Movie review - "The Mission" (1986) ***1/2 (warning: spoilers)

 Smart. Literate. Gorgeous to look at. Top cast. Magnificent locations. Divine score. 

Doesn't quite work. Jeremy Irons and Robert de Niro look too much alike. The original idea, for the priest to be an older actor, should have been persisted with. Irons is fine by the way. But he doesn't feel like a real person. Just a good priest.

Ray McNally feels real. So too does Robert de Niro. Liam Neeson. The other slave guy.

The depiction of the locals is unforgiveable. They are childlike simpletons. 

It's a shame because the film has such a great driver - slaver tries to redeem himself, returns to violence, defends native people against colonisers. That's Avatar. But in Avatar the local culture had a voice. It was personified.

If there had been a proper Indian character who had a relationship with the men - a firebrand and a peacelover, both women, say - this would have really resonated. The movie needed some women in it (there's one briefly, she's in love with de Niro's brother Aidan Quinn, but that's it). Also they could have ended the film on some hope. Having de Niro and Irons die felt really men. Maybe it would've been okay if some dimentional Indian character survived.

So much great stuff but they didn't nail the story. 

Script review - "Love Actually" by Richard Curtis

  Curtis said he restructured this in the edit maybe he did but it feels very close - Nicole Kdiman referenced instead of Claudia Schiffer and there's the African sequence which was filmed but cut.

There's a sub industry of hot takes about the flaws of this film, many from the US who I think are annoyed their country is described as a bully. And the fat jokes clunk and they could've jettisoned Colin in Wisconsin and yes flaws flaws.

But it's very sweet - grieving widow and step son have a lovely bond and satisfying pay off, the Prime Minister plot is (fat jokes aside) charming, the married woman stuff is great, no it makes no sense Sarah doesn't schtup Karl but it works, the flabby friend-in-love-with-mate's-wife story is redeemed by the cards at the end. So many iconic moments.  

Movie review - "Excalibur" (1981) ****

 Silly but fun. Great integrity. Tremendous cast of future stars but it's Helen Mirren who steals the show. Great spookiness. They could've made Arthur and Percy look more different.

Movie review - "Silence" (2016) ***1/2

 It's got a fascinating world - Japanese Christians being persecuted in the 17th century - and a terrific set up two priests (Andrew Garfield, Adam Driver, both ideally cast) set out to find their mentor (Liam Neeson) who has gone missing. (Sidebar: I'm surprised WW2 Allied propaganda didn't use stories of persuctions of Christians in Japan. Maybe they did.)

There's also an intriguing Japanese character,a. former Christian who repented who is their guide. But once that's set up in the first ten minutes the film doesn't really have any more ideas. Japanese Christians are glad to meet them, but also scared. They are persecuted and killed. Martin Scorsese gets to do lots of violent scenes that he likes of Christians being crucified, burned, tortured, decapitated, in amognst the long running time and minimal female presence.

I really liked the ambiable Japanese politician who does great evil, an all too recognisable type from history. It's well acted, looks terrific, with lovely photography, sets, costumes, etc.

It just suffers from lack of structure and character development.  The last third is strong. I really liked it. It was dramatic conflict not just repetitive torture. It's just that middle section.

Garfield and Driver go full actor. Both seem like priests, Garfield goes believably nutty. I wonder if the film would've done better had they just thrown rocks at him for half an hour. (How long did Driver go without sex for?) I think it was a mistake to allow them to have Portugese accents. Also the piece could've done with some humour - it comes in the end, I guess.

I wonder if Mel Gibson ever considered filming this novel it feels right up his alley with its suffering and violence. He might've ensured a better structure too

Movie review - "Husbands and Wives" (1992) ****1/2

 Woody was really hanging his dick out on this one.A remarkable piece of work - self exposing, fierce, honest, bold. All his flaws are on display though not endorsed... he would lose this skill/desire.  I love how at this stage he was keen on experimenting with visual looks... he would lose that skill/desire.

