Tyrannosaur ———————————7/10
Directed and Written by Paddy Considine, Starring Peter Mullan, Olivia Colman and Eddie Marsan
Fandango Synopsis - An angry, violent alcoholic finds respite with a devout woman whose husband abuses her.
Positives - Tyrannosaur gives you a focused, unflinching look at a world most people don’t even want to consider. Many of those who inhabit this world have had their lives crumble long ago and are just hanging on with alcohol as their solace. It’s an ugly, primitive world of violence well depicted. I like that it doesn’t shy away from the brutality these people live with.
Peter Mullan and Olivia Colman both give strong performances. Peter Mullan’s Joeseph is one of the scariest characters I’ve ever seen in a film. He’s has no control over his temper and when he snaps he’s capable of some horrifying things. He just stumbles around with seemingly no purpose or will. Over the course of some great scenes and his chance meeting and odd friendship with Olivia Colman’s Hannah, Joseph does gain some purpose and will to live. He may be a hard character for many to embrace due to some awful things he does, but I felt for him and think that has much to do with Mullan’s performance.
As good as Mullan was, it was Olivia Colman who stole the film. She plays a sweet, loving, religious woman in a terrible marriage who tries all she can, often to her disasterous detriment, to see the good in even the most awful people and actions. She radiates the love that is lacking in the rest of the people in her life. The things she endures makes you nauseous, but the believability of her performance helped make it special. She is fantastic and her character’s journey takes a wildly unexpected turn.
I liked the lesson Joseph had to learn, which is one many people don’t immediately grasp. He, in his poor, drunken, shit existence is of the belief that those who on the exterior appear to be living comfortably obviously have cushy, easy lives. It’s easy to think you have it worse than others, but Colman’s character, like many women, hide the abuse at great cost to themselves.
Negatives - I didn’t have any major problems with TYRANNOSAUR, but I guess I wish the film had been longer and more time would have been spent between Mullan and Colman’s characters. It ended a little abruptly, but I wasn’t dissatisfied.
Verdict - TYRANNOSAUR is a tough film that isn’t likely to be a comfortable watch for many. It’s brutal subject matter, but feels authentic and is brought to life by two fantastic performances. Peter Mullan is terrifying yet oddly endearing, while Olivia Colman is heartbreaking. I thought both of these characters went on a journey worth examining and I praise first time director Paddy Considine for his unflinching depiction of this world. TYRANNOSAUR is absolutely worth seeing.
Please leave a comment by clicking the comment button to the upper left of this post. Type a name, give a real or fake e-mail (it will not post your e-mail address, real or fake). On the optional register screen, click “just post as a guest” on the bottom left.
I will respond to every comment I receive.
FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER and/or FACEBOOK to get updates as to when I update the Blog
Lastly, Check out THE FLICKSATION PODCAST to which I contribute.
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close ————7/10
Directed by Stephen Daldry, Written by Eric Roth, Starring Thomas Horn, Tom Hanks, Sandra Bullock, Max von Sydow and Jeffrey Wright
Fandango Synopsis- Oskar, who lost his father in the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center, is convinced that his dad left a final message for him somewhere in the city. Upon finding a mysterious key in his father’s closet, Oskar sets out in search of the lock it fits. Feeling disconnected from his grieving mother and driven by a tirelessly active mind, Oskar has a journey of discovery that takes him beyond his loss and leads to a greater understanding of the world.
Positives- I’m someone who has almost completely avoided ( not entirely actively ) the true life 9/11 stories and anniversary specials etc. Sadly, when I think of 9/11 it’s usually about the horrid abuses of power by the government and the infringements on civil liberties in response to the atrocity. So, as odd as it may be, EXTREMELY LOUD AND INCREDIBLY CLOSE felt like a relatively fresh story to me.
I was surprised that I found it to be a sweet and sometimes touching film. It took me on a journey I wasn’t always sure I wanted to be on with a kid I wasn’t always sure I wanted to be with, but as a whole I’m glad I was along for the ride.
While his character could be annoying, I was impressed by Thomas Horn, who was tasked with carrying this behemoth, Oscar baiting picture. Oskar, who may have some form of Aspergers, is all over the place emotionally. He’s bossy, intelligent, secretive, driven, hyper-aware and often an emotional mess. Horn was good throughout, but truly nails the few big emotional breakdown scenes in a way that almost no child actor can and many adult actors struggle with.
