Fair Game Review

Fair Game is not a remake of the action-romp starring Adam Baldwin and Cindy Crawford, but is actually a 2010 thriller directed by The Bourne Identity’s Doug Liman and is based on Valerie Plame's memoir, Fair Game: My Life as a Spy, My Betrayal by the White House.

 

Plot

 

We follow Valerie Plame Wilson (played by Naomi Watts) during her time as a covert CIA officer at the start of the war in Iraq. During the investigation to whether or not Saddam Hussein does indeed have weapons of mass destruction, Mrs Wilson’s husband, former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson (played by Sean Penn), is sent to Niger, Africa, where he finds no such evidence.

 

In retribution to Mr Wilson’s published findings, What I Didn’t Find in Africa, a member of the Bush administration reveals Mrs. Wilson's covert status, and wackiness ensues………………

 

Review

 

Doug Liman is best known for the original The Bourne Identity and Mr and Mrs Smith (should we blame him for Brangelina? Yes, yes we should). As Director of the Canberra International Film Festival Mr Simon Weaving pointed out at the Australian premiere of the movie, the film is a real life retelling of Mr and Mrs Smith; spies and political intrigue under the same roof.

 

The movie does not start with a clear focus however. We are presented with the origins of the War in Iraq, and the question of whether or not a substance called yellow cake is being shipped from Niger, Africa, for the purposes of Saddam Hussein to build weapons of mass destruction, and the spinning from the Bush administration to demonstrate that even if there is a small risk of such weapons manufacture occurring, that it is still a significant one. We are shown the responsibilities that CIA covert agent Valerie has, and the real dangers her contacts in the field face working with her. This of course all becomes threatened once her cover is blown, and an ethical debate arises between her and her husband. The movie takes a long time getting to its purpose, and, once it gears up, it is suddenly over.

 

Political thrillers can be done in an entertaining way, and in a way that is understood by the audience. Brilliance is simplicity, and it seems that this story is presented too convoluted and takes too long to get to its purpose: a man and his wife at odds over very big themes with tremendous consequences. Tom Clancy’s Jack Ryan thrillers are well researched and intriguing, even the The Bourne Identity’s was a clearer, more accessible movie.

 

Even more distracting is the camerawork. Where Paul Greengrass made his Bourne sequels into shaky-cam territory, Doug Liman takes it here, into the world of conferences, phone calls and coffees. Shaky-cam is great to give a first person documentary feel inside a world of action, however, when it is used to artificially liven up a scene a la Michael Bay, it is distracting at best and nauseating and irritating at worst.

 

Rating

 

Like last year’s The Men Who Stare at Goats, this deserved a better telling. A fantastic story that could have been delivered clearer, both in plot and cinematography.

 

2 Out of 5 board-room meetings.

 

Check out what Margaret and David have to say, watch their interview with Director Doug Liman and the trailer!

 

Luke McWilliams, December 2010

Podcast-17 December - Megamind, Teenage Paparazzi, Gomorrah and favourite films of 2010!

Join Luke McWilliams, Liam Jennings and Felix Barbalet as they review Megamind, Teenage Paparazzi and Gomorrah and have a look at their favourite films of 2010 and upcoming films in the Christmas holidays!

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 Review

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part 1 is the first part of the 7th and final chapter in the Harry Potter series.

Plot

We quickly meet Harry Potter (again played by Daniel Radcliffe) in his England ‘muggle’ house as he is to be escorted to the safety of the Burrow, by the heroic Order of the Phoenix. Hogwarts is now host to the evil Death Eaters led by the villainous Lord Voldermort, who do their best to dispatch our hero along his way. Escaping the chaos and destruction that the Death Eaters bring to their supporters, Ron Weasley ( played by Rupert Grint), Harry and Hermione (played by Emma Watson)soon choose to go their own way, constantly disapparating to areas throughout England on a quest to find and destroy the remaining Horcruxes ( physical objects that aid Voldermort’s immortality) before the evil Wizard can kill Harry and come to his full power. Wackiness this-way ensues....................

