NO (Pablo Larraín, 2012)

no

Starring: Gael García Bernal, Alfredo Castro, Antonia Zegers

You may like this if you liked: Lincoln (Steven Spielberg, 2012), The Last King of Scotland (Kevin Macdonald, 2006), Cry Freedom (Richard Attenborough, 1987)

In Chile in 1988 military dictator Augusto Pinochet due to international pressure calls a referendum to legitimise his regime. Despite what has happened under his regime it seems a foregone conclusion that the people of Chile will predominantly vote ‘yes’. In a desperate bid to defy the odds, the opposition organising the ‘no’ campaign employ a young advertising executive called René Saavedra (Bernal) to head their campaign.

No has been marketed as the ‘Spanish Mad Men’ which I understand as it may get us uncultured Westerners watching it, but there is so much more to this film than Jon Hamm wearing suits and sleeping with women. In fact, due to the subject of the film I am sure there is some kind of irony in that. No is a compelling, involving and expertly put together political drama in its own right.

This is not a moment in history I am particularly knowledgeable about but that in no way hampers the involvement of No. There is a brief scene setting at the beginning and then what follows is actually a simple story. The first thirty minutes or so do require attention as they are dialogue heavy with very snappy editing so you are required to read the subtitles quite quickly but you are amply rewarded as what then follows is an extremely watchable and compelling drama. All the heavy dialogue is necessary to show the intelligence displayed by Saavedra as he applies marketing techniques to persuade the population of Chile to vote ‘no’ which is the best thing to do for their country. Marketing itself is a notoriously dull subject but in No this never feels alienating and it is generally fascinating how Saavedra applies positive images to a notoriously negative word.

The marketing videos used are a joy to watch as due to what has happened before in the film the viewer can truly appreciate the genius behind them. What is also very effective is that the ‘no’ videos are often shown preceding the ‘yes’ campaign videos which makes compelling viewing. No is also very much a technical success. The director made the very bold decision to film the whole thing using cameras from 1988 and merge what was filmed with archive footage. In my opinion this proves to be a success as the transition from filmed to archive footage is seamless and adds to a smoother flow of the narrative. Of course this means the whole film is not in widescreen so when seeing it at the cinema it seemed a little narrow at first. However this does not detract from the viewing experience in any way as just like with watching something in black and white, you just get very used to it pretty much straight away. This technical aspect along with quick editing and constant use of close ups all contributes to a very genuinely involving experience. No is a perfect example of how the medium of film can manipulate the different technical methodologies available to create a more involving and effective viewing experience.

Gael García Bernal gives an excellent performance making the protagonist likeable and sympathetic despite the fact Saavedra is only actually doing his job and seems to not care too much about the result of the referendum.

No is a compelling and deeply involving depiction of an important moment in Chile’s history, with its unique style only adding to the emotional power. A thoroughly recommended and unique film experience.

8/10

Posted in All Film Reviews, The Best of 2013, World Cinema | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

THE BOURNE LEGACY (Tony Gilroy, 2012) viewed on 21/3/13

bourne legacy

 

Starring: Jeremy Renner, Rachel Weisz, Edward Norton

You may like this if you liked: The Bourne Trilogy (2002-2007), Taken 2 (Olivier Megaton, 2012), Unknown (Juame Collet-Serra, 2011)

The Bourne Legacy focuses on Aaron Cross (Renner) who is an agent for the mysterious Outcome operation. This is an operation where using medical science and the frequent taking of certain pills can enhance the human body’s physical and mental abilities. Hang on; was that not in Captain America? Never mind, anyway after the events of The Bourne Ultimatum when information on the Treadstone and Black Briar operations were leaked to the media, those at the top decided to shut it down for good. Outcome is linked to these and so those involved decide to shut this down by changing the medication for its agents which basically kills them. Thankfully Cross was not part of this due to hanging around in a forest in the mountains for some reason sporting a very fetching beard. After someone tries to blow him up, and with his meds running low, Cross decides to return to America to figure out what the bloody hell is going on. Meanwhile, the aforementioned nasty people at the top try to cut all lose ends by having all those that work at the lab associated with Outcome shot, with only one escapee Dr. Marta Sheering (Weisz). When at home, some nasty agents are sent to kill her and then make it look like suicide. Thankfully, she was the one that treated Cross and he turns up looking for meds just in time to save her, kill the nasty agents and then blow up her house for good measure. Now the two of them must get to the bottom of this while avoiding nasty CIA agents and get Cross some new meds, which happen to only be produced in Manilla (naturally). Oh, also Ed Norton is the nasty person in charge of it all who shouts at a lot of people.