New York was gorgeously filmed in an interesting way. You often get to view New York through the eyes of Oskar, as a big, chaotic, exciting, but terrifying place.
Andres Desplat’s score really worked for me.
Jeffrey Wright and Thomas Horn share a fantastic scene late in the film. This is the big emotional payoff as Oskar may have finally found what he’d been searching for throughout the film. It’s an emotional few minutes and the best scene in the film for Horn and the film as a whole. Jeffrey Wright was perfect. He is one of the best actors working and really needs to be in pretty much every film and get a ton more leading roles.
Negatives- As good as Thomas Horn was, his character was oftentimes irksome. The film was at its worst when Horn was doing the terrible voiceover. It was grating and almost always unnecessary. I place the blame on the writing rather than the acting there.
Some of the meetings Oskar had with people along the way hit the wrong note with me, coming across as unnatural and unrealistic, even for a highly contrived story like this one.
The story was highly unbelievable and contrived, but I mostly accepted that, therefore I could have completely done without the tying up and explaining of things from Sandra Bullocks character. Then, after those unnecessary scenes they offered up the swing scene, which pushed things too far and offered a quasi happy ending that felt wrong for this story. No one gets a happy ending out of 9/11 and even that little bit of an answer for Oskar seemed too perfect.
Verdict- EXTREMELY LOUD AND INCREDIBLY CLOSE has plenty of flaws without a doubt. The narration is awful to listen to, your lead character annoys at times, there are some huge contrivances and a pretty terrible final few minutes, but the heart of the story and the film is in the right place, which does a lot to overcome its shortfalls. It’s a sweet and often touching film featuring a surprising and impressive lead performance by Thomas Horn. He nailed the emotional breakdowns in ways other child actors rarely do. There’s a strong supporting cast too which features Tom Hanks, Sandra Bullock, Viola Davis, Max von Sydow and Jeffrey Wright, who is front and center in the best scene in the film. New York City is filmed in a uniquely frenetic way and Andres Desplat supplies a fitting score. It’s not too soon for a 9/11 film and it never was. I don’t think EXTREMELY LOUD AND INCREDIBLY CLOSE is the Oscar Best Picture Nominee embarrassment that many do, but rather a very well made film that overcomes some major flaws and mostly delivers. I think it’s worth seeing.
Please leave a comment by clicking the comment button to the upper left of this post. Type a name, give a real or fake e-mail (it will not post your e-mail address, real or fake). On the optional register screen, click “just post as a guest” on the bottom left.
I will respond to every comment I receive.
FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER and/or FACEBOOK to get updates as to when I update the Blog
Lastly, Check out THE FLICKSATION PODCAST to which I contribute.
The Flicksation Podcast just posted Episode #18. On the episode we review/discuss the Best Picture Oscar Nominee EXTREMELY LOUD AND INCREDIBLY CLOSE, David Cronenberg’s A DANGEROUS METHOD and the Meryl Streep starring THE IRON LADY.
In the Feature Segment “Hanky Panky” we each chose a Tom Hanks film to discuss that we particularly enjoy. (My choice was PHILADELPHIA)
Of course we spend time discussing the most interesting recent film news and in the “Quick Fix” we mention any other films/TV we’ve seen of late. (I quickly talk about two critical darlings CERTIFIED COPY and THE ARBOR as well as the great Brit television show SHERLOCK)
If interested the links are below. If you know anyone else who may like it, please pass it along to them. (Thanks for any help getting the word out!)
You can listen on the website, but I urge you to subscribe to the podcast through the iTunes Store. Just search The Flicksation Podcast. You can read my thoughts on all the new films discussed right here on my blog as well, in fact PLEASE DO!
Certified Copy—————————————-5/10
A French Film Directed and Written by Abbas Kiarostami, Starring Juliette Bincohe and William Shimmell
IMDB Synopsis- In Tuscany to promote his latest book, a middle-aged British writer meets a French woman who leads him to the village of Lucignano. While there, a chance question reveals something deeper.
Positives- The acting was fantastic. Juliette Binoche and Williams Shimmell spend the majority of this film going one on one and there was a chemistry that had me me happily along for the trip throughout most of the film. I liked spending time with these two. Binoche’s mood throughout fluctuates wildly and she is able to sell all the emotions. She also masterfully slips in and out of three different languages. Shimmell has a little less heavy work to do as his character is mostly confidently pompous and later becomes annoyed and withdrawn.
