Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 05 April 2011

Sucker Punch is what you’d get if you mixed Mulholland Drive, Showgirls and Tomb Raider and then turned it into a music video.  It’s an audacious effort from director Zack Snyder but unfortunately, it doesn’t work.  It’s actually quite boring.

The film begins with a lengthy musical montage.  We see a teenage girl (Browning) being locked up in a mental asylum by her vindictive step-father.  He wants to make sure she never gets out.  He has bribed the doctors and asked them to perform a lobotomy.

As the doctor gets ready to insert his scalpel, the film completely changes.  The girl now finds herself as a prisoner in a brothel.  In five days time, a wealthy guy known as the “High Roller” will be coming to collect her.  She realises that her only chance of survival is to escape.  It won’t be easy given the tight security but she will helped by four new friends and her show-stopping dancing ability.

This is a strange movie and the early reports from the United States suggest that it isn’t sitting too well with audiences.  Shot on a budget of roughly $80m, the film has pulled in just $29.8m over its first 10 days.  It slipped a staggering 68% during its second weekend – a clear sign of poor word of mouth.

I feel somewhat harsh in criticising the film because at least it’s trying to be something different.  As evidenced by 300 and Watchmen, Zack Snyder is continuing to push his own distinctive style of filmmaking – heavy on special effects, music and lengthy slow-motion sequences.  Dialogue is not in his repertoire.  He’d prefer to let the visuals do the talking.

Sadly, that technique doesn’t work here.  I was intrigued by the opening but as the film progressed, I realised that there wasn’t much to the story at all.  I felt like I was just watching fantasy sequence after fantasy sequence.  It’s hard to engage with the characters and connect with the story when you’ve no idea what’s going on.  I wish I could have video taped the audience’s puzzled facial expressions at the preview screening.

It’s worth mentioning that the two leading actresses in this film are both Australian – Emily Browning (A Series Of Unfortunate Events) and Abbie Cornish (Bright Star).  Both look stunning on screen but it’s a shame that the screenplay doesn’t require more of them.  I could say the same for the whole cast – particularly Jon Hamm (Mad Men) in a ridiculously tiny role.

Sucker Punch is too much style, not enough substance.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 23 March 2011

Barney Panofsky (Giamatti) has lived a pretty interesting life.  He’s been married three times, he’s produced a successful television show and he’s even been accused of murder.  I don’t know quite how to sum up his personality but there’s a bit of everything in there – he’s seductive, he’s neurotic, he’s impulsive.

Barney is now in his mid-60s and hasn’t been in the best of health.  It seems to have given him a newfound clarity about himself.  He realises that he’s in the final chapter of his life story and so he takes the opportunity to reflect back on how he got here.  What we’ll see is “Barney’s version” of events.

The film delicately mixes genres by recounting some of the humorous moments and heartbreaking moments in Barney’s life.  He certainly had an up and down ride when it came to love.  He met his third wife at the wedding reception for his second marriage!  The film’s tagline aptly sums it up – “First he got married. Then he got married again. Then he met the love of his life.”

It takes a little while to warm up but Barney’s Version is a charming film that will leave you reflecting on your own life.  I’m not in my mid-60s just yet but if I do make it that far, how will I look back on my life today?  Do I appreciate what I have and am I making the most of my opportunities? 

Paul Giamatti (Cinderella Man) gives a fantastic performance and he deservedly won the Golden Globe award for best actor in a comedy.  He has the perfect demeanour for this character – a little rough around the edges but hard not to like.  He’s backed by a strong supporting cast including the elegant Rosamund Pike (An Education) and the scene stealing Dustin Hoffman (Rain Man).

Barney’s Version seemed to get lost amongst the other contenders during the recent awards season in the United States but it’s nice to seeing it getting a release in Australia.  Make sure you check it out.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 30 March 2011

I’m not really sure how much I should reveal about the premise of Never Let Me Go.  I haven’t read the much loved novel, named the best of 2005 by Time Magazine.  I also hadn’t heard too much about the film prior to its release.  The trailer makes it looks like the elegantly told yarn of two girls falling for the same guy.

That impression stayed with me during the film’s opening moments.  Kathy, Ruth and Tommy were three pubescent youngsters who attended the Hailsham boarding school in England.  This was a strict school.  Their headmaster (Rampling) laid down firm ground rules and the students went about their day in a regimented fashion.

It was the Kathy who first developed a crush on Tommy.  They shared a few sweet moments but things changed when her best friend, Ruth, snuck in and stole Tommy’s affections.  Best described as shy and timid, Kathy’s reaction was to do nothing.  She stepped back and quietly watched the developing relationship between Ruth and Tommy.

By this point, we were about 25 minutes into the film.  I’d finished my popcorn and reclined back into my seat, comfortable with the way things were going.  Then, something happened.  There was a scene in a classroom that left me stunned.  I wanted to jump up in the crowded theatre and scream out “what???”

Those familiar with the book or who have heard other reviews might already know what I’m referring to.  I’m choosing to keep my mouth quiet.  The reason is simple – I want others to be surprised too.  It's the head-scratching twist that I'll remember the film for most.  I want to talk to other friends about it but I’m going to have to wait until they’ve seen it first.

Even with the twist, the heart of this film doesn’t change.  I’m going to borrow a phrase from Shakespeare and call it a tale of “star crossed lovers”.  People fall in love every day but sometimes, fate has other plans for them.  That’s my overly simplistic way of summing up this complex romantic drama.