So we have Hollywood trying to keep another franchise alive by getting together some generic plot and giving it a title that ties to that franchise.  Maybe this time there will be a film produced that not only works as an excellent stand alone thriller, but also compliments the franchise?

This is of course Hollywood, so of course bloody not!

I thoroughly enjoyed The Bourne Trilogy, there was enough style and substance, and a decent character driven narrative along with plenty of action to produce three very fine action thrillers. However, The Bourne Legacy has none of this as it is basically boring pointless crap. In fact, I think my plot synopsis may have made this film sound more interesting than it is. For a 135 minute film my synopsis may have covered two thirds of it. I try to avoid spoilers, but that is hard when first of all there are not any anyway, and the film just suddenly stops. When finally the action and admittedly rather shoddy plot finally get going we suddenly see the credits! It is obvious those involved want another trilogy and are thinking about the sequel already when making this boring soulless rubbish.

As for the plot, for me what made the other three good thrillers is we cared about the protagonist and saw the film from his point of view as we uncovered the truth as he did. Here we are basically following a druggie desperate for his next fix, and his identity is not a secret to him or anyone else. He signed up for this Captain America programme and knew the risks, why should we care about him? As for the protagonist; Renner may physically look the part but for me he just does not cut it as the leading man in an action film. He was excellent in The Hurt Locker but just lacks any likeability, charisma or presence essential for an action flick like this. If we cannot care about the protagonist then automatically the film struggles to work, especially with a wooden script like this that takes itself way too seriously.

I believe I just mentioned the word ‘action’? Well for a 135 minute action film there is surprisingly very little action, the whole narrative is dominated by soulless and humourless exposition dialogue to set up the next desired films and subsequently forgetting that maybe the first film should perhaps have something exciting happen. In terms of plot and dialogue, every ten minutes we are reminded about Jason Bourne and what happened because we are all obviously stupid and keep on forgetting. This film could be at least 30 minutes shorter if this actual plot could develop on its own without constant patronising reminders of what happened in The Bourne Ultimatum. I appreciate that there are of course links to the other film, but there is almost an element of deluded smugness that this film thinks it is a lot cleverer in the way it fits in to The Bourne Ultimatum to solely make money than it actually is.

The Bourne Legacy is a very dull and very pointless ‘action’ thriller that spends all of its time focussing on reminding of us of the last trilogy while trying desperately to set up a new trilogy. This was made solely as a cash cow and treats the audience with a total lack of respect, just watch the original trilogy again and pretend this never happened!

Posted in All Film Reviews, Blockbusters, Major Dissapointments, Rants | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

THE IMPOSTER (Bart Layton, 2012) viewed on 20/3/13

the imposter

 

Starring: Adam O’Brian, Anna Ruben, Cathy Desbrach

You may like this if you liked: Catfish (Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman, 2010) Inside Job (Charles Ferguson, 2010), Zeitgeist: Moving Forward (Peter Joseph, 2011)

The Imposter tells the true story of Spanish con artist Frederic Bourdin and how, despite being 21, claimed to the Spanish authorities that he was a homeless teenager. Desperate to give a false identity, he stumbles across police records and claims to be a 16 year old from America that has been missing for three years called Nicholas Gibson. He is then reunited with his ‘family’ and despite so many obvious differences in appearance and character; the Gibson family through desperation to find Nicholas at first take him in as their son without question.

I am ashamed to say that I do not watch enough documentaries as there are so many brilliant ones out there. The Imposter is an excellent documentary film that is also an unforgettable cinematic experience. The immediate reaction when hearing about this story would be as to doubt that any family would believe a complete stranger to be a beloved missing family member. This film shows the family with absolute and genuine integrity and tells the story exactly how it was, and it is impossible not to be sucked in, amazed and heartbroken. There is also a very frank interview with Bourdin himself throughout the narrative that adds to the emotional intensity and involvement.

