Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 12 February 2007

Music & Lyrics is a romantic comedy that uses a traditional formula.  The boy gets the girl, loses the girl and then gets the girl back.  Unless this is the first movie you’ve ever seen, you’ll be able to predict everything with near certainty.  Those more experienced filmgoers can play a game to see who can count the most clichés.

Despite this, the film is marginally saved by the comedy of star Hugh Grant.  I can only assume that many of his jokes were improvised because he’s much funnier than the rest of the cast.  His smart one-liners (which largely pay out himself) brought a smile to my hardened face.

Back in the mid 1980s, Alex Fletcher (Grant) was the star of a five-man boy band group called Pop.  During the film’s opening credits, we hear them sing a lovey-dovey song targeted at their adoring female audience.  For those that saw the Australian Film Boytown (released in October last year), you’ll be thinking of the many similarities.

Pop broke up in the early 1990s and Alex’s solo career flopped after just one album.  This loyal manager (Garrett) has tried to keep him in the business but Alex’s only jobs of late have been at high school reunions and small carnivals.  He’s more than happy to admit that he’s a “has been”.

Out of the blue, Alex is approached by star-of-the-moment Haley Bennett (Corman).  She’s recently been dumped by her boyfriend and wants someone to write the lyrics to a song which expresses her feelings.  She’s always liked Alex’s music and has given him less than a week to put words to paper.

Alex desperately needs the job (for both money and fame) but is struggling with writer’s block.  He’s great at composing music but struggles with the lyrics.  From nowhere, enters Sophie Fisher (Barrymore), the woman who waters the plants in his high-rise apartment.  After Alex hears her mumbling a few catchy tunes, he pleads for her help.  Soon enough, the two are staying up all night and putting together a perfect love song.

There are so many strange aspects to this story that didn’t agree with me.  I couldn’t understand why Barrymore’s character was so dumb in some scenes (e.g. watering plastic plants) and so insightful in others (e.g. her thoughts on not selling out).  There’s also a bizarre sub-plot involving an ex-boyfriend (played by Campbell Scott) and I couldn’t see the value in its inclusion.

In relation to Alex and Sophie’s growing relationship, I also had trouble believing it.  Alex comes across as being very self-absorbed and he makes some offensive comments early in the film.  Sophie doesn’t seem to care until the later stages when a flimsy argument is used to divide the happy pair.  It just didn’t feel right.

As for the ending, every loose end is wrapped up with ridiculous ease.  This may sound like another criticism but in a way, it’s not.  For those who like their traditional romantic comedies, the sweet finale will give you exactly what you want.  I was a fan of the conclusion but wish the opening and middle sections of the film had more substance.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 02 February 2007

Harold Crick (Ferrell) is a very ordinary man.  He routinely goes about each day and never does anything unexpected.  Each day, he wakes up at the same time, brushes his teeth with the same number of strokes and catches the same bus to work.  It’s always the same.

That is until one morning when Harold wakes up and hears a voice in his head.  It’s the sound of someone narrating his life.  He doesn’t recognise the voice but it knows exactly who Harold is and what he’s thinking.  Not only is the voice annoying but it’s disrupting Harry’s life.  He can’t concentrate at work and his regimented lifestyle is being disrupted.

Harold’s worries escalate when the narrator hints at Harold’s “imminent death”.  Looking for an expert in storytelling, he finds a literary professor by the name of Jules Hilbert (Hoffman) who wants to help out.  Jules thinks that somehow, Harold must be a character in an unfinished novel.  Harold’s fate rests in the typing hands of its author.  There’s only one way he can saved – Harold must find this narrator and tell her to stop writing.

As Harold looks for answers, a romantic interest is introduced.  Her name is Ana Pascal (Gyllenhaal) and she runs a small bakery.  After a fiery introduction, the unlikely pair hit it off.  They share a dry sense of humour and are soon spending more time together.  How will it end though?  Is Harold’s narrator writing a comedy or a tragedy?

This bizarre idea for a movie reminded me of two great screenplays written by Charlie Kaufman - Being John Malkovich and Adaptation.  Both were masterpieces which blended fiction and reality in a way I could never have imagined.  Stranger Than Fiction deserves praise for its originality but it’s not the equal of Malkovich or Adaptation.  It doesn’t have enough momentum to keep me intrigued for two hours.  I almost wish they had of taken this strange concept further.

The characters within this tale are all peculiar.  Emma Thompson’s performance as the film’s chain-smoking narrator didn’t sit well with me.  I think she’s too over-the-top.  My favourite scenes in the film were those shared by Dustin Hoffman and Will Ferrell.  It will be interesting to see if Ferrell can use this film to move into more dramatic roles (as opposed to his usual comedies).

If you’re a cinemagoer who is looking for something different, Stranger Than Fiction delivers on most counts.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 12 February 2007

Barbara Covett (Dench) is an elderly teacher at a middle-class English school.  You get the impression that she has grown bitter with age.  She doesn’t care if the children like her and she doesn’t respect the other teachers.  Barbara’s cynical attitude has many believing that her retirement is well overdue.

Having never married, Barbara lives in a small apartment with her aging cat.  With seemingly no close friends, she confides everything in her many diaries.  Each evening, Barbara writes about her daily events and inner-most thoughts.  It’s a peculiar routine which she has followed for many years.

