Director : Ryan Murphy
Cast : Annette Bening, Bryan Cox, Gwenyth Paltrow, Joseph Fiennes, Evan Rachel Wood, Alec Baldwin
Based on the memoirs of Augusten Burroughs, this movie follows the experience of a boy whose mother (Annette Bening) is a poet wannabe, and whose dissatisfaction with her own failure drives his father (Alec Baldwin) to alcoholism. When his parents divorce and his mother is not coping, Augusten is put into the care of his mother's therapist (Brian Cox). The house is out there, to say the least, and the family a mishmash of children from different backgrounds which the doctor has 'collected', and who are in one way or another unbalanced. The doctor, however, seems to take no care of any of them, in body or mind, making for an interesting household for a teenager going through the angst of adolescence to be in.
The movie looked very promising from the trailer and from the excellent cast, so naturally I had high expectations. The cast does not disappoint, they all act their parts well. What is lacking is any cohesion. There are so many interesting characters, but we never get to hear the whole story of any of them, they are simply hinted at and left to the breeze. One is left with a great deal of sympathy for the doctor's wife, but utter confusion regarding the choices and situations of the rest of the cast. What could have had the enjoyable oddity of the Royal Tenenbaums (2001) ended up leaving me bitter with disappointment as there was so much that could have been done to make me feel some connection to these strange characters, but I was left with no insight to them whatsoever. The problem may have been that the adaptation of Augusten Burroughs' memoirs were never actually adapted for the screen, but rather were crammed into a movie.
The director, Ryan Murphy, also did the screen play, so he was obviously keen to adapt the book. I will have to wait until I read the book before I can tell whether the faults in the storyline were his writing or actually trying to reflect the confusion of the protagonist.
Overall, I say, don't bother, unless you like cool 60s and 70s costumes!
Wednesday, 12 December 2007
Wednesday, 11 April 2007
ITV Jane Austen Series
The world of YouTube is such a wonderful place. Despite its bad quality pictures, I have access to the three adaptations of Jane Austen Classics shown in America and the UK in little bite size pieces. Being a period drama freak, I have naturally taken advantage of this opportunity and can tell you a little bit about it here.
Mansfield Park
After the monumental plot cock up achieved by the 1999 version (Starring the lovely Frances O'Connor, the yummy Alessandro Nivola and a favourite of mine, Jonny Lee Miller) I was hoping that this TV version could right some wrongs and actually pay attention to the book.
Somehow, however, they managed to take a novel, adored by many, and turn it into something altogether flat. Jane Austen was a wonderful critic of the human character, yet this aspect was entirely missing from the script. Combined with filming being confined to one set, poor dialogue and direction, the program seemed naive or just extremely disinterested in what it was adapting.
Northanger Abby
I have to admit, I have not read the book, and consequently only gave myself a sneak preview of this adaptation. Luckilly the screenplay was entrusted to the hands of Andrew Davies, better known for his magnificent adaptation of BBC's 'Pride and Prejudice', as well as favourites 'Wives and Daughters' and 'Vanity Fair'. The Jane Austen spark was there, and the acting and direction was very much adequate as far as I could tell from my sneaky preview. I cannot vouch for loyalty to the book however, but given Andrew Davies consistency in the past, I am guessing that this will be excellent.
Persuasion
One of my favourite Jane Austen novels! So I was very anxious that they get this one right. They had to contend with the well received BBC adaptation of 1995, which I think pushed them to a very different personal level. The overall portrayal is a little more somber than I would have expected, and very much constructed from the view of Anne Elliot. The humerous characters are almost pushed into the background (unfortunatly this limited the lovely Anthony Stuart Head's screen time as the Baronette) but I believe all the character representations remain loyal to the novel. In particular, Amanda Hale as Mary Musgrove is a lovely Jane Austen characture of the rediculous! The chemistry between Rupert Penry-Jones as Capt. Wentworth and Sally Hawkins as Anne Elliot is undeniable. The use of hand held, which usually distracts me, does not get annoying and I think the director uses it extremely effectively to show the inner turmoil of Anne. Also curious in the direction is how Anne stares directly at the camera at times, but again it does not seem out of place and connects the viewer with Anne's character.
Many a fan of this novel will lament the tampering with a particular scene (I will not ruin it for you) but the tampering is well done and does not remove from the moment too much.
One problem I had was the rushed ending, but with a TV movie adaptation it was to be expected.
Keep an eye out for the Sense and Sensibility mini that will be out hopefully by the end of the year, also in the capable hands of Andrew Davies' script writing.
Mansfield Park
After the monumental plot cock up achieved by the 1999 version (Starring the lovely Frances O'Connor, the yummy Alessandro Nivola and a favourite of mine, Jonny Lee Miller) I was hoping that this TV version could right some wrongs and actually pay attention to the book.
Somehow, however, they managed to take a novel, adored by many, and turn it into something altogether flat. Jane Austen was a wonderful critic of the human character, yet this aspect was entirely missing from the script. Combined with filming being confined to one set, poor dialogue and direction, the program seemed naive or just extremely disinterested in what it was adapting.
Northanger Abby
I have to admit, I have not read the book, and consequently only gave myself a sneak preview of this adaptation. Luckilly the screenplay was entrusted to the hands of Andrew Davies, better known for his magnificent adaptation of BBC's 'Pride and Prejudice', as well as favourites 'Wives and Daughters' and 'Vanity Fair'. The Jane Austen spark was there, and the acting and direction was very much adequate as far as I could tell from my sneaky preview. I cannot vouch for loyalty to the book however, but given Andrew Davies consistency in the past, I am guessing that this will be excellent.
