There's been a few good movies coming out of WA for a while now - this is one, an intense, testosterone driven look at the last few hours of the world. A meteor has hit and everyone is going to die so people are reacting in crazy ways - prayers, looting, random acts of sex, drugs and violence. Nathan Phillips just wants to get wasted even though his pretty girlfriend (Jessica De Gouw) wants to spend the last few hours together. It's a hell of an introduction, with the foot put on the throttle - and things get more intense when he rescues a young girl from being raped and decides to take her to her family.
There's not going to be much of a happy ending in this movie, but it gets points for not whimping out - Phillips discovering his sister and hubby have killed their kids and then themselves, a neighbour being hacked to death on the street, the little girl decides to stay with her dead family rather than Phillips.
It's a very blokey bloke look at the end of the world - drugs, partying, speeding cars, heroically saving little girls, not wanting to commit to your girlfriend, avoiding psycho exes, Russian roulette, reluctantly seeing your mother.
Nathan Phillips gives a strong performance as does Angourie Rice as the girl; there are good cameos by Dan Henshal, Sarah Snook, Lynette Curran and Jess DeGouw. It's beautifully shot and scored; the script could have done maybe with more of a story instead of being a collection of scenes, but they are strong scenes.
Saturday, August 01, 2015
Book review - "Clint: The Life and Legend" by Patrick McGilligan (2002)
A controversial book when it came out because it took a much harsher view on Eastwood than we normally hear about - charges which demanded to be taken seriously because McGilligan is one of our major film biographers. McGilligan does his typically excellent, professional job - he does plenty of research, there are lots of interviews.
It's just his judgements feel a little... cranky, maybe? Exasperated? McGilligan seems to get really annoyed with the media and critics who easily swallow the Eastwood myth - he's publicity shy, he's a feminist movie maker, he's a great movie maker, he's a great American. I felt McGilligan was a little unfair on the critics and Eastwood himself and perhaps unduly influenced by fawning attitudes of the press.
I should add though that McGilligan provides enough facts for the reader to draw their own conclusions. My own take was Eastwood doesn't come across that badly - a bit ruthless and vindictive, sure; tight with the buck, absolutely. But he is surrounded by people who are always wanting a piece of him - all these "betrayed" friends and associates could try to make money off other projects. Yes he had a big ego, like every Hollywood star. But his survival at the top is remarkable - as are the creative risks he continued to take: Breezy, Play Misty for Me, Every Which Way But Loose, Bronco Billy, Black Hunter White Heart... these were not safe choices.
Anyway back to the book - its superb on Eastwood's family history and early years, especially him breaking into Hollywood and the large number of people who helped him (during the first decade he really coasted in life on his looks). Very thorough on Rawhide and the Leone Westerns. If it feels less strong in the stuff on the 70s through to 90s it may be because that material is more familiar. A strong book nonetheless.
It's just his judgements feel a little... cranky, maybe? Exasperated? McGilligan seems to get really annoyed with the media and critics who easily swallow the Eastwood myth - he's publicity shy, he's a feminist movie maker, he's a great movie maker, he's a great American. I felt McGilligan was a little unfair on the critics and Eastwood himself and perhaps unduly influenced by fawning attitudes of the press.
I should add though that McGilligan provides enough facts for the reader to draw their own conclusions. My own take was Eastwood doesn't come across that badly - a bit ruthless and vindictive, sure; tight with the buck, absolutely. But he is surrounded by people who are always wanting a piece of him - all these "betrayed" friends and associates could try to make money off other projects. Yes he had a big ego, like every Hollywood star. But his survival at the top is remarkable - as are the creative risks he continued to take: Breezy, Play Misty for Me, Every Which Way But Loose, Bronco Billy, Black Hunter White Heart... these were not safe choices.
Anyway back to the book - its superb on Eastwood's family history and early years, especially him breaking into Hollywood and the large number of people who helped him (during the first decade he really coasted in life on his looks). Very thorough on Rawhide and the Leone Westerns. If it feels less strong in the stuff on the 70s through to 90s it may be because that material is more familiar. A strong book nonetheless.
