Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 19 October 2014

Andrew Neyman (Teller) is a talented jazz drummer in his first year at the most prestigious music school in the United States.  In the film’s opening scene, we see him practicing late one night to the point where the drumsticks have left blisters on his hands.  Appearing to have very few friends, Andrew is prepared to forgo an active social life in pursuit of his goal – to be the world’s best drummer.

In that same opening sequence, he is spotted by Terence Fletcher (Simmons) – the school’s chief music conductor.  There are some teachers who like to be friends with their students and take the “softly, softly” approach.  Fletcher is not one of them.  When he storms into a rehearsal room, he always brings a sense of fear.  Everyone falls silent.  Their eyes collectively look to the floor.

There’s a nice side to Fletcher that is fleetingly visible.  For example, we see him talking sweetly to a young child and inspiring her to become a successful pianist.  Such moments are forgotten when you see the second of his two faces.  He tells a female saxophonist that she must have been selected because of her good looks and not her talent.  He teases another student about his weight and then accuses him of playing out of tune (when that’s not actually the case).

The opening half of Whiplash is about trying to understand Fletcher.  When he’s throwing chairs at students from across the room and when he’s reducing them to tears with his sadistic comments, is there a method to his madness?  Is he using fear to motivate the students?  Is he trying to separate the good from the great?  Or… is he just an odious human being?  Does he take pleasure from the humiliation and degradation of those under his control?

The film’s second half flips the focus – it’s about trying to understand Andrew as Fletcher’s emotional abuse and intense practice regime starts to take its toll.  Andrew clearly has a love for drumming but he now has doubts.  Does he actually have what it takes to be a professional?  Have Fletcher’s unorthodox techniques exposed his weaknesses?  Or… does he believe in himself enough to push back?  Should he stand up to Fletcher and put him to the test in return?

Winner of the Audience Award and Grand Jury Prize at the Sundance Film Festival back in January, Whiplash is a powerful film headlined by two passionate performances.  Fletcher is a character whose actions and insults could easily become laughable if overplayed.  Thankfully, that’s not the case thanks to the brilliance of J.K. Simmons (Spider-Man, Juno).  Writer-director Damien Chazelle considered Simmons for the role after recalling his equally strong presence in the 1990s television series, Oz, set in a maximum-security prison.

It feels like Miles Teller has been around for a lot longer than 4 years.  After making his debut in 2010’s Rabbit Hole, Teller has built a name for himself through a series of teen-orientated movies including Project X, The Spectacular Now, That Awkward Moment and Divergent.  You’ll see a different side of Teller here as he deftly illustrates Andrew’s skill with the drums but also his fragile mental state.  He draws on numerous emotions and it’s a performance equal to that of Simmons.

Before the shoot, Teller spent months improving his drumming skills under the tutelage of Nate Lang – a member of a New York based band known as the Howlin’ Souls.  It’s a nice touch that Lang plays Andrew’s drumming rival, Carl, in the film itself.

The screenplay rushes through some events a little too quickly but this is still an impressive achievement for Chazelle who loosely drew on his own experiences when creating the story.  It wants you to dissect these intriguing characters and also reflect on what it takes, rightly or wrongly, to succeed.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 23 September 2014

Released this week, Josh Lawson’s The Little Death covers a subject matter that we don’t see often on the big screen – sex and fetishes.  Perhaps it’s because we don’t like to talk about such stuff publicly.  Perhaps it’s because film financiers don’t want to take a chance on edgier material (they’d prefer to stick to safe, PG stuff).

It’s a nice coincidence that we have another release this week in Australia that also covers “taboo” topics that we don’t see much of in mainstream cinemas.  The Skeleton Twins is an equally dark comedy that explores suicide, depression, and child abuse.  It’s the second feature of writer-director Craig Johnson and it took home a screenwriting award at the 2014 Sundance Film Festival back in January.

