Man on Wire

I saw this yesterday with Senna in a members' free double-bill - well done Harbour Lights. The second film about an a man who dices with death for the sake of his art.

This is a docudrama - more documelodrama as Philippe Petit flamboyantly narrates the story of his successful wire-walking act between the Twin Towers in New York in 1994. The film charts Petit's childhood obsession with circus style performing arts and the excesses of the circus ring are employed by Petit as he lays on the drama through his exuberant retelling of the story.

The drama builds by showing Petit's walks between the towers of the Notre Dame in Paris and then between the towers of the Sydney Harbour Bridge in Australia. It goes into great detail as Petit and his team research and plan the greatest and most audacious high wire act of all time. The tension builds as the narration is mixed with archive footage and a re-enactment of the preparation for the rigging of the wire. To get a team onto the roof of both towers along with half a ton of equipment took a lot of planning, guts and good luck.

The film explores the relationships between Petit and his friends. Petit was able to enthuse and envision people and inspire unflinching loyalty as his drivenness propels everyone on towards the goal. When he finally achieves it, he goes off for romp with a girl in the crowd and dumps his girlfriend from childhood days - Annie Allix. The successful walk transforms Petit and elevates him to a higher plain where these indiscretions are overlooked by his entourage and Allix can only marvel at his accomplishment.

This is a well made docudrama that embodies Petit's flamboyant and showman-like style. It is also an erie spectacle as we fast approach the 10th anniversary of 9/11!

I'll give it 7/10.

Senna

A documentary about a Brazilian Formula 1 World Champion - surely just for aficionados? NO. Although there is almost no frame that fails to contain a racing track or racing car, this film offers an intimate engagement with a charismatic and obsessed genius. This is a film about a man who on one level is an ordinary guy and on another just happens to be the fastest man on the planet.

The film uses archive footage and overlays it with commentary, news reports and interviews to produce a compelling documentary of Senna's F1 career. The way this film is edited presents a masterclass in the art. It reveals someone who was uniquely gifted as a racing driver and a man who established a spiritual connection between his craft and his faith. For Senna, racing cars was the vocational fulfilment of the reason he'd been put on the planet.

The film appears to be objective in the way it portrays Senna's life. It exposes the political maneuvering of the sports governing body the FIA and in particular the seemingly collusive relationship between driver Alain Prost and FIA President Jean-Marie Balestre. This appeared to generate one interpretation of the regulations for everyone else and a tougher interpretation for Senna. Even so, Senna continues to win. When Senna changes teams from McLaren to William's, new rules are introduced that force the removal of the technology that gave the William's the edge. The changes make the car unstable and Senna struggles to make it perform. At the San Marino Grand Prix at Imola in 1994 Senna crashes and dies from his injuries at the age of 34.

Senna is portrayed as a warm, shy, intelligent and generous man. Fiercely patriotic and always keen to play the Brazilian card, Senna is always aware that he enjoys privileges beyond the reach of many Brazilians. Senna set up a Foundation to help children in Brazil - a Foundation that lives on today as Senna's legacy continues to benefit many, long after his passing. He not only gave immense pride to a struggling nation but he served and continues to serve as an inspiration to many.

The film makes it clear that Senna's faith played an integral part in his success. Senna was a man of prayer who felt connected to and directly enabled by God. Again it offers this information in a neutral way and reports it as fact rather than in any other way.

I found the film deeply engaging and something that offers a privileged window allowing a view into the life of a global icon and someone who was at the pinnacle of their game. A compelling watch.

In the coverage of Senna's funeral Prost is shown as one of the coffin bearers and in the closing credits the point is made that Prost is one of the trustees of the Senna Foundation. I don't want to be unkind, but I wonder if these things are not simply a way for one man to try and deal with his feelings of guilt?

Go and see the film or get the disc. I'll give it 8/10.

A Winter's Tale

This is the second of Eric Rohmer's quadrilogy presenting a story from each of the four seasons. I have already commented on A Summer's Tale and A Tale of Springtime. This one also explores love, commitment, indecision and fulfilment.


In a story that seems so incredible as to be implausible, Rohmer marries together plot devices from Shakespeare's The Winter's Tale with Pascal's Wager - a metaphysical equation designed to prove the benefit of hoping in the Christian afterlife. (A rational person should wager as though God exists, because living life accordingly has everything to gain, and nothing to lose.) In case the viewer doesn't make the connection both Shakespeare and Pascal's ideas are inserted crudely into the narrative to make the point.


The central character Felice (Charlotte Very) is a loathsome idealist who uses and abuses the two men in her life, Maxence and Loic as she lives in hope of rediscovering Charles - a holiday romance from five years ago and father of her daughter Elise. Whilst she does have love for Maxence and Loic, she can't live with either as she doesn't love them sufficiently. However, she is prepared to accept their roof over her head while her mother provides care for Elise. Much commentary on society centres on the systematic abuse of women by men as items of consumption - this film is an antidote to that critique.


Paris is portrayed as cold and wet - not the usual views we get in cinema. The city of Nevers is similarly cold and grey. Only the bright and bustling Brittany seaside and the romance with Charles has any visual warmth. Maxence is shown as caring and patient, wishing to include Felice in his expanding and successful business and wishing to set up home with her. Loic is portrayed as gentle, kind, generous and willing to wait until Felice comes around. 


Maxence is committed to propriety and, as far as modern relationships allow, doing the right thing. Loic is seen as someone wrestling with making sense of their Christian faith in the face of the world around them. Felice rejects both ways of being and pursues her own brand of mystical utopianism in which premonition, not chance, plays an important part. Dragged into Nevers Cathedral by Elise as she wants to see the Crib, Felice sits on her own in the large and empty church, perhaps for the first time, and experiences an epiphany in which for the first time she sees everything clearly. A religious non-religious type experience.


This leads her to return to Paris and days later she is reunited with Charles after a chance meeting on a bus and she, Elise and Charles live happily ever after. Maxence and Loic are left scratching their head's and licking their wounds.


Relationships can be sources of great elation and life-affirming. They can also be painful and abusive. I wonder what Rohmer was really trying to say? Perhaps nothing more than that.


I'll give it 6/10.

