The Movie Club

Favourite Film-The Shining Review

Favourite Film

It was a difficult choice. As a child of the 80s, I had The Breakfast Club and Labyrinth, Hellraiser and Terminator and even Aliens on my list, but I've decided to go with a film that I still find haunting even after many viewings:

The Shining, directed by Stanley Kubrick, released here in 1980.

Jack Torrence (Jack Nicholson), a recovering alcoholic, has taken the job as winter caretaker of the very large and very isolated Overlook Hotel. He tells the manager he plans to write a novel and his family will enjoy the peace and quiet. His wife Wendy (Shelly Duvall) and young son Danny (Danny Lloyd) join Jack at the Hotel as the rest of the staff pack up to leave. Danny has a psychic gift, identified by the Hotel's chef as 'The Shining' – the ability to see echoes of past traumatic events and the hotel has had many.

Jack slowly lets the hotel take him over, Danny tries in vain to ignore the increasingly disturbing images he sees and Wendy tries to keep the family together.

The reasons I love this film:

I first saw it at an impressionable age – I was 14 and somehow my friends and I (dressed in Catholic school uniforms no less) were able to rent this R rated film. We watched it huddled together in the dark and shrieked at every jump and scare. I'm sure it was instrumental in my growing love of the horror genre.

The visual aesthetics of this film are very strong. The 1970s décor, the strong symmetrical framing, the stillness and controlled pace of the descent into madness.

This film was one of the first to extensively use stedicam, a motion stabilising camera rig, allowing for eerily smooth floating camerawork. Those seemingly endless shots following Danny on his tricycle around the hotel are moody in the extreme. The images of the elevators that release a tsunami of blood that wash the furniture away, the two girls in identical clothes that meet Danny at the end of a corridor only to be seen chopped into hundreds of pieces moments later, the woman who tries to seduce Jack in Room 237 and then turns into a decaying corpse, the snow covered labyrinth that hosts the film's climax – all are extremely visual, frightening, complex and beautiful.

The use of sound in this film is extraordinary. The menacing hums and tones, the grand classical music that covers the film's opening (which I'm sure is based on Berloiz's Symphony Fantastique), the use of diagetic sound (Danny's tricycle wheels as they go from hard floor to carpet, to hard floor to carpet) is mesmerising, even hypnotising.

Performances are typical Kubrick – after hundreds of takes, the emotion is almost entirely removed, hysteria and insanity are at the fore. Jack Nicholson is unforgettable. Shelly Duvall is an annoying screen presence and I try to ignore her. I'm glad I saw the film before the Simpsons got it's hands on it, the film has been parodied so often, that a new viewer of the film would probably find themselves constantly going, 'I know that from somewhere' rather than being awed by the quality of the filmmaking on show.

The film stays with me because the imagery is so powerful, the atmosphere so overwhelming, the story so unforgettable. There's a lot to see in the film and it rewards re-viewing. It's nothing like the book, which I tried to read after I saw the film, and in turn, nothing like Stephen King's Television adaptation of his book from the 90s. It is the definitive version of the story, Kubrick took it from King and truly made it his own.

Like Jack, perhaps Kubrick was always the caretaker here.

Marisa Martin, May 2011

~ ~

Secret Film Shame-Bring it on Review

Secret Film Shame

Bring It On

Director: Peyton Reed Writer: Jessica Bendinger Stars: Kirsten Dunst, Eliza Dushku and Jesse Bradford

Bring it On follows the Rancho Carne High School Cheerleading Team, the Toros, as they continue their six year run at the title of National Cheerleading Champions. New Captain Torrance Shipman (Kirsten Dunst) looks set to lead the team to another win until it’s discovered that their perfectly rehearsed routine was stolen by the former captain from an inner-city cheer squad called the Clovers. No-one had noticed because the Clovers have never been able to afford to compete. Torrance has her work cut out for her to rebuild the reputation of the Toro Squad and begins by enlisting the help of new student Missy (Eliza Dushku) who becomes her ally in the fight to maintain control of the cheer-team. They falter at first by hiring a Professional Cheer Choreographer, the hilarious Sparky Polastri (played by Ian Roberts), who belittles, taunts and in the end humiliates them in front of the entire cheer community.

