Tag: Better Than Average Bear

Review: Mirror Mirror

The first of the two fresh takes on the Brothers Grimm’s most famous tale sets the visual bar and fun factor high in this cheeky spin on a fairy tale.

[stextbox id=”grey” caption=”Mirror Mirror (2012)” float=”true” align=”right” width=”200″]

Director: Tarsem Singh

Writer(s): Melissa Wallack, Jason Keller

Runtime: 106 minutes

Starring: Lily Collins, Julia Roberts, Armie Hammer, Nathan Lane

Distributor: Roadshow Films

Country: US

Rating: Better Than Average Bear (?)

More info

[/stextbox]

With its groundbreaking animation and winning score, Walt Disney’s first animated classic Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs has largely shaped the modern conception of what this well-trodden tale should look like. Countless versions have been crafted over the last 75 years, based on the Grimm Brothers most famous version of the story, but the core variations of the myth have all been Disneyfied to a certain extent. In the grand tradition of Hollywood, two contenders to the throne have been announced for 2012, and Mirror Mirror beats Snow White and the Huntsman to the screen by a matter of months.

A wicked enchantress uses magic to marry, and then dispose of, the King and take her place as Queen Clementianna (Julia Roberts). Keeping the rightful air to the throne, the beautiful Snow White (Lily Collins), subservient and out of sight, the Queen taxes the poor and runs the kingdom into ruin for her own vanity. After a chance encounter in the forest, the charming prince Andrew Alcott (Armie Hammer) becomes smitten with Snow. The jealous Queen orders her henchman Brighton (Nathan Lane) to kill her, but instead he lets her run. There, Snow encounters seven diminutive highway robbers who take her in, and help her take back her kingdom from the Queen.

Tarsem Singh Dhandwar, known to the movie world simply as Tarsem, developed a visually arresting glossy style in the commercial and music video world. It was one that he would employ in his debut feature film The Cell, and again in his sophomore effort The Fall. After taking the sword and sandal genre to artistic heights in last year’s Immortals, he rather unexpectedly turns to family comedy in Mirror Mirror, and it is a welcome and surprisingly fresh change. Once again, Tarsem’s visual style is what distinguishes this film from its competition, ensconcing its protagonists in brightly coloured garb and surrounding them in carefully placed faux antiquities and exotic objects. Every still from the film is worth framing. There is some darkness here, but while sinister, it is never truly frightening. In this respect, it shares more with modern family-friendly animation than Disney.

Melissa Wallack and Jason Keller‘s script has Grimm at its core, but aims to subvert it enough to make it relevant to knowing modern audiences. The casting of Julia Roberts is a clear attempt to get audiences on side with the Queen from the start, who begins telling the story as though it is her own, and her mirror is not simply on the wall but a trans-dimensional portal. Around her swirls a whole lot of winking to the audience, especially around the frequent semi-nudity of Hammer’s prince, meaning that not all of the elements are for the smaller kids. Recasting the dwarfs as brigands with less than noble intentions is certainly a progressive step as well, especially when this set of seven kicks some serious tail.

Collins radiates as Snow White, having never looked as beautiful or played as strong a role. After a completely forgettable turn in Priest, and a laughable one in unintentional comedy Abduction, she finds her place in this fairy tale, effortlessly transitioning from graceful to buccaneer bandit. Making a wonderful foil for her is Hammer, cheekily playing up to the character, even spanking Snow several times during the obligatory sword fight. This is incredibly silly stuff, but it’s a fairy tale after all, and the important thing is that everybody, including the audience, lives happily ever after.

Mirror Mirror was released in Australia on 29 March 2012 from Roadshow Films.

April 2, 2012
Review: The Hunger Games

The first chapter in the highly anticipated franchise gets off to a solid start, and may the odds be forever in their favour.

[stextbox id=”grey” caption=”The Hunger Games (2012)” float=”true” align=”right” width=”200″]

Director: Gary Ross

Writer(s): Gary Ross, Billy Ray, Suzanne Collins

Runtime: 142 minutes

Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Lenny Kravitz, Wes Bentley, Stanley Tucci

Distributor: Roadshow Films

Country: US

Rating: Better Than Average Bear (?)

More info

[/stextbox]

The Hunger Games arrives with all of the hype of a major franchise release, yet for the majority of mainstream audiences this may be their first encounter with the material. Based on the young adult novels by Suzanne Collins, the almost three million copies in print indicate the impact that this series has had on a generation of young readers, giving director Gary Ross‘ adaptation a pre-publicity machine of Twilight proportions. Yet with this series, Collins has tapped into a darker and more cynical stream of youth consciousness, one that has is not only filled with real characters but echoes the consequences of the way we run the world today.

