Review: Noah (2014)

Noah (2014)

Whether you're religious or otherwise, the story of Noah is a pretty much ubiquitous bedtime classic, one of those perennial tales that everyone remembers from their youth; a key part of western culture and cornerstone of Abrahamic religion, featuring as it does in both the Quran and the Judeo-Christian book of Genesis. 

Bearing that in mind, it would take a person of mighty cojones indeed to not only consider adapting it for the screen, but to also dare to modify the tale. Step in Darren Aronofsky, an auteur and defiantly independent film maker who has assiduously developed the film over the best part of a decade and produced what must be the most downright bonkers, wilfully bizarre studio blockbuster in years.

The story itself adheres fairly closely to the old familiar, albeit with with some fairly mighty embellishments:

Humanity, cast out of paradise for eating the forbidden fruit, have forged a path of self destruction and selfishness. Noah (Russell Crowe), the last good man on the planet lives a quiet, righteous life away from the rest, foraging berries and generally living in peace with the world. One day he receives a message from “The Creator”, who is vexed with mankinds lack of respect and plans to dispose of them all with an almighty flood, tasking Noah with the building of an arc that will save all the animals (two of each), while leaving the other humans to die. These others, led by angry cockney king Tubal-Cain (Ray Winstone), are understandbly miffed about the whole thing and do their best to inhibit Noahs arcly enterprise.

Darren Aronofsky has always been a maverick film maker with a history of thoughtful, deeply individual films: if anyone was to make a decent go of making this it would be him. Indeed, even with such a massive blockbuster canvas to work with, Aronofsky's Noah is little different to his other films in its bold, uncompromising, and gruelling vision; full of compelling, often divisive story telling and beautiful visuals, as well as the unerring potential to divide an audience in two. However, unlike his other films it is also the closest he has come to making a bad film.

Based on his own graphic novel, the film is laden with a frankly shonky script that, although hitting the key narrative beats and adding some neat flourishes along the way, never really offers any of the characters, Noah aside, any form of development, nor is there any compelling reasoning or motivation for the main characters actions. It's also fairly hard to determine a genuine focus behind the film thanks to choppy edit, robbing it of its clearly intended meditative core. The film is stuffed with varying degrees of social commentary and moral sermonising on the ills of modern society that never come to come to any fruitful conclusion either way. It's all fairly murky.

As mentioned, the story deviates from the source in some key ways. Noah is assisted by giant walking, talking rock beasts, fallen angels called The Watchers who come across as the bastard child of Optmus Prime and the Ents from The Lord of the Rings, who are admittedly fairly entertaining but seem to belong in a different film entirely. So too, a massive sweeping battle, deftly put together and possessed of a gritty realism evokes something from Peter Jacksons Rings saga more than anything else and just doesn't seem to make sense within the confined narrative of the story.

That being said, the film is often so dazzling to look at that these shortcomings can sometimes be ignored. The beautiful Icelandic scenery is shot with a loving eye, the cast frequently silhouetted against beautiful lingering sunsets. So too, a stunning two minute sequence telling the creation story from big bang to the ascent of man is a thing to behold, and will no doubt rile the religious purists.

However, for every beautifully crafted image there's another, jarring over the top CGI shot of poorly animated snakes and elephants walking through a pixel forest to jolt you out of your seat and remind you that what's on screen just doesn't seem to want to cohere into something great. Likewise, the post apocalyptic costume design is often laughable, screaming Benetton advert rather than a biblical epic.

The cast are varying degrees of fine, Russell Crow in particular shining as the gruff loner with some very difficult lines and fairly dark character developments late on, while Jennifer Connelly humanises the film and lends an empathetic core, no mean feat given that she has hardly anything interesting to say or, for that matter, any character development whatsoever.

Anthony Hopkins is the highlight of the film, delivering his four or five lines with a twinkle in his eye as the strangely magical and berry obsessed Methuselah, who doesn't fit in with anything else going on around him.