Despite being a documentary, The Imposter has many cinematic qualities. Visual reconstructions are shown throughout the narrative that are superbly directed and hauntingly shot adding to the involvement. As the narrative develops it is far from predictable and more questions are posed, some still unanswered today, and all told in a way that is devastatingly gripping and emotionally involving for the viewer. The whole story is portrayed and told so well that The Imposter stands up very well against any fictional Hollywood thriller, and is probably a more rewarding and involving experience.

Unforgettable and deeply involving The Imposter is not only a gripping documentary but a brilliantly put together cinematic experience that grips till the very end.

Posted in All Film Reviews, Documentaries | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

MAXIMUM CONVICTION (Keoni Waxman, 2012)

This gallery contains 1 photo.

Starring: Steven Seagal, Steve Austin, Bren Foster You may like this if you liked: Anything involving the Shakespearean thespians mentioned above as well as Dolph Lundgren, Jean-Claude Van Damme etc. Everyone’s favourite action granddad stars as Cross an ex CIA … Continue reading

More Galleries | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

DJANGO UNCHAINED (Quentin Tarantino, 2012)

django unchained

Starring: Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz, Leonardo DiCaprio

You may like this if you liked: Django (Sergio Corbucci, 1966), Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia (Sam Peckinpah, 1974), Blazing Saddles (Mel Brooks, 1974) – trust me on that one!

Unsure what the targets of his next job exactly look like, German bounty hunter Dr. King Schultz (Waltz) buys the freedom of a slave by the name of Django (Foxx), who knows the exact identity of these targets and can help Schultz track them down. The two form an unlikely friendship and Schultz makes Django his deputy bounty hunter. Django agrees to do this for the following winter, but afterwards, now a free man vows to find his wife Broomhilda Von Shaft (Kerry Washington) who is a fellow slave separated from his just after their wedding day. After winter is over Schultz feels compelled to help Django and vows to do so. However, Broomhilda is owned by ruthless plantation owner Calvin Candie (DiCaprio) and to get her back will require intelligent negotiation and not just quick gun slinging.

I would love to get inside good ol’ Quentin’s head and know exactly what his intentions were when making this thing as that would make it a damn sight easier to review the bugger. For me Django Unchained is potentially many things but fails to be specifically anything, making it almost an enigma. However I prefer to refrain from using that word as that sounds too much like a compliment.

Is it a serious depiction of the age of slavery in America? Is it a buddy comedy? Is it a spoof? Is it a homage to westerns of a bygone era of cinema? Is it just an orgy of over the top violence?

Well, there is potential for Django Unchained to be any of these things. However, all that it feels like is Mr. Self Indulgent being even more self indulgent than ever with no actual idea of what he is trying to specifically make.

I fail to see how it is possible for this to be a serious document of a moment in history. I would be out of my depth commenting on this too much, but when there are so many moments of outrageously cheesy and over the top dialogue, as well as some outrageously hammy performances (DiCaprio and Sam Jackson in particular) and moments which are intended to be farcical and humorous this cannot simply be possible. There have also been complaints about the language used throughout the narrative, but I am not going to dwell on this as I think it is pretty obvious that this is not ever meant in a derogatory or insulting way. Anyone who knows me will know I have plenty of bad things to say about Tarantino, but I firmly believe the language used is solely there to represent the language used of the era it is set.

However, to say Django Unchained is not like Blazing Saddles is not entirely true. There is far too much farcical humour here that is genuinely funny, but detracts from this ever being a serious film. It is the comedy and Tarantino’s eye for snappy and witty dialogue that is Django Unchained’s saving grace. The first third is an absolute blast; it is tremendous fun and works perfectly as a buddy comedy that never takes itself too seriously. Waltz is on top form and a joy to watch whenever he is on screen, Foxx is however very forgettable in what is supposed to be the title role. It is the charismatic and extremely likeable character of Schultz that not only seems to drive the narrative forward but makes Django Unchained effortlessly watchable and tremendous fun.

