Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 11 September 2016

By way of a quick recap, Bridget Jones’s Diary (2001) chronicled our hero’s efforts to find a boyfriend.  She wisely decided against the slimy Daniel Cleaver (Hugh Grant) and went with the slightly awkward Mark Darcy (Colin Firth).  The follow up, Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason, followed her attempts to find a husband.  Mark Darcy was again the successful candidate but there were plenty of bumps along the way.

The opening scene of Bridget Jones’s Baby show that Bridget’s life has gone off the tracks yet again.  She’s at home, she’s alone, and she’s sitting on the couch in her pyjamas.  It may sound idyllic to some but it’s actually Bridget’s 43^rd birthday.  Her friends have tried to drag her out to a nightclub but she’d rather sit at home and wallow in self-pity.  There’s no supportive husband by her side because there was no wedding.  Despite the upbeat ending at the end of the previous film, Mark and Bridget had their differences and went their separate ways (for reasons that aren’t well explained).

What happens next is something that Bridget would never have predicted.  Coerced into attending a large musical festival, she has a one night stand with Jack (Dempsey), a handsome, middle-aged guy who she meets in humorous circumstances.  Several days later, she is reunited with the now married Mark Darcy at a christening and after a few drinks, another bedroom session ensues.  A pregnancy test subsequently comes back with a positive result and the identity of the father is anyone’s guess.

The earlier movies were based on the published, well-read works of English author Helen Fielding.  A different path has been taken this time around.  Fielding’s third novel in the series, published in 2013, is set decades into the future and shows Bridget as an elderly widow with two grown up children.  Looking for something more audience and box-office friendly, the producers engaged Fielding to craft a new story that sits somewhere in between her last two books.  She was helped by co-writers Dan Mazer (Borat) and Emma Thompson (Sense & Sensibility).  Thompson is also the best of the supporting cast which highlights the benefits when you can write your own snazzy one-liners.

The recently released Blood Father reminded us that Mel Gibson is still alive and still has a strong screen presence.  The same applies to Oscar-winning actress Renee Zellweger (Cold Mountain) as this marks her first role in 6 years.  In explaining her absence, Zellweger has told reporters that she was fatigued and in need of a break.  The lure of bringing this famed character back to life was clearly too hard to resist and it’s nice to see her back in action again.  She has an endearing charm that makes her a great fit for the clumsy, yet likeable, Bridget Jones.

Directed by Sharon Maguire, Bridget Jones’s Baby takes a little while to warm up.  It needs to explain the happenings of the past decade and the absence of Hugh Grant.  Some subplots don’t add much value either.  These include an election involving Bridget’s mother (Henderson) and another involving Bridget’s boss and her plans to change a news-based television show.

The film is at its best when it brings its three leading actors together.  Their light-hearted battles and arguments provide more than enough laughs to make this an entertaining experience.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 31 August 2016

Mel Gibson has put together a resume that any Australian actor would be proud of.  He rose to fame in the early 1980s with Gallipoli and the Mad Max trilogy.  He was snared by Hollywood and starred in a string of hits including What Women Want, Ransom, and the Lethal Weapon franchise.  He then transitioned into directing – winning an Oscar for Braveheart and setting box-office records for The Passion of the Christ.

It’s no secret that Gibson’s career has taken a few steps back over the past decade.  He had always intended to take a break from acting and spend more time behind the camera.  However, the overriding reason was a severe drop in popularity after some not-so-great personal moments.  This included a series of racist comments after being arrested for drunk driving in 2006 and the leaking of a tape that showed him going on a violent tirade against his then wife in 2010.

When you look at the figures, it’s hard to believe how inconspicuous Gibson has been.  Blood Father is only his 6^th acting credit in the last 12 years.  It’s not exactly a big film either.  This is a low-budget affair that received a tiny release in the United States before going straight to video-on-demand.

His character has had a similarly chequered past.  Link (Gibson) is an ex-con who spent 9 years in prison and is now trying to forge a new life.  He lives in a rundown trailer in the middle of nowhere.  He makes a meagre living as a tattoo artist.  He reluctantly attends Alcoholics Anonymous meetings and is battling to stay sober.

His quiet, lonely existence is upended when he received an unexpected phone call from his teenage daughter, Lydia (Moriarty).  The two have spoken in several years but she’s in desperate need of help and has nowhere else to turn.  Her ex-boyfriend (Luna) was part of a huge drug syndicate and given how much information she knows, a professional hitman has been directed to kill her.

