Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 13 November 2014

American author Dennis Lehane has some powerful fans in Hollywood.  Three of his novels have previously been brought to the big screen by top-notch directors – Clint Eastwood for Mystic River, Ben Affleck for Gone Baby Gone and Martin Scorsese for Shutter Island.  The catch is that while these intriguing films were based on Lehane’s work, other writers were responsible for the adaptation from lengthy novel to two-hour screenplay.

That’s not the case this time around.  Based on his own short story (entitled “Animal Rescue”), Lehane has crafted a script that bears all the trademarks of a traditional crime drama.  It centres on a quiet, unassuming guy named Bob Saginowski (Hardy).  He doesn’t seem that bright and his social skills are lacking.  That said, he’s somehow found a job working at a small bar named Cousin Marv’s.

Marv’s (Gandolfini) name may still be on the front door but he’s no longer the owner.  He sold out years ago to a group of wealthy Chechens who are using the bar as part of a money laundering operation.  Bob and Marv take home their small salary and turn a blind eye to all the illegal activity.  It’s not like they have a choice though.  Those who have double-crossed the Chechens have a knack for disappearing… permanently.

Things start to get messy when the bar is held up late one night.  The two masked thieves escape with only about $5,000 in cash but that’s not really the point.  The question is – who would have the audacity to steal from the wealthy Chechens?  Did they simply not know who owned the bar?  Or is there something much more devious going on here?

A few other characters are brought into the mix to keep you guessing.  Detective Torres (Ortiz) is investigating the robbery and a handful of other crimes in the neighbourhood.  Nadia (Rapace) is a young woman from the neighbourhood with a hidden past.  Eric Deeds (Schoenaerts) is a local goon who is suspected of being involved in a much talked about murder.

This is a decent drama.  It’s not ruined by overly convenient moments or unbelievable twists (as tends to be case with such films).  You may be a little confused by these characters are first but as their motivations are revealed, you start to realise the sense in their actions.  It all leads up to a worthy ending and a particularly memorable line from the police detective (which sums it all up).

That said, it is a little slow in places.  A significant chunk of time is spent watching Bob bond with a puppy dog that he finds in a rubbish bin.  Yes, it’s a cute dog that will woo audiences but it feels like an odd plot device.  I’m not fully sold on its purpose.  I was also unconvinced by the budding friendship / relationship between Bob and Nadia.  It’s hard to figure out what’s drawn them to each other.

It’s worth noting that The Drop marks the final on-screen performance for James Gandolfini (The Sopranos) who passed away in June last year.  It’s nice to see him one final time and so yeah, that in itself is a good enough reason to see this film.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 28 October 2014

In 1996, American journalist Gary Webb (Renner) came across a career defining story.  He had evidence that Nicaraguan drug cartels has been importing and selling cocaine in Los Angeles during the 1980s.  That in itself wasn’t news.  Most knew that anyway.  The catch was that the CIA knew this was going on but were turning a blind eye.

Why?  Well, that’s because the profits from the drug trade were going to CIA-supported rebels in Nicaragua.  They could then buy arms and continue their fight to overthrow the Nicaraguan government (a cause that President Reagan supported).  The bottom line – the CIA was prepared to lose one fight (the growing cocaine epidemic) in the hope that they would win another (political stability in Nicaragua).

The first half of the film chronicles Webb’s efforts in bringing the story to the public’s attention.  Working for the San Jose Mercury News, a small newspaper with an even smaller circulation, Webb didn’t have a lot of resources at his disposal.  He would have to do all the heavy lifting himself.  A further complication is that not all of his sources were willing to go “on the record”.  We see Webb being warned by a National Security Council official that “some stories are just too true to tell.”

Webb’s article was published in August 1996 and became headline news across the country.  Director Michael Cuesta uses archival news footage and interviews to help illustrate the level of public concern that existed at the time.  There was particular outrage from the African American community as many youngsters had become cocaine addicts.

What happened next may surprise you.  It was certainly a surprise to Gary Webb.  Bigger newspapers were unhappy that they’d missed this “exclusive” and so, instead of investigating the CIA further, they went after Webb.  The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times and the Washington Post tried to discredit his allocations by using “anonymous intelligence officials” as their sources.  It left Webb ostracised by the journalism community and struggling to keep his own job.