Going down the ladder, Logan Lerman and Douglas Booth are both completely boring background fluff as the sons Ham and Shem, while Emma Watson isn't given much else to do apart from cry, which she does fairly well. Bottom of the heap though is surely Ray Winstone, who is woefully miscast as a naff king who spends the entire film shouting and forging swords in the rain, or lending unintentional comedy from sitting in a darkened corner and quietly eating what I assume are dinosaurs and unicorns.

Despite all this though, Noah isn't a complete failure, and you can't deny Aronofsky's lofty aims and ambitions even if his final product falls way short of the intended mark.

Noah is a daring and interesting film, wilfully bizarre and unrelentingly annoying, yet strangely compelling and often visually sumptuous.

Not quite a biblical catastrophe then, just a disappointing misfire.

2/5

Thomas Shutt

Review: The Double (2014)

The Double (2014)

In a bleak and distorted alternate reality, isolated and lonely office clerk Simon (Jesse Eisenberg) encounters James (Eisenberg again), the exact double of himself but with polar opposite characteristics. At first the two become friends, but as the confident and aggressive doppelgänger proceeds to take over all aspects of his life a bitter antagonism builds and Simon begins to unravel.

Based on a 19^th century novella by Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Richard Ayoade's “The Double” takes the plot and primary themes of the source story and melds them together with off kilter surrealism to create a darkly comic, Kafkaesque nightmare.

Much has been said of the films influences; it's not hard to see shades of Terry Gilliam's seminal Brazil in the film or, indeed, hints of Wes Anderson and the Coen brothers; but too closely comparing Ayoade's work with his antecedents would be to do a major disservice to what he has created here.

Meticulously crafted from top to bottom, the sparse script (co-written by the director and Avi Korine) makes for a deliberately claustrophobic, confined film. Most of the scenes take place in only one or two scant but well designed sets, the small cast drift from event to event like puppets; actions and sounds repeated over again in a dance of despair and inevitability.

It's a stark, bold vision, both artistically and tonally; Ayoade makes no concessions for the popular audience. The beautifully lit photography by Erik Wilson works alongside the angular, dense sound design ramping up the tension, while a delightfully noirish score score by Andrew Hewitt cuts throughout like nails to a chalkboard.

The limited cast each do fine work with tricky roles, Eisenberg particularly shining in his duel capacity as protagonist and antagonist. While in the past he has come across as a bit too glib or self knowing, here Ayoade uses these traits as advantages, drawing out a performance that fully exploits the actors quirks. Mia Wasikowska too is wonderful as the sweetly melancholic Hannah, co-worker and love interest caught between Eisenberg's polar opposites.

Likewise, Ayoade has wisely filled out his remaining cast with fine comic actors, each providing otherwise thinly drawn characters with a degree of depth and humour. Cameos from Chris Morris and Paddy Considine shine in particular as a hilarious highlights. Indeed, dark as it is, The Double is a very funny film, full of surreal asides and well judged physical humour.

The film is not without a few issues, however. The momentum so meticulously established in the first half wanes in a final act that comes across as rushed, muddling a finale that ends up landing with more of a timid thud than the expected explosion. So too, a sub-plot involving Simon's mother doesn't quite hit home, offering a few funny moments at the expense of diluting the impact of the core story.

These quibbles are minor, though, given how elegant and well crafted the majority of the film is, and it'd be a hard personality indeed who could walk away from the film without something to think about. Ayoade, along with his cast and crew have built a strong individual piece of cinema that stands proudly separate from anything on offer in mainstream cinema at the moment, and for that they should be applauded.

4/5

Review originally written for York Vision

Review: Her (2013)

Review: Her (2013)

The set up: Los Angeles, in the not too distant future, and preposterously named writer Theodore Twombly (Joaquin Phoenix) has recently split from the love of his life. Navel gazing and stuck in a rut he buys a shiny new operating system, an artificially intelligent entity designed to give his life a spring clean and boost his happiness. Constantly linked to him via smartphone and earpiece, the new OS, named Samantha (silkily voiced by Scarlett Johansson) gives him more than he expected, and inevitably Theodore falls in love.