Whilst I was intrigued by certain elements, I left the theatre with a feeling of disappointment.  It was like I hadn’t seen the whole story.  I realise that’s part of the film’s mystery but I was still frustrated.  It didn’t quite fit with my pragmatic disposition.  I wanted more information.  I wanted answers.

Keira Knightley (Pride & Prejudice), Carey Mulligan (An Education) and Andrew Garfield (The Social Network) are three of the finest twenty-something actors working today.  That said, I had trouble buying into the romance shared between them.  Maybe it’s because of their character’s detached personalities but perhaps it’s also a fault of the screenplay.  More time needed to be spent developing their relationships.

Kazuo Ishiguro’s book may be a hauntingly beautiful read but this film hasn’t inspired me to read it.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 20 March 2011

Every child should have access to a quality education.  This ideal has been spouted by politicians for decades.  There’s a humorous clip in Waiting For Superman that shows a string of U.S. Presidents preaching about education and why it is one of their most important policies.

Has anything changed though?  Has the education system in the United States improved?  Or has it deteriorated further?  These questions are asked in the latest film from Academy Award winning documentarian Davis Guggenheim (An Inconvenient Truth).

Guggenheim has tackled this controversial subject matter from a number of angles.  First and foremost, he looks at the children themselves.  He has picked a group of kids from low social-economic background and shown the difficulties that they face in getting a decent education and progressing on to college.

Evidence suggests that the public school system in America is lagging behind the rest of the world.  Amongst 30 developed countries, they are ranked in the bottom third in both science and math.  Roughly 70% of students in the 8^th grade cannot read at that level.

Those statistics aren’t good but there are certain schools that do perform very well.  You can actually check their results on certain websites (similar to our My School system here in Australia).  Why do they outperform other schools?  Guggenheim believes it comes down to one similar answer – they have the better teachers.

The problem this creates is that many parents want to send their kids to these “better” public schools.  When there is an over-enrolment, the school is forced to host a public lottery.  The parents turn up and pray that their number is drawn.  It’s crazy stuff.  A child’s education is effectively put in the hands of Lady Luck.

Guggenheim then shines the spotlight on those with the power to make a difference – the politicians, the bureaucrats, the school boards, the unions and the teachers.  Many have tried to initiate change but they have been met with the brick wall known commonly as “the system”.  What adults say and what they do are very different things.  They may say that a child’s education is important… but in reality, it’s their personal job security that comes first.

Like any documentary, I’m sure some will disagree with the points that Davis Guggenheim is making.  That’s to be expected but it will help generate a badly needed debate on this subject matter.  I’m not saying Guggenheim has all the answers but he makes a persuasive argument that there are fundamental flaws within America’s education system.

Waiting For Superman left me with plenty to think about but I wish the film had of focused more on the stories of those fighting against “the system”.  In particular, the tale of superintendent Michelle Rhee and her battle against the teachers unions.  They were more interesting those revolving around the public school lotteries (which were a little overdone).

We’ve been treated to an impressive crop of documentaries over the past few months (GasLand, Exit Through The Gift Shop, Inside Job) and here’s another one to add to your viewing list.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 28 March 2011

“Looking forward to a Matthew McConaughey movie tonight. Never thought I’d ever say that.”  That was a tweet I posted a few hours prior to the preview screening of The Lincoln Lawyer.

I couldn’t elaborate on Twitter given the 140 character limitations but my reasons were twofold.  Firstly, this was not a romantic comedy.  I’m sure that was a relief to Mr McConaughey as it was to me.  Let’s just say you won’t find films like Ghosts Of Girlfriends Past, Fool’s Fold and Failure To Launch in my personal DVD collection.  Secondly, this film boasts a killer cast.  When I saw the list of names on the poster, it had my attention.

Having now seen the film, I can say that it’s worth the price of admission.  The Lincoln Lawyer is a smooth thriller that offers decent twists and intriguing subplots.  Based on the novel by Michael Connelly, it’s reminiscent of the John Grisham adaptations we saw throughout the 1990s.  The pieces fit together a little too neatly in these types of films but they’re still fun to watch.  They always have you cheering for the reluctant hero, hoping they’ll expose the truth and giving the bad guys what they deserve.

Our protagonist in this story is a slick defence lawyer by the name of Mick Haller (McConaughey).  He doesn’t always do things by the book but he gets results.  If you find yourself up on a serious charge, this is the guy you want representing you.  He exudes confidence and can sweet-talk almost anyone.

Haller finds himself with a new client.  32-year-old Louis Roulet (Phillippe) has been charged with rape and assault.  Roulet is from a wealthy family and claims that it’s a set up.  He tells Haller that the woman is a vindictive prostitute who looking to pursue him through the civil courts and land a big cash settlement.

Haller’s first thought isn’t one of guilt or innocence.  He’s more concerned about how much he’ll get paid.  It’s a dream job in the sense that his client is rich and he can therefore charge whatever he wants.  As the case progresses however, his focus will change.  There’s something not quite right about the facts presented and so he uses the help of a good friend (Macy) to investigate.

The film moves along at a brisk pace and there aren’t many lulls during its two hour duration.  You could make a valid argument that the film should have been a little longer.  With so many characters, there isn’t enough time to explore their background and their relevance to the story.  A good example is the relationship shared between Haller and his ex-wife (Tomei).

That said, the quality of the cast does a lot to overcome these limitations.  Matthew McConaughey does a nice job creating a flawed yet likeable hero. Marisa Tomei and Ryan Phillippe are great too.  Of the supporting players, William H. Macy, Josh Lucas, Michael Pena and Bryan Cranston make an impact in almost every scene in which they appear.  They add further flavour to the meat in this ensemble.