Review

Last year’s Harry Potter and The Half-Blood Prince ended with a quest being set up, giving birth to a new trilogy of films in the Harry Potter series. Whereas each previous part started with an introduction of a plot, a year in the life of Harry and his friends and then a quick resolution of the storylines mentioned at the movie’s / books beginning, The Half-Blood Prince positions Harry on the path to his ultimate showdown with He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named. In other words, this is the start of the end and what we all have been dying to see for so long!

The Half-Blood Prince went a way to take us off of the beaten track that has set up the Harry Potter series: we usually are introduced to Harry in his muggle home, again returning to Hogwarts to learn more about being a Wizard, his mysterious past and overcoming another obstacle, most usually Voldermort’s attempts to get his groove back, all in time to go home at year’s end. At the Half-Blood Prince’s end, all bets are off and Harry and friends decide not to go back to Hogwart’s but instead to go on a mission to find Voldermort’s magical devices and destroy them, giving them a chance at ultimately defeating him.

This premise was enticing as it moved our heroes away from an environment that they, and we, have gotten comfortable with. Done with English private boarding schools metaphors and allegory, this movie chooses to showcase themes of maturity and being able to finally put theory into real-world practice: metaphors of the machinations of war during WWII brings up the atmosphere and tension of a thriller. However, in the execution, we get a road movie reminiscent of The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, complete with a shared object of evil power, worn around our characters’ necks that force them to turn on each other during their journey to destroy it.

In relation to script, Alfred Hitchcock invented a script-writing term for an arbitrary object to kick his protagonists and antagonists into action: a MacGuffin. A MacGuffin was usually something that the antagonist needed to complete their evil scheme and one which the hero must then stop him from getting. The first Mission Impossible movie was criticized for having a too convoluted plot, where the 2nd was given a MacGuffin which was cheekily constantly explained throughout. The third film went further and referenced their MacGuffin in theory only, never revealing what it was to the audience! The movie admitted that it was only a plot device to what the audience really wanted to see anyway: action action action and Maggie Q. Harry Potter 7.1 however relies on no more than 7 Macguffins, with two previously being dispatched in HP6. The story is basically a treasure hunt for our young heroes whilst avoiding the attacks of their enemies.

Another lazy script-writing technique is, when one is facing writer’s block and just cannot move their story along, they kill a character to send a shock-wave through the remaining character arc / storyline like the butterfly effect. This usually progresses the story through a myriad of new threads, setting up questions such as who killed the character and why? What sort of affect will this have on the characters and their situations and so on.

JK Rowling has done this since Harry Potter 4, and doesn’t slow down. Admittedly, a big theme of the Harry Potter series is death, what with Harry’s parents being killed by an evil wizard who wants to kill he-who-lives. However when a minor character is reintroduced to a series just to be killed-off is cheap and reeks of bad television.

That all being said, the acting and characterization in this film is great. The Hermione character hits her stride after leaving me cold in a few of the previous instalments. Emma Watson has now found a middle-ground between early adolescence and just being a brat. Harry is great as always and Ron gets a few good laughs as well. The relationship between our three heroes is well balanced out. Of note is a particularly poignant scene with Harry and Hermione dancing in the face of misery and death: not in a romantic moment at all, but just two very good, old friends being there for each other in a moment of crisis.

The look of the film is fantastic. Whereas the earlier Christopher Columbus directed films have a classic, stage and CG feel, the introduction of Alfonso Cuarón in Prisoner of Azkaban gave the series an organic, natural feel: glows from wands where not overly dramatic but looked like moonlight, and Hogwart’s surrounds were rich and atmospheric. The Goblet of Fire added wands which fired off naturalistic, organic hot and cold lava which splurted and spilled plenty o’ magic about.

David Yates joined the series in Order of the Phoenix and has kept these stylistic choices, whilst getting our characters out of their school and their uniforms, placing them in the cold, dark and mysterious UK woods, country-side and beaches. The action is great and intense, melding a lot more of the real world with its magical set pieces (such as a shoot-out in a London cafe) than any other of the instalments. This feels like a gritty Harry Potter movie that we can empathise with, away from the magic of Hogwarts and into our world.

