Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 22 July 2019

Sporting movies are incredibly difficult to make because there’s no substitute for the real thing.  I can remember being at Suncorp Stadium in 2011 when the Brisbane Roar kicked two goals in the final 5 minutes of extra time and then won the A-League Grand Final in a penalty shootout.  When I pull it up on YouTube, I still get a tingle down my spine watching the players’ reactions and listening to the commentators’ stunned reflections.  A filmmaker could have a $200 million budget and could hire the best cast and crew but it’s highly unlikely that any re-enactment would have the same emotional impact.

Oscar winning filmmaker Asif Kapadia (Amy) understands the pitfalls of traditional sporting flicks and has developed a winning template.  Released in 2011, Senna was an unforgettable documentary about the life of racing driver Ayrton Senna that featured no narration, no re-enactments and no modern day perspectives.  He accessed the media archive of Formula One rights owner Bernie Ecclestone, sifted through 15,000 hours of video, and told Senna’s fascinating story using actual footage and interviews from the 1980s and 90s (much of which had never been seen before).

Kapadia has used similar techniques with Diego Maradona.  It too is a narration-free documentary that uses grainy video tapes from the 1980s to explore the life of the infamous football star.  Given the limitations of time, the film doesn’t delve too deeply into his upbringing in the slums of Buenos Aires.  It picks up his story in 1984 when, following two disappointing seasons with Barcelona in the La Liga, the 23-year-old was transferred to Napoli, a struggling Italian football club in the Serie A.

Kapadia’s film shows us the power of sport and the way it can inspire the masses.  In the 1980s, Naples was seen as the “sewer of Italy” but Maradona helped transform the city’s image with his incredible talents on the football pitch.  When he first arrived at the club, Napoli had never won a major title, they were struggling to avoid relegation, and they were continually taunted and degraded by opposition fans.  Within three years, they were the best football team in the country!

The movie also has something important to say about the perils of wealth and success.  Because he was so vital to the financial and societal success of Napoli on the pitch, his friends/enablers were not prepared to question his many mistakes off the pitch.  He befriended Italian mobsters, used copious amounts of cocaine, and cheated on his partners.  The fact that he’d become “too big” also rubbed some fans up the wrong way and, perhaps unavoidably, he became one of the most divisive figures in sport.

Kapadia interviewed Diego Maradona several times as part of the project and found it a “tough film to make.”  Maradona was happy for the film to be made and didn’t even ask to see it before being released… but there were moments during the interviews where he refused to answer heavier questions.  It’s fallen upon Kapadia, editor Chris King and composer Antônio Pinto to weave it all together and create an engrossing narrative.  There are a few small gaps but for the most part, they’ve done a stellar job.

You don’t need to be a sports fan to take something away from Diego Maradona.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 21 June 2019

Richard Curtis has some wonderful credits to his name including Four Weddings and a Funeral, Notting Hill and Bridget Jones’s Diary (I deliberately haven’t mentioned Love Actually).  He didn’t come up with the original idea for Yesterday (credit there goes to Jack Barth) but Curtis was quick to join the project and write a screenplay given his lifelong love for The Beatles.  He can even remember being a 6-year-old who waited outside a hotel trying to get a glimpse of John, Paul, Ringo and George when they toured Sweden in 1963.

Brought to the screen by Oscar winning director Danny Boyle (Slumdog Millionaire), Yesterday features a cool premise.  Some kind of weird cosmic event causes every electric device around the world to be switched off for roughly 12 seconds.  It’s caused a rift in the space-time continuum and we now have a world where practically everything is the same… except The Beatles were never formed and hence, they never produced the unforgettable music that transformed the 1960s.

There’s a catch.  For whatever reason, Jack Malik (Patel) is the only person on Earth who can remember The Beatles.  He’s wanted to be a singer-songwriter since high school but despite his passion, he’s struggled to write catchy lyrics and is yet to catch his big break.  That’s about to change though.  Jack can take The Beatles’ iconic songs (or at least those he can remember), pass them off as his own and become an international music star.

All films have production challenges but in the case of Yesterday, one of the trickier tasks was to secure access to The Beatles music.  The rights are currently held by Apple Corps (performance rights) and Sony ATV (cover rights) with both entities being very protective about their product.  After lengthy negotiations, Boyle and the producers were able to secure a deal that took up “a substantive part of the film’s budget” but allowed them to play 17 different Beatles songs throughout the movie.  The closing credits include a rare original master recording for “Hey Jude”.