The lead performances are superb. Sydney Pollack is magnificent in one of his biggest parts as a successful businessman looking for meaning with a fair streak of c**t in him. The woman who plays his aerobics instructor girlfriend is terrific and their domestic violence scene is fantastic. Mia Farrow is superb - ditto Liam Neeson, Judy Davis, Woody himself, Juliette Lewis.

Every now and then you go 'hang on, Woody is that how it is".... the nasty depiction of Mia Farrow's passive aggressiveness, showing Lewis to be a middle aged man-hungry mantrap. But he puts it out there.

Movie review - "The Lego Movie" (2014) ****

 A delight. Funny, clever, inventive. Great characters, doused in jokes. A really good movie.

Movie review - "Men in Black: International" (2019) **

 I'm not a massive fan of this franchise but anyway here goes. Chris Hemsworth and Tessa Thompson were a great time in Thor Ragnarok but both were playing very specific, big characters - here it's less clear. She's a sort of Bridget Jones/Hermoine but not really and he's a sort of Han Solo but not really. They both quip. There's a lot of quips.

Decent effects and some cool action. But it lacks action. The reveal of who the baddy is is tired. So is the Europe setting.

It's not awful just feels a little bleh.

Script review - "Chloe" (2008) by Erin Cressidia Wilson (warning: spoilers)

Not bad erotic thriller/drama from Wilson which I read because I loved Wilson's script for The Girl on The Train. This isn't as good but is still sharply written. It has an intriguing premise - a woman is convinced her husband is cheating and pays a hooker to seduce him.

You can have more fun reading erotic tales written by women (I have anyway) because you can go "hey if it turns you on" and don't have to worry about (as much) dodginess. It's the basic story that I felt a little underwhelmed by - it lacked a twist or two. I think the husband should have genuinely been a cheater and one of the family should have died. Just to give it more oomph and deliver on its promise. Though it was cool the wife slept with the hooker.

Movie review - "The Bounty" (1984) ***

No one seems to remember or care much for this version in part I think because it flopped but also because it was going to be made by David Lean in two parts and has a bit of "oh if only" aura about it.

It's intelligent, looks great, has location shooting in Tahiti, and a real life Bounty replica. The film is full of people about to become big stars - Mel Gibson (a kind of star, the hottest thing in Hollywood at the time), Tony Hopkins (famous but pre Silence of the Lambs), Daniel Day Lewis (quite a big role), Liam Neeson (quite a big role).

The movie never really comes alive. The local Tahitans are either noble savages or nubile women - the character of Fletcher Christian's wife has never been anything in movies other than a doe eyed topless smiling ninny.

Maybe it was a mistake to do it in flashback. The stuff on the boat is good. It suffers from the anti climax factor most Bounty stories have. 

It looks fantastic. It's smart. It lacks a little X factor but this probably should be better remembered. It's very well cast.

Movie review - "Taken" (2008) ***

An unexpected box office monster, in part because it is so effective on a primordial level - a lonely single middle aged man who only lives for his teenage daughter listens as that daughter is kidnapped and sets about getting her back. The set up is familiar to a 1986 film, Targets, where Gene Hackman was revealed to be a kick arse killed. Hackman had to rescue his wife and was helped by son Matt Dillon. Here Neeson has to act mostly on his own, although he does have the benefit of some old associates he can draw upon.

There's a lot in this movie that people will find offensive - basically the notion of daughters as property, all the dick measuring, the constant fear of foreigners (Paris, Albanians, Arabs), the fact the daughter gets to live because she's a virgin but not the slutty best friend. On a craft level it's frustrating the movie doesn't really develop - it's like a video game with Liam Neeson moving from one level to the next. There's not even the one villain - new ones keep coming along (the good looking Peter, the guy Liam speaks to on the phone, a smarmy American, a dodgy Arab). 

I kept expecting to see a character like Jeffrey Hunter in The Searchers to flesh out Liam's character and provide more complexity but it never happened. Indeed, the story was disappointingly linear, the only real twist being the betrayal from Liam's old mate - I kept expecting say some relationship between Liam and that girl he rescued, or to use the step father character more (all he does is lend Liam a plane when really he could've got a normal flight), or the wife more.

