Retro-Goldwyn-Mayer
So I just got back from watching the new ’21 Jump Street’ at my local cinema.
for those of you who don’t know, this film is actually a “remake” of a tv-show from the 80’s. In its original incarnation, it looked like this:
Does something stand out to you? Maybe a particular person? Maybe a particular handsome person? Maybe a particular handsome person who is now one of the worlds most famous male film stars. That’s right, Mr. John Christopher Depp II was first introduced to the world through the magic of 80’s television. Actually, that’s not true. You cine-literates out there will know that the first film to feature Mr. Depp was really ‘A Nightmare on Elm Street’ from 1984. Oh, by the way, I do realise that there are some other people in this picture too, but we both know no one cares about them or their careers.
The premise of the original show was that police officers were sent into high-school, undercover, in order to infiltrate drug circles etc. Oh, the hilarity.
I will admit that I have never seen the original show, though I was aware of it prior to seeing the film. I wasn’t alive during the mid-80’s, true, but I still managed to catch up with shows like ‘Cheers’. I guess this is the one that got away. It’s weird, but I can’t seem to find anyone else who’s seen it either. Strange. Still, Hollywood felt the need to remake it and revamp it completely. By the way, if you did watch the show in the 80’s: CONGRATULATIONS… …you’re old.
This new version features Johan Hill and Channing Tatum. They are cast in the roles of “geekhead” and “meathead”. Although, since it’s Jonah Hill it’s more like “meathead” and “taller meathead”. I don’t know, I guess after all the loser comedy roles he’s played I just can’t believe him as a nerd. However, Channing Tatum as a “stupid jock”? Way ahead of you. So the casting kinda half-works. Not great, but not bad either. I’m going to give you the trailer for the film now. I want you to watch it, and then listen to what I have to say afterwards:
It’s a lie.
The film is not that stupid. The trailer makes it out to be all “partyhard” and “drugs are trippy”. It’s almost not like that at all. The drug scenes are actually used in a very intelligent manner to push the story forward, and the party scenes are used to drive a wedge between the characters. I was pleasantly surprised by this film. It’s actually good. Okay, it’s not great. It didn’t have me lying on the floor in stitches of laughter, but I did laugh. For a grumpy soul like me that’s an achievement.
The best thing about this film is how it manages to create a believable solid friendship. The first half of the film seemed ploddingly conventional, but it picked up, and by the end it had me. These two characters get to re-live high school all over again. It’s an opportunity we’ve all fantasised about. Admit it, if you had the chance you’d do it. We all would. Think how much cooler you’d be. Think how “above the clique social structure” you’d be. Except, you wouldn’t. As the characters discover; humanity is humanity regardless of its setting or its age. The film actually has life lessons and a plot which wraps around neatly by the end.
In addition, there are several in-jokes about the ridiculousness of the entire concept of the movie. Look out for them, cause they’re funny when you get them. Speaking of looking out for things, watch for a few cameos from the original cast members. Memorise the poster above so you can spot them when they turn up. That said, there’s one that you obviously won’t miss.
FINAL FACT:
There’s a character in this movie called “Jr. Jr” played by an actress called Rye Rye.
FINAL SCORE:
7.5/10
“Good”
Rant Over!
Smiley, George Smiley.
I saw ‘Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy’ in the cinema a couple months ago, but since it’s still fresh in my mind I thought I’d give it a review here.
First of all I have to vent my frustrations that this film was not nominated for an Academy Award or a Golden Globe (Oops, did I just give away how much I like it?). It was nominated for “Best Adapted Screenplay” and “Best Original Score”, as well as “Best Actor” for Gary Oldman. However, if the Oscars had any sense they’d flag this thing for “Best Film” before giving any credit to things like ‘Tree of Life’.
Anyway, ‘TTSS’ is a movie all about male mistrust.
In the bleak days of the Cold War, espionage veteran George Smiley (Gary Oldman) is forced from semi-retirement to uncover a Soviet agent within MI6. – Imdb
A movie about a suspected Russian spy within a small elite group of British spies. Who better to uncover the mole than…an ex-spy?!
That’s just about the most espionage-centered premise I’ve ever heard of. I’m game! Basically, there is evidence to suggest that one of the top five spies at MI6 is working secretly for the Soviet Union. These five have the code-names “Tinker”, “Tailor”, “Soldier”, “Poorman”, and “Beggarman”. Gary Oldman is brought in to figure out which one is the “rat”.
Prepare for 127 minutes of extreme tension and intrigue. This is not a movie about car chases, but instead one about interrogation and mystery. Here, you will have to pay attention to every detail. “What’s not right in this picture?”, “Why is the top button of his shirt undone?”, “Why did he smile just now?”, things like that. You’ll find yourself engrossed in the main characters suspicions as well as your own. In the end, one of them has to be guilty, but who?
The two performances that stand out to me are that of Gary Oldman and Tom Hardy. Oldman gives the most quiet and solemn performance you can imagine. He hardly says a word, and it’s all behind the eyes. Hardy is the opposite. He’s young, he’s in love, and he’s under extreme stress. He has a monologue scene consisting of an emotional breakdown on Smileys couch, and it’s by far the most moving thing in the entire film.
Add to this the beautiful 1970’s cinematography and symbolic images, ‘TTSS’ is simply the best of the best of spy thrillers.
