Movie review - "Ocean's 8" (2018) **1/2 (warning: spoilers)

The trailer for this was fantastic - bright, fun, with a knock out cast, funky music and great one liners. It looked like it was going to be a great time in the cinema.

But it was curiously flat. It never had the energy or pizzaz of the trailer. The cast are all there doing their thing - you can't say any of them are bad. Sandra Bullock holds the lead with her star power, Cate Blanchett is a useful sidekick, Helena Bonham Carter and Anne Hathaway are fun in the showiest parts. I wish Mindy Kaling and Rhinanna had been given more to do. I wasn't sure what Sarah Paulsen's role in the heist was which is a shame since she was set up so promisingly.

The film lacks a romantic interest. There's the guy Bullock is getting revenge on - but nothing moving forward. It just would've been fun. Maybe use the James Corden character - expand that out. But they don't.

The last fifteen minutes things perk up when Hathaway comes more involved and so you see the film for what it could be. But it's really... ordinary. Some nice clothes.

Script review - "The Limey" by Lem Dobbs (warning: spoilers)

I haven't seen this film yet; the script is quite a lively piece of entertainment, about a London hit man who gets out of prison and visits Los Angeles to avenge the death of the daughter. There's not much mystery - Wilson goes after Valentine, who was involved... he has a fling with a woman who knew his daughter.

There's a nice bit at the end where Valentine admits he did it because the daughter didn't want him to be a criminal.  There's a fantastic bit where Wilson is thrown out of a building, goes in and shoot a bunch of people. Some enjoyable character interplay - Wilson talking about his life, Valentine talking about the sixties, Emma discussing her acting career.

It feels a little on the light side, like it sacks a subplot or a twist or something. It's lively though and has some fantastic character stuff.

Movie review - "Behind the Candelabra" (2013) *****

A nice reminder that Hollywood hasn't forgotten to make entertaining dramas with movie stars and a decent director - although it was HBO, and not a studio, which funded this. It's a brighter version of Sunset Boulevard if you can imagine such a thing.

Michael Douglas is superb as Liberace, camp as a row of tents, brilliant on the keys, world weary, touching, smart, wryly funny... by no means a monster, but a man of immense talent struggling against a prejudicial society (one that discriminates against gays and the bald), capable of great kindness but corrupted by his power.

Matt Damon is equally good in a less showy role - a young, not particularly smart, earnest young man, who thinks he goes into this eyes wide open but ultimately can't handle it. There are also superb turns from Rob Lowe (his best movie performance yet... magnificent make up), Dan Aykroyd, Debbie Reynolds (nearly unrecognisable as Liberace's mother... she has a great scene involving a poker machine), and Scott Bakula.

Director Steven Soderbergh's fondness for soft lighting is perfectly at home in the world of Vegas tack. Excellent script from Richard La Gravenese, full of funny lines and human touches. My only real gripe was that it went on too long.

Movie review - "Magic Mike" (2012) ***1/2

As artfully a constructed star vehicle as anything in Clarke Gable's day, with the added appeal that Channing Tatum really was a stripper. He's kind, likeable, funny, can dance, good looking, shows his backside in the first couple of seconds (with two women in bed - how's that for a star entrance), is nice to young Alex Pettyfer, just wants someone to settle down with and leave stripping, wants to make driftwood out of stuff he finds on the beach.... swoon.

In all seriousness Tatum is pretty good - he's clearly comfortable in the role, does the dances well, has some good support. Matthew McConaughey continues to defy those who are convinced he's a rom com specialist with an engaging performance as the old stripper who is Tatum's boss (I did feel he would have used another scene just for him), and Alex Pettyfer isn't annoying for the first time I've seen him. These three provide a solid foundation for the movie and ensure it always has somewhere to go.

Some really good scenes, and confident handling; it looks great with it's bright Florida sunshine and dingy clubs (how the hell did this only cost $7 million?). Cody Horn - the love interest - starts off impressive and interesting but we soon realise she doesn't have anywhere to go apart from giving sass to Tatum and worrying about her brother, but Olivia Munn is great as the sophisticated psych student into sex games with Tatum. There's also a rich array of support characters - the other strippers are all well cast (their dodgy dances are funny) and the casting of the girls who go to the shows is spot on (giggling, screaming, flirting, etc.)