This miscalculation on Torrance’s part leaves her again without the support of most of her squad, and Cheerleaders Courtney and Whitney planning a takeover.

This is not the end of Torrance’s problems however - she is trying to handle her cheerleader boyfriend who’s gone off to college and begun to ignore her as she starts to fall for Missy’s brother Cliff (Jesse Bradford) who hates everything cheery.

We watch to see if the Toros can overcome their internal cheer-rivalries and come up with a new routine good enough to regain their place at the National Cheeroffs, whether the Clovers will find the money to finally compete at the competition themselves and earn the title they deserve and whether Torrance will be able to choose between her cheery boyfriend and the non-cheery new boy.

Why I love this film

It’s funny, cheeky (occasionally bordering on filthy) and an absolute ball to watch. Great characters, great dialogue, lots of laughs. It knows what it is and doesn’t take itself too seriously.

Endlessly quotable:

Torrance Shipman: “You know, mothers have killed to get their daughters on squads.”
Christine Shipman: “That mother didn't kill anybody. She hired a hit man.”
Sparky: “I am a choreographer. That's what I do. You are cheerleaders. Cheerleaders are dancers who have gone retarded. What you do is a tiny, pathetic subset of dancing. I will attempt to turn your robotic routines into poetry, written with the human body. Follow me, or perish, sweater monkeys.”; and, of course,
“Spirit Fingers!”

The routines are also great to watch and well shot and performed as is the whole film. There’s never a dull moment in this cheer-fest.

Totally fun, a hearty 5 Spirit Fingers out of 5

Marisa Martin, May 2011

~ ~

Water for Elephants Review

~ ~

Water for Elephants is a romantic drama film directed by Francis Lawrence. It is based on Sara Gruen.novel which is based on the Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey Circus disaster and parallels the biblical story of Jacob in the Book of Genesis.

Plot

We meet an elderly man named Jacob Jankowski (played by Hal Holbrook and later to be played by Robert Pattinson) on a rainy night as he stands in the parking lot of a closed circus. Two circus workers are quick to assist him and bring him inside. After attempting to find the nursing home responsible for Jacob, the worker is soon mesmerized by the story Jacob begins to unfold involving his time with the travelling Benzini Brothers circus which has the dubious honour of hosting the greatest circus disaster of all time. Soon we are transported to 1931, where whackiness ensues………………….

Review

Water for Elephants is basically Titanic at the circus, but not as emotionally crippling thank god. Titanic lite. We flash backward to the 1930’s and meet a young man as he falls in love with the star attraction of a circus, Marlena (played by Reese Witherspoon). However, the star is already married to the ring-master, August (played brilliantly by Inglourious Basterds’ Christoph Waltz) leading to a love triangle facing a larger disaster.

Unsurprisingly Water for Elephants does not have the same production value of James Cameron’s blockbuster however it still looks lovely: the production design of the train, especially rooms decked out with cigars, cards, booze and opulent bedrooms makes you want to host a cocktail party. The layout of the train itself mirrors Titanic’s class system: the bottom of the circus rung is in the last carriage, increasing in circus status up to the top of the carriage which holds the ring-leader and his wife. The movie even has a “I’m the king of the world” moment on top of the carriages as it flies through depression era America (albeit not as cheesy).

Christoph Waltz gives another great performance. Christoph’s August can be absolutely charming but then can change flawlessly into a frightening brute. More than just the film’s villain, Christoph shares the pain and frustration of being a leader of a business facing harsh times, and brings an agonising empathy to his creation. Robert Pattinson proves again that he is an actor with chops, capable when given the chance. He also makes a dashing lead. Reese Witherspoon however, is no Kate Winslet. Her ‘look’ did not captivate me. Instead of the captivating angel that Jacob narrates to us, we see a thin, gaunt and mean looking Reese. This appearance was probably spot on for depression era America, especially for a character given such a troubling back-story. However I was not empathetic with Jacob in his feelings for her, and therefore did not believe the love between the two leads. Unfortunately this is the common consensus among film reviewers.

In relation to production value, after a great 2 acts, the third is a surprising let down. The circus disaster is in no way as bit a spectacle that you would have been led to believe. This may have been due to the production budget, however this is quite different from a production’s value: - value can be added in choice framing and lighting techniques. The first Matrix had surprisingly few ‘special effects’ when compared to its bloated sequels and the first Bad Boys was so budget conscious that every single explosion shot had to count or be discarded if it did not work. Jerry Bruckheimer’s The Rock’s production value was shown in its comic-book lighting and framing.

