Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 14 September 2003

The success that Depp referred to cannot be ignored.  Pirate movies have often tanked at the box-office.  Have you seen Cutthroat Island?  I didn’t think so.  On top of this, the film was inspired by a theme park ride of the same name at Disneyland.  This fact didn’t fill me with confidence.  Doubters have been left stunned by the amazing box-office success.  Outgrossing The Matrix: Reloaded, Pirates is the second biggest film of the year (behind Finding Nemo) and firmly placed in the top 20 of all time in the United States.  There’s always one film which comes from the woodwork each summer and this is it for 2003.

Jack Sparrow (Depp) is an eccentric pirate looking for a new boat to pillage and plunder.  He previously controlled a ship known as The Black Pearl but he was overthrown in a mutiny by the greedy Barbossa (Rush) and left for dead.  The local authorities then catch Sparrow stealing a docked ship and imprison him in a jail cell.  Not before he engages in a swashbuckling duel with petty blacksmith Will Turner (Bloom).

Turner is in love with the governor’s daughter, Elizabeth Swann (Knightly), and he will soon be given the chance to prove this when she is kidnapped by the pirates of The Black Pearl.  Reluctantly, Will strikes a deal with Sparrow and springs him from jail with promises he will take him to The Black Pearl to rescue his “bonnie lass”.  Sparrow is more than happy as he too has unfinished business with Barbossa…

Johnny Depp really is wonderful and it’s fun to watch his character continually switch from good guy to bad guy.  Orlando Bloom is at an important stage of his career as he tries to build on his Lord Of The Rings publicity.  He actually very good as is love interest Keira Knightley who you should remember from Bend It Like Beckham.  Australian Geoffrey Rush is the weakest of the foursome but not disgraced by any means.

There’s a bunch of fun special effects and some nice, if not a little lame, jokes.  You may see it as a long stretch at 143 minutes but in contrast to the many other action releases this year, there is enough action and adventure to maintain one’s attention and go the distance.  There’s talk of a sequel (how could there not be) but I say that without Johnny Depp’s signature you can forget all about it.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 07 September 2003

Harrison Ford looks about as excited making this film as I felt watching it.  He talks like a tired, washed up cop but he could just as easily pass as a tired, washed up actor.  Josh Hartnett isn’t much better but at least in forty years time he can tell his grandkids that he once worked with the legendary Harrison Ford.  I know neither will admit it but you have to think they’re pretty disappointed by what ended up screen.

It’s a dull affair that screenwriters Robert Souza and Ron Shelton have unsuccessfully tried to spice up.  Joe Gavilan (Ford) and Casey Calden (Hartnett) are LAPD detectives but they both have other interests outside the force.  Gavilan is a part-time real estate agent who’s struggling to sell a property he’s invested in, and Calden is a wannabe actor who like a million others, is looking for some Hollywood exposure.

The case they’re currently investigating involves the murder of a rap band at a nightclub.  They were brutally slain and the evidence suggests there was a witness but he or she cannot be identified.  Hampering their efforts is the LAPD’s internal affairs department.  Lieutenant Bennie Macko has a grudge against both Gavilan and Calden and is looking to pin something on them.

You can count the number of jokes on one hand and if you have seen the trailers and advertising, you’ll have already heard every single one of them.  I can’t emphasise enough how disinterested Ford and Hartnett look.  What is in abundance are the number of stupid inconsistencies in the plot.  How these two can do half the stuff they do and get away with it is beyond me.  They shoot wildly in a public street and no one blinks an eyelid.  They obtain police sealed files so effortlessly.  They have a sixth sense for following the enemy in chase sequences even when they didn’t see where they went.

What else can I say?  There’s some farcical romantic subplots including Hartnett screwing everyone in town and Ford nailing his enemy’s wife.  Academy Award winner Martin Landau lowers his credibility with a role which requires about times.  As for the other characters, there’s little to no explanation as to why they’re even in the film or what fate their characters meet.   What an incoherent mess.  Oh and yes, Lou Diamond Phillips has a cameo role as a transvestite.

