly comedic tone throughout. If you think about the premise, the inherent comedy value of a guy doing anything to stay excited ought to be self evident. And Chev stops at nothing to stay frantic, including having sex with his girlfriend in a public place in front of a throng of cheering onlookers!

In many ways 'Crank' has the feel of a video game, with stylistic flourishes that seem to evoke the GTA series, and it even references video games directly on a few occasions. The action is exciting, with inventive sequences, snappy editing and kinetic camerawork; there's also an interesting use of first person / odd camera perspectives and sometimes bizarre on screen text. Overall, with its colourful visuals and thumping soundtrack, the film is quite successful at making the viewer maintain the same level of excitement as its hero! Jason Statham is by no means a great actor but he has his niche and is perfect in this sort of role - he's an explosive presence and has always exuded an air of barely contained rage, and this film allows him to unleash it. Amy Smart is also smokin and strangely sweet as his dumb blonde girlfriend. Dwight Yoakam is hilarious as the Doc who seems like he's just wandered onto the set by mistake. The rest of the actors make for a colourful lineup and round out an effective cast.

Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor crafted an inventive and exhilarating experience with 'Crank', one that I thought might be somewhat fun but which ended up leaving me wearing a pretty big grin throughout its runtime! Sure it's daft as hell, but it isn't ashamed of that fact at all - in fact, it embraces it! I'm quite curious to see how the forthcoming sequel will turn out; needless to say, it's on my to watch list!

Deliver Us From Evil (2006)

(Image from IMP Awards)


Deliver Us From Evil (2006)

'Deliver Us From Evil' is a documentary that tells the story of child abuser priest Oliver O'Grady, and how the Catholic Church attempted to cover up his activities by moving him from parish to parish during the 1970s and 80s. It does this by presenting three different perspectives. One perspective presents the stories of several of O'Grady's many victims and their families via often emotional interviews. Another recounts the activities of the clergy using witness accounts and recordings of depositions given by various, often very senior, members of the US Catholic Church (they declined to participate in the documentary). Third, and perhaps most interestingly, are interviews with Father O'Grady himself, living freely in Ireland and being incredibly candid about what he did and about the Church's complicity in allowing him to get away with it. Interspersed are various interviews with other involved parties such as lawyers and psychologists.

O'Grady is really the most intriguing part of this film - the man is disarmingly charming and engaging, and it's easy to see see how he took people in and worked his way into their confidence. He shows absolutely no remorse for what he did and describes his actions in a calm and collected manner, and sometimes even presents himself as a victim, describing his 'indulgences' in much the same way an alcoholic might describe giving in to drink - in his mind the kids were temptations dangling before him. He's clearly disturbed, but given that he knew at least on an intellectual level that what he did was monstrous it's impossible to feel any kind of sympathy for him, even when certain revelations about his past are made that may explain his actions. And there are some moments, such as where he sits down and writes ridiculously patronizing letters of apology to his victims, that make you want to just punch him in the face.

The true villain of the piece, however, is the weaselly Church, as can be seen in the accumulated evidence and the deposition videos where various members of the clergy try to conjure up excuses and fail miserably; the dishonesty is written all over them. The segments involving the victims describe how O'Grady earned the trust and respect of their families and the ways in which he abused them; they also explain how the families felt betrayed by both him and the Church, an anger that lives on because their lives are in many ways still in tatters so many years later. Many of the interviews are quite emotional and serve as a strong counterpoint to O'Grady's cheerful, nonchalant countenance, constantly serving to remind the viewer of the gravity of what he did and the inherent injustice in the fact that he gets to live his life as a free man.

This may be a documentary, but it's far from the bland 'talking heads' style that the presence of an abundance of interviews might suggest. There's a strong visual style, with varied camera angles and establishing shots being used judiciously. The editing is also well done, and the film is structured as a pseudo-narrative that builds up towards a dramatic payoff of sorts. There are strong musical choices as well, somber and appropriate.

Taken at face value 'Deliver Us From Evil' doesn't offer anything new in terms of facts, but it presents them very effectively and provides faces and a human element that transcends those facts and turns them into a real punch to the gut. Watching this, one can't help but feel sympathy for the victims and their families while also feeling a fascinated kind of loathing towards the perpetrator of the horrendous crimes that caused so much suffering. Above all, however, this is a film should make anyone (apart from the brainwashed) who sees it feel nothing but contempt and unbridled anger towards the cruel, exploitative institution that let it all happen while turning a blind eye, and subsequently tried to cover it up when the shit hit the fan.

Medium - Season 2 (2005-2006)

(Image from Amazon)


Medium - Season 2 (2005-2006)

I wrote a fairly comprehensive review of Medium's first season, and really so little changes in the second that there's nothing new to say. It's business as usual. Which is actually something of a problem when the first season was already threatening to be formulaic; now, it unquestionably is. All of the pluses are still there, and it's certainly very well made, but it is undeniably 'comfort TV', the type of show where you know exactly what you're going to get with no surprises. The plot twists lack any real zing. I still enjoyed it, but when there's no overall story arc or change in the formula, it becomes repetitive pretty fast. Especially when there are 22 episodes in the season! The show is good enough to warrant watching another season (I think), but if the creative team don't shake things up a little in Season 3, I can't imagine staying around for the fourth...

