Monthly Archives: February 2013

Despite the explosion of the zombie genre in the last decade, the undead themselves have become predictable one trick ponies. They stumble around. They drool. They’re most commonly very stupid. They hunger for human brains. And eventually, they’re killed off with a bloody gunshot to the head. It’s almost impossible to put a new spin on zombies without taking away the very characteristics that made them so memorable in the first place.

Warm Bodies provides a solution to that problem. Not by changing the zombies themselves too much, but by putting them in a different context, in this case a romantic comedy. A zom-rom-com if you like. In this instance, the zombie apocalypse is caused by an addiction to technology, which when you think about it is a hauntingly plausible idea. It sounds like the kind of zombie film David Cronenberg would make. And yet, the apocalypse itself is barely explored. It’s central theme of love being the best form of redemption removes the edginess of the premise, but it’s still admirable that a film like this could adopt such a positive outlook.

After the apocalypse, a zombie known as R (Nicholas Hoult) lives in an abandoned airport with fellow members of the undead. When R and a group of other zombies attack a group of humans, he meets Julie (Teresa Palmer) and is suddenly overcome with a strange affection for her. Throwing caution to the wind, R rescues Julie from the rest of the pack, and the two soon find themselves developing a strong bond.

R really could be the first of his kind; a zombie that feels there could be more to life than eating people. Or at least that’s what he hopes. But then again, there are many things that make R more human than zombie. He tries to remember his name, but is only certain it starts was an R. He fantasises about the past human lives of his zombie friends at the abandoned airport. Nicholas Hoult does a great job bringing it all together, combining understated charm and wit with the occasional scene of snarling and drooling.

Teresa Palmer’s Julie may not be quite as well drawn out as R, but at least we can see why they like each other. The unlikely friendship that forms between the two of them feels genuine, and that’s mostly down to the rather natural chemistry between Hoult and Palmer themselves. John Malkovich also makes an appearance as Julie’s heavily militarised father. Malkovich for the most part gives a restrained performance, no doubt because he knows the material is already strange enough.

Director Jonathan Levine handles the source material by novelist Isaac Marion very well. He gives the film occasional flourishes of style, mainly during the scenes that have an impressively cold grey tint. He doesn’t forget to provide plenty of humour during the dark and bleakly comic portraits of the day-to-day life of a zombie. Levine handles it more like an indie film that has more in common with smart and quirky rom-coms like (500) Days of Summer than it does with romantic teen fluff like Twilight.

Ultimately, Warm Bodies has a central universal theme, despite having all the niche qualities of a cult classic. It’s about the difficulty in communicating what you truly feel. R struggles to tell Julie how he really feels, at points rather comically, because he thinks he’ll seem creepy. The film manages to keep the rather darkly charming laughs coming throughout, despite the final act which drifts into more unoriginal action movie territory.

There are times when it feels like the film has made the point it’s trying to make, but it still feels the need to hammer it home a little too much. All things considered however, that is a minor fault. There are after all very few zombie films around that are so warm that it makes the threat of an apocalypse seem charming. It’s a heartwarming and entertaining delight that has the, erm, guts to go in a different direction.

Image reproduced from ropeofsilicon.com
Video reproduced from YouTube / warmbodiesmovie

Beautiful Creatures is a very appealing film. I was quite surprised by this entry. The trailer looked very ‘Twilight’-ish, even the posters had a Twilight feel. I’m rarely impressed when a movie ‘mimics’ another, so I assumed it was going to be a poor man’s Bella and Edward spin.

But it was very good, Alden Ehrenreich and Alice Englert make a great onscreen couple. With acting heavyweights Emma Thompson and Jeremy Irons on board, this drama lit up the screen.

The basic story is Lena Duchannes (Englert) is actually a magic person, a ‘caster’. She won’t get a sweet sixteenth birthday, for that’s when she’s chosen for either the light or dark side. Ehrenreich plays her love interest Ethan Waite, who has dreams about Lena before he meets her.

Irons plays Lena’ uncle Macon, whilst Thomspon plays a very mean townsfolk member, Mrs. Lincoln, whose intent on getting rid of poor Lena from the local school. The whole town ends up against Lena, who unsuccessfully tries to hide her magic.

