Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 17 January 2004

“No hand can deter me from my battle for the truth.” – Veronica Guerin

Veronica Guerin was a relentless journalist who wrote for Ireland’s Sunday Independent.  Between 1994 and 1996, her stories about the drug lords of Dublin left her synonymous with the Irish public.  Never before had someone had the guts to expose these criminals and finally the citizens of Dublin were learning of the seedy underworld corrupting their city.

Her popular, award winning articles were also read by those who featured in them.  Suffice to say they did not enjoy their anonymity being shattered in millions of newspapers across the country.  In October 1994, bullets were fired through the windows of her home.   In January 1995, a masked man entered her home and shot her in the leg.  In September 1995, she was heavily beaten by a suspected drug lord whom she was trying to interview.  Finally, in June 1996, she was shot by two men whilst sitting in her car at a set of traffic lights.  She was the first journalist ever to be murdered in Ireland.

Guerin’s story is the stuff of which movies are made.  She was an unfortunate victim but she was living proof that one person can make a very big difference.  Within a week of her death, the government introduced laws clamping down on drug dealers.  Those responsible for her death were brought to justice and eventually over 150 arrests were made.  It would be wrong to say she was solely responsible for this but her actions went a lot way.

Australian actress Cate Blanchett puts on a superb Irish accent to play this revered character.  Some viewers have been critical that the film portrays Guerin as too much of a “saint” and that she wasn’t as passionate and determined about her plight as the film makes out.  Perhaps this is so and I do not know the fact well enough to dispute them.  Still, I enjoyed the overall feeling of this picture and whilst we often criticise them (me included), there are many journalists who do an amazing job and will stop at nothing to expose hidden truths.  Director Joel Schumaker makes reference to this in the finale when he points out that 189 journalists have been killed in action within the last six years.  That’s a staggering number.

The film itself was shot in Dublin on a budget of just $17m and the most has been made of the money and location.  It’s ironic but Joel Schumaker is always at his directorial best when working with a small budget.  Compare the brilliant Tigerland, The Lost Boys and Falling Down with the not-so brilliant Batman & Robin, 8MM and Bad Company.

Receiving only a limited release in Australia on a small number of screens (I’m not sure why), Veronica Guerin is a very unique and interesting story which I heartedly endorse.  A little sugar coated but aren’t all true life adaptations these days?

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 16 January 2004

63-year-old Harry Sanborn (Nicholson) loves dating younger women.  He’s always got the upper hand which allows him to complete the phase of dating them, sleeping with them and then dumping them.  It sounds perverse but he does this will elegance and class.  In fact, a leading New York magazine recently wrote a glowing article on this wealthy, never-married bachelor.

Harry’s latest flame is a cute twenty-something named Marin Barry (Peet).  She’s invited him to her mother’s empty beach house for the weekend but don’t intend on spending too much time outside the bedroom.  Harry’s packed his Viagra and is set to roll.

A few major glitches will then ruin his weekend but more importantly they will change his life forever.  Firstly, Marin’s mother arrives unexpectedly at the beach house.  Erica Barry (Keaton) is a very successful playwright and has come to the house to clear her mind and work on her latest play.  She is horrified to see Marin dating someone older than herself but her sister, Zoe (McDormand), pleads with her to be reasonable and give Harry a chance.

That first night at the beach house, Harry suffers a mild heart-attack and is rushed by Erica and Marin to the hospital.  There he is treated by Dr Julian Mercer (Reeves) who agrees to release him under the condition that he stay close to the hospital for a few days in case there are any further complications.  Of course the only such place is the beach house and with Marin returning back to the city, it’s just Harry and Erica on their own…

Jack Nicholson is his usual suave self and a fitting choice for the role but it’s the amazing Diane Keaton who shines in one of her best ever performances.  Her character is strong on the outside but as we learn as the film progresses, she is highly vulnerable on the inside.  You do feel for her and credit to Keaton for bringing out these feelings in the audience.

Writer/director Nancy Meyers (What Women Want) doesn’t let the film get too bogged down in the drama and keeps things light with appropriate comedy.  There’s a scene where Erica cries at her keyboard but then starts laughing, then crying, then laughing again.  This sums up in a nutshell the mix of drama and comedy on display.  It’s a little long in duration (over two hours) but one can be excused considering we’re looking at two of the greatest actors going around.