An investigation is certainly required to find out what went wrong in this Hollywood Homicide.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 14 September 2003

When we last left Elle Woods (Witherspoon), she had beaten the odds and graduated with a law degree.  We open this sequel with Elle and company planning her upcoming wedding.  She’s to marry fellow legal mind Emmett Richmond (Wilson), who you may remember from the first film.  Elle is just as much in love with her dog, Bruiser, and hires a private investigator to find Bruiser’s mother so that she too can be invited to the big day.

The investigator does his job but the result is not what Elle expected.  Bruiser’s mum is at an animal testing facility where a comedic company is using her as a test subject.  Elle hopes the partners at her law firm to help fight this terrible injustice but her wishes fall on deaf ears.  She realises there’s only one way to remedy the situation – to go to Washington.

Elle magically walks into a position working under Republican Senator Victoria Rudd (Field) where she can create a bill and generate interest in her plight to ban animal testing by cosmetic companies.  At first, she is laughed at by Rudd’s other staff (shock horror) but she uses her unique style to impress a few key politicians and suddenly the ball is rolling.  Throw in some helpful advice from her hotel doorman (played by, wait for it, Bob Newhart) and victory will be hers.

I am at a loss to explain what the message is here.  Is it that one person can make a difference even if they are a bloody moron?  If so, then that message was thoroughly drummed into us in the first Legally Blonde film and didn’t need retelling.  Is it that testing on animals is wrong?  If so, then this is the most one-sided biased piece of propaganda since A Time To Kill.  In only one scene is reference made to the other side of this argument comes it’s a dismal effort at best.  Is it that some American politicians are corrupt but the good guys always win in the end?  Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Reese Witherspoon, what have you done to deserve this?  Her career began so promisingly with a wide range of roles in some brilliant low-budget flicks including Freeway, Pleasantville, American Psycho, Cruel Intentions and Election.  She is a great actress and deserves better than the pitiful script dished up here.  Let’s not even discuss the many other stereotypes on show.  Most irritating moment: watching the senators nod their heads up and down with bliss as they listen to Elle’s “powerful” address.  

If there’s no legitimate reason for a sequel, leave it be.  This is a nothing film.  No jokes but rather one complete joke.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 06 September 2003

We begin in London at a laboratory where highly classified medical testing is being performed on apes.  Three animal activists break through the security but a scientist at the lab pleads with them not to continue as the apes have been infected with “rage”.  Unaware of the danger, one of the activists releases an ape from its cage and it sets upon her like a starving lion.

28 days later… Jim awakes in a locked operating theatre in a hospital.  The last thing he can remember is couriering on his cycle and being struck by a car.  He yells “hello” but there’s no response.  He looks around the hospital and there is not a living soul to be found.  He wanders outside and the normally bustling London streets are completely deserted with strewn rubbish the only sign that people once existed.

Thinking he is hallucinating, Jim wanders into a church and there he will know for sure that this is no illusion.  An unspeakable plague has overrun the country and life has ceased to exist.  There is no way of knowing if any others are still alive or if the virus has spread across the oceans.  Jim has no time to be philosophical because the infected that remain alive are hunting him down as food.  As a piece of graffiti so eloquently phrases is “Repent.  The end is very fucking nigh.”

Engrossing is the perfect adjective to describe the latest film from the director Danny Boyle who’s stellar credits include Shallow Grave, The Beach and Trainspotting.  The writer of the original screenplay is Alex Garland, who any backpacker should know wrote The Beach.  I have a copy of on my bookshelf and Garland is one guy who knows how to tell a compelling story.  28 Days Later is riveting all the way through.