Still, it is extremely stylish with some excellent action sequences and Liam proves to be an ideal hero - battered, smart, soulful, haunted.

Movie review - "Entourage" (2015) **

The not-eagerly-awaited film version of the TV show plays out a lot like an episode from the later dud seasons: one or two moments but basically underwhelming, with seemingly little understanding about why the series was a success, despite being under the stewardship of creator Doug Ellin.... which leads one to surmise that the behind the scenes X factor must have been Rob Weiss. It was Weiss who was heavily involved with the strong first couple of seasons before heading off for other pastures, after which the show went downhill - he's credited with helping on the story for this film, but the blame has to lie with Ellin.

Like the later seasons, unlike the first, it's very easy being a movie star in Entourage - money just gets thrown at Vinnie Chase and he never lacks adoring women or fans. The "challenge" here is him turning director, but so there's no stress the film skips over that, and deals with post production - he needs another $30 million or so to finish it, and head of studio Ari Gold needs to get it from financier Billy Bob Thornton. Thornton sends his idiotic son Hayley Joel Osmet to Hollywood to supervise - this plot is the best thing about the film, but even that's undercooked.

Under-developed subplots abound - E's character has totally changed: instead of being the monogamous old fashioned guy who was devoted to Sloan, he's separated from her even though she's pregnant with his baby and is having random sex with hot women who can't act; there's a terrible scene where two of them meet up and turn out to have known each other that has no impact on the plot. Turtle is now so rich he doesn't have to work (they invoke the terrible tequila story several times); he has an OK romance with a fighting champ girl but it doesn't have any interesting developments/complications. Lloyd is getting married though we never really get to know his fiancee; there's a nice moment where he asks Ari to give him away but nothing much is done with that. Mrs Ari whinges a lot yet again despite their happy ending at the end of the series. Drama is always fun though again I wish more could have been done about his storyline. Vinnie just sort of glides through the film never seeming to care that much about his movie - he's never convincing for five seconds as a director; we get no sense of the passion that say drove Kevin Costner and Mel Gibson to make their films.

Entourage had a tentative relationship with reality which this throws out the window - Vinnie wanting to direct; not wanting to show anyone his film. Even small things ring false like the two hookers in Osmet's room when Ari storms in - there was opportunity for comedy/poignancy there, or at least some sort of reality (they could complain, ask Ari to join, offer up a head shot to Ari) but they just keep doing their thing.

Many cameos including lots from American sports I didnt recognise. Some of the funnier ones included Liam Neeson at the traffic lights, Kelsey Grammar walking out of therapy. A lot of other ones seem random and kind of pointless like Arnie Hammer.

The actors are mostly lethargic except for Jeremy Piven, who is always good. A lot of the male leads seem to have had plastic surgery and/or hair transplants. There's lots of product placement, few good gags, some impressive photography and groupings of extras and I liked the credit sequence. There's no decent drama or character work.

Movie review - "Trumbo" (2007) ***

The best known members of the Hollywood Ten would probably be Ring Lardner Jnr, Edward Dmytryk and Trumbo. Trumbo has a special place in history because of his justly famous letters which reveal him to be one of the genuinely nicest and liberal of the Ten - Richard Corliss in his book on screenwriters Talking Pictures would praise Trumbo's letters but criticise his screenplays. Trumbo is also the writer with the greatest fall from grace, going from one of the top paid writers in Hollywood to be on the blacklist - but also with the best comeback, winning two Oscars secretly (Roman Holiday and The Brave One) and the first to be credited again with Exodus and Spartacus.

This is an unusual sort of film - part documentary, with the standard talking heads (including Trumbo's kids) and footage from the time (eg the ten being self righteous at the hearings, home movie work) - interspersed with famous actors reading from letters to and from Trumbo: Josh Lucas, Liam Neeson, Brian Dennehy, Donald Sutherland, Nathan Lane, Joan Allen, Paul Giamatti, David Straithairn. It's a little distracting to be honest - the latter piece feels a bit too theatrical for me (the letters have been turned into a play), and you can see the actors Acting.. I felt myself watching and going "wow Josh Lucas has good teethe" instead of concentrating on the content.