Red Heat (1988)

(Image from Wikipedia)


Red Heat (1988)

Arnold Schwarzenegger plays Russian Police Captain Ivan Danko in this late eighties action comedy. The story has Danko tracking a Russian drug dealer, Viktor Rostavili (Ed O'Ross), to Chicago and reluctantly teaming up with Detective Sgt. Art Ridzik (Jim Belushi). Both men are mavericks who cause considerable amounts of trouble with their aggressive 'result oriented' styles, which pisses off Police Commander Donnelly (Peter Boyle) and Lt. Stobbs (Laurence 'Larry' Fishburne). Also in the mix is Viktor's dance teacher wife Catherine (Gina Gershon). As the investigation progresses both men end up developing personal reasons to pursue and bring Viktor to justice (i.e. lay him to rest six feet under), and are forced to go up against a dangerous gang working for their nemesis as they shoot and drive their way recklessly across Chicago.

The film is fairly typical for the genre, and if you've ever seen a buddy cop slash fish out of water action comedy before, you'll know what to expect here. The story is basic but fairly strong for a comedy - much of it could conceivably be transposed to a non comedic film, though the scene with the cross dressing killer in a nurse's uniform might have to go! The characterization and humour are obvious and you can usually see it coming in advance, though I found much of it quite funny nonetheless. A lot of that has to do with the leads and not any particular genius in the script; both Arnie and Belushi are coasting here but the two have a natural comedic tendency, particularly Arnie who requires only subtle variations to his usual shtick ("but I dohn't want too touch his ass!") to elicit a laugh or two. And seriously - Arnie as a Russian? Director Walter Hill's work is nothing to write home about except when it comes to the action sequences, which are frenetic and exciting, and there's also a fun chase scene towards the end featuring two buses.

'Red Heat' is by the numbers but leans slightly towards the above average end of the scale. It's fun, and probably the type of thing you'd end up watching on TV when there's nothing else demanding your attention. And one more plus in its favour is that it is R rated and doesn't skimp on the nudity and violence, unlike so many of today's kiddie friendly films (though sadly a lot of the nudity tends to be Arnie's well molded physique).

Hitman (2007)

(Image from IMP Awards)


Hitman (2007)

I took away two things from 'Hitman'. One is that Timothy Olyphant is pretty cool even in relatively mediocre fare (though perhaps not so much in Die Hard 4.0). The other is that Olga Kurylenko is smokin hot and her gratuitous nudity in this will undoubtedly give Hitman's DVD sales / rentals a boost once people see the next Bond movie, in which she plays the Bond girl. Okay fine, there is a third thing. Video game adaptations seem forever destined to be relegated to 'crap to decent' in terms of quality. 'Hitman', based on the successful video game series of the same name, tells the story of Agent 47 (Olyphant), the best of the best in a secret 'Organization' of assassins. Hired to kill the Russian president, 47 seemingly succeeds, only to discover that he has become ensnared in a complex conspiracy and is now being pursued by both FSB agent Yuri Marklov (Robert Knepper), Interpol agent Mike Whittier (Dougray Scott), and his fellow assassins from the Organization. The key to clearing himself and getting back at those who set him up appears to be a prostitute, Nika Boronina (Kurylenko), whom he nabs before beginning his quest.

Directed by Xavier Gens - who apparently had the film taken away from him by the studio during editing - 'Hitman' is a fairly stylish film that in terms of production values is up there with the best videogame adaptations (that is, it's up there with Tomb Raider). It opens with a promising sequence depicting the assassins of the Organization training from early childhood before jumping forward to show us Agent 47 in action. The plot is actually quite straightforward but the screenplay manages to deliver it in an unnecessarily messy manner. None of the narrative threads are particularly compelling, and when you consider that the film is mostly devoid of any substantial characterization, it becomes apparent that the writers were the first barrier to quality (source material be damned). Gens action scenes are competent enough if uninspired, though Olyphant is great in them and makes them quite entertaining, particularly with that weirdly nonchalant gait of his. The film's not afraid of a little violence and mayhem either, always a plus in a shoot 'em up. Olyphant is the star and he delivers a good though necessarily one dimensional performance. Olga Kurylenko is surprisingly good (and easy on the eyes) as the feisty prostitute. Everyone else is forgettable, though it was funny to see Henry Ian Cusick make a small appearance as a Russian arms dealer - far removed from his role as Desmond in Lost, brutha!

Overall it's a decent action film that goes by fairly quickly. It won't impress, but it won't make you wish for your time back either. It doesn't do anything to improve the status of video game based movies, and I'm not sure what fans of the game will think - based on what I've seen of the games, they involved a lot of stealth and deception and sneaking around garroting people, not running around guns blazing. Actually, the kind of style seen in the games might have made the film more interesting, though the massively superior 'Leon' has already explored similar territory. This ain't no Leon, but on the other hand it ain't no Double Dragon either! It's more like Tomb Raider, only with violence and nudity, which is always a plus...

Deadwood - Season 2 (2005)

(Image from Wikipedia)


Deadwood - Season 2 (2005)

I'm quite surprised to find myself pleased with my review of the first series of 'Deadwood', and there isn't really much to add to my assessment of the show with regard to this second series, which maintains the same high standards throughout its twelve episodes. In summation, the primary storylines revolve around the possible annexation of Deadwood to the territories of Dakota and the attempted acquisition of much of the gold claims by wealthy businessman George Hearst. But of course the smaller stories and the characters collectively play such a large part in the show, and these include: Swearingen's debilitating illness; Sheriff Bullock's fragily alliance with Swearingen and his affair with Mrs. Garrett, followed by the arrival of his wife and stepson; Hearst's geologist Francis Wolcott's scheming and sexual dalliances; Joanie Stubb's attempts to start her own brothel; Cy Tolliver's alliance with Wolcott in their scheme to buy out people's claims; Mrs. Garrett's troubles with the Pinkerton's and her clashes with Bullock's wife; and Mr. Wu's problems with the 'San Francisco Cocksucker', amongst many others.

