Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 18 June 2012

You can (almost) always count on Pixar.  When it comes to creating top-notch animated movies, they are the best in the game.  I don’t think there’s any subjectivity in the argument whatsoever.  Since the made their debut with Toy Story back in 1995, they have released a total of 12 animated features.  These films have earned a total of 41 Academy Award nominations and have a cumulative international box-office of $7.2 billion.  All but two of the films have a critics score on Rotten Tomatoes exceeding 90%.

Brave is their latest and it arrives at the perfect time.  I’m a big fan of animated movies but I found the graduating class from 2011 to be somewhat underwhelming.  It was as if more time was being devoted to whizz-bang 3D graphics as opposed to creating compelling tales.

For me, the most disappointing trend has been a move away from dramatic storylines.  Writers tend to be favouring light-hearted, action-packed animated films (e.g. Kung Fu Panda 2, Puss In Boots) that don’t really challenge the audience.  These movies can be entertaining in their own right and I’ve enjoyed my fair share… but you can’t beat an emotive animated feature that pulls at the heartstrings.  The few recent examples that come to mind are WALL-E, Up and The Illusionist.

Brave is set in the 10^th Century and follows a young princess named Merida (Macdonald).  Her parents, King Fergus (Connolly) and Queen Elinor (Thompson), rule the kingdom of DunBroch and as their first born sibling, Merida is being groomed to follow in their footsteps.  It is her fate.  One day, she will be required to sit on the throne and lead her kingdom’s people.

Many would dream of being princess… but Merida does not fit into that category.  She’d prefer to live a life with no lessons and no expectations.  Her favourite days are those where she can escape her family’s castle and explore the mountainous countryside.  It gives her a chance to hone her already impressive skills with a bow and arrow.

Merida’s rebellious nature reaches a tipping point when she is told by her parents to find a suitor and get married.  They have organised a huge celebration where the sons of three lords will come together and demonstrate their strength.  The winner will get to stand alongside Merida at the altar and become a future king.

As you can imagine, Merida wants nothing to do with this.  She has no desire to get married at all.  With King Fergus doing everything he can to avoid conflict, it falls upon Queen Elinor to confront her daughter and explain that sometimes we don’t get to choose our destiny.  It’s just the way life is.

What follows is a captivating story filled with drama and a little magic.  Brave has a lot to say about “fate” and the importance of a bond between mother and daughter.  I also enjoyed its take on legends and their relevance in today’s world.  There are a few nice laughs but you’re more likely to remember the film for its strong characters and overall message.

You only have to look at a trailer to see that the quality of animation is superb.  A team of more than 80 animators have used new software to create a level of detail never before seen in an animated film.  You can feel the wind blowing through Merida’s beautiful red hair.  You can see the water vapour as her hand touches a waterfall.  I also loved the use of focus in certain scenes – as if it’s been shot using a real camera.

Brave is a shoo-in for an Academy Award nomination in the best animated feature category.  It sets the early benchmark and those films to be released in the second half of 2012 will have to work hard to catch it.

You can read my interview with star Billy Connolly by clicking here.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 05 June 2012

Prometheus wasn’t what I expected.  I'm confident that many others will leave the cinema with similar feelings.  This isn’t meant as a negative comment though.  I’ve always believed that the best way to see a film is to avoid trailers and know next-to-nothing about it beforehand.  It will often heighten your curiosity and reduce the risk of over-hyping.

The problem in this instance is that the film has been heavily promoted as a prequel to 1979’s Alien, also directed by Ridley Scott.  The two films inhabit the same futuristic world but the genre of this film is noticeably different.

Alien was all about thrills.  The crew of a spaceship found themselves under attack from a freaky looking creature.  I first saw it as a teenager and it scared me silly.  The film’s tagline neatly summed up the sense of hopelessness that came with the scenario – “in space, no one can hear you scream”.

Prometheus is set roughly 30 years before Alien and seems to be offering something more spiritual, more reflective.  Explorers on Earth have uncovered a series of ancient carvings that suggest that the human race was not created by God or through natural selection.  Rather, we were created by an alien race from a planet similar to our own.