Persuasion
One of my favourite Jane Austen novels! So I was very anxious that they get this one right. They had to contend with the well received BBC adaptation of 1995, which I think pushed them to a very different personal level. The overall portrayal is a little more somber than I would have expected, and very much constructed from the view of Anne Elliot. The humerous characters are almost pushed into the background (unfortunatly this limited the lovely Anthony Stuart Head's screen time as the Baronette) but I believe all the character representations remain loyal to the novel. In particular, Amanda Hale as Mary Musgrove is a lovely Jane Austen characture of the rediculous! The chemistry between Rupert Penry-Jones as Capt. Wentworth and Sally Hawkins as Anne Elliot is undeniable. The use of hand held, which usually distracts me, does not get annoying and I think the director uses it extremely effectively to show the inner turmoil of Anne. Also curious in the direction is how Anne stares directly at the camera at times, but again it does not seem out of place and connects the viewer with Anne's character.
Many a fan of this novel will lament the tampering with a particular scene (I will not ruin it for you) but the tampering is well done and does not remove from the moment too much.
One problem I had was the rushed ending, but with a TV movie adaptation it was to be expected.
Keep an eye out for the Sense and Sensibility mini that will be out hopefully by the end of the year, also in the capable hands of Andrew Davies' script writing.
Friday, 2 March 2007
Miss Potter
Director: Chris Noonan
Cast: Renee Zellweger, Ewan (Yummy) McGregor, Emily Watson
Language: English
Location: UK
Everyone should have grown up with the mischievous tales of Peter Rabbit, if not Gemima Puddleduck, and enjoyed the light hearted and simple tales they wound for us. Now that we 'little bunnies' are all grown up, the fascination passes to the author, Beatrix Potter, and we wonder at how such stiff Victorian society could have produced a woman with such fluid and innocent imagination.
The tale is very much a portrait, played beautifully by American Renee Zellweger (who is very much becoming an adopted British actress considering her other iconic work as Briget Jones). If you read a few of the articles, you will find that Beatrix Potter is a bit of a mystery to biographers due to her utmost want of privacy. Thus, we must always allow for embellishments to be made by script writers to flesh out what appears to be a very private person. After all, what are the movies for except to allow us our fancies? (Don't answer this, please!)
The movie follows the life of 'Miss Potter' from the beginning of her published career with Norman Warne as her adviser and overseer (played by Ewan McGregor), to the work that occupied her to the end of her life, the conservation of the farming community in the Lakes district where she retired from London life. Throughout the movie there are lovely flash-backs to an inspiring and blossomingly (if that is a word) imaginative child-hood. Emily Watson plays Millie Warne, Norman Warne's 'spinster' sister and Beatrix's friend and confidant.
The movie contains both the comical and the tragic, but retains the feeling of warmth that Potter cherished in her work. At times, it is clear that there are undertones of the struggling feminist in Victorian England as well as the rebellious crossing of class structures. Fortunately these are kept as undertones and do not hinder the development of the story, and are kept within the bounds of being relevant to Beatrix's life.
The part of Millie is a little eccentric at times, but as the movie does not attempt to be factual or serious it is perfectly delightful to watch Emily Watson's performance. The parents are played to perfection by Barbara Flynn and Bill Paterson (both of who are in BBC production 'Wives and Daughters'), who maintain the realities of their position in Victorian society, concern as parents, and their comical roles in perfect balance. The chemistry between Ewan McGregor and Renee Zellweger is delightful to watch, and they paint a pretty picture for us. Chris Noonan (of Babe fame) directs beautifully, capturing both the environment and the character to give a both visually stunning and emotionally evoking film.
A delightful movie to experience.
Cast: Renee Zellweger, Ewan (Yummy) McGregor, Emily Watson
Language: English
Location: UK
Everyone should have grown up with the mischievous tales of Peter Rabbit, if not Gemima Puddleduck, and enjoyed the light hearted and simple tales they wound for us. Now that we 'little bunnies' are all grown up, the fascination passes to the author, Beatrix Potter, and we wonder at how such stiff Victorian society could have produced a woman with such fluid and innocent imagination.
The tale is very much a portrait, played beautifully by American Renee Zellweger (who is very much becoming an adopted British actress considering her other iconic work as Briget Jones). If you read a few of the articles, you will find that Beatrix Potter is a bit of a mystery to biographers due to her utmost want of privacy. Thus, we must always allow for embellishments to be made by script writers to flesh out what appears to be a very private person. After all, what are the movies for except to allow us our fancies? (Don't answer this, please!)
The movie follows the life of 'Miss Potter' from the beginning of her published career with Norman Warne as her adviser and overseer (played by Ewan McGregor), to the work that occupied her to the end of her life, the conservation of the farming community in the Lakes district where she retired from London life. Throughout the movie there are lovely flash-backs to an inspiring and blossomingly (if that is a word) imaginative child-hood. Emily Watson plays Millie Warne, Norman Warne's 'spinster' sister and Beatrix's friend and confidant.
The movie contains both the comical and the tragic, but retains the feeling of warmth that Potter cherished in her work. At times, it is clear that there are undertones of the struggling feminist in Victorian England as well as the rebellious crossing of class structures. Fortunately these are kept as undertones and do not hinder the development of the story, and are kept within the bounds of being relevant to Beatrix's life.
