Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 09 February 2014

It’s Valentine’s Day this week and here in Australia there are a few “romantic” options being offered in cinemas. I’ve been won over by my fair share of romantic comedies/dramas because of quality casting but that said, it’s hard to think of another genre that so often falls back on overused clichés and predictable plot points (well, aside from horror films).

Some films pair a nice girl with a bad boy (or vice-versa) and prove that opposites attract. Others have two people who don’t realise they’re in love (despite the fact it’s painfully obvious to everyone else in the movie… and in the cinema). Perhaps the one that frustrates me most is where the two characters fall in love, have a stupid misunderstanding, and then end up back together.

I make this reference so as to highlight that Blue Is The Warmest Colour is something different. If you were to describe it in a single sentence, you’d say it’s a French coming-of-age tale that centres on a 17-year-old high school student named Adele who falls in love for the first time. Such a simple explanation wouldn’t do the film justice, however. This is an intriguing, three-hour character study that requires you to observe and analyse.

In the same way that I admired Michelle Williams in Take This Waltz (released back in 2011), I was drawn to Adele’s character because of her insecure, emotional disposition. She’s a smart young woman. No doubt about that. She loves to read and hopes to be a teacher one day. On the flip side though, Adele is shy, unsure of herself. She’s quiet, she’s constantly fiddles with her hair, and she’s seemingly unaware of her own beauty.

Confused as to what she’s looking for romantically, Adele finds the answer with a “love at first sight” kind of encounter on a busy street. The object of her affection is an older woman named Emma (Seydoux) who stands out from the crowd with her distinctive blue hair. It’s not long before the pair become inseparable.

Rather than lead us by the hand to a predetermined destination, this is a film that asks us to stand back and observe. What do you think of this couple? Do they belong together? With next-to-no experience when it comes to relationships, has Adele attached herself too strongly? What of Emma? Is she attracted solely to Adele because she’s young and good looking… or is there something deeper?

Blue Is The Warmest Colour has taken an up and down journey since it premiered at the Cannes Film Festival last May. The Festival jury (which included Steven Spielberg, Ang Lee, Nicole Kidman and Christoph Waltz) and the International Federation of Film Critics both gave the film their top prize. It was just the start of the acclaim. Critics in New York and Los Angeles named it the year’s best foreign language film and it’s nominated in the upcoming BAFTAs in the same category.

Despite the critical acclaim, the film has shrouded in controversy because of the actions of director Abdellatif Kechiche. Crew members claim they were subject to harassment and were not adequately paid for their work. Stars Adèle Exarchopoulos and Léa Seydoux stated that Kechiche didn’t meet any lesbians or do any research prior to the shoot. New York Times critic Manohla Dargis expressed concerns about the film’s ten-minute sex scene which she noted “feels far more about Mr Kechiche’s desires than anything else.”

If nothing else, the film will provide some good conversation starters. Filmmakers are often pandering to audiences with nice, happy, feel-good moments – as unrealistic as they may be. I’ve seen plenty of romantic comedies where I can’t believe the couple end up together in the end. To come back to this movie… is the inclusion of a lengthy, gratuitous sex scene between two women any different? Is it exploitive? Or is it just another way to shock/titillate audiences?

While three hours is a little too long to be investing in this story, Blue Is The Warmest Colour is film I won’t be forgetting any time soon.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 29 January 2014

There’s a great non-fiction work from Lebanese American writer Nassim Nicholas Taleb entitled The Black Swan that looks at the nature of random events and the way we analyse them. A book that influenced him heavily as a child was a published diary from a journalist working in Berlin during the early stages of World War II.

Taleb wrote about the concept of “retrospective distortion”. Our memories are limited and so our perception of events can change over time. There’s also the benefit of hindsight. What drew Taleb to this diary was the fact that it was describing events as they took place. The writer didn’t know what was going to happen next. It revealed that many in France thought Hitler was a fleeting phenomenon and that any conflict would be quickly resolved.

I was thinking about Taleb’s writings while watching 12 Years A Slave – the third feature film from British director Steve McQueen (Hunger, Shame). The story is based on the novel of the same name that was authored by an African American slave back in 1853. It provides an important perspective because (1) it was written well before slavery was abolished by the U.S. Government in 1865, and (2) only a small number of slaves were able to read and write.

