Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 28 July 2015

I have a city dwelling friend who has considered giving up his lifestyle and moving to an isolated part of the country.  He’d get a decent sized property with a dog and a few farm animals.  He could sit on his porch, read a good book, drink a glass of scotch, and just relax.  It may sound incredibly boring but his motivation is simple.  He’s tired of the depressing news on television and the negativity on social media.  He’d rather escape it all and live a peaceful, albeit solitary, life.

I’m not sure that’d work for me… but it’s the decision made by Daru (Mortensen) – the lead character in Far From Men.  Set in Algeria 1954, the country is on the brink of war.  A socialist political party is pushing for independence from France.  They’ve pulled together a well-armed militia group and have called upon Muslims in Algeria to fight for the “restoration of the Algerian state.”  The body count is already rising.

Daru wants nothing to do with the conflict.  Born in Algeria of Spanish parents, he doesn’t want to have to pick a side.  He has shut himself off from the world in a small, rundown home in the middle of nowhere.  It comes with an adjoining classroom that he uses to teach young kids from local villages.  Daru believes in the value of a good education and he wants to make sure these children, all from poor families, get a positive start in life.

Unfortunately, Daru can no longer avoid the increasing unrest.  An old acquaintance turns up at his doorstep and is accompanied by a dishevelled man with hands bound.  The prisoner’s name is Mohamed and he has admitted to killing his cousin after a property dispute.  Daru has been asked to escort Mohamed on a lengthy trek to the town of Tinguit so that he can be tried and executed.

Based on the short story by Nobel Prize winning author Albert Camus, Far From Men astutely highlights that no matter how hard we try, we cannot avoid the tough choices that fate throws our way.  Mohammed appears to have made his choice.  He killed a man and is now ready to accept his punishment.  If he tries to escape, his immediate family will be targeted and persecuted.  He understands that he must die so as to protect those he loves.

Daru is still undecided about his choice.  As the two get to know each other, he realises that Mohammed is an honest, warm-hearted man.  Could he live with himself if he takes Mohammed to Tinguit for a sham trial and execution?  What’s the alternative though?  If he doesn’t go through the request, the authorities will be alerted and it’s likely his own life will be in danger.  How does one react when faced with a “lose-lose” situation?

Far From Men could be described as patient (in a good way) or slow (in a bad way).  It will all depend on your mood and appetite.  The idea of a subtitled movie that follows two guys walking across a barren Albanian landscape won’t appeal to everyone.  It’s not exactly “action packed”.  Those interested in the subject matter will take much more away from it.  While it’s a little sleepy in places, writer-director David Oelhoffen has done a great job fleshing out the important themes in Camus’ story.

Selected as part of the official competition at the 2014 Venice Film Festival, Far From Men is a heavy drama with much relevance in today’s society.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 15 July 2015

For most of his life, 17-year-old Quentin “Q” Jacobsen (Wolff) has had a crush on the girl next door, Margo Speilgelman (Delevingne).  They were childhood friends but drifted apart during high school.  They’ve hardly said a word to each other in more than a year.  Margo is living her life – complete with a boyfriend and a sense of adventure.  Q is the opposite.  He studies hard and gets good grades… but his life is incomplete because he doesn’t have the “miracle” that is Margo by his side.

Their worlds reconnect in ridiculous circumstances.  Margo climbs through Q’s window late one night and asks for a favour.  She needs Q to help drive her around the city so that she can get revenge against a series of people who have wronged her.  Top of the list is her now “ex” boyfriend who has been sleeping with one of her close friends.

Suffice to say Margo isn’t the forgiving kind.  She turns up at her friends place and an elaborate plan goes perfectly, she ends up taking a photo of her ex-boyfriend as he runs naked across the lawn.  There’ll be no ramifications through.  It turns out he has an incredibly small penis and Margo (through Q) threatens to tell everyone (using the photographic evidence) if he badmouths her.  That’s classy.

It gets better.  It turns out another of Margo’s teenage friends knew she was being cheated on but didn’t say a word.  To get revenge on him, she breaks into his house, goes into his bedroom while sleeping, and waxes one of his eyebrows.  It would provide a great scenario to use in a criminal law exam.  As for Q, he is somewhat freaked out by the whole escapade but he goes along with it because (1) he loves Margo, and (2) she tells him that he needs to break out of his shell.

The next morning, Q wakes up and thinks his world is now peachy.  He and Margo are best buddies again.  Wrong.  She doesn’t turn up at school and after a few days, she is reported missing.  Her “deadbeat” parents aren’t too concerned.  They tell the cops that Margo runs away all the time as a means of getting attention.