Perhaps breaking a load of classroom windows during a lesson isn’t a good idea. D’oh!

Ethan’s best pal Link (Thomann Mann) provides the humour which is a welcome relief as it does get a bit dreary with the lovebirds bemoaning their love and how difficult things are.

But with a great script and good leads this film gets away with quite a lot. I found the CGI patchy in some scenes, the moaning from Ethan and Lena- which could have been cut… but for me it didn’t dampen the viewing. It was rather was like a favourite nephew/niece being naughty. You just forgive them.

A very good effort from all involved, which is why I award 7/10

Image reproduced from very aware.com
Trailer reproduced from You Tube/Hollywood streams

“Lincoln” is an unexpected triumph. You expect it to be a talky biopic, that as a consequence is dry and dusty. It is talky, but it’s also thrilling. This is down to the precise vision of Steven Spielberg, who gives the story wonderful coherence. He doesn’t need to be loud and flashy; he’s making a movie about a political hero.

It’s taken a long time to get to cinema screens too. Steven Spielberg has owned the rights to Doris Kearn Goodwin’s biography “Team of Rivals” since 2001. Liam Neeson had been on board to play the 16th President of The United States from the start, until he pulled out in 2010 when Spielberg wanted to get filming underway. Playwright Tony Kushner was given screenwriting duties, and provided Spielberg with a 550-page script. Spielberg removed the last 80 pages and went to work. Instead of making an epic biopic, the director decided to dedicate the movie to the fiery final months of Lincoln’s presidency.

To be more specific, “Lincoln” is about the President’s attempts to pass the 13th Amendment – abolishing slavery. Here we have a quietly intellectual man, who knows that the very soul of his nation is at stake. Tony Kushner is more than aware of that, and it shows in his clinically planned screenplay. He knows that slavery came very close to continuing with the South contemplating a return to the Union. For Lincoln, it was now or never.

He’s even willing to give up a peaceful end to the Civil War in order to get his amendment passed in the House of Representatives, a place that feels like a grand theatre. Because Spielberg ditches the idea of biography in favour of a precise approach, the focus is very much on the heated situation, and the crisis hammering at Lincoln’s door. Many movies like this reveal a lot about the director’s mindset. Oliver Stone applied paranoia to “JFK”, and poked fun at an easy target with “W”. With “Lincoln”, we can see that Spielberg clearly admires the President. He likes hiss passion, and his quiet cerebral nature. Spielberg and Lincoln themselves have rather a lot in common.

Take for example their shared subtle intelligence. Steven Spielberg is often accused of being too restrained as a director, but “Lincoln” proves those naysayers wrong. He demands that the audience pay full attention, all the way through it’s two-and-a-half length. Every line of dialogue is thoughtful, and the language leaps from the screen. Every camera angle is precisely executed, and often have more to say than the dialogue. It’s designed with a consuming dark brown and grey tint, with flowing clouds of tobacco thickening the air.

Daniel Day-Lewis’ Abraham Lincoln is surrounded by a very strong supporting cast. There’s Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Robert Todd Lincoln, the President’ son. In the rather minor family based storylines, Lincoln attempts to protect Robert from enlisting, more than aware of all his other American sons who have fallen in the Civil War. Sally Field is Mary Lincoln, the President’s wife who drains him with her concern and heartbreak. James Spader is also a delight as the wonderfully moustached William N. Bilbo, a Republican once imprisoned by Lincoln, now lobbying for the amendment to be passed. But no one is having more fun than Tommy Lee Jones as Thaddeus Stevens, a man who could strike fear into any Congressman on the floor of the House.

It goes without saying though that this is Daniel Day-Lewis’ film. His performance is remarkably authentic, which isn’t really surprising for an actor who clearly immerses himself in research. It’s easy to see how Lewis and Spielberg make such a good partnership. Despite the final five minutes of the film shifting into melodrama, “Lincoln” is heartfelt, delightfully intelligent and gripping right until the very end. It’s the only way you can tell a story about a man who raised the bar high, and then had the audacity to clear it.

