Garyswordz

Best” Worst Film Contender, 20 October 2007

Author: gary-444 from United Kingdom

It is very difficult to salvage any redeeming features from this film, other than its burgeoning status as a contender for the best worst mainstream film in recent years.

The plot really is as simple as a man obsessed with a woman amputates her limbs and keeps her in a box.

As for the tag lines, bizarre, yes, erotic no. Leading lady Sherilyn Fenn is sexually neutralised in her role, pretty much undermining the entire premise of the film. Director Jennifer Lynch, in trying to emulate the off beat vibe of her fathers work, falls flat on her face on this project with a resounding thump.

Kim Bassinger famously pulled out of this film at the last minute at considerable personal cost to her – she should reflect that it was worth every penny not be involved. This is the only time I have ever stayed with a film to the end purely because I wanted to verify its worst ever status unfolding before my eyes

Off – Bleat Gem, 14 October 2007

Author: gary-444 from United Kingdom

How much you enjoy this film lies wholly in your approach to it. Those expecting a sophisticated, glossy gore – fest will come away feeling “fleeced”. However those prepared to sample a quirky, low budget, unassuming story with its tongue firmly in its cheek will not be disappointed.

Director and writer Jonathon King combines some very effective “American Werewolf in London” style special effects with a “light” script not ashamed to make plenty of bad sheep jokes. A cast of unknown, yet affectionate stereotypes,is held together by the most rounded character, Eco Warrior, Experience, well played by Danielle Mason, around which all this mayhem is played.

The business end of the film , the “killer sheep” is convincingly portrayed with a realism which surely pushes its British “15” Rating to the limit. But at just under the magic hour and a half length, the story does not outstay its’ welcome and shows a discipline, structure, and coherence, which belies its zany left field premise.

Strong on laughs and explicit gore, the “feel” of the film is more “Shaun of the Dead” than “Evil Dead” and harks back to those 1940’s and 50’s black and white films about mad professors and mutant monsters to which this frequently pays homage.Just enjoy – don’t judge

Undistinguished, formulaic fare, 28 September 2007

Author: gary-444 from United Kingdom

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The pedigree of leading lady Jodie Foster and Director Neil Jordan suggested that they might be able to do something new and refreshing with the “revenge” genre, which this film is firmly entrenched in. Sadly, they don’t. Dame Helen Mirren recently said that no artist should be ashamed of making a film for the money – and that is what this enterprise reeks of.

The synopsis of the plot is simple. Foster and fiancé are beaten by Central Park thugs, fiancé dies, Foster “fights back” against the bad guys in general with a cop slowly closing in. If this sounds as though it doesn’t merit a 2 hour running time, you would be right. But Jordan does not do 90 minute films.

In principle the “Chick as vigilante” twist has potential. But it is squandered by the clichéd scenes. The opening tunnel ambush, the subway mugging and closing tenement shootout are almost shot for shot lifts from “Death Wish”, the story’s modern inspiration. Even the “john pulling hookers” and Vietnamese store hold up pay obvious homage to Clint Eastwood films in the former case, and Michael Douglas in “falling Down ” in the second.

The Rod and Bruce Taylor screenplay is exceptionally “clunky”, betraying their big screen inexperience. Plot developments are not so much hinted at – as smacked across your face.

Yet it does have some redeeming features.Terence Howard gives a fine performance as Detective Mercer who closes in on Foster as the film moves on. There are a few funny lines too. When Detectives ascertain that double murder victims are husband and wife, one remarks:”Haven’t they heard of Divorce?” And the final scene, having been arrived at in the most hackneyed, clichéd, and formulaic way possible is redeemed by an unexpected twist.

Do not be seduced into believing that this is some sort of Feminist statement . It isn’t. Foster behaves as cynically as any past man has in the role. Multilayered ? No, more like a badly fitting jigsaw whose bits JUST fit.

The music lacks atmosphere, and the moral issues are skimmed over in favour of trying to do too much, in too long a time. The studio would have probably got a much stronger film if they had insisted om 90 minutes. This notwithstanding, expect the blood, violence, gratuitous use of the word “cunt” and gunning down the bad guys mixture to have audiences rooting in the aisles.