“Man creates machine, man falls in love with machine” is not a new concept by any stretch; Isaac Asimov and Philip K Dick were touching on these themes nearly half a century ago, but in this package as a science fiction romantic comedy drama, we are offered a new, interesting and often beautiful take.
We are presented with the burgeoning relationship as something organic and normal, it could almost be a standard "boy meets girl" love story were it not for the fact that one half of the couple resides in a computer. Indeed, Her wears its romantic comedy influences on its sleeve, not least in its debt to existential 70’s Woody Allen (albeit with a pinch of Minority Reports glossy future sheen). Her is a film that fuses many fairly common elements together in an distinctly uncommon and fresh package.

Much like the best sci fi, it works as a mirror of the present day, reflecting contemporary anxieties and cultural quirks: The film is littered with people vacantly walking around with earphones in, staring at their phones, or talking via hands free thingamy; Theodore sits alone on the couch interacting with a game rather than with other people. In his job, he writes love letters for people who either can't be bothered to write them themselves.

And yet despite the blunt, unflattering treatise on modern ills, and the almost standard rom-com tropes, what we ultimately end up with is a genuinely sweet natured film with honest heart felt emotion. It's a tough balancing act, but writer/director Spike Jonze has produced perhaps his sharpest film yet.
The (deservedly) Oscar nominated screenplay guides his star through a gamut of emotional turmoil. Joaquin Phoenix is at the top of his game here, bringing humor and innocence to a character that in other hands could easily come off as distant and moody. Phoenix is in nearly every scene in the film, with much of that in tight close up, and every emotional tick, every minute thought is delivered with precision and authenticity. It's a great performance, and a surprise to me that he hasn't been nominated for the big awards, since Her is just as much dependent on his performance as it is on Jonze's creativity.

Scarlett Johansson adds warmth and, strangely, humanity to the film, drawing us in and making us believe, just as Twombly does, that there's genuine emotion in this machine. Amy Adams is also invaluable, if underused, as a good natured best friend figure and the only real other person who it's easy to connect with.
Visually, too, the film is wonderfully judged, the cinematography striking yet warm, framing of each shot inextricably linked to Theodores frame of mind at any given time. The  beautiful final shot is an image I'd be happy to have on my wall. Likewise, the music, by Arcade Fire's William Buttler is less a traditional orchestral score, more an ambient soundscape punctuated by brief flickers of piano, dripping with melancholy and reinforcing rather than hammering home the emotion.

Of course, it is possible to fault. At 126 minutes it runs a tad long and as mentioned; Amy Adams gets short changed in terms of screen time. But these few flaws aside, what we have here is a beautiful and thoughtful film, an observation on loneliness, isolation and the how modern technological innovations may not be the best way to remedy these woes. While in lesser hands this could have been a drab lecture, Jonze, together with his impeccable cast and technical crew, has managed to create a modern classic.

5/5


~Review originally written for York Vision~

Review: Robocop (2014)

Alex Murphy (Joel Kinnaman ) is a cop, a bloody good cop at that, but unfortunately he gets exploded and what’s left of him encased in metal. Lo, he becomes Robocop: a cybernetic force of good who kicks ass and eats bad guys for breakfast.

Therein lies the basic premise of both the original and new Robocop, and in the case of Paul Verhoevens schlocky 80’s classic, a razor sharp rumination on themes as varied as political corruption, authoritarianism and human nature; chock full of satire, wonderfully gory action and, most importantly, oodles of fun.

Although this new reimagining does touch base with all the above, it never quite comes close to matching it in any meaningful way, let alone surpassing it. But, after a spree of awful and pointless remakes recently (Total Recall, anyone?), Robocop is actually, when all is said and done, not bad at all.

Much like the central character himself, Robocop (2014) is a well put together, glossy bit of kit; but ultimately you have to question how much free will director José Padilha actually had in its genesis, and how much of its DNA was imposed by the suited bods in the office upstairs.