Rating

All in all, a very solid first part to a complete movie which fans of Harry Potter will lap up. Hopefully the mechanical set up will give way to a brilliant and satisfying conclusion to a film series that surprisingly still has a massive fan base. 4 out of 5 wands.

If you had to click on any of the links in the plot section of this review, chances are you will have trouble keeping up with the goings-on in this particular episode as it references close to all previous adventures. A solid Potter knowledge is required and expected with this outing!

See what Margaret and David have to say and check out the trailer!

Luke McWilliams December 2010

Toy Story 3 Review

Toy Story 3 is the third and apparently final film in Disney/ Pixar's Toy Story series. Interestingly the editor of the first Toy Story, Lee Unkrich, stepped up as co-director of the second movie and is the director of this one.

Plot

We meet the usual team during an exciting imagination/playing sequence with their young owner Andy. Soon enough, we discover that Andy is now 17, and has neglected playing with his toys for years, instead choosing to leave them in his toy-trunk. Whilst packing up his belongings before moving on to college, Andy separates his toy collection by choosing to bring Woody (voiced by Tom Hanks) to college with him, packing up his other toys into a plastic bag to be taken to the attic to go into storage,. In the shenanigans however, Andy's mother makes the mistake of throwing the bag of toys out with the other trash, where literal death-defying wackiness ensues.

Review

Disney is best known for their fairy-tale/princess stories (starting with Snow White in 1937) and their journey home stories. The Toy Story series have done much with themes of abandonment, the journey home and growing up.

In 1942 Disney introduced the film Bambi which is famous for its ‘Bambi moment’ – Bambi and his mother are racing from a hunter to the safe and secure surrounds of the forest. After making the distance, Bambi turns to see where his mother is only to be informed by his father that “your mother can't be with you anymore". Finding Nemo was chock-full of these moments, with the main character’s mother and entire family being wiped out in the first few minutes of the movie, and going so far as to giving Nemo a physical disability along with the requisite large, emotive ‘Disney eyes’. Toy Story 3 takes all of this contrived, sad and sorrowful elements and ramps it all up to factor 10.

I do not like to be emotionally manipulated in this way and therefore did not connect with the movie at all. Where there is an inherent sadness to the beauty of the Shrek series as they deal with themes of discrimination, prejudice and love, simply taking a character away from its family to explore child abandonment issues is upsetting and ultimately lazy. To the detriment of characterization the toys are given several arbitrary obstacles to overcome while on their journey home, which we have seen countless times before from Disney, let alone the Toy Story series themselves.

As in the basic story structure, there is the introduction of the stories’ characters and storyline. The second act deals with the characters arcs while adding in obstacles and plot complexity with the third act bringing all of these story threads to a resolution. Quite literally, the structure can be seen as birth, life and death. Most movie trilogies based on the arche-typical hero’s journey follow this, none more so than The Matrix trilogy that explores the literal birth, life and death of its protagonist Neo, and...I guess...the Bible as well.

Toy Story 3 then explores the theme of death head on: the toys make their preparations as they head ‘up to the attic’, their choices between certain death during their many trials along the way, up to a very upsetting scene reminiscent of Bosch’s and Dante’s hell. The toys, like Nemo, are constantly in harm’s way or are under oppressive authority like the patients in One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest, complete with a child-friendly lobotomy scene. It is as if the writers of the Final Destination film series have gotten their fatalistic hands on the script at some point. The toys are only having a good time when the credits are rolling. The only reprieve from all of this misery, sadness and facing one’s mortality is a Spanish dance sequence that rips of Shrek’s superior Puss in Boots.

Rating

Whereas Shrek has a great time whilst dealing with his issues, Toy Story will have you feeling like rubbish and your children screaming.

It is a shame that the company that brought us the beautiful and genuinely moving Up and The Incredibles, a children’s movie with a classic 50’s cool look that dealt with strong themes of family and personal sacrifice better then the Fantastic Four movies, would serve up Toy Story 3.0. Following the adventures of Buzz Lightyear or having a bit more play-time reminiscent of the opening sequence would have been a much more enjoyable way to go.