Movie review - "Gosford Park" (2001) *****
A wonderful movie, perhaps Robert Altman's best - he has an entirely fresh setting (a mansion in the early 1930s), a new - for him at anyway - genre (Agatha Christie type murder), a superb script by Julian Fellows, a complex subject matter (class system of the time), and a sensational cast. He keeps his indulgences under control and focuses on tackling things with a fresh, withering eye.
Everyone is so good - Maggie Smith's bitchy aristocrat, Kelly MacDonald's sweet little maid, Clive Owen's brooding man of mystery, Helen Mirren's devoted maid (heartbreaking at the end with Eileen Atkins), Kirsten Scott Thomas' sensual lady of the house, Michael Gambon's horrible aristocrat (with his little dog everywhere), Emily Watson's wise old maid (I predict she'd wind up as a top Hollywood executive or a leading madam), Bob Balaban's pushy producer, Camilla Rutherford's dopey aristocrat, Tom Hollander's panicky son in law, Alan Bates' corrupted butler, Richard E Grant's campy and vengeful footman, Jeremy Northam's Ivor Novello, Eileen Atkins' lioness cook. Even Ryan Philippe is good as an annoying bisexual actor.
It's consistently entertaining and interesting - it has a social point, some marvellous dialogue, and a decent story. A masterpiece.
Everyone is so good - Maggie Smith's bitchy aristocrat, Kelly MacDonald's sweet little maid, Clive Owen's brooding man of mystery, Helen Mirren's devoted maid (heartbreaking at the end with Eileen Atkins), Kirsten Scott Thomas' sensual lady of the house, Michael Gambon's horrible aristocrat (with his little dog everywhere), Emily Watson's wise old maid (I predict she'd wind up as a top Hollywood executive or a leading madam), Bob Balaban's pushy producer, Camilla Rutherford's dopey aristocrat, Tom Hollander's panicky son in law, Alan Bates' corrupted butler, Richard E Grant's campy and vengeful footman, Jeremy Northam's Ivor Novello, Eileen Atkins' lioness cook. Even Ryan Philippe is good as an annoying bisexual actor.
It's consistently entertaining and interesting - it has a social point, some marvellous dialogue, and a decent story. A masterpiece.
Movie review - "This Thing Called Love" (1992) **1/2
An odd sort of a movie - part romance, part ensemble piece about friendship, part musical, part star vehicle for Samantha Mathis. It's not hard to see why it wasn't a big hit - on the other hand you can see too why some people would like it a lot. It's got a good heart and features one of River Phoenix's last performances, plus one of Sandra Bullock's first, and occasionally manages to be something sweet and interesting.
It starts off clunkily, with Mathis arriving in Nashville to make it as a singer-songwriter, with what seems to be very rudimentary direction and some really awkward scenes. But it gets better as it goes along (or maybe I got more used to what the director was trying to do) - those long takes Bogdanovich likes to do were particularly effective, and I wish the whole movie had been full of them.
The other movie of the director's this reminded me most of was They All Laughed - the easy banter and sense of camraderie amongst the characters (Howard Hawks influenced no doubt), the unexpected warmth from strangers (the policeman who pitches his songs, the person crashed into by Dermot Mulroney who is excited for Mulroney to hear his song on the radio, the girls watching River Phoenix propose), the use of country music.
Maybe at times he was going for a Last Picture Show vibe as well but the characters aren't as strong - Mathis basically plays a good girl, Phoenix a brooding bad boy who is kind of good, Bullock a warm comic relief, Mulroney a nice guy who likes to drink... Either these characters could have been fleshed out more, or we could have done with a few more characters (They All Laughed had one or two more).
Also I felt Mathis wasn't quite strong enough to carry the movie. I had a crush on her in the early 90s as did a lot of people who saw her in Pump Up the Volume - but she doesn't have the warmth and charm of Bullock. I'm nor surprised she got a leading role after Volume - on the other hand, I'm not surprised she wasn't offered too many more. (Though it should be said that attractive male actors get more chances than female).