Narratively it’s smart and snappy and you can’t deny that much thought has clearly gone into the story, which deviates from the original in some new and interesting ways. Likewise, it looks great, with top level effects and shiny cinematography making it consistently great to watch. However tonally it veers wildly and that’s where the main problems lay.

Specifically, it often seems like the film-makers couldn't decide what they wanted the film to be, so they just crammed all the ideas in there for good measure: one minute it’s soft and mournful, next it's all whizz bang spectacle, then a bit of ham handed political satire for luck. Although it’s hard to fault the intent, the sometimes sharp philosophical musings just don’t sit well with the loud, forgettable action and are often undermined by it. Likewise, the strange decision to use the original theme music is very distracting and feels like an attempt to remind us of the original, rather than give the new film something of its own.

That being said, Padilha has assembled a great cast here and they all make a decent effort with the material they're given. A particular tip of the hat must go to Michael Keaton as a dodgy CEO with the lions share of the best lines, and his partner as most valuable player, Gary Oldman who shares most of the screen time with Keaton as a good-egg Doctor. Both light up the screen, and it's hard to imagine the film would be half as watchable without their efforts. Likewise, Samuel L Jackson is a pleasure in his small role hamming it up as rush Limbaugh-like political commentator.

Elsewhere, though the remaining cast don't really fair quite as well, especially poor Joel Kinnaman as the titular tin man who just isn't given anything meaningful to do aside from mumble and shoot.

So it's a fairly entertaining movie then, mostly elevated by some good performances and slick gloss, but it's hard to escape the feeling that it could have been so much more if only they'd just let it be a little more... human.

3/5

~This review was originally written for York Vision~

Review: 12 Years A Slave (2014)

12 Years a Slave (2014)  

The set up is simple: It is Pre-Civil War United States and Solomon Northup (Chiwetelu Ejiofor), a free man from New York, is abducted, stripped of his identity and sold into a life of slavery in the south. Over the following decade the renamed "Platt" first becomes the property of Ford (Benedict Cumberbatch), before being sold down the river to Epps (Michael Fassbender), an unhinged psychopath who's obsession with slave girl Patsey (Lupita Nyong'o) edges him into regular fits of cruel, violent rage.

Based on the memoirs of Northup himself, 12 Years a Slave treads similar thematic ground to last years Django Unchained. But where Tarantino doused his film in an ostentatious, gleeful revisionist sheen, McQueen provides nothing of the sort. His is a sober, often painful study that has its basis in cold punishing fact.

As is to be expected from a Turner prize winning artist, every image is precise and sharp, there is no flab or excess here. Stunningly photographed, prolonged indelible images that infiltrate the mind and induce unease. Central of which is a extended shot of Northup, strung up from a tree as punishment, his feet barely reaching the ground, life continuing around him in ignorance. It's deliberately stark, visceral and uncomfortable viewing. You want it to stop, but of course it doesn't.

The film is full of these unflinching, devastating moments, most of which are provided by the deranged Epps, who delivers an unrelenting stream of degrading, painful punishments to his slaves.
Most notable is a scene in which the master whips field girl and object of his obsession, Patsey (Lupita Nyong’o, in an impressive understated performance), then forces Solomon himself to provide the torture. It’s unpleasant, sickening and all the worse because it's true. These things happened, and they happened regularly.

McQueen counterbalances these frequent abhorrent occurrences with punctuations of elegance, shots of the deep south in its serene beauty, the flickering embers of a dying fire, moments of emotional release for Northup.

The cast is uniformly excellent, with much deserved praise being heaped on Ejiofer. His natural performance delivering a humanity and empathy, a surrogate for the audience, a way in to this horrific situation. Descending through the emotional spectrum, his often silent performance relies on a mastery of the physical, minute changes in his face or stance telling a story without the need for words. Michael Fassbender is also impressive, delivering a performance of pure fire and brimstone, terrifying and repugnant. Both are awards worthy.

