Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 14 January 2020

There have been very few (perhaps none at all) who have had more influence in the American media over the past two decades that Roger Ailes.  He was appointed CEO of the newly created “fair and balanced” Fox News in 1996 and, within the space of a few years, had turned it into the country’s highest rated news network reeling in profits of $1.5 billion USD a year.  He launched the careers of right-wing commentators such as Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity, attacked other media outlets as having a pro-liberal bias, and wove his programs into the hearts of predominantly old, white and conservative voters.

Over a period of three weeks in July 2016, Ailes’ career came to an abrupt end.  Gretchen Carlson, who had co-hosted the morning Fox & Friends program, launched a lawsuit against Ailes (as opposed to the network) claiming sexual harassment.  James and Lachlan Murdoch, who weren’t the biggest fans of Ailes, instigated an investigation overseen by an independent law firm.  More than 20 other women came forward and his contract was terminated.  A man with seemingly infinite power had been reduced to nothing overnight (although he did get a healthy severance package).

Bombshell delves into the final months of Ailes’ tenure at Fox News.  The opening titles reveal it is “inspired by” actual events which signifies that creative licence has been used in places to create necessary drama.  As an example, Margot Robbie plays an “evangelical millennial” named Kayla Pospisil who is trying to quickly climb the corporate ladder at Fox.  The reality is that Kayla never existed and her character is a composite of numerous young women employed by the network.

Written by Oscar winner Charles Randolph (The Big Short), Bombshell succeeds in illustrating the toxic culture that can exist in the workplace.  Ailes (Lithgow) was disgusting but he was also cunning.  We learn about the elaborate system he had in place to cover his tracks including private elevators, security cameras and loyal assistants.  He could also exercise huge power over these career-driven women by dangling the prospect of promotion and other “front of camera” roles.  Even when the whistle was finally blown by Gretchen Carlson, many victims didn’t want to come forward as they were worried about job security and judgement by others.

The film has been criticised for failing to address the broader issue of Fox News and its role as a right-wing propaganda tool.  If you’re looking to see that movie, prepare to be disappointed.  Yes, the on-air views of these women would be considered “deplorable” by some but they’re still entitled to justice given the sexual harassment they were subjected to.

Both Charlize Theron and Margot Robbie picked up Oscar nominations earlier this week while Nicole Kidman could be considered unlucky to miss out.  The make-up artists have done a stellar job creating their look (Theron and Kidman look uncannily like their real life counterparts) but the actors deserve just as much praise for creating interesting characters.  In identifying the stand-out, it’s hard to go past Theron who deftly captures the inner turmoil of a journalist who “doesn’t want to be the story” whilst balancing up her career, family and morals.

Directed by Emmy Award winner Jay Roach (Recount, Game Change), Bombshell will (hopefully) get people talking.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 24 December 2019

Louisa May Alcott was an unheralded 35-year-old when, on the strong urging of her publisher, she reluctantly wrote the first of a two part book series that would become known as Little Women. Not even Alcott would have believed how popular and beloved her novel would become. It’s taken on Shakespearean traits given the frequency with which it has been adapted for stage and screen.

This latest version is the creation of Oscar nominated writer-director Greta Gerwig (Lady Bird). Gerwig had loved the book growing up but on re-reading it as a 30-year-old, she found fresh themes and was instantly inspired to adapt it in her own unique way. She pitched her idea to Sony producer Amy Pascal, penned a script (a few changes were made from Alcott’s novel) and, following the success of Lady Bird, was given approval to serve as the film’s director.

If you’re new to the tale, Little Women is set in the mid-19th century and is the story of four young ladies on the cusp of adulthood.  Their ambitions are as different as their personalities.  Jo pursues independence, Meg wants a husband, Amy yearns for wealth, and Beth seeks contentment.  The wonderful actresses stepping into their famed shoes are Saoirse Ronan (Brooklyn), Emma Watson (Beauty and the Beast), Florence Pugh (Midsommar) and Australia Eliza Scanlen (who got her start in Home and Away).

