Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 19 December 2019

I often lament that film titles are boring and unoriginal when compared to those we see in books, songs and theatrical productions.  That’s not the case here.  Are we talking about a portrait of a lady… on fire?  Or is it a portrait… of a lady on fire?  There’s also room for interpretation when it comes to “portrait” and “fire”.  Is it a reference to something physical or do these words carry a different meaning?

The answer to all of these questions is “yes” which highlights the complex, beautiful nature of this feature film from French director Céline Sciamma (Water Lilies, Girlhood).  Its richness was revealed at the Cannes Film Festival back in May, where it won the award for best screenplay, and it’s now being honoured more widely with critics’ awards and appearances on annual “top 10” lists.

Sciamma takes us back to the 18^th century where, in a period of history prior to photography, the only way to capture and preserve one’s image was via the painting of a portrait.  This relevant because Héloïse (Haenel) is a young French woman who, through the intervention of her mother, is engaged to a wealthy suitor she has never met.  He has requested a portrait of his bride-to-be so he can see what she looks like before the big day arrives.

The problem is that Héloïse has no desire to marry and hence, refuses to pose for any painter.  It’s the reason her mother has adopted a sneakier, more cunning approach.  She has employed the services of a young female painter, Marianne (Merlant), but asked this not be revealed.  Marianne’s job is to befriend Héloïse, spend time with her, and use the learnings to secretly paint a portrait without her knowledge.  All of this takes place on a near-deserted island off the western coast of France.

Portrait of a Lady on Fire is one of the year’s best films (and I can confidently say that given it’s being released on Boxing Day).  It’s the kind of movie I like – one that relies on eye movements, facial expressions and gestures as opposed to forced, unnatural dialogue.  Just as Marianne studies her subject matter, so too do we as the audience.  These two characters are continually “sizing each other up” as they seek information whilst also maintaining their guard.  Stars Noémie Merlant and Adèle Haenel are outstanding.

Cinematographer Claire Mathon (Stranger by the Lake) makes use of great camera angles (such as when Marianne sees Héloïse’s face for the first time) and composers Jean-Baptiste de Laubier and Arthur Simonini heighten the mood during key scenes by using a choir-heavy music score.  Some may see it as slow but this is a careful, skilfully assembled drama where it feels every scene and every image has been thought through in immaculate detail.

Portrait of a Lady on Fire earned a Golden Globe nomination for best foreign language film but we won’t be seeing it at the Oscars as each country can only submit one film for consideration.  I’m yet to see France’s official submission, Les Misérables, but if it’s as good as this, I’ll be surprised.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 25 November 2019

45-year-old writer-director Rian Johnson (Star Wars: The Last Jedi) loved Agatha Christie books growing up and now, thanks to his growing influence in Hollywood, he gets the chance to create a murder-mystery of his own for the big screen.  There’s nothing understated or restrained about the set up.  A character describes the case as being like a game of Cluedo and it’s an apt description given its clichés and farcical nature.

The location is a huge, lakeside mansion adorned with statues, ornaments and paintings.  The victim is a renowned mystery writer (Plummer) who has been found dead at his 85^th birthday party.  The suspects are an eclectic group of family members who are all given a plausible motive to within the film’s opening half-hour.  The detective (Craig) is an mysterious individual described as “the last of the gentlemen sleuths”.   The only thing missing is Colonel Mustard and a candlestick!

There’s a catch though.  In a recent interview for Variety magazine, Johnson stated that the “whodunit” element of such movies is often the weakest part and he wanted to take that onus off viewers.  I don’t want to give too much away but you won’t have to wait until the final scenes to see all the pieces of the puzzle fit together.  The film changes tack at several points and becomes more of a quirky, offbeat comedy as opposed to something borrowed from the pages of Agatha Christie or Arthur Conan Doyle.

I’ve read some glowingly positive reviews for Knives Out thus far but my thoughts are mixed.  It boasts a huge ensemble cast but the likes of Jamie Lee Curtis, Michael Shannon and Toni Collette are given next-to-nothing to do.  The opening sequence of interviews are unnecessarily drawn-out and the film is overstaying its welcome at 130 minutes.  I’d preferred something more fast-paced.

