Valentine's Day

Director: Garry Marshall (aka Pretty Woman, The Princess Diaries and Raising Helen... so you know what to expect!)

Cast: Julia Roberts, Ashton Kutcher, Jennifer Garner, Bradley Cooper, Patrick Dempsey, Jessica Alba, Jessica Biel, Eric Dane, Jamie Foxx, Topher Grace, Anne Hathaway, Queen Latifah, Taylor Lautner... my fingers are already getting tired... and more!

Valentine's Day is exactly what you expect. An easy love conquers all approach to the mine field that is a Hallmark created non-holiday, set to either annoy you terribly, or make you sigh and giggle. It annoyed me terribly.

I went to the movie expecting to not like it very much. It is the kind of movie I go to so I can escape the real world, and come back out liking it much more than the sloppy over dramatised crap that Hollywood sells as RomComs these days.

Basically, you have a lot of story lines played by a lot of well respected (and not so well respected... I am looking at you Taylor and Taylor) actors and actresses, which all have issues surrounding this one day of the year in some form or another. The biggest fail was the really unimaginative story lines that we have seen over and over again, and a stupid attempt to copy the boy from Love Actually - that kid is gorgeous and no one can trump him! The highlights were the unexpected story lines that rang true a little, or actually made you (shock horror) relate to a character that is not a cardboard cutout stereotype.

My love goes to Eric Dane, Bradley Cooper, Julia Roberts, Topher Grace and Anne Hathaway (just for the accents), oh, and Jennifer Garner in that one scene as a waitress... ball-breaking never was played with such finesse!

My hate goes to the younger element of the cast (why were they even in the movie) and Ashton Kutcher - I cannot stand that guy.

Everyone else gets a standard RomCom pass.

To the writer, Katherine Fugate, might I suggest that you try and not make too many story lines next time. Cut the crap ones so the good ones can be fleshed out a little bit more so you don't think you are being shown flashcards instead of a movie. Just because you have a director that can call in RomCom favours from all over Hollywood does not mean that you have to give parts to every one of them.

I agree with the reviewer from IMDB, save your money, watch Love Actually again instead!

Australia (2008)

Director: Baz Lurhmann
Starring: Nicole Kidman, Hugh Jackman, David Wenham, Bryan Brown, Essie Davis

I take offense at those reviewers that expected 'Australia' to be some high brow revelation into Australia's controversial colonial past in the mid 20th Century. You could tell from the outset that these movie 'experts' clearly expected so much more than was ever going to be delivered. When Baz Lurhmann sets out to create a 'Gone with the Wind' or 'Cassablanca' set amongst the isolated cattle stations (not ranches, ranches are American, cattle stations are Australian) of the Top End and the Japanese attack on Darwin, I knew what to expect. I clearly had one up on all those vindictive journalists that wanted something more serious and less enjoyable.

Australia is good fun. It is meant to be fun. Sure, there are outrageously corny points (slow motion water seen, Hugh Jackman topless, SQUEE) and a storyline that sometimes is so extremely out there it has no basis in reality (a little kid vs stampeding cattle? who won?), but that is a part of the fun, and is to be expected both from a Baz Lurhmann film, and from a movie of the epic genre.

The movie is essentially in two parts, but the flow of story is seemless. This is in part held together by the extraordinary effort of the two leads. Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman had to adapt from seens of pure hilarity to seens of nail biting suspense, to heartbreaking drama. Those critics that have blasted Nicole Kidman's performance I believe have an agenda, because unlike in recent movies where her role seemed flat and dull, Kidman did jump out of the screen and make an impression.

As everyone else has mentioned, Brandon Waters is absolutely fantastic. There is no denying the fact that he is the revelation of this movie. He ties together not only the storyline, but truly engages you emotionally. He, an amateur actor and still a child, was given the most emotionally difficult scenes of the film, and carried them off beautifully.

In defence of some of the more negative comments I have heard about this film:
I believe Baz Lurhmann included enough of our abominable past with the aboriginals to educate, but not so much as to make the movie difficult to watch or to make the audience feel like they were being punished for the sins of their fathers.
In response to the fact that he digitally edited the glorious Australian Landscape to make it even more breathtaking : who doesn't edit their holiday photos these days to get the colours right and the feeling just right? Get off your high horse people.
And, to the fact that 20th Century Fox forced Lurhmann to change the ending. Be angry at them, not at Lurhmann.

There are some scenes in this movie that are so Australian, I would love to know what people unfamiliar with our humour or our outback lifestyle thought.

Quantum of Solace (2008)

Director: Marc Foster
Starring: Daniel Craig, Judi Dench, Olga Kurylenko

Bond is out for revenge, even if he is in denial about it.