Based on the 2006 book written by Nick Schou, this is a film that sides with Gary Webb.  Not everyone is going to agree with that stance.  Jeff Leen, an editor for The Washington Post, describes this Hollywood-ised version of the film as “pure fiction” and notes Schou’s own comments that Webb’s stories “contained major flaws of hyperbole.”

So who is right?  I’m not sure anyone knows the full answer given how many people “may” have been involved in the CIA’s “alleged” conspiracy.  Those particularly interested in the subject matter can do more reading on the web (or perhaps track down Schou’s book).  The film heightened my interest in this small piece of history so it’s effective in that regard.

I was also lured in by the film’s look at the inner workings within the media.  It may be set in the mid-1990s but its issues of journalistic integrity as just as relevant today.  You can scrutinise the actions of the Gary Webb and the staff at the San Jose Mercury News.  You can do the same for those at the major newspapers who subsequently went on the attack.  It’s a nice reminder of the adage – “never let the facts get in the way of a good story.”

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 11 November 2014

Justin Miller (Wayans) and Ryan O’Malley (Johnson) are two guys living in Los Angeles who are going absolutely nowhere in life.  Justin works for a video game design company where he gets no admiration from his fellow employees.  His ideas are quickly scoffed at.  Ryan doesn’t even have a job.  He gets by thanks to royalties from a general herpes commercial he featured in two years ago (his only acting gig).

To put it bluntly – they’re screw-ups.  This is illustrated when they turn up to their high school reunion.  Both of them have come dressed as police officers thinking it to be a costume party.  It turns out Ryan misread the invitation.  It’s actually a masquerade party and they’re instantly the butt of everyone’s jokes.

Don’t feel sorry for them though.  Despite their silly actions, their lack of friends, and their inability to meet women, Justin and Ryan are about to have a hell of a lot of fun.  While walking home from the reunion, they find everyone looking at them differently.  It’s not because they’ve suddenly becoming better looking.  It’s because they’re still wearing the police uniforms.  Suddenly, people respect them.

There are lengthy prison sentences for those impersonating a police officer but it doesn’t deter these two.  They take their charade a step further by purchasing fake guns, bullet proof vests, and a run-down police car (complete with sirens).  They hit the streets and actually take it upon themselves to investigate crimes (well, the ones that interest them).

You could possibly argue that Justin and Ryan are the “bad guys” but since this is a light-hearted buddy comedy, you need a stereotypical bad guy for them to face off against.  This is where the film introduces us to a group of sinister Albanians who seem to be involved in everything – drugs, guns, corruption and money laundering.  They’re led by the villainous Mossi Kasic who warns them that “I’m the law here.”

That’s enough said in terms of the story.  It’s not particularly adventurous and there aren’t many laugh-out-loud moments.  There’s only so far you can take this concept and I quickly grew tired of the crude, endless chatter between the two leading characters.  They party in nightclubs, they smoke weed, and they torture suspects.  Some may find it amusing.  Others (myself included) will not.

It won’t be winning any awards but those at 20^th Century Fox won’t be complaining.  Let’s Be Cops was shot on a budget of just $14m and has already grossed in excess of $100m across the globe.  The film clearly has its fans but if I’m sitting down to watch a buddy cop comedy, I’d much rather go with Bad Boys, Lethal Weapon, Rush Hour, The Heat, The Guard or Hot Fuzz.    Those films will be remembered.  This one will not.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 23 October 2014

The UK miners’ strike in 1984 has been well documented.  The Margaret Thatcher led government announced the closure of numerous coal mines across Britain.  The National Union of Mineworkers responded by initiating a national strike.  It was an issue that divided the country and it wasn’t until almost a year later that the workers finally relented and returned to the mines.

The strike provided the backdrop to 2000’s much acclaimed drama, Billy Elliot (still my all-time favourite film).   Writer Stephen Beresford and Tony Award winning director Matthew Warchus (Matilda: The Musical) have borrowed from the same piece of history to create Pride.  The focus here is not so much on the miners but rather a group of gay and lesbians fighting for their own equality.