The only person who concerned about her whereabouts seems to be Q.  He enlists his two best friends, Ben (Abrams) and Radar (Smith), and they start going through Margo’s belongings in search of answers.  Their efforts put  Sherlock Holmes and Miss Marple to shame.  They piece together some ridiculously obscure clues and set off on a road trip to find her.  Oh, and they have to make sure they get back in time for their high school prom (a more important priority).

The overwhelming message that is shoved down the audience’s throat throughout the film is to get out there and take a few chances in life.  It’s a nice message but the execution is poor.  Some of the material in this film is quite serious (criminal acts, uncaring parents) but the screenplay shrugs it off as something minor.  Other moments don’t make much sense.  There’s a bizarre scene where they stop at a petrol station and rush through their purchases to save a few minutes.  When you’re travelling more than 3,000 miles, there are plenty of better ways to make up that time.

I’d also argue that these characters are shallow and moronic.  They spend an inordinate amount of time yammering about the prom.  Despite the fact they’re looking for a missing person, they have to make sure they get back for their pre-prom haircuts.  Radar talks about how it’s going to be the first time he and his girlfriend will have sex.  Ben is trying every move he has (and they’re not very good ones) just to find a date to go with.  Q is perhaps the biggest bore.  There’s a scene near the end where he has a quasi-meltdown about Margo.  I reiterate that this is a girl who has ignored him for years.

If Paper Towns is representative of the youth of today, our species is truly doomed.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 22 July 2015

Damian Hayes (Kingsley) is obscenely wealthy.  I’m talking a Warren Buffett kind of wealthy.  He commands a huge amount of power in the business world.  He owns a lavish apartment in New York City where everything seems to be gold plated.  He has an expensive car and a driver who takes him everywhere.

So what do you get the man who has everything?  The answer is a new body.  Damian has been diagnosed with cancer and has been given less than 6 months to live.  After being left a mysterious business card, Damian has stumbled across a secretive company that conducts a medical procedure known as “shredding”.  They can take your mind and place it in a fresh body that has been genetically engineered to be near-perfect.  It’s as close to immortality as you can get.

It’s not quite that simple though.  There are rules that need to be followed.  For starters, you have to be prepared to start a completely new life.  The technology is still secretive (guess they don’t want human rights groups after them) and so Damian can’t go back to his nice apartment and drink expensive bottles of wine with his business associates.  He’ll be given a new identity, a new past, and a new town.

I’m not all that sure why Damian wants to go through with the procedure.  When you’ve achieved everything you want out of life, why start again?  If he has a fear of death, he’s not really showing it.  Anyway, the procedure goes to plan and Damian wakes up as a handsome 34-year-old known as Mark Hale (Reynolds).  He doesn’t have much to complain about… at first.  He’s been given the keys to a new home in New Orleans where he plays basketball, goes jogging, drives fast cars, and sleeps with numerous women. 

Don’t you hate it when you buy something you can’t use?  I’ve bought a few shirts online that turned out to be the wrong size.  Damian has taken this to a whole new level.  He should have been shrewd enough to remember the Latin phrase “caveat emptor” – let the buyer beware.  It may have that “new body smell” but it turns out Damian’s new body is anything but.  He starts have hallucinations which relate to the body’s “original owner”.

Directed by Indian-born Tarsem Singh (Immortals, Mirror Mirror) Self/Less is a poorly paced action thriller that pushes for too many twists.  You can see the groundwork laid well in advance (e.g. an odd comment made about metal in a machine).  It moves quickly between events and the scenarios feel overly constructed.

There’s a moment where Damian tracks down the wife (Martinez) and child of the original Mark Hale in search of answers.  He comes across as a helpful, compassionate individual but this doesn’t make a lot of sense.  It contradicts the version of Damian from the opening half-hour where we see him arrogantly trying to reconcile with his estranged daughter.  I realise he has a different body but shouldn’t his personality be the same?

The film culminates with a bland finale that involves a doctor (Goode) who has taken on super villain like qualities.  He’d make a good addition to a Marvel film.  John Woo’s Face/Off (released back in 1997) made a much better fist of the “body changing” concept.  Watch it instead.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 13 July 2015

Pop quiz.  Which Australian has won more Academy Awards than any other?  Costume and production designer Catherine Martin (Moulin Rouge, The Great Gatsby) set a new benchmark in 2013 with her 4^th win.  Up until then, the record had been held for more than 50 years by costume designer Orry-Kelly who won for An American In Paris, Les Girls and Some Like It Hot.  He could have won a lot more if not for the fact the Academy didn’t introduce the best costume design category until 1949. 

If you’d have mentioned the name Orry-Kelly to me a few weeks ago, my first response would have been “who?”  Many others would have a similar response.  That answer is a big reason why acclaimed director Gillian Armstrong (My Brilliant Career, Little Women, Oscar & Lucinda) wanted to bring Orry-Kelly story to the screen.  How did an unknown from a small town in New South Wales end up designing costumes for Bette Davis, Olivia de Havilland, Ingrid Bergman and Katharine Hepburn in Hollywood?