Image reproduced from insidemovies.ew.com

The Impossible starring Ewan McGregor and Naomi Watts was a great movie. It is so rare that a movie based on an actual event, touches the heartstrings.

Based on one family’s account of surviving the tsunami that struck south west Asia was so moving. A sterling cast, supported by impressive CGI and a great script made this the event of the month for me.

It’s all too easy to forget the trauma and suffering that people go through when Mother Nature goes on the rampage, particularly when these events are far from our own shores. News events rarely focus on one particular family’s point of view, so this film was a unique way to witness how people have to cope with what life has hit them with.

Ewan McGregor plays Henry Bennett whilst Naomi Watts plays his wife. If movies weren’t so well advertised, I would never have guessed playing around the pool would end up in a battle for survival. When the tsunami hits, it’s like you’re there with this poor family. The charisma between the actors made me instantly care for them, I became worried for them once disaster struck.

Spilt up and far apart, how would they cope? What was going to happen to them? You can only imagine how you would cope if something like this happened. It’s all too easy to assume, yes that’s what I’d do – when in fact you never really know. The tsunami effects were awe inspiring. Water was everywhere and the power it unleashed was devastating.

It was heart wrenching to watch, but I had to keep watching. I had to know what happened to them. This was how I knew I loved the film, it was believable and I was swept inside their world.

The younger members of the cast were brilliant. Lucas (Tom Holland), Thomas (Samuel Joslin) and Simon (Oaklee Pendergast) played the kids. I believe they have good careers ahead of them.

The choice of Ewan McGregor as the lead actor was shrewd. He is never the same in any movie I’ve seen him in. That guy can do anything!

I disagree with some comments that the larger impacts of the tsunami were ignored. One family wouldn’t think about the entire world – and that was this film’s focus. I understood that choice and it doesn’t diminish the film at all.

I think this will be the first film of 2013, to get a well deserved 10/10 from me. Of course my thoughts and prayers go to the real people who actually endured this.

Image reproduced from impmedia.co.uk
Trailer reproduced from YouTube/PvrPictures.

The Sessions is an alarming film, but not for the reasons it’s plot suggests. It’s not because of graphic, steamy sex scenes, or the fact that Helen Hunt bravely bares all to the camera. It’s because it handles the sexual nature of the story with tenderness and maturity. It rights all the wrongs left behind by the countless Hollywood films, that attempted to titillate with cheap sex scenes that have no meaning.

This isn’t an easy thing to accomplish, but it does prove to Hollywood that a grown-up film about sex can be done. And not just sex, but sex involving a severely disabled person. It’s certainly a subject that you don’t envy anyone tackling, but Ben Lewin’s film handles the subject matter with gentility, and rather extraordinary frankness. And it’s one of the few films you’ll see this year, or indeed ever, where a protagonist getting it on is a joyous and crowd pleasing moment.

Based on a real life story, Mark O’Brien (John Hawkes) is suffering from polio, that has left him severely disabled. He’s unable to move his arms or his legs, and yet he’s devoted his life to becoming a writer. When he’s asked to write an article about how disabled people approach sex, he realises that because he’s been so devoted to carving out a writing career, he himself is still a virgin. Realising he may not have much time left, he contacts Cheryl (Helen Hunt), a sex surrogate who, over the course of six sessions, helps him lose his virginity.

One of the bigger injustices with the Oscar nominations has to be the absence of a Best Actor nod for John Hawkes. He has been one of the most underrated actors in Hollywood for some time, ever since he announced his presence in the superb TV series Deadwood. He’s an actor of tremendous versatility, and he certainly demonstrates that here. It’s certainly a physically demanding role (you try not moving a single muscle even when your instincts tell you to), and he’s still able to elevate the story in touching, and often funny ways.

It’s not only John Hawkes though who has to carry the story forward. Helen Hunt is also relied on to take some of the strain. As the sex surrogate Cheryl, she delivers a performance of tremendous tact and delicacy. She’s a very warm presence, and seems surprisingly comfortable during the scenes where she bares all, some of which have a considerable length. Cheryl herself is a very professional person, who lays out the ground rules for Mark before they begin; there will be no more than six sessions, and the intention is by no means to fall in love. Mark understands this.