The two positives are easy to spot.  Daniel Craig (Casino Royale) gets the best of the dialogue as the humorously named Detective Benoit Blanc.  He keeps everyone guessing (including the audience) throughout the film as to whether he’s incredibly astute and ridiculously goofy.  Ana de Armas will be lesser known to mainstream audiences but her career is on an upward trajectory following her memorable performance as a hologram in Blade Runner 2049.  She too has fun with her role as an anxious nurse with a propensity to vomit when telling a lie.

Rian Johnson deserves credit for giving the whodunit genre a good shake-up and whilst Knives Out wins points for creativity, I didn’t care about these characters as much as I should.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 02 December 2019

The Addams Family was created by cartoonist Charles Addams in 1938 and since that time, it’s been tailored into television shows, animated series, TV movies, feature films and Broadway musicals.  Perhaps the most well-known adaptations are the 64-episode, black and white TV show from the mid-1960s (starring John Astin and Carolyn Jones) and the two popular movies from the early 1990s (starring Anjelica Huston and Raul Julia).

With few artistic mediums left to utilise, directors Conrad Vernon and Greg Tiernan have gone with an animated feature film.  It makes it a little easier to bring these creepy-looking creatures to life and it also helps in assembling a cast who can do all their work over a couple of days in a recording booth.  Voices you’ll recognise include Oscar Isaac, Charlize Theron, Allison Janney, Bette Midler and, if you’ve got an astute ear when it comes to mumbling, Snoop Dogg.

The opening 10 minutes or so provide the background details of this iconic monster family.  After being attacked by a group of “racist” humans, they fled to an old, deserted mental asylum in New Jersey where they’ve lived for the past 13 years.  “It’s hideous, it’s horrible, it’s home” is the way they describe their well-fortified residence which comes complete with a bottomless pit and a “whine” cellar.

The parents, Gomez and Morticia, aren’t given much to do and so the film’s focus falls on their two children.  Pugsley (Wolfhard) is a bomb-creating prankster who is preparing for a coming-of-age ritual similar to a bar mitzvah.  Wednesday (Moretz) is a guillotine-loving teenager who is tired of being confined to the house and wants to see the real world.

The two kids have a role to play when, for curious reasons, the Addams Family decide to visit a nearby town and naively befriend its human population.  It’s here where they come face-to-face with Margaux Needler (Janney), the conceited host of a popular home-makeover show similar to Grand Designs.  Margaux isn’t one to embrace diversity and so, using an online Facebook-style chat group, she spreads lies about the monsters to ensure they’re not welcome.  It escalates further from there.

The Addams Family is a disappointing feature that lacks a strong, compelling narrative.  It has monsters doing/saying weird things and humans acting like huge jerks but when that’s all you’ve got for 87 minutes, the novelty quickly wears thin.  Subplots involving interesting characters (such as the demon who possesses the house) don’t get much time to breathe given the rushed, haphazard way the film moves from scene-to-scene.  Parts could have been cut (such as the introduction) to make room for more meaningful plot points.

A sequel is planned for 2021.  Hopefully it has more to offer.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 22 November 2019

There was no doubt that a sequel would be made.  In 2013, Frozen reeled in $1.3 billion at the global box-office making it the highest-grossing animated film of all time (not adjusted for inflation).  Critics were just as enamoured and the film won Academy Awards for best animated feature and best original song (“Let it Go”).

This time around, the key ingredients are largely unchanged.  Inspired by a research trip through the forests of Scandinavia, writer-directors Chris Buck and Jennifer have returned with a fresh, creative story.  Songwriters Robert Lopez and Kristen Anderson-Lopez are back on board with 7 new songs including the memorable “Into the Unknown”.  Kristen Bell, Idina Menzel, Jonathan Groff and Josh Gad have all reprised their roles as the film’s reluctant heroes.

If your memory is a little hazy as to what took place in the original movie, there’s a humorous sequence at the end of the opening act where the talking snowman, Olaf (Gad), provides a fast-paced summary.  It culminated with the magical Queen Elsa (Menzel) and the brave Princess Anna (Bell) harnessing their collective talents to save their small kingdom from the villainous Hans.  The tale was loosely inspired by Hans Christian Andersen’s fairy tale, The Snow Queen.