Funded by a very wealthy businessman, a small team of explorers are travelling on the space ship Prometheus and are going in search of a faraway planet.  A few are there for the money (it’s a highly paid job) but most are driven by pure curiosity.  They want to know if their theory is true and if so, who created life on Earth and for what purpose?

I feel like I should say too much more because Prometheus is a film that relies heavily on suspense.  It’s the not the “jump out of your seat” kind of suspense.  It’s more one of mystery and intrigue as to try to work out where the story is heading next.

It’s a bold project from Ridley Scott (Gladiator, Black Hawk Down).  I saw this film with a friend (who loved it) and it provided much post-film discussion.  This fact alone elevates it above a run-of-the-mill science fiction flick that relies heavily on battle sequences and special effects.  Instead of offering nothing but action, action and more action, Prometheus tries to put forward a thought-provoking theory about our evolution.

The key word in my previous sentence is “tries”.  It’s a gutsy effort but the screenplay from Jon Spaihts and Damon Lindelof isn’t strong enough.  I was struggling with the characters from the very beginning.  To put it simply – they’re a bunch of over-emotive half-wits and I don’t know how they were selected for the mission.  They make such dumb mistakes and whilst I realise these mistakes help create the film’s drama (yeah, I know, it’s only a movie), I wanted something smarter.  The final half-hour is particularly silly.

As an example, if you’ve got an object rolling towards you, why do you keep running in a straight line?  Why don’t you simply move to the side and out of its path???  Don’t even get me started on the love making or the do-it-yourself surgery.

Michael Fassbender (Shame) delivers the film’s best performance as a strange, life-like robot that is trying to keep the crew focused on the task at hand.  He may speak with the same monotone voice but he finds a way to make his character rather unsettling.  I was less impressed with the other two big names.  Charlize Theron (Young Adult) spends too much time in the background and Noomi Rapace (The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo) irritated me with her simplicity.  It’s probably unfair to make this reference (since they are very different films) but I much preferred Sigourney Weaver in Alien – she’s a much stronger, more charismatic female heroine.   

The door is open to a sequel with many questions left unanswered as the credits start to roll.  I’m curious to know where this series will head next.  It has my attention but there’s room for improvement.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 13 June 2012

I saw 30 films at the 2011 Toronto Film Festival and my favourite was a lightweight romantic drama starring Michelle Williams and Seth Rogen.  Before you start rolling your eyes, give me a chance to defend my unexpected choice.  I’d like to put forward two key reasons.

Firstly, the story revolves around a fascinating character.  Margot is bright 28-year-old woman but she is also incredibly fragile and insecure.  There’s a moment early in the film where she’s visiting a colonial theme park and gets picked out from the crowd to be part of a show.  Margot is terrifyingly reluctant (you can see the look in her eyes) but eventually lets her guard down and enjoys the moment.  When a bystander makes a wisecrack, she quickly reverts back into her shell and scurries away.

This is Margot is a nutshell.  To borrow the lyrics from a Katy Perry song – “you’re hot then you’re cold, you’re yes than you’re no, you’re in then you’re out, you’re up then you’re down.”  She’s an emotional rollercoaster – one minute she looks like she wants to cry and the next minute she can’t stop laughing.

I realise that Margot’s muddled personality will infuriate some filmgoers but I loved her complexity. Michelle Williams brings the character to life with her finest performance yet (and yes, I've seen Brokeback Mountain and Blue Valentine).

Williams was the strongest part of My Week With Marilyn (released back in February) but she received no help from the stuffy, disappointing script.  That’s not the case here... which leads me to the second reason why Take This Waltz won me over – the level-headed screenplay from writer-director Sarah Polley (Away From Her).

Margot is happily married and lives a simple life with her husband, Lou (Rogen).  With much experience in the kitchen, he’s working on a chicken cookbook with the hopes of getting its published.  Lou is a nice, sweet guy.  There’s nothing wrong with him and the two seem perfect for each other.  You’ll get a clear sense of that as you listen to some of their silly conversations.  They share a particularly cute moment on the couch while Lou’s on the phone to his editor.