There is some excellent support along the way too. William H. Macy is a particular delight as the liberal priest Father Brendan, to whom Mark confesses that he has a desire to have sex with a woman. While during the early stages Father Brendan is comically a little out of his depth with the topic of conversation, he eventually tells Mark that God would tell him to go for it. He tells him that even though sex outside of marriage is a sin to the Catholic Church, that God would grant him a free pass on this one. And so Father Brendan caps off some humorous scenes with a moment of joyous compassion.

It’s very rare in this day and age, when special effects often take centre stage, that two actors are called upon to carry the heart of a film, but director Ben Lewin knows that it’s in safe hands. Lewin is himself a survivor of polio, with some disability. No doubt he’s very aware that the script and characters are right where they need to be. Although, when you strip away the emotion and sensitivity, the plot itself is rather formulaic. Many people will also wince a little when lots of mechanical detail is divulged regarding sex for the severely disabled.

The sex scenes themselves though are handled very tastefully, regardless of how graphic they are. We never actually see any intercourse take place, and that’s really a wise move on Lewin’s part. He knows it’s the idea of what is happening that prevails. And in the end, The Sessions really does serve as a gentle reminder of what a unique and joyous experience sexual intimacy is, and illustrates that we wouldn’t really want anyone to go through life without experiencing it at least once. It’s a film that celebrates being kind to one another, without resorting to cheap or corny tactics. Certainly an achievement that deserves more than just one Oscar nomination.

Image reproduced from joblo.com

Quartet has become the surprising tool of political debate in the United Kingdom over the past month. Because of recent events that are really too dull to get into, the status of the senior members of our society has been put under the political microscope, and Dustin Hoffman’s directorial debut is being used to illustrate that OAPs can live the closing years of their lives with vitality. This has probably come as a big surprise for the film makers, considering that Quartet is nothing but a gentle slice of fluff.

It’s all really come down to timing. First of all, politics have changed the context surrounding the film’s release. But second of all, Hoffman’s life affirming debut is just the latest in a wave of retiree films. In 2012 the joyous The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel became a surprise hit when retirees started flocking to the cinema to watch Dame Judi Dench and Bill Nighy growing old disgracefully in India. Hollywood figures there can only be two possible explanations for this; either the older generation are rediscovering cinema through films that appeal to them, or they’ve been going to the cinema all along and nobody noticed. It seems like a little bit of both.

The plot is certainly something that will resonate with the older generation. British treasure Maggie Smith plays Jean, a diva who reluctantly arrives at a retirement home especially for senior musicians. They’re planning an annual concert to celebrate Verdi’s birthday. It’s a concert that could save the retirement home from closure, so the rest of the residents try their best to convince the grumpy Jean to take part. To make matters worse, one of the residents, Reginald (Tom Courtenay), was briefly married to Jean before she cheated on him hours after taking their vows.

It’s the relationship between Jean and Reginald that takes centre stage. Maggie Smith and Tom Courtenay bring a lot of heart to their story of reconciliation, but there are points that test the audience’s patience a little. For example the conclusion of the film, which goes exactly the way you would expect it to, or rather the way you hoped it wouldn’t. It probably will go down as one of the corniest moments in cinema this year, and for the people who are not too forgiving for things like that, it may cause the stomach to turn a little.

This occurs mainly because of the honesty on Dustin Hoffman’s part. He knows he’s making a light and fluffy film, so makes no attempt to have it masquerading as something else. The only downside is that because Hoffman keeps things rather traditional, there is a serious lack of memorable moments, apart from a narrative issue that involves someone having what presumably is a stroke, and making a very quick recovery to be in the concert. Billy Connolly certainly brings in some laughs as Wilf, one of the residents. You can tell Connolly is having a good time making this film.

Pretty much the same can be said about the entire cast. Considering this is a film about the pressure of performance, the cast seem to be taking it easy. Perhaps this is down to the directing style of Dustin Hoffman, a man who has had more than his fair share of acting experience. He of course will know how to direct actors, and indeed cast them perfectly. That’s certainly one thing you can’t fault about Quartet – it does have a cast of actors that are perfect for their roles.