Toy Story 3

In a week that has seen a very negative portrayal of community and interdependence on the streets of the UK it was good to watch this film which offers a very positive model of what it means to live together. This film is thoroughly watchable and probably the best of the franchise. Taking in excess of $1 billion at the box office, it's animation is so good that at times you forget your watching a cartoon. The characterisations are top notch too - being accesible to both your average pre-schooler and also to adults - if they have eyes to see and ears to hear.

In a world where positive stories about loyalty, sacrifice and common calling are hard to find, this film delivers buckets full of challenging drama. I managed to resist shedding a tear - but it was close. Even though I rationalised that I was watching a cartoon with a script that was trying to exact maximum leverage on me, I found it hard not to be sucked in by the compelling way the narrative is delivered.

This is also a film about risk taking and about doing the right thing - even when the consequences are dire. You cannot fail to watch this film and link the characters to your circle of friends, colleagues and family. Unless you have turned your brain off, you will also recognise yourself in many of the characters. That is why this film is so compelling - because it has the power to touch many of our deepest needs and set up a dialogue of empathy through which Woody, Buzz and co become vicarious avatars through which our past wrongs are righted.

The film also deals very effectively with transition, grief, loss and the challenge of growing into a new life opening up in fornt of you. The Ken and Barbie relationship is great fun which rips into many stereotypical portrayals of type. Mr and Mrs Potato Head give a strong account of what a loving and committed relationship has to go through in order to survive. Buzz's flirting with Jessie is good fun too.

Whichever toy feels down, the others are always on hand to lift their spirits. No-one is unloved or unlovable and even the evil Lotso is given a second chance by Woody - it's up to him what he does with it and there is a touch of ironic justice in the fate that eventually befalls him. The power of lies to control and coerce are explored and when exposed offer the hope and opportunity of repentance and reconciliation. These are all strong themes that draw on our Judeo-Christian heritage and deliver the happy ending demanded by Western audiences. Not a sentimental and mushy ending like Super 8 but a happy ending that involves loss, real cost and the need to adjust to a new and previously unforeseen outcome.

This really is top draw drama and a great advertisement for state-of-the-art animation. If you've not seen it - go and see it. If you've already seen it - watch it again. Make sure the disc or bytes are sitting (legally) in your collection.

I'll give this 8.5/10.

The Good, the Bad and the Multiplex

Kermode on tour with another new book!

I've got my tickets for 1st October. See you there?

Super 8

Saw this yesterday at the BFI IMAX in London. Watching in IMAX is a totally immersive experience with very impressive surround-sound - but alas tons of hairs, gunk and fluff - and at one point an insect - on the projector lens! When you pay £16 for a ticket, you expect better!

This film has some very strong points and also some serious short comings. Nevertheless I did enjoy it and would encourage you to see it. Set in Lillian, Ohio (generic small-town USA) in 1979, the plot is at the same time unlikely and yet strangely familiar as it pays homage to the many genres this fim is a derivative of. The ending is particularly weak as it gushes Spielberg sentimentality in the extreme.

If you look at the posters of the film they are all about the Director, Producer - even the Wardrobe Designer, but none of the actors are mentioned. The lead five roles are all children and whilst they may not be household names, with the possible exception of Elle Fanning, they surely deserve some recognition. The performances are strong and the characterisations reinforce the cliched types needed to make an ensemble piece work.

I'm currently reading a great book on Film and Theology which I will blog about when I've finished it: Into the Dark by Craig Detweiler. He has a section on nostalgia (p192) and its place in movies. He makes the observation "Nostalgia arises from loss. Having tasted triumph, we long to reclaim the glory of an earlier time." In many ways that description defines Spielberg's whole catalogue and this film is no exception.

The rose-tinted innocence of the summer vacation spent hanging out with friends is the back drop for the story. Charles (Riley Griffiths) is the film making obsessive that lends the film its Spielberg-like biopic theme. The group of friends are out shooting by the railroad in the middle of the night when a US-Air Force train is derailed. They happen to catch the event on film and it becomes for them a feature of the film they make - it "adds production value" is Charles' mantra. Why the train was there, or why it's cargo was in transit are never explained.

The acting - particularly from the youngsters - is strong. The fact that the 'monster' is rarely seen in the first three-quarters of the film cleverly heightens the tension as your imagination is invited to fill in the blanks to great effect. The fact that this film carries a 12A certification in the UK surprised me. The cinema was full of youngsters off school and they repeatedly were shrieking in response to the regular building of tension. The special effects, courtesy of ILM, are good - but why a train takes five minutes to crash is a little puzzling. The story line is borrowed from a thousand comic books and 'B movies' but is worthy of the work it's asked to perform.

For me, the ending lets the whole film down. The narrative hinges on a one-liner from the central character Joe who says "Bad things happen, but you can still live". Thereby earthing his own bitter personal experience with the whole of the cosmos. The speaking of this line triggers so many reconciliations  in the last five minutes of the film that I lost count. Particularly cheesy was the way in which Joe signals his coming to terms with his own mother's recent death. Barf factor 10!

This is primarily a story about relationships, about family, about our inadequacies and the need for interdependence and community. On these points it scores well and as I said is worth the investment of time and energy in going to watch. A word of advice - if you do go and see it, watch the credits at the end as they deliver possibly the best bit of the film!

I'll give it 6.5/10 - I've deducted a point for the ending!

Sarah's Key

Saw this today at Harbour Lights at a members free preview - well done Picture Houses!


This is as sure an Oscar winner as I've ever seen - it is brilliant and my hanky is still soggy from mopping up the tears. The only question that could spoil it is 'does the story spill too much into melodrama' to milk the tears or is it that the subject matter is so sensitive and the way it is acted so compelling that the film is rightfully due every accolade it will receive? I'm going with the latter.


This is by all accounts a fairly accurate adaptation of the novel  Elle s'appelait Sarah by Tatiana de Rosnay which centres on the infamous Vel' d'Hiv roundup of Parisian Jews in August 1942. The infamy stems from the fact that the roundup was at the hands of the French authorities who were forced into demonstrating their allegiance to the Nazis to keep control of their own police force. In the film the dilemma the Gendarmes confront is etched on the faces of most of them. They are (largely) unwilling pawns.