Based on actual events, the story is largely centred on Mark Ashton (Schnetzer), a twenty-something year old gay rights activist living in London.  Looking to improve the public’s perception of the homosexual community, Mark starts a campaign known as “Lesbians and Gays Support the Miners.”  He and his friends collect money on the street and then pass the proceeds through the National Union of Mineworkers.

It’s a good deed… but one with a dual purpose.  By targeting the miners, who now find themselves marginalised like many homosexuals, he hopes to build a rapport that can break down barriers.  It won’t be easy though.  There are plenty of folk on both sides of the fence who have doubts.  Some have much stronger moral objections.

Pride is an ensemble piece with most characters leaving an impression.  A subdued Bill Nighy (The Boat That Rocked) and an excitable Imelda Staunton (Vera Drake) play residents of a small Welsh town who embrace their new gay friends.  George MacKay (Sunshine On Leith) features as a closeted youngster who sneaks out of his parents’ house to help the cause.  Andrew Scott (Sherlock) plays a middle-aged gay man looking for the courage to speak to his mother for the first time in almost two decades.

Some have panned the film for its narrow focus.  They believe it glosses over the plight of the miners (who ultimately lost) and the rising impact on AIDS within the gay community.  Others have criticised the film for its lack of historical accuracy.  They claim that it oversimplifies the characters and makes things out to be far too black and white (for example, the real Mark Ashton was far more politically driven that the film suggests).

These detractors are in the minority.  Pride premiered at the Cannes Film Festival (as part of the Directors’ Fortnight program) and performed solidly at the box-office when released in the U.K. last month.  The high grading from the public on the Internet Movie Database (a current score of 8.1 out of 10) suggests that most are seeing this film as it was intended – as a warm-hearted, feel-good comedy that embraces its 1980s setting and highlights a small piece of forgotten history.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 02 November 2014

A small Belgian solar panel factory has 17 employees.  One of them, Sandra (Cotillard), suffers a stress-related breakdown and is granted extended leave.  During her absence, the business goes through a slight downturn.  Management believe the work can comfortably be performed by just 16 employees.

Instead of making the tough decision himself, the boss shirks the responsibility and throws it over to the staff by way of a vote on a Friday afternoon.  They have two choices.  Option one – they can agree to terminate Sandra and with the cost savings generated, they will all receive a bonus of 1,000 euro.  Option two – they can agree to keep Sandra but they will not receive any bonus.

The vote takes places without Sandra’s knowledge and the overwhelming majority go with the first option.  The bonus was simply too great to pass up.  Sandra gets wind of the decision via a phone call and is immediately overcome with emotion.  Her income is critically important to her husband and two children.  Without Sandra’s job at the factory, they will most likely default on their mortgage and be forced into public housing.

Sandra confronts management and requests a second vote.  She argues that the employees were pressured into choosing that particular option and further, she was not present so as to put forward her own arguments.  It is agreed that a second vote will take place on Monday morning by way of a secret ballot.  It leaves Sandra with 48 hours to get in touch with her 16 co-workers and try to convince a majority that she deserves to stay.

My attention wavered during several chunks of Two Days, One Night.  Once the premise is established, it becomes repetitive in the way that Sandra tracks down and speaks to the other employees.  She outlines her position and they fire back with their own views.  Some throw their support behind her.  Others do not.  It leaves Sandra wondering if she’s in a lose-lose situation.  Even if she can win over a small majority, how easy will it be to work with those upset that they’ve lost their important bonus?

Why the film is worth your time is for its exploration of mental illness.  Sandra is already battling depression and these events have the potential to further rupture her self-esteem.  It’s a wild roller coaster.  Her spirits are instantly lifted when she speaks to a colleague who agrees to vote for her.  All that positivity is lost an hour later when she speaks to someone else with an opposing view.  It leaves her husband, Manu (Rongione), scrambling to keep his wife upbeat.

After premiering at Cannes, the film moved on to the 2014 Sydney Film Festival where it defeated 11 other films to win the Official Competition.  It was recently announced as Belgium’s entry for the foreign language category at the 2015 Academy Awards and many pundits believe it will be nominated.  Much of the praise is being directed at French actress Marion Cotillard (La Vie En Rose, Inception) who is terrific in the leading role.  She draws on a wide range of emotions and her passionate performance with resonate with many.