That is rather fortunate, because for the most part, the plot stumbles along a little. The characters are very genuine, and Dustin Hoffman deserves a lot of credit for making them so, but the plot has more in common with an early afternoon TV movie than anything cinematic. But it’s incredible light hearted charm will win a lot of people over, especially people of a certain age group. It still could have been smoother and funnier; a problem which could have been fixed with a few exotic marigolds.

Image reproduced from digitalspy.co.uk

If Martin McDonagh (In Bruges, Seven Psychopaths) ever wrote a horror film, it would be exactly like Grabbers. Almost like an Irish Shaun of the Dead mixed in with an invading monster of the Roger Corman tradition, Jon Wright’s second film is wonderfully silly and is very aware of it. For people who are sick to the back to teeth of terribly written and executed alien invader movies with massive budgets (Michael Bay, we’re looking in your direction) then Grabbers will go down very well as a witty and gory antidote. When the inevitable moments of bad taste do crop up, they’re delivered with such a cheery Irish smile that it’s almost impossible to resist. In many ways it’s filling in the gaps where Lake Placid failed to deliver.

The problem with many comedy-horror films is that they know how to bring the funny, but they don’t have the energy to deliver any decent scares. Here though, Jon Wright manages to keep everything on an even keel through what seems like very simple delegation. He saves the more humorous moments for the characters, while the alien invaders (aptly named grabbers) are able to do what they do best. And that usually involves swiping people away with big long greasy tentacles and drinking their blood. Hence their name. And the grabbers certainly don’t care about cinema conventions as they merrily spring up without any warning, claiming the lives of characters you were convinced were going to make it to the end. Think Samuel L. Jackson in Deep Blue Sea, only a few times over just to keep you on your toes.

So what exactly are the aforementioned grabbers? They’re aliens made up almost entirely of tentacles and teeth. They arrive on the back of a meteor which smashes into a small island off the coast of Ireland. The grabbers then start picking off the laid back inhabitants and drink their blood. Only these grabbers have one Achilles’ heel; they can’t drink blood that contains a high alcohol level. It’s almost impossible to even type this without grinning. In falls to permanently drunk Garda police officer Ciarán O’Shea (Richard Coyle) and the attractive, uptight new recruit from Dublin Lisa Nolan (Ruth Bradley) to try and find a way to stop the feckin’ aliens. You might be able to see where this is going now. What’s their big plan? That’s right; head to the pub for a massive lock-in.

It’s every bit as barmy as It sounds, but that’s what makes it such a joy to watch. There’s nothing entirely original about it; the grabbers themselves have a very basic design. But then that’s not really the point. It’s a victory for style over substance (again, Michael Bay we’re looking right at you). There are of course special effects, but these are used sparingly and only when it’s really necessary. It’s the boozy Irish charm that makes this linger long in the memory as a fun, Friday night monster movie experience that’s almost impossible to resist. Because of the limited budget it only has a limited release, but if you can then it’s definitely worth grabbing.

Image reproduced from bloody-disgusting.com

The Life of Pi is an ambitious film. It is a different way of telling a story, however due to choices of content and actors, it doesn’t hit the big notes.

The film lacked in any big names in a starring role. This is always a risk, it either works or it doesn’t. Gerard Depardieu (The Green Card) had a small role. Maybe that’s why he was listed as an ‘and’.

The cast selected were good but they lacked pizzazz as it was quite slow. There were a few comic moments but not enough. They didn’t gel as a family.

The main issue I had is the film was more like a nature program than epic blockbuster. As children will be going to this, I will be flagging some scenes that were shocking.

The style of going back and forth from ‘Pi’ as adult, child and teen was very confusing. The ‘adult Pi’ was being interviewed about his life. This was as exciting as grouting my kitchen tiles. The format was again too slow.

There was a lot of CGI employed, even for a swimming pool scene – no wonder they didn’t have a budget for a half decent script.

It diverges then into ‘child Pi’ exploring different religions. This contrasts against the nature theme. When a film doesn’t keep to a main focus, it becomes muddled. This is what happened. Slow and confusing is not a good starting point. Rather like racing across an icy lake in loose flip flops.