For some reason, some scenes in Elephants were also shot extremely basically, failing to capture the true grandness of some scenes. For example, the circus performances are played during the day, under a low ceiling-tent in front of a sparse audience even though we see a swarm of people entering the circus beforehand. When the circus and its various behind-the-curtains working-class shenanigans is shown at night, it looks absolutely beautiful, evoking my memories of the Adelaide Fringe festival: bold reds, flame and wine. Reese on top of her beautiful elephant, Rose (heh? Heh?) looks flat instead of awe-inspiring, and there are moments when lead characters heads are also chopped out of the frame.

Conversely, there are some fantastic shots, hence the confusion. Characters on top of the train looking at the inherent beauty of the country they are flying through and also who’s events they are trying to escape from, cabaret like set ups at night providing a fly-on-the-wall showing the inner social life of a circus, and a wonderful film-noir shot of Reese escaping a romantic interlude in n 1930’s American back-alley. Such beautiful scenes beg the question why other sections fall so flat.

Rating

I really wanted to like this movie. Its inexplicable faults are only obvious once compared to its strengths. Elephants is pushed above a solid drama due to its classic production design and the great interplay between the 3 leads: - Christoph Waltz trumps Billy Zane 3.5 out of 5 elephants.

Check out the film at IMDB, and check out the trailer.

~ ~

Luke McWilliams June 2011

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides Review

~ ~

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides

is the fourth entry into the Pirates of the Caribbean series, directed by Rob Marshall of Chicago, Memoirs of a Geisha and Nine fame. The film is based on the book On Stranger Tides by Tim Powers, which also inspired the LucasArts game series The Secret of Monkey Island

Plot

After seeing Capt Jack Sparrow (played by the forever young Johnny Depp) rowing in the sea with the map to the fountain of youth at the end of the last instalment, we meet him here in London as he sets about rescuing his former first mate, Joshamee Gibbs (played again by Kevin McNally) being hanged. Soon they are both brought before King George II ( played by Richard Griffiths), who wants Jack to guide an expedition to the Fountain of Youth before the Spanish get to it first. During the meeting Jack crosses paths with his nemesis, Captain Barbossa ( played once again by Geoffrey Rush) who is now in the Kings British Navy, minus the Black Pearl, and his leg. Amongst all of this Jack must also discover the identity of an imposter who is recruiting a crew to also search for the Fountain, where wackiness ensues.

Review

Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl was actually quite a gamble back in 2003. Cutthroate Island, Directed by Die Hard 2’s Renny Harlin and starring Geena Davis, and Matthew Modine sunk an entire production company and regaled Geena to television ever since. It is amazing that the director is still working in Holywood! In the early 00’s we had fantasy movies coming out of our ears, what with the The Lord of the Rings trilogy and the never-ending Harry Potter movies. Disney obviously wanted to get onto the gravy train and so, using a title that they already had the rights to, and a plethora of Pirate books to plunder (arrrr), Disney went ahead and produced a fantasy action adventure with a hint of the supernatural. If the movie sunk, it would still make a killing in the box-office due to its already standing Disney goodwill. The production would have been solid, with a wonderful score to match. Swashbucking to-and-fro would bring in the older crowd watching for a hint of matinee nostalgia, and the inclusion of “he’s-so-hot-right-now” LOTR Orlando Bloom and Kiera Knightly would get the tweens in. Geoffrey Rush would be on board as a character actor, and Johnny Depp’s involvement would be enough to pump the project to A-level status.

However, something peculiar happened; a fortuitous, unexpected ingredient. The star, who was hired for nothing more than an A-list presence delivered a crafted, three dimensional performance!

Johnny Depp took the notion of a dirty, conniving, rebellious pirate and completely flipped it on its head. Inverting the notion of a pirate, Johnny Depp’s Capt Jack Sparrow was an observer of the action, not an antagonist nor a protagonist, Jack was an amoral watcher, flipping in and out of the goings-on as it suited him. Instead of the traditional villain, Capt Jack had a conscience. Instead of a traditional hero, Capt Jack was an opportunistic coward. Johnny’s Jack was a creature of survival, acting and reacting off of the world’s developments, and always trying to come out on top, with no other real motive than just simple survival. Hell: his magical compasss couldn’t even tell him what his true heart desired.