Through a serendipitous encounter (as it tends to be in the movies), Margot befriends a single guy who has moved into their street.  His name is Daniel (Kirby) and he is not shy with his affections.  Seizing on her “permanently restless” disposition, he convinces Margot to sneak out with him for an afternoon drink.  In the film’s best scene, Daniel then describes in explicit detail what he’d do to her if he had the chance.

We’ve see plenty of films where a man/woman cheats on their partner and they often cover familiar territory.  I enjoyed this particular scenario however because it finds an extra few layers of complication.  For starters, both guys are likeable.  This goes against traditional formulas where one suitor is portrayed as a schmuck to make the choice for the audience really easy.

Without giving anything away, the ending will leave you humming the lyrics to the 1979 hit song Video Killed The Radio Star.  More importantly, it will also provide you with food for thought.  You can dissect all three characters and decide if you’d have acted the same way if standing in their shoes.  There’ll be varying points of view and Polly isn’t trying to offer a “one size fits all” answer.

Following the Toronto Film Festival, I expressed my hope that the movie would get a cinematic release in Australia.  It’s taken nine months but my wish has been granted.  Don’t miss it.

Sarah Polley, Luke Kirby, Sarah Silverman and Seth Rogen at the world premiere of Take This Waltz.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 03 June 2012

Anyone who tries to craft an intelligent romantic comedy deserves points in my book.  It’s a genre I’ve grown to loathe but that’s because so many films can be classified as cheesy, predictable and unrealistic.

Just over a decade ago, actor-writer Jennifer Westfeldt adapted her own play and brought it to the big screen.  Kissing Jessica Stein was one of favourite movies of 2002 and focused on a woman who could never find the right guy because of her incredibly high standards.  In the end, she tries something completely different… and starts dating another woman.  It reminded me of a witty Woody Allen flick and was filled with sharp dialogue and unconventional moments.

When the program was released for last year’s Toronto Film Festival, one of the first films that I added to my “must see” list was Friends With Kids.  It marked the return of Westfeldt as a writer but also saw her take on a new challenge by sitting in the director’s chair for the first time.

The broad premise is nothing new.  Last year, we saw two comedies explore the idea of best friends have a relationship based purely on sex – Friends With Benefits and No Strings Attached.  Friends With Kids takes it a step further however.

Julie (Westfeldt) is in her mid-30s and, unable to find the perfect guy, is worried that the opportunity to have kids is slipping away.  It takes some debating but she ultimately comes to an understanding with her long-time friend, Jason (Scott).  They agree to have a child together whilst not actually engaging in a relationship.  It’ll take the pressure of Julie and she won’t have to worry about diving in too quickly with the wrong guy, for the sole reason that she wants a baby.

Ground rules are laid down with both Julie and Jason free to date whoever they want.  The parental responsibilities will be shared and in Jason’s words – he’ll “be 100% committed to this, half the time”.  It’s an interesting plan but as you can imagine, it won’t be simplest of social experiments.  Two couples who they regularly hang out with (played by Wiig, Hamm, Rudolph and O’Dowd) have serious doubts about the idea but prefer to gossip amongst themselves instead of publicly airing their concerns.

Following the traditional storytelling arc, a few spanners are thrown into the mix during the second act.  Julie and Jason both start dating.  She’s going out with Kurt (Burns), a divorced construction worker with kids of his own.  He’s going out with Mary Jane (Fox), a career-driven dancer who has no desire to have children.  Things are about to very complicated.

You’ll always have a sense where the story is going but there’s a lot to like about Friends With Kids.  The whole concept of “children first, relationship second” should provide some entertaining post-film discussion with your own friends.  Westfeldt explores both the positives and negatives of this argument through her sharply written screenplay.

The strong cast is also a testament to the material.  It’s no surprise to see Mad Men’s Jon Hamm (since he and Westfeldt have been dating for many years) but the list also includes three actors backing up from Bridesmaids - Kristen Wiig, Maya Rudolph and Chris O’Dowd.  It’s just a shame some of these supporting players don’t get more screen time.  Getting the best of the laughs is the underrated Adam Scott who as Jason, is never afraid to share what’s on his mind.