What I love about this show is how it's so rich, so full of detail and atmosphere, and populated with such diverse, interesting characters each of whom has their own unique voice and idiosyncrasies, each of whom plays some small but integral part in the big picture. It's all character driven, and there are a myriad little stories that criss cross and interweave, and yet it all ties together so perfectly in the end - it really is a supreme piece of storytelling. True, the pacing is deliberate and there is a dearth of action, but that's not what this show is about. I think it's all kinds of great, even though I have to confess to finding some of the more complex speeches a little hard to follow!

Once again Ian McShane rules the roost with his commanding portrayal of Al Swearingen, whose presence seems so intrinsic to the town that when he approaches the brink of death it's almost like the town itself collectively holds its breath. McShane is terrific, and spews out verbose commentary and foul language like there's no tomorrow, and it's a joy to behold. Timothy Oliphaunt has somewhat less of a presence but is still great, and the added dimensions of his awkward relationship with both his mistress and his wife and son adding to his burdens as town sheriff and Swearingen cohort. Powers Boothe, William Sanderson, Robin Weigert, and Brad Dourif are the other standouts from the regular cast, but one guy stands out above most of the other regulars - Garet Dillahunt, who plays the creepy, disturbed, very intelligent, and very persuasive Francis Walcott. Dillahunt also appeared in the first season as Wild Bill Hickok's killer, and he was excellent in that role, but his character here is as far removed as possible from that one - in fact, it took me a while to realize that it was the same guy! Truly an excellent performance; this guy ought to be one to look out for - he has popped up in 'The 4400' and 'The Sarah Connor Chronicles' as well, and has minor roles in 'The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford' and 'No Country for Old Men'.

'Deadwood' continues to impress in its second season, and I'm dying to see the third and final batch of 12 episodes. It's disappointing to realize that the series was canceled without some form of finality; reading up on the history of the real Deadwood just can't compare to watching David Milch's foul mouthed dramatization! An exceptional TV series that adds further weight to the argument that HBO are without peer when it comes to gritty, edgy dramatic fare.

Zodiac (2007)

(Image from IMP Awards)

Zodiac (2007)

Man, I'm way behind on these.

David Fincher's 'Zodiac', his first film since the fairly good but not great 'Panic Room', is a terrific procedural crime drama. He's best known for 'Fight Club' (a film I need to see again), but this is much closer to his serial killer film 'Seven'. It's based on the true story of the Zodiac Killer who terrorized San Francisco during the 1960s, and is a meticulously detailed and apparently quite comprehensive recreation of the investigation into the killings. The film focuses on three men - Robert Graysmith (Jake Gyllenhaal), a cartoonist at the San Francisco Chronicle newspaper who is drawn to the case by the Killer's cryptic puzzles, Inspector David Toschi (Mark Ruffalo) who works the case, and SF Chronicle writer Paul Avery (Robert Downey Jr.), who writes about the killer. Spanning several decades, the film chronicles every significant detail relating to the investigation of the Zodiac Killer and the major players involved in the investigation.

It's a procedural, but one that is devoid of the usual Hollywood gloss that we have come to expect from the genre. I would say that it is toned down even compared to Fincher's own 'Seven', which is an excellent film that is already a decent example of restraint. 'Zodiac' is completely matter of fact and realistic, showing the investigation as something that takes time, tedious amounts of research and legwork, numerous dead ends, paperwork, communication with various - and occasionally uncooperative - parties, and working within legislature and bureaucracy. And often, lots of waiting around for something to happen. There are no convenient epiphanies that lead to exciting chases or shootouts. Despite all of the effort that went into hunting the killer, the case was never and probably never will be solved, even though those involved believed they had their man.

The attention to realism may sound boring - I'm fairly certain some people feel that way - what with there only being a handful of scenes showing the killer in action (face never revealed) and lots of scenes of interviews, meetings, and people throwing ideas around, but I found it to be utterly fascinating and a refreshing change. Having said that, it's not just the crime procedural aspects that make this compelling. The film also tells the story of how these three men become completely and utterly obsessed with their subject, and were unable to rest without following some new angle or another. Such was their obsession that it affected both their professional and personal lives, often detrimentally. These aren't conventional cinematic heroes; these are the guys who'll go through the grind day after day, committed to their quest for answers and closure, and ultimately, justice. The film allows us to experience the sheer scale of their Herculean task, and deals us the same sucker punch they received at the end - we'll never really know for sure who it was.

Cinematically it's like the serial killer version of 'All the President's Men', taking a seemingly mundane aspect of historical events and making it something fascinating and gripping by focusing on making the film atmospheric and believable. There is no narrative trickery and no caricatures. The style is muted with none of the overly showy camerawork Fincher demonstrated in his last few films. It presents a wholly convincing recreation of the era and lets the setting, the script and the actors take centre stage. The performances from the three leads, whose paths cross but who mostly work alone, are superb as they depict men who become, literally, addicted to their work while trying to maintain (mostly unsuccessfully) some element of normalcy in their lives. Ruffalo is no nonsense and street smart as Toschi, while Gyllenhaal unsurprisingly plays the bookish nerd with a proclivity for puzzle solving. Downey Jr. has the least screen time but he's terrific as the egotistical and charismatic star reporter.

All in all, an excellent and under appreciated film that came and went without many people taking notice. Overlong and slow? Hell no - honest and absorbing! 'Zodiac' is definitely one of the better films from last year - immaculately made and a fresh, revitalizing take on a genre that hasn't offered anything nearly as good in the last few years.