McQueen had been looking to make a movie about slavery in the 19^th Century (there aren’t a lot of them when compared to say WWII movies) and it was his wife who stumbled across a copy of Solomon Northup’s 12 Years A Slave. He has compared it to The Diary Of Anne Frank and can’t believe that it’s not widely read in schools across the United States. That fact may change as this powerful cinematic adaptation is likely to build interest in the subject matter.

The film begins in 1841 and introduces us to Solomon Northup (Ejiofor) – a well-to-do African-American living in New York with his wife and two children. Approached to work as violinist for a travelling circus troop, Solomon is drugged and kidnapped by two men looking for some “fresh niggers”. They steal his identification papers and ship him to New Orleans to work as a slave on a cotton plantation.

What follows is a decade long journey of survival. He was whipped, beaten, worked to the bone. He saw fellow slaves tortured, raped and killed. The movie is tough to watch at times (there were a few walkouts at my preview screening) but you’ll know exactly what Solomon went through and you’ll feel the uncontrollable sense of hopelessness that engulfed him. Twelve years is a long, long time to be held against your own free will.

Similar to McQueen’s previous two films, dialogue is kept to a minimum. It’s as if he doesn’t want the characters to speak unless words are absolutely necessary. It’s an approach that suits this subject matter as it gives you time to observe and reflect as opposed to just listening to constructed dialogue. The subtle music of Hans Zimmer (Inception) also helps in this regard.

The film recently received 9 Academy Award nominations – 3 of which were in the acting categories for first-time nominees. Chiwetel Ejiofor (Children Of Men, Kinky Boots) and newcomer Lupita Nyong’o were recognised for their passionate performances as African American slaves. Michael Fassbender (Shame, Prometheus) received a nod for his portrayal as a ruthless, vengeful plantation owner. I’d argue he’s the film’s most interesting character.

12 Years A Slave has been the Oscar front runner since it won the prestigious People’s Choice Award at the Toronto Film Festival back in September. It’s a heavy, depressing film but it’s also one that’s hard to discredit.

You can read my chat with director Steve McQueen by clicking here.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 05 February 2014

The most common approach with a biopic is to focus on a small part of the subject’s life and cover it in sufficient detail. Lincoln covered the President’s attempts to abolish slavery in 1865. Capote recounted the events that led to the famed novel In Cold Blood in the early 1960s. The King’s Speech looked at how King George VI overcame his stutter on ascending the British throne in 1936.

Director Justin Chadwick (The Other Boleyn Girl) and Oscar nominated screenwriter William Nicholson (Shadowlands, Gladiator) have gone for something far broader with Mandela: Long Walk To Freedom. They’ve taken Nelson Mandela’s autobiography (a rather lengthy 630 pages) and tried to condense more than 50 years of his life (1942 to 1994) into just over two hours.

It works… kind of. If you were new to the Nelson Mandela story and were looking for a neat summary of his upbringing, his struggles and his achievements, you’ll find it here. Idris Elba (Pacific Rim, Thor), in a rare leading role for him, does a good job recreating Mandela’s speech and mannerisms. Naomie Harris (Skyfall) also makes her presence felt by stepping into the shoes of Winnie Mandela.

Unfortunately, the film can’t quite overcome the inevitable problems with trying to tell a long story in a short space of time. It feels like we’re rushing between events and there’s never enough time to “take stock” and absorb some of the key themes. If you were to compare it to last week’s 12 Years A Slave – a story also about rights and freedom – it’s easier to see where this film is lacking. The emotional impact isn’t as strong. Some of the dialogue is a bit cheesy too.

South African born producer Anant Singh became friends with Mandela not long after he was released from prison in 1990 and was granted to rights to the autobiography after it was first published in 1995. You’d think that studios would jump at the chance to bring this tale to the big screen but it’s taken almost two decades to get where we are today. Authenticity was of particular importance to Singh and so actual locations were used wherever possible. These included scenes in the courtroom at the Palace of Justice and also at the prison on Robben Island.