It evolves into an action thriller reminiscent of the Taken franchise.  In true Liam Neeson style, Link will do whatever it takes to protect his daughter.  He doesn’t care how many laws he breaks, how many crimes he commits, and how many more years he’ll spend behind bars.  This is his one chance do something right for Lydia after years of neglect.

It’s a fairly standard premise but Gibson makes it work by creating sympathy for his forlorn character.  Link has hit rock bottom and you can’t help but support his efforts to find redemption.  French director Jean-François Richet (Assault on Precinct 13) adds value by crafting a number of suspenseful action sequences where Link and Lydia try to outrun and outsmart their many pursuers.

This is a slightly unorthodox release for Father’s Day but for fans of Mel Gibson, it should provide a timely reminder that he still commands a powerful, likeable screen presence.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 07 September 2016

There’s a moment in Sully when a member of the National Transport Safety Board (NTSB) listens to the cockpit voice recorder aboard US Airways Flight 1549.  He remarks that he’s investigated many plane crashes but this is the first where he’s listened to the recording and then had an opportunity to question the pilots.

That is a very good thing.  For a commercial airliner to experience a catastrophic failure and then find a way to land safely with no fatalities is remarkable.  A character sums it up best by saying “it’s been a while since New York City has news this good… especially with an airplane in it."  The event, which took place in early 2009, was dubbed the “Miracle on the Hudson” by New York State Governor David Paterson.

The most interesting aspect of Clint Eastwood’s film is the flight itself.  The plane left LaGuardia Airport in the mid-afternoon with 155 passengers on board.  Three minutes later, it struck a flock of birds and thrust was lost on both engines.  Captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger (Hanks), a pilot with 42 years of experience, quickly realised he couldn’t get the plane back to the airport.  His only option was to attempt an emergency water landing in the Hudson River.

Todd Komarnicki’s (Perfect Stranger) screenplay offers numerous perspectives.  We hear the thoughts of Sully and his co-pilot (Eckhart) as they size up the situation.  We watch the air traffic controllers assess available options.  We see the passengers thinking the worst but hoping for the best.  The film also acknowledges the work of the NYPD and ferry drivers who brave freezing waters to play a part in the rescue effort.

A major limitation in bringing this tale to the screen is that the flight itself only lasted for 5 minutes.  So while the crash landing sequence will grip audiences, it doesn’t have the stamina to match other plane-drama films such as Paul Greengrass’s United 93 (still a masterpiece).  The remainder of the film is spent chronicling Sully’s upbringing, the media attention following the event, and the investigation by the NTSB.

This is where the film suffers.  It’s apparent that events have been altered to simplify the story and make it more Hollywood-friendly.  The “court room” finale is borderline laughable.  The NTSB puts pressure on Sully to admit that he made a mistake and that the plane had the capability to return safely to the airport.  When Sully exposes the basic flaws in their assumptions (which a high school student could figure out), it makes the NTSB look like incompetent fools.  Is this what really took place?

The subplots involving Sully’s flying history and the strained relationship with his wife (played by Laura Linney) also feel superfluous.  We are shown fleeting flashbacks and quick phone conversations that don’t add much to the narrative or our insight into Sully.  The same can be said of dream-type sequences that try to illustrate the difficulty Sully is having in adjusting to post-accident life.

Let me make it clear – Captain Chesley Sullenberger is a hero and a terrific guy.  This film doesn’t do him justice though.  Several television shows and documentaries have already been made which chronicle US Airways Flight 1549 and they offer more insight than this cheesy, fictionalised version.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 29 August 2016

Kids spend too much time on their phone.  Kids are subject to peer pressure.  Kids do dumb things.  None of these statements are ground breaking.  Drawing from Jeanne Ryan’s 2012 young adult novel, screenwriter Jessica Sharzer (American Horror Story) has crafted a teen-orientated thriller that highlights these very themes.

Our hero is a character we’ve seen before.  Vee (Roberts) is about to finish up at high school and is unsure about whether she should leave her fragile mother (Lewis) and attend college.  She’s got a major crush on the star on the football team but is too shy to talk to him.  She doesn’t realise that her closest male friend (Heizer) is madly in love with her.  Oh, and her best friend is a bossy cheerleader (Meade) who is forever stealing the attention.