However, when the two protagonists go to retrieve from Von Hilda from Candie in the final two hours (!), this is when Django Unchained takes a serious nosedive and becomes almost knotted up in its own self awareness and indulgence. As with most Tarantino films Django Unchained contains many obvious moments of ‘inspiration’ from films and genres of the past. There is of course nothing wrong with this, but Quentin just seems to be like Peckinpah, then Sergio Leone, then John Ford. These are all great film makers of this genre, but here this just leads to a frustratingly uneven tone to the narrative which does actually get quite boring at times.  Quentin is obviously a man full of ideas, but he needs to develop some kind of filter to know to leave the bad ones out of his films. There is still an amateurish sense of a man that knows a lot about films, but nothing about making films. I know a lot has been said about the running time, and I am afraid I will have to say I am in agreement as Django Unchained is at least 45 minutes too long. There are so many moments, both of action and dialogue that add nothing and just make Django Unchained an effort to watch.

In the final third when the (occasional) action happens and the whole theme of ‘vengeance’ takes over this is once again all done with a lot of filler that detracts from the potential guilty pleasure fun that could be had by the ridiculously over the top violence. The whole experience feels very frustrating in that when things are going to kick off, they infuriatingly do not. There are also some very lazy plotting devices to keep things ticking over: The plot device that Schultz is German and Von Hilda was raised by Germans feels a little too contrived and almost Dickensian in terms of its neatness. This would work if the film was constantly tongue in cheek, but due to the running time and self indulgent tone, it cannot help but feel a little lazy.

In my opinion, the fact is the protagonist and actual story are too weak for this to ever work as a serious character driven vengeance thriller, especially one that is 165 minutes. Also, two minor quibbles: A director cameo involving an embarrassing Australian accent and occasionally using 21st century rap music were very bad ideas Quentin!

In summary, (yes, finally) with all the comedy, over the top performances, even more over the top violence and a (much) shorter running time, Django Unchained would work perfectly as a not to serious fun period romp that even gets away with a little self indulgence. It is certainly worth a watch with some genuinely great moments, but prepare to be frustrated by an uneven, inconsistent self indulgent narrative mess.

6/10

Posted in All Film Reviews | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

RISE OF THE GUARDIANS (Peter Ramsey, 2012) viewed on 19/3/13

rise of the guardians

 

Starring: Chris Pine, Hugh Jackman, Jude Law

You may like this if you liked: Arthur Christmas (Sarah Smith and Barry Cook, 2011), Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole (Zack Snyder, 2012), Avengers Assemble (Joss Whedon, 2012) – yes, really!

Since the dark ages, all the children of the earth have been watched over by a group of four ‘guardians’ chosen by The Man in the Moon. These are: Santa Claus (Alec Baldwin), The Easter Bunny (Jackman), The Tooth Fairy (Isla Fisher) and The Sandman (he appropriately has no voice). As long as children believe in these guardians, they will always have the power to protect them. However, when the evil spirit Pitch (Law), or the bogeyman as he is commonly known tries to plague children’s dreams with nightmares and spread fear amongst them. If Pitch succeeds, this will lead the children of earth to stop believing in the guardians, taking away their power and leaving children living in fear forever. To fight Pitch, The Man in the Moon chooses a new guardian to join them: Jack Frost (Pine), the group are reluctant, and Jack Frost himself is reluctant as he never intended to be a hero. Children everywhere love snow, but never associate it with Jack Frost, who does not know why he has been given these powers. Now Jack Frost must finally discover who he truly is and find meaning to his existence. The Guardians must persuade him to help them before it is too late as Nightmares and darkness start to take over the world and the children begin to stop believing in Christmas, Easter and the Tooth Fairy.

As soon as I was aware of ROTG I immediately thought Avengers for children, and I know many others have said this. Well, this is kind of the case as there is of course obvious comparisons but it is best not to dwell on those comparisons, but ROTG is in my opinion a great concept, especially for children, and is tremendous fun. What proves very effective about this concept is the non-traditional depiction of these very traditional characters. Santa, called ‘North’ as a tattooed sword wielding Russian and The Easter Bunny as a sarcastic Australian warrior. Jack Frost himself is a very cocky upstart and the interaction between these characters proves very entertaining to watch, with plenty of jokes.