The five-person writing team have done well to craft something distinctively different for the sequel.  Not too far from the Kingdom of Arendelle lies an enchanted forest.  Its residents, a mysterious group of people, can summon the elements of air, water, fire and earth as part of their day-to-day existence.  However, the forest has been surrounded by an impenetrable mist for more than 30 years following a battle that “enraged the spirits”.

Queen Elsa had been told this story as a child but it’s only now become relevant because of an odd musical tune that’s ringing in her ears (I was humming it too on leaving the cinema).  Tracking its origins to the enchanted forest, Elsa is able to use her magic powers to break the mist and, working with her fearless crew, goes in search of answers.  As per the advice of a wise troll – “the truth must be found”.

Frozen II is a notch below its predecessor but still has a lot to offer.  Josh Gad wins big laughs as the deep-thinking Olaf, there’s a cute frog that will win audiences’ affections, and, while I can’t believe I’m saying this, there’s a scene stealing performance from a gust of wind (although it might be tough to sell merchandise based on that character!)

The story is great too.  It’s a cool, strange, mystic world where you’re not quite sure what lies beyond each corner.  The character interaction is also terrific with the film delving into the theme of siblings growing up and developing their own sense of independence.  There are some great, often tense, conversations shared between Elsa and Anna that many will relate to.

A research study published in 2016 showed that for Disney animated features involving princesses, male characters produced the majority of the dialogue in almost all cases (the only two exceptions were Tangled and Brave).  The original came up a touch short (59% of the words spoken were from men) but if Frozen and Frozen II are any indication, female-driven adventures are in high demand.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 28 November 2019

In 1997, Ian McKellen was an accomplished theatre actor who had been performing on stage for more than 30 years.  He’d won five Olivier Awards for his work on London’s West End and, across the Atlantic, he’d earned a Tony Award for his performance as Antonio Salieri in the acclaimed play Amadeus.  While he’d picked up the odd film role here and there, he was keen to transition and make his mark in the world of cinema.

It was at that point when he first crossed paths with American director Bill Condon who had just finished a screenplay chronicling the final days of iconic filmmaker James Whale.  They shared a meeting in Los Angeles and their careers were forever changed.  Gods & Monsters earned Ian McKellan an Academy Award nomination for his stunning lead performance (losing to Life is Beautiful’s Roberto Benigni in an upset) and for Condon, he took home the coveted 13 ½ inch statuette after winning best original screenplay.  Many doors opened in the years that followed.

The pair reunited for 2015’s Mr Holmes (another must-see movie) and now, they’re teaming up for a third time with The Good Liar, adapted from the debut novel of former British intelligence officer Nicholas Searle.  It was inspired by a distant relative of Searle’s who met and befriended an elderly man through an online dating website only to later learn he was full of lies and secrets.

That’s largely how this film begins.  Roy Courtnay (McKellan) is an 80-something-year-old guy who, after exchanging details online, meets the similarly aged Betty McLeish (Mirren) at a nice restaurant.  They make good conversation, go on a few more dates, and it’s not long before the hobbling Roy has moved into Betty’s newly purchased home.  Things are moving far too quickly in the eyes of Betty’s grandson (Tovey) who suspects Roy has ulterior motives.

He’s right.  As the audience, we know Roy is a liar and a crook.  You might think an octogenarian isn’t too concerned about accumulating wealth but that’s not the case here.  Roy, together with his long-time business partner (Carter), concoct elaborate plans and fleece unsuspecting folk of their hard-earned savings.  They love the challenge as much as the money and, given she has more than few dollars in her bank account, Betty makes for the perfect new target.

This should have been a better movie.  It’s an intriguing storyline but the execution is poor.  When characters speak of farcical investment returns and then exchange money between bank accounts, they use giant calculator-type devices that are burdensome to carry around.  It’s such a goofy plot device.  Could they not have used an app on their iPhones?  There’s another sequence where Roy commits a heinous crime on a railway platform and it’s odd that he can get away with it so easily.  There’s just one CCTV camera in the whole area?

Don’t get me started on the ending!  A plethora of new information is revealed and it feels like a rushed, very different movie from the 90 minutes that preceded it.  Ian McKellen and Helen Mirren are two of the best actors to come out of England but they’re not enough to save this muddled, disappointing script.  I can only assume the book was much better.