It has been 15 years since the original Toy Story and the animation, 3d model rigging and texture have come a long way. To watch the original after this is almost an assault on the eyes as the stock-colour looks garish in comparison. The same expertise and attention to detail is given to live-action movies and for this technical marvel I give TS3 2 monkeys-in-a-barrel out of 5.

It should be noted that currently the movie is highest-grossing film of 2010. It has surpassed Finding Nemo to become Pixar's highest ever grossing film, and also has surpassed Shrek 2 as the highest-grossing animated film of all-time worldwide. It is also the first ever Pixar film and animated film in history to make over $1 billion worldwide. It is currently the 5th highest-grossing film worldwide of all time. Not surprisingly, it is rumoured that there are new adventures to be had with Woody and his fellow immortals.

Check out the movie at Rotten Tomatoes and watch the trailer!

Luke McWilliams December 2010

Machete Review

Machete is a 2010 action exploitation B-movie homage, co-written, produced, and directed by Robert Rodriguez and Ethan Maniquis. This movie is Danny Trejo’s first (and, let’s be honest, probably last) starring role, and has an all star-cast including Robert De Niro, Jessica Alba, Michelle Rodriguez, Lindsay Lohan  Rose McGowan, Cheech Marin, Steven Seagal, and Don Johnson.

 

Plot

 

We are introduced to Mexican Federale Machete, who is on a mission to rescue a kidnapped girl in Mexico. During the rescue attempt, he runs into a corrupt Chief as well as the powerful drug lord, Rogelio Torrez (played by Steven Seagal), who do their best to dispatch our hero. Three years later, Machete aimlessly roams Texas as an illegal immigrant, until businessman Michael Booth hires him to assassinate the corrupt Senator McLaughlin (played by Robert De Niro ) who holds a hard stance on illegal immigration for $150,000. Aided by Mexican illegal immigrant advocate Luz (Michelle Rodriguez) and hampered by the likes of immigration officer Sartana Rivera (played by Jessica Alba) wackiness ensues.......

 

Review

 

In 2007, Rodriguez released Planet Terror alongside Quentin Tarantino’s Death Proof which together made Grindhouse: a double-billed 70’s style exploitation film. The film was released in America on the Thanksgiving weekend and bombed as a result. The two movies were then split and released to the overseas DVD market, which did not help the films at all.

 

Whereas Quentin Tarantino’s Death Proof  was more akin to the exploitation films of old in regard to script style and themes, Rodriguez simply threw in a zombie film he was working on at the time and labelled it Planet Terror. What the movie lacked in 70’s exploitation beats, it made up for in style: the colour turns red in anticipation of violence, the film jumps with action hits, such as punches and kicks, and there is even a missing reel between acts 2 and the final confrontation. Rodriguez  even went so far as to drive the film stock around his studio car park to get authentic scratches on the frames!

 

Of note is that Grindhouse  showcased many fake trailers influenced by exploitation films, such as sexploitation movie Werewolf Women of the SS, Don't, the slasher Thanksgiving, Hobo with a Shotgun and, of course, exploitation movie Machete, which follows a Mexican federale who gets hired to do a hatchet job for the U.S. government for relatively low pay. The trailer’s plot alone was more in line with the exploitation movie that Rodriguez was attempting to emulate at the time, with themes of prejudice, racism, and Mexican US politics thrown into the mix. The relationship between illegal Mexican immigrants within the US is a staple of Spaghetti westerns and of Robert Rodriguiez’s earlier Mariachi Trilogy (El Mariachi, Desperado, Once upon a Time in Mexico which were influenced by Chinese action films Hard Boiled and The Killer), where Rodriguez reportedly got the idea for Machete in the first place.