Nothing about the direction wows you, but it’s a beautiful looking film. Kiarostami shoots the Tuscan countryside and lovely quaint village in such soft loving light. You feel like you’re visiting these areas with the characters.
I found a lot of the discussion about the value of art and the value of forgeries or copies to be interesting, with Shimmell and Binoche batting ideas and beliefs back and forth. No definitive answers are given about anything, but it was interesting stuff that I haven’t spent much time thinking about.
Negatives- While I enjoyed the two actors playing off each other, my interest began and continued to wane as their possible charade of being a fifteen year married couple kicked in. The exact extent of their relationship was and continues to be a mystery, but it never became one I really cared to uncover or explore.
I loved the performances but as the film continued on and my interest in the charade never materialized. I had to wonder what are these strong performances in service of? I either missed the profundity (very possible) or I was in search of something more than was ever offered up. I had a good time with the characters for a while, but for me it never materialized into anything for me to take away from the film.
Verdict- CERTIFIED COPY is a critical darling and an interesting film in some respects. I found the strong performances by Binoche and Shimmell and their chemistry together to be enough to drag me happily along for most of their day trip. Kiarostami lovingly shot beautiful Tuscany. I was also interested by some of the early debate of the value of copies, but as things went along and the mystery of their relationship came to the forefront I stopped caring. My lack of interest pretty much corresponded with Shimmell’s characters annoyance. I felt the strong performances were in service of something I either didn’t grasp or was never there to begin with. CERTIFIED COPY is highly regarded, but I cannot recommend it.
Please leave a comment by clicking the comment button to the upper left of this post. Type a name, give a real or fake e-mail (it will not post your e-mail address, real or fake). On the optional register screen, click “just post as a guest” on the bottom left.
I will respond to every comment I receive.
FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER and/or FACEBOOK to get updates as to when I update the Blog
Lastly, Check out THE FLICKSATION PODCAST to which I contribute.
The Arbor——————————-6/10
A Documentary Directed by Clio Barnard, Starring Manjinder Virk, Christine Bottomley and Natalie Gavin
Fandango Synopsis- A mix of documentary and fictional elements tells the story of doomed playwright Andrea Dunbar, who wrote about the difficult life she endured growing up in England’s Bradford housing projects. Archival footage featuring Dunbar is presented, along with interviews with family members, including her daughter, Lorraine, who led a similarly troubled life. Excerpts from Dunbar’s most famous play, “The Arbor,” are performed on the streets of her hometown and at Buttershaw Estates, where she lived.
Positives- The best thing about THE ARBOR is the characters. These are real people and the film doesn’t try to make you feel a certain way about them, but instead presents them as they are. There aren’t any perfect or evil people here, just humans existing, making choices, sometimes terrible ones and living with the consequences of those choices and what life has dealt them.
THE ARBOR also gives you an unbiased matter of fact view into a side of England that isn’t often enough shown in films. These people grow up and live in a very poor and rough neighborhood, but it’s normal to them.
The best scenes in the film are when specifics scenes from the Andrea Dunbar play are acted out in public. It’s done in a way unlike I’d really seen before. The scenes take place outdoors right in the middle of the neighborhood, with people looking on. Being unfamiliar with Dunbar’s work, I wished there had been a lot more of these. Natalie Gavin playing “The Girl” in these scenes was very good.
Negatives-The big debate coming away from THE ARBOR will be about its experimental style as a documentary. It has actors lip-syncing to the original recordings of the people in Dunbar’s life. I found that the lip-syncing worked AT TIMES, but for the most part was a big mistake. I often found it awkward and silly, serving to significantly lessen the emotional impact of these people’s stories. It was so unnatural that at times I found it laughable even though they are talking about some dark and heavy things. ( For example an actor lip-syncing words from an ex-boyfriend of Dunbar’s stands over a car he is fixing, says two lines of dialogue and then looks away and goes back to fixing ) It’s a very real life they are digging into, so it’s disappointing these scenes felt so staged. If you put the real people, with their aged faces on screen to tell their harrowing stories, the impact could have been huge.
I think being unfamiliar with Dunbar’s material hurt the film for me. You hear about some horrible, ugly things that people had to live through and have done, but without the connection to the material there was a lack of context. I don’t feel I got to know these people well, so it made me wonder why any of it really matters to me. I had no connection to the lip-syncing actors and didn’t know the real people, so I had little in which to connect. Making THE ARBOR as a regular dramatic feature or a more intimate Documentary with the real people could possibly have made this a special film.