However, the film isn't entirely perfect. Narratively speaking, it never truly gives the impression that Northup has been living this misery for many years. While the pace is often broken by a disjointed structure as Northup is dragged from owner to owner and back again. It's also possible to gripe that the film tells the story of the man who survived, who ultimately did get his happy ending where countless millions did not. This film shows us a journey into (and out of) slavery, allowing us to leave at the end with him.

But of course, these are all  inherent in the source material, and in making a film for the masses Mcqueen has to consent to certain stylistic constraints. And, in the end films about American Slavery are so vanishingly rare, especially as blunt and real as this, it's hard to find flaws in the intent.

Ultimately, 12 years a slave is an overwhelmingly accomplished film, weighty and powerful. A story of the triumph of courage through an unthinkable hell, a real life pain and trauma for millions, told in a beautiful often brutal and uncompromising fashion, and yet it comes through the other side with no shortage of grace and beauty. A elegant, emotional film.


5/5


Thom Shutt


*This review was originally written for York Vision*

Ones to watch 2014

Ones to watch 2014

Arriving March 7th, THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL looks like another slice of fried gold from Wes Anderson. Ralph Fiennes headlines as a hotel concierge bequeathed a painting by elderly guest/lover (Tilda Swinton), much to the chagrin of her son (Adrian Brody), resulting in a cat and mouse chase as they attempt to determine the paintings true owner. Also featuring the likes of Bill Murray, Willem Dafoe, Jeff Goldblum, Edward Norton, and Owen Wilson, Anderson has assembled a cast so esoteric it makes the heart swell. Expect a bonkers treat.

A week later sees the release of Terry Gilliams THE ZERO THEOREM, starring  Christoph Waltz as a computer analyst working to find the meaning of life. Poor old Terry hasn't had much luck recently so it's a relief here to find him working in a similar ball park as his earlier masterworks Brazil and Twelve Monkeys. The Orwellian plot sounds pleasingly kooky and, if all else fails, the wonderful Waltz has a habit of winning an Oscar whenever anyone points a camera at him, so we can expect a characteristically top notch performance from him.

Fans of Sci Fi are in for a treat again later in the year when Brit wunderkind Christopher Nolan unleashes INTERSTELLAR (November 7th). Details on the plot are thin for this one (it is Nolan after all), but we do know that it's based on a concept by legendary physicist Kip Thorne and focusses on a group of astronauts as they head through a wormhole into another universe, or dimension... or something. Based on Nolan's previous high watermark, we can expect an cerebral visual feast of a movie, and with a cracking cast featuring the likes of Anne Hathaway, Matthew McConaughey (who is on great form recently) and Nolan regular Michael Caine, it'll be a surefire winner.

Finally, fans of smaller scale indie fare will no doubt find much to love in Zach Braff's sophomore effort, WISH I WAS HERE (sic), the "spiritual follow up" to his charming 2004 debut Garden State. Although not an actual sequel to the earlier film, it's very much in the same vein, with Braff starring as an actor, father and husband struggling to find the purpose of life as he approaches his forties. Featuring perennial indie darling Kate Hudson as his wife and Scrubs alumnus Donald Faison, this looks like it'll be a funny, sweet and a tiny bit life affirming.


**Originally written for the York Vision website**

In Review: The Hobbit, The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

The Hobbit - The Desolation of Smaug (2013) 


For three glorious winters a decade ago, a cheerful bearded fat man delivered a trio of specatular and gorgeous Christmas treats to cinemas around the world. Rich in detail, monumental in scope and universally acclaimed, Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings is a supreme achievement in modern cinema. It would take a brave man to even attempt to repeat the feat.

And yet, after years of fannying about in development hell, last year came An Unexpected Journey. The first of a whole new trilogy of Tolkeiny goodness, a chance to revisit Middle Earth and relive some of those precious memories.