Trying to break free from her own timid personality, Vee signs up to an online phone application called Nerve.  Those who choose to “play” are given dares which they must complete to win money.  Those who choose to “watch” pay a small daily fee and watch live footage of the dares on their phones, tablets and computer screens.

An interesting aspect of the dares is that they draw from all knowledge available about each person on the internet.  After scrolling through Vee’s social media accounts, an algorithm selects a dare that will rattle her comfort zone.  She’s given 2 minutes to walk into a crowded café, find a stranger, and plant her lips on him for 15 seconds.  The prize is a generous $100.

The lucky guy receiving the kiss is Ian (Franco), a fellow Nerve competitor.  They’re asked by the game to team up and complete a series of increasingly difficult dares.  It’s at this point where the film jumps off the deep end and loses all sense of reality.  How are people watching these dares unfold?  Fellow Nerve users conveniently pass by with their own phone cameras but how good can the footage be from a moving taxi?  What about all the parts when they’re not being filmed?  The Truman Show this is not.  I’d also like to know who’s paying $20 a day to watch this dodgy, fragmented footage.

The film’s most puzzling element is the character of Vee who changes her nature every 10 minutes or so.  She starts out as a smart, shy woman and within 24 hours has become a complete fool.  She has no qualms when the game asks her to walk along a fire ladder hanging precariously between two buildings (it’s suicidal stuff) and yet she’s passionately upset when the game induces a petty stoush with her best friend (which is easily forgivable).

As the film enters its third and final act, you realise that it’s not possible for it to be wrapped up in a logical fashion.  There’s a group of muddled subplots involving Vee’s worrying mother, a group of underground computer hackers, and a bunch of masked strangers who threw away their moral compass.  The cops would have no hope in piecing this all together.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 05 September 2016

In 1995, Toy Story posed the question – what do kids’ toys get up to when there’s no one else around?  Illumination Entertainment, the production company behind the animated Despicable Me franchise, have taken that concept and applied it to the world of pets.  When owners close the front door and head to work, what adventures keep their beloved animals occupied?

Our leading man in this case is a Jack Russell terrier named Max (voiced by Louis C.K.)  He describes himself as the “luckiest dog in New York” because he has such a loving, caring, affectionate owner, Katie.  They live together in a spacious high-rise apartment with a beautiful view of Manhattan.  When left alone during the day, Max uses the external fire stairs to catch up with other animals in the building.  They include cats, birds, fish, hamsters and many other dogs.

Max’s idyllic world is upended when Katie brings home a new pet – a giant shaggy dog named Duke (Stonestreet).  Displaying his selfish side, Max is threatened by Duke and is worried that he’ll play second fiddle in the battle for Katie’s affections.  His problems are about to get much bigger.  Taken to the local park by a professional dog walker, Max and Duke fight and then become lost in New York City.  It’s time to tap into an iconic movie theme – two adversaries teaming up in pursuit of a common good.

Their efforts to find a way home won’t be easy.  They are led into the sewers by a villainous rabbit named Snowball (Hart) with a hatred for the upside world.  He was once a magician’s rabbit but has harboured a grudge against all humans after being discarded by his owner (bunny tricks went out of fashion).  He now leads a group of discarded animals that go by the name of The Flushed Pets.

Not everyone in this ensemble has a darker side.  The friendly animals from Max’s apartment building have bandied together, risked their lives, and gone in search of him.  They include a white Pomeranian dog with a secret love interest, an apathetic tabby cat who loves to raid her owner’s fridge and a feisty hawk (voiced by the iconic Albert Brooks) with mixed motives.

Kids should be entertained by the film’s light-hearted nature but the story doesn’t offer much in the way of emotion.  That’s not a wholly bad thing.  There’s a great scene where Max and Duke break into a sausage factory and go on a feast to the backdrop of the song “We Go Together” from Grease.  My point is that you’ll laugh at these individual moments but they seem to have more focus than the broader, more heartfelt narrative of two dogs reconciling and finding a way home.

It’s hard not to fall love with these characters though.  The varied voices of Louis C.K., Kevin Hart, Steve Coogan and Albert Brooks are big help.  Credit also goes to the animation team.  Animals are cute but talking, animated animals are even cuter.