Oh and I wasn't wild about the music. But still, it's a charming tale in it's own way.
It starts off clunkily, with Mathis arriving in Nashville to make it as a singer-songwriter, with what seems to be very rudimentary direction and some really awkward scenes. But it gets better as it goes along (or maybe I got more used to what the director was trying to do) - those long takes Bogdanovich likes to do were particularly effective, and I wish the whole movie had been full of them.
The other movie of the director's this reminded me most of was They All Laughed - the easy banter and sense of camraderie amongst the characters (Howard Hawks influenced no doubt), the unexpected warmth from strangers (the policeman who pitches his songs, the person crashed into by Dermot Mulroney who is excited for Mulroney to hear his song on the radio, the girls watching River Phoenix propose), the use of country music.
Maybe at times he was going for a Last Picture Show vibe as well but the characters aren't as strong - Mathis basically plays a good girl, Phoenix a brooding bad boy who is kind of good, Bullock a warm comic relief, Mulroney a nice guy who likes to drink... Either these characters could have been fleshed out more, or we could have done with a few more characters (They All Laughed had one or two more).
Also I felt Mathis wasn't quite strong enough to carry the movie. I had a crush on her in the early 90s as did a lot of people who saw her in Pump Up the Volume - but she doesn't have the warmth and charm of Bullock. I'm nor surprised she got a leading role after Volume - on the other hand, I'm not surprised she wasn't offered too many more. (Though it should be said that attractive male actors get more chances than female).
Oh and I wasn't wild about the music. But still, it's a charming tale in it's own way.
Book review - "Take Two" by Philip Dunne (1992)
In his diaries, Charles Brackett makes a few swipes at Philip Dunne as a dull, boring liberal. It was a little nasty of Brackett - and ironic, especially considering Brackett worked as Dunne's producer at 20th Century Fox several times in the 1950s. But after reading this book I get the feeling Brackett was right.
Dunne was a very good writer who seems like a nice guy with impeccable liberal credentials - helping set up with WGA, early opposition to Nazism and communism, making movies in the war, solid Democrat... But his memoirs are so dull.
To me, at any rate - he talks far too much about the politics in Hollywood at the time, all the dealings with anti-fascist organisations, and Communist groups, and labour and the studios, and it's written in stuffy, unengaging manner. Towards the end of the book he goes on and on (and on and on) about Ronald Reagan the politician, and American politics of the 80s and 90s, and it's just so dull and you don't care.
And more surprisingly it's not very well written. Yes, okay, I'm not that much interested in the politics of the time but surely Dunne could have made things more lively - had more of an eye for character and anecdote?
The most interesting big comes in the middle where Dunne talks about some of his adventures in the screen trade - a screenwriter for Fox in the 30s, working his way up to become one of Daryl Zanuck's top guns, credits including How Green Was My Valley and Pinky - eventually turning producer and director. Film buffs will particularly enjoy his anecdotes about making Wild in the Country, The Robe, David and Bathsheba, Prince of Players and Ten North Frederick. But Dunne doesn't seem that interested in talking about films - his preference seems to be crapping on about politics.
Dunne would up directing ten features none of them particularly distinguished except Ten North Frederick (he did helm Wild in the Country with Elvis Presley!). He's full of excuses as to why none of the movies particularly worked - not enough budget, public didn't go for the subject matter, studio wouldn't give him the names he wanted in the cast. So it comes as a shock at the end to read Dunne considered him more suited to directing than writing; I'm sorry but ten times at bat, you should have an idea of how good you are and he was simply mediocre. A very good screenwriter - and obviously a decent humane man. A mediocre memoirist.
Dunne was a very good writer who seems like a nice guy with impeccable liberal credentials - helping set up with WGA, early opposition to Nazism and communism, making movies in the war, solid Democrat... But his memoirs are so dull.
