Nowhere Boy

Sam Taylor Wood, UK, 2009

Being that this is the film that was chosen to close this year’s London Film Festival, it has to be said that it’s pretty forgettable.

Maybe that’s that the point, I don’t know, I’m not the artist here. Perhaps Taylor Woods intention was to capture the monotony and claustrophobic feeling of growing up in 1950’s Liverpool where dreams of escaping and a passion for American rock n’ roll culture were the order of the day.

Out of John Lennon’s remarkable life, tales of his child and teenhood often go overlooked, maybe because it is not especially different to that of any other angsty, young man growing up in an industrial British town and that’s why nowhere boy can tend to feel slightly flat, it’s just not that interesting a story. There are no problems with the direction, the clothes, dialogue and music are dead on and most of the performances are pretty solid, although I couldn’t help but notice that there were frequent accent transplants but I concede that a Liverpool accent is very distinctive and difficult to nail if you are not a native.

Another aspect of the film that griped me is in fact one of its strengths, in that Lennon comes across as an arrogant bully who thinks he is funnier than he actually is. This is where I have to give kudos to Aaron Johnson for pulling this off whilst maintaining his charisma and still managing to make the audience care for him as a troubled, abandoned child with a determination to live his dreams.

I also hated the creepy sexual tension between Lennon and his mum but I can just about forgive this for the part where one of my personal dreams came true, seeing Paul McCartney smacked in the gob.

If you are a fan of Lennon, the Beatles, 50s music or British cinema then this could be the film for you, if not, see it anyway, it’s pretty watchable, just don’t expect it to change your life.

Thirst

(Park Chan Wook, S.Korea, 2009)

Thirst aka Bakjwi is yet another of those Korean films that goes on for about 3 hours and seems to change direction several times during the whole course.

Most of the synopsis’ that I read before going to see it state that it’s about a priest that has a blood transfusion to amend his guilt about not being a very efficient saviour, said transfusion leads to a him developing vampiric tendencies, namely a thirst for blood and a ridiculous sexual appetite that develops in to a raunchy affair with his friends down-trodden wife. So far so good. This part of the movie is very entertaining, frequently funny, genuinely sexy and significantly more light hearted than anticipated.

Then comes act two, we saw the female lead, Tae-Joo switch from doormat to lustful object of unbridled passion, but now she suddenly switches to manipulative psycho. After leading the naive vampire priest up the garden path, she has now gained his powers. This is the point where Thirst takes a vast left turn and falls in to Korean movie syndrome where it suddenly becomes a completely different movie. According to the director, this move was deliberate. He originally intended to dramatise a French novel, the name of which escapes me now, about a murderers guilty paranoia under the scrutiny of an ever watchful eye. Now I understand this, it made me appreciate the film a little more but at the time it seemed baffling and frankly pointless. Then it becomes a battle of morals over need, a la Interview with the Vampire, a string of rubbishy special effects and an ending almost identical to 30 days of night but with the confusing character transplant where Tae-Joo repeatedly tries to save redemptive ‘priestpire’ Kang-so Hong.

Despite the hype, Thirst is not the most impressive film at this year’s London Korean Film Festival, see forthcoming posts on Treeless Mountain and Private Eye for more on this, however Thirst wins extra points for being a generally unique viewing experience.

Broken Embraces

Pedro Almodovar, Spain, 2009

Told in flashbacks and set between Madrid and Lanzarote, Broken Embraces tells the tale of Mateo Blanco, a succesful writer and director that falls in love with his starlet, leading to a bitter rivalry with her benefactor ultimately leading to the young stars death and Blanco losing his sight.

Despite the melodramatic plot, it is actually highly enjoyable and easy to watch. The melancholy and romantic feeling, perfectly balanced with humour and charm.

Broken Embraces is also a very stylish film, which could be considered a negative, depending on your outlook, some may see it as trying too hard to look arty, it is heavy on the metaphors but in all honesty is not too style conscious to be pretentious. I see it simply as Almodovar adding tastes of his own personality to his film, which is what auteur film making is all about.