In what was once North America, the nation of Panem forces the selection of one teenage girl and boy from each of its twelve districts to compete in the annual Hunger Games. The games are a combination of tribute to a age-old conflict, a form of entertainment and a government intimidation tactic from the Capitol. The “Tributes” must fight each other to the death, and only one may remain standing at the end. Voluntarily taking her sister’s place, backwater survivor and gifted hunter Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) joins district stablemate Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) against a group of highly-trained Tributes who have been preparing for the games their entire lives.

Targeted at the same audience who devours the Twilight Saga, The Hunger Games offers a much stronger role model in the shape of Katniss. Rather than weeping for months over the loss of a fanged lover, Katniss is a self-reliant individual who relies on her own skills to get by. Jennifer Lawrence is perfectly cast, lending the film her Winter’s Bone determination and fragile beauty. This is set-up early in the film in the gap between the “haves” of the Capitol and the “have nots” of the outer districts, returning to an exploration on the class divide that we’ve not seen in teen movies since the heyday of the 1980s. Which is why it is a shame that we don’t always get to hear her inner monologue, replacing moments of contemplation with long shots of Lawrence in trees.

Gary Ross, who hasn’t directed a film since 2003’s horsey drama Seabiscuit, does a capable job of setting up the world of Panem with co-writers Billy Ray and original author Collins. In only a handful of scenes, we are presented with the rich and complex tapestry of Collins’ alternate future. It is filled with extravagant dandy couture from Rodarte, Alexander McQueen and Jean Paul Gaultier on one end of the scale, and abject poverty on the other, with people living out of the ruins of a conflict that is only hinted at. Did we not have to spend the majority of the film in the “games” themselves, this is the more intriguing of the dichotomies in the film. Characters such as the drunken mentor Haymitch Abernathy (Woody Harrelson), fashion-conscious Effie Trinket (Elizabeth Banks) and thoughtful Cinna (Lenny Kravitz) are worth exploring further. Likewise, any second we spend with emcee Caesar Flickerman (Stanley Tucci) is worth its weight in blue hair dye. The effects shots of the Capitol are breathtaking.

Shot with the close-quarter handheld camera to convey intimacy, it is one of several tactics that actually serve to momentarily distance the audience from the action. The other, being a teen-centric film, is of course the fledgling romance between Katniss and Peeta. One never gets the sense of any genuine emotion here, although readers of the original texts will get more of a sense of how everybody is ultimately using each other to get what they want. There is a sense of urgency to the survival, on the other hand, and even in the extended running time, the film rips along at a pace that other teen films would do well to take notice of.

Sharing a heritage with Japan’s Battle Royale, and harking back to 1979’s The Long Walk, Schwarzenegger’s Running Man (1987) or even death-match game show Series 7 (2001), The Hunger Games chooses not to linger too long on the social implications of reality television and ritual. There is, after all, an inherent criticism of the church/state partnership in aspects of the film’s narrative. Like the games depicted, this is primarily an entertainment device for the masses and it accomplishes that effortlessly.

[stextbox id=”custom”]A solid start to the franchise, filled with action and spectacle in equal measure, but mostly setting up a world that leaves us hungry for the next chapter.[/stextbox]

The Hunger Games is released in Australia on 22 March 2012 from Roadshow Films.

March 22, 2012
Review: A Dangerous Method

David Cronenberg returns for a spanking good time in his first film of the decade, opening the cases files on the relationship between Freud and Jung.

[stextbox id=”grey” caption=”A Dangerous Method (2011)” float=”true” align=”right” width=”200″]

Director: David Cronenberg

Writer(s): Christopher Hampton

Runtime: 94 minutes

Starring: Michael Fassbender, Kiera Knightley, Viggo Mortensen, Vincent Cassel

Distributor: Paramount/Transmission

Country: UK

Rating: Better Than Average Bear (?)

More info

[/stextbox]

Since Canada’s David Cronenberg began making moves away from the “body horror” genre, which he pioneered in the 1970s and perfected with Shivers and Videodrome, his source material has become even more eclectic. As he struck a winning partnership with actor Viggo Mortensen in comic book adaptation A History of Violence and Russian mob picture Eastern Promises, his films have become increasingly layered and sophisticated. Cronenberg’s work has always explored the limits of the human mind, and a biopic on two of the world’s most famous analytical psychologists perhaps reflects the director’s own recognition of the basis of many of his nightmares and dreamscapes.

