Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 02 December 2012

We’ve seen teen films that revolve around dance contests (Step Up) and cheerleading contests (Bring It On).  Pitch Perfect uses the same formula and applies it to the world of a cappella.  For those unfamiliar with the term, I’m speaking of a group of singers who perform a song without using background instruments.

There are many players in this ensemble but most subplots seems to revolve around Beca (Kendrick) – a freshman who is about to start college.  After being overheard singing in the dormitory shower, she is strongly pursued by an all-female a cappella group known as the Bellas.  They’re in desperate need for fresh blood and to avenge their defeat in last year’s collegiate titles.

It’s something the introverted Beca would rather not be involved in.  She loves music… but singing isn’t her thing.  She dreams of being a DJ and spends her spare hours mixing songs together on her laptop.  Her father doesn’t approve however (as is often the case in such movies).  This forces Beca to join the Bellas and prove to her father that she can commit to a project and interact with others.

I’ll cut to the crunch and say that the broader story isn’t that important here.  What you need to know is that Pitch Perfect has a fun, likeable spirit.  It’s not a game-changer within the genre but I know plenty of people, myself included, who will have a great time watching this.  It’s like an episode of Glee in hyperdrive.

What makes the film work is the huge assortment of well-crafted characters.  Kay Cannon, a writer on the 30 Rock television series, has come up with a screenplay that seems to give the right amount of time to each individual. 

There’s the bossy, insecure leader of the Bellas.  There’s the cocky, arrogant leader of a rival group known as the Treble Makers.  There’s the singer who seemingly has no voice.  There are the two crazy commentators who pop up at each a cappella competition.  They’ve all got their idiosyncrasies and they’ve all got their fair share of witty one-liners.  It’s the kind of movie where the whole cast deserves credit as opposed to just one or two standouts.

The premise allows the characters to sing a variety of songs which contribute to the film’s terrific soundtrack.  The list includes Kelly Clarkson’s “Since You’ve Been Gone”, Flo Rider’s “Right Round” and Rhianna’s “Don’t Stop The Music”.  It’s not all modern stuff though.  A reference in the film to The Breakfast Club allows for the use of the Simple Minds song “Don’t You (Forget About Me)”.

With a surprising number of laugh-out-loud moments, Pitch Perfect is one of the year’s most entertaining releases.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 05 November 2012

The Sessions takes us inside a world that only a small few would be familiar with.  It’s based on the true story of Mark O’Brien (Hawkes) – a 38-year-old man who has been paralysed from the neck down, due to the effects of polio, since he was a young child.  He relies heavily on an iron lung to survive and requires constant care.

The premise centres on Mark’s hopes to lose his virginity.  He’s never had a girlfriend and he’s never had an intimate contact with a woman.  That’s about to change.  Thanks to the advice from a good friend, Mark has been given the details of woman who can help.  Her name is Cheryl (Hunt) and she’s a professional sex surrogate.

It’s a job that I was previously aware of.  Cheryl isn’t a prostitute – a point she makes clear at the very start of their sessions together.  Her role is to teach Mark the “basics” and to help him explore his sexual potential.  He will then the confidence and experience to increase his sexual activity in the future.

Writer-director Ben Lewin has made the decision to position the film somewhere between the comedic and dramatic genres.... and it works.  If you were to hear Mark’s story from a complete stranger, you might think of it as a terrible tragedy.  This is a guy who has almost no quality of life.  He spends every moment confined to a bed and struggling to breathe.  Not once has he experienced the sensation of an orgasm.

Mark has found a way to deal with the situation as best he can – by having a sense of humour about it.  He’s not afraid to make a joke and he seems to take great pleasure in stirring a local priest (Macy) with whom he has become friends.  Mark enjoys putting him to the test by asking what God would think of his use of a sex surrogate.

There’s another side to this story however.  We also see things from Cheryl’s perspective and it gives us an insight into this tricky profession.  She needs to establish trust with her clients and help them deal with problems that they’ve long suppressed.  At the same time, she has to be careful not to get too close from an emotional perspective.  It’s not easy.

The Sessions premiered at the Sundance Film Festival back in January and the performances have been talked up as “awards worthy” ever since.  John Hawkes (Winter’s Bone) is excellent in the leading role and deftly illustrates his character’s deep insecurities.  Hunt is also very good with her soothing voice and comforting disposition.  The scenes they share in bed together are both awkward and humorous.

The film skirts around a few issues and its look into Cheryl’s home life is a good example.  We see small glimpses of her interacting with her husband and son but they don’t offer as much as you’d expect.  As the priest, William H. Macy’s character could have also used a little more depth.  He pops in and out of the story for the sole purpose of proving a few laughs.