Payback: Straight Up - The Director's Cut (1999)

(Image from Cinema Blend)


Payback: Straight Up - The Director's Cut (1999)

This is one of those interesting situations where a director who lost control of his film gets to come back and do it his way. I haven't seen the original, Mel Gibson overseen cut of Payback, but Brian Helgeland's Director's Cut (which uses around half of the theatrical footage and features a new score, new colour timing, a different tone throughout and a whole new ending) is a thoroughly enjoyable crime thriller. It's a remake of the 1967 Lee Marvin film Point Blank, which was pretty good but not quite as fun as this one. Mel Gibson stars as Porter, a thief who is betrayed after a risky heist by his partner in crime Val (Gregg Henry) and his wife Lynn (Deborah Kara Unger) and left for dead. He survives, and comes back to town looking for... you guessed it - PAYBACK! Plus, he wants returned his share of the heist money. His quest leads him to cross paths with an old flame, Rosie (Maria Bello), some crooked cops, and the mysterious 'syndicate' that is responsible for organized crime in the city.

'Payback' is a vicious and violent thriller that takes place in a crime ridden, mafia controlled, corrupt city. There are many elements of black humour, but overall it's a fairly somber affair. Gibson is somewhat aloof as the relentless Porter but he doesn't come across as an invincible superman either; he also doesn't appear nearly as angry as Lee Marvin did. He lives by a simple code, and he wants his money back as a matter of principle - it doesn't matter to him if he has to go all the way up to the syndicate's top brass to get it. The rest of the performances are pretty good, with Gregg Henry's sleazy Val being especially memorable. Oh, and Lucy Liu pops up as a silent, violent seductress - natch! The story is fairly straightforward, with the manner in which Porter goes about his business being almost comical. There are some excellent scenes in here, like Porter's confrontation with some of the senior brass of the syndicate, his exchanges with the corrupt detectives, and his showdown with Val. The action sequences are infrequent but effective - the finale in particular is quite thrilling.

It's not a classic, but as a streamlined old fashioned crime thriller complete with an appropriate score, a fun central performance, violence, and humour, it's well above average. Entertaining and memorable; while Gibson is no Lee Marvin, I prefer 'Payback: Straight Up' to its progenitor.

The Departed (2006)

(Image from IMP Awards)


The Departed (2006)

I think I've mentioned on this blog how I admire the films of Martin Scorsese but don't really consider myself a fan of any of them - not Taxi Driver, not Raging Bull, and not Goodfellas - but that has now changed. 'The Departed' is, unsurprisingly, an excellent film, but it's also one that I loved from start to finish.

The film is a crime thriller that revolves around the story of two men in Boston - Billy Costigan (Leonardo DiCaprio) and Colin Sullivan (Matt Damon). Costigan is a kid with family links to the local Irish mafia who becomes a cop and enters the State Police. Here he meets Captain Queenan (Martin Sheen) and Sgt. Dignam (Mark Whalberg) of the undercover division who tell him he has no future in the Police department, but that his background and ability to blend in within mafia neighbourhoods make him an ideal candidate for undercover work. Sullivan meanwhile is groomed by mob boss Frank Costello (Jack Nicholson) to be his man on the inside of the Police Department. So while Sullivan lives the life of a successful bright young rising star in the State Police Department reporting to Captain Ellerby (Alec Baldwin), Costigan becomes a gangster who works closely with Costello and his henchman Mr. French (Ray Winstone). Coincidence leads to both men striking up a relationship with the same woman, Madolyn (Vera Farmiga). As the police try to build a case against Costello, both sides become aware of a mole in their ranks and enlist their own inside man (i.e. Costigan and Sullivan) to find out who the other side's mole is.

Its high concept belies what is actually a complex, intricately plotted thriller full of drama, humour, violence, and great characters. The Hong Kong movie this is based on, Infernal Affairs, is a slick thriller but it doesn't really attain the type of depth and scope and impact its remake does. 'The Departed' borrows a lot of plot elements from its progenitor but the writing grafts it superbly into a completely different world and adds more layers of complexity and fleshes out the characters, including the more minor characters. There's some terrific dialogue in here, sharp and often verbose, and some of it very foul indeed, especially a good 50% of what comes out of Mark Whalberg's mouth.

The symmetry between the police and the mafia is an overarching theme here - they're two sides of the same coin, and in some ways they are like two duelling families complete with father figures and complementary tough right hand men. The deception and duality of the central characters is also significant, with both playing at being someone else who isn't that far removed from their actual personalities. Sullivan is a smarmy and ambitious opportunist, and Costigan is a resourceful but hot headed firebrand. The deception and sacrifice take their toll and wear them down however, with Costigan having to assuage the guilt of committing crimes by downing pills, and Sullivan being tempted to just get out of the whole business and start over.

Scorsese makes this compelling from the beginning, and does so while fusing his usual sensibilities with a more crowd pleasing and mainstream sensibility (I guess I am a complete sucker for the mainstream). His interpretation of these characters and realization of every scene is nigh on perfect. The atmosphere is palpable and the fear and excitement in so many scenes feel genuine; but it's also very, very funny at times, and also explosively violent, two qualities you don't often expect to sit well together, but here they do. The drama is tense, the action sequences are exciting, and the violence is often flinch inducing but avoids being gratuitous. Despite how meticulous and unlikely the plot is, it plays out in a realistic tone and there is often a feeling of spontaneity and capriciousness to proceedings.