Just before the start of the First World War, Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung (Michael Fassbender) stands on the verge of breakthrough in analysing his mentally ill patients with the so-called “talking cure”. He spies an opportunity to test out those theories with Russian patient Sabina Spielrein (Kiera Knightley), an intensely neurotic case who is aroused over physical acts of violence. As Jung begins an intense intellectual relationship with his mentor and eventually friend Sigmund Freud (Viggo Mortensen), he also begins an explicit affair with Spielrein, who is destined to become one of the first female psychoanalysts. This unconventional triumvirate challenge each others ideals, and ultimately leads to a convergence in the profession.

Christopher Hampton’s script, based on the on his own National Theatre play which was in turn based on the John Kerr novel A Most Dangerous Method, is an engaging character study of a moment in history. Hampton takes this event and spins it into a dramatic retelling of the beginning of an era, or the end of one if you prefer. The skills of the twin brains of Hampton and Cronenberg working in their Freud/Jung symbiosis, probably without the sexual dysfunction and extended episodes of spanking, weave what could have been an endlessly talky stage-focused piece into a dramatic interpretation of the realisation of a new set of ideas.

Fassbender earnestly throws himself into the character of Jung, remaining aloof and distant with his wife at times, loving at others, even when he is engaging in unfettered acts of lust with Knightley. Mortensen, knowing his way around a Cronenberg film by now, effortlessly slides into Freud, drawing out each line as if perched on a throne looking down at disciples. Trying a Russian accent on for side, possibly in preparation for the upcoming Anna Karenina, Knightley is initially off-putting in a slightly overplayed version of her malady, threatening to dislocate her jaw with every jarring take. Yet she too finds her voice in this tale, that as we later learn has a tragic ending at the start of Holocaust and the Second World War. Also worth singling out is Vincent Cassel as the hedonist Otto Gross, who was himself an analytical pioneer, for completely playing the yin to Jung’s yang.

If A Dangerous Method had simply been a biopic of the origin of two of histories most famous minds, then Cronenberg’s film wouldn’t have been anything that a first year psych study could have taken you through. Instead, Hampton, Cronenberg and the incredibly capable cast prove that Freud’s contention of their work being forgotten within the century was completely unfounded for good reason. There are times it dwells on the psycho-sexual aspects of the tale, and like Spielrein it begins to get off on the regular spankings, but it was over these points that Jung and Freud ultimately diverged, and it is doubtful now that their story could have been told in any other way.

[stextbox id=”custom”]Cronenberg takes a familiar story and together with his excellent cast, he makes something brand spanking new. [/stextbox]

A Dangerous Method is released in Australia on 29 March 2012 from Paramount/Transmission.

March 22, 2012
80s Bits: Valley Girl

Welcome back to 80s Bits, the weekly column in which we explore the best and worst of the Decade of Shame. With guest writers, hidden gems and more, it’s truly, truly, truly outrageous.

[stextbox id=”grey” caption=”Valley Girl (1983)” float=”true” align=”right” width=”200″]

Director: Martha Coolidge

Writers(s): Wayne Crawford, Andrew Lane

Runtime: 99 minutes

Starring: Nicolas Cage, Deborah Foreman

Distributor: Atlantic Releasing

Country: US

Rating: Better Than Average Bear (?)

More 80s Bits

[/stextbox]

With the release of a fourth American Pie film this year, one that largely looks back at the highs and lows of the 1999 original, it is tough to imagine a time when teen sex comedies weren’t a dime a dozen. When reflecting on Martha Coolidge’s 1983 hit film Valley Girl, what makes it stand out is just how much hasn’t changed in the last three decades. Some of the fashions might have altered, the music is now retro and valley girls have been parodied in everything from Frank Zappa music to Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Yet there remains a central familiarity that this film set the tone for in many ways.

In fair California, where we lay our scene, Julie Richman (Deborah Foreman) is a rich valley girl who has everything a young lady could dream of: cool parents, money, a gaggle of friends and the hottest boyfriend in town. After hanging out with her valley friends Loryn (Elizabeth Daily), Stacey (Heidi Holicker), and Suzi (Michelle Meyrink), she decides that Tommy (Michael Bowen) doesn’t respect her anymore and unceremoniously dumps him. When she meets Hollywood punk Randy (Nicolas Cage) at a party, the pair share an instant connection, and Randy falls in love hard, showing her a world she never knew existed. Yet Julie’s friends don’t approve, and she must decided whether to go with Randy or cave to peer pressure and reconcile with Tommy.