Fast paced, one cold hearted attack after another, this is less about storyline, and more about Bond getting some of that angst out to maximum effect. Plus, someone tried to shoot 'M', how dare they! This all leads Bond to discover an international baddie organisation more convoluted than the Russians during the Cold War. They have their sticky fingers in everything without any of the goodies knowing about it, mainly because, they seem to be the goodies! Confused? Don't worry, Bond sorts it all out.

The storyline does get a little bit swamped by the thrills and chills, I admit, but I have that fantastic information retention, so I didn't mind. The director was an interesting choice for an movie that is so action focused. Marc Forster's previous movies include Finding Neverland (2004) and The Kite Runner (2007). Not your average action movie director choice. But his direction is more than competent, and it includes some beautiful scenes that really highlight contrasts in the landscape.

Daniel Craig was definitely a cold heartless bastard out for revenge, and played it beautifully. His emotional story ark was fantastic. The movie script wasn't absorbed by it, but was blended in perfectly with the chasing of the bad guys across the world. Olga may be beautiful, but she ain't a bond girl. Something was missing. She just didn't quite fit into the movie. Judi Dench was fantastic, as always. Gemma Arterton was not used well, but her small part was good. Someone had to be the real bond girl.

I loved the modern twist to the storyline. Bad guys using Humanitarian organisations to get the world's good intentions to work against themselves, and how governments seem to do really bad things with the best intentions in times of financial instability. Considering the UN just decorated one of their ceilings with money from a relief fund in Spain, it seems the idea does have a grain of truth in it.

The continuity from the last movie was good, though it seems I am one of few that seemed to be able to follow it. Maybe I am better at information retention, but I did not see Casino Royal just before I watched Quantum of Solace, and I was able to follow the storyline fine. Some of the continuity wasn't needed, for example, bringing the same CIA agent back. Actually, why bring the Americans into it at all again? This is Bond.

Credibility was also a question that I heard rise after people saw the movie. I ask you this. If you want to watch something credible, what are you buying tickets to a Bond movie for? Thrills and chills and unbelievable moments are what you are going to get. Deal with it.

Fun fun fun. Do not expect high quality cinema, but high quality bangs and smashes.

Burn After Reading (2008)

Director: The Coen Brothers
Writers: The Coen Brothers
Starring: Brad Pitt, Frances McDormand, George Clooney, Tilda Swinton, John Malkovich

I could just say it was written and directed by the Coen Brothers, and that is all the information your would need. It immediately implies all the things that can be good about a movie. An original concept that is put together with fantastic acting and storytelling, more than competent direction and cutting (which is becoming rarer and rarer in hollywood sadly), and a subject matter that both informs and amuses.

The scoop? An alcoholic CIA agent decides to quit and write his tell all memoirs when the agency tries to demote him. A middle-age-ish simple minded gym assistant is obsessed with the idea of plastic surgery. The charmingly stupid workmate and friend finds what he believes is top secret spy shit. Returning it to the alcoholic CIA agent turns into an ordeal when they want a reward, and that want turns into blackmail. The truth is, however, that the ramblings of a drunk ex-CIA agent are worthless. But she wants that plastic surgery, and she will get money for it even if she has to take it all the way to the top. Their bungling takes them further than they, or us, could have imagined .

We are taken into the sick, silly but sadly slightly true world of what can go wrong when honestly stupid folk try and be smart in a country that isn't that smart to begin with.

This is Americans laughing at themselves with tears in their eyes, and it is definitely worth going along and joining in. You will want to turn away from the sad reality of it all, but you can't. Grippingly good.

Brideshead Revisited (2008)

Director: Julian Jarrold
Starring: Emma Thompson, Matthew Goode, Michael Gambon, Greta Scacchi
Screen Writer: Jeremy Brock and Andrew Davies

I have never watched something so wonderfully British. A beautifully filmed costume period drama where time was taken in direction, not only of the beautiful locations, but of the actual storyline. The period drama has a long treasured and perfected history in the film industry, and a crowning glory of the BBC, but of late, efforts to master all the beauty while including a storyline seem to be completely botched (think the disaster that was 'The Other Boleyn Girl'). The moral of the story, best leave the British to what they do best, and Hollywood can return to churning out devastatingly bad contributions to the film industry that only the American's think are alright.

Brideshead is a return to form for popular period drama, along with the magnificent 'Duchess'. The plot development, though slow, is well thought out and unfolds masterfully. I did not think the flashforward to flashback at the start of the movie was required, but it does not make the film disjointed so it can be forgiven. The characters are a well balanced ensemble between the stereotype and the serious, and all themes of the plot seem to be addressed equally and seriously. There is nothing done flippant about this movie, so it is not cheapened in any way. Costumes and locations are exquisite (it goes without saying) and casting was superb. Stand out performance has to go to Ben Whishaw, who played Sebastian Flyte.