The part of Millie is a little eccentric at times, but as the movie does not attempt to be factual or serious it is perfectly delightful to watch Emily Watson's performance. The parents are played to perfection by Barbara Flynn and Bill Paterson (both of who are in BBC production 'Wives and Daughters'), who maintain the realities of their position in Victorian society, concern as parents, and their comical roles in perfect balance. The chemistry between Ewan McGregor and Renee Zellweger is delightful to watch, and they paint a pretty picture for us. Chris Noonan (of Babe fame) directs beautifully, capturing both the environment and the character to give a both visually stunning and emotionally evoking film.
A delightful movie to experience.
Saturday, 17 February 2007
A Midsummer Night's Dream
A Midsummer Night's Dream
Yohangza Theatre Company
as part of the Perth International Arts Festival
In Korean with English surtitles
Hilarious! How fun it is to be mischievous. Wonderful use of the theatre- be ready for surprises when you Go See It.
Language is no problem because the Yohangza Company are so communicative with their bodies and faces. And they're clearly not afraid of a bit of toilet humour! Crowd was cheering like at a rock concert, and fair enough too.
Yohangza Theatre Company
as part of the Perth International Arts Festival
In Korean with English surtitles
Hilarious! How fun it is to be mischievous. Wonderful use of the theatre- be ready for surprises when you Go See It.
Language is no problem because the Yohangza Company are so communicative with their bodies and faces. And they're clearly not afraid of a bit of toilet humour! Crowd was cheering like at a rock concert, and fair enough too.
Tuesday, 6 February 2007
Big Day Out, Perth, 2007
Venue: Claremont Showgrounds
Line Up: Spazzys, Sick Puppies, Calerway, The Simian Line, The Dirty Secrets, Streetlight, The Butterfly Effect, Evermore, Scribe, The Sleepy Jackson, Blue Shaddy, New Rules For Boats, Trivium, Little Birdy, My Chemical Romance, Eskimo Joe, The Vines, Kasabian, Schvendes, Sugar Army, The Drones, The Killers, John Butler Trio, Jet, Muse, Tool, Something for Kate, You Am I, Bob Evans, Snowman, Violent Femmes, Tim&Tex with Strings, and some more that I just can't be bothered listing right now.
My first Big Day Out. It was an event that I have fantasised about going to for such a long time now. It started with the older brother thing. They liked metal, rock, alternative, etc. and went to listen to their favourite bands while the little sister who was too young got left behind, despite her growing appreciation for their taste in music. I think, with this lovely ideal in mind, we should start with first impressions...
The set up was terrible! I have to say it - What were the organisers thinking? Claremont showgrounds is a maze of permanent structures that are not appropriate for a multiple stage set-up, let alone huge masses of eager music fans pushing into a venue. For example, to get to the Green Stage, where most of the better smaller acts were playing (the likes of Little Birdy, Something for Kate, and You Am I) you had to make your way behind the pavillion into crowded market/food lined walkways with little visibility to try and discern whether you were going the right way. The entrance was a small walkway that was quickly fenced off because the mash of people broke the hand rails in the early afternoon, or an open grassed way that was around the back and hard to find unless you knew exactly where you were going. Once in the venue area, the fenced off drinking area was lower than the actual audience area, so if you wanted to enjoy a beer while watching, you couldn't watch. And to tip it off, The "Green" Stage was actually Red... CONTINUITY PEOPLE???
There was also the problem that the two main stages were facing West, precisely where the wind was coming from (which was blowing throughout the whole day) so the sound quality was badly effected at times.
I am not sure how to take the drinking areas. I was with my cousin, who is an eastern stater, and he says that the drinking areas aren't fenced off like they are over here. While I can see the sense in keeping the alcoholics away from the younger and more eager punters, this venue would have benefitted a lot from getting rid of some of the barriers because it was hard enough to move around without the extra fences needed for licensed areas.
I will gladly now move onto the music.
There was no way I could have seen all the bands that I wanted to see, so I tried to focus on bands I hadn't seen, keeping it breezy so that I had a good time, and what was better for my own health. (I wasn't about to try and press into a venue with all the people ee-ing off their heads and get smushed against the fence, or ground, or scary Tool fans!)
Starting the day off with The Spazzys was an excellent choice. Up-beat, fun on stage, silly and it is always nice to see girls on stage playing their instruments well instead of blokes. The early punters even got up a bit of a dance crowd for them, bless 'em.
A change of pace was provided by The Butterfly Effect. I was sceptical about these guys, but was pleasantly surprised. Got the crowd up and going, great energy on stage and produced a very tight set. They suffered from the poor sound quality provided by the wind sweeping all the music away (I think the people in Subi would have heard it better than us!), so they failed to keep my attention for the whole set.
Birds of Tokyo filled up the Converse Venue (which was a shitty indore small venue to begin with, another proof of the inadequacies of Claremont Showgrounds) to the extent that I couldn't have seen them. Instead, I gave Evermore a chance, and I am pleased to report that their other songs aren't as shit as their popular ones, and they definitely know how to play a live gig.
My cousin Nigel said Sleepy Jackson put on a good show, so we TRIED (see above) to move over to the Green Stage, but arrived late putting up with all the crap of the set up. Then we experienced a shitty set anyway, which disappointed me greatly because the crowd was the right temperament that I could have had a great dance, but the boys didn't warrant the attention, so we moved to the back of the crowd and waited for Little Birdy to lift our spirits.