The animation and the action itself looks spectacular, the wintery setting proving a real spectacle that dazzles on screen. For children, I can imagine this is a great watch as there is a perfect balance of heart, action and humour. For adults too, this is a great watch as it is a poignant reminder of the feeling of believing in these characters and of the magic associated with these seasons. There are plenty of themes within the narrative that add feeling and involvement such as finding your own identity, belonging and learning to have faith in others.

As much fun as ROTG is, there is still a slight feeling of unrealised potential. For me, there could have been so much more fun to be had with these characters and maybe a stronger script could have provided more laughs for children and adults alike. The story is a little too predictable, even for a kids film, and at times the moralistic messages feel a little too preachy and in your face when a viewer of any age would have already got the message, but this only rarely detracts from what is otherwise tremendous fun.

In summary, a great concept and solid execution: Rise of the Guardians is a spectacular and immensely enjoyable film for all seasons, there is a good balance of heart and action that will appeal to both adults and children. Expect a sequel, and hopefully one with a better and sharper script.

Posted in All Film Reviews | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

DRAGON CRUSADERS (Mark Atkins, 2011) viewed on 17/3/13

dragon crusaders

 

Starring: Dylan Jones, Cecily Fay, Feth Greenwood

You may like this if you liked: Merlin and the War of the Dragons (Mark Atkins, 2008), Mega Shark Vs Giant Octopus (Jack Perez, 2009), Nazis at the Centre of the Earth (Joseph J. Lawson, 2012) or any of the other movies produced by The Asylum (there is a lot of them): http://www.imdb.com/list/SlHs1k_kFWE/?ref_=tt_rls_0

A travelling group of Knights Templar save a village from attacking pirates and kill all the pirates. However, due to a spell cast by an innocent villager they are all destined to turn into gargoyles which proves a little annoying for them. It is only due to their valiant and courageous hearts that the curse has not taken over, but it is only a matter of time. To fight the curse, and conveniently save the world as well they have to go on a quest to destroy some all great and powerful and obviously evil wizard dragon before it is too late.

Firstly, let’s establish the facts: This is one of the many films produced from The Asylum, they can usually be found on the SyFy channel or Movies for Men. So, we have: A ridiculous title, an even more ridiculous story, wooden acting, extremely clunky dialogue and mega drive standard CGI.

In fact, there is very little point in even reviewing this film; it is only due to some moral obligation I have set myself to review every single film I watch that I am writing this. Of course, for the reasons I just listed Dragon Crusaders is an absolute turd of a film. It would be easy to go on a rant, but I will refrain from that temptation. The fact is that Asylum films know their place, all those involved surely know what they are making, and these films that they make tend to actually make a profit, so fair play to them. Calling these films B movies is probably too much of a compliment, maybe Z movie, but they certainly deserve to be a genre in their own right. As long as you know what you are getting in too, have a strong alcoholic beverage at your side, then films like Dragon Crusaders are more entertaining and certainly funnier (intentionally or not) than anything Adam Sandler or Nancy Meyers ever produce. Also, I would rather watch anything produced by The Asylum than Taken 2 again. There. I have said it!

Posted in All Film Reviews | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

SLEEP TIGHT (Juame Balagueró, 2011)

sleep tight

Starring: Luis Tosar, Marta Etura, Alberto San Juan

You may like this if you liked: Julia’s Eyes (Guillem Morales, 2010), [Rec] (Juame Balagueró and Paco Plaza, 2007), Tesis (Alejandro Amenábar, 1996)

César (Tosar) lives a lonely life in an upper class tower block in Barcelona; he also works as the concierge on the front door. César is a man who finds it impossible to find happiness and indeed be happy, so he takes it upon himself to prevent the residents of the tower block to experience happiness themselves. He goes to extremes to prevent one of the residents; the beautiful and eternal optimist Clara (Etura), from experiencing true happiness and in the process develops an apparent obsession with her. As concierge, he has access to all the flats, and César uses this power to destroy Clara’s happiness without her knowing, when she is asleep.