Verdict- I think THE ARBOR is a decent film, but I cannot help looking at it as a missed opportunity. There are tough, heartbreaking stories to be told around the life on Andrea Dunbar, but the experimental lip-syncing style of this Doc undermined the material. I still think there are things to like about the film. The non-judgemental, matter-of-fact view of the neighborhood and the people in Dunbar’s life was refreshing and the scenes from her play acted out in the neighborhood were a high point. So, I think there is rich material, but weak execution, which makes THE ARBOR an interesting, but ultimately frustrating and mediocre film. It could be worth a watch, but there are plenty of better films to seek out.
Please leave a comment by clicking the comment button to the upper left of this post. Type a name, give a real or fake e-mail (it will not post your e-mail address, real or fake). On the optional register screen, click “just post as a guest” on the bottom left.
I will respond to every comment I receive.
FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER and/or FACEBOOK to get updates as to when I update the Blog
Lastly, Check out THE FLICKSATION PODCAST to which I contribute.
A Dangerous Method ————————————5/10
Directed by David Cronenberg, Written by Christopher Hampton, Starring Michael Fassbender, Keira Knightley, Viggo Mortensen, Vincent Cassel and Sarah Gadon
Fandango Synopsis- In 1904 a Russian woman named Sabina Spielrein arrives at Carl Jung’s clinic, seeking treatment for hysteria. Jung is eager to test Sigmund Freud’s theories on Sabina and, in fact, successfully treats her. Two years later Jung and Sabina meet Freud in person, and Jung takes over the treatment of Otto Gross, whose influence leads Jung to begin an affair with Sabina, contributing to a rift with Freud.
Positives- The best scenes in the film are when you get Viggo’s Freud and Fassbender’s Jung discussing or arguing their philosophies. A lot of their discussions didn’t have a ton of frame of reference for me, but those two actors are really good and worked well together. You could feel the animosity from Freud and the frustration from Jung.
Viggo Mortensen is one of the best actors working today and completely disappears into his roles every time. He does so again in A DANGEROUS METHOD. I don’t know enough of about Freud to be able to recognize whether Viggo accurately portrays the man, but I can say I bought the character and all his cigar chomping. Viggo’s Freud is fun to watch.
Keira Knightley is an actress that ALWAYS bothers me. She seems to genuinely want to be a part of interesting films, rarely going with the money roles, but she never seems to convince me, but instead annoys the hell out of me. (NEVER LET ME GO being an example) That being said, I think she gives a brave performance in A DANGEROUS METHOD. After hearing how over the top her performance was supposed to be, I was positive I was going to loathe her, but while not close to perfect, I think she delivered. I think she went to places that very few actresses would be willing to attempt. She wants to be a great actress and the effort showed.
Vincent Cassel had one scene as Freud disciple Otto Gross and he brought more energy in his few minutes than the rest of the film did in one hundred. He brought life to the screen and Gross’ short time with Jung made a huge impression on Jung, altering his views for the rest of his life.
Negatives- A DANGEROUS METHOD is a near lifeless film. It fell dramatically flat for me. Michael Fassbender’s Jung is your lead character and he’s easily the least dynamic and interesting of them all.
You are meant to care about Jung and Sabina Spielrein’s relationship but I couldn’t care a less. The same with Jung’s family life and interactions with his wife. Tons of time is spent on this stuff, including the films final minutes, but I wasn’t interested in the least. The interesting stuff had to do with his relationship with Freud and the theories of Jung, Freud, Gross and Spielrein, but that stuff kind of disappears near the end.
Even the more interesting stuff between Freud and Jung was a little too academic and dry. I didn’t have a context to put a lot of it in, therefore I didn’t grasp all of it. The enjoyment was more about their interactions than it was the specifics of what they were saying.
Verdict- A DANGEROUS METHOD sounds better on paper than it turned out on screen. It’s well acted with Viggo disappearing into another role and Knightley going places few others would, but your lead character, Jung, his family drama and his affairs are all a bit of a bore. Individual conversations and some of the exchanging of theories between Jung, Freud, Gross and Spielrein are interesting, but as a drama the film is lifeless. I still think there is a more engaging story to be told with these characters, but A DANGEROUS METHOD was a disappointment to me. I think there may be a small audience to which A DANGEROUS METHOD really works (maybe those who know more about these real life characters and their methods), but for most I don’t recommend seeking it out.