Little Birdy were awesome, combining old with new, as well as their highly popular Finn brother's cover.
By now the crowds were a bit heavy, and moving around was getting even more difficult. I was sad to miss local act Schvendes who I was wishing to introduce my brother to, but happy to skip Eskimo Joe, who I believe are practicing the act of boring the audience to death by replaying their cds back to them.
I caught a bit of Johnny Butler, but he also suffered from sound problems with the wind in the wrong direction, and The Killers, who played both the old and the new superbly and have a great live feel that made me forget that I had already heard their songs a million times each on the radio.
I skipped across to Something for Kate at the Green Stage alone for a while, seeming as my brother doesn't like them. This is the first time I had seen them live, though I have been a fan since being introduced to them by a friend in high school. I am not a huge fan of their two latest cds, but I am glad to say that when played live they lose that commercial feel and ring with the sound of good old S4K. Paul Dempsey was sporting some longer hair and a sense of humour which made the set run smoothly when he didn't run the songs directly into another. The drummer was dripping with sweat he was working so hard! I was sad they didn't play more from their old albums, but this is understandable with Desert Lights so recently released. As they played while Jet was, the crowd consisted mostly of loyal followers and allowed for much fun dancing and bouncing a-long.
Muse was coming up on the big stage, so I tried desperatly to find an OK viewing spot for their set. It is enough that I say they impressed me even though I was atleast 300m away from the stage!
The crowd then got a lot more crazy waiting for Tool to come on stage, and surged forward when they began. Though I had a great view for the distance I was sitting away, and I am a great Tool fan, I could not enjoy the set. The sound quality for that deep bass just wasn't there, and putting up with all the drugged up fans was almost unbearable. At times I couldn't hear the band at all, just all the people singing the lyrics wrong in the crowd. It didn't bother me that Maynard was almost invisible on stage (he was hiding at the back somewhere) because his voice is more than enough for me, and I appreciate the bands stance on their music. The venue was just completely wrond for the band, and being at the end of the day, the crowd was way too far gone to appreciate it as they should.
Due to my discomfort, I convinced my brother to go visit Tim&Tex with Strings, who I had bragged about ever since seeing them with WASO. These two blokes have performance to a T (so to speak!) and their light hearted banter makes them a constant pleasure to watch, despite the poorly Converse Venue. It was such a relief after the oppressive crowd at Tool. So we ended the evening with a nice small crowd, acoustic guitar and two performers who love to perform. A perfect end to a very long day.
Though I would love to end this very long review on the positive note above, I have to make the observation that if Perth doesn't do something with the transport leaving the venue, which was completely inadequate, they might next year have a riot on their hands. The situation was completely unorganised and so close to getting out of control. People could have seriously gotten hurt with the lengths they were going to to get on the train platform.
Line Up: Spazzys, Sick Puppies, Calerway, The Simian Line, The Dirty Secrets, Streetlight, The Butterfly Effect, Evermore, Scribe, The Sleepy Jackson, Blue Shaddy, New Rules For Boats, Trivium, Little Birdy, My Chemical Romance, Eskimo Joe, The Vines, Kasabian, Schvendes, Sugar Army, The Drones, The Killers, John Butler Trio, Jet, Muse, Tool, Something for Kate, You Am I, Bob Evans, Snowman, Violent Femmes, Tim&Tex with Strings, and some more that I just can't be bothered listing right now.
My first Big Day Out. It was an event that I have fantasised about going to for such a long time now. It started with the older brother thing. They liked metal, rock, alternative, etc. and went to listen to their favourite bands while the little sister who was too young got left behind, despite her growing appreciation for their taste in music. I think, with this lovely ideal in mind, we should start with first impressions...
The set up was terrible! I have to say it - What were the organisers thinking? Claremont showgrounds is a maze of permanent structures that are not appropriate for a multiple stage set-up, let alone huge masses of eager music fans pushing into a venue. For example, to get to the Green Stage, where most of the better smaller acts were playing (the likes of Little Birdy, Something for Kate, and You Am I) you had to make your way behind the pavillion into crowded market/food lined walkways with little visibility to try and discern whether you were going the right way. The entrance was a small walkway that was quickly fenced off because the mash of people broke the hand rails in the early afternoon, or an open grassed way that was around the back and hard to find unless you knew exactly where you were going. Once in the venue area, the fenced off drinking area was lower than the actual audience area, so if you wanted to enjoy a beer while watching, you couldn't watch. And to tip it off, The "Green" Stage was actually Red... CONTINUITY PEOPLE???
There was also the problem that the two main stages were facing West, precisely where the wind was coming from (which was blowing throughout the whole day) so the sound quality was badly effected at times.
I am not sure how to take the drinking areas. I was with my cousin, who is an eastern stater, and he says that the drinking areas aren't fenced off like they are over here. While I can see the sense in keeping the alcoholics away from the younger and more eager punters, this venue would have benefitted a lot from getting rid of some of the barriers because it was hard enough to move around without the extra fences needed for licensed areas.
I will gladly now move onto the music.
There was no way I could have seen all the bands that I wanted to see, so I tried to focus on bands I hadn't seen, keeping it breezy so that I had a good time, and what was better for my own health. (I wasn't about to try and press into a venue with all the people ee-ing off their heads and get smushed against the fence, or ground, or scary Tool fans!)