Firstly, I feel it is important to state that though the marketing says everywhere ‘from the director of [Rec]’, and I understand why, this is nothing like [Rec]. I personally thought that [Rec] was an excellent film, and despite being an addition to an over exhausted genre, at the time it brought something new to it. Sleep Tight is however, though a ‘horror’ by genre, much more subtle and psychological. For me, this it to its credit and what is produced is a master class in psychological horror. It is very hard to describe the plot to Sleep Tight without giving too much away about the developments in the plot, as it are these constant developments that are central to the psychological and emotional impact of the narrative. I also feel it is important to say that from what I described in the plot that it is not a film that is brutal or horrific just for the sake of it, or is torture porn. Sleep Tight is a far more intelligent film that in fact has very little blood or gore, and the horror lies simply in the atmosphere, psychology and emotional impact of described plot developments.

I personally found that one of the shocking aspects of this film was the personal revelations that our revealed about our own sub conscience. César commits some quite despicable acts that any moral human being would never consider doing; however we do feel sympathy and understanding towards the protagonist. We almost feel a part of his actions due to how the story is told from his point of view and when there is a risk of him getting caught I genuinely felt nervous, despite the fact he should obviously be in prison for what he is doing. I am of course only speaking for myself here, and the viewing experience of this film and emotional reaction to what goes on within the narrative may differ between viewers. I was however relieved to read that other reviewers have said similar things. Our emotional sympathy for the protagonist is most definitely partly down to Luis Tosar’s magnetic performance as César. He strikes up feelings of fear and disgust, yet also evokes sympathy, in a similar way to his stunning performance in the excellent Cell 211 (Daniel Monzón, 2009).

Sleep Tight is a film consisting of some deeply unforgettable moments that stay with us for a while. The feelings we often get from these moments may not be good ones, but it is due to the expertly crafted psychological horror with images that are often only described that lies in what makes Sleep Tight such a deeply effecting experience. Many horror films tend to have farfetched concepts which take away some of the effectiveness, however what happens within the narrative of Sleep Tight is perfectly believable and it is not beyond the realms of possibility that this can happen to anyone, possibly without us even knowing. The shocks never get boring, leaving to an extremely compelling experience, leading all the way up to unforgettable ending that will haunt for days. Also adding to the horror is the extremely effective juxtaposition of there always being bright sunshine outside and having an up-tempo swing soundtrack, despite what is happening within the narrative leaving an extremely disconcerting feeling even during the day when everyone is supposed to be safe.

One criticism is that some of the few things that César does without getting noticed are perhaps a little unbelievable. However, maybe I thought this because I know he is there. If you are not aware of his presence then maybe you indeed would be less likely to notice.

Proving that less can indeed be more; Sleep Tight is vastly more effective and genuinely haunting than any big budget horror film that Hollywood tends to produce these days. With some unforgettable moments, Sleep Tight is genuinely guaranteed to haunt your sub conscience for days.

8/10

Posted in All Film Reviews, The Best of 2013, World Cinema | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

FRANKENWEENIE (Tim Burton, 2012) viewed on 15/3/13

frankenweenie

 

Starring: Martin Short, Winona Ryder, Catherine O’Hara

You may like this if you liked: ParaNorman (Chris Butler and Sam Fell, 2012), The Nightmare before Christmas (Henry Selick, 1993), Corpse Bride (Tim Burton and Mike Johnson, 2005)

Young Victor Frankenstien (really?) is an outsider who is fascinated by science, his only real friend being his beloved dog Sparky. However, a tragic turn of events lead to Sparky being run over and unfortunately killed. After being shown in a science lesson that electricity has the potential to restore life, Victor has an idea to bring back his beloved Sparky. During a heavy storm, Victor uses the electricity from the lightning to attempt to bring Spaky back to life. The experiment is a success, however Victor is forced to hide Sparky from others as some will refuse to accept that he is still the same dog at heart, while with an upcoming science contest; others may want to replicate Victor’s idea.

The term ‘A Tim Burton Film’ has almost become a cliché in itself these days in that it basically refers to a film being weird almost for the sake of being weird, especially Tim’s remakes, or ‘re-imaginings’ as they are often called. Being the cynical bugger, I regarded Frankenweenie with a little scepticism, especially as I am an animal lover and do not want to see one die in any film, let alone a kid’s film! However, I found Frankweenie a pleasant surprise. I remember hearing in an interview that Burton, as a fan of horror films as kid, wanted to make the kind of film he would have loved at that age. This is what lies at the very heart of what makes Frankenweenie such a success; it is obviously a very personal film and made with total compassion and affection.  After all the big budget remakes, Frankenweenie is a much welcome reminder of why Tim Burton is popular and regarded as a unique director.