Please leave a comment by clicking the comment button to the upper left of this post. Type a name, give a real or fake e-mail (it will not post your e-mail address, real or fake). On the optional register screen, click “just post as a guest” on the bottom left.
I will respond to every comment I receive.
FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER and/or FACEBOOK to get updates as to when I update the Blog
Lastly, Check out THE FLICKSATION PODCAST to which I contribute.
Carnage ———————————————5/10
Directed by Roman Polanski, Written by Roman Polanski and Yasmina Reza, Starring Kate Winslet, Christoph Waltz, Jodie Foster and John C. Reilly
Fandango Synopsis - After two boys duke it out on a playground, the parents of the “victim” invite the parents of the “bully” over to work out their issues. A polite discussion of childrearing soon escalates into verbal warfare, with all four parents revealing their true colors. None of them will escape the carnage.
Positives- CARNAGE was ridiculous and mostly funny for nearly the first hour. The dialogue was quick and the film moved along nicely. It was farcical and very stagey, but I accepted that and enjoyed that hour. I admired that Polanski didn’t feel the need to make the film more cinematic, but instead just gave us these four characters played by good actors, put them in a room and let them go.
Christoph Waltz was given the best role and was great in it. His character doesn’t take the situation serious in the least and makes the least effort to mask that. He’s miserable and just wants to get out of there, but finally is able to get some joy in watching the others unravel once they start in on the alcohol.
John C. Reilly was good too. He always plays a great drunk. His character plays the concerned father and mediator of the meeting for a long while, but eventually he can’t take the charade anymore and reveals who he really is, which is a complete 180 to what he had shown.
I think Foster and Winslet more so had some strong moments as well in the first hour of the film. It’s a great foursome of actors who are fun to watch work together.
CARNAGE highlighted a few interesting aspects of human nature. It showed the tendency toward forced pleasantness and faux concern, but also the ugly or unrefined true feelings and beliefs that most people harbor and rarely share.
Negatives- Foster and Winslet had some strong moments in the films first hour, but once they got into the alcohol they seemingly got completely trashed in a matter of minutes and things went downhill. Those two and Reilly to an extent way overplay the drunkenness, which make the last fifteen minutes of CARNAGE embarrassing and pretty unbearable. Foster and Winslet are cartoon drunks. I was having a great time and then I couldn’t wait for the shit to stop. Oddly, this seventy five minute film was too long.
I found Foster to be the weak link of the film. Again, she had some good moments, but as a whole it didn’t work. I think it could have a lot to do with the character she was playing.
Verdict- CARNAGE is a weird film to score because it truly was fun for fifty five minutes, but that last fifteen minutes was so bad that it’s hard to recommend it. I love the idea of putting four good actors together in a room and just letting them go without much interference. Waltz was a big standout. He had the best character to play and gave the best performance. Reilly was good too, but as with Winslet and Foster he at times went too far. When things got immediately drunken, things got annoying. The film did illustrate a few interesting aspects of human nature with these four going from strangers to pretty intimate quickly. I think CARNAGE is fascinating at times and I’d like to have seen the play it’s adapted from, but it goes too off the rails late to recommend. I think you can skip CARNAGE or watch it, but turn it off at the fifty five minute mark and pretend the rest doesn’t exist and it’s a good film.
Please leave a comment by clicking the comment button to the upper left of this post. Type a name, give a real or fake e-mail (it will not post your e-mail address, real or fake). On the optional register screen, click “just post as a guest” on the bottom left.
I will respond to every comment I receive.
FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER and/or FACEBOOK to get updates as to when I update the Blog
Lastly, Check out THE FLICKSATION PODCAST to which I contribute.
The Flicksation Podcast just posted Episode #17. On the episode we review/discuss the fantastic British spy film TINKER, TAILOR, SOLIDER, SPY, Chris Evans’ PUNCTURE, Marky Mark’s CONTRABAND and the indie darling ANOTHER EARTH.
In the Feature Segment “Up in Smoke” we each chose a film with lots of smoke (fires, cigars, marijuana, cigarettes etc) to discuss that we particularly enjoy. (My choice was BLOW)
Of course we spend time discussing the most interesting recent film news and in the “Quick Fix” we mention any other films/TV we’ve seen of late. (I quickly talk about a very good, but difficult Doc about sexual abuse and cover up within the Catholic Church, DELIVER US FROM EVIL and Woody Harrelson’s new crooked cop film, RAMPART)
If interested the links are below. If you know anyone else who may like it, please pass it along to them. (Thanks for any help getting the word out!)