It is all well and good from the safety of today's freedoms and with 20/20 hindsight to pontificate about the moralities that get traded when the exigencies of war force the unwitting to place pragmatism ahead of ethics. I hope no-one is forced into having to make the same decisions that contribute to the horror story that unfolds in this film. I do however hope that many experience the potential for new life and rebuilding of identity that the story offers.


This is not an easy film to watch. I made my lip bleed biting it to stop myself from dissolving into a blubbering heap at one point! It's a story that needs to be told but one should be wary as it comes from the Weinstein stable. However, the story is seemingly told with a degree of evenness but also with unrelenting emotional big hits as the stories of two families who share an unwitting common past are intertwined and then unpicked before they collide again 70 years on.


The script is lively and believable and uses different languages in appropriate ways. One piece of dialogue brilliantly unpacks what drives investigative journalism - or is that simply what drives human curiosity - by asking what price do you put on truth. Another memorable line underlines the fact that we cannot escape our past - we are, however unwittingly, a product of it. The choice of whether or not we choose to acknowledge it is ours.


This film has plenty of style and barn-storming performances from Kristin Scott-Thomas and the young and very able Mélusine Mayance in the title role. I have purposefully avoided disclosing the plot as you will want to see this tear-jerker for yourself. It is excellent viewing, first-class and engaging cinema and a story that deserves to be told. Book your ticket now - it's on general release 5th August. Take plenty of Kleenex - you have been warned!


I'll give it 9/10 - see you at the Oscars.

The Double Life of Veronique

This film presents a tour-de-force performance form Irene Jacob in the lead double role of Weronika/Veronique. I'm a huge fan of Kieslowski but I struggled with this one - it's difficult to get your head around it. Nevertheless it presents interesting things to reflect on.


The central theme is that two identical Veroniques, born on the same day - one Polish, one French, both with an identical heart condition and the same great operatic singing voice. The first third of the film follows Weronika as she begins to make it big-time in singing. Walking across a square she spots a doppelganger amongst a group of French tourists taking photos of a political demo as their tour bus leaves the square. The middle third introduces us to the Parisian Veronique who, on health grounds gives up her musical career. The final third explores Veronique's interaction and response to a secret admirer who makes and performs with marionettes.


Perhaps it is the puppets that provide the key to unlock the story as notions of free-will, intuition and fate interplay to weave a story which Kieslowski asserts is all about emotions. I find this odd - not that the film is lacking in emotional content - far from it, but it seemed to me more a film about identity and developing a notion of self. Both Veronicas felt they were never alone - in a way sensing the existence of the other. When Weronika dies, Veronique awakes from her sleep suddenly to underline the connectedness between the two girls. Veronique's world begins to unravel when her admirer points out Weronika on a set of contact photos and she feels despairing as her admirer becomes her lover. An odd and jerky transition.


The second disc interviews throw little illumination on the plot and the web provides even less about the film - even IMDb fails to carry a plot synopsis! I still think this film is worth the watch, so don't be put off by this rather negative review - it's just that I would choose to deal with the subject matter in a different way. This film still carries the hallmark Kieslowski feel and that still demands attention. I think the key is not to analyse this film too forensically and to take most of it at face value without digging too deep.


I'll give it 6/10.

Tree of Life

This is a demanding film. Demanding is many ways. The narrative is on such a grand scale that when it periodically dips into the specific here and now and then jerks back into cosmic eternity it is not always easy to follow the thread. It also jumps to today every now and again! At 2 hours 19 minutes - it's also demanding in terms of endurance.


The film is pretty uniqe in that the 11 or so years of the recognisable here and now of 1950's Waco, Texas (why Waco?) are intersperesed with Hubble-esque shots of the birth of the cosmos and evolution of galaxies. added to these are sequences which would give The Living Planet a run for its money and which feature sperm searching for an egg, Hammer-Head Sharks, Dinosaurs, barren derserts, beautriful rock formations, flowing rivers and breaking surf. This film is a celebration of the created order and humanity's attempt to make meaning of it all.


The film opens with words from Job 38:4

"Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?

Tell me if you have understanding."

and then departs on a metaphysical exploration of how we make meaning from being family. Perhaps we can see this as an exploration of community stemming from the Trinity who are at the heart of the creation in the Christian worldview?


Right at the beginning viewers are told there is a binary choice: they can choose to live by nature or by grace. The couple at the heart of the story are named as Mr & Mrs O'Brien. Mr (Brad Pitt) exemplifies the 'nature' approach to life - self-made, supremely self-confident, devoutly religious and running a family with such authoritarian rigour that he becomes abusive. Mrs O'Brien (played by the soft and dreamy Jessica Chastain) represents 'grace' - generosity, self-giving, there for the other. The recipients of the nature and grace are their three sons Jack, Steve and RL. The story is told from the contemporary viewpoint of the now middle-aged and confused Jack who, in looking back on his childhood, is himself trying to make meaning from a past that cannot be changed as he approaches a future that is there for the taking - or giving. This for me was the central axis on which the story pivots.


Initially Jack sees the world and all it contains through the eyes of his gracious mother. Everything is wonderful and a gift. Life is there for the living and the world is a playground to be enjoyed with true gratefulness to its Creator. Life however opens Jack, his brothers and his family to the harshness of nature and thus sets up the struggle. As Jack is exposed to illness, drunkeness, criminality, devout piety, his father's idealised view of the American Dream, DDT, pubescent curiosity, brothers that need his nurture rather than bullying and a local gang who look to him for daring leadership, Jack realises he is confronted by a series of questions.Will the abused Jack follow the ways of his father, who does not even permit himself to be called 'Dad', or will he follow the grace and self-giving of his mother whose arms are always open for a loving embrace of reassurance?


The film's master-stroke is in its editing and cinematography - both exceptional. I did feel the film didn't know when to end and could have done with losing 20 minutes or so. The end does eventually come when the adult Jack goes through a door frame in the middle of a desert (doorways are a recurring motif for points of transition in the film) and then finds himself on a beach filled with people from his life as he reaches a place where his understanding can accommodate the forgiveness of his father and allow him to receive afresh the love of his mother. The visualisation of this does need some interpretation - and I could well have got it wrong here.