It can’t match the emotive power of films such as The Sea Inside and The Diving Bell & The Butterfly but The Sessions is still a nicely told story that makes you appreciate the things we take for granted.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 14 November 2012

Since cinema began, we’ve been able to take one book and turn it into one movie.  It’s not easy but it has been done time and time again.  Then, someone inside Hollywood came up with a revolutionary idea.  Let’s take the last novel in the Harry Potter series and turn it into two movies!  We can put out a press release and tell everyone that it’s because “the story is incredibly complex and to condense it into one film would not do it justice.”

I hope this person earned a promotion and a healthy bonus.  They found a way of doubling a film’s box-office without taking any risks at all.  The sixth film in the Harry Potter series made $934 million at the international box-office.  The last two films, which were based on the final novel, made a combined total of $2.284 billion (also thanks to the higher 3D ticket prices).

It’s clear to everyone that the real motivation in splitting a book into multiple films is to make more money.  I’d do the same thing in their position.  My problem is that from the point of view of a moviegoer, it feels like we’re being cheated.  Harry Potter & The Deathly Hallows – Part 1 was a tiring affair and it wasn’t until Part 2 that the action and the excitement began.

Sadly, it appears this trend is going to become far more frequent.  It’s been announced that the final book in the Hunger Games series (Mockingjay) will be split into two movies.  Director Peter Jackson has gone one step further and adapted The Hobbit into three movies!  Instead of looking for new ideas, Hollywood is grasping onto anything profitable and milking it for all its worth.

This leads us to… drum-roll please… The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part 2.  As for my thoughts on Part 1, the word “dull” appeared in my original review.  I also described the plot using just nine words – “Bella gets married, Bella has sex, Bella gets pregnant.”  Despite my disappointment, I did hope that it would follow in a similar vein to the Harry Potter series and finish with an enthralling second part.

I was wrong.  This is a weak movie.  The plot moves at a glacial pace and just when you think it’s starting to get interesting, you discover that it’s going nowhere.  The characters, developed no further than in prior films, emit almost no emotion and speak as if they have a gun to their heads while reading a ransom note.  They’re talking because they have to, not because they want to.

The music from the usually reliable Carter Burwell (Fargo, Being John Malkovich) doesn’t suit the film’s tone.  I’m also puzzled by the very obvious special effects.  Are the scenes where characters are running through the forest supposed to look like a computer game?  Given that the first four films have reeled in more than $2.5 billion at the box-office, you’d have thought they’d have some cash to splash around on something better.  Was all the money wasted on helicopter flyovers?

My criticisms mean nothing though.  Fans of Stephenie Meyer’s novels and the earlier movies will love this.  They’re invested in the series and will be thrilled to see the final instalment in all its glory on the big screen.  I honestly hope they enjoy it.  I mean that.  As for everyone else, well, they’ll have no desire to go near it.  Even if I described this film as “amazing”, why would you go along if you haven’t seen any of the earlier parts (which are necessary viewing)?

As a joke, I often say that the best part of a bad movie is the closing credits.  The reason is obvious – the pain is over and you get to leave the theatre.  The joke is back on me because the closing credits in Breaking Dawn – Part 2 are the best part of the movie… but for a different reason.  They serve as a nice tribute to all the characters we have followed throughout the series.

With this book opened, closed, opened and closed again… I’m very, very keen to move on.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 04 November 2012

The Master marks the sixth film of the brilliant writer-director Paul Thomas Anderson (Magnolia, There Will Be Blood) and it is perhaps his most inaccessible to the wider public.  Anderson himself has said that “there’s not a lot of plot but hopefully we make up for it with an abundance of character.” 

I can’t believe I’m making this comparison but Anderson’s approach reminds me of the Big Brother television series.  There’s no strict narrative.  Rather, we simply watch the characters go about their day-to-day lives.  That’s not to say that it’s boring.  It’s just that our focus is different.  Instead of wondering what’s going to happen next in the story… our focus is on the characters and trying to understand who they are and what they’re thinking.

Part of my fascination with The Master is that it centres on such an aimless character.  Set in the early 1950s, Freddie Quell (Phoenix) is a solider who served in World War II and is struggling to assimilate back into society.  He has no friends, he can’t hold down a job and he has no interest in being social.  The only two things on his mind would appear to be sex and alcohol.

Roaming the streets late one night, he sees a lively party being held on a moored yacht.  He sneaks onboard and meets Lancaster Dodd (Hoffman), a published author and leader of a small philosophical movement.  The centre point of Dodd’s teachings is a technique known as “processing”.  He will ask someone a series of questions and then use the information to reveal details about their prior lives.

Dodd senses that Freddie has “wandered from the proper path” and takes him under his wing.  There’s an intense moment early in the film where Freddie submits himself to “processing” and Dodd tries to unlock his past.  It’s the first chapter in an ongoing battle between these two.