The performances are flawless and as a combined ensemble, it’s the equal of anything else seen on screen over the past year.  I love the openness and affection shown by these characters towards each other.  They’re constantly touching and laughing and arguing and talking over each other in a way that feels authentic and honest.

Saoirse Ronan brings a beautiful spirit to the role of the tomboy Jo and the interplay between her and Florence Pugh, as the slightly envious sister, comprehensively captures the rocky, up-and-down relationship that often exists between siblings.  Timothée Chalamet (Call Me by Your Name), as a love struck suitor trying to win Jo’s affections, also deserves praise for his charming, adorable nature and his pitch-perfect hair (kudos to the make-up team).

The most obvious point of difference between Gerwig’s adaptation and previous movies is the use of a second timeline.  We follow the women as teenagers whilst concurrently looking at their future lives (roughly 7 years ahead).  It’s a touch confusing at first (it takes about 30 minutes or so to get your head around which timeline is which) but its value is soon evident.  It helps maintain a brisk pace while also immediately illustrating the ripple effects of key decisions.

Largely shot in a recreated house modelled on Louisa May Alcott’s childhood home in Massachusetts, Little Women is an exquisite drama about art, wealth, family, sisterhood and unrequited love.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 05 January 2020

When first sent the script for Sam Mendes’ new film, cinematographer Roger Deakins admitted to being shocked.  They’d worked together on a number of challenging projects (Skyfall, Revolutionary Road, Jarhead) but 1917 would require an unprecedented level of thought and planning.  The vision was to create a World War I movie, complete with battle sequences, that looks like it’s been shot in a single continuous take with no edits.

Such real-time movies have been created before (the Oscar winning Birdman springs to mind) but this takes that concept to a new level in that it’s shot almost entirely outside, the characters are continually moving, and it involves a large number of elaborate, manmade sets.  On seeing some of the camera angles, such as a smooth-moving close up of a soldier’s feet as they slide through mud, I kept thinking to myself - “how the hell did they shoot that?”

For this reason, the story behind the camera is as interesting as that in front of it.  Each continuous shot (running up to about 9 minutes) had to be meticulously choreographed and rehearsed.  The camera needed to be moved seamlessly from crane to hand to vehicle to keep pace with the fast-moving actors.  The elements were a factor with the crew required to wait for the right level of cloud cover to ensure consistency of lighting from scene-to-scene.  It’s rare I say this but the “making of” videos on YouTube are compulsory viewing (once you’ve seen the film of course).

The narrative suits the technique.  1917 follows two British soldiers asked to go on a perilous mission.  Their job is to hike from an open-air trench in northern France, navigate their way several kilometres through German occupied territory, and deliver news of a pending attack to allied soldiers on the front line.  1,600 lives are in jeopardy if they fail.  The lead performances from George MacKay (Captain Fantastic) and Dean-Charles Chapman (Game of Thrones) are outstanding given they are required to emote for lengthy periods without the director yelling “cut”.

Inspired by stories from his late grandfather, who was a messenger in the British Army during World War I, 1917 is a tense, immersive filmgoing experience.  We’re placed in the shoes of these two characters and we follow every step and every word as part of their journey.  There are fleeting moments where they can relax and make small talk but for the most part, they must deal with the realisation that their lives could end at any moment.  They will need to rely on a combination of smarts and luck.

The script is “stagey” and romanticised in places.  As an example, there’s a scene involving singing soldiers where it’s hard to reconcile the lack of awareness and decision making.  There’s a contradictory sequence moments later where a soldier wastes a few seconds thinking about whether he could take a different path to save a few seconds. 

Qualms aside, this is still a powerful film that makes effective use of visuals, sound and music.  Deakins seems a shoe-in to win the Oscar for best cinematography (he previously won for Blade Runner 2049) but it’d be great to see iconic composer Thomas Newman (The Shawshank Redemption) break his losing streak given he’s been nominated 14 times previously without success.  Fingers crossed.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 24 December 2019

English director Guy Ritchie has made 11 feature films across 20-plus years and my favourite remains his first – Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels.  It was a fun, violent crime flick that involved gangs, heists and some really dumb people (hunt it down if you’ve never seen it).  Having transitioned into safer, bigger Hollywood blockbusters over the last decade (Sherlock Holmes, King Arthur: Legend of the Sword, Aladdin), Ritchie sees The Gentlemen as a “return to my roots” in going back to the genre that launched his career.