In one scene child Pi’s father went so mad, he made his son watch a tiger eat a goat at his zoo. A bit of an overreaction! And I found the scene completely unnecessary.

All the child was doing was feeding a tiger to say hello to it. The mother didn’t seemed fussed and just let the father carry on. The family discussion about religion at the dinner table was dire and dull.

The teen Pi (Suraj Sharma) then falls for a girl, the switch in story was very jolting. One minute he’s a child seeing a goat being eaten, then he’s a teen fancying a girl. Then he gets told the family is leaving India and going to Canada. This is main part of the film.

His father sold the zoo they had, all the animals had to shipped. They were going to start a new life in Canada. His father argues with Gerard Depardieu who plays the ship’s chef. All over having sausages and gravy with rice. If they were vegetarians, why not simply ask for rice? A fight breaks out and I’m wondering – what??? This is a plot? It served no purpose at all.

Pi becomes shipwrecked when a storm hit’s the boat, the only survivor along with some animals on the sole surviving lifeboat.

The boat sinking was good CGI, the way Pi battled the ocean was very good. He jumped off the lifeboat as the tiger swam aboard. Then the tiger seems to disappear, allowing Pi to get back in. A zebra crashes in the boat, despite high waves and being injured it stays in!

Now here are the main plot flaws, somehow an orangutan, hyena and tiger are all living below the canvas cover of the small lifeboat. The next day they appear and fight and run all over. How is that possible?

The sudden attacks between the animals was quite distressing. One minute all okay, then smack, bite and gulp! The hyena keeps going underneath the cloth. The hyena ignores the orangutan, then again there’s another sudden fight and the hyena kills the orangutan. Then the tiger appears and kills the hyena! It was very graphic. I was shocked.

The lifeboat itself would make Batman jealous! It had food storage, life jackets, some of the floor could lift up and become rafts! Pi could carve pieces to become sticks, it had loads of oars. There were even blueprints and survival manuals! It stayed afloat, even if sea water was coming in! And somehow plugged the hole all by itself! So its unsinkable!

Teen Pi wasn’t that heavy as he clinged to the canvas at the front and side. He wouldn’t have weighed as much as the tiger. And one zebra at the back would not counterbalance three big animals plus Pi near the top. This amazing lifeboat needs making!

But with only Pi and the tiger, the film went down further than the sinking boat. It was not entertaining at all. Somehow Pi makes a mini raft (yes there‘s even more stuff in the trunk, netting and loads of rope!), where he can store all the cans, bottles etc. He needs to be separate from the tiger. He can even sit on the tiny raft and lay back. Wow!

You know by laying the cans, and everything, out on the box something is going to happen! Que a big whale who just randomly comes along and knocks them all off. Yes the lifeboat never capsized and Pi’s makeshift raft is intact too.

Then after three weeks, Pi gets an idea to train the tiger! Gee, what a novel idea. Still it took Harry Potter nine months to figure out the Chamber of Secrets, so three weeks isn’t so bad I suppose. So it turned into ‘How to train your tiger’. Oh man, that was tedious!

That’s where I stopped. This is movie meltdown at its worst. What a mess. Like the Fosters boys would say in the adverts – ‘Good call’.

If this is based on a book, I’ll skip the book. It was a bold vision from director Ang Lee but one that didn’t work. Perhaps if the movie had followed Pi from a child to adult in progression, that might’ve worked. Also a carnivore animal is restricting. I would’ve gone with the monkey and zebra – at least he could do more with them. Even Clint Eastwood had a great monkey in some of his movies. ‘Hit ‘em again Clyde.’

Suraj Sharma does show promise, I don’t think for his first film he should’ve been carrying the main part of the film. He was good – but the task was too big. It’s too much to ask of an upcoming actor. I felt sorry for him.

I will give this 4/10. One for the orangutan and zebra (they weren‘t in it much), one for Suraj, one for the CGI of the ship going down and one for the most amazing lifeboat ever built!

Image reproduced from wikipedia.co.uk
Trailer reproduced from YouTube/IGNentertainment