Tremendous Trilogy Finale, 19 August 2007

Author: gary-444 from United Kingdom

When the Bourne Identity came out I was as impressed as anyone with the clever storyline,fine acting, and pacey, often innovative, action sequences. However the Bourne Supremacy, which I had assumed was a “cash in ” sequel lost me, mainly because the narrative was poor, and the sense of purpose in the story was lost. Well, this third installment puts that right with spades, and works both as the end of a trilogy, and as a stand alone piece.

Matt Damon proves what a fine actor he is. Although an action hero, he always seems to avoid cliché and formula in the role. Cleverly, because the essence of the story is the search for his “identity”, it is also a search for his soul. So although the action sequences are frequently quite brutal, he never succumbs to the Schwarzenegger “automaton” style of action hero.

Although awash with surveillance gadgetry, the story eschews hi tech killing methods, and is far the better for it. The thrill is in the chase. David Strathairn, who has a gargantuan list of film acting credits behind him, is tremendous as the maverick Deputy CIA Chief,Noah Vosen. Joan Allen,as his nemesis Pamela Landy, is superb as his nemesis, and proves that there is a place for women over 50 in modern movies. By contrast, Julia Stiles as erstwhile love interest Nicky Parsons, has a curiously underwritten, functional role.

Not cerebral, but visceral entertainment. Much cleverer than the Mision Impossible franchise. and a for once plausible cross Atlantic contrast to James Bond.

Mawkish, lumbering dross, 15 July 2007

Author: gary-444 from United Kingdom

I viewed this film cold, knowing nothing about it, and left it cold. The tale of Chris Gardner,played by Will Smith, a down on his luck black travelling salesman, making good as a Stockbroker has narrative potential. But Director Gabriele Muccino, whose track record is hitherto with foreign language films, squanders it.

I didn’t really like Chris Gardner.His pursuit of the stockbroker “Dream” is at the expense during the film, of a squalid life for his young son. His wife, played by Thandie Newton,has a horribly underwritten role. her inability to look after their son, at least in the short term, is never clear.

His co workers at the stockbrokers are all pretty shallow, and objectionable characters – is this really the dream that he is chasing? The narrative hinges on an ever increasing series of disasters and hurdles which impede his “pursuit of happiness”. Yet the uplifting element required to counterbalance this in the minds of the audience never really works.

At 117 minutes the running time is a good 30 minutes too long. After 90 minutes I found myself saying to myself, “look he gets the job at the end, can we just finish now?”

Essentially episodic in style, there are some good moments, and good characters, but Muccino fails to “join up the dots”. For a film so dark and downbeat, racism and the cynicism of the financial world gets a super-gloss. The happiness that he finds at the end is a Stockbrokers job which subsequently earns him millions . Wow.

A total miss hit. This story should either have been rewritten as a straight comedy – and it could have worked as such, or as a cinema “verite” piece, warts and all. It wasn’t, so it fails.

Bloated Finale, 28 May 2007

Author: gary-444 from United Kingdom

I am a huge fan of Pirate films as a genre, and loved the first POTC installment. The second one seemed like half a film to me, so i was keenly waiting the conclusion of this tale. I could not have been more disappointed.

It is easy to forget that the first film focused on the roguish charm and wit of Jack Sparrow, told a coherent story, was well plotted, pacey, and had few special effects. “worlds End” has grown into a bloated monster, fat on the success of the first two installments. Hugely impressive, and expensive, special effects have dwarfed the plot such that Sparrow has been relegated into little more than a bystander in this juggernaut of a CGI driven picture.

Many of the scenes were shot during last years filming of the second “Dead Mans Chest”, and apparently the script had not been finalised at that point. It shows. This franchise has become a “Mision Impossible” style enterprise whereby the set pieces are put together first, and then joined up by a script that tries to make some sense of it.

Sadly, i do hope that this is the end for this series.The English Rose innocence of Keira Knightley now seems wet, her attempts at being Action Woman risible. And as for Orlando Bloom, he is about as dashing as Larry Grayson, as he hangs around to win his lady’s heart. Jack, previously the vibrant life of every frame has been sidelined by a tidal wave of special effects that are simply there because the money is there to provide them , rather than because of any dramatic imperative.

Farewell, and bon voyage – i will remember the good times.