The disparity between rich and poor, and the class war it created, was a major theme in the films of the 1980s, proving to be the Romeo and Juliet stumbling block that stopped couples from uniting in Pretty in Pink and Some Kind of Wonderful to name but a few. Just as the decade of decadence was getting underway, the familiar trope is pulled out here not so much as a cheap cash grab, but rather as a parody of the popular youth culture of the 1980s. More so than any other film that has lampooned or been set in the 1980s since, Valley Girl captures the era perfectly, from the plastic image-focused girls of the valley, to the New Wave punks of Hollywood, just as caught in the scene as the sex-obsessed girls.

Where most teen comedies are the fantasies of the middle-aged, who vicariously live out deflowering fantasies that they missed out in their own formative years, female filmmaker Martha Coolidge creates a world inhabited with real kids. Much of the film cleverly sits back and observes conversations, adopting an almost documentary approach to exposition. Refreshingly, this means that catching girls out in the nude or obtaining a pair of panties as a trophy are not the ultimate goals in the film, nor is there a contest to be the first past the cherry-popping post. These young characters are sexual active, aware of their own bodies but in contrast conflicted over the dichotomy between their feelings and social status. Through the mere act of listening, we find out their fears and their desires. Who knew that girls talk about sex almost as much, if not more than, boys?

Valley Girl is fuelled by a terrific New Wave soundtrack, making liberal use of The Plimsouls and Josie Cotton, who both appear in the film. Peppered with minor hits of the 1982-83 charts, “I Melt with You” by Modern English serves as an unofficial theme song for the film. The film originally had a lot more on the soundtrack, with the music rights costing $250,000 on top of the film’s original $350,000 budget. However, while The Clash, Culture Club, Bananarama, and The Jam all originally appeared in the credits to the film, none of their songs can be found in the actual picture thanks to an inability to secure the rights. Frank Zappa, whose satirical 1982 song “Valley Girl” served as the basis for the film, unsuccessfully attempted to sue the film’s makers for capitalising on his song’s name.

Trivia fans will know that this was the first film in which a young Nicolas Coppola first used his more famous stage name of Nicolas Cage, but the legacy of the film goes well beyond beginning the career that launched a thousand hairpieces. Apart from popularising the highly imitable “Valspeak”, Valley Girl opened the door for frank and open explorations of youth anxiety and sex, far more than the Porky’s films ever did. Indeed, a direct line can be traced between Valley Girl‘s star-crossed lovers and the Jane Austen-inspired Clueless. Like, totally for sure.

March 9, 2012
Review: 21 Jump Street

A reworking of the 1980s television series borrows the name but brings the laughs in a film that is nothing like what you will expect it to be.

[stextbox id=”grey” caption=”21 Jump Street (2012)” float=”true” align=”right” width=”200″]

Director: Phil Lord, Chris Miller

Writer(s): Michael Bacall, Jonah Hill

Runtime: 109 minutes

Starring: Jonah Hill, Channing Tatum, Ice Cube, Deray Davis, Dax Flame, Dave Franco

Distributor: Sony

Country: US

Rating: Better Than Average Bear (?)

More info

[/stextbox]

As regular readers of 80s Bits will know, the 1980s is a mine of rolled gold for remake material. From the wonderful TRON: Legacy, the woeful Clash of the Titans and Conan the Barbarian and the troubling The A-Team, recapturing the trends of a bygone era have served as a substitute for creating a meaningful post-1990s culture of any consequence. Certainly in terms of box office push, we are back to a place of escalating budgets and diminishing returns both creatively and financially. Which is why it is refreshing when something like 21 Jump Street comes along, taking the legacy of a bygone era and crafting something that lives in the now.

Schmidt (Jonah Hill) and Jenko (Channing Tatum) are from opposite ends of the social spectrum during high school, but once they go through the police academy together, they find that their friendship is mutually beneficial, with Schmidt bringing the smarts and Jenko the braun. Failing at every attempt at police procedure, they are sent to do undercover work under Captain Dickson (Ice Cube), who runs the Jump Street program. They must go undercover at a high school to bust a drug ring selling a deadly new breed of high. The only problem is that in the ten years since they’ve both been at school, the times have rapidly changed and they find themselves in a world they no longer understand.

The real joys of 21 Jump Street begin when the film explicitly acknowledges the cycle of remakes and retreads. Ice Cube’s angry black Captain not only acknowledges his own stereotype, but the derivative nature of the plot. Referencing Jump Street as a “cancelled program from the 80s”, he ponders how they can keep dredging up “shit from the past and expect us all not to notice”. It is a small token of a line, which in and of itself doesn’t make the movie an instant classic, but it is part of a generous deal that asks us to overlook any familiar paths in return for a genuinely fun and funny ride through modern high school.