With wild flesh eating humans roaming the streets, you’d be easily fooled into thinking this an unrealistic horror flick.  In fact, it’s quite the opposite.  It’s a rational tale about how technology has left our society on the verge of annihilation and it could take just one person to destroy it all.  Further, this is a story of survival.  One man pulling on all his resources to stay alive and find the answers.

There are no big name cast members adds to the suspense.  If this were a standard Hollywood blockbuster, you’d know a few of the lesser heroins would be killed off, the big-name hero would defeat the baddies in a bloody finale and the world would go on living happily ever after.  You are never quite sure how this story will end and like a good book, you just wish it would go faster so you can find out.

It seems not even the studio and the director could agree on the ending.  Don’t leave the cinema early because following the final credits is an alternate ending – the one the director himself preferred.  Either ending works for me.  For that matter, you wouldn’t want to arrive at the cinema late either because if you miss the first 5 minutes, you won’t have a clue what’s going on.

There are some amazing scenes early in the film where Jim walks through the deserted London streets.  These scenes were shot very early in the morning and with council approval, crew members blocked off streets to ensure no one would wander on camera to ruin the shot.  When you consider some of the locations include the heart of London and the M1 motorway, it’s quite an achievement.  Danny Boyle produces where few other directors could.

If you notice the different visual style, you’d be interested to know the film was shot with digital cameras to give it a realistic look.  Boyle uses the lighting to great effect and combined with precise editing, it truly is a horrifyingly genuine film.  28 Days Later is undoubtedly a film to be seen and more importantly, to be remembered.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 10 September 2003

In 1966, Harvey Pekar began work as a file clerk at a hospital in Cleveland.  After thirty-five years of the same monotonous work, he retired in 2001.  It’s the kind of story that was made to be told in a movie, right?  Well there’s a lot more to Hervey Pekar and he is a cult hero to many around the world.

Tired of the same comic books, Hervey decided to write his own in 1976.  He wasn’t an artist but knew the story he wanted to tell.  Leading animator and friend Robert Crumb read Hervey’s work, put ink to paper and published the first edition of American Splendor.  A new edition has been published every year since and Pekar’s work has found universal appeal.

His comics aren’t about superheros.  Rather, it’s about himself and all the frivolous dramas and problems he faces in his average day.  Hervey’s a negative guy and always manages to find a negative in every positive.  Having not read one of his comics myself, I can only presume his popularity comes from telling it as it is.  He’s an early day Jerry Seinfeld only much darker.

Filmmakers Shari Springer Berman and Robert Pulcini wanted to bring Pekar’s story to the screen and have found an incredibly inventive way to tell it.  In the film, Pekar is played by great actor Paul Giamatti.  However, this is not just an adaptation, it’s also a documentary.  The real Harry Pekar narrates the film and appears on screen from time to time to explain situations.  Further, the directors incorporate the comic books themselves into the film by having some scenes which are simple animation.  There’s even more in store because some archived footage of the real Hervey back in the 80s is also used to help tell the story.  So if you can comprehend all of that, you’ll understand the film stars the real Hervey, the real Harvey 20 years ago, an actor playing Hervey, and an animated version of Hervey.

This originality has not gone unnoticed.  The film won a special prize at this year’s Cannes Film Festival and also won the top prize at the Sundance Film Festival.  Hopefully this attention will help the movie reach a wide audience.  The early buzz is pushing Giamatti for a best actor nomination and I’d be thrilled to see it.  He’s an underrated actor I’ve always admired for roles in films such as Man On The Moon and Planet Of The Apes but this is a career defining roles.  Pekar is not an attractive character but he’s certainly very interesting.

The film covers much of his life.  From his pathetic filing job to his numerous appearances on The Late Show With David Letterman.  From his search for love to his battles with cancer.  Pekar is still alive today and his stories will continue to be told through his now famous American Splendor comics.  Only from now on, an even bigger audience is watching thanks to the production of this film.  Do see it, if only for something different.  You won’t be disappointed.