If you have some time to invest and are prepared to do a lot of work after watching this film, then do go and see it. If 90 minute Hollywood action movies are your thing - don't see this! If you like striking visuals and a soaring soundtrack - go and see it.


I'll give it 8/10.

Beginners

This is a film that invites a high degree of self-reflection. It is poignantly moving, wonderfully edited and at times quirkily amusing. The film sees Ewan McGregor cast as the Hugh Grant-like Oliver. The film is a road movie - without the road! Oliver journeys back over his life, confronts his demons and in the end resolves to head in a given direction. I won't spoil the outcome for you.

A child of the 60's, Oliver works as an illustrator in a Design/PR company. When the film begins it is a couple of months after the death of his father. His mother had died five years previously. As far as we know, Oliver is an only child. Following the death of his mother and after 43 years of marriage, Oliver's father Hal (Christopher Plummer) 'comes out' and announces that he has known he was gay since the age of 13. This revelation destabilises Oliver who over time comes to accommodate this revelation.

In marriage, Hal was faithful to his wife for whom he performed 'satisfactorily'. Following her death, he sought partners and was not concerned about exclusive relationships. All of this sends Oliver's mind reeling as he tries to decipher the clues from his childhood and the contrast between his father as a husband and as a gay lover and activist. In the video flashbacks we never see his father - except from behind and then only fleetingly. We see lots of Oliver with his mother Georgia (Mary Page Keller) where the relationship seems to endlessly feature her pretending to shoot Oliver and the boy having to play dead.

As Oliver stuggles to make sense of who is as a product of this marriage the flashbacks repeatedly set events within their context inviting him and the viewer to reflect that was then, this is now. Eventually oliver emerges from the fug of confusion and sets course with new resolve. The vehicle for the this paradigm shift is Anna (Melanie Laurent) who stumbles onto his consulting couch at a fancy dress party where Oliver is hiding 

behind the disguise of Sigmund Freud. In the end it her perceptive empathy and offer of open love 

that provides the therapy that begins to unlock Oliver's heart and his ability to trust. Fearful of 

re-enacting the sham that was his parent's marriage, he cannot commit as he fears the pain of

it coming undone. The film is his wrestle with his journey and the trajectory that he feels destined

to follow. The journey for Oliver is a painful one. Arthur the Jack Russell Terrier and Andy (Goran 

Visnjic), Hal's younger boyfriend provide interesting additional twists and depth to the script.

It would be interesting to watch this alongside A Single Man and also Milk to which the film 

refers - both in terms of subject matter but also context and the time in which they are set.

I commend this film as a gentle, thoughtful, engaging and well-acted piece. Do go and see it.

I'll give it 7.5/10

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

Worth waiting a decade for! A fitting and tremendous climax to the Potter chronicles. Thank you JK, Daniel Radcliffe et al.


I was frustrated with the final instalment being released in two parts - but this was, as I said, worth waiting for. I haven't read any of the books but Stephen Fry's characterisations have been filling our home for many many years. My daughter has grown up in the world of Harry Potter - it will be for her a defining hallmark of her teenage years.


This film brings everything together. I won't spoil any of the plot just in case there is another sad person waiting for the surprise of the story in film. What I will say is that the story and its depiction is the clearest recasting of the Christian Gospel story you could ever wish to see. It is full of hope, forgiveness, redemption, salvation and above all love. The ending isn't altogether happy - but a lot better than it might have been given where the story gets to at certain points.


The producers have left it open for a whole series of spin-off franchises and sequels. How long will it take for MGM to roll out the Albus Potter?


Following on from In Bruges it is interesting to note that in addition to Ralph Fiennes's obvious appearance in both films, that Fleur Delacour is played by Clémence Poésy!


This really is a first class film that will keep you on the edge of your seat all the way through. Join
the hoards and swell MGM's coffers. Say thank you JK and connect with the light side. I wonder what
Pelagius and Augustine would make of it all?


I'll give this 8.5/10.

In Bruges

The first film in nearly two months! It's been a desperate time.

Well, where to start with this one? Let's get some of the general positives out of the way first. The cast is excellent with the three main men giving stunning performances - particularly Colin Farrell whose performance of angst-ridden guilt draws you in and demands sympathy. Thekla Reuten and Clémence Poésy also give strong performances as the two main women in the story. The cinematography is first class too - the night scenes and early morning empty street travelogue shots do a great job of promoting this medieval jewel in Belgium's crown.


For such a post-modern piece of cinema, the narrative arc is way too obvious and in-your-face. The script and plot deploy a range of clever devices yet at time take you into side loops that do nothing to heighten the suspense or develop the character or stories. Perhaps some extra time in the editing room might have improved things? The story is a morality tale - the question is which moral code provides the framework?


If I were being generous, I'd say that this could be seen as an exploration of situational ethics, but in the end I have to say, and this where the post-modern bit comes in, it is simple a portrayal of a different and self-referencing moral code. A code where it is perfectly alright to shoot dead a priest, but also a code in which the ultimate sin is to shoot dead a child - this is the narrative arc that embraces the story.


Within the arc we see Ray (played by Farrell) wrestle with the consequences of his unintentional murder of a young boy waiting for the confessional to become vacant. He has neatly written out his sins so that he won't forget them but instead this device is clumsy and serves only to ramp up the despair and alienation Ray (and the audience?) feels. Ray takes the now blood-stained note from the boys hand:

and as you can see he was murdered for peccadilloes - perhaps the system that generates such guilt in children requires our examination?


Morality, guilt and grief are indeed the central themes - but only in so far as they relate personally to Ray and corporately within the world of the hired assassin. The former is a universal human consequence of acting against conscience, the latter is a convenient massaging of conscience for the sake of doing a job. Ken (Brendan Gleeson) even justifies his actions by explaining that the majority of people he kills are not nice people! Ray's guilt is continually pricked by Ken's insistence on doing the tourist thing while they are there and visiting lots of churches and art galleries which seem to filled exclusively with paintings depicting the final judgement!