Throwing anything vaguely resembling the original show out the window, short of the title and the abandoned church headquarters, 21 Jump Street is above all things a comedy: one where the laughs are fast and frequent, and incredibly disarming at times. While some of the jokes are low-brow, including an alarming number of dick jokes that share the mildly homophobic humour of their contemporaries, the hit rate is pretty high thanks to a sharp screenplay from Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World‘s Michael Bacall, co-plotted by Jonah Hill.

Villains, friends and well-wishers are perfunctory when compared to the chemistry between Hill and Tatum, who make an excellent mismatched pair of cops. Once the initial gag of just how different they are wears off, we are left with an easy back and forth that plays to Hill’s natural comic experience and gives Tatum a chance to flex his hitherto unseen comedic flow. Placed in a rapid-fire series of scenarios, the pair seem to react as often as they are “acting”, and this is one of the great strengths of this comic gem.

[stextbox id=”custom”]Bucking the trend of TV adaptations going wrong, 21 Jump Street strikes a perfect balance between action and comedy, but finds its real strengths in playing this 80s reboot for laughs.[/stextbox]

21 Jump Street is released on 15 March 2012 in Australia from Sony.

March 7, 2012
Review: Like Crazy

A refreshingly improvised romance emerges from a sea of tightly scripted genre films, showcasing the talents of rising stars Felicity Jones and Anton Yelchin.

[stextbox id=”grey” caption=”Like Crazy (2011)” float=”true” align=”right” width=”200″]

Director: Drake Doremus

Writer(s): Drake Doremus, Ben York Jones

Runtime: 90 minutes

Starring: Anton Yelchin, Felicity Jones, Jennifer Lawrence, Alex Kingston

Distributor: Paramount

Country: US

Rating: Better Than Average Bear (?)

More info

[/stextbox]

Like Crazy is released internationally in the shadow of the Sundance Film Festival behemoth, where it won the Grand Jury Prize all the way back at the 2011 festival. While director Drake Doremus isn’t exactly a household name, at least not yet, his previous feature Douchebag also played at Sundance in competition the following year. For his third feature, he brings us one of his most personal stories to date, reenacting (according to Austrian-born ex-wife Desiree Pappenscheller) much of their romantic history.

Jacob (Anton Yelchin) and Anna (Felicity Jones) meet at college in the US, and promptly fall in love. After an intense period of romance, Anna decides to break her visa and not return to her native UK in order to spend more time with Jacob. However, when she eventually goes home for a wedding, she is denied re-entry into the US for having broken the terms of her initial visa. So begins a long-distance romance between the pair, testing the limits of their love and the very notion of what a relationship is.

Like Crazy offers an amazingly intense and intimate portrait of a relationship as it grows and fades. If the emotional reactions seem like genuine ones, it’s because they are to some extent. What is truly remarkable about the film is that while the scenarios were scripted, the dialogue and individual moments were entirely improvised. Actors Jones and Yelchin were given a “scriptment”, much like the TV shows in the vein of Curb Your Enthusiasm, where the scene had a purpose but it was up to the actors how that scene played out. Yet moving this technique from comedy to drama is a bold one, bringing the same freshness to melodrama.

This would not be possible, of course, without two strong leads and the impressive Jones and Yelchin are the very model of a young couple in love. What is essentially a two-hander, with the exception of a few people who drift in and out of their lives, is driven by their dual passions for finding the truth in these characters. The relationship is either doomed or fated to be from the start, begging the larger question of what happens when you do find the person you are supposed to be with from the start. The purposely ambiguous ending makes us question whether this love is just an illusion, as manufactured as the Go-Kart/beach montage that indicates they are now in love, but the relationships that they do develop with other people (including an incredibly patient Jennifer Lawrence) seem to be simply biding their time. On the other hand, could love simply be the ache we feel for something we can’t have?

Shot on the inexpensive Canon EOS 7D DSLR camera, a consumer level piece of equipment, the rawness of this imagery enhances rather than detracts from the realness of the scene. As Ryan Adams once sung, “When you’re young you get sad, then you get high”, and Like Crazy aims to strip raw the illusion of youth, back to these bare essentials. The slow and meandering pace serves to capture the frustration of aching to be something or with someone that may never come to pass, but having to keep on living regardless of what the heart wants.