With a few subplots working in the background, the ending isn’t quite as predictable as you might think.  I was kept on my toes throughout and often outsmarted when trying to pre-empt the story.  There are strong messages underlying the plot and those of an older age will appreciate them most.  Although having made close to $100m in the United States so far, you’d have to say the film is appealing to all age-groups.

Something’s Gotta Give will undoubtedly be one of the best films of the romance genre we’ll see in 2004.  Reward yourself and appreciate its intelligence before the usual sappy, predictable garbage comes back to litter our screens for the rest of the year.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 16 January 2004

I’m finding The Last Samurai very difficult to swallow.  Even before seeing the film I had my doubts and I do hope these have not jeopardised my “impartial” review.  I can’t picture an American warrior going to Japan to teach them how to fight.  Whether this story is true or not, I am not sure since the website doesn’t provide much detail in that regard.  Perhaps there are elements of truth but in the end I didn’t find it at all interesting.

Our story begins in America where we meet Captain Nathan Algren (Cruise).  He fought gallantly in the Civil War but now the war is over, he’s struggling to find work and he’s become an alcoholic.  A friend comes to him with an opportunity and Algren is introduced to Omura (Harada), a close adviser to the Japanese Emperor.  There is division amongst the people of Japan and a small ancient group known as the Samurai have been caused the Council much grief.  They want a group of top American soldiers to train the Emperor’s army so they finally defeat the proud Samurai.

On their very first battle, the Emperor’s army is defeated and Algren is taken captive by Katsumoto (Watanabe), the leader of the Samurai.  Algren is not sure why his life has been spared but all is soon revealed.  There is a lot about the Japanese culture that Algren does not understand but as it becomes clearer to him, so too will his direction and path in life.

It’s a long, melodramatic film and I am none too pleased with the style that director Ed Zwick (Glory) has adopted.  The battle scenes feature the same tired slow motion shots, dramatic music and obvious sound effects.  And yes, even in the 1870s, it was somehow possible for one guy to kill about 10 others at once.  At least when they did this in Kill Bill it was funny.  Like his acting career of late, Tom Cruise gets way too many second chances.

Speaking of Cruise, I believe him to be miscast in this role.  I have seen Tom Cruise in some great films but his over-the-top passionate delivery and general good looks don’t suit this character.  Instantly coming to mind are several other actors who I believe could have been better.  The only benefit in having Cruise is that at least it creates more box-office security having a headline name in the title role.  In his first role in an English speaking movie, Ken Watanabe gives the film’s best performance as Katsumoto.

I’m very curious as to what the reactions to this film will be in Japan.  Director Zwick knows much about Japanese culture and has wanted to make this film since he was teenager but there looks to be too much of an American studio influence.  The “culture” that Zwick is trying to show isn’t coming through on screen.  Consequently, this will probably be the last time I see The Last Samurai.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 01 January 2004

Cold Mountain, adapted from the novel by Charles Frazier, is a love story set against the backdrop of the American Civil War.  Those looking for battle scenes and detailed information on this tragic war will not find that here.  The film begins with Inman (Law) barely escaping a massive gunpowder blast on the war front but from there he is transported to a hospital where he will begin his journey home.

During these scenes, Director Anthony Minghella takes us back shortly before the war began.  Inman was a quiet tradesman living in the small town of Cold Mountain.  He was working on the construction of a chapel for the new Reverend (Sutherland), when he first caught glimpse of Ada Monroe (Kidman), the Reverend’s daughter.  There is a definite attraction between the two but both are hesitant at instigating contact.  They soon have no choice when the war breaks out, Inman is forced to leave and as he does so, the two confess their love for each other.  Ada promises to wait at Cold Mountain for his return.

Three years then pass which takes us into the present tense.  Bands of troops roam the countryside in search of “deserters” – those men in hiding who refuse to fight.  Prepared to take his chances, Inman flees from the hospital and begins the long trek to Cold Mountain.  At home, Ada desperately continues to wait although she has fallen on tough times.  Her father has passed away, she has no servants to tend to the farm, the house is a pig-sty and there’s hardly any food to eat.  Help though will soon arrive when a young lady named Ruby (Zellweger) comes to her doorstep offering assistance.  The two will need the comfort of each other as more troubling times lie ahead…

It’s unusual to see a romantic drama where the leading characters spend so much time apart from each other.  It has made it somewhat difficult to create feeling in the audience but Minghella has still done a great job in doing so.  He is helped largely by Jude Law and Nicole Kidman who deliver marvellously passionate performances.  You can sense the hurt as they think of the other so very far away but as they get closer together, you excitedly await the scene where both with finally come together.

