Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 28 December 2016

Science-fiction can be formulaic and predictable (the same as any genre I guess) but the scenario explored in Passengers grabbed my attention.  It’s set in the not-to-distant future where the Earth has become rundown and overpopulated.  Wealthier individuals have bought tickets on a spacecraft that transports them across the galaxy to a new, exciting, inhabitable planet known as Homestead II.  The catch is that the journey takes 120 years.  Don’t stress though.  You spend the entire time in a hibernation pod and you’ll look and feel exactly the same when you arrive.

When Jim Preston (Pratt) wakes from his pod, he shrugs off the sleepiness and gets ready for a new life.  That is until he realises something is amiss.  None of the crew or 5,000 other passengers have woken up.  A quick investigation reveals that he’s woken up too early.  His pod malfunctioned (something thought to be impossible) and there’s still 90 years left on the journey.  With no way of going back into hibernation, he’s destined to spend the remainder of his life helpless and alone.

It’s at this point where I have to talk about a key plot development that isn’t specifically mentioned in the film’s trailer.  If you want to avoid it, read no further.  I think it warrants discussion because it occurs inside of the first half-hour and is critical to the remainder of the film.  Anyway, after spending a full year alone and going through all of its mental side effects, Jim decides to wake another of the sleeping passengers so that he’ll have company.  He picks Aurora Lane (Lawrence) because of her good looks and interesting profile (she’s the daughter of an acclaimed writer).

All of this should leave you thinking.  What would you do in the same situation?  By waking her up, she’s condemned to the same fate.  Both of them will be dead by the time the ship reaches Homestead II.  Is it the same as murder?  Or is such an act forgivable?  The screenplay from Jon Spaihts (Prometheus, Doctor Strange) will leave you questioning the actions of both characters as the credits start to roll.  There will be different opinions.

Outside of that intense moral quandary, the film doesn’t have quite enough to material to hold your attention for two hours.  You simply watch Jim and Aurora walk around the ship, eat their breakfast, and go through their daily exercise routines.  It doesn’t set a fast pace.  To help understand what’s going on inside their heads, they regularly chat with a robot bartender (Sheen) who provides both drinks and conflicting advice.  That’s largely it when it comes to the cast.

Problems develop with the ship’s mechanics and this is clearly designed to inject action and suspense into the narrative.  There’s a particularly good scene when the artificial gravity machine malfunctions while Aurora is using the ship’s swimming pool (which comes complete with a view of the universe).  It’s just a shame the safe finale doesn’t take a few more chances and offer something more memorable or unexpected.

Directed by Academy Award nominee Morten Tyldum (The Imitation Game), Passengers is interesting without being overly memorable.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 16 December 2016

At the start of 2014, few cinephiles were familiar with name Damien Chazelle.  The 28-year-old had one directorial credit to his name, Guy and Madeline on a Park Bench, which opened in 5 theatres in the United States and grossed a total of $35,556.  One year later, he was one of the hottest properties in the film world.  Whiplash, his sophomore feature, took in roughly $50 million internationally and won 3 Academy Awards.

Chazelle and fellow Harvard classmate Justin Hurwitz came up with a script for La La Land in 2010 but film studios had padlocked their doors.  The majority of musicals which have thrived at the box-office in recent years were all based on existing, well-known Broadway productions – Chicago, Les Miserables, Into the Woods, Hairspray and Mamma Mia!  The idea of an original, modern-day musical from an unknown filmmaker sounded like a financial train wreck.  I wouldn’t have invested either!

It’s funny how the world works sometimes.  La La Land won the Audience Award at the prestigious Toronto Film Festival back in September and is sure to be nominated for a slew of Oscars next month.  We have the benefit of hindsight but you still have to question the vision of studio heads who all turned down Chazelle’s project.  If not for the success of Whiplash, this script would still be sitting in Chazelle’s bottom drawer.

As for the premises, Mia (Stone) works at a café located on the Warner Bros. studio in Los Angeles.  It’s a job she hopes is temporary.  The huge poster of Grace Kelly on her bedroom wall provides more than enough insight into Mia’s hopes and dreams.  She fell in love with moves as a young child and has wanted to be an actress ever since.  Despite an obvious talent and numerous auditions, she just can’t get her foot in the door.