When it comes to the performances, there's just too many good ones to really do them all justice. One look at the cast list and you can see the potential for greatness, and amazingly everyone delivers in spades. The man that stands out most is probably Mark Whalberg in a limited supporting role. He's brilliant, funny and apoplectic at the same time and his personality fills up the room; it's testament to how good everyone else is that he never really steals the show. Matt Damon is fantastic as the weaselly Sullivan, a guy who's charming and resourceful but also a complete asshole - watching him is always interesting and it's incredible how Damon still manages to make the character likable. Then there's DiCaprio. Anyone who still questions the man's acting talent is surely delusional, because despite his babyface he is perfect as the smart but burdened man who doesn't belong anywhere. He seems uneasy, out of place (not in an undercover cop sense, but more in the sense of a person angry with the world), and also capable of unrestrained violence. The character has to go through a lot more than Sullivan, including some physical stuff and a fair amount of verbal sparring with Nicholson's Costigan, and DiCaprio pulls it off superbly. Speaking of Nicholson, he is an actor I've never really liked but he is well suited to playing psychotic and slightly unhinged characters as he does here.

The rest of the supporting cast are equally good. Despite being the only woman in an impressive male cast, Vera Farmiga holds her own in a fairly limited role, and her interactions with Damon and DiCaprio work well in revealing facets of those characters that are usually kept hidden or in check. Alec Baldwin, who I'm fast becoming a fan of after '30 Rock', is hilarious as the smug, cocky Captain Ellerby. The scene where he assaults a technician for screwing up had me in stitches! Martin Sheen's Captain Queenan on the other hand is down to earth and fatherly, and amazingly he makes for a good team with the foul mouthed Wahlberg. And finally, there's Ray Winstone as Mr. French; one word - badass.

Everything in 'The Departed' just comes together like precision engineering - from the camerawork and photography to the editing, music, costumes, locations, and performances, it all just clicks. Let me mention the music again; Scorsese has always been a master of marrying songs to images and the choice of songs and their use here really makes a strong impact. All in all, it's a phenomenal film, a brilliant crime thriller, and a remake that supersedes the original. The epitome of great filmmaking, and a must see.

Heavenly Creatures (1994)

(Image from IMP Awards)


Heavenly Creatures (1994)

Based on the shocking Parker-Hulme murder that took place in New Zealand in 1954, 'Heavenly Creatures' is an excellent dramatic thriller with some fantasy elements. It heralded Peter Jackson's arrival as a writer director of note and is probably one of the main reasons some people believed he was the right man for Lord of the Rings when everyone else was going "Peter Who?".

Melanie Lynskey plays Pauline Parker and Kate Winslet plays Juliet Hulme. Pauline is an introverted outsider at her school, but she gets along fairly well with her family and does well with her studies. The impudent and haughty Juliet arrives from England and joins Pauline's class; both girls sit out their physical exercise class due to medical conditions, and during this time they discover that they have much in common and bond very quickly. They start hanging out together all the time, with Pauline growing attached to Juliet's well educated and wealthy family while growing ashamed of her own working class roots, particularly her mother Honorah (Sarah Peirse). What starts off as a charming friendship slowly grows into something else as the girls start to write stories that they believe will get them into the movie business in Hollywood. They begin to have delusions of grandeur and see themselves as superior to everyone around them, and soon start living out their stories in a fantasy land called the 'Fourth World'. The girls' parents become worried about the nature of the friendship, which they fear is bordering on homosexual, and attempt to keep the girls apart; this only makes them become more distant from the real world and resentful of their families, and ultimately leads to tragic consequences.

Right from the opening sequence that depicts archival footage of New Zealand from the era in which the story takes place up till the end credits, the film holds your attention. It's engrossing and the heart of the film - the friendship - is absolutely convincing and engaging despite the girls themselves being fairly unlikable, which is a testament to the writing, acting, and directing on display. The way the friendship transforms is presented in a dark and sinister light, but it also feels a little tragic. The use of actual excerpts from Pauline's diary is incredibly effective and really gets across just how twisted and messed up the two girls ultimately became while also wiping out any sympathy you might have for them. The pacing is spot on (this was the extended cut of the film) and the film never lingers; it's always progressing the characters and their stories. In addition to the central friendship, the film also thematically touches on cultural norms, the class divide, the popular culture of the era as well as familial relationships.

Jackson's work here is full of the kinetic camerawork and close ups that are his trademark, and it works surprisingly well to create a thriller out of what could easily have been a very sedate drama. Heavenly Creatures successfully creates two worlds on screen - one the world of 1950s New Zealand, and the other the fantasy 'Fourth World' populated by medieval castles and clay people. The way these fantasy elements are integrated into the film is brilliant (they sometimes even encroach upon the real world in the girls' minds), and really serve to demonstrate the girls' overactive imaginations and the extent to which they lose themselves in the 'Fourth World'. The film is atmospheric and dark, and also has elements of the unrestrained twisted sense of humour Jackson exhibited in his earlier splatter horror movies.

Winslett and Lynskey both made their film debuts here, and both made the most of the opportunity. Winslett, who went on to greater fame, initially seems overly formal and too aristocratic, but it becomes apparent that this is in fact the nature of the character - Juliet is poised, speaks with perfect diction, and is more than a little snobbish, but her presentation of these traits is something of an affectation. In the course of her friendship with Pauline she often appears vulnerable and simply a child. It's a terrific performance, and one that is matched by Lynskey, whose character is generally gloomy and morose; one can imagine her being a goth if goths were around those days. When she's with Juliet, she comes alive and is far more animated, getting caught up in admiration of her friend's exuberance. The most sympathetic character in the film, however, is not either of these two - it is, in fact, Pauline's mother Honorah, who is played to perfection by Sarah Peirse as a good natured if stern, down to earth, hard working mother who tries to do the best she can for her child while having no idea how huge their disconnect actually is.