[stextbox id=”custom”]A touching and genuine love story, told from a place of truth that strips love of its mystery and replaces it with the highs and lows of living.[/stextbox]

Like Crazy is released in Australia on 1 March 2012 from Paramount.

February 29, 2012
Review: Carnage

Roman Polanksi goes back to his apartment roots and lightens up a little bit in this star-studded observation of human nature.

[stextbox id=”grey” caption=”Carnage (2011)” float=”true” align=”right” width=”200″]

Director: Roman Polanski

Writer(s): Yasmina Reza, Roman Polanski

Runtime: 80 minutes

Starring: Kate Winslet, Christoph Waltz, John C. Reilly, Jodie Foster

Distributor: Sony

Country: France, Germany,
Poland, Spain

Rating: Better Than Average Bear (?)

More info

[/stextbox]

Roman Polanski is undoubtedly one of the most interesting and experimental filmmakers of the twentieth century, with Repulsion, Rosemary’s Baby and Chinatown alone being enough to forever secure him a place in film history. Whether connected or not, the years following his highly publicised sexual assault charges have seen his career take a series of patchy turns, with only the highly acclaimed The Pianist standing out in the last three decades. With Carnage, based on the play God of Carnage by French playwright Yasmina Reza, Polanksi is back in in top form.

Following a fight between two schoolboys, in which one severely injures the other with a stick, the parents of the two children meet to discuss the issue amicably. The parents of the boy wielding the stick, Alan and Nancy Cowan (Christoph Waltz and Kate Winslet), visit the home of Michael and Penelope Longstreet (John C. Reilly and Jodie Foster) and things initially go well. However, as the conversation progresses, irreconcilable differences begin to emerge between the couples, slowly turning on each other and their own spouses as an all-out argument ensues.

With the weighty themes of The Pianist and the mediocre The Ghost Writer dominating much of the last decade, it is great to see that Polanski still has a funny-bone. Indeed, not since 1967’s The Fearless Vampire Killers or: Pardon Me, Madam, but Your Teeth Are in My Neck has the Polish director attempted something this consciously humourous, albeit a very black comedy at that. This is not a comedy in the traditional sense, but the humour comes from a darker place, one in which we revel in the rapid decay of civilised niceties between four otherwise typical middle-upper-class folk. Alliances are formed, couples separate and come together again, there is male and female bonding over tulips, cobbler, whisky and cigars. It’s a microcosm of society, of course, showing how one single issue can cause otherwise “liberal” people to rapidly change sides, but also that civilisation itself is an illusion.

The voyeuristic interest in watching the scene disintegrate is enhanced by the performances, which are undoubtedly the focus of the piece. In Waltz, Winslet, Reilly and Foster, director Polanski has assembled some of the finest Academy Award nominees or winners of the last few decades, and it is a no-brainer that they all perform their roles admirably. Foster in particular, in an increasingly rare on-screen appearance, does not mind making herself both physically and emotionally unattractive, screeching her way through an angst-ridden feature. Reilly, on the other hand, is remarkable in just how unremarkable he is for the first half of the film, before making a dramatic turn on a dime and revealing his true form. As the uptight Waltz and Winslet gradually unwind and let it all go, quite literally in the case of Winslet and to the detriment of several coffee table books, the versatility of the actors is evident.

The claustrophobia of the setting, harking back to Polanski’s own “Apartment Trilogy”, enhances the social angst and commentary of the less-than-subtle class struggles in the film, but it also betrays the stage origins of the story. Alan’s addiction to his mobile phone, Penelope’s attachment to her art books and the composed Nancy losing it when the contents of her handbag are spilled are all indicative of this commentary. This is hardly groundbreaking stuff, and Reza’s script doesn’t necessarily alter any preconceived notions we might have about these characters. Much like the quartet in the film, our allegiances shift and reform throughout the film, but we ultimately end up not too far from where we started.

[stextbox id=”custom”]As a performance piece, Carnage is a terrific showcase for its four stars, even if it leans a little too close to the stagey side of things. A nice comedic return for Polanski.[/stextbox]

Carnage is released in Australia on 1 March 2012 from Paramount.

February 27, 2012
80s Bits: My Beautiful Laundrette

Welcome back to 80s Bits, the weekly column in which we explore the best and worst of the Decade of Shame. With guest writers, hidden gems and more, it’s truly, truly, truly outrageous.

[stextbox id=”grey” caption=”My Beautiful Laundrette (1985)” float=”true” align=”right” width=”200″]

Director: Stephen Frears

Writers(s): Hanif Kureishi

Runtime: 97 minutes

Starring: Gordon Warnecke, Daniel Day-Lewis, Saeed Jaffrey, Roshan Seth

Distributor: Mainline Pictures

Country: UK

Rating: Better Than Average Bear (?)