It remains interesting and Trumbo is a fascinating, admirable figure. Even he couldn't give up Hollywood money and concentrate on novels, though.

Movie review - "Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues" (2013) ***

Pretty good sequel, if not as funnier as the original - it also doesn't have as "fun" a story. The first movie was about a good thing happening in news history, i.e. women being allowed to anchor the news; this is about a bad thing happening in news history i.e. the dumbing down of news. The team of Ferrell and McKay often like to make sharp satirical points in their movies (something for which they never get enough credit for, I feel) - but here it's a bit depressing. (It's kind of like the two magazine war mini series in Australia - the first one was about women's sexual liberation the second one was about trash).

The satire is very strong and there are some excellent gangs. It's also got a nice "comedy of remarriage" plot between Will Ferrell and Christina Applegate, and their son, plus some excellent music (mostly soft rock). And the performances are all strong, not a weak link in the bunch.

On the down side, it's very long (almost two hours) and feels it; there are too many characters, some of whom feel entirely superfluous (why didn't they combine Meagan Good and Dylan Baker's characters) or ill-defined (Megan Good starts off tough, then is sort of evil, then sort of good). Steve Carrell gets a great romance with Kristen Wiig and Josh Lawson is an effective villain as a Junior Rupert Murdoch, but there's no subplot for Paul Rudd and David Koechner, which is a shame (it would have only taken an extra scene or two). And after a while all the cameos stop being fun and start being annoying.

Movie review - "The Grey" (2012) ***

A very well made film with some good actors, stunning photography, wonderful location work and strong direction...  but at the end of the day it's just about a bunch of guys in the snow trying not to be eaten by wolves. Yeah, they add stuff about the meaning of life, and what it's like to die, and a few other philosophical discussions, but still it's man against nature and wolves. A shooting gallery movie.

There's nothing wrong with that, as long as the action is good, which it is, and the deaths vary, which they do. The wolves are a scary threat, and Liam Neeson has the tormented male action hero down pat by now. But the story doesn't really develop - it's one person killed at a time, with no real twists and turns, and differences among the group raised then resolved quite quickly. (NB Liam Neeson's plan actually turns out to be a bad one in hindsight - they would have been better staying at the plane).

The fact its a star vehicle lessens the suspense since you know Liam will be alive at least for the final confrontation. Also the other characters aren't really well defined - there's the guy with glasses, the one called Diaz... but it's hard to tell who is who really when they are running through know and their faces are buried underneath snow, beards and parkas.

Movie review - "Battleship" (2012) ** (warning: spoilers)

Not as appalling as I feared it would be, and probably great if you are a 12 year old boy. It is clunky in spots, Taylor Kitsch is not a movie star, Liam Neeson is barely in the movie, the special effects aren't very good (it feels like a cartoon), there are dumb lines and scenes (e.g. the soccer game), some of it is achingly predictable (e.g. knowing that brother is going to be a dead duck).

But there are effective moments, which really work - the redemption of a crippled veteran, Taylor realising he's in charge of the whole show, co-operation with the Japanese (they probably could have done another nationality here), the friendship between the American and the Japanese captain, the battleship sequence (only a small section of the film), and most of all using the USS Missouri to take on the aliens, manned by veterans (NB why not make one of them a character).

This isn't a good movie, but once things start blowing up I did keep watching, which is a lot more than I expected.

Movie review - "Kinsey" (2004) ***1/2

The life of the sex researcher who so livened up the 50s (and inspired a generation of novelists writing racy airport novels) treated with warmth, humour and compassion. There's lots of sympathy for Kinsey, who did much to shed light on sex research (solving a bunch of problems...but with his information, creating a whole bunch of new ones). 