There was however one part of the movie that made me feel quite uncomfortable. After sitting in the cinema chair for around and hour, I needed to tend to my routine bollock scratch, unfortunately this arrived at exactly the same moment that you see Penelope Cruz’s boobs so I had to keep my hands above waist level for around ten minutes so the good folk around me didn’t think I was having a sly stroke. Other than that minor gripe, it’s a pretty decent movie, still, you’d think those foreigners would learn to speak English.

Mesrine, Public Enemy Number 1

(Jean Francois-Richet, France, 2008)

I actually saw this film a couple of weeks ago but it’s taken me this long to write about it simply because it is severely underwhelming.

Part one was a so so kind of film, I was hoping that part 2 would fill in the blanks and redeem the series as a whole but instead, part two actually makes it seem worse. There is nothing wrong with any of the performances, I remain a fan of Vincent Cassel and especially Ludivine Sagnier but the problem with this film is that it seems to suffer an identity crisis. It doesn’t even follow the gritty, yet action over story line, formula of the first part. It is part crime thriller, part trendy biopic, part comedy caper, resulting in a series of ludicrous disguises and ends up looking like a poor Peter Sellers movie written by Guy Ritchie.

What really made me balk are the soundtrack choices, the pointless London Calling interlude springs to mind but the scene featuring Rappers Delight is possibly the most unfitting coupling of film and music since the bit in Baywatch when Mitch apparently dies in a parachuting accident whilst Mike and the Mechanics’ Looking Back plays out.

On a lighter note,Cassel is thoroughly entertaining in his portrayal of Mesrine as a charismatic yet wholly unlikeable character, which I suspect is quite near the truth, so much so that when he meets his bloody death at the hands of disgruntled police officers, you actually feel quite glad.

Also, as I mentioned in my review of Mesrine: Killer Instinct, despite being a supposedly true story, a strong feeling of artistic license hangs over the production, well at the beginning of part 2, a disclaimer practically admits that this is the case, adding my feeling of deflation ten-fold, however it did go some way to explaining why I’d grown a massive beard by the end of the screening.

the truth about angels

Lichelli Lazar-Lea, USA, 2009

This was the opening header if you will of this years Portobello Film Festival. And it is an absolute treat.

Starring my main man Simon Rex aka Dirt Nasty as big time movie star who invites his struggling artist, best friend to an A-list party, resulting a battle of morality and a questioning of mortality.

According to the writer/director Lazar-Lea the script and story are about 90% accurately based on true events that happened to her husband. If this is the case, then this dark tale shines a light on the darker side of life in tinsel town and could spell commercial suicide for the parties involved as it would almost certainly ruffle a few feathers to say the least.

Aside from the main themes, it also deals with strained personal relationships with old friends and family members. But also highlights the difficulty of being a foreigner or outsider in a superficial community.

Despite its sombre mood, this movie does have its lighter moments, the ever- charismatic Rex sometimes threatens to steal the show from his down to earth immigrant friend, there is some smart, natural dialogue and a few laughs.

All in all, a great piece of personal film making, that deserves a wider audience.

Mesrine, L’Instinct de Mort (Killer Instinct)

Jean- Francois Richet, France. 2008

This is supposedly the biopic of France’s most notorious career criminal Jaques Mesrine, starring two of France’s most gifted and famous actors, Vincent Cassel and Gerard Depardieu. In truth it it is a laddish action movie that focuses much more on the crime and violence than the actual story. If you are unfamiliar with Jaques Mesrine, which, let’s face it, is highly likely if you are from neither France nor Quebec, then don’t expect to come out of this any the wiser. It flits from scenario to scenario frequently, without offering any outcome or background on the matter. It’s like, whoah where did the bride come from? When did they have a kid? Why is he in jail? All this is excused so we can see lots of punch ups, shoot outs and car chases.