What more is there to say? On technical merits the film fares well, and it has a fairly good if unremarkable musical score. The visual effects are exemplary - not something you normally hear being said of this sort of film, but there you go. 'Heavenly Creatures' is a landmark in Peter Jackson's career, the one that launched him on his way to becoming one of the most significant and interesting filmmakers working today. Ignoring all of that baggage, the film is a historical drama / thriller that is informative (the facts are apparently quite accurate), gripping and, by its conclusion, quite horrifying. In short, it is an excellent film that is under-appreciated and deserves to find a wider audience.

Minority Report (2002)

(Image from IMP Awards)


Minority Report (2002)

Spielberg's follow up to AI was another sci-fi film, this time based on the short story 'The Minority Report' by P. K. Dick, an author famed for writing stories based on the nature of reality and self, and also for often writing while being on drugs. The original short is great, but the adaptation is only loosely based on it and is much more of a thriller than a sci-fi film.

John Anderton (Tom Cruise) heads the Pre-Crime Division of Police in Washington D.C. - it's a trial division that is on the verge of going national under the auspices of its director, Lamar Burgess (Max von Sydow). Pre-Crime works off the predictions of three mutant 'precogs' who can see future murders before they happen, allowing officers to swoop in and stop the killing. Pre-meditated murder is now a thing of the past, and only murders of passion take place anymore in the D.C. area. At a personal level Anderton is a messed up individual who takes drugs to numb the pain of losing his son some years earlier and subsequently separating from his wife (Kathryn Morris). The main narrative kicks off when Anderton himself is predicted by the precogs to commit (inexplicably, as it turns out) premeditated murder in the near future, something he believes to be impossible. Determined to prove his innocence, he runs and is pursued by FBI Agent Danny Witwer (Colin Farrell), a hotshot gunning for Anderton's job. Anderton learns of the possibility of a 'minority report' - a future vision by one of the precogs, Agatha (Samantha Morton), that differs from the other two - and seeks it out in the hope that it will clear his name.

'Minority Report' is a 'man on the run' thriller with sci-fi trappings; as a thriller, it's excellent, but as sci-fi film, I'm a little mixed. The themes of the film are similar to the original novel, dealing as it does with the concept of free will vs. fate, the morality and logic behind arresting people for crimes they haven't actually committed, and the messy consequences of being able to see the future. The stories are, however, quite different, and in fact the titular minority report doesn't even really come into play in the movie. Both plots involve the mechanics of precognition; I seem to recall the short story's plot being more satisfying, involving multiple potential timelines causing havoc, though I can't honestly remember the details (but I'm certain that it would have been too complex to have a chance of appearing in a mainstream film). In the movie there's a temporal paradox at play, where Anderton is set on the path to potentially commit murder only because he was predicted to do so in the first place. This paradox is an interesting conundrum, but the film doesn't really dwell too much on it. In fact, one of the irritating aspects of the story is how this paradox is essentially brought about by a character (in order to cover up another crime), implying that he understood it well enough to exploit it, yet it is never explained how he did it.

The film does, in the end, address the ethical aspect of arresting people who are destined to commit a crime, albeit only after addressing the free will vs. fate question, which is a bit of a cheat as it changes the rules of the game before committing itself. The ethics of the scenario presented at the start of the film are still somewhat murky and dubious, but then again this is a quite dark and somewhat dystopian future. Also disturbing is the manner in which pre-crime is handled - those arrested are judged beforehand and incarcerated immediately in a facility where they experience hallucinatory visions for the duration of their imprisonment. Other disturbing elements of this future are the complete erosion of civil liberties, the forfeiture of privacy thanks to ubiquitous retinal scanning systems, massive social inequality, and the obnoxious encroachment of advertising into all walks of life. Hang on... did I say the future?

Tom Cruise is fairly good as a man with his back against a wall desperately struggling to stay ahead of his pursuers, though the emotional stuff relating to his son comes across as a little forced. Farrell is great as the cocky and ambitious FBI agent who, despite being an arrogant prick, is damned good at his job. Samantha Morton is the standout as the precog Agatha, seeming completely screwed up in the head but not in that showboating way that gets on your nerves. Max von Sydow is solid as the experienced and dignified mentor figure, while Kathryn Morris is fine as Anderton's wife. Also very memorable is Peter Stormare as an unhinged unlicensed surgeon Anderton turns to to get a new pair of eyes in order to avoid the ubiquitous biometric systems.

Visually the film has a very distinctive, bleak look completely drained of colour that matches the generally dark and sometimes grungy atmosphere of the film and makes it very arresting. At a design level, much of the technology in this future is fantastic, such as the autopilot cars that drive up buildings right to an apartment, the re-usable digital newspapers, the funky computer user interfaces, the holographic display technology, and the virtual reality systems. Sadly, some of it is also kinda silly - like, for instance, the vomit sticks that cause their targets to... vomit. Why would you design something like that? The crawly mechanical spiders that are used in one scene are cool but have a little too much of a cutesy personality to them that rings false. And then there's the flying around on jetpacks that seems to serve no purpose other than to create an admittedly quite entertaining chase scene. That scene actually highlighted one of my beefs with the film - Spielberg's inconsistent tone that mixes a serious thriller atmosphere with jarringly out of place humour that takes you right out of the film. Overall though, the film is well directed and is suspenseful and exciting. The excellent special effects and fairly decent musical score (again, somewhat uneven from John Williams) round out what is a very slick package.

'Minority Report' is a very good film that has a few annoying flaws that almost ruin it for me. I don't like it much, and I think that its sci-fi trappings are often window dressing for a thriller and not integral to the story or all that well thought out, leading to some lapses in logic - a criticism I lay at the feet of the writers, since the film excels in almost every other regard. It's definitely a worthwhile cinematic experience, and judging from other opinions my relatively mixed review is something of a minority report itself (sorry, I couldn't resist).

