Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 04 May 2011

Captain Colter Stevens (Gyllenhaal) wakes up and finds himself aboard a train heading to Chicago.  He has no idea how he got there.  The last thing he can remember was being on a mission in Afghanistan.  Before anything has a chance to sink in, the woman seated opposite (Monaghan) starts up a conversation.  He doesn’t know what she’s talking about or why she’s calling him by a different name.

He slips into the bathroom to compose himself and on looking in the mirror, sees a completely differently reflection.  Panic starts to set in.  He opens his wallet and finds identification belonging to a Mr Sean Fentress.  The photo matches the reflection in front of him.  Who is Sean Fentress and why has he found himself in his body?  Before he has a chance to process anything further, the train explodes.

What I’ve described is the first 8 minutes of Source Code, a slick thriller from director Duncan Jones (Moon).  I’ve got mixed feelings about the film as a whole but to its credit, it is trying to offer something a little different.  It wants to keep the audience thinking and it wants to surprise us with a few twists.

It turns out that Colter Stevens is being used by the military in a secret new project.  A scientist (Wright) has found a way for people to relive the final few minutes of another’s life.  It has something to do with “source code” but most of it went over my head to be honest.

This new technology is being used to identify the terrorist responsible for the train explosion.  The unwilling Stevens has been transported back in time and into the body of Fentress so that he can piece the puzzle together.  He needs to determine where the bomb is located, who planted it and how it was detonated.  Time is of the essence as in the “real world”, further terrorist threats have been made.  The authorities need to know what they’re up against and only Stevens can provide the answers.

All “time travel” flicks face reality hurdles and it’s critical that the screenwriters get us past them.  We can then focus on the broader story and the characters contained within it.  I wanted to enjoy this film for what it was but the little voice in the back of my head kept picking out the plot holes.  For example, I couldn’t understand how Stevens kept dying after 8 minutes, even when he decided to get off the train.  Was this a coincidence or part of the design of this alternate universe?  The ending was also befuddling.

There are elements of the film that deserve praise and in particular, the casting.  Jeffrey Wright always has a distinctive presence on screen and he delivers once again in this quirky role.  I love listening to his voice.  Michelle Monaghan is great too.  She offers some much needed charisma and it’s a shame her role wasn’t bigger.

At a nicely paced 93 minutes, Source Code is hard to go along with at times but it's an intriguing thriller that will hold your attention.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 18 April 2011

You can read my interview with director Kenneth Branagh or check out the podcast by clicking here.

The story of Thor spans several million light years.  It begins in the distant world of Asgard, ruled by the wise King Odin (Hopkins).  After many years on the throne, Odin has decided to pass the mantle to his eldest son, Thor (Hemsworth).

It’s clear that Thor is not ready for the responsibility.  Looking to assert his “manhood”, he hastily declares war against the neighbouring realm of Jotunheim.  Thor may have incredible strength but he and his small army are no match for the nasty inhabitants of this icy planet.  Bruised and broken, they are lucky to escape.

Disappointed with his son’s actions, Odin strips Thor of his power and banishes him to the planet Earth.  Not until he has proven himself worthy will he be able to return home.  Quietly happy with these events is Odin’s younger son, Loki (Hiddleston).  He has always lived in his older brother’s shadow but he now sees this as an opportunity to take the crown for himself.

Thor’s arrival on Earth creates quite a stir.  He is discovered by a team of scientists headed by the experienced Professor Andrews (Skasgard) and the inquisitive Jane Foster (Portman).  They’re not sure what to make of Thor’s strange stories and unusual mannerisms but they sense something magical about him.  If he really is from a far away galaxy, his knowledge would be invaluable to their research.

They’re not alone with that line of thinking.  A government agency has also become aware of Thor’s arrival but they’re more interested in the mysterious hammer that he has brought with him.  It’s lodged itself atop a small rock and despite all their efforts, they cannot move it.  It reminded me of King Arthur and his famous sword in the stone.

There are quite a few characters in the mix but my reaction throughout much of Thor was apathetic.  It’s not a horrible film but it’s one that doesn’t want to take any chances.  It has been crafted from the familiar PG-mould used by many other comic books adaptations over the past decade.  It wants to impress with dazzling special effects rather than through an emotive, captivating story.  There’s clearly an audience for this film but I don’t think I’m part of it.

The performances in Thor aren’t too bad.  The dialogue is expectedly cheesy (particularly from those in Thor’s small army) but I had a soft spot for Natalie Portman, Stellan Skarsgard and Kat Dennings.  They inject the film with much-needed humour.  Australian Chris Hemsworth also deserves credit.  He takes his shirt off when required (sure to please many) and taps into Thor’s rough, arrogant nature.  It’s just a shame I didn’t care more about his character (a fault of the screenplay).

I confess to becoming tired of comic book films.  They offer few surprises and continually reiterate the same themes.  There are exceptions however.  I’ve enjoyed the darker undertones contained within the rebooted Batman series.  The Dark Knight highlighted the fine line that often exists between good and evil.  Christian Bale also captured the torturous nature of being a hero through his strong performance.

The ushers will probably be cleaning up around you but make you stay all the way through the lengthy end credit sequence.  You’ll get a sneak peak at The Avengers, the 2012 Joss Whedon film that brings together Thor, Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk and Captain America.  Now that looks interesting!

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 01 May 2011

I don’t know about you but I hated music class when I was in primary school.  I couldn’t sing and it got even worse if you put an instrument in my hand.  Our teacher was a real Grinch too.  She always seemed angry and seldom had a smile on her face.

Mrs Carey’s Concert left me reflecting on those days.  It’s an insightful documentary put together by Bob Connolly (Rats In The Ranks) and Sophie Raymond.  The idea arose back in 2007 when Bob was asked to film the performance of the MLC School at their bi-annual concert at the Sydney Opera House.  He was moved by these talented young performers and decided they would be the perfect subject matter for a feature film.