Worthy But Turgid, 28 May 2007

Author: gary-444 from United Kingdom

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Fincher is one of the best directors around at the moment. His credentials include Alien 3, Fight Club, Seven, Panic Room and the massively under rated The Game. Stylistically, and technically, the film is fine. But by his own high standards it is a dramatic failure.

The opening third of a long 2 hour 49 min running time shows him at his best. The violence is shocking, malevolent and unsettling with the audience sharing the bewilderment of the time. Whio is the killer ? Why is he doing this? What are the links ? When is he going o strike next? Then the problems start.

Essentally this is the story of Grayson the cartoonist turned author and his quest to unmask the Zodiac killer. But this takes over twenty years, the contact from Zodiac is episodic, and the genuine killings all take place at the front end of the picture.

Grayson does have a complex story to tell – and Fincher tells it. But ultimately in so doing he kills the dramatic tension of the tale. A journalistic maxim is “never let the facts get in the way of a good story” and this applies here.The labyrinthine detective work begins to collapse under its own investigative weight leaving space really only for devoted “Zodiacphiles” but not the standard cinema goer.

Surprisingly Fincher chooses to pass on two of the most dramatic moments of the story. The moment when two patrol car officers pass the Zodiac killer after he has slain the taxi driver is recounted but not portrayed, and the heart attack death of the prime suspect is told by post film postscript ! The soundtrack is wonderful “Hurdy Gurdy Man”, Santana et al, as is the acting and dialogue.But ultimately an intriguing story does not necessarily make a great film, as is evidenced here.

Irritating but Inventive Sequel, 26 May 2007

Author: gary-444 from United Kingdom

After the shortcomings of the recently released “Sunshine”, Garland and Boyle, the Executive Producers give further evidence that their talent doesn’t quite match their ambition.

A sequel to the limited, but well delivered 28days later, was merited.A sci fi film set in a contemporary Britain riven by virus crazed zombies/ crazies is worth revisiting. Initially the opening sequence when Robert Carlyle, the lead, is besieged by lightning quick vicious zombies is handled brilliantly. The camera work and editing combine to make a genuinely terrifying and horrifying scene.

However when the film settles down the hand held camera work and trademark grainy dark visuals start to irritate, as do the holes in the plot. The London settings, for a film financed in part by the UK film Council are thudding – Tower bridge,The Dome, Wembley, Big Ben.Nice for the Yanks, but a bit too obvious for British audiences.

The allegorical content regarding the parallels between the Americans inability to “hold” central London in the same way as they have failed in Baghdad is fine. You either “get” the layering, or you don’t. Those that don’t are not missing out as it does not interfere with the mainline plotting.

Pretty consistently dark, gory and unpleasant, there is an hilarious scene towards the end when a helicopter uses its blades to decapitate dozens of attacking zombies causing everyone in the cinema to burst out laughing – intentionally so, and a piece of welcome “black” relief.

The finale neatly opens the way for a third installment in such a way that i am sure it would b successful. Maybe next time eh Danny and Alex?

Flawed, but worthy,visually spectacular effort, 6 May 2007

Author: gary-444 from United Kingdom

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The sci fi genre has only fitfully appeared in mainstream cinema recently. As a fan, I wanted the film to succeed. Boyle and Garland are distinguished and accomplished at directing and producing, and equipped with a big budget, this picture stood every chance of success. But somehow it doesn’t quite get there.

The CGI effects are tremendous. The soundtrack compelling, broody and sympathetic.The subject matter is Shakespearean in ambition – destiny, fate,tragedy, the Grand Quest. But the script doesn’t match this ambition and the storyline looks as though it has been machine-gunned in the editing suite.

A third of the way through the film we discover that the first mission spaceship is still around. The crew have to make a momentous and plot altering decision to investigate. the dramatic potential is huge but after the decision is taken we suddenly appear at “Icarus1” the original spaceship.

Ultimately i lost interest as the bold and challenging aspirations of the original story are shredded by cheap dramatic devices and unconvincing plot and character development. as a consequence it fails against the less ambitious “Event Horizon”, and never matches “Alien ” in the suspense stakes- both films clearly providing a stylistic anchor.

A decent effort – but could, and should, have been far better.