Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 03 May 2006

To date, we’ve seen Ethan Hunt (Cruise) survive two impossible missions.  Now, he’s ready for a third.  If he continues at this rate, I’ll be wondering if there even is such a thing as an “impossible mission”.

I speak jokingly of course.  When I thought about the film afterwards, I realised that it’s the insanely crazy situations that Tom Cruise manages to extricate himself from that gives it such appeal.  In Mission: Impossible 3, he dodges missiles from a fighter jet, jumps off a high-rise building and is electrocuted by live wires.  It won’t win awards for realism but there were certain scenes (the high-rise jump in particular) that gave me a genuine adrenalin rush.

The villain in this instalment is played by Academy Award winning actor Philip Seymour Hoffman (Capote).  He plays Owen Davian, a wealthy arms dealer with friends in the Middle East.  Davian’s illegal activities have attracted the attention of the Impossible Missions Force who want evidence against this slippery individual so that he can be bought to justice.

Hunt and his team (including Ving Rhames and Jonathan Rhys Meyers) have a range of gadgets at their disposal that would make James Bond jealous.  They go too far in my opinion and the best example is the “face making” machine used early in the film.  When speaking of dramatic action flicks, I see the Bourne Identity series as much more appealing.  The bad people are brought to justice with intelligent thinking rather than ridiculous gizmos.

My other gripe with the film is how serious it takes itself.  There’s no reality in the plot so I thought the writers would have taken the chance to throw in more humorous moments.  Not that I want to compare the film to the James Bond series (which has its own weaknesses), but at least Bond has a sense of humour.  The Ethan Hunt character is too full-on for my liking but I confess this is a matter of taste and others will feel differently.

Mission: Impossible 3 is the first major film directed by J.J. Abrams, the man who directed the first two episodes of the Lost television series.  He has also written a few screenplays including Joy Ride, Forever Young and Armageddon.  It’s a superb debut for Abrams who has made the most of a $150m budget.  It looks awesome on the big screen and credit also must go to stylish cinematographer Daniel Mindel (The Bourne Identity, Domino).

No member of the cast stands out but neither do any let the film down.  Cruise is his usual self and whilst I haven’t liked him in many of his recent films, his passionate personality suits the role.  Hoffman has a fun time as the villain but doesn’t have as much screen time or dialogue as I anticipated.  His character is very much underdeveloped.

Mission: Impossible 3 is easily the best film in the series to date.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 24 April 2006

It’s not often that a horror film is rated R here in Australia.  We’ve seen two though in the last two months – Hostel first and now The Hills Have Eyes.  I think the only reason I go to these violent horror flicks is to see how far they are prepared to “push the envelope”.  We have become more and more desensitised to violence over the years and filmmakers have to find new ways to scare us silly.

For this reason, there is no point recommending this film to anyone perturbed by bloodshed.  You won’t find any Oscar-worthy performances or anything resembling a realistic storyline.  You only need see this flick if you want a fright and in my honest opinion, you won’t even get that.  For all the fake blood and special effects that are used, I was never on the edge of my seat.  The Aussie slasher flick Wolf Creek was rated MA and offered much more in the scary department.

The Hills Have Eyes is set in an isolated part of the American desert.  A family on a sight-seeing expedition have become stranded when their car (and attached campervan) crashes on a lonely, dirt road.  This is no accident.

Many years ago, the American military performed nuclear tests in the desert.  The resulting radiation had a catastrophic effect on a small number of miners working in the area at the time.  They became deformed and their intent on revenge has seen them develop a taste for human blood.  This won’t be the first time they’ve preyed on an unassuming family…

The movie is actually a remake of Wes Craven film of the same name which was released in 1977.  There’s no denying that this new film is violent but as I hinted at earlier, it doesn’t add up to much.  There are standard killings and standard close escapes.  Even fans of the horror genre will be disappointed.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 29 April 2006

In Final Destination, a group of school students boarded a flight for Paris.  One of them freaked out after having a premonition that the plane would crash.  All of them were kicked off the flight and as it turns out, the plane did crash and all on board were killed.  You may have thought these students were lucky by “cheating death” but not so.  Death got his revenge and the surviving students were soon killed in a series of bizarre accidents.

It was a different plot but the same concept in Final Destination 2.  A young girl had a premonition of a massive car accident and intervened to save those involved.  They survived the day but not too many after.  With more freaky accidents, Death came and took them all one by one.

Nothing has changed in Final Destination 3.  This time around, a girl boards a rollercoaster and has a creepy feeling that it will go off the tracks, killing everyone.  She loses the plot and is taken off the ride by the attendant.  A few others disembark in the mayhem.  Lo and behold, the rollercoaster crashes and Death returns to claim those who escaped…

Having seen the first two films, I was left bored and frustrated by the third in the series.  It felt exactly the same.  There’s no originality and that you can do is sit there and wait for the next person to die.  The way each of them is killed is mildly interesting but that’s the only positive I have to say.  The dialogue was dreadful and some of the scenes between stars Mary Elizabeth Winstead (Sky High) and Ryan Merriman (The Deep End Of The Ocean) had me cringing with disgust.