There are scenes that show us the bizarre nature of mind controlling cults.  There are scenes that highlight the difficulty of a solider coming back from war.  As I’ve alluded to above, that’s not what the film is really about though.  At its heart, The Master is a two hour journey that explores the relationship between Freddie and Dodd.

Why is the directionless Freddie allowing himself to be subjected to Dodd’s manipulative teachings?  Is it because he’s in search of a father figure?  It is because he’s mentally unstable?  Why does Dodd keep Freddie around, despite the misgivings of his wife (Adams) and close friends?  Does he see him as the ultimate challenge?  Does he enjoy the sense of the control?  These are questions you will ask yourself as opposed to the traditional “how will this story end?”

The Master is the first major film to be shot using 65mm film since Kenneth Branagh’s Hamlet back in 1996.  It involved using cameras that were decades old and with the support of cinematographer Mihai Malaimare Jr (Youth Without Youth), Anderson has created a beautiful looking film that comes with a 1950s feel.  Jonny Greenwood’s moody, uneasy score further enhances the experience.

Joaquin Phoenix (Gladiator) and long-time Anderson collaborator Philip Seymour Hoffman (Capote) have been touted as Oscar contenders for good reason.  The film draws much strength from the exceptional performances of both Phoenix and Hoffman and the riveting interplay between their characters.

You could argue there a few unnecessary scenes during the final 45 minutes but The Master is still an engrossing character study that again demonstrates the talents of Paul Thomas Anderson.

You can read my interview with Paul Thomas Anderson by clicking here.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 07 November 2012

A key aspect of any movie is how quickly it can reel you in.  In the case of Skyfall, this box is ticked in the opening few minutes.  The film begins with an elaborate action piece that is both exhilarating and suspenseful.  It surpasses the foot chase sequence (complete with the use of cranes) that I remember so vividly from 2006’s Casino Royale.  Coupled with the traditional opening credits, to the backdrop of a new song from Adele, you’ll realise early on that this is a very good Bond movie.

The premise is somewhat darker than we might expect.  A hard drive that contains the identity of every undercover operative within MI6 has been stolen by an unknown adversary.  M (Dench) isn’t sure who is responsible and what they plan to do with this incredibly valuable information.  Things get even worse when a bomb is detonated within MI6 that kills 6 civilians.

These incidents have left the British Government questioning the security within MI6 and whether the aging M is still the right person to sit at the top.  Is it time to bring in some fresh blood with some fresh ideas?  That seems to be the opinion of the Chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee (Fiennes) who has told M that it’s time to retire.

I’m sure she’d pick up a nice redundancy package but M has no plans of giving up her title just yet.  She’s called upon her most loyal agent, James Bond (Craig), to discover who is behind the attacks on MI6 so that she can restore the public’s credibility in the organisation she has long helmed.

Sam Mendes is a gifted filmmaker but he was a curious choice to director Skyfall given his background has been in critically acclaimed dramas such as Road To Perdition, Revolutionary Road and American Beauty (which won him an Oscar in 2000).  Burned with the weight of public expectation and the pressure of $150m budget, Mendes has delivered!  There’s a “style” about this film that elevates it above a traditional Bond flick.

It feels odd saying this about a James Bond movie but what impressed me most was the cinematography from 9-time Academy Award nominee Roger Deakins (The Shawshank Redemption, No Country For Old Men).  His work is highlighted by a beautifully shot action scene atop a Shanghai office building that uses reflected light to great effect.  Can someone please give this guy an Oscar before it’s too late?

Daniel Craig is again superb with his portrayal of Bond as a man who looks cool, calm and collected on outside but does have a few insecurities on the inside.  Judi Dench gets a lot more screen time than you might expect and is also terrific.  The playful banter between Dench and Craig is great and credit belongs with the screenwriting team.

Ben Wishaw (Bright Star) deserves a mention as stylishly dressed Q, the man within MI6 who provides Bond with his firepower and necessary gadgets.  The moment where he meets Bond for the first time will leave you smiling.  The character you’re most likely to remember though is the villain.  We don’t meet him until about half-way through the film but Javier Bardem (No Country For The Old Men) brings a camp-ness to the role that will surprise.

There’s a running theme throughout Skyfall about old versus new.  This is the longest running movie franchise in history (with 23 films over 50 years) and it’s a nice touch to see this added to the screenplay.  I don’t want to spoil too much but you’ll get the picture once you see the weaponry and cars that are used.  The plot involving M being replaced and Bond being past his prime also fits suitably within this message.

My excitement and enthusiasm started to wear off a little in the film’s second half and more could have been made of the finale but this is still one of the best Bond films ever made.  I can’t wait to see what they come up with next!