Or that was the idea, anyway. Unfortunately for many, An Unexpected Journey never quite managed to take flight in the way that it's esteemed predecessors did. Dogged by pacing problems and sometimes lacking a certain magic that made the earlier trilogy so wonderful, it wasn't quite the immediate classic we'd hoped for. Of course, The Phantom Menace, this was not. Sure, it took a while to get going, but once it did it still had plenty going for it. Gollum, those wonderful middle earth vistas, hair raising action... Sir Ian in that big hat. It was all quite lovely, but it wasn't perfect.

So, one year on, where are we? What of Smaug?

Opening with a neat flashback in a familiar pub, Desolation breezes out of the gates and takes flight through a seeming infinity of action and plot towards a  roaring climax with onehelluva dragon.

As with every Jackson film, we're clocking in here at close to three hours, but it's three very fast hours. Indeed, as strange as it sounds, I find myself wanting more time with these characters once the film closes out. After years of watching extended editions on DVD, the original trilogy became more like a mini series that I'd watch in dribs and drabs. Voluminous as this film is, it's clear to see some of the cuts he made that will surely be slotted back in come the inevitable extended DVD.

That being said, we're not missing any great detail here, and of course, many purists will gripe about the inflation of a slender tome into a 9 hour uber-trilogy, but to be honest anyone who does is missing the point. As an adaptation of a book, a few liberties are taken and Jackson crams in extra details from Tolkeins own writings, but... as a film, a slice of cinematic entertainment, it works very well indeed.
In fact, one can't quite shake the feeling that the film is trying to shake off the sins of its forebear: it's notably short on the plot-lite standing around on the first film, and heavy on the zippy action and story development of the earlier trilogy.

In trimming out much of the expositional mud that tainted the first film, here we have a pace and lightness that characterises Jacksons best work. A multitude of action sequences, each as dazzling and entertaining as the last clatter along while a plethora of characters and beasties zip across the screen in breathless fashion.
Of course the film isn't short of flaws. While all are fun, some of the action seems a tad unnecessary, particularly elements of the final Smaug showdown which runs a tad long. But it's a small gripe when other elements are so rousing. The much touted barrel set piece in particular is, excuse me, barrels of fun (sorry). A particular moment involving rotund dwarf Bombur had me grinning very widely indeed.
Meanwhile, Gandalfs adventures into the appendices continue  to engage, although never quite take full flight despite the delightfully trippy introduction of big-bad Sauron.

The sprawling cast all seem to be having fun, and sink their teeth into the little screen time they're given. Of course, some of the dwarves inevitably become background fluff, but kudos must go to Lee Pace as nasty bastard Elf king Thranduil, who is a nice counterpoint to Elrond and Galadriel. Big up also to arian uber-hunk Orlando Bloom who almost steals the film as Legolas. His succession of ridiculously over the top but fun action beats is an obvious but pleasing nod to his famed over the top scenes in the original trilogy.
She-elf Tauriel is also decent addition, adding much needed femininity to an otherwise entirely blokey affair, although the hokey subplot about her and fit dwarf Kili is a bit lame, but it doesn't detract greatly from the rest of the film.

Stephen Fry is pleasingly unctuous as the self serving Master of Laketown, although a tad underused. It would be no surprise if many of his excised scenes end up in next years extended edition.

Elsewhere, we find Weta digital delivering awesome spectacle in the effects department, particularly with that titular dragon, who really is a sight to behold. Benedict Cumberbatch delivers a characteristically wicked performance, his voice echoing through the Dwarvish halls like a supersized Darth Vader. Much like the Gollum scene in the first film, his scenes with Bilbo are one of the highlights of the film.

Come the final cliffhanger ending (which may wind a few people up), it's hard to fault Jacksons effort. While still falling slightly short of his own very high bench mark, it's a definite improvement on part one. A succession of glorious New Zealand postcard views, wonderfully esoteric characters and spectacular action, Desolation of Smaug is tantalisingly close to being that new Middle Earth film we wanted. Good work, Sir.
Bring on part 3!

4/5

Thomas Shutt

**This review was originally written for York Vision