 

Liam Neeson is strong as the dogged, near-fanatical Kinsey - watching him with the child molesterer, the time where Kinsey says "I never said you should go do everything" feels a bit tacked on. Wasn't Kinsey's big thing is his non-judgemental attitude? (A bit more conflict about this,making him less a hero, might have made the film for interesting). Very good acting from the support cast. Laura Linney is always so warm and loving that she makes the slightly unconventional Kinsey marriage seem so natural.

Movie review - "Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace" (1998) ***

Watching the film several years after its debut was an interesting experience: it holds up OK, but is still irritating. There are positives: Liam Neeson and Ewen McGregor add some class as jedis, Darth Maul is a top notch villain and their fight at the end a worthy addition to the films (in previous jedis the fighters had always been mismatched - here its three at the top of their game), its kind of clever how the future Emperor lures everyone into his trap, Natalie Portman is beautiful, it moves fast and there is plenty of action and explosions, the final ceremony is rousing, John Williams' score in good shape.

OK, now for the negatives - you know the film isn't going to be strong when the heroes disappear into the "ventilator shaft" within the first few minutes, Jar Jar Binks is irritating, Natalie Portman gives a poor performance, the much-vaunted CGI special effects look at times like simple animation (models at least have "weight"), it's lazy how they try to incorporate R2D2 and C3PO into the story (a little kid in the middle of nowhere needs to build a protocol droid), its irritating how the Force is "in the blood, and very dodgy how the kid gets involved in the battle at the end just like in a video game.

The whole film feels as if Lucas was wrestling between his genuine filmmaking gifts and his desire to make a much cash as possible by shoving in "audience pleasing" elements (characters from the earlier films who don't automatically belong here, video game friendly action sequences).

Movie review - "Kingdom of Heaven" (2005) **

After conquering Ancient Rome with Gladiator, Ridley Scott no doubt licked his lips at the idea of taking on the middle ages, but he drops it. There's plenty of stunning visuals, and the setting of the crusades makes it interesting, but the story has problems. Mostly in that the story is so fair to Muslims that they really should have been the heroes - these invades coming into their land and acting beastly, killing people, being treacherous, shouldn't have been there in the first place. Saladin is so nice that the big siege at the end is totally pointless. Orlando Bloom should have just surrendered, same result would have happened, more people would have lived. 

Orlando isn't an engaging hero - he's buffed up, tries hard, is conscientious... but is still too vanilla. Jeremy Irons, Brendon Gleeson and Liam Neeson are professional but we've seen them in these roles too often (Neeson played a similar role the same year in Batman Begins ditto Gleeson in Troy); Edward Norton however kicks a goal as the leper king, as does Eva Green as his tormented sister.

Movie review - "The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion the Witch & the Wardrobe" (2005) ***

Workman-like version of CS Lewis' famous novel which surprisingly has never been given big budget treatment before - in a way, probably just as well, since it allowed computer technology to create some impressive talking animals. It feels like the Harry Potter adaptations: solid rather than inspired, sticking close to the source but lacking the source's magic. Tilda Swinton is good as the witch; the kids playing Peter and Susan are bland pair of potential tween idols, looking as though they stepped off a cover of Girl Zone or some such magazine; the kids playing Edmond and Lucy are a little better - they can at least act - although it must be admitted they at least have characters to play. Liam Neeson is perhaps not totally right as Aslam. Will they make sequels? I'm guessing they will be direct to video ones.

Movie review - "K19: the Widowmaker" (2004) ** 1/2

The classic case of a film that should have had a smaller budget and more integrity for its story - but instead they cast Harrison Ford and pumped needless millions into it. This is based on a true story which is gripping, but it doesn't make an ideal star vehicle, at least not for Harrison The sub captain is a driven man and Ford isn't that good doing driven, his thing is playing stressed out people caught up in events beyond their control (Indiana Jones, Han Solo, Jack Ryan, the Fugitive - they're all really stressed). 

Having said that it looks fantastic and there are some effective moments, notably when the crew go into a leaky nuclear reactor core. This is amazing stuff. I wish I could read the original Louis Nowra script. (NB A thought - has there even been a film about Russians that has been successful at the US box office apart from Dr Zhivago? Buggered if I can think of one.)