This film is offered - and by most received - as a black comedy. I only found a couple of scenes amusing. One is the first picture above and the second near the end where Ray and  Harry (Ralph Fiennes) are arguing about who will count to three! The rest of the comedy was lost in a sea of blood and dismemberment that dissolved under a torrent of profanities. All of which left me feeling uncomfortable and concluding that watching this particular film had not been the life-enhancing experience I'd hoped for.


The hope of redemption and forgiveness is held out by Ken to Ray, but Harry's lust for sticking to his principles gives this film a blood-splattering conclusion where nobody wins. A true post-modern piece of cinema.


I'll give it 6/10.

Back from holidays - more films to watch!

Apologies for the inactivity but I've just spent a very pleasant 2 weeks touring Switzerland by rail. This means that my Flickr pages will have benefited rather than this blog - sorry. I did intend taking a stack of discs with me to watch on my MacBook - but I forgot to pack them :-( !

On the odd rainy day I did contemplate going to the cinema in Zurich to watch an English language showing of Source Code but at SFr 18 (about £15), I decided I could buy the Bluray for less when it comes out!

Received Alamar as a Father's Day present today - looking forward to seeing it again.

The Fountain

"Death is the road to awe". The problem is that this film about death and how we handle it is anything but awesome! Any film that chooses to explore death and how we might prepare for it and embrace it is courageous. However, this film delivers three interlocking stories that spread over a millennium but which drown in a sea of the slushiest sentimentality.

Death remains the great barrier which we all fear. The hope is that we live on in some way - I'm not at all sure that I buy into the the mishmash of Eastern-Buddhist Nirvana driven reincarnation pantheism. No, I am sure - I don't.

If you want a film that plays mind games with your darkest fears and holds a hope of pie-in-the-sky lotus position transcendant experiences then this is something for you. This film is short on philosophy and short on a coherent way to string a story together.

I could continue trying to write intelligibly about this film but there is a much more erudite review from the archives of BFI's Sight and Sound here.

As much as I like Darren Aronofsky's films (Black Swan, The Wrestler, Requiem for a Dream and Pi) I can only say he's getting better and better. I'll give this 4/10.

The Kids are Alright

I  missed this in the cinema and am grateful for the rainy holiday weekend that keeps me indoors! What a delightful film. This film is strong on narrative and strong on performance. It is both believable and reasonable - given that the story is set in southern California! This film explores questions relating to family and how nature and nurture relate to one another, about relationships and fidelity. The story explores emotions and the morality surrounding a gay couple who both mothered a child from the same anonymous sperm donor. The fun starts when one of the children comes of age and makes contact with their father.

There are two key moments in this film. One where Nic (one of the Moms [Annette Bening]) challenges sperm doning Paul (Mark Ruffalo) by reminding him that this is her family and not his and suggesting that if he wants his own, he should grow it and go with all the pain and struggle that this entails. The irony is of course that the family was enabled to grow through his donation which begs the question to what extent is it his family too?

The second moment comes on the painful journey from infidelity to forgiveness when Jules (Julianne Moore) - the other Mom - delivers a blockbuster speech on the nature and challenges of the long haul of making a marriage work.

In every respect the two Moms operate like a 'conventional' heterosexual couple with Nic taking a more masculine role and Jules describing herself as the 'wife'. The two kids have obviously come to terms with the unconventional nature of their family unit - perhaps in southern California it is not so unconventional?

Donor Dad Paul who dropped out from College and is very laid back and languid is the antithesis of Nic's conception of drivenness and high-achieving. He runs an eco friendly restaurant using locally grown organic produce and is finally making good in life. He strikes up an relationship with the  empathetic sensitive and unsettled Jules which nearly derails the whole thing.

This film is a gift for exploring questions realting to same-sex relationships, families, and whether or not the concept of nuclear family is open to redefinition in post-modern southern California - or next door to you. The fact that it does so in such an accesible way with such great humour (yes this a comedy) is a great credit to Lisa Cholodenko who conceived and directed this film.

If you've not seen it - do watch it. If you've already seen it - watch it again! I'll give it 8/10.

A Screaming Man

This is a good film on a number of levels:

• The story is credible - the narrative draws you in.
• The characters are played with warmth and a sense of realism.
• The context in which the story is set is all too common.
• The lessons the film invites viewers to learn are worthwhile.
• It is a joint French/Belgian/Chad production.

This is a story about a male problem - pride. Or, at least as I see things the way in which pride manifests itself in men. In that way the central character Adam (Youssouf Djaoro) is an archetype - heard that before somewhere! In his youth he reprtesented his country as a swimmer and won, consequently everyone calls him 'Champ'. Now in his 50's, his job is pool supervisor at a hotel - a post he appears to have held for 30 years purely on the merit of once having been champ. He supervises his twenty year old son Abdel (Dioucounda Koma ) who teaches the wealthy guests to swim.


The hotel is taken over by new foreign owners and is run through the ruthless effeciency of Mme Wang (Heling Li). The review of staffing results in Adam's best friend the cook who has worked there for 30 years being made redundant. Soon after Adam is redeployed to gate-keeper and the ignominy of having to wear a uniform and be at the beck and call of all the drivers is clearly somehting he finds degrading.


The country is engaged in civil war and as the rebels move nearer the city pressure is put on families by the local Chief (Emile Abossolo M'bo ) to make cash contributions to support the war. Adam has also taken a pay cut and is unable to contribute. His feeling of helplessness is made worse when the Chief proudly tells Adam that he gave his 17 year old son to the army with a clear implication that Adam should do likewise. Under increasing pressure he too gives his son up to the army. The fighting intensifies.


As Adam slides into a sea of despair, his son's previously unknown pregnant girlfriend turns up. As the rebels approach the city the population flee and Adam's world is turned upside down when he spots the Chief masquerading as a woman shepherding two younger children along with the throng. Adam challenges him but a gun is pulled.


This brings Adam to his senses and he tries to make amends for his actions. He realises that life has passed him by as he rested on the laurels of his teenage success. He realises that in reality his life is worth nothing. The leader he looked up to has betrayed him. The only son he has and whom he loves has been given over to the war. His job has vanished, his best friend the cook lies ill in hospital. Adam's wife (Hadje Fatime N'Goua ) and would-be daughter in law (Djénéba Koné ) are depicted as dutiful victims of a male world.