This however, may be resolved, as this is only the first chapter so hopefully some of the blanks may be filled in part 2.

The best way to describe this movie is that it is like a Michael Mann film, in French. (Michel Homme perhaps) Richet’s direction and the cinematography give this action vehicle a certain, what the French would call I don’t know what, if not for this, it would just be like one of those films that Channel 5 alway show. The action is fun and exciting and sometimes shocking, like the bit where he roughs his wife up in front of his friends and kids, it is a credit to Richet that he did not attempt to glorify a life of crime, In Depardieu’s first scene as crime boss Guido, he states that people in this line of work never really win, and Cassel’s portrayal of Mesrine is that of a charismatic, yet callous scumbag.

I am now very interested to find out about Mesrine’s story in deeper detail, to see if some of the action scenes are actually based on fact, as there are some parts that, if not for the supposed biopic status, make this film a little chinny rcck on! Maybe the 1984 biopic of Mesrine or the 2006 made for television movie would be good starting points.

moon

Duncan Jones, 2009, UK

The man formerly known as Zowie Bowie has released his second movie, the first in seven years and it is worth the wait. If you were actually waiting for it that is.
The problem with modern Sci-Fi, or even life in general, is that it isn’t the 80s anymore. So there’s no fear of replicants/cyborgs, time travelers, Russians etc and therefore it’s been a while since we had something like Bladerunner, Terminator, Robocop, Aliens, Total Recall etc. But Duncan Jones has managed to created a decent Science Fiction story that reflects the anxieties of modern Western society. One element of 80s Sci-Fi that remains relevant today is the power of Capitalism. And it is this that has been used to set the story in Moon.
Sam Rockwell plays pretty much the only character, a working class American average Joe who is stationed on the moon working for a Korean corporation that provides energy to Earth.
Sam has two weeks left of his three year contract when something goes wrong, his isolation is broken, by himself.
I won’t spoil it for you by revealing why there are two Sam’s but I will point out that this film is not the head fuck that Bladerunner/Terminator were. The mystery of the two Sam’s is revealed quite early on, leaving enough time for the Sam’s to stick it to the man in an exciting, funny, interesting thriller.
Despite what critics and hype may dictate, Moon is actually the best film in cinema’s right now.

antichrist

Lars Von Trier, 2009, Denmark etc.

I’ve always wanted to know how it would look to see Willem Dafoe getting wanked off and spunking blood from his broken dick on the big screen, so lucky for me, I went to see Antichrist, the movie everybody’s talking about.
Once again we have a movie that polarised opinions at the festivals, I don’t wish to take sides as I can see why some people would consider it one of the most important films of recent times, others feeling it was tripe.
The film is graphic and gruesome and probably worth seeing for these reasons alone, if you like that sort of thing. Trouble is, it’s a bit slow and actually pretty boring to watch until you get to the good bits, which are too infrequent and not actually as original as the yes men would have us believe.
Brief synopsis is that a grieving couple retreat to Eden so that the psychologist man can treat his troubled wife and help her overcome her feelings of guilt and grief at the death of their infant son. In the woods, a few creepy images are seen, then she inexplicably goes spacko Jacko on him. Something to do with evil nature.
It’s not a bad film, it’s well acted, visually stunning, extremely graphic, with a decent, if somewhat underdeveloped storyline. The thing with Von Trier is, I can’t help but feel that people tend to blow smoke up his arse. There is an Emperor’s New Clothes air about him, as if people are scared to admit that his films are a bit hit and miss for fear of looking stupid.
For all its hype, Antichrist did not have half the impact I expected. The scenes of extreme, torturous violence will not be that powerful if you have already seen Audition. And the gothic, fairytale, woodland of Eden, although beautiful, was done just as well, but with much less fanfare in last year’s Korean thriller Hansel and Gretel.
No doubt, this is an interesting movie that will stick in the viewers mind for a long time, but that doesn’t excuse the fact that it is boring to watch.
I believe that directors like Von Trier are important to the evolution of cinema, just don’t get too caught up in the hype. If you really want to see graphic violence, evil spirits and woodland, just watch Evil Dead 2, it’s just as stunning but a whole lot more fun.