Starting the day off with The Spazzys was an excellent choice. Up-beat, fun on stage, silly and it is always nice to see girls on stage playing their instruments well instead of blokes. The early punters even got up a bit of a dance crowd for them, bless 'em.
A change of pace was provided by The Butterfly Effect. I was sceptical about these guys, but was pleasantly surprised. Got the crowd up and going, great energy on stage and produced a very tight set. They suffered from the poor sound quality provided by the wind sweeping all the music away (I think the people in Subi would have heard it better than us!), so they failed to keep my attention for the whole set.
Birds of Tokyo filled up the Converse Venue (which was a shitty indore small venue to begin with, another proof of the inadequacies of Claremont Showgrounds) to the extent that I couldn't have seen them. Instead, I gave Evermore a chance, and I am pleased to report that their other songs aren't as shit as their popular ones, and they definitely know how to play a live gig.
My cousin Nigel said Sleepy Jackson put on a good show, so we TRIED (see above) to move over to the Green Stage, but arrived late putting up with all the crap of the set up. Then we experienced a shitty set anyway, which disappointed me greatly because the crowd was the right temperament that I could have had a great dance, but the boys didn't warrant the attention, so we moved to the back of the crowd and waited for Little Birdy to lift our spirits.
Little Birdy were awesome, combining old with new, as well as their highly popular Finn brother's cover.
By now the crowds were a bit heavy, and moving around was getting even more difficult. I was sad to miss local act Schvendes who I was wishing to introduce my brother to, but happy to skip Eskimo Joe, who I believe are practicing the act of boring the audience to death by replaying their cds back to them.
I caught a bit of Johnny Butler, but he also suffered from sound problems with the wind in the wrong direction, and The Killers, who played both the old and the new superbly and have a great live feel that made me forget that I had already heard their songs a million times each on the radio.
I skipped across to Something for Kate at the Green Stage alone for a while, seeming as my brother doesn't like them. This is the first time I had seen them live, though I have been a fan since being introduced to them by a friend in high school. I am not a huge fan of their two latest cds, but I am glad to say that when played live they lose that commercial feel and ring with the sound of good old S4K. Paul Dempsey was sporting some longer hair and a sense of humour which made the set run smoothly when he didn't run the songs directly into another. The drummer was dripping with sweat he was working so hard! I was sad they didn't play more from their old albums, but this is understandable with Desert Lights so recently released. As they played while Jet was, the crowd consisted mostly of loyal followers and allowed for much fun dancing and bouncing a-long.
Muse was coming up on the big stage, so I tried desperatly to find an OK viewing spot for their set. It is enough that I say they impressed me even though I was atleast 300m away from the stage!
The crowd then got a lot more crazy waiting for Tool to come on stage, and surged forward when they began. Though I had a great view for the distance I was sitting away, and I am a great Tool fan, I could not enjoy the set. The sound quality for that deep bass just wasn't there, and putting up with all the drugged up fans was almost unbearable. At times I couldn't hear the band at all, just all the people singing the lyrics wrong in the crowd. It didn't bother me that Maynard was almost invisible on stage (he was hiding at the back somewhere) because his voice is more than enough for me, and I appreciate the bands stance on their music. The venue was just completely wrond for the band, and being at the end of the day, the crowd was way too far gone to appreciate it as they should.
Due to my discomfort, I convinced my brother to go visit Tim&Tex with Strings, who I had bragged about ever since seeing them with WASO. These two blokes have performance to a T (so to speak!) and their light hearted banter makes them a constant pleasure to watch, despite the poorly Converse Venue. It was such a relief after the oppressive crowd at Tool. So we ended the evening with a nice small crowd, acoustic guitar and two performers who love to perform. A perfect end to a very long day.
Though I would love to end this very long review on the positive note above, I have to make the observation that if Perth doesn't do something with the transport leaving the venue, which was completely inadequate, they might next year have a riot on their hands. The situation was completely unorganised and so close to getting out of control. People could have seriously gotten hurt with the lengths they were going to to get on the train platform.
Thursday, 1 February 2007
Marie Antoinette
Director: Sofia Coppola
Cast: Kirsten Dunst, Jason Schwartzman, Rose Byrne, Judy Davis, Rip Torn
This is a movie that is beautiful to behold, with stunning costuming, casting and scenery. The script leaves something wanting however. At the end of the film you are left knowing that the message wasn't quite told, that the depths of the character's weren't quite expressed. There was a goal in creating this movie, and it wasn't made. The problem is, you can't quite fix where it went wrong.
In the end a fun experience, and a lovely portrayal of Marie Antoinette's life from 15 to 30, but don't expect to be left with any revelations. After all, we already know the end.
Cast: Kirsten Dunst, Jason Schwartzman, Rose Byrne, Judy Davis, Rip Torn
This is a movie that is beautiful to behold, with stunning costuming, casting and scenery. The script leaves something wanting however. At the end of the film you are left knowing that the message wasn't quite told, that the depths of the character's weren't quite expressed. There was a goal in creating this movie, and it wasn't made. The problem is, you can't quite fix where it went wrong.
In the end a fun experience, and a lovely portrayal of Marie Antoinette's life from 15 to 30, but don't expect to be left with any revelations. After all, we already know the end.
Wednesday, 31 January 2007
Efter bryllyppet / After the Wedding
Director: Susanne Bier
Cast: Mads Mikkelson, Sidse Babett Knudgen, Rolf Lassbard, Stine Fischer Christensen
Language: Danish and English
Location: India and Denmark
comments in italics by charlie.