This is a potent story about how pride can blind. It graphically shows how life's opportunities need to be siezed and that everything simply can't go on forever unchanged. The advancing rebels and the civil war are a dynamic metaphor for the struggle Adam is facing and the battles he has to fight. The muted colours of sub-Saharan Africa and the relentlessness of the sand reinforce the narrative as it unfolds.


I saw this at the BFI Southbank in London. Catch it if you can. It is directed by Mahamat-Saleh Haroun who has many great films under his belt - including Darrat which is also on at the BFI in an Haroun season and is well worth seeing.


I'll give this 7.5/10.

Limitless

This is a simple story that is creatively told. Everyone dreams 'what if' dreams - what if my brain worked to its full potential rather than the usual limits of 20%? In a chance encounter, Eddie (Bradley Cooper) who is a down-on-his-luck writer bumps into his ex brother-in-law Vernon (Johnny Whitworth) who takes pity on him and offers a pill (NCT) that will make him feel better. Eddie pops the pill and rest is history.

Directed by Neil Burger, the film uses a number of stunning visual techniques to narrate the story. The opening titles sequence is a series of never ending zooms through car windows and along crowded side walks up Manhattan. The speed, saturation, brilliance and cacophony of noise are pushed to the limit to exhibit the heightened sensual acuity that Eddie enjoys when riding the NCT wave. His brain able to process all this data and generate a thousand possible scenarios means he is always 50 steps ahead of the opposition whether it be in terms of negotiating a deal with a loan shark, fighting to save his own life or closing the biggest merger in US Corporate history.

The film chooses to place the new Eddie as a transformed author who finishes his book in just days. He enter the world of share and commodity dealing and quintuples his profits on a daily business. This brings him to the attention of Wall Street's Mr Big - Carl Van Loon (Robert De Nero) who hires him to oversee a merger/acquisition. It's a pity that enhanced abilities are put to use generating wealth rather than engaging in some other philanthropic activity - but I guess that is the prevailing 'what if' dream of post-modern Western society.

This is an action film. As Eddie's stocks of NCT runs low he runs the risk of death from the severity of the withdrawal symptoms. He commissions a scientist to manufacture NCT but the scientist is unsure about the safety without clinical trials. Those who originally manufactured the NCT are trying to get their stash back and when the generic Balkan/Russian loan shark discovers the existence of NCT and pops one himself he too puts pressure on Eddie to supply. As all of Eddie's spinning plates look like falling off their poles at the same time, he runs out of NCT and has to find a solution using his 'normal' intellect. There is of course an ongoing love interest, the possibility of re-engagement with his ex and a series of heightened one-night-stands, one of which leaves his partner dead meaning he has the police on his back too.

There are other stunning visuals - like when the ceiling tiles become letter and number tiles and click over like those on airport departure boards. Burger invents his own version of 'digital rain' - alphabet rain, as Eddie types at a speed his laptop struggles to keep up with.

For me, whilst inviting the audience to ask an important question, the limit of the exploration of only one possible response means the story is never fully able to reach its potential - it is far from limitless as it plays out the usual stuff of greed and personal advancement. What if multiple possible futures had played out simultaneously? Once or twice the dialogue verges on the metaphysical with references to human striving to become the perfect expression of what we have been created to be, but it never really engages in anything remotely philosophical or spiritual. For me this is the film's major short-coming.

An enjoyable action movie but ultimately limited rather than limitless. I'll give it 6.5/10.

Oranges and Sunshine

This is an outstanding film - whichever way you come at it. The directorial début of Jim Loach - son of Ken is almost like watching a documentary because the acting is so compelling and draws you in. That doesn't mean it is lacking in drama in any way - far from it.

Emily Watson turns in a stunning performance as Margaret Humphreys a Social Worker from Nottingham who has a chance encounter late one evening with an Australian lady trying to trace her family. When was the last time you heard a story about Social Workers that portrayed them in a positive light? This is one and deservedly so.

The irony of the opening scene finds a deep resonance as the story unfolds. From researching the documents given to her by the Australian woman and decoding the story they tell, Humphreys discovers that over three decades tens of thousands of British children were systematically deported from care to Commonwealth countries. In total, more than 130,000 children were deported to Australia alone. What emerges is that many of the children were only in temporary care and that their families were told they had been adopted by a good family and were now enjoying a much better life.

Many children were told that their parents had died and that they were being given the golden opportunity of travelling to Australia to begin a new life with the promise of sunshine and oranges. The reality was that they were more often than not made to work as slave labourers in the harshest of conditions. Many of the children - particularly the boys, told stories of repeated and systematic rape and abuse. The greater betrayal is that much of the abuse happened at the hands of priests in church orphanages - who then levied punitive charges on the children once they had grown up and were earning so that they could repay the cost of their care!

As Humphreys listens to endless stories, the sheer horror of what she hears eats its way into her caring heart with serious implications for her own health. Added to this as the story unfolds is the growing sense that her family are being asked to pay too high a price themselves as Humphreys spends more and more time in Australia.

The film's genius lies in the gentle way the story is told and how Humphreys persistence in trying to get the authorities to admit and take responsibility for what they have done eventually bears fruit. Furthermore, the way in which Humphreys begins to help the victims own and articulate the fact that as a defence mechanism they have lost the ability to 'feel', is sensitively handled and capably demonstrates the sense of justice and generous humanity that were her motivation.

As sad and sorrowful as the subject matter is, this film is British drama at its very best. No special effects, no fanfares, nothing flashy - simply a good story very well told. I spent large periods of the film fighting back the tears - take the tissues, but do go and see it - it's a story that needs to be heard.

I'll give it 8/10.

The Social Network now on Reel Issues

I have just completed a new study for the Bible Society in their Reel Issues Epic series on The Social Network. Find it and many other stimulating studies here.

Moon

Caught up with this last night. Duncan Jones' Directorial début has a minimal cast but delivers a lot of impact and much food for thought. The acting is tight and the set conceptualisation generic of any sci-fi moon base setting. It is the dynamics of evolving human understanding, personal identity and the movement from isolation to community that makes the narrative journey of this film worth engaging with.