I cannot comment on the effort of adaptation because I have not had the opportunity to read the novel by Evelyn Waugh yet. Andrew Davies does have a fantastic track record, however, so I am sure it was in good hands. If certain scenes were left out, it was probably the normal amount that is left by the way side when books are adapted to the big screen, thanks to time constraints.

Do not go to this film if you are looking for fast paced or racey 'entertainment', but if you wish to be told a story about love and life and loss set in the beautiful past, even if it ends up being a bit oppressive with its serious subject matter and bitter sweet ending, this is the movie for you.

A beautiful, beautiful movie.

The Greek Treasure

Author: Irving Stone
Published: 1975

An easily read biography on the lives of Henry and Sophia Schliemann, the 'discoverers' of Troy, my mother thought that this was right up my ally. I have never been big on biographies, but I read it to make sure that I could give her a decent reason why I didn't like it. I knew, in other words, that I was not going to like it.

The book lacks, to a modern audience, an in depth treatment of the relationship of Henry and Sophia Schliemann for a start. It is very innocently played out, almost sickening at times, the way that Sophia appears to accommodate her husband while he tramples over their lives with his ambitions.

This perhaps is because the real meat of the biography is given not to those characters, but to their work - the uncovering of 'Homer's' Troy and their related struggles. Schliemann's determination to uncover Troy extended from his private life (his determination to have a Greek wife and therefore a Greek son by her) to his professional (spending any amount on his pursuit). This determination and zealousness was the reason why he was negligent to his wife and often confrontational to the authorities. The biography sometimes lists in depth the kind of finds the Schliemanns uncovered, the sheer scale of their operations and the logistical struggles of accomplishing it. More in depth is the continual back and forth between the Schliemanns and the countless toes they seemed to tread on while accomplishing their task.

I found this tiring for two reasons. The author made no attempt to be critical of the Schliemanns' approach to their work or to the people around them. It was clearly a one sided story in favour of the Schliemanns' approach when it was clearly flawed and selfish. The second reason is that the author seems to take the side of their archaeological approach as well, which was the equivalent of treasure finding and tomb robbing. When this book was published, archaeology had advanced considerably. I would have definitely appreciated a more educated reflection upon their actions. Archaeology suffers from a fantastical image provided by the likes of Lara Croft and Indiana Jones, and this book can be added to that list that fails to inform the public that history, all elements of it, should be saved for posterity without bias to its period, prettiness, and to who it will be shown in the future.

Overall, though Irving Stone provides a very pretty and easy to read biography of the Schliemanns, it lacks a proper engagement of the real topics and clearly demonstrates the author's admiration without reservation.

Book Browsing

The Canterbury Papers: a novel
-Judith Koll Healey
I have a soft spot for easy to read historical fiction, on one condition: that it isn't completely 'out there'. Unfortunately, this does seem to stray more on the fictional side of things rather than the historical. Its style, however, does make up for this. It is very easy to read and even though it is very predictable in its plot developments, the book does not bore. A light and easy read if you like a little bit of romance and intrigue set amongst those European royal houses of old.

The Lady in Blue
- Javier Sierra
This novel is a little bit of a Davinci Code, but fortunately the author has more literary style. The novel is set around the mystery of the Blue Lady, a nun that appeared to the Native Indians in Mexico 400 years ago and converted them to Christianity before the Spanish monks ever arrived. Sierra takes the reader down the paths of several characters in different times, all in some way connected to this enigmatic lady and wanting to solve her mystery. Naturally, the church is involved and perhaps their motives are not entirely as pure as they should be. The book keeps you guessing all the way, is not afraid to embrace the supernatural while not coming off as cliche, and though slow to get started, genuinely enthralls the reader with this facinating mystery. Well researched and well written, and puts Dan Brown to shame in my opinion.

The Salt Letters
-Christine Balint
I was drawn to this book for two reasons. One of my university lecturers reviewed it and it was written by an Australian while writing her Honours thesis. It facinates me how anyone could have the time or patience to write something else while attempting a piece of academic writing (having gone through my honours project recently) let alone how Balint managed to get shortlisted for the 1998 Australian/Vogel Literary Award while doing so! This aside, the book has enlarged upon a letter that the author read from Louisa Cobden to her daughter, Sarah, who had boarded a boat from Old England to New Holland. Balint has vividly written the journey of Sarah both upon the boat and in her mind as she experiences the many trials and few pleasures of being a single woman of no rank alone on the open sea, destined for a new life. It is clear that Balint studied the conditions on ship well and one is made to feel genuinely for our ancestors that made that journey. Balint's style, though accomplished, is a little unfocused however. I feel that this may have been purposeful, imitating the unfocused and wavering consciousness of the protagonist, but it left me unable to get completely drawn into the novel. In addition, the 'memory' sequences seemed a little cliche compared to the raw experiences on deck. Overall it was a pleasant surprise and I hope Balint grows into a great home grown author.