I should forewarn you that I have a habit of revealing too much about a movie to a person that hasn't seen it. So please excuse a girl her tendency to get carried away, and her first attempt at reviewing a movie for an audience, however unknown her audience might be.
Danish movie 'After the Wedding' is another example of great movies coming out of the small, cold country that now houses our new favourite royal family, and yet another example of how European films just seem to portray emotional situations ten times better than anything Hollywood creates. It has somehow had an effect that no other film has had on me, a feeling of being raw. It challenges the way emotions are felt, and how we should react to them in a movie clearly about how to do the right thing by the ones you love.
Actor Mads Mikkelson, best known by English speaking audiences for his role as Le Chiffre in the latest Bond installment, has matched up again with director Susanne Bier (they previously worked together on 'Elsker dig for evigt') to play Jacob, a man who is dedicated to bringing aid to those people suffering over the other side of the world, but not exactly successful at doing so. His orphanage in India is going under despite his best intentions, and when he is offered a donation from Danish businessman Jorgen (Rolf Lassgard), it seems perfect timing. There is one condition however, he must return to Denmark to 'shake the hand' of the mouth that is about to feed him. The prospect clearly disgusts Jacob, but he leaves his little orphanage and his favourite orphan boy with the clear decision to be returning in eight days.
While in Denmark, he is offered a seat at the wedding of Jorgen's daughter, Anna, played by Stine Fischer Christensen. After the toasts it is clear that Jacob's reality has shifted far from his sheltered life in India.
I won't spoil what happens after the wedding, as this story is crafted to reveal itself slowly and I fear I may have already revealed too much despite my best intentions!
From the beginning of this film it is clear why the director has chosen to work with Mikkelson again. Mikkelson's controlled acting style suits his character perfectly, and works well with the close perspectives employed by the director. Rolf Lassgard however seemed awkward at times. The script develops his character well, and the scenes with his wife Helene, played by Sidse Babett Knudgen, are almost flawless. His solo takes however seem too obvious at trying to tell us something more, as if he is pushing himself to act instead of acting. This might be the direction, but either way I found it frustrating.
I thought Rolf Lassgard performed his solo scenes perfectly! They were a highlight for me and I found him at least as intriguing if not moreso than the lead. The way the camera follows him around so we are always just a pace behind but experiencing and observing an apparently usual day in the life of a 'great man', I found myself excited to look for clues as to what goes on in such a mind.
The two women leads are beautiful, in both senses. Helene is perfectly cast, seemlessly carrying her character into its different roles throughout the film. It is almost as if she holds the emotional heart of this film as she is the only one that seems to portray her emotions on the surface. Stine Fischer Christensen seemed too immature for the role of Anna, but this may be the character rubbing off on my interpretation, for in reflection, her character seems flawless.
The role of Anna is rather underdeveloped. I suspect there are other scenes, or at least lines with her that have been left on the cutting room floor, for there were a couple of places which gave the impression they would lead onto more detail about the girl later - but were left unresolved.
The direction is difficult to understand. Susanne Bier uses hand-held for many shots, which I usually find frustrating. However, it seemed to enhance the emotion of the scenes and made the very controlled performances of Mikkelson and Lassgard stronger. She also showed the contrast between India and Denmark, though how to describe how she did it is at a loss to me. At other times though she used shots that seemed so blatant an attempt at showing symbolism or giving us a message it spoiled the plot's slow unfurling of the heart of the story. I can only conclude that her filming of the characters was perfect for this film, while her extra shots were too blatant. I am curious to see how what I believe is her first English speaking movie, 'Things We Lost in the Fire', will turn out.
Agreed that the symbolism shots became too blatant. You know how home movies can somehow seem less real than professional films, for all that they are raw footage? That seemed to me what was imitated for the India scenes, and it didn't bother me until the end, during the return to India. There it was terrible! In those final scenes between Jacob and the Indian boy I could not connect with the characters at all. I was extremely aware I was watching two actors who had been told to 'sit here', 'kneel there', do this then that. It was embarrassing.
This movie was interesting to watch for the performances and techniques it tried out and interesting to talk about afterwards for the topics and situations it brings up - would this have happened in real life? What would you have done being in such a characters situation?
I recommend that this movie is watched once only, because anything else would ruin the emotional impact.
**After note: Congratulations are in order as Efter bryllyppet has been nominated for best foreign language film in this year's Oscars.**
Cast: Mads Mikkelson, Sidse Babett Knudgen, Rolf Lassbard, Stine Fischer Christensen
Language: Danish and English
Location: India and Denmark
comments in italics by charlie.
I should forewarn you that I have a habit of revealing too much about a movie to a person that hasn't seen it. So please excuse a girl her tendency to get carried away, and her first attempt at reviewing a movie for an audience, however unknown her audience might be.
Danish movie 'After the Wedding' is another example of great movies coming out of the small, cold country that now houses our new favourite royal family, and yet another example of how European films just seem to portray emotional situations ten times better than anything Hollywood creates. It has somehow had an effect that no other film has had on me, a feeling of being raw. It challenges the way emotions are felt, and how we should react to them in a movie clearly about how to do the right thing by the ones you love.