The film cost a staggering $83m and thankfully the recent Golden Globe nominations will ensure audiences go out to see the film.  It certainly was a huge financial risk for Miramax but you could not ask for a better crew behind the camera.  Anthony Minghella has assembled the same gifted team which he worked with on his previous two films, The English Patient and The Talented Mr. Ripley.  Gabriel Yared provides a haunting film score, Australian John Seale immaculately captures the setting with his lens, Dante Ferretti has crafted some wonderful production sets, and Walter Murch has brilliantly brought the entire 155 minutes together in the editing room.

Cold Mountain is a little long and some of the secondary characters could have been sliced without detriment to the film.  Natalie Portman plays a single mother and Philip Seymour Hoffman plays a corrupted priest but their talent seems wasted considering their characters serve little purpose.  The same could be said for Jena Malone and Giovanni Ribisi.

The award season is once again in full swing and I can’t help but lick my fingers at the enticing list of films slated for release in the first two months of 2004.  Cold Mountain is not the pick of the bunch but it ranks very highly.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 16 January 2004

There are few laughs to be had in Steve Martin’s new comedy, Cheaper By The Dozen.  In fact, I can’t remember exuding more than a sarcastic chuckle at any time during the hour and a half.  This to me is a big problem.  Steve Martin hosted last year’s Academy Awards and I was in hysterics at some of his great out-liners.  Why then is he not funny here?  Simply put, the script is not up to scratch.

Tom (Martin) and Kate (Hunt) live in the country with, as the title tells us, a dozen kids.  It’s exhausting work and they have both sacrificed dreams and given up better work opportunities to keep the family happy together.  Finally though, a window has opened up for both.  Tom has always wanted to coach his college’s football team and an old friend has called upon him for the job.  The problem being that the family will have to move to Chicago and they are none too pleased with the idea.

Within days of the family moving, Kate receives a call from a publisher with the exciting news that her first ever book is to be put into print.  The publisher asks that she go to New York for three days so that details regarding the soon-to-be best seller can be ironed out.  She’s reluctant to leave Tom alone with the kids but he guarantees he can handle the situation and off she goes.

The plot from here dictates that anything that can go wrong, will go wrong.  Tom is required to work long hours coaching but the kids need him at home.  Soon, the newspapers are publishing articles questioning his ability to juggle the responsibility.  The kids too are having a rough time.  They are struggling to find friends at their new school and even the eldest are subject to bullying.  The pressure is mounting on Tom to put things right but can he give up his lifelong dream for the sake of the family?  Need I answer this?

This is a G-rated flick so there it’s pretty cut-and-dry.  I like my comedies with a bit more edge and the most apt way of describing this film is that it would be perfect to take my grandmother to see.  What I mean is that the jokes are simple, there’s nothing controversial, there’s some sappy sentimentality, and there’s a happy ending.  There are many out there who enjoy such a movie (including myself sometimes) but as I have already indicated, this isn’t good enough.

It saddens me to say that Steve Martin is the weakest of the cast.  It’s painful to watch him rely on poor jokes and then use zany facial expressions in trying to entertain.  As his wife, Bonnie Hunt was far superior in the acting stakes.  To woo younger audiences, young heartthrobs Piper Perabo, Hilary Duff, Tom Welling and a surprisingly enjoyable Ashton Kutcher have been included amongst the cast.  You won’t see a lot of them but they’re there nonetheless.

Some other critics have made point of the strange inconsistencies in Cheaper By The Dozen with the most obvious being that of salaries.  A job as a college football coach can’t pay that well and yet the family has a very comfortable lifestyle and lives in a mansion with 11 bedrooms in a well-off neighbourhood.  Does this add up?  No.  Once again, the weakness of the script has been exposed.  It’s the tickets themselves for this film which should be cheaper by the dozen.  Much cheaper.