My top 10 cinema releases of the last 12 months

1. Waltz with Bashir – Reminiscent of slaughterhouse 5. Tells the story of events that happened in our lifetime that you probably know nothing about. The first time I’ve seen a cartoon reduce an entire cinema of adults to floods of tears. Powerful stuff indeed.

2. Hunger – Neither romanticizes nor demonizes. Just portrays what happened, and does it well.

3. Watchmen – Lacks the impact of the book, but so did Jaws and The Shining.

4. In the Loop

5. Let the Right One In

6. Jar City

7. Sugar

8. Mark of an Angel

9. Vicky Christina Barcelona

10. Gomorrah

This is just a top ten of films I have seen at the cinema between August 2008 and now. It is not a definitive chart, just my opinion. If a film is not featured in this list, chance are I haven’t seen it. But before you ask, yes I have seen Slumdog Millionaire. Don’t believe the hype.

Synecdoche New York

Charlie Kaufman, 2008, USA

Early reports of this movie were that it polarised audiences. Some feeling that it was a groundbreaking, mesmerizing treat. Others feeling that it was self indulgent, pretentious tosh. So I had to go in with an open mind and arm myself with the knowledge that it may not be everybody’s cup of tea and that it may not follow conventional rules of movie making or story telling. Having enjoyed Kaufman’s other movies, although directed by Spike Jonze and Michel Gondry, I imagined it would be all the better for it, I hoped, I was wrong. The unfortunate reality is that this movie is indeed no more than a big celluloid wank. Self indulgence being an understatement.

Part of the problem being that it is essentially plotless. Not that this should ever be too problematic, Gomorrah never sufferd from lacking any real structure. But at over 2 hours, Syecdoche New York does become rather tedious.

Not to say that it is an entirely bad film. The first 45 minutes or so is actually pretty entertaining and funny. the creation of alternative, surreal worlds that somehow blend in naturally with our own world is a trait that Kaufman has become known for. The ever burning house, the self-writing book and ludicrous German accent are initially part of the films charm, but as the film continues, I won’t say progresses because it really does not progress, it emerges that there is actually no point to any of this.

The basic synopsis is that a middle aged man is unhappy with his career, relationship, life in general and creates a an alternative life for himself by erecting a huge, sub-subterranean theatre set and casts actors to play himself and the people around him, as a way of having some control over his life whilst simultaneously gaining career satisfaction as he is an unsuccessful playwright.

It’s a pretty clever concept, and on paper it works, but on the big screen it is just tiresome. I believe that it was meant to be non conclusive to portray that the main protagonist only had direction in his life when he was indeed, directing his life. So the play is never finished, new characters emerge and scenes are constantly written and played out but the play is never finished and never gets an audience. At one point a cast member asks the director something along the lines of “When’s this gonna be finished, it’s been 17 years”, and that’s how it feels watching this film. We get the idea of what the director is trying to say but after 90 minutes it’s hard to care any more. Had the film been trimmed to around the 90 minute mark it would have been infinitely more bearable. I imagine that this type of film improves with repeated viewing as the viewer becomes more acquainted with the surreal world that the director has created. Wes Anderson for instance does this very well, but the problem with Synecdoche New York is that the prospect of having to sit through all that again is hard to imagine, unless you bring a book or your ipod.

If you really want to see a movie about a frustrated artist, that is scared to admit his work is finished. You’re better off watching Driller Killer, at least that has some action.

AFTER THOUGHT: The title is a play on the fact that it is set in Schenectady New York and that an alternative realm exists in this same setting. This is also the theme for the Will Self novel How the Dead Live, which is also a big pile of shit.