Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 08 February 2015

At first, I thought this was a light, silly English comedy.  Abi (Pike) and Doug (Tennant) are going on a road trip with their three children from London to the Scottish Highlands.  It’s so they can attend the lavish 75^th birthday party of Doug’s father, Gordy (Connolly), who hasn’t been in the best of health.  The antics begin before they’ve even left home.  Jess, the youngest child, throws a tantrum when she’s not allow to take her “pet rocks” along for the ride.

Adding to the slapstick is the fact that Abi and Doug are separated… but they haven’t told anyone yet.  They’ve decided to keep the news to themselves so as not to ruin Gordy’s birthday celebrations.  When in front of others, it’s all smiles and sunshine.  When alone (or stuck in the car with the kids) it’s all insults and slander.  They just need to make it through the weekend and then they can return to their very separate lives.

The tone of the film shifts around the 30 minute mark and becomes much more dramatic.  We learn that Gordy has terminal cancer and doesn’t have long left to live.  While it seems to be creating stress and division within the family, Gordy isn’t too fussed.  If anything, it’s provided him with clarity.  He’d rather spend his final months doing what he loves – fishing and passing on wisdom to his grandkids.

It’s a weird sequence in the film with writer-directors Andy Hamilton and Guy Jenkin (Drop The Dead Donkey) unsuccessfully trying to juggle drama and comedy.  One minute, there’s a simple joke about lights that turn off when you clap. Next minute, you’ll be watching Gordy battle the effects of his cancer.  It’s also during this part of the movie where the fragile truce between Abi and Doug starts to unravel.  She says she’s talking the kids to live in Newcastle.  He locks her in the bathroom.  She threatens to scream “rape”.  So yeah, it’s no longer a “light, silly English comedy.”

If you think that’s strange, wait until you see what happens next.  A quick twist (which isn’t divulged in the film’s trailer) sets in motion a series of events that can be described as both shocking and unexpected.  Part of me admires the efforts of Hamilton and Jenkin to go push beyond comedic boundaries and give us something different.  However, the other part of me has concerns about their methods.  Do they want it to be a light comedy or a dark comedy?  The simplistic finale, complete with a shallow message, only adds to the confusion.

I’m not sure how much of their dialogue was scripted but it’s the three children, played by Emilia Jones, Amelia Bullmore and Bobby Smalldridge, who get the most laughs.  They’re proof that kids can say some very odd things.  Billy Connolly features in a few nice scenes (he’s always the voice of reason) but the remaining members of the adult cast feel like they’re working too hard to sell their eccentric personalities.

Featuring one of the year’s more boring titles, What We Did On Our Holiday opens a few interesting doors but isn’t brave enough to walk through them.  

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 03 February 2015

When it comes to making action films, English director Matthew Vaughn doesn’t like to take things too seriously.  Kick-Ass was about a shy, nerdish kid who took to the streets and tried to become a superhero (complete with a ridiculous green costume).  X-Men: First Class fabricated and put a lighter spin on the events behind the 1962 Cuban missile crisis.

Kingsman: The Secret Service follows in the same vein.  Drawing from a comic book series that was first published in 2012, Vaughn and co-writer Jane Goldman have created a light-hearted spy film that tries to offer something a little different from the heavier James Bond films with which we are all familiar.

It centres on a super-secret crime fighting organisation known as the Kingsman.  I’m not quite sure how the fund their elaborate headquarters but they operate outside the realms of the government (so that they can’t be interfered with).  They travel across the world, collate valuable intelligence information and yep, they kill a few bad guys.

Following the recent death of a Kingsman, the organisation is going through a recruitment phase.  A group of young men and women are being put through a series of high-pressure trials to see if they have the required physical strength and mental toughness to make it through.  The most unlikely of the candidates is Eggsy (Egerton) – a guy fresh out of high school who has had somewhat of a troubled upbringing.

There’s another story that runs concurrently through the film.  An experienced Kingsman, known by the codename of Galahad (Firth), is trying to find who is responsible for the death of a close friend.  It leads him to the home of Valentine (Jackson), an insanely wealthy telecommunications tycoon who has developed a sinister plan to solve the world’s climate change problem.