Sebastian (Gosling) has lofty goals himself but they’re related to a different artistic craft.  A gifted pianist and songwriter, Sebastian wants to buy and run his own jazz club.  His problem is money, or the lack thereof.  He drives in an uninsured car and he’s accepted a small, unfulfilling job in a restaurant just so he can pay his other bills.  He articulately describes his situation by telling his sister (DeWitt) that “I’m letting life hit me until it gets tired.”

Mia and Sebastian meet in serendipitous circumstances and a relationship ensues.  The first two acts are all very light and charming and you could argue that they’re designed for the cheesy romantics among us.  However, the film’s tone shifts in the final half-hour and it’s here where the film makes its impact.  Damien Chazelle has something to say about the choices we make in life and the directions they take us in (without giving too much away).

Lovers of classic musicals are likely to be drawn to the material.  Chazelle admits to being influenced by films such as the Palm D’or winning The Umbrellas of Cherbourg (1964).  La La Land opens with two big, bright dance numbers but what follows is a little more nuanced.  There are moments when dialogue takes a back seat and the beautiful music of composter Justin Hurwitz controls the mood.  In contrast, there are emotional conversations where no soundtrack is required at all.  The simple sound of the needle on a record player as it reaches its climax is all that’s needed.

The film isn’t without its weaknesses.  It’s a relatively simple storyline that goes through several lulls before its powerful epilogue.  Mia and Sebastian share fleeting discussions with supporting characters that are rushed to the point of being superfluous.  Examples include scenes with Rosemarie DeWitt (as Sebastian’s sister) and Finn Wittrock (as Mia’s boyfriend).

La La Land still amazes from a technical perspective.  The use of lighting and music is pin point.  Parts of the film are heavily edited to get the blood pumping (like the opening song) whereas others require no editing at all (such as a single-shot dance number atop a hill overlooking Los Angeles).  The casting of Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling is perhaps the film’s strongest element.  It’s the third time they’ve worked together on screen and the chemistry is evident.

Easy on the eyes and tough on the heart, La La Land is a film I could watch again and again.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 26 December 2016

Assassin’s Creed is based on the video game series that was first released for the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 back in 2007.  As someone unfamiliar with the gaming world, I asked a teenage friend who said it was his favourite video game while growing up.  His direct quote – “It was fun when you ignore the storyline and go around bashing guards and seeing how long you could live before they all kill you.”  I can only assume this is faithful adaptation since that largely describes the movie too!

Most of the action takes place at a secretive research facility in Madrid run by Alan Rikkin (Irons) and his daughter, Sophia (Cotillard).  They are part of the Templar Order – a highly influential group that are looking to leave their mark on the world.  Up until now, the broader population has been controlled using religion, politics and consumerism.  Alan wants to go a step further and use science to rid the world of conflict and violence.

It may sound far-fetched but there’s an object known as the Apple of Eden which holds such power.  The problem is that it hasn’t been seen since the late 15^th Century.  A flashback reveals that a brotherhood of assassins went to great lengths to keep the Apple from falling into evil hands.  They “worked in the dark to serve the light” and were prepared to sacrifice their lives to save mankind’s freedoms.

It’s at this point where the relevance of the film’s central figure becomes apparent.  Callum Lynch (Fassender) is a convicted murderer who has been kidnapped (well, kind of) and taken to the research facility.  He is the last surviving descendant of the assassins and so Alan intends to use a billion dollar machine, known as the Animus, to tap into his genetic memories and discover the Apple’s current hiding place.

You can probably see that there’s a worthwhile narrative here.  This is a movie that taps into the fine balance between individual freedom and government control.  This makes the finished film all the more disappointing.  The chaotic action sequences are over edited and the suspense levels are low.  It all feels so mindless and pointless.

Assassin’s Creed marks the second collaboration between Australian director Justin Kurzel (Snowtown) and stars Michael Fassbender (Shame) and Marion Cotillard (La Vie en Rose) in the space of two years.  Their previous outing was Macbeth – a film more positively received by critics.  They are all immensely talented individuals but for whatever reason, they haven’t breathed much life into this new franchise.  Weak box-office figures from the United States suggest that floated sequels may be put on the backburner.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 05 December 2016

Released in 2004, House of Sand and Fog showed that life often throws up situations where there are no winners.  Jennifer Connolly played a struggling woman from San Francisco who had her house mistakenly repossessed by the government.  Ben Kingsley played an Iranian immigrant who subsequently bought it as a home for his family.  Neither side had done anything wrong but they found themselves in a tragic tug-of-war for the property when the government realised its mistake.  It was one of my favourite movies of that year.