At times this was reminiscent of Shampoo (Tatum tries to get a bank loan but is knocked back) but this is a different sort of movie, a lot more positive and "Hollywood". But it's enjoyable and deserved its success.

Movie review - "Haywire" (2011) **1/2

This would have been more fun if it was trashier - good on Steven Soderbergh for trying to make a commercial action thriller with a female lead, and attempting to launch a new star in Gina Carano, but the plot will be familiar to anyone who watched a lot of action movies in the 80s. Carano is a kind-of government agent who is set up by - gasp - her own organisation and who try to kill her.

They try to jazz it up a little with some non-linear structuring but that doesn't help. Nor does shying away from fully embracing the cliches to give cheesy emotion - at least that would be something. It all feels a bit flat.

Carano is cute and a terrific fighter, though clearly inexperienced as an actor. There's a divine cast, but Michael Fassbender and Ewan McGregor are called upon to do fight scenes and don't do them that well - Channing Tatum is very believable though. Michael Douglas and Antonio Banderas look old, and Michael Angarano seems as though he's going to have a big part but then kind of disappears.

Some of the fight scenes are very well done but a lot of the excitement feels drained out of this movie. Carano would have been better off making her star debut in some straight to DVD action trash.

Movie review - "Out of Sight" (1998) ****

A fascinating case study - a movie where they made all the right decisions, brought back Steven Sodebergh from Hollywood exile I guess you could call it, had two exciting new stars in career-defining performances, a rich galaxy of support actors, an excellent script from a "hot" novelist, romance and action, etc - but the public didn't come.Well, that's not the whole story - they came, but not in large numbers,and the film has remained an audience favourite ever since, not to mention providing a massive boost to the careers of Sodebergh, Clooney,Lopez, etc. So quality in the long run does out. The only reason I can think of why this didn't attract bigger audiences on initial release was that Clooney and Lopez weren't as big stars then - make it with them no wand it would go gangbusters. Or maybe the essentially sad nature of the romance counted against it. Anyway it's a marvellous piece of entertainment, a tribute to everyone who made it.

Book review – “Rebels on the backlot” by Sharon Waxman

Waxman tries to do an “Easy Riders Raging Bulls” for Gen X, concentrating on six hot directors of the 90s: Tarantino, David O Russell, Fincher, PTA, Sodebergh, Spike Jonze, with emphasis on the director’s personalities and love lives. Problem is, its too soon to get a real idea of the impact of these directors and rather than concentrating on their careers Waxman instead rather gives case studies of specific films – a lot of time is taking up on the making of Boogie Nights, Being John Malkovich, Three Kings and Fight Club, for instance, whereas other movies from the directors are passed by quickly (why not tell us a bit more about Se7en or Adaptation or Kill Bill?). Those are good films and the book is worth reading from that point of view.

There was a fair bit I didn’t know – Clooney and Russell came to blows making Three Kings, Jonze got John Malkovich to appear in his film by calling on father in law Francis Ford Coppola to make a phone call, Sodebergh had an erratic love life, Aussie producer Ross Bell got Fight Club optioned by having actors read a copy of the book, taping that and playing it to a producer, Russell Crowe was interested in the project and had a bigger fan club so probably would have made the film a bigger hit, Tarantino spent a lot of the late 90s smoking cones watching crappy old movies. And its always worth being reminded how hard it is to get a good movie through the Hollywood system.

But the book is full of irritating inaccuracies (Peter Jackson is not Australia) and hyperbole (there was such a thing as independent film before the 80s – heard of John Cassavetes?). Waxam also takes an annoying narky tone towards her subjects, tsk tsking Tarantino for snubbing his former video mates (maybe they were losers – although it was mean to dump his manager), creating the “myth” of his poor upbringing and not giving his mother lots of money (OK he hyped it a little and his mum was an achiever – but he still had no father, his mother went through several relationships, he was raised by his grandma for a few years when mum couldn’t hack it, and went away for a year to Tennessee – it wasn’t the most stable upbringing), and for crying out loud – this goes for most writers on Hollywood – stop taking writers claims “I wrote most of that script” at face value, you have to actually read the different versions.

She also takes PTA to task for being an egomaniac (which sounds very believable – his films do need cutting) and Clooney for continually going on about the fight with Russell and Russell for hiring a publicist. She seems to like Sodebergh, Jonze and Fincher. There is a lot better book to be written about this period.