Actor Mads Mikkelson, best known by English speaking audiences for his role as Le Chiffre in the latest Bond installment, has matched up again with director Susanne Bier (they previously worked together on 'Elsker dig for evigt') to play Jacob, a man who is dedicated to bringing aid to those people suffering over the other side of the world, but not exactly successful at doing so. His orphanage in India is going under despite his best intentions, and when he is offered a donation from Danish businessman Jorgen (Rolf Lassgard), it seems perfect timing. There is one condition however, he must return to Denmark to 'shake the hand' of the mouth that is about to feed him. The prospect clearly disgusts Jacob, but he leaves his little orphanage and his favourite orphan boy with the clear decision to be returning in eight days.
While in Denmark, he is offered a seat at the wedding of Jorgen's daughter, Anna, played by Stine Fischer Christensen. After the toasts it is clear that Jacob's reality has shifted far from his sheltered life in India.
I won't spoil what happens after the wedding, as this story is crafted to reveal itself slowly and I fear I may have already revealed too much despite my best intentions!
From the beginning of this film it is clear why the director has chosen to work with Mikkelson again. Mikkelson's controlled acting style suits his character perfectly, and works well with the close perspectives employed by the director. Rolf Lassgard however seemed awkward at times. The script develops his character well, and the scenes with his wife Helene, played by Sidse Babett Knudgen, are almost flawless. His solo takes however seem too obvious at trying to tell us something more, as if he is pushing himself to act instead of acting. This might be the direction, but either way I found it frustrating.
I thought Rolf Lassgard performed his solo scenes perfectly! They were a highlight for me and I found him at least as intriguing if not moreso than the lead. The way the camera follows him around so we are always just a pace behind but experiencing and observing an apparently usual day in the life of a 'great man', I found myself excited to look for clues as to what goes on in such a mind.
The two women leads are beautiful, in both senses. Helene is perfectly cast, seemlessly carrying her character into its different roles throughout the film. It is almost as if she holds the emotional heart of this film as she is the only one that seems to portray her emotions on the surface. Stine Fischer Christensen seemed too immature for the role of Anna, but this may be the character rubbing off on my interpretation, for in reflection, her character seems flawless.
The role of Anna is rather underdeveloped. I suspect there are other scenes, or at least lines with her that have been left on the cutting room floor, for there were a couple of places which gave the impression they would lead onto more detail about the girl later - but were left unresolved.
The direction is difficult to understand. Susanne Bier uses hand-held for many shots, which I usually find frustrating. However, it seemed to enhance the emotion of the scenes and made the very controlled performances of Mikkelson and Lassgard stronger. She also showed the contrast between India and Denmark, though how to describe how she did it is at a loss to me. At other times though she used shots that seemed so blatant an attempt at showing symbolism or giving us a message it spoiled the plot's slow unfurling of the heart of the story. I can only conclude that her filming of the characters was perfect for this film, while her extra shots were too blatant. I am curious to see how what I believe is her first English speaking movie, 'Things We Lost in the Fire', will turn out.
Agreed that the symbolism shots became too blatant. You know how home movies can somehow seem less real than professional films, for all that they are raw footage? That seemed to me what was imitated for the India scenes, and it didn't bother me until the end, during the return to India. There it was terrible! In those final scenes between Jacob and the Indian boy I could not connect with the characters at all. I was extremely aware I was watching two actors who had been told to 'sit here', 'kneel there', do this then that. It was embarrassing.
This movie was interesting to watch for the performances and techniques it tried out and interesting to talk about afterwards for the topics and situations it brings up - would this have happened in real life? What would you have done being in such a characters situation?
I recommend that this movie is watched once only, because anything else would ruin the emotional impact.
**After note: Congratulations are in order as Efter bryllyppet has been nominated for best foreign language film in this year's Oscars.**
Tuesday, 30 January 2007
Triple J's Hottest 100 2006 Top Ten - Ringtones.
http://abc.mercurymobility.com.au/j3/hottest100_2006/ringtones.asp
I only listened to the top ten (ringtone versions). Actually make that nine - Gotye doesn't seem to be working.
Award for Song That Sounds Most Like Its Ringtone Version:
The Killers - When We Were Young
Award for Ringtone That Is Interesting Enough I'd Actually Use It:
Muse - Starlight
Enlightening, huh?
I only listened to the top ten (ringtone versions). Actually make that nine - Gotye doesn't seem to be working.
Award for Song That Sounds Most Like Its Ringtone Version:
The Killers - When We Were Young
Award for Ringtone That Is Interesting Enough I'd Actually Use It:
Muse - Starlight
Enlightening, huh?
C.R.A.Z.Y.
Director: Jean-Marc Vallée
(in French-Canadian with English subtitles)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0401085/
This is a great film. It is vivid, well structured, has brilliant performances, there's laughter, tears, and even miracles. All the relationships between characters are superbly done. Some of the actors are even good looking.
If only my friend hadn't gone to the toilet. When she came back and asked me to summarise what she'd missed, I found all I could say was "His father thinks he's gay, he thinks he's not gay, he thinks he's gay, his father thinks he's not.." If wasn't for the persistent focus on this issue as a driving force of the story and also the reinforcement of some stereotypical views of being gay (all gay boys dress in their mothers clothes?) this would be a perfect film.
But besides that. There are many instant-classic scenes. The one with the parents talking in the bathroom is certainly the most 'laugh out loud' worthy I'd seen all year. I was happy to see the inclusion of the final scene between Zac and his best friend, a lesser movie wouldn't have had it. When the mother is on the phone and the father is listening to a record. Small touches like these make films. If you want to understand what I mean, see it.
And yes, it does have a great soundtrack.