Lunar Industries Ltd harvest Helium 3 from the surface of the moon and it is shipped back to earth in pilot-less pods as a source of energy. The facility is on the far side (as opposed to the dark side) of the moon and is overseen by one operative - Sam Bell who is there on a three year contract. The story begins two weeks before the end of his contract as he begins to look forward to his return to earth. The only link with earth are video messages from earth-bound bosses and from his wife and daughter. The comm-link is down so live communication is out. Bell's only company is a robot by the name of GERTY spookily voiced by Kevin Spacey.

Bell eventually discovers another person on the base - a different version of himself, one that is like he was when first arrived and one which has not been formed by the process of living alone for three years. The two Bell's have a different emotional outlook and even manage a fight at one stage. Eventually they discover they are in fact clones and that the base has hundreds of Bells in stasis in chambers hidden away. It seems they can only last for three years before their body decays and they die. GERTY then wakes up a new Bell telling him he has had an accident and his lack of memory is a consequence of this. The way this is done is extraordinarily engaging and not at all as facile as my description might suggest.

But the Bells do have memory - memory of their wife Tess and daughter Eve. Their desire to return home is unquenchable and GERTY who has been programmed to ensure their well-being is persuaded that helping one of the Bell's to return to earth in the Helium 3 pod is in their best interest. In the end the drive for family, for community, for human connectedness is the thing that pushes this film beyond being just another sci-fi movie.

Bell has been making a balsa wood model of his home town as another symbol to help us to see the depth of longing for rootedness and community that he has. GERTY confirms that he has spent nearly 1000 hours making this model over the three years - a true labour of love.

The film raises a whole heap of questions:

• What does it mean to be human?
• Is there wisdom in cloning humans - even for dangerous isolated jobs?
• How does the nurture/nature debate impact Bell's development?
• Do all Bells develop in the same way or are they a product of their development?
• What role do family and community play in defining our sense of self?
• How can Corporate greed push a company to develop such technology?
• How might 2001 been different if HAL had been GERTY?
• How were the cloned Bells related?
• Where was the original Bell - was he aware that he had been cloned?
• How can the sacrifice of one Bell set the other Bells free?
• How many fathers does Eve have and does it matter?
• Does a story of sacrifice, salvation and redemption after three years of work ring any bells?

I thoroughly enjoyed this film. Do see it when you get the chance or add it to your Love Film wish list! I'll give it 8/10.

The Adjustment Bureau

Where did you get that hat?

This is a slick film. Arminianism takes on Calvinism head-on in a postmodern roller coaster of an action movie. Wow! Go see it.

Here's one for the guys. If you thought that the longer and harder you kissed Emily Blunt the greater the chance of a perfect future for you and her together, would you give it a try? Well, I'm not going to spoil the outcome, but there is an interesting twist at the end.

For me, the premise of the story is based on Psalm 139:16:

Your eyes saw my unformed body;
   all the days ordained for me were written in your book
   before one of them came to be.  

That is, 'The Chairman' (Him upstairs) writes the plan for everyone in a series of books and his minions, whom some call angels, intervene to ensure things are kept on track to give the best outcome for humanity. The whole thing pivots on the idea of an interventionist God and the free-will/predestination debate and is a wonderful theological exploration of cause and effect based on a short story by Philip K Dick (Blade Runner).

The minions move around the space-time substrate of Manhattan by going through doors that enable them to jump from one place to another. The key to making it work is the hat! Next time you are out walking and someone wearing a hat passes you by - beware!

This is also a love story - a predestined love story. It also includes an angel motivated by guilt who breaks the rules. It is commendable for being a contemporary action film that has minimal violence and as far as I can remember no weapons!

Matt Damon stars as the action-hero as he chases after Emily Blunt time and time again. He tests her patience to beyond breaking point but in the land of Disney - well, I'll leave you to discover if there is a happy ending or not. Emily Blunt plays the archetypal attractive girl but delivers more than that in a strong performance with some top class dancing. There is more than a hint of Men in Black lurking in the visuals and conceptualisation too.

This is well worth seeing. I can now add the Empire Newcastle to my list of cinemas. I commend this film to you. I'll give it 8/10.

Sherlock Holmes

I know I oscillate between seeing some films on the day of release and then catching up with others a year after release, but this one has escaped me first time around. I've been on holiday and then on the road solidly for 4 weeks - sad boy, no movies!

This is an engaging film - on whatever level you wish to watch it - unless of course you are looking for something that pays homage to Basil Rathbone! This is an in-your-face postmodern update of the the Victorian sleuth using Matrix-style cinematography, a wonderful soundtrack and the portrayal of Holmes as an action hero with serious issues.

The acting performances are all strong but Downey Jr. dominates by a long way. His physical presence, his experimentation with mind-bending substances, his bare-knuckle fighting, his inability to sensitively articulate his emotions and his immense intellect combine to produce a mesmerising character. There are periods of prolonged and brutal violence. As unwelcome as they are, they are an integral part of the contradiction that this Sherlock Holmes is. Loathed but needed in equal measure by every character in the film, he stumbles his way through sheer genius and hapless coincidence fighting a foe who is only revealed at the end - thus the scene is set for the next in the franchise.

I was fortunate enough to watch this on Blu-ray disc and I must say that it was visually stunning. The lighting and colour palette combine to give a compelling depth of characterisation of Victorian London and the Thames-side wharves and docks. In one scene of a series of monumentally vivid explosions where fireball after fireball erupt in stunning vibrancy, the sound is almost non-existent as the full force of what you witness is perfectly well transmitted by visual means. This heightens the impact and is a most clever Directorial device - well done Guy Ritchie.

Where the story does deviate from the norm is that it features a separate love-interest for both Holmes and Watson. Both girls give good performances against lead pair. At the conclusion one is betrothed and one in handcuffs - plenty of scope for development in Sherlock Holmes 2 which is already in the can and which also features Noomi Rapace (Millennium Trilogy).

There is little by way of morality to explore in the main story-line - it is incidental to the plot as Holmes confronts the first potential WMD. What does make this film endearing is Watson's addiction to gambling and also to Holmes and Holmes use of reasoning to reveal the only possible solution. The film does tend to go a bit too long and could happily lose 20 minutes. There is also homage paid to gothic horror and at times the script does sound like something set in Hogwarts.