So it began.  Over the next two years, Bob and Sophie shot 263 hours of footage chronicling the lead up to the 2009 concert.  Unlike most reality television shows, one of their major objectives was to be as unobtrusive as possible.  They didn’t want any interviews with the students or the teachers.  They didn’t want any moments they missed to be re-enacted.  They simply wanted to hide in the corner with their cameras and watch the action unfold.

Central to the story is the school’s music director, Mrs Karen Carey.  She has a passion for music… that isn’t necessarily shared by the 1,200 students.  Mrs Carey’s role is challenging to say the least.  Trying to get teenagers to put in the effort and to continually turn up for practice is not easy.  It gets worse than that though.  There are a small group of troublemakers in the choir who are deliberately trying to sabotage her efforts.

The most impressive feature of this documentary is the breadth of material it covers in its 95 minute running time.  We get to peer inside the offices and hear the healthy debates shared between the staff.  We get to know many of the students and watch them change over time.  Most importantly, we get to see the whole story come together in a stunning finale at the Sydney Opera House.  Listening to the beautiful music created by these teenagers sent a tingle down my spine.

There are a few scenes that felt overdramatised (like when Mrs Carey loses her folder at the concert) but for the most part, this is moving documentary with much to say about the value of music programs in schools.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 13 April 2011

“What is your favourite scary movie?”  It’s a famous line from the original Scream and that same question is asked repeatedly of the cast in this latest instalment.  My answer would include films such as Psycho and The Shining.  I’d even include the first two Scream flicks.  Unfortunately, Scream 4 would not rate a mention.

It’s a shame because the movie starts with a few good laughs.  Those who’ve seen the previous films in the series will know they always begin with someone being brutally killed.  I won’t give too much away but the creative introduction to Scream 4 is likely to leave you with a wry smile on your face.

From that point on, the only emotion I felt was disappointment.  It was nice to see Neve Campbell, Courteney Cox and David Arquette once again but the new characters are all so boring.  There’s a bunch of dumb girls, two unlikeable films nerds and a dreary ex-boyfriend.   Maybe I’m getting too old but I found the likes of Skeet Ulrich, Matthew Lillard and Rose McGowan (from the original) far more entertaining and charismatic.

The premise revolves around two copycat killers slaying unsuspecting victims in the small town of Woodsboro.  The killings coincide with the return of Sidney Prescott (Campbell).  Having survived the three previous massacres, Sidney is in Woodsboro promoting her “tell all” book.  She’s also catching up with her old friends, Gale Weathers (Cox) and Dewey Riley (Arquette).

The film tries to follow in the mould of its predecessors by making numerous references to sequels and the rules of horror films.  There’s a key scene where the two film geeks try to explain to Sidney and Gale how these rules have changed over time.  I’ve watched my fair share of horror films but I was not convinced by them or their confusing arguments.  They’re too smart for their own good.

My biggest grievance is that the movie lacks suspense when required.  The early films in the Scream franchise showed how to successfully blend the comedy and thriller genres.  Some moments left you chuckling whilst others left you squirming and clenching.  I can’t say the same here.  Maybe it’s because I didn’t like these characters but the growing death toll and uninspired ending did nothing to get my blood pumping.

As a footnote, this my 3,000th grading of a movie for my Film Pie website and a big thanks to everyone who reads my reviews on a regular basis or tunes in on 612ABC, Logan 101.1FM or ABC Southern Queensland.  Here's a photo of me at the Scream 4 premiere celebrating the milestone.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 20 April 2011

Potiche is a sweet, charming, delightful French comedy.  I saw it late last Friday night after an excruciatingly long week.  I felt tired walking into the theatre but I left with a spring in my step and a satisfied smile on my face.  This is a crowd pleaser.

Set in 1977, the story centres on a wealthy family who own a profitable umbrella making company.  Robert (Luchini) has run the business with an iron fist for many years.  The unions have been trying to secure better wages and better working conditions for the employees but Robert has refused to bow to their demands.  They’ve retaliated by going on strike.  Neither side is prepared to budge.

Things take an unexpected twist when Robert suffers a heart attack.  It’s apparent that it was brought on by work-related stress and he is ordered to take a few months off.  With no one else to turn to, he hands the reigns of the company to his wife, Suzanne (Deneuve).

Suzanne has spent her entire marriage being the “trophy housewife”.  She cooks dinner, keeps the house clean and is always there to support to her husband.  She knows that he’s been sleeping around with other women but she’s kept quiet, as if afraid to create any tension within the household.

Now suddenly in control of a multi-million dollar company, Suzanne comes alive.  She has power, she has responsibility, she has a purpose.  She may not have much experience but her passion and enthusiasm starts rubbing off on those around her.  With the help of an old friend (Depardieu), she reaches a compromise with the unions and sales start increasing.

I hope I haven’t made this sound too much like a drama because it’s anything but.  Legendary critic Roger Ebert summed it up best when he tweeted “Deneuve. Depardieu. All you need to know.”  It’s such a simple, yet accurate point.  Just the idea of Gerard Depardieu and Catherine Deneuve together in a movie was enough for me to buy a ticket.  Now that I’ve seen just how good they are, I can tell you all to buy a ticket for yourself.  They create such wonderful characters.

They are well supported by the witty script from writer-director Francois Ozon (Swimming Pool, 8 Women).  Ozon wants to provide us with laughs but the film also wants to observe the changing nature of politics, women’s rights and family dynamics in France during the late 1970s.  He is a gifted filmmaker.

If you didn’t get to see the movie when it opened the recent French Film Festival in Brisbane, now’s your chance.