More 80s Bits

[/stextbox]

My Beautiful Laundrette (1985) directed by Stephen Frears (The Queen, Dangerous Liaisons) is a queer cult classic that once seen will never be forgotten. Based around the Indian community in London the film exploits issues of England in the mid 80s including minority groups, class and race segregation, drugs, poverty and crime.

The story follows Omar (Gordon Warnecke), a dutiful son to father Hussein (Roshan Seth, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom) who arranges a job with his uncle Nasser (Saeed Jaffrey) a successful business man. “Try and fix him up with a nice girl, I’m not sure his penis is in working order”. With a burst of ambition an almost mute Omar finds his confidence and blindly strides forward with his laundrette venture assisted with the money (and drugs) of his extended families corrupt side dabbling.

Omar is joined by business partner and love interest Johnny (Daniel Day-Lewis, Gangs of New York, The Last of the Mohicans) who coming from the slums of London decides to make an honest living. Together they build a glamorous laundry palace like no other with luminescent signs, cassette decks, pin ball machines, scenic murals and comfort for all.

Omar idolises Johnny and confidently includes him in all his endeavours without hesitation. There is a power shift and role reversal between the two with Omor becoming Johnny’s “boss”. “I want big money; I’m not going to be beaten down by this country. When we were at school you and your friends kicked me all around the place, and what are you doing now, washing my floors and that’s how I like it. Now get to work…or else you’re fired.”

Sexuality is subtly addressed as an issue throughout the film. During Omar and Johnny’s love scene his Uncle and mistress Rachel (Shirley Anne Field) are seen dancing simultaneously though the mirrored window of the Laundrette. Nasser and Rachel walk in on the lovers who were “Asleep, Uncle. We were shagged out.” At the request of his Uncle, Omar is asked to marry Cousin Tania (Rita Wolf). Tania, initially satisfied with being provided for, soon realises her fate and “would rather drink my own urine”.

The segregation of race, politics, the power of money and relationship dynamics are themes throughout. This is reflected in Johnny’s obedience to Omar and his needs at the expense of his own socialist values. The status of “Pakis” in the British community is portrayed as being overshadowed by the opportunities to make money. This negates any thoughts for the Ali family returning to their home country. Johnny is accepted into the Asian community and as a result is forced to choose between his new shady connections and his socialist homeless drifter past ending in violence.

[stextbox id=”custom”]My Beautiful Laundrette is a film with depth and explores conflicts from a perspective rarely depicted in its day.[/stextbox]

February 24, 2012
Review: One For the Money

It’s two for the show as Katherine Heigl has visions of a sugary Plum dancing in her head.

[stextbox id=”grey” caption=”One For the Money(2012)” float=”true” align=”right” width=”200″]

Director: Julie Anne Robinson

Writer(s): Stacy Sherman, Karen Ray, Liz Brixius

Runtime: 125 minutes

Starring: Katherine Heigl, Jason O’Mara, Daniel Sunjata, John Leguizamo, Debbie Reynolds

Distributor: Roadshow Films

Country: US

Rating: Better Than Average Bear (?)

More info

[/stextbox]

Now an explosive eighteen books into Janet Evanovich’s successful series of Stephanie Plum novels, it is surprising that the 1994 novel is only now making its way to the big screen. Reportedly sold to Columbia Pictures for over $1 million, the adaptation had been sitting in development hell for thirteen years, which Evanovich took in her stride, in a comment worth of Plum herself. “Hard to believe they’ve been sitting on this multi-million dollar franchise for all these years but go figure”.

In One For the Money, Stephanie Plum (Katherine Heigl) is an out of work lingerie saleswoman, and desperate for some cash, turns to her cousin Vinnie the bail bondsman (Patrick Fischler) for some work. With no experience, she decides to become a bounty hunter, tracking down people who failed to show for their court dates. Needing the money, she dives straight in at the deep end, former vice Joe Morelli (Jason O’Mara) who is wanted for murder, and also happens to have unceremoniously dumped her after a sexual encounter in high school. With only the help of the dashing Ranger (Daniel Sunjata), it’s up to her to bring the FTAs to justice.