Oscar winner Matthew McConaughey (Dallas Buyers Club) steps into the shoes of Mickey Pearson, an Oxford graduate and wealthy entrepreneur who has created one of the largest, if not THE largest, illegal marijuana distribution businesses in the United Kingdom.  The plants are grown in massive underground laboratories hidden away on remote, private estates.  It’s a wonder than no one has tipped off the cops given the number of staff and socialites involved.  I can only assume they’re handsomely remunerated.

Anyway, Mickey believes it’s time to “get out of the game” and there are two interested parties bidding to take over his empire for the right price.  The frontrunner, played by Jeremy Strong (Succession), is a suave, confident gangster who has a knack for getting what he wants.  His competition is an Asian crime syndicate headlined by Henry Golding (Crazy Rich Asians) as a “Chinese James Bond”.  Others with a key role to play include Colin Farrell (In Bruges) as a boxing coach unwillingly dragged into the mayhem and Charlie Hunnam (Sons of Anarchy) as Mickey’s right-hand man.

On the whole, it’s a complex story that requires a little too much explaining from Hugh Grant who features as a private investigator and also the film’s quasi-narrator.  The opening hour is particularly slow as Grant continually rambles and the action/drama is kept to a minimum.  The script is over-written with characters seemingly in a competition to see how many metaphors and analogies they can squeeze into each scene.  I’m not sure I’ve ever seen so much slang in a single movie and while it results in a few memorable one-liners, the novelty wears out quickly.

The screenplay also struggles in balancing up the numerous subplots.  As the only key female in the film, Michelle Dockery (Downton Abbey) gets very little to do as Mickey’s loyal wife.  The same applies for Eddie Marsan (Happy-Go-Lucky) as a boisterous newspaper editor looking for a big story.  It’s a wonder why his story was included at all given its insignificance to the wider narrative.

I do enjoy a quality crime-gangster movie and while The Gentlemen tries to look cool with its flashy cast and debonair dialogue, it struggles to provide a meaningful entertainment until the final half-hour.  Yes, the finale is amusing but the rest is forgettable.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 05 January 2020

With animated features seemingly being released every second week in Australia, it’s becoming harder to stand out and create something that is both entertaining and original. Aardman Animations ticked those boxes in 2015 with The Shaun the Sheep Movie. It featured no dialogue and yet these cute animals and its human owner, were able to convey emotion and tell a story in the same vein as great silent actors from the early 20th century.

The same techniques have been utilised by directors Will Becher and Richard Phelan for this follow-up sequel - A Shaun the Sheep Movie: Farmageddon. Rather than clear, spoken words, you’ll be required to pick up the gist of the story through grunts, bleats, sighs and mutterings. It makes it the perfect movie to take internationally since it can be understood by people of all ages without the need to read subtitles.

While any movie with thinking, active sheep would be considered fantasy, you’d argue this new instalment is a little more whimsical than its predecessor.  A cute blue alien named Lu-La crash lands at Mossy Bottom Farm and it’s the responsibility of the sheep to keep Lu-La hidden whilst also working on a strategy for her to return home.

It’s not quite as good as the original but Farmageddon is easy to like.  Shaun the Sheep, named as a play on the word “shorn”, is cool character who kids will engage with.  The same can be said of the broader ensemble which include the farm’s owner, who walks around in a state of ignorant bliss, and the intuitive sheep dog who is harder to fool.  We’ve come a long way since Shaun was first introduced in Nick Park’s 1995 Oscar winning short film, A Close Shave.

Created using stop-motion animation and plasticine characters, A Shaun the Sheep Movie: Farmageddon is 87 minutes of simple pleasures.