To me, at any rate - he talks far too much about the politics in Hollywood at the time, all the dealings with anti-fascist organisations, and Communist groups, and labour and the studios, and it's written in stuffy, unengaging manner. Towards the end of the book he goes on and on (and on and on) about Ronald Reagan the politician, and American politics of the 80s and 90s, and it's just so dull and you don't care.
And more surprisingly it's not very well written. Yes, okay, I'm not that much interested in the politics of the time but surely Dunne could have made things more lively - had more of an eye for character and anecdote?
The most interesting big comes in the middle where Dunne talks about some of his adventures in the screen trade - a screenwriter for Fox in the 30s, working his way up to become one of Daryl Zanuck's top guns, credits including How Green Was My Valley and Pinky - eventually turning producer and director. Film buffs will particularly enjoy his anecdotes about making Wild in the Country, The Robe, David and Bathsheba, Prince of Players and Ten North Frederick. But Dunne doesn't seem that interested in talking about films - his preference seems to be crapping on about politics.
Dunne would up directing ten features none of them particularly distinguished except Ten North Frederick (he did helm Wild in the Country with Elvis Presley!). He's full of excuses as to why none of the movies particularly worked - not enough budget, public didn't go for the subject matter, studio wouldn't give him the names he wanted in the cast. So it comes as a shock at the end to read Dunne considered him more suited to directing than writing; I'm sorry but ten times at bat, you should have an idea of how good you are and he was simply mediocre. A very good screenwriter - and obviously a decent humane man. A mediocre memoirist.
Movie review - "Maximum Risk" (1996) *** (warning: spoilers)
One of the most distinguishing things about Jean Claude Van Damme's career is he brought over so many Hong Kong directors to Hollywood. Hard Target introduced us to John Woo and this was the Hollywood debut of Ringo Lam, famous for City on Fire. Good move too for Lam is clearly trying hard to make this fresh and different - there is plenty of energy, the quality of support acting is strong, the action sequences are consistently interesting (a chase through a Russian steam bath, crashing on to taxis, fights in rickety old elevators). Van Damme gives one of his best performances.
The story isn't bad either and gets off to a great start, with Van Damme being pursued... then killed... then revealed to have a long lost identical twin a la Double Impact who is the actual hero. He takes his brother's place, which involves going to New York, meeting a comic relief cab driver (whose death is a big shock and good writing) and his brother's girlfriend (the gorgeous and ever-likeable Natasha Hestridge, who flashes a bit of boob and proves to be probably Van Damme's strongest female co star ever), and has Russian mafia.
However after 40 minutes or so I began to feel the filmmakers made a mistake killing off the brother - there was something a little hollow about him avenging the death of someone he never met and would never meet; the brother surviving and entering the action would have made a great third act. It would have enhanced the emotion of the film.
The story isn't bad either and gets off to a great start, with Van Damme being pursued... then killed... then revealed to have a long lost identical twin a la Double Impact who is the actual hero. He takes his brother's place, which involves going to New York, meeting a comic relief cab driver (whose death is a big shock and good writing) and his brother's girlfriend (the gorgeous and ever-likeable Natasha Hestridge, who flashes a bit of boob and proves to be probably Van Damme's strongest female co star ever), and has Russian mafia.
However after 40 minutes or so I began to feel the filmmakers made a mistake killing off the brother - there was something a little hollow about him avenging the death of someone he never met and would never meet; the brother surviving and entering the action would have made a great third act. It would have enhanced the emotion of the film.
TV review - "Orange is the New Black: Season 3" (2015) ****
The season premiere of this got things off to a wonky start and my expectations were low but it got better as it went along and some of the arcs proved surprisingly durable: privatisation of the prison led to some excellent satire (I love the moment "am I being fired?" "HR will talk you through it") and a great characterisation in the new boss of the warden; I went with Piper becoming more corrupted (though I did get sick of soiled panties gag) and enjoyed Soso's breakdown and the new religion and the Jewish food plot; Ruby Rose isn't much of an actor but she was very well cast. Loved the finale, with moment of warmth undercut with buses upon buses of new arrivals.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)