While I’m sure it will appeal to Beatles fans, Curtis has erred in structuring the story as a formulaic rom-com.  Ellie (James) has served as Jack’s manager for more than a decade and has followed him to every event like a love-sick puppy dog.  The character makes no sense.  It’s depressing that one woman would invest so much emotional energy over such a long period into a man who refuses to reciprocate and has zero music talent (at least based on the crowds turning up to his shows pre-fame).  The up-and-down nature of their relationship across the film’s two hour running time also feels fake and forced.

If you think that’s illogical, wait until you see the ending.  The film sells uplifting messages about life, music and happiness (e.g. two unique fans, a meeting at a beachside home) but then becomes unnecessarily moralistic during a key scene where Jack performs on stage following an Ed Sheeran concert.  Why would he make the decision to say that and why would the audience understand and react accordingly?

It’s a shame the film doesn’t work because there are positives.  Newcomer Himesh Patel is likeable in the lead role, Kate McKinnon earns laughs as a tell-it-like-it-is manager, and Ed Sheehan isn’t afraid to mock his own talent in playing himself.  The movie also boasts a few nice surprises (e.g. the fate of a fizzy drink) which take advantage of the time-changing narrative and add humour.

Failing to take advantage of its fun concept, Yesterday is a stale, unrealistic romantic comedy.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 17 July 2019

There are great works of literature that have been adapted many times for the stage and screen.  It’s the role of the cast and crew, with particular emphasis on the director, to put their own unique spin on the material and create something that feels fresh and authentic.  As an example, I’d seen previous adaptations of William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet but was still blown away by Baz Luhrmann’s stunning adaptation in 1996.  I knew exactly how the story would unfold but was still amazed by the visuals and its strong emotive impact.

The Lion King follows in the footsteps of Beauty and the Beast, Dumbo and Aladdin in that Walt Disney Studios is taking its much loved animated classics and remaking them using live-action techniques.  It’s probably not correct for me to use the term “live-action” in this case since there isn’t a single human character.  The African settings are real and have been shot by Oscar nominated cinematographer Caleb Deschanel (Never Look Away) but all the animals are computer generated.

Few would deny that the original 1994 version of The Lion King was a great movie.  It was the highest grossing film of that year, it won two Academy Awards, and it enthralled younger audiences across the globe.  It was the story of a young lion cub who, following the death of his powerful father, must harness the courage to stand up to his villainous uncle and take control of the Pride Lands of Africa.  It offers valuable lessons about family, compassion, loyalty and the “circle of life”.

The problem with this 2019 version is that whilst the visual effects team have created cute, life-like animals, the film lacks heart and passion.  It’s as if we’re watching the same movie from 1994 and the filmmakers have been too scared to make any huge creative choices.  The musical themes from Hans Zimmer are the similar, the songs are unchanged, the dialogue is similar and the characters feel stale.  It begs the question – what does this film have to offer (aside from financial profit) that wasn’t already included in the original 25 years ago?

Given a noticeable lack of emotion, the film tries to redeem itself with the laughs provided by Seth Rogen (Pineapple Express) as the loveable warthog and Billy Eichner (Parks and Recreation) as the cheeky meerkat.  They’re easily the best two characters.  The remaining cast is extensive, including 88-year-old James Earl Jones who reprises his role from the original, but they struggle to create anything special or memorable.

The film is likely to be admired by a new generation of young kids but when looking at this through a critical eye, the 1994 movie did it much better.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 17 June 2019

There are few movie studios (if any) who could boast of four consecutive films in a franchise that have been as good as those offered by Disney and Pixar with Toy Story.  They’ve had different directors, different producers and different writers but somehow, the ingredients have come together perfectly each time to create funny, intelligent, sentimental movies that appeal to audiences of all ages.

Released back in 2010, Toy Story 3 culminated with the adult Andy handing over his beloved toys to a new childhood owner, Bonnie, before heading off to college.  It was a sweet, feel-good finale that confirmed these chatty toys weren’t destined scrap heap and could entertain someone else… for a few more years at least.

Toy Story 4 wastes no time in tugging at the heartstrings.  Bonnie is on the verge of starting kindergarten and her taste in toys has evolved.  She’s looking for a female to rule over them and so she’s stripped Woody (Hanks) of his sheriff’s title and pinned his coveted badge on cowgirl Jessie (Cusack).  Bonnie still regularly plays with her toys on her bedroom floor but poor Woody has been relegated to the darkened closet.