Despite a setup reminiscent of every rom-com that has emerged from the factory that makes them for you in any colour (so long as its pink), One for the Money is a refreshingly smart and sassy crime comedy. Sitting somewhere between Elmore Leonard and more traditional chick flicks, the ubiquitous Heigl finds herself in one of her strongest roles to date. The film is not afraid to play her as a outspoken character, right down to her New Jersey accent, even if her world ironically revolves around the increasingly hot men that enter her life. Of course, there’s something for everyone during an extended sequence in which a naked Heigl is handcuffed to a shower rod.

A cast of eccentric characters populate One For the Money, not least of which is Plum’s family, who could spin-off into their own show, Jersey Shore: The Geriatric Years. A hilarious Debbie Reynolds (yes, Debbie Reynolds!) quite literally shoots a turkey during one memorable scene, and the presence of the always terrific John Leguizamo and seasoned character actor Fisher Stevens add to the quirkiness. The attempt at dark humour is somewhat hamstrung by the slightly sanitised version of events, dropping character elements like one character’s sexual proclivities with ducks for example. The denouement is all a bit too convenient as well, but it’s all in the spirit of the affair, making One For the Money a value proposition.

[stextbox id=”custom”]Janet Evanovich’s popular series gets off to a bright start, promising a solid series ahead of it if the characters find their audience.[/stextbox]

One For the Money was released in Australia on 16 February 2012 from Roadshow Films

February 21, 2012
Review: Love

Telling you everything you need to know in the title, Love is a light alternative to the carbon copy romantic comedies that populate the cinemas at this time of year.

[stextbox id=”grey” caption=”Love (2012)” float=”true” align=”right” width=”200″]

Director: Doze Niu

Writer(s): Doze Niu, Li-Ting Tseng, Wang Qian

Runtime: 125 minutes

Starring: Mark Jua, Vicky Zhao, Shu Qi, Yi-Han Chen, Ethan Ruan, Amber Kuo, Eddie Pen

Distributor: China Lion

Country: Taiwan/China

Rating: Better Than Average Bear (?)

More info

[/stextbox]

Taiwanese director Doze Niu has led a life mostly in the spotlight, beginning his career as an actor at the age of nine and nominated for his first Golden Horse Award at seventeen. His celebrity status got him bullied at school, until he became friends with a mob boss’ son by the name of “Teapot”. The hardships continued at home with a father diagnosed with a degenerative motor neuron disease. With his films What on Earth Have I Done Wrong? and Monga, the director incorporated elements of his life to great effect, but with this latest movie, he is about celebrating all things romantic.

Love is a series of tangentially connected stories featuring an all-star ensemble cast, including megastars Shu Qi and Vicki Zhao, structured in a manner not too dissimilar to Hollywood’s hyperlinked Valentine’s Day, New Year’s Eve or a slightly less comic All’s Well That Ends Well. Yi Jia (Yi-Han Chen) is a college bicycle team captain who finds out she is pregnant by her best friend’s boyfriend Kai (Eddie Pen), shattering her friend Ni (Amber Kuo) and causing the couple to break up. Yet Kai is devoted to Ni, and determined to get her back. Meanwhile Ni’s father, Lu (Doze Niu) leaves a high-flying lifestyle with his glamourous actress girlfriend Zoe Fang (Shu Qi), but he is unable to commit and her her lover Mark (Mark Jua) is unable to love. Her outlook on life changes when she meets Kuan (Ethan Ruan), a waiter with a speech impediment. Meanwhile, successful businessman Mark encounters Xiao-Ye Jin (Vicky Zhao), a bumbling real-estate agent with a young child in need of a father.

The tone for the film is set early by a stunningly shot opening sequence, which appears to be a single fluid take that runs for almost 15 minutes. Set to a happy-go-lucky tune about all things love, the sequence gives us everything we need to know about these characters and their motivations in one handy bite-sized piece. Love never gets any deeper than surface level, but it doesn’t treat the affair a cynical marketing tool either. The relationships that develop between the leads feel like genuine ones, and although we have seen thematically similar stories before, Mark Jua and Vicki Zhao come off as the more naturally suited in these kinds of pairings.

Love, as the title would imply, is an incredibly sweet affair. If the storyline isn’t sugary enough for you, the seemingly ubiquitous presence of Häagen-Dazs® ice cream will be the sweetener. Really: it’s everywhere, even on the back of magazines central to the plot. Yet there is little to dislike about Love, and the bright and breezy film injects a much-needed sense of joy into this crazy little thing we call love.

[stextbox id=”custom”]It will be difficult to not feel at least a tiny bit of love in the cookies (and cream) of your heart in this enjoyable scoop of a romance.[/stextbox]

Love is released in Australia on 23 February 2011 from China Lion.

February 20, 2012