It’s not a full-on spoof like Austin Powers but Kingsman: The Secret Service is very aware of the clichéd world in which it operates.  It makes reference to other spies such as James Bond and Maxwell Smart.  It also throws in a few plot twists that you won’t find in the well-used “spy movie” textbook.  It’s invigorating to see a movie that takes a few chances.

There’s not a lot of coherence to the storyline.  If you think about it for more than a few seconds, you’ll realise that it makes even less sense than a traditional comic book adaptation.  There’s a method to the madness however.  The film culminates with a final half-hour that is so wonderfully absurd that it will leave many laughing loudly and repeatedly.

Kingsman: The Secret Service is quite violent and it pushes the boundaries of political correctness… but if you’re not upset by either of those attributes, you should find it a lot of fun.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 08 February 2015

Biopics are featuring strongly this awards season.  The Imitation Game told the story of cryptanalyst Alan Turing.  The Theory Of Everything centred on famous cosmologist Stephen Hawking and his first wife, Jane.  American Sniper took us inside the world of the Navy SEAL Chris Kyle.

Selma may have only just snuck into the best picture category for the upcoming Academy Awards (it has only one other nomination) but it’s superior to the three abovementioned films.  Its focus is a lot narrower too.  Instead of trying to condense Martin Luther King’s whole life into a single movie, writer Paul Webb and director Ava DuVernay have concentrated their attention on events that took place in Selma, Alabama in early 1965.

Many believed the passing of the Civil Rights Act in 1964 would end segregation but the African American citizens of Selma were continually being thwarted by local government officials in their efforts to become registered voters.  There’s a scene early in the movie where King (played by David Oyelowo) sums up why the matter was so important.  Firstly, it would provide African Americans the power to vote out those officials who continually discriminated against their community.  Secondly, it would give them the right to serve on juries and help prevent black citizens from being falsely convinced by their “all white” peers.

The most fascinating element to this film is its exploration of tactics.  If I wanted to protest an issue today, I’m not going to achieve much by walking down a street and holding a simple placard.  King and his supporters knew that the best way of winning this battle was through the media – both newspapers and television.

Their strategy was to organise a series of peaceful protests featuring a few hundred marchers.  That itself wouldn’t make headline news.  The critical “catch” was that King hoped the police would retaliate with unwarranted violence.  It was a big reason why they’d picked Selma as a town.  The County Sheriff was known to act outside the law and Governor George Wallace (Roth) did little to stop him.

If images were to be broadcast across the nation of white state troopers attacking unarmed black men and women, it would expose the problem and create sympathy for the African American cause.  President Lyndon Johnson (Wilkinson) would be left with no choice but to introduce further legislation guaranteeing African Americans the right to vote.

Not everyone agreed on this approach.  The film makes time to illustrate the division and uncertainty that existed on both sides of the fence.  There were some African Americans who didn’t appreciate King barging into Selma and trying to take charge.  Back in Washington, President Johnson was sensitive towards their plight but as he wanted to focus on other issues, he quietly used the FBI to hinder King’s endeavours.

I’ve read a few “fact check” articles that have tried to discredit elements of the film (the most notable being the interaction between King and President Johnson).  Perhaps the film isn’t 100% accurate but I’d passionately argue it’s a lot more balanced than others in this year’s Oscars race.  It’s also not afraid to show King’s flaws.  Yes, he won the Nobel Peace Prize… but yes, he also cheated on his wife.

Skilfully directed by Ava DuVernay and featuring a wonderful leading performance from David Oyelowo, Selma pulls back the curtain on a riveting piece of U.S. history.  Just as importantly, it highlights the value that can be achieved from a successful, well-organised protest.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 26 January 2015

What do Kim Basinger, Hilary Swank, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Nicole Kidman have in common?  They’ve all prevented Julianne Moore from taking home a coveted 13 ½ inch gold plated statuette.  However, after two decades of great performances, it seems the “movie gods” are finally set to smile on Moore.  Having won a string of lead-up awards, she’s a ridiculously short priced favourite to win the Oscar next month for her lead performance in Still Alice.