You can listen on the website, but I urge you to subscribe to the podcast through the iTunes Store. Just search The Flicksation Podcast. You can read my thoughts on all the new films discussed right here on my blog as well, in fact PLEASE DO!
Rampart ————————————————-5/10
Directed by Oren Moverman, Written by Oren Moverman and James Ellroy, Starring Woody Harrelson, Robin Wright, Sigourney Weaver, Anne Heche and Brie Larson
IMDB SYNOPSIS- So meet Dave Brown, Brown is a cop long ago unleashed from the rules of the Los Angeles Police Department. Roving the streets in his black-and-white cruiser, he governs and punishes at will. His home life is a riddle. Somehow he has fathered children with two sisters. Somehow he still lives casually with them both, slipping in and out of a family life that’s as tangled as his long career on the force. His own daughter calls him Date Rape. That’s because, years ago, Brown may have killed a rapist and gotten away with it. The shadow of the incident still haunts him, so when his Rampart division gets caught up in a corruption scandal, Brown makes an easy target. As the controversy seeps through the department and into city hall, this hardened, reckless officer finds himself at the centre of a sordid L.A. story.
Positives- Woody Harrelson gives an impressive performance as the unsavory L.A. Police Officer Dave “Date Rape” Brown. He’s an unhinged, scary and mostly pathetic human being. Brown is exactly what you don’t want in a cop. (and sadly a type that often attempts to go into law enforcement) In part due to his upbringing and part due to the hardening that takes place in a man who has endured the Vietnam War and twenty years patrolling the street of L.A., he has a horrifying and concrete world view. He’s a racist, sexist and all around misanthrope. (as his daughter plainly states) It’s not an attractive character to play, but Harrelson is able to show some vulnerability in the guy, humanizing him just a little as his whole world starts to crumble around him and he tries to hold on to anything and weather the storm.
Brown basically believes he can do anything he wants and get away with it. He believes being a Police Officer and carrying a gun makes everything he does right. He also thinks he’s a lot more clever than he actually is, so the best scenes in the film end up being Brown’s interactions with those whose job is to investigate him and his questionable actions. Everyone knows Brown isn’t following procedure, that he does things his own way and is mostly full of shit, but his smugness and the steaming animosity in those discussions are fascinating to watch.
Negatives- I see RAMPART mostly as a character study of Harrelson’s Brown. He has some bizarre and interesting family dynamics, but is so far down an ugly path by the time you get to know him at the beginning of the film that it’s really difficult to form any bond with him. He’s despicable and not all that interesting of a guy, so I didn’t find myself wanting to study him or spend much time with him other than the fact that Harrelson was playing the part.
The Director Moverman likes to experiment with structure and improvise a good deal, which works at times, but with RAMPART it seems to make the film feel disjointed. He also goes overboard on the jump cuts early, making it feel like you are watching a choppy Youtube video with a bad internet connection. The rotating 360 degree thing he tried during a conversation around a table was distracting and felt silly. I don’t know how a more structured film would have come out or even what exactly the story would have been, but Moverman’s interesting methods didn’t work nearly as well in RAMPART as they did in his very good film from a few years ago, THE MESSENGER.
I got nothing out of the side plot (if you can call it that) with Robin Wright. It almost felt like there was more there that got cut, but since it’s Robin Wright you don’t want to cut her completely out of the film, so you are left with whatever that was.
Verdict- RAMPART isn’t a terrible film, but it lacks anything that really grabs you in order to make you care about these characters or want to see what happens to them. Woody Harrelson gives a committed, strong performance playing a vulnerable, despicable character grasping at anything as his world collapses. It’s a character study of a character you aren’t sure you want to study. The film often feels disjointed and that’s magnified by some camera choices made by the director, Moverman. I was a fan of Moverman’s last film, THE MESSENGER and find him and his way of working interesting, so was disappointed by RAMPART. I think people are OK to skip RAMPART, but should check out THE MESSENGER if they haven’t already
Please leave a comment by clicking the comment button to the upper left of this post. Type a name, give a real or fake e-mail (it will not post your e-mail address, real or fake). On the optional register screen, click “just post as a guest” on the bottom left.
I will respond to every comment I receive.
FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER and/or FACEBOOK to get updates as to when I update the Blog
Lastly, Check out THE FLICKSATION PODCAST to which I contribute.
Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy ———-9/10
Directed by Tomas Alfredson, Written by Bridget O’Connor and Peter Straughan, Starring Gary Oldman, Colin Firth, John Hurt, Benedict Cumberbatch and Tom Hardy
Fandango Synopsis- In 1970s England, Control, the head of MI6, dispatches a spy to meet with a Hungarian general who knows the identity of a Soviet spy within the organization’s ranks. However, the mission goes wrong, and the general dies before he can reveal the information. Undersecretary Oliver Lacon calls veteran agent George Smiley back from forced retirement to ferret out the mole and stop the flow of vital British secrets to the Russians.
Positives- TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY is a cold and calculated film, which is perfect for telling a story inhabited by the kind of emotionless men that make up much of the intelligence agencies. It has a gloomy, gray and green, ugly 70’s, smoke filled look through the whole film that really makes you feel in the period. (The yellow meeting room was awesome!)
The cast is phenomenal. It’s the best acting across the board in any 2011 film I’ve viewed. It’s hard to choose standouts when everyone is pitch perfect, but it’s a joy to see John Hurt, Toby Jones, Tom Hardy, Colin Firth, Benedict Cumberbatch etc etc etc all working together and not demanding the spotlight.
The one actor who is given the spotlight is Gary Oldman, who in turn gives an amazingly restrained, minimal performance as George Smiley. Smiley is a fantastic character and Oldman gives a special performance. His Smiley internalizes everything and shows nearly no emotion or even signs of life. He’s a voyeur, always aware, watching and studying those around him. The way Smiley is is much of what makes him so damn good at his job.
TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY is very very dense. It demands full concentration and is enhanced by repeat viewings. There is a ton happening with a lot of different characters and everything matters. It’s a smart film that I admire for being unwilling to dumb things down for the audience. You are expected to either keep up or have the patience to let things come together. I found the film fascinating from the opening credits and was hanging on every word trying to figure the meaning of every action and conversation in this world of deceit and ulterior motives. It manages to be gripping through dialogue and almost no action movie crap.
The last thirty minutes of the film as everything is starting to make sense to Smiley were as good as any section in a 2011 film. Smiley finally shows the audience what makes him great and really takes control. He’s in full command and comfortable as he plays everyone in order to out the mole. You can see some joy in him for the first time. The interrogation at the airfield was a high point.
Cumberbatch’s scene where he is sent to retrieve the documents was spectacular. The suspense was thick and the shot of the library from outside through the windows was the best in the film. It was one of many shots of a character or interaction through a window, which was a choice by Alfredson that may serve to subtly illustrate the voyeuristic aspect of spying.
TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY makes an interesting observation about the type of men and women who get into the spy game or at least what becomes of them. There is no happiness and really no outside life. Their perspective is usually lost and the working of the entire world can become a game.
The score done by Alberto Iglesias is perfect. It’s one of my favorite of the year and it was only enhanced by the great song choices for the soundtrack. The Julio Iglesias “La Mer” playing as most of the characters stories are tied up at the end had me smiling leaving the theater.
Negatives- I had no problems with the film.
Verdict- TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY is an amazing film and even better on second viewing. It’s dense, doesn’t dumb anything down for the audience and has you hanging on every exchange trying to piece everything together. The amazing cast all put in strong performances with Oldman as the lead giving a spectacularly restrained, Oscar worthy one. It creates a world that I want to spend a lot of time immersed in. The film has a distinctive, gloomy 70’s look and Alfredson is able to make some not inherently exciting scenes quite suspenseful. It’s a film that worked for me in every way and Iglesias’ score was another great element. TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY is a nearly perfect film and much more subtle and intelligent than the “spy” films being made today (or maybe ever). I loved it from the beginning and it continued to get better as it went along leaving you in a place that satisfies, but leaves you wanting another installment, which appears to be a possibility. TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY is a film everyone should see and more than once!
Please leave a comment by clicking the comment button to the upper left of this post. Type a name, give a real or fake e-mail (it will not post your e-mail address, real or fake). On the optional register screen, click “just post as a guest” on the bottom left.
I will respond to every comment I receive.
FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER and/or FACEBOOK to get updates as to when I update the Blog
Lastly, Check out THE FLICKSATION PODCAST to which I contribute.