Point Break (1991)

(Image from IMDB)

Point Break (1991)

I'll state right up front that the only reason I watched this movie (and the only reason I watched Bad Boys II) is because of the way it was spoofed in the brilliant Hot Fuzz. It seems that 'Fuzz' is actually much better than both of the two movies it directly pays tribute to. Still, while it pales next to Edgar Wright's brilliant film, 'Point Break' is a fairly decent action movie.

Keanu Reeves plays Johnny Utah (awesome name), a young hotshot FBI Agent just transferred to the bank robbery division. He's partnered with Agent Angelo Pappas (Gary Busey), and together they wind up investigating a bank robber gang called 'The Dead Presidents' that the FBI has been unable to get even a single lead on. Pappas has a theory that the robbers are actually a group of surfers, and so Utah goes undercover to hang out with surfer gangs to try and suss out the criminals despite the protestations of their boss Agent Harp (John C. McGinley). It is here that he meets Tyler (Lori Petty), a woman who teaches him to surf and whom he falls in love with. Through Tyler he meets the charismatic Bodhi (Patrick Swayze), a master surfer who embraces the spiritual aspects of surfing and who sees in Utah a kindred spirit. As Utah and Pappas's (between these two and Bodhi, my 'weird names in the blog' quota has now been met) investigation leads them to a suspicious gang, an 'unexpected' twist throws things for a loop.

As bizarre as that plot sounds, it makes for a fairly entertaining and original film. The twist isn't all that surprising really; even though I knew about it before seeing the film, the way the story plays out it had to work out that way or the narrative focus of the first half of the film would have been somewhat redundant (in a mainstream film, at any rate). The script is quite cheesy and full of not so memorable lines and attempts to appear deep and spiritual on the part of the surfers, but I can forgive that because it's still fun and is never truly bad (plus some of that spiritual stuff ends up looking like hypocrisy in the story itself). There's a lot of diversity in this film in terms of action - surf boarding, sky diving, a thrilling foot chase in and around houses, bank robberies, shootouts - and director Kathryn Bigelow handles them all quite skillfully. And yes, I did bust a gut when the 'firing your gun in the air and yelling AAAAAAAH' scene came up! *BANG* *BANG* *BANG* AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH!

Reeves is miscast in this role and is completely unconvincing, and some of his line deliveries are hilarious - "I AM AN F--B--I--AGENT!". He just seems too similar to his Bill and Ted persona playing at an FBI agent, and not like the persona that worked so well in Speed. Patrick Swayze is great as the enigmatic Bodhi, and it's easy to see how the Utah character gets caught up in his aura. As supporting cast, Lori Petty makes for an appealing love interest and Gary Busey is fairly goofy and effective as Utah's veteran partner (though it's kinda weird seeing him as a good guy). John C. McGinley - aka Dr. Cox from Scrubs - is a hoot as Utah's boss, and I wish there had been more of him. He gets some great snide, verbose lines, and anyone who's seen Scrubs knows how great McGinley is at unleashing that kind of material!

'Point Break' is a fairly enjoyable two hours with some very good action sequences. It's not brilliant, but it's not mediocre either. Good, but not great. There's extra entertainment value for fans of 'Hot Fuzz'.

Memento (2000)

(Poster from Imp Awards)

Memento (2000)

Memory can change the shape of a room; it can change the color of a car. And memories can be distorted. They're just an interpretation, they're not a record, and they're irrelevant if you have the facts ... I've told you this before, haven't I?

Christopher Nolan blazed onto the scene back in 2000 with his unconventional, bravura thriller. 'Memento' mesmerized with its atypical structure and unique premise. Seven years on, I checked it out again to see if it could stand on its own two feet now that the hype has faded. My initial reaction to the film had been positive, but I wasn't blown away. I found it to be a much better experience the second time round.

Leonard Shelby (Guy Pearce) was an insurance fraud investigator. His wife was raped and killed during a break in to his house, and he himself was assaulted and left with brain damage. He is now unable to create new memories, and can only remember things up to the time he was assaulted. His short term memory works for brief stretches of time, but fades and 'resets', often leaving him wondering where he is and what he's doing. Despite this seemingly debilitating condition, Leonard has vowed to avenge his wife's death and is conducting an investigation to track down the killer (the police caught a suspect, but Leonard believes there were two people involved). He does this by tattooing essential facts onto his body to remind himself of what he is doing, and making brief notes and taking photographs of pertinent people and places. The notion sounds far fetched, and in some ways it doesn't hold together, but the way it's presented makes it easy to suspend disbelief. The course of Leonard's investigation leads him to interact with a man named Teddy (Joe Pantoliano) and a woman named Natalie (Carrie-Anne Moss), who may or may not be helping him.

The real trick behind Memento is that it presents the story in much the same way that Leonard experiences it. It starts at the end and works backwards in a series of segments, where each segment ends at the beginning of the segment shown previously. Basically, we see a segment of the story with no idea how Leonard got there or why, or even what he's doing, and we see that segment play out. The next segment we see, which chronologically takes place earlier, explains what Leonard was doing in the preceding segment. At the start of each segment, we are in the dark, same as Leonard. A pretty clever narrative device, but it wouldn't be worth much if the story itself wasn't interesting, and fortunately it is. It's relatively basic (the way it's presented makes it appear complex) but it does have a fair few twists and turns, including a fairly big twist at the end that puts preceding (chronologically subsequent) events in context and solves the mystery quite effectively . In addition to the primary storyline, the film intercuts with scenes of Leonard talking on the phone with an unnamed person and explaining an insurance case he investigated involving a man named Sammy Jenkis (Stephen Tobolowsky) who supposedly had the same condition Leonard now has; these segments give additional insights into Leonard's character and condition, as well adding to the plot.