Johnny’s Johnny also gave his Capt Jack a whole host of mannerisms, quirks and aural inflections, fully rounding his character out. Johnny Depp reportedly admitted that he held onto a slew of character traits after playing gonzo journalist Hunter S. Thompson in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. Here, Depp goes back to the well and pulls out a pirate who is more rock-star than anything else. It is no surprise then when Johnny later admitted his Capt Jack was based on and inspired by the living rock legend Keith Richards who would go on later to play Sparrow’s father. Johnny’s Pirate held a swagger, a drunken broken speech pattern and a natural campiness that seems inherent in 70’s-80’s rock. Capt Jack Sparrow was a rock legend without a band, constantly lost without his crew and stage; the Black Pearl.

If Johnny’s risky performance (backed only by Dick Cook, former Chairman of Walt Disney Studio Entertainment) was the ingredient that launched the first Pirate’s into the stratosphere, it was milked during the inferior, increasingly convoluted sequels. Capt Jack seemed to be restrained more-so as more screen-time was dedicated to Orlando, Kiera and a swath of second stars and extras. The plots were convoluted, the storylines multiplied, and we were taken further away from what made the first one so fantastic: the character of Capt Jack Sparrow.

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides was given a smaller budget compared to the sequels (55.5 million of it going to Johnny Depp), and only Capt Jack Sparrow.and Barbossa were expected to return in this new spin-off. There was an expectation that the movie would be scaled back to concentrate on the strengths of the first instalment, being the Capt Jack Sparrow.character.

At the end of the 2^nd instalment, Capt Jack was devoured and killed by the Kracken, transporting him to limbo, or, Davey Jones’ Locker. From this expeireince, Jack resolves to never die again, thus attempting to become the Capt of The Flying Dutchman to live forever, albeit under a curse. When this attempt fails, he is determined to uncover the Fountain of Youth.

Instead of stripping down events, characters and plot-lines in an attempt to have a more character based story following Jack as he attempts to avoid his mortality, the film instead repeats the mistakes that bogged down the original trilogy; too many characters, too many subplots, too many mindless action set-pieces and too much exposition. We have another evil Capt Pirate (Blackbeard played by Ian McShane) who has a super power that allows him to magically steer his own ship (why does he need a crew?), and after the jettison of Orlando Bloom and Kiera Knightly’s character’s from the series, the filmmakers feel the need to shoehorn a young couple back in. This movie does all of this, replicating the original trilogy, on a lesser budget and it shows.

Another problem is the characters’ intent. Why is everyone searching for the Fountain of Youth? Instead of following Jack as he goes about finding it from the ending of the last film, we are inexplicably in London where many a thing have changed, and we need to be brought up to speed through exposition. Barbossa, who has already escaped death after being killed at the climax of the superior first film is now working for the British Royal Navy, minus a leg. The Black Pearl is once again lost, again emasculating Jack.

Penélope Cruz is introduced as a past jilted lover much like Marion from the original Raiders of the Lost Ark, and once the characters are all set up, its back to business as usual, although in rather darker settings, more muddled fight scenes leading to an empty, bland feeling: the difference between a matinee and a pantomime.

On the plus side, if the first one is to be remembered for the creepy un-dead crew, the second for the sea creatures (and third) this one’s highlight is undoubtedly the spooky, nasty little mermaids led by Australia’s Gemma Ward. The beautiful french actress Astrid Berges-Frisbey plays an extremely vulnerable mermaid, and it would be fantastic to see her in another feature soon.

Rating

Instead of just giving the audience what they want ( Capt Jack Sparrow captaining the Black Pearl and being a Pirate! Arrrr), Disney has delivered the least satisfying Pirates movie yet. There are another 2 planned (filmed back to back). I would recommend watching the first one again, however, this film is doing gangbusters so perhaps it is the case of why try harder?

It is fun admittedly, and because its cheaper than travelling to London and watching a god-awful pantomime, I’m giving this 2.5 out of 5 mermaids.

Check out the film at IMDB, and check out the trailer.

~ ~

Luke McWilliams June 2011