As a new school year begins, a young teacher arrives at the school.  Her name is Sheba Hart (Blanchett) and her vibrant personality endears her to both teachers and students.  At first, Barbara is jealous of Sheba’s looks and popularity.  She keeps her distance and only observes Sheba from afar.

Barbara’s envy soon becomes an obsession.  Wanting to be a part of Sheba’s life, Barbara subtly strikes up a friendship.  It begins with light-hearted chats in the corridor and coffee after school.  Not long after, Sheba is inviting Barbara into her home so that she can meet her husband (Nighy) and two children.  The two are becoming close.

If I’m painting the right picture, you should be getting the sense that Barbara Covett is a very creepy person.  It’s hard to imagine Judi Dench playing the part but having now seen the film, I can declare that she is incredible.  The role requires two completely opposite personalities.  When we see Dench on screen, she comes across as sincere.  Yet when we hear her thoughts (through narration), we get a sense of how vicious she can be.  Some of her diary entries are shocking but will leave you in stiches.

The balance of their friendship changes as a result of an unexpected event.  Barbara spies Sheba having an affair with a 15-year-old student named Steven Connolly (Simpson).  Realising that she “could gain everything by doing nothing”, Barbara seizes the upper-hand.  She promises not to tell knowing that this secret will bring them even closer together.  Barbara now has Sheba’s life in her hands.

Notes On A Scandal is a very unnerving motion picture which has been written by Patrick Marber (Closer) and directed by Richard Eyre (Iris).  Marber has earned an Academy Award nomination for his screenplay.  He has smartly adapted Zoe Heller’s 2003 novel into a film which runs for just 92 minutes.  This may sound short for a thriller/drama but it’s an ideal length – there’s no time to be bored.

Also receiving deserved Oscar nominations are stars Judi Dench and Cate Blanchett.  Their two performances, combined with Philip Glass’s loud film score, are critical in creating the film’s intimidating atmosphere.

A few plot developments left me scratching my head but this is still a powerful film which tells a great story.  Let me use my own influence over you and suggest that you see it.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 31 January 2007

Writers Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer are the two most unoriginal writers in Hollywood.  Every movie they have made has been a spoof – a rip-off of more successful, more entertaining films.  Their credits include Spy Hard, Scary Movie and Date Movie.

I’ve seen some very funny spoofs (Flying High being my favourite) but Friedberg and Seltzer have completely run out of ideas.  I don’t think I could imagine a more humourless bunch of scenes than those I witnessed in Epic Movie.

The film takes off The Chronicles Of Narnia, Harry Potter, Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory, X-Men, Nacho Libre, The Da Vinci Code, Pirates Of The Caribbean and Snakes On A Plane.  It stars a bunch of no-name actors who are only starring in it because they can’t land a better role. 

Epic Movie provides no original laughs.  All it offers are silly re-enactments and impersonations.  Given the clichés that have riddled so many of Hollywood’s recent flicks, you’d have thought that they could have come up with something funnier.  I know everyone has a difference sense of humour but I’m struggling to think of anyone who would enjoy this.  The fact that it topped the U.S. box-office in its opening week is extremely concerning.

The Internet Movie Database informed me that this “epic movie” went for 86 minutes.  Thankfully for me, the credits were rolling after just 73 minutes.  What a joke.  How did I end up paying full price to see (a) a film that short, and (b) a film that awful?  Don’t make the same mistake I did.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 06 February 2007

Silence Of The Lambs is one of the great thrillers of all time.  It won the Academy Award for best picture, director, screenplay, actor and actress in 1992.  Only two other films, It Happened One Night and One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest, have achieved such an honour.

Hannibal Rising is a prequel to Silence Of The Lambs in that it looks at how Hannibal Lecter developed his evil nature and his love for human flesh.  Given the popularity of Lambs, I’m sure many people will want see this film out of curiosity.  It’s the same reason why they saw the previous two sequels – the below-average Hannibal in 2001 and the above-average Red Dragon in 2002.

I can best sum up my thoughts on Hannibal Rising in saying that it should have gone straight to video.  It has no big name stars and the storyline is very weak.  French actor Gaspard Ulliel (A Very Long Engagement) has been cast at the teenage Hannibal.  He tries to act cool and creepy but frankly, his performance was laughable.  There had to have been other actors who were more suitable.

The film begins in Lithuania where a young Hannibal witnesses the death of his parents in a World War II attack.  Not long after, his younger sister is slain by a group of Russian soldiers.  I’ll let you see for yourself how she is killed.

We then move eight years into the future and find Hannibal living with his widowed aunt (Li) in France.  Hannibal still has nightmares about his sister’s gruesome death and has decided to find and get revenge on the war criminals responsible.  His knowledge of both martial arts and the human anatomy will ensure that his enemies suffer as much as possible.

Director Peter Webber (Girl With Pearl Earring) has said that “you don’t have as much sympathy for Hannibal at the end as you do in the beginning, but you do understand why he ends up the way he does.”  I disagree.  I thought Hannibal’s transformation was ridiculous and his actions made little sense.  I couldn’t understand how he was always one step ahead of his opponents and how he always had the upper hand.

This story could have been told in ten minutes as a prelude to Red Dragon.  Instead, it’s dragged out into a two hour feature with little drama or suspense.  There are fleeting moments of tension but for the most part, it’s a dull snooze-fest.