 

The movie starts off surprisingly strong with a ludicrous rescue mission gone awry. All of the Planet Terror’s B-Movie visual film tricks are here; cut frames, scratches and dodgy colouring, blended with messy ultra violence and contemporary technology. This leads up to a fantastic, highly stylised credit sequence. Soon however, the style is brought down to contemporary digital film. The plot starts to waiver as more and more screen time is given to the villains of the piece, concentrating on the villains inter-relationships, their family and even their personal security. The plot also gets convoluted, as if  Rodriguez was repeating his mistakes made on Once upon a Time in Mexico. It is fun to see Machete when he is on screen, carving up the bad guys, but it is too little at this point. The film’s climax is too messily filmed and chaotic to appreciate and falls flat when compared to the fantastic introduction.

 

Of note however is Michelle Rodriguez phoenix-rising at film’s end; mustering up images of SS exploitation films and the work of Russ Meyer. Paradoxically, it is good to see Jessica Alba being given a strong character to play, even though her rousing speech at the movie’s climax is a bit of a stretch. In regards to Lindsay Lohan's first performance since her fall from grace.....meh. 

 

Rating

 

If Machete kept to its B-movie roots already set in the Grindhouse trailer, and just kept the energy and style of its opening, the movie would have been a no-brainer hit. As it is, it is a good bookend to Planet Terror.

 

2.5 out of 5 machetes

 

Check out the trailer, see what Margaret and David have to say and check out their interview with director Robert Rodriguez!

Luke McWilliams November 2010

Lost Boys The Thirst Review

Lost Boys: The Thirst is a 2010 horror film directed by Dario Piana.

Plot

We are quickly reintroduced to Edgar (played by Corey Feldman ) and Alan Frog (played by Jamison Newlander ) who interrupt a vampire from killing a Congressman. During the chaos however, Alan becomes infected with the Vampire virus.

Five years pass, and we find Edgar in San Cazador, California, facing eviction from his trailer. With no money and no surviving friends to help him out, romantic vampire novelist Gwen Lieber offers Edgar a job for a large sum of money and all the weaponry he wants: find her brother Peter who was kidnapped during a rave in Ibiza, Spain, where DJ X has been handing out a drug called “The Thirst”. From here on in, Vampiric wackiness ensues……………..

Review

The first Lost Boys directed by Joel Schumacher was a surprise 80’s classic, starting the careers of the Kiefer Sutherland, Jason Patric, Corey Haim and Corey Feldman, who, as the Corey’s made a slew of movies together afterwards. It was the first successful horror movie to make the allegory between being a teenager and being a vampire: you never have to grow up, never get old and you can stay out all night and sleep all day – a perfect marriage of immortality and power. Like Peter Pan’s Lost Boys, these vampires never grew up, never accepted responsibility for their actions, but still yearned for a family and parental figures.

The design of the vampires has been replicated in every main-stream interpretation of a Vampire since, which you can see notably in Buffy, Angel and Tru Blood.

The Lost Boys sequel, the Tribe changed the location of the movie and made the main vampire clan surfers, repeating the original movie’s beats, without any fun to be had at all. The Thirst goes a little bit further by enhancing the main strengths of The Tribe: specifically Corey Fieldman’s Edgar Frog. A little bit of back-story from the Tribe introduced the notion that one of the Frog Brothers had become a Vampire, and that Corey Haim’s character is turning into one. Of course, due to Corey Haim’s untimely demise, he does not make an appearance in the Thirst apart from flash-back scenes to the original movie that pays tribute to him.

The Thirst is enjoyable if you are a fan of Corey Fieldman. It makes a passing remark to a generation of ravers being 'lost boys' but here is where the allegory begins and ends. This is a fun actioner, aimed at dispatching vamps with cool, albeit cheap, weapons, and not much more. It is unfortunately low budget, however the action sequences and special effects, especially when the Vamps reach their demise, really aren’t that bad, and, when compared to the Tribe, the acting and emotional beats are quite well done. Corey’s grunts and the movie’s humour does elicit laughs.

Rating

That all being said, a good episode of Tru-Blood, Buffy or Angel would beat this hands down. This is for nostalgia fans only, which, I guess, includes Corey Feldman fans.

2.5 fangs out of 5.

 

Check out the trailer and see what Rotten Tomatoes has to say!

Luke McWilliams November 2010