That film and its messages sprang to mind when watching Little Men, the latest from American director Ira Sachs (Love is Strange).  Brian (Kinnear) and Kathy (Ehle) are a long-married couple who are battling to make ends meet.  He’s earning next-to-no income while pursuing an acting career and she’s just getting by as a physiotherapist.  They have a 13-year-old son, Jake (Taplitz) who shows a healthy interest in the arts but has trouble making friends at school.

Their economic situation improves considerably when Brian’s father passes away.  The will prescribes that title to his small Brooklyn apartment be split equally between Brian and his sister.  Brian and his family move into home in the short term to avoid having to pay rent back in Manhattan.  Jake is the most affected by the transition who now must adjust to a new school.

The apartment contains a downstairs tenancy that is occupied by Leonor (Garcia), a single mother with a 13-year-old son of her own, Tony (Barbieri).  She operates a small dress shop and makes a small profit only because of the peppercorn rent granted by Brian’s father.  Jake and Tony quickly become best friends and they spend an endless number of hours playing computer games and talking about girls.

Their friendship will be put to the test when a dispute develops between their parents.  Brian needs to sell the apartment so that he can split the proceeds with his sister (who also needs the money).  However, that involves terminating Leonor’s current tenancy and charging a “market rate” as to ensure the property retains its value.  This would immediately put her out of business and she protests strongly that it’s not what Brian’s late father would have wanted.

Shot on a budget of just $2 million, it is simple, moving stories like these which have struggled to find a place in Australian cinemas over the past few years.  Low budget independent films are now more likely to go straight to DVD/download because they don’t have the marketing budget (nor place in cinemas) to compete against the big blockbusters.  It’s nice to see Little Men bucking the trend and getting a release, albeit a small one.

It’s a well-told tale that comes together nicely in the last half-hour.  None of the performances are overplayed.  The adults are sympathetic towards others but realise that their own needs have to come before others.  The kids find themselves trapped in the middle where their mix of innocence and naivety serves as both a strength and a weakness.  The finale is a good fit for the material and the closing scene (set a little bit into the future) provides an important moment of reflection.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 18 December 2016

Ever since he was 6 years old, koala Buster Moon (McConaughey) has been enamoured with the stage.  He’s followed through on that dream and now owns a famous old theatre which has been home to several productions.  Unfortunately, his passion hasn’t translated into financial success.  He owes money “all over town” and the bank is top of the list.  His loyal assistant, an iguana named Miss Crawley (Jennings), is helping keep the credits at bay.

Desperate for a hit, Buster comes up with the idea of a singing competition.  It’ll follow in the footsteps of American Idol and The X-Factor but instead of being televised, people will buy tickets and see it live in his theatre.  The prize was supposed to be a mere $1,000 but a typo from Miss Crawley, who accidentally puts $100,000 on the promotional flyer, sends the whole town into a spin.

As we see from a whirlwind segment that introduces the characters, there are plenty looking to get their hands on the prizemoney.  Johnny (Egerton) is a gorilla looking to get away from his criminal father.  Meena (Kelly) is an elephant who struggles when it comes to self-confidence.  Rosita (Witherspoon) is a pig who needs a hobby to help provide space from her 25 children.  Mike (MacFarlane) is a cocky, arrogant mouse following in the footsteps of Frank Sanatra.  Ash (Johansson) is a rock-music loving porcupine in a troubled relationship.

It’s a tricky job trying to balance up the many storylines but writer-director Garth Jennings (The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, Son of Rambow) has done a good job.  Kids shouldn’t have too much trouble keeping up.  My pick of the group was Miss Crawley as the goofy iguana but it’s easy to see why others will have a different favourite as all of these characters are fun and adorable.  The voice cast is strong too.

Given the film’s title, it’s no surprise that it contains an abundance of music.  There are scenes where a different song is seemingly played every 20 seconds.  It’s this element of the movie where Jennings has tried to broaden appeal by using a mix of old and new.  Younger crowds will be humming to the songs of Taylor Swift, Carly Rae Jepsen and Ariana Grande.  Those with a few more years under the belt will recognise the lyrics of Paul McCartney, Elton John, Leonard Cohen and Irving Berlin.

Sing is entertaining but the third and final act is its weakest.  Instead of throwing in a few surprises or a bit more drama, it culminates with a lengthy sing-a-thon and not much else.  It’s a safe ending for what is a safe animated feature.

You can read my interview with writer-director Garth Jennings by clicking here.