Last week in Australia, we were “treated” to What To Expect When You’re Expecting – a silly, shallow rom-com that looked at the trials and tribulations of pregnant women.  Offering more insight and digging much deeper into its characters, Friends With Kids is clearly a better film.  Do see it.

Megan Fox with husband Brian Green on the red carpet at the world premiere of Friends With Kids.

Jennifer Westfeldt on the red carpet at the world premiere of Friends With Kids.

Jon Hamm on the red carpet at the world premiere of Friends With Kids.

On the red carpet at the world premiere of Friends With Kids at the 2011 Toronto Film Festival.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 11 June 2012

I first heard about The Cabin In The Woods back in March.  It was generating serious buzz but many people were throwing out the warning message – make sure someone doesn’t spoil it before you see it.  Immediately, I was intrigued.  It brought back memories of films from the 1990s like The Crying Game, The Usual Suspects and The Sixth Sense.  Who doesn’t enjoy a good twist?

Of course, it was a lot easier to avoid spoilers back in the 1990s.  You certainly didn’t have to worry about social media.  It’d take you 15 minutes just to download a pixelated version of the trailer through your painfully slow dial-up internet connection.

That’s not the case now though.  Every time I’d seen a mention of The Cabin In The Woods in my Twitter feed, I’d quickly go to my “glazed eyes” look.  There was no chance that I’d be clicking on links to any reviews, articles or trailers.  Perhaps they were “spoiler free” but I didn’t care.  When a film relies heavily on surprises, you don’t want it being ruined.

Things started to get really messy in mid April.  The film was released widely in the United States and opened with a respectable $14.7m at the box-office.  Many here in Australia were putting the obvious question to Roadshow Films – why are you waiting until July to release the movie in this country?  With spoilers now all over the web, why not show it now and capitalise on the U.S. publicity?  It’d had reached the point where an online petition had been created to put pressure on the distributor.

What happened next was completely unexpected.   Instead of bringing the release date forward, Roadshow announced that they weren’t releasing it at all!  It would be going straight to DVD.  What the hell was going on?  A film that (1) had been profitable in the United States, (2) had overwhelmingly positive reviews from critics, (3) had been co-written by Joss Whedon (The Avengers), and (4) had an Aussie in a leading role (Chris Hemsworth) was going to bypass Australian cinemas.  Filmgoers were getting angry.  Those that had seen The Lucky One and The Five-Year Engagement were even angrier!

We all know there’s a happy ending to this tale.  The fact that I’m sitting here and writing this review is proof of that.  Roadshow buckled.  In early May, they put out a press release stating the film would receive a small release in Sydney and Melbourne in June.  It still wasn’t good enough.  After more pressure, cinemas in Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth announced that they too would be screening the movie.

We often hear about the dark side of social media but here’s a great instance where the “power of the people” have produced a positive outcome.  This movie deserves to be seen in a darkened theatre with a decent-sized audience.  That was my experience when I caught it at the Gold Coast Film Festival.  If you’re up for a horror-thriller that doesn’t always follow a predictable formula, make sure you don’t miss it.

I personally wouldn’t consider it a game-changer but The Cabin In The Woods kept me on my toes and has many interesting elements.  Perhaps it's been a little over-hyped.  It’s good but not great.  The movie marks the directorial debut of Drew Goddard (writer of Cloverfield and the TV series Lost) and was filmed way back in 2009.  Financial difficulties within MGM saw it sit on the shelf for close to two years and it was ultimately sold to Lionsgate in mid 2011 for the cheap price of $12m.  A great buy.

Lionsgate wasn’t the only big winner.  He didn’t know it at the time but it turned out to be a life-changing role for Australian Chris Hemsworth.  Writer Joss Whedon, impressed with his performance, recommended him to Kenneth Branagh for the lead role in Thor.  The rest is history.

I’ve written 650 words and am yet to mention the plot.  That’s no accident.  I think I’ve made it clear that the less you know about this film, the better.  A group of five college students go on holidays to a remote cabin in the woods.  Some stuff happens.  Then some other stuff happens.  What more do you want?  The end.