The title may lure you into thinking this is simply a two-hour film about great costumes.  It offers much more than that.  Orry-Kelly’s career began in New York during the Roaring Twenties.  An openly gay man, Orry-Kelly embraced the era’s cultural progression.  He found work in the clothing industry and ended up designing extravagant sets and costumes for Broadway shows.  He spent several years living with Cary Grant and many believed they were in a relationship.

Orry-Kelly moved to Hollywood in the early 1930s and his career took a rollercoaster-like path.  The highs were high.  He was employed by Warner Bros. in 1932 and he designed the costumes for hundreds of films including Casablanca, The Maltese Falcon, and 42^nd Street.  The lows were low.  He battled alcoholism and found himself subject to discrimination because of his sexuality.  Hollywood was a lot more repressed than New York.

Considering that Orry-Kelly died in 1964, trying to put together a well-informed documentary was a challenge for Armstrong.  Many of the people he worked had also passed away.  Thankfully, she was able to speak with the likes of Oscar winning costume designer Ann Roth (who worked with him on Oklahoma!) and actors Jane Fonda and Angela Lansbury (who worked with him in the early 1960s).  There are plenty of other costumers and film buffs who share their own thoughts on Orry-Kelly’s legacy.

Armstrong didn’t feel it best to use a traditional narrator to tell the story.  Instead, she’s used an actor (Darren Gilshenan) who appears on screen from time-to-time.  Armstrong believed this would provide better insight into Orry-Kelly’s mindset.  It’s a little clunky but it’s hard to suggest a better alternative.  There isn’t much in the way of photos or videos of the real Orry-Kelly.  It was nice though to see Armstrong include one of his Academy Award acceptance speeches as one of the final scenes.

A major part of the film’s allure is that you feel like you’re accompanying Armstrong on this journey of discovery.  She’s deliberate in the way that information is revealed.  Just when you think you have an understanding of Orry-Kelly, she throws in a surprising twist that sends the narrative on a different path.  Make sure you stay through the closing credits because it includes perhaps the biggest discovery of all.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 20 July 2015

We watch our favourite action characters on the big screen, we’re accustomed to seeing them in their prime.  James Bond, Indiana Jones, Han Solo and Jason Bourne are almost always in peak physical condition.  The same can be said of comic book heroes like Batman, Iron Man and Thor (although some are helped with super powers).

Based on the novel by Mitch Cullin, Mr Holmes takes a different path.  You can forget about the sharp, agile Sherlock Holmes that Robert Downey Jr made famous in the 2009 reboot and 2011 sequel.  When we first meet this version of the famed detective, played by Sir Ian McKellen, he’s a 93-year-old man living in a farmhouse and battling dementia.  He has to write people’s names on his shirt sleeve so that he can remember them.

Now that his career has wrapped up, Holmes is starting to think about his legacy.  His good friend and ex-partner, Dr Watson, wrote a series of popular books that detailed the many cases they solved together.  Holmes knew that Watson was loose with the facts (never let the truth get in the way of a good story) but the books achieved their purpose – the public regard him as one of the great sleuths of all time.

Notwithstanding his fame and fortune, there’s one case that still frustrates Holmes.  Watson wrote about a married woman who had been struggling to come to grief with two miscarriages.  Her husband had asked Holmes to investigate why she was spending so much time with a mysterious music teacher (de la Tour).  The finale in Watson’s novel never felt right to Holmes.  He wants to set the record straight and tell the “true” story.  The problem is that he can’t remember it.

In 1998, Ian McKellen teamed up with director Bill Condon to make the brilliant Gods & Monsters (which earned a rare A+ grade from me).  Condon won the Oscar for best adapted screenplay and McKellen earned his first nomination for best actor (losing to Robert Benigni who has done very little since).  It’s a delight to see them working together again and that fact alone is worth the price of admission.

It’s easy to see why they were attracted to the project.  Despite everything I’ve already mentioned, Mr Holmes isn’t really a whodunit tale.  It’s a sad, heart-warming drama about an old, prickly man in desperate need of a connection.  That need is met through two people – his lonely, middle-aged housekeeper (Linney) and her inquisitive, young son (Parker).  It proves that it’s never too late to make new friends.

Screenwriter Jeffrey Hatcher (The Duchess) has done a beautiful job weaving the film’s multiple narratives together.  As Holmes reflects on the case of the married woman, he applies the learnings to his current situation.  It leads to a memorable punch line that has something to say about the value of fiction when compared to reality.

I don’t believe Mr Holmes will generate the same awards season heat as Gods & Monsters but it’s still a film to seen and appreciated.