There’s no point getting too sad because a resilient Woody is quick to prove himself.  He sneaks into Bonnie’s backpack (it comes complete with a see through window) and keeps a close eye during her nervous first day at kindergarten.  It’s during “craft time” that a lonely Bonnie, in search of a friend, decides to literally make one.  She takes a plastic spork from the rubbish bin and then uses popsicle sticks, pipe cleaner, googly eyes and playdough to provide its face and limbs.

“Forky” (voiced by Tony Hale) quickly comes to life but it’s clear he has psychological issues.  He knows he’s trash physically but he also thinks he’s trash metaphorically!  Rather than interact with the other toys and serve as Bonnie’s valued companion, Forky just wants to hide alone in rubbish bins where it’s “safe and cosy”.  It falls upon the experienced Woody to talk sense into Forky and help build his self-confidence.

There’s much more to this deep, multi-layered story but rather than give it all away, you’re best to see the film for yourself.  A campervan, a struggling antique store and a packed amusement park serve as the setting for the adventures that follow.  A few old favourites don’t get much screen time (e.g. Rex, Mr Potato Head) but that’s necessary to make room for the horde of fun new characters with a voice list including Keegan-Michael Key, Jordan Peele, Christina Hendricks and Keanu Reeves.

I’ve always found it ironic that the toys in this series have more emotional authenticity than human characters in many live action movies.  Writers Stephany Folsom and Andrew Stanton have crafted a terrific script filled with great dialogue and laced with exquisite metaphors.  It has a lot to say about the value of companionship, the way we change over time, and the importance of helping those in need.  A subplot involving the reintroduced Bo Peep (Potts) and her quest for independence also carries weight.

For this 4^th instalment, the directorial reins have been handed to first-time feature director John Cooley who began his career at Pixar in 2003 as a 23-year-old intern working in the Story Department.  He’s clearly soaked up all the learnings from the past 15 years as this is well-polished production.  The cinematography stands out (feels weird to be saying that about an animated movie) and Oscar winning composer Randy Newman is back with another satisfying music score.

If you’re looking for a reason to smile, Toy Story 4 will provide.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 24 June 2019

Parasite revolves around two Korean families.  They both include a husband, wife, son and daughter but that’s where the similarities end.  Family A is dirt-poor.  None of them are currently employed (unless you count folding pizza boxes as a job) and they live in a tiny basement apartment that overlooks a smelly alleyway where drunk guys often urinate.  They can’t even afford the internet and so they creatively steal Wi-Fi data from neighbouring premises to stay in touch with the rest of the world.

Family B is extremely wealthy.  They live in a beautiful, spacious mansion designed by a renowned architect.  They don’t fret about mundane tasks and daily chores because that falls upon people they can afford to employ.  A smartly-dressed chauffeur drives them around town in a luxury car and an experienced maid takes care of all cooking and cleaning needs.

The odds of anyone from these two families interacting would be ridiculously slim (if not zero) but a chance encounter changes that.  The son from the poor family (Choi Woo-shik) is approached by an old friend and asked if he could provide English language tutoring sessions to the daughter of the wealthy family.  It’s not exactly his area of expertise but, in need of cash to help his struggling family, he does enough to bluff the daughter’s parents and land the job.

At its world premiere last month, director Bong Joon-ho released a memo to critics asking them “refrain as much as possible from revealing how the story unfolds” so as to provide a “wonderful gift to the audience and the team that made this film possible.”  I’m happy to oblige out of respect to the filmmaker… and also because I’d run over my word limit if I tried to explain the complex narrative.  I spent 10 minutes trying to provide a verbal overview with a friend last weekend and even that wasn’t enough time!

As we saw with Burning earlier this year, another brilliant South Korean drama-thriller, you’re never quite sure where this story is heading.  Just when you start to get comfortable, Bong Joon-ho throws a curveball and changes the focus and the genre.  If you’re like me, you’ll need a few days (and perhaps a Google search) to reflect on the fate of the characters and the film’s numerous themes.  It’s the kind of movie you’d never see come out of Hollywood and there’s a lot to process.

In a competition that included new works from Quentin Tarantino, Pedro Almodóvar, Ken Loach and Terrence Malick, Parasite took home one of cinema’s most prized honours by winning the Palm D’or at the 2019 Cannes Film Festival.  Jury President Alejandro Gonzalez Iñárritu (Birdman) said the decision was unanimous and described the film as a “unique experience” that “spoke in a funny way about something so relevant and urgent and global.”  High praise indeed.

Hopefully you’re intrigued because there’s not much more I can say.  Parasite is weird, funny and unforgettable.