Given the narrative structure, the writing had to be very precise with its details and the information it conveyed, and it is successful in this regard. The stylized and verbose script has its fair share of wry humour as well, but there is a hopelessness to Leonard's predicament that feels overpowering at times - such is the nature of the story. The characters are sketchy by design and present themselves to Leonard in different ways, often to manipulate him. One of the overriding themes of the film is the nature of knowing and how it relates to memory and facts, and how context, subjectivity, deception, and even self-deception can alter one's perception of the world. Despite being driven almost single mindedly, Leonard makes for a sympathetic hero who at times bungles from one situation to the next; while his systematic approach to overcoming his disability is impressive and quite effective, one can't help but feel for him when he gets in over his head and doesn't even know it.

Guy Pearce deserves some of the credit for that; despite wearing a tough guy face for much of the movie, he has an appropriate air of helplessness about him, and there are brief poignant moments where he reminisces about his past and his dead wife. His narration is also excellent and serves to bind the film together. Carrie-Anne Moss is pretty good as the coldly manipulative and strangely seductive woman who appears to be (and may be?) helping Leonard. Joe Pantoliano is perfectly cast as the weaselly Teddy, who may be genuine but hardly ever seems sincere or trustworthy.

Writer / director Nolan is the real star; apart from the tightly plotted script, he crafts a tense, suspenseful, and exciting film that keeps you alert and guessing as events unfold. It's visually slick and briskly paced, and looks more expensive than its mere $5 million budget would have you believe. There is a sense of emotional detachment to the film even when it is meant to be affecting, which I can only attribute to a directorial quirk of Nolan's, as it's a trait I've noticed in all of his films. I'm satisfied with his style (including the fact that even his big budget films feel unassuming and small), but it does have its critics. The final aspect of the film that deserves a mention is the mournful low key score that has a minimal but quite effective presence.

'Memento' is a great film, one of those that, ironically, you will remember for quite a while. It embodies excellent filmmaking that brings to life an original and quite unconventional story. Nolan has gone on to make some pretty good films following this, but I don't think any of them are as well put together and impactful as this one.

No Country for Old Men (2005) by Cormac McCarthy

No Country for Old Men (2005) by Cormac McCarthy

Another novel recently made into a film that I've managed to read first. Unlike 'I Am Legend' though, this book's adaptation looks (and apparently is) very, very faithful to the source material, so much so that nigh on every line in the trailer seemed to the best of my recollection to be lifted verbatim from Cormac McCarthy's novel. Which is a good thing because the novel is propulsive and cinematic, and the story and subject matter seem to be suitable for the sensibilities of the guys who made Fargo.

'No Country for Old Men' is a bleak western thriller set in Texas in the early eighties that follows the criss crossing paths of three men. It begins with Llewellyn Moss, a relatively poor chap who works as a welder, coming across a drug deal gone bad in the middle of the desert. He comes across a bag full of money and makes the life changing decision to take it, knowing full well that it could be the end of him; he follows this choice with a really bad one that causes him to end up on the run. Anton Chigurh is an assassin / problem solver working for the drug buyers who comes looking for the money and picks up Moss's trail. Chigurh is a relentless and amoral being, a man of pure evil who believes himself to be merely an implement in a world of cause and effect, and he leaves a trail of corpses behind him in his quest. Sheriff Ed Tom Bell is the man who has to deal with the aftermath of Chigurh as he tries to get to Moss first and save him, and also end the spate of killings.

The book is framed at the start of each chapter by ruminations from Sheriff Bell, who recounts his past and his thoughts on the country and how much it has changed for the worse. The main narrative jumps back and forth between the three protagonists as events unfold, with the consequences of those events being depicted from different perspectives. A word about the style of the book - it's quite unconventional and feels very abrupt. I mean that in a good way, as McCarthy really does (as the blurbs promise!) convey a great deal using few words, and creates a strong sense of place and character. The dialogue is superb; it's just sharp and to the point, full of curt exchanges and philosophical ruminations. It's also often quite hilarious. The style in which it is written makes it seem impossible for it to be read in anything but a 'Southern' accent, almost as if the accent is purely dictated by the style of speech.

Although it doesn't dwell much on backstory, the characters come to life vividly through their actions and speech. It's a non stop thrill ride that is hard to put down, and it features quite a few tense 'action' sequences and violent shootouts. Like I said, very cinematic. Though it also sometimes throws you for a loop by having things happen 'offscreen' where the reader is only entitled to the aftermath and is left to fill in the blanks. Which is very doable, even though I will confess a few plot points ended up eluding me. While a thriller on the surface, the book acts as a commentary on morality, the degradation of values in society, and the prevalence of evil and violence in the world, with the latter being embodied to great effect by the frightening Chigurgh. The character of Chigurgh is almost like a human terminator, relentless and unstoppable and impossible to bargain with; a force of nature.

'No Country for Old Men' is a terrific book, downbeat but compulsive and a fairly quick read that makes quite an impression. I don't necessarily fully agree with the sentiments expressed by the character of Bell (presumably they echo those of McCarthy), but I can see where they're coming from and a lot of what he says about society and the world are true; while I don't think people have necessarily become worse per se, modern society does facilitate base behaviour on a larger scale than it once did. In the midst of being thrilled and amused, the book leaves you with something to chew on and doesn't really offer a ray of sunshine at the end to make you feel better about the world. But don't let the pessimism put you off, as reading this book is worth your while.