The story centres on two middle aged twins, Milo (Hader) and Maggie (Wiig), who have drifted apart and haven’t seen each other in close to a decade.  They are brought together after Milo unsuccessfully attempts to commit suicide.  We’re not quite sure why.  His suicide note simply read “to whom it may concern, see ya later” followed by a smiley face.

Maggie suggests to Milo that he come and spend some time with her in New York so he can clear his head and get things back on track.  It’s a gesture that serves more than one purpose.  We learn that Maggie has been battling her own demons.  She tells everyone that things are great but she too is struggling to find her place in the world.  Suicide is at the forefront of her mind.

Most of the film is spent watching these two characters interact with a few supporting players thrown in.  Luke Wilson (Legally Blonde) plays Maggie’s nice-guy husband, Boyd Holbrook (Milk) plays her seductive young scuba instructor, and Ty Burrell (Modern Family) plays one of Milo’s former lovers.  Joanna Gleason (Last Vegas) also makes a great cameo as their quirky mother.

They combine to create what is a heavy comedy.  There were plenty of awkward moments during the preview screening I attended where some audience members laughed loudly while others maintained a deadpan expression.  It’s a change of pace for these two Saturday Night Live stars who we’re used to seeing in much “lighter” films (Hader – Superbad, Hot Rod, Tropic Thunder, Wiig – Walk Hard, Bridesmaids, Despicable Me).

It’s a moral that’s covered repeatedly in films – The Skeleton Twins is trying to highlight the value of human interaction.  Maggie and Milo haven’t been in touch for ten years but it doesn’t take long for the connection to reform and the memories to come flooding back.  Through the power of conversation (and a bit of singing), they can help each other without actually realising it.

I wasn’t a fan of the finale.  It felt too conventional given much the unorthodox material that preceded it (without giving too much away).  Aside, this a strong feature that successfully blends comedy and drama while also exploring a very tough subject.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 02 October 2014

There are few Hollywood directors who have delivered quality films as consistently as David Fincher over the past two decades.  I’m talking about Seven, The Game, Fight Club, Zodiac, The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button, The Social Network, and The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo (I’ve deliberately left off Panic Room).

Gone Girl marks his 5^th consecutive feature film that isn’t an original story.  Rather, it’s using a popular novel as its source material.  American author Gillian Flynn, a former writer for the Entertainment Weekly magazine, first published her book in 2012.  It soared up the best-seller charts and the film rights were quickly snapped up by Reese Witherspoon (yes, she’s a producer on the side) and 20^th Century Fox.

Like all good thrillers, it’s tricky to work out how much to reveal in a review (for the benefit of those who haven’t read the novel).  If I work solely from what is divulged in the trailers, Gone Girl is the story of Nick Dunne (Affleck) – a struggling bar owner from Missouri who has been accused of murdering his wife, Amy (Pike).  There’s no body and no weapon… but the circumstances surrounding her disappearance are suspicious.

Given that Amy is the daughter of a successful writer, it’s the kind of case that becomes headline news across the United States.  Everyone has an opinion as to whether he’s guilty or innocent.  It’s effectively “trial by media” with fresh information being provided to the thirsty public each day – some of it fact, some of it mere speculation.

It’s this part of the film that I found the most engaging.  The recent murder trails of Gerard Baden-Clay and Oscar Pistorius have highlighted our seemingly insatiable interest in certain crimes.  What is it about these particular cases that generated such public interest?  Why are we so quick to form and opinion as to guilty or innocence based on a splattering of information (sometimes false) in news reports?

Nick is originally perceived by the public as a nice guy.  They believe the story that his wife must have been kidnapped.  However, when Nick is seen smiling for a split-second at a press conference, people start to think otherwise.  We have this perception how people “should” reaction in such a situation and so when reality doesn’t match up, it creates doubt in our minds.

There are many characters in this ensemble and the film provides much insight by looking at the situation through all of their eyes.  Two police detectives (Dickens and Fugit) have identified Nick as the key suspect and are trying to find enough evidence to charge him.  Nick’s sister (Coon) is trying to be as supportive as possible but senses that her brother is hiding something.  Nick’s attorney (Perry) is heavily focused on spinning the media back in his client’s favour.  Amy’s parents are co-ordinating a large search party while trying to deal with their own suspicions.

Unfortunately, all the good work is brought undone by a rubbish ending.  To use a metaphor, it’s like getting a call from a telemarketer who just won’t take no for answer.  You understand what they’re trying to sell.  That’s not the issue.  The problem for them is that you’re not interested in buying.  To come back to Gone Girl, I understand what message this film is trying to sell in its final 20 minutes… but I simply didn’t buy it.  Characters start acting in a nonsensical manner so as to fit the predetermined conclusion.

It’s a long film a two and a half hours and I think there’s a lot to like here… but Gone Girl rubbed me up the wrong way at its pointy end.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 20 September 2014

It remains one of my favourite scenes from a movie.  In The People Vs. Larry Flynt, released back in 1996, Flynt (played by Woody Harrelson) stands on the stage at a political rally and asks people to re-evaluate their morals.  He notes that “murder is illegal, but if you take a picture of someone committing the act of murder, that puts you on the cover of Newsweek and you might even win a Pulitzer Prize.”  On the flip side, “sex is legal” and yet “if you take a picture of two people in the act of sex, or even just take a picture of a woman’s naked body, they’ll put you in jail.”

Flynt was talking about the porn world in the mid-1970s but the same arguments could be used when discussing the film industry today.  Violence underpins so many movies.  Of the top 10 films at the Australian box-office in 2013, 7 contained “violence” according to the Australian Government Classification Board.  There’s action violence (Iron Man 3), fantasy violence (The Hobbit), animated violence (Despicable Me 2), science fiction violence (Man Of Steel), and good old general violence (The Hunger Games).

In contrast, you’d have to go number 14 on the box-office list before you found a film with nudity (The Hangover III) and you’ll need to look all the way down to number 57 (Safe Haven) until you come across a movie with a single sex scene.  Why the imbalance?  Most people have sex (or at least want to be having sex).  It’s legal, there’s nothing wrong with it… and yet, big movie studios steer away from it when putting up the cash for their latest ventures.

It’s part of the reason why 33-year-old Australian Josh Lawson wrote his script for The Little Death.  He acknowledges that sex has been treated as a “taboo” subject for far too long and it’s time to start asking questions as to why.  His film reminded me a little of Love Actually in the sense that it contains a group of unrelated short stories that follow a series of couples as they try to push their relationships in a positive, forward-moving direction.

The catch is that they’re all looking to explore a particular fetish.  Maeve confesses that she wants to be forced into rough sex by a stranger (although the fantasy will be played out by her boyfriend).  Phil’s relationship lacks passion but he is aroused while watching his wife sleep.  Dan and Evie have turned to roll play (dressing up as doctors, police officers) try to spark their sex life.  Rowena hasn’t had an orgasm in years but suddenly finds herself stimulated when her husband starts to cry.  Sam is a deaf man who finds pleasure using a phone sex hotline… but only because there’s a young sign-reader helping him out.

In formulating the screenplay, Lawson has blended both comedy and drama.  It works in some places.  It doesn’t work in others.  The film’s highlight is at the very end – a lengthy, laugh-out-loud sequence where the deaf man forces an unsuspecting call centre operator to use some awkward sign-language gestures.  It’s pure comedy.

The film’s darker moments aren’t quite as effective.  There’s a scene where a man (played by Lawson) asks a friend if he’s ever raped someone so as to try to get some background information for his wife’s fantasy.  I fully support edgy comedy but the way the characters interact here is a little too flippant.  They stop acting like “real people” and the humour doesn’t feel natural.

I’d also argue that some jokes are too obvious.  For example, there’s a moment where the woman turned on by crying brings home Sophie’s Choice from the DVD store for her husband.  The audience was laughing well before the punchline was delivered.

I enjoy movies that take chances and in its defence, The Little Death is doing just that.  It’s an unorthodox subject matter that blends tones and doesn’t provide a neat, clean, happy-go-lucky ending.  There’s stuff to think about here as you leave the cinema.  I just wished the execution was better.

You can read by chat with writer-director Josh Lawson by clicking here.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 01 October 2014

I’m really not sure we needed another vampire movie.  It’s a genre that’s been well covered over the past decade with films including Vampire Academy, Only Lovers Left Alive, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, Dark Shadows, Let Me In, Daybreakers and 30 Days Of Night.  There’s also a bunch of popular franchises including Night Watch, Underworld and Twilight.  We’ve even reached the point where spoofs are being created – check out Vampires Suck and What We Do In The Shadows as examples.

Anyway, first-time writers Matt Sazama and Burk Sharpless have tried to come up with their own fresh take on the genre. Dracula Untold is an origin story which shows us how a 15^th Century Transylvanian prince was transformed into one of the world’s most infamous vampires.  Don’t expect it to be wrapped up too neatly.  Several plots have been left open for possible sequels (provided this film makes a profit).

The film opens by introducing us to popular prince known to most as Vlad the Impaler (Evans).  It’s a nickname well earned.  During war time, impaling his victims on giant spears was his favourite form of execution.  Vlad may be a powerful warrior but he’s no match for a domineering Sultan (Cooper) who controls the kingdom with a 100,000-man army.  The Sultan’s latest demand is that that Vlad hand over 1,000 children, including his own son, so that they can be trained and added to his growing militia.

It’s the last straw for Vlad.  As the saying goes – desperate men do desperate things.  He heads into the mountains and tracks down a vampire named Caligula (Dance) who many believed to be a legend.  Vlad asks to be transformed into a blood sucking creature so that he will have the power to defeat the Sultan’s army and hence, protect his family.  Caligula provides a sinister warning – “what kind of man crawls into his own grave in search of hope?”

Oh, but there exists a fairy tale type loophole.  Vlad will only be transformed into a vampire for 3 days.  That’ll be just enough time to slay the Sultan.  After that, he will return to his life as a mortal human and live happily ever after (or so I assumed).  However, if he drinks the blood of a human inside of those 3 days, he will remain a vampire for all eternity.  The bottom line – don’t drink any blood or you’re screwed.

I realise it’s a fantasy flick but I still had trouble going along with several parts to the story.  If Caligula is so unsatisfied with his life (you’ll see what I mean), why doesn’t he just walk out into the sunlight and kill himself?  As for Vlad, why does he wait for the Sultan’s army to come to him?  Shouldn’t he go straight after them to save time?

There are a few noteworthy elements (I like the idea that Dracula is a bit of a family man) but the film generally plays out like a standard action flick.  For example, Vlad can kill 1,000 men by himself in a matter of minutes… and yet he has to “lower himself” to a choreographed sword fight during the film’s finale.  We’ve seen it before.  We’ll see it again.

The cast do their job.  Luke Evans (Fast & Furious 6) does his best to look as aggrieved and tortured as possible.  Sarah Gordon (Cosmopolis) does what most females did in the 15^th Century – playing second fiddle to their husband.  It’s Charlies Dance (Game Of Thrones) who leaves the biggest impression as the cunning Caligula.  He’s far more interesting than the film’s keynote villain, played by Dominic Cooper (Need For Speed).

First-time feature director Gary Shore is to be applauded for the film’s brisk pace (it clocks in at a tidy 92 minutes) and some impressive visuals (such as the way in which the vampires react when coming into contact with sunlight or silver) but if you’ve grown tired of the vampire genre, it’s hard to see this tale providing much in the way of reinvigoration.