The film centres on a 50-year-old woman who is battling the early stages of Alzheimer’s disease.  When we first meet Alice (Moore), we learn that she’s a highly regarded linguistics professor at Columbia University.  Her husband, John (Baldwin), is also a college professor and they have three children who have all moved out of home.

Alice is sharp enough to realise that something isn’t quite right with her memory.  She loses her train of thought while giving an important lecture.  She becomes disorientated while going out for a late afternoon jog.  Several trips to a specialist confirm Alice’s deep-seeded fears.  The indignity she soon feels is summed up in a comment to her husband – “I wish I had cancer.”

This film is about more than just feeling sad and sorrowful.  It’s provides an insightful look at how such a disease can affect the family dynamic.  Alice is told that Alzheimer’s is genetic and that there’s a 50/50 chance that each of her children will go through the same experience.  The moment she shares this news with her kids makes for tough viewing.  If you were in their shoes, would you want to know this?  Would then want to have a genetic test to know for sure?

The disease also puts a strain on John.  He wants to be there and support his wife… but there’s only so much time he can take off work (particularly since he is now the sole breadwinner).  When a lucrative job offer arises in another state, he’s left with a tough decision to make.  How much of his own life and career is he prepared to sacrifice?  When is the right time to get a live-in carer or perhaps even put Alice in a nursing home?

Julianne Moore is wonderfully good as Alice and her performance will bring a tear to many eyes.  As part of her four months of research, she met with not just those suffering from the disease but also researchers, clinicians and therapists who deal with it every day.  She wanted to create a credible character that depicts the effects of Alzheimer’s as accurately as possible.  Moore is helped by a great supporting cast that includes Alec Baldwin, Kristen Stewart, Kate Bosworth and Hunter Parrish.

Based on the novel by Lisa Genova, Still Alice has been brought to the screen by the writing-directing team of Richard Glatzer and Wash Westmoreland.  It’s a neat twist of fate that the film is being released in Australia on the same date as The Theory Of Everything.  Just like Stephen Hawking, Glatzer suffers from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).  He has lost the ability to speak and can no longer use his hands.  The only way he could communicate with the cast and crew was by typing on an iPad using his right toe.  The fact he was able to make such an affecting movie is inspiring.  There’s no other word for it.

It’s a shame the film itself hasn’t received more recognition during the awards season.  I’d argue that it’s a lot more balanced, engaging and moving than the likes of The Imitation Game and American Sniper.  Put it high on your “must see” list.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 04 February 2015

There are a lot of reasons why people gamble.  Some do it because they think they can win and get rich.  Others do it purely for the rush of adrenalin.  Some are trying to escape their problems.  Others do it out of sheer boredom.

In the case of Jim Bennett (Walhberg), the best explanation I can come up with is depression.  He’s a moderately paid English professor who only took the job because he couldn’t cut it as a writer.  He once had a novel published but it made him only $17,000 in royalties.  He lives alone, he has no girlfriend, he hates his mother and he has no interests.  If you catch him smiling, it’d be a very rare event.

Unsatisfied with seemingly every part of his life, Jim has become a gambling addict with a death wish.  He’s borrowed $260,000 from two gangsters and blown it on the blackjack tables in a matter of minutes.  They’ve given him 7 days to repay the loans but Jim doesn’t seem too fussed.  If he finds the cash, so be it.  If not, he’s happy enough to take what’s coming.

He’s an interesting character… but I can’t use that same adjective for the film itself.  There’s really not a lot to it.  We simply watch Jim going about his life and digging himself into a deeper hole with each passing day.  A love interest is introduced (Larson) but she’s never given enough screen time.  If she is the reason that he’s going to turn his life around, it’s hard to buy.

Martin Scorsese and Leonardo DiCaprio were reportedly interested in the project back in 2011 but after settling on something better (The Wolf Of Wall Street), it fell into the hands of director Rupert Wyatt (Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes) and Mark Wahlberg (The Fighter).  I liked the blasé personality that he brings to the character.  I just wish I understood a little more about what was going on inside his head.

After a heavy, slow-paced opening hour, Wyatt tries to brighten things up in the later stages.  Jim concocts an elaborate plan that could put him on the path to redemption.  Like so much of the film though, it doesn’t provide the “pay off” you might expect.