This film is well worth watching - a visual feat if you don't mind the violence that runs throughout. I'll give it 7.5/10.

Cloudy with a chance of meatballs

I've had this on the shelf for a while and watched it yesterday. A Disney animation about a geeky kid who invents things and is an outcast at his local school. It's an authentic geek comes good, saves the planet and gets his girl story.

The story is well told as it explores a number of universal themes: child/parent relationships, following your vocation, over compensating in order to impress, collapse of a one industry town, greed and celebrity, self-sacrifice to save the world and boy gets girl. Not bad for 90 minutes of animation - the quality of which is stunning. The way animators are able to render water these days is simply amazing.

There isn't a lot to say about this film, except it takes the original book story and re-presents it in a fun and imaginative way. The voice characterisations are spot on including Mr T as the town cop. If you could call up manna from heaven, what would you choose?

Good family viewing that would allow gentle exploration of important themes with children. I'll give it 7/10.

Brighton Rock

Another trip to London provided the opportunity to return to the Ritzy in Brixton to view this gritty and hard film. A retelling of Graham Greene's novel rather than a remake of the 1947 film with a few interpretative twists of its own. Set in the early 1960's, the film's locations, costume and feel are very authentic all of which struck a deep resonance with my childhood.

As a film, the violence of petty and organised crime in Brighton is stereotyped to the point of ridicule - even the cigar smoking Colleoni played by Andy Sirkis is a character more at home in 1930's Chicago or the Soprano's Bada Bing. Rose is never wholly convincing either as the naive girl or emerging mobster wife besotted with Pinkie. John Hurt also (unusually) delivers a stale performance in a role reminiscent of the Chancellor in V for Vendetta. In terms of performances it the menacing Pinkie (Sam Riley) and in particular the resolute Ida played by Helen Mirren who carry the film.

There is a recurring theme of Roman Catholic faith that threads its way through the story. Pinkie believes, but only in hell. Rose believes and we see here strikingly in a church from above a cruciform Christ suspended from the ceiling. Pinkie offers her the choice of freedom or committing a mortal sin meaning she could never go to Church again. She chooses Pinkie and sin.

The script is at times clunky and plot devices are sometimes too contrived, usually in relation to timing. The running battles between mods and rockers add nothing to the organised crime theme that underpins Pinkie's world. There is a high level of deceit and lying necessitated by the plot which made this an uncomfortable watch for me. The moral bankruptcy of the criminal underworld is revealed in all its glory - even to the point of there being no honour amongst thieves! There is constant violence that is consistent with gang-land crime but it is thankfully restrained and demands little in the technicolour department.

This film has too many short-comings for it to be great. Unfortunately it will always live in the shadow of its illustrious predecessor - which will remain a hard act to follow.

I'll give it 6/10.

A Summer's Tale

This is the second in Eric Rohmer's Four Seasons quartet of films. Set in Dinard in Brittany, the film charts the romantic journey of Gaspard one summer as he awaits the start of a new job. Having recently completed his Masters in Maths, Gaspard gets off the ferry and finds his friends house where he plans to await the arrival of Lena. The film covers three weeks of a Breton summer.

As he waits Gaspard fills his time with swimming, walking, sun-bathing and composing songs on his guitar. He encounters Margot, a waitress working at her aunties creperie. Margot has herself recently completed a PhD in ethnography and the two of them spend much time together walking the coast and conducting philosophical debates about the nature of relationships and love.  Margot persuades Gaspard to go to a disco with her and her friends. It is here that he meets Solene and afterwards Margot alerts Gaspard to the fact that Solene has the hots for Gaspard. Gaspard begins to see Solene whilst continuing to see Margot as he waits for Lena.

The problem Gaspard faces is that he is unable to make a choice. He prefers to intellectualise romance and play philosophical games. Whichever of the two girls he is with is the the girl he is madly in love with - but he cannot commit just in case Lena proves to be an even bigger catch. Margot is self-assured, charming, attractive and refreshingly straight-forward. Solene is flirtatious but always wants everything on her terms and sees nothing wrong in stringing two or three boys along at the same time. Lena doesn't arrive until three-quarters of the way through he film.

With each of the three Gaspard attempts to clumsily paw and kiss them. Each rejects his advances for different reasons. Margot because he is intent on Lena and/or Solene and in any case her boyfriend is due to return from overseas. Solene because she likes to play games and toy with her catch and Lena - well that's simply the way Lena is.

Gaspard's intellectualisation of commitment and love blinds him to the fact that Margot is throwing herself at his feet and offers so much to a potential relationship. His mind is seduced by Solene who is more of a sexual tease but whenever things begin to get serious in that department she withdraws citing her principles. Lena is the big prize that Gaspard holds out for as her enigmatic mind-games and pouting tantrums seem only to increase her level of attraction to Gaspard.

Unable to disentangle his mind from the fact that he has got three girls in tow at the same time, he manages to set up a trip with each in turn to the same island destination at the same time and then is unable to get himself out of the fix. Out of the blue, a friend calls with the offer of a deal on an eight-track recorder and as quickly as the ferry delivered Gaspard, he departs on it immediately for a tryst with a tape recorder in La Rochelle. All of which demonstrates that the only true passion in Gaspard's life is music and that girls are nothing more than an intellectual interest.

That well educated, maturing twenty-somethings could allow themselves to get caught up in such shallow and empty mind-games is a surprise. That each of the three women are in different ways very attractive is not.  The film maintains the tension of latent sexuality fervently simmering throughout - I was expecting sexual activity to spontaneously erupt at any point, but it never does. There are kisses with Solene and Lena and when Gaspard attempts the same with Margot she gently but firmly repulses his advances. It is as Margot and Gaspard stand on the jetty as he waits to board the ferry that will take him away that we see the first and only really passionate kiss - and that at Margot's inception. A literal taste of what he will be missing because of his pursuit in women of unreachable perfection - and for him in the pre-eminent sphere of music, an eight-track tape recorder! There are no winners in this story.

An interesting but ultimately frustrating film. I'll give it 6.5/10.