However, when a film is personal to the director it can of course become over indulgent and alienate a lot of the audience and sometimes lose sight of even any clear narrative. An element of restraint is necessary, and I am pleased to say that I felt Frankenweenie demonstrated a perfect balance of this. This is a film that adults and children can all enjoy and relate to.  Despite being all in black and white, this is a film children will enjoy; there is enough heart and a sense of adventure, as well being told from the perspective of a child. Victor’s position as a slight outsider to the norm is one that is easy to relate to, and many of us do. There are also countless nods and winks to various horror films that adults will enjoy, these all always tremendous fun as well as respectful to their original source. Of course, it goes without saying that people of any age who are animal lovers (like myself) and have experienced the companionship an animal can give you will find a genuine emotional connection to this film.

There is also style to the substance, with some important underlying moral messages within the narrative that keeps Frankenweenie being a film with a good narrative structure and character arcs. The inevitable ‘dramatic’ scenes towards the end, though they feel inevitable, they still are good fun and never feel they have to be there as they fit in perfectly with the tone of the film, mirroring perfectly scenes from past horror films in consistently fun way. My one issue was an aspect of the ending. I don’t want to give anything away, but there is a certain aspect of the ending that was a little inconsistent with a moral message that had up until then been a major theme of the narrative. Of course, this is essentially a kid’s film so I am sure that may have had something to do with it, which I understand. I know that Frankenweenie was not a major box office success, and I understand why, I was a little guilty of having reservations against it myself. However, now it is available to buy, it is a film I would strongly recommend to kids and adults alike.

Made with passion and heart, Frankenweenie is Tim Burton’s most personal for a long time. It is all the better for it as Frankweenie is very accessible, involving and great fun for viewers of all ages.

Posted in All Film Reviews | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

KILL KEITH (Andy Thompson, 2011)

kill keith

Starring: Keith Chegwin, Marc Pickering, Susannah Fielding

You may like this if you liked: Food poisoning, having an amputated limb with no anaesthetic, having a television land on your head.

Keith ‘Cheggers’ Chegwin is (apparently) a national treasure, and when the presenter of popular morning TV show Crack of Dawn (hilarious) quits the show, he is on the short list to become the new presenter. However, events take an unexpected turn as those on the shortlist, including Joe Pasquale, Tony Blackburn and Russell Grant (all gratefully accepting the pay check and playing themselves) start being killed by the ‘breakfast cereal killer’. Spoiler alert: This is the funniest joke in the film.

Firstly, I feel it is important to explain why I watched this. Some may call it naive, I prefer to call it an open minded optimism in British cinema, though if you called it pure stupidity, in hindsight I would struggle to disagree with that one. Sometimes a British film comes along and it looks a bit crap; however there is some charming Brutishness about it that only we British (the inventors of the sense of humour) actually get. If you then throw in some well known names playing themselves and willing to make a fool of themselves, you can have as a result an unashamedly self referential allegorical satirical take on society that maybe has a niche market, but is actually trashy but quite enjoyable.

However, Kill Keith is none of these. This is the most embarrassingly and painstakingly awful film I have seen recently. Usually I can find redeeming features in most films (see my St. Georges Day review), however, in this case I cannot. There is nothing funny, entertaining or redeeming about this film. I know those previously mentioned are not exactly big names, but do they not have any self respect?!?

Keith himself did Channel 5’s Naked Jungle so should surely know better by now, but even after his excellent “Jews and queers” cameo in Extras should not feel the need to do this. The apparent comedy involving the protagonist Danny (Marc Pickering) is not funny and just cringe worthy and embarrassing. Pickering himself seems to give a decent effort but his character is not even likeable, just plain irritating. As the god awful ‘hilarious’ plot develops you will simply want to punch yourself in the head, it is physically impossible to laugh either at or with this film, it is just purely awful. It is beyond me how this tripe ever got funded, and I am pleased that it made no money.

In summary, there is no words to describe how unbelievably appalling Kill Keith is, 90 minutes sat on the toilet staring at the ceiling would be a more productive use of time!

1/10

Posted in All Film Reviews, British Films, Rants | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment