Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 05 August 2004

The film doesn’t deserve much of my time so I’ll keep this short and sweet.  Against The Ropes is just dismal.  I saw it as part of the in-flight entertainment on a Qantas flight from Sydney to Bangkok but felt like complaining since it didn’t meet the definition of “entertainment”.  My friend sitting beside me on the plane watched it also and about every 5 minutes, we removed our headsets and looked at each other with stunned disbelief at how corny it all was.

Based on a true story (pretty loosely I guess), the story focuses on Jackie Kallan, a female boxing promoter trying to make it in a man’s world.  We go through a routine introduction of her being squashed by other males and guess what?  She has a few ego problems along the way but as you’d expect, it all leads to a rosy ending where we can celebrate Jackie triumphing over adversity.  I celebrated the film’s finale by going to sleep and rejoicing that I didn’t waste $10 at a regular theatre to watch it.

I haven’t met the real Jackie Kallan but I can’t possibly believe she is as annoying as Meg Ryan portrays her.  Ryan is so obviously putting on a rough girl accent and you’ll cringe at how fake it all sounds.  I cannot believe studio executives cast her in a role which clearly does not suit.  Other major cast members include Tony Shalhoub and Timothy Daly but I’ll excuse you if you don’t know who they are.

Now that I’ve wasted another 10 minutes of my life on this tripe, I’ll call it a day.  Good night.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 03 August 2004

Laws Of Attraction pairs one of my favourite actresses, Julianne Moore, and the very suave Pierce Brosnan.  Moore plays Audrey Woods, a divorce lawyer who never loses a case.  Sure she works long hours and she hasn’t had a relationship in years but Audrey likes her life – she’s the best New York City has to offer.  Her mother Sara (Fisher) doesn’t share the same viewpoint.  She wants Audrey to find a man.

Enter Mr. Daniel Rafferty (Brosnan), another divorce attorney who has just returned to the Big Apple after a stint on the West Coast.  He too never loses a big case and sure enough, he defeats Audrey at their first head-to-head encounter.  A rivalry ensues and if you catch the drift, an interesting romance develops.

Moore and Brosnan are simply great at delivering lines.  They use a little improvisation, throw in some perfect facial expressions, and have an impeccable sense of timing.  Unfortunately for them, the whole screenplay has the feel of a clichéd play.  It tries to be too cute and witty with the biggest slap in the face coming in the final half hour when it all degenerates into a very predictable, much overused ending.  A few more surprises and twists were need to hold my attention.  On comparison, the film reminds me of last year’s Down With Love with Ewan McGregor and Renee Zellweger.  I found Love showed more flair with Laws getting too bogged down in its limited story

The whole show has been directed by Englishman Peter Howitt who is most famous for Sliding Doors, another romantic tale I found dreary.  I’ll lay most of the blame though on screenwriters Aline McKenna (Three To Tango) and Robert Harling (Steel Magnolias).  After 30 minutes, the novelty wears out and the only reason to remain in the theatre is to watch Julianne Moore and Pierce Brosnan do their best to keep the film together.

I’m not sure what the “laws of attraction” are but in the “laws of movies”, there are just too many broken here to go unpunished.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 05 August 2004

Very little about the past of John Creasy (Washington) is revealed to us but he looks a tired, forlorn figure.  Continually drinking, John has made his way to Mexico City to visit Rayburn (Walken), a long time friend.  Rayburn wants to help out and recommends Creasy for a low paying body guard position for a wealthy family.

You see, in Latin America, kidnappings are a very common occurrence.  The seedy underworld targets the rich and susceptible and can hold family members hostage for exorbitant amounts.  Businessman Samuel Ramos (Anthony) has a 9-year-old daughter, Pita (Fanning), who he wants protected after he and his wife (Mitchell) interview John Creasy, the position becomes filled.

You sense this isn’t a job or a place Creasy wants to be.  He looks disinterested and whilst doing his job with precision, the sense is that he’s going along with it to get enough money to keep on boozing.  But as the weeks pass, Creasy mellows to Pita and for the first time in a long time, life has a purpose.

The crux of the story arrives when Pita is kidnapped in a bloody shootout and Creasy is left for dead.  Whilst unconscious in hospital, the ransom drop is botched and Pita is killed.  When Creasy awakes to learn of this, there’s only one thing in his mind – revenge.  As Rayburn so eloquently phrases it “Creasey's art is death, and he's about to paint his masterpiece.”

So after the long-winded introduction, the film takes on its more interesting side.  It is extremely violent in places but I found particular pleasure in watching Denzel clean out the streets.  I guess you could be critical of its realism – how one person could do all this is beyond me? – but it’s still an entertaining good vs. evil story whilst building towards an unforseen climax.

The story does have its limitations but the standout quality of the film for me was the direction of Tony Scott (Spy Game, Crimson Tide, Top Gun).  The colours are sometimes grainy and there’s a lot of fast paced editing but it looks very good.  He is one of the few action directors I have seen of late to show any creativity.  My favourite trait of the film was its unique subtitles.  They appear randomly throughout (even if English is being spoken) and appear in a variety of fonts in a variety of places on the screen.  Some may be annoyed by this but I found it all the more appealing.

At 146 minutes, Man On Fire is too long but if you can push your way through the first hour, a creative action thriller will be your reward.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 02 August 2004

The most important film of the year, perhaps even the decade, has lived up to expectations.  That sounds like a big statement to be making but I challenge anyone to find a film of equal stance.  So far, the film has grossed over $100m in the United States to become the biggest documentary in cinema history.  But it’s the subject of the documentary which is the key.  In a country where interest in politics has been waning (the last election had the worst voter turn out ever), millions of Americans are being exposed to a secret government underworld which is best described as “shocking”.  With current polls showing things neck and neck between current president George Bush and Democrat contender John Kerry, every ticket sold to a swing voter is pivotal.

The news and publicity surrounding the film has been strong.  Ever since it won the lucrative Palm D’Or at the Cannes Film Festival, every journalist and his dog have had a say.  Those against Fahrenheit 9/11 have slammed Moore for misleading the American public and attacked supporting film critics for letting their political views influence their reviews.  Unfortunately, these articles have only spawned even more talk about the film and ironically, more people will go and see it.  I ask the question again, how many films have generated such heated discussion in the past few years?

I suppose I should go on the record as saying I am anti-Bush and perhaps this is why I love the film so much.  It’s important to note though that Fahrenheit 9/11 is not just about George W. Bush.  He is the focus but the film looks heavily at the government as a whole, America’s political system and the war in Iraq.  If you think politics are dull, think again.

From a documentary perspective, it’s near perfect.  Filmmaker Michael Moore has gone to great lengths to make it as persuasive as possible based on factual information.  He doesn’t speak often and impressively, Moore lets the footage and interviews do all the talking.  George Bush comes off looking like a fool.  One of the key scenes is footage of Bush on the morning of September 11, 2001 on learning the news that terrorists were attacking America.  You have to see it to believe it.  Also compelling are the many instances where politicians seem to contradict themselves.  What Colin Powell said about Iraq in 2001 is rather different to his thoughts in 2003.

From a crew perspective, credit to film editor, ,for putting it all together.  Moore was editing the film up right until its release date (to ensure the information was as current as possible) but the whole package looks very good and the order and timing of the scenes is well thought out.  An example would be the humorous introduction.  Lacing the whole film is a haunting film score from  which also deserves praise.

My favourite part of the film is the topic of fear.  Moore also explored this in his last film, Bowling For Columbine, but it’s just staggering how easily the government and the media can instil fear and paranoia in not just Americans, but citizens all over the world.

I stand up and applaud the work of Michael Moore and his film Fahrenheit 9/11.  I’d even say it’s got a shot at being the first ever documentary to be nominated at the Oscars for best picture.  This is huge stuff and it goes to show you can be both entertained and educated in a movie theatre.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 05 August 2004

I am fast becoming a very big fan of the Spider-Man series.  I thought the first film was great and this follow up flick is just as good if not better.  This time around, the necessary introductions and such aren’t required so there’s more time for character development and adventure.  It sounds strange to be talking about character development in a big action blockbuster but it’s one of the reasons I enjoyed the film so much.

In Spider-Man 2, we begin with our fearless crusader, Peter Parker, thinking that it’s time to hang up the old spidey suit.  His college results are dropping, he’s lost his job, has no money, has no love life, has few friends and can’t stand the demands of fighting crime 24 hours a day.  Things soon change when a new enemy arrives on the scene – Doctor Octopus (Molina).

Octopus was once Dr. Otto Octavius, a brilliant scientist who worked for one of Peter ’s few loyal friends, Harry.  Octavius had been working on creating a new energy source using cold fusion but in a botched demonstration, he was left with four metal tentacles attached to his spine and a mind which no longer knew the difference between good and evil.

Where it goes from here, I will not reveal.  There were many more plot twists that I expected.  Having seen the trailers numerous times, I could not wait until the scene where Harry finally removes the mask of Spider-Man to reveal his identity.  If you remember, Spider-Man killed Harry’s father at the end of the first film and he’s been out for revenge.  What will he think when he realises his best friend killed his father?  You’ll have to see to find out for yourself.

Both films have been made by experienced director Sam Raimi who has fulfilled all of my expectations.  One very positive comment I have is how this second film did got get bogged down in an abundance of special effects.  There’s a lot of drama and dialogue with Tobey Maguire stepping up to the plate in a surprisingly real and emotional performance.  I have always been impressed with Maguire and hope he sticks with the series in years to come.  I also wish to praise another beautifully sinister film score from composer Danny Elfman and you’ll hear the best of it during the craftily made opening credits.

I was overseas at the time the film was released here in Australia and caught a screening of the film in Vienna a few weeks after its release.  I’m sure glad I didn’t miss it and the huge box-office figures being posted around the globe show that word of mouth is good and the public are liking what they see.  A further sequel is imminent and if the directing, screenwriting and acting stay this good, I only see further good reviews coming from this computer.