It’s been a busy awards season and Mandela: Long Walk To Freedom hasn’t quite generated the attention that its financiers would have hoped for. The film’s only Academy Award nomination is for best song – a piece entitled “Ordinary Love” which was written by U2 and appears at the start of the closing credits. It’ll face strong competition from Frozen’s “Let It Go” on Oscar night.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 29 January 2014

We’ve witnessed some great boxing rivalries over the past century – Muhammad Ali versus Joe Frazier, Tony Zane versus Rocky Graziano, Arturo Gatti versus Micky Ward. The screenwriters for Grudge Match have come up with a new pairing to “rival” them all. In the red corner we have Henry “Razor” Sharp played by Sylvester Stallone. In the blue corner we have Billy “The Kid” McDonnen played by Robert DeNiro.

Three decades ago, these guys were at the top of the sport. They fought in front of two huge crowds and the honours were shared – The Kid won the first bout over 15 rounds but Razor took the title back in a shorter second fight. Their adoring fans for ready for a “winner takes it all” third fight but Razor stunned almost everyone by announcing his retirement. That was that. Their record would forever remain at 1-all.

Well, until now. Razor has just lost his job at a shipyard and is in desperate need of cash (he lost all his boxing winnings). The Kid has no financials concerns but he’s always wanted to prove himself as the better boxer. When approached by a self-promoting promoter (Hart) looking to make a quick buck, the pair agree to a one-off rematch. They’ve got 12 weeks to get into shape for a rematch that’s been 30 years in the making.

As is often the case with a sporting flick, the focus can’t solely be on the contest itself. Grudge Match contains a few subplots to help us get to know the characters and their plight. Razor is reunited a former flame (Basinger) and his foul-mouthed trainer (Arkin) who offers some fair advice – “if you go down, it’s safe to say that you’ve fallen and can’t get up.” The Kid discovers that he has not just a son (Bernthal) but also a grandson.

The story here is fairly loose. For starters, it’s hard to believe that two renowned boxers would have so much trouble pulling in a crowd. There are a few scenes in the film where they go out and perform cheap, gimmicky stunts to help publicise the event. I’m sure if Mike Tyson and Evander Holyfield announced a rematch today, there’d be enough interest (as well as a few laughs).

I probably shouldn’t get too hung up on plot specifics since this film is clearly designed as a comedy as opposed to a drama. A few jokes will put a smile on your face but there’s not enough to warrant a “must see” recommendation. I’d also argue that Alan Arkin’s political incorrectness and Kevin Hart’s hyperactivity personality are overdone.

The film’s big fight finale doesn’t quite generate the excitement that you might expect (it’s formulaic at best) but make sure you do stay through the early part of the closing credits. There’s a surprising sequence that provides the film’s most memorable moment. For a boxing fan, it’s almost worth the price of admission.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 01 February 2014

They’ve been best friends for 60 years but time is finally starting our four protagonists. Sam (Kline) has enrolled in a water aerobics class to try to get back into shape. Archie (Freeman) is recovering from a mild stroke and is dealing with his overprotective family. Paddy (DeNiro) has become a depressed couch potato following the death of his wife. Billy (Douglas) is worried about dying alone and has decided to take the plunge and marry someone less than half his age.

What better way of getting over their problems… than spending a wild weekend in Las Vegas! They can dance, play blackjack, drink martinis, judge swimsuit competitions, get laid, and generally have a good time. It’s designed to be an impromptu bachelor party for Billy before he finally ties the knot.

These are shallow characters. They’re loveable/sleazy (take your pick) and they all have some kind of magic epiphany over the course of the weekend that has them re-evaluating their lives. It’s a stretch. We never really get to know them. There are problems with the ending too. Writer Dan Fogelman (Crazy Stupid Love, The Trip) has created such a convoluted scenario that it’s really hard to come up with a plausible conclusion where everyone is “smelling like roses”.

That’s not to say that the film isn’t entertaining. Robert DeNiro, Michael Douglas, Morgan Freeman and Kevin Kline – all Academy Award winning actors – share the jokes around and have a good sense of comedic timing. They generally poke fun at themselves (describing the weekend as the “first bachelor party covered by Medicare”) but they also find time to mock those a little younger.

It's far from perfect but there's a layer of sentimentality that makes Last Vegas easier to digest. These guys reflect back on their lives and the enduring power of friendship. There are no Earth-shattering revelations but it’ll still win over the majority of cinema-goers. That’s evidenced from the film’s box-office take thus far – more than $120m internationally on a budget of just $28m (me thinks our leading men didn’t get paid huge dollars).