(in French-Canadian with English subtitles)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0401085/
This is a great film. It is vivid, well structured, has brilliant performances, there's laughter, tears, and even miracles. All the relationships between characters are superbly done. Some of the actors are even good looking.
If only my friend hadn't gone to the toilet. When she came back and asked me to summarise what she'd missed, I found all I could say was "His father thinks he's gay, he thinks he's not gay, he thinks he's gay, his father thinks he's not.." If wasn't for the persistent focus on this issue as a driving force of the story and also the reinforcement of some stereotypical views of being gay (all gay boys dress in their mothers clothes?) this would be a perfect film.
But besides that. There are many instant-classic scenes. The one with the parents talking in the bathroom is certainly the most 'laugh out loud' worthy I'd seen all year. I was happy to see the inclusion of the final scene between Zac and his best friend, a lesser movie wouldn't have had it. When the mother is on the phone and the father is listening to a record. Small touches like these make films. If you want to understand what I mean, see it.
And yes, it does have a great soundtrack.
The Valet
La Doublure
Director: Francis Veber
(in French with English subtitles)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0449851/
You know how French romantic comedies have charming quirks which elevate them above Hollywood fluff? This is a French romantic comedy without the quirk.
Director: Francis Veber
(in French with English subtitles)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0449851/
You know how French romantic comedies have charming quirks which elevate them above Hollywood fluff? This is a French romantic comedy without the quirk.
Riding Alone For Thousands Of Miles
Quian Li Zou Dan Qi
Director: Zhang Yimou
(in Japanese and Mandarin with English subtitles)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0437447/
I tend to not go in for films 'based on the true story' because real life is boring, isn't it? And because of that, so many 'botts' films try to dress their stories up in oversized suits of movie-realism. This beautiful film knows better.
We follow Takada-san, an aging Japanese man who travels to China to film folk-opera singer Li Jianmin. It is his attempt to reconnect with his estranged filmmaker son whose project it was - the son is now ill and cannot complete it. (It's not as complicated as that sounds.) But Li also has his own disconnected son on his mind..
Visually, Takada emotions are highly suppressed - the occasional voice overs from the future Takada telling us what he is thinking or feeling are very welcome. Li is the opposite - easily showing his feelings. Whether this is supposed to reflect a generalisation that Japanese people are more repressed than Chinese or is just a contrast between the two fathers it is hard for me to know. There are many moments during the film where I found myself questioning how I was supposed to interpret a scene - was what was happening as strange to the foreign Takada as it was to me or were my own cultural differences preventing me from understanding? Bits of both I think. Being unable to easily read Takada-san's emotions leaves room for ambiguity at moments, when you don't know what he is going to decide to do.
Scenes showing the rural Chinese country-side are often breathtaking, and do well in illustrating how alone Takada is in this country where he doesn't understand the language. Yet the people are generous and of good humour. There are plenty of opportunities to laugh when the humour transcends not only the Japanese-Chinese cultures but also Australian/English.
There is quite a bit of the phenomenon of mobile phone acting called for in this film, especially with Takada-san's daughter. I found her unconvincing, but can't be sure if I shouldn't allow for cultural differences again or awkwardness of translation to english or just that mobile phones are making us more stilted in expressing emotions! There are also a couple (only a couple) of moments where the picture quality isn't up to scratch - I'd be interested to know if some of it was shot in a studio, or altered post-production. But these are minor points.
Altogether there is a touching naivity to this film that lends it charm. I might even watch some of Zhang Yimou's more commercial films now..
Director: Zhang Yimou
(in Japanese and Mandarin with English subtitles)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0437447/
I tend to not go in for films 'based on the true story' because real life is boring, isn't it? And because of that, so many 'botts' films try to dress their stories up in oversized suits of movie-realism. This beautiful film knows better.
We follow Takada-san, an aging Japanese man who travels to China to film folk-opera singer Li Jianmin. It is his attempt to reconnect with his estranged filmmaker son whose project it was - the son is now ill and cannot complete it. (It's not as complicated as that sounds.) But Li also has his own disconnected son on his mind..
Visually, Takada emotions are highly suppressed - the occasional voice overs from the future Takada telling us what he is thinking or feeling are very welcome. Li is the opposite - easily showing his feelings. Whether this is supposed to reflect a generalisation that Japanese people are more repressed than Chinese or is just a contrast between the two fathers it is hard for me to know. There are many moments during the film where I found myself questioning how I was supposed to interpret a scene - was what was happening as strange to the foreign Takada as it was to me or were my own cultural differences preventing me from understanding? Bits of both I think. Being unable to easily read Takada-san's emotions leaves room for ambiguity at moments, when you don't know what he is going to decide to do.
Scenes showing the rural Chinese country-side are often breathtaking, and do well in illustrating how alone Takada is in this country where he doesn't understand the language. Yet the people are generous and of good humour. There are plenty of opportunities to laugh when the humour transcends not only the Japanese-Chinese cultures but also Australian/English.
There is quite a bit of the phenomenon of mobile phone acting called for in this film, especially with Takada-san's daughter. I found her unconvincing, but can't be sure if I shouldn't allow for cultural differences again or awkwardness of translation to english or just that mobile phones are making us more stilted in expressing emotions! There are also a couple (only a couple) of moments where the picture quality isn't up to scratch - I'd be interested to know if some of it was shot in a studio, or altered post-production. But these are minor points.
Altogether there is a touching naivity to this film that lends it charm. I might even watch some of Zhang Yimou's more commercial films now..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)