With Final Destination 3 performing very well at the U.S. box-office, you have to think that another sequel will be put into production by New Line Cinema.  I hope I’m wrong.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 24 April 2006

19-year-old Tsotsi (Chweneyagae) is the leader of a small gang.  He and his crew roam the streets of Johannesburg looking for people to steal from.  There’s no excuse for his actions but you have to feel somewhat sympathetic for Tsotsi.  He was orphaned at a young age, never properly educated and lives in a shack in a poor, depressed community.  The chance to earn a decent living isn’t there and never will be.

On a fateful evening, Tsotsi heads to the wealthy side of town and steals a car from a woman who is parked outside her luxurious home.  The screaming woman resists and Tsotsi shoots her through the chest.  Leaving her on the driveway, he takes the car and flees.

It is not until he has driven some distance that he realises there is a newborn baby in the backseat.  Tsotsi’s first instinct is to leave the baby in the abandoned car but deep down, he knows he can’t do it.  He takes the baby back to his home and tries to take care of it whilst deciding what to do next.

As each day passes, the situation becomes more and more desperate.  He has no idea how to look after a baby and keeping her presence a secret from the other members of his gang is proving difficult.  The police are also closing in after the mother (who survived the shooting) provided a composite sketch of her attacker.  Conflicted as to what to do next, Tsotsi faces the toughest decision of his life…

The one film festival award I value above all others is the People’s Choice Award and the Toronto Film Festival.  More great films screen at Toronto than at any other festival and previous winners of this prize have included Hotel Rwanda (2004), Whale Rider (2002), Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon (2000) and American Beauty (1999).  Tsotsi took the honours in 2005 and went on to win the Academy Award for best foreign language film.  That’s not bad for a small film shot a tight budget (just $3m).

Tsotsi is based on a novel by Athol Fugard and has been brought to the screen by Gavin Hood, a South African born director who went to film school in the United States.  The absorbing story and the force of its characters make it impossible not to be drawn in.  You will feel for Tsotsi but also for the people he has hurt.  How will you feel about it?

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 29 April 2006

Georges (Auteuil) and Anne (Binoche) are in their living room watching a video tape.  On the tape is a long, unedited shot of their house taken from across the street.  It was left at their front door in a plastic bag with no note.  The tape includes footage of Georges leaving for work and walking right past the camera.  Both he and his wife can’t believe that he didn’t see it.  They are also confused as to why it has been sent and who made it.  Is it a prank?

Their curiosity turns to anxiety when another tape is left at the front door.  It too has been left in a plastic bag at the front door.  On this tape is a long, unedited shot of the house in which Georges was raised as a child.  He now realises this is not a random act.  Someone is playing a carefully considered game over which he has no control.

A third tape arrives.  This time, it shows a street sign, an apartment building and a door with a number on it.  Georges follows the clues from the video and locates the door.  He knocks.  The door opens.  Standing in the doorway is a man he doesn’t immediately recognise.  Then, he does.

That’s about as much information as I’m willing to give.  I’d love to give you more but that would be spoiling a film which absolutely must be seen.  With five minutes, this film had grabbed me by the back of the neck and wasn’t letting go.  Hidden is two hours of increasing, unrelenting suspense.  You will analyse every conversation and scrutinise every facial expression with the hope of finding some hint as to who is behind the video tapes.  It’s the ultimate mind-boggler in the tradition of Reservoir Dogs and The Usual Suspects.

At this point, I will issue a strong warning.  The ending is open to interpretation and not all the questions will be answered.  If you are a moviegoer who likes everything wrapped up at the end, this film will feel pointless.  If you do take it on, I’ll offer some advice and that is to pay very close attention to who is in the final scene.  Intrigued yet? 

I saw Hidden with two friends and we were still discussing it the next day.  The more we thought about it, the more we appreciated the craftiness of writer-director Michael Haneke (The Piano Teacher).  In the film, someone is playing a game with Georges.  In the cinema, Haneke is playing a game with us.  He’s only showing us what he wants us to see.  It reminded me very much of David Lynch’s Mulholland Drive.

Haneke’s ability to create tension is what separates the film from your usual thriller.  There is no soundtrack and many scenes contain next-to-no dialogue.  He doesn’t want us to feel comfortable in the theatre and this is exemplified by a scene late in the film.  It is so shocking and so unexpected that people were literally screaming at the session I attended.

Hidden has been showered with awards including the best director prize at the 2005 Cannes Film Festival.  It also won best picture, best director and best actor at the European Film Awards (honouring the best of European cinema).  It’s remarkable!