A word of warning, however. The film is somewhat slow-paced. It’s not too off-putting, but if you think you’re going in to see James Bond you’ll be disappointed. It makes up for it, however, with an interesting and complicated plot. And by complicated I mean complicated. If you had trouble following ‘Inception’, believe me; this film “goes deeper”.
FINAL FACT
Did you know that the Oscar-nomination Gary Oldman garnered for this film is the first one he’s ever had?
FINAL SCORE
8.5/10
“Great”
Rant Over!
An Odyssey
So I’m not here now to recommend another film, but instead a tetralogy of films (often referred to as a quadrilogy). A tertaology that is about to become a pentalogy.
Not only that, but it’s the best tetralogy that has ever been made(that is, until they make a ‘Jurassic Park 4’). I am of course referring to the ‘Alien’ films.
This tragedy-in-four-acts details the consequences of a stowaway extra-terrestrial monster haunting the life of a female protagonist both physically and mentally.
A friend of mine once expressed distain for the original ‘Alien’ film by implying that it was “boring”. Yes, I’m looking at you Alie of 250filmstudent. I guess deep psychological horror isn’t exciting to you, but it is to me. For all those others out there who have not seen any of the original Alien films, or skipped some along the way, follow me as I take you through the reasons why you should give each one of them a go. I’ve tried to avoid spoilers as best I can.
Now, I will not be recommending the films in the order in which they debuted, but rather in order of best to worst according to moi.
BEST
Alien (1979)
Jesus Christ, what a film. I’m not recommending this movie in a “I do declare, Citizen Kane is true cinematic genius” kind of way. I’m also not saying this film was “good at the time”. I’m saying it’s actually dead-fucking-scary and entertaining. Watching ‘Alien’ for the first time on a large screen with the sound up high and the lights down low is one of the most self-inflicting adventures you can undertake. I mean that in a good way.
The film is actually less sci-fi horror and more horror-noir, at least in terms of the cinematography. Sharp contrasts and dark shadows create an unsettling atmosphere which leaves you on your toes. Combined with this is a claustrophobic set-design intended to compound the audiences fears of being trapped with the creature itself. A creepy score serves to remind us that the worst is still ahead and helps to emphasise the nihilistic nature of the story. The tagline of the film really does capture it’s essence:
“In space no one can hear you scream.”
SECOND BEST
Alien 3 (1992)
This film is something of a controversy. It was the debut film of a first-time director named David Fincher. Grappling with the studios about trying to put his own stamp on it, he eventually lost the battle in the editing room and disowned the project altogether. There doesn’t seem to be a person in the world who thinks this film is worth it’s title, exceptme. I really love this movie.
I know it’s a bastard child born out of a war between artistic licence and commercial dictatorship, but it’s fucking awesome!
Set on a prison planet, Ellen Ripley crash-lands to find herself surrounded by an all-male cast of violent offenders. Threatened with rape and violence several times, she manages to hold her own and out-testosterone the boys. It’s clearly the most butch we’ve ever seen her, with a shaved head and a no-tolerence attitude to boot. Of course, since it’s an Alien movie…there is also an alien.
I don’t care how much Fincher wants it to disappear, I think his vision shines through the corporate re-edit. No doubt, the so-called “Director’s Cut” of some years ago is a much better film and I would love to see Fincher’s original version.
Even so; the story is solid. The characters are flavoursome and memorable with their own ripe unique dialogue. The symbolism of the cinematography has also prevailed. Submerged in deep browns and greys, the movie has a very rustic feel. Appropriate, given that the characters are all living in one giant prison cell.
“The bitch is back!”
THIRD BEST
Aliens (1986)
With James Cameron comes action-adventure. Thankfully this film isn’t a cartoon like ‘Avatar’, but it certainly does away with the claustrophobia and noir aspect of the other films in the series.
The pulpiness gets ramped up in this 1986 sequel to the first ‘Alien’. That’s fine, not my preference but it’s fine. More aliens, more victims, more gore, more robotics, and more special effects than the first. Is that what you want? Well, you got it.
James Cameron certainly has a way with production design and splashy entertainment, and he delivers in barrel-loads. The finale to this film is certainly more extravagant and eye-popping than in any of the others, and for that it gets a huge thumbs up.
“This time it’s war.”
WORST…BUT NOT ALL BAD
Alien Resurrection (1997)
Alright, firstly I need to say that I love the idea of ‘Alien Resurrection’. In fact, it’s more than that. I love the story of ‘Alien Resurrection’. Unfortunately, story and plot are two separate things. Not to mention acting, effects, atmosphere, and production design.
The whole concept behind Resurrection is “let’s bring it all back”. It’s integral to the plot as well as the title. The wackiness of the story is off-the-wall. Joss Whedon (creator of ‘Buffy the Vampire Slayer’ and ‘Firefly’) wrote a brilliantly twisted script which did a wonderful job of reuniting Ripley with the alien when it seemed utterly impossible. Not only did he reunite them, he quite literally blended them. The problem isn’t so much in the script, it’s in the directing.
They took a wacky script and gave it to a wacky director; Jean-Pierre Jeunet. You know the guy who made ‘Delicatessen’ and ‘Amelie’? Yeah. That’s right. This film ended up being less Alien and more “French Alien”. It’s so french.
There’s really no other way I can explain it. The film has some beautiful lighting, but bizarre cinematography choices and absolutely horrendous acting. The characters are weird. Except they’re not good-weird, they’re bad weird. They look weird. They’re actually awkward to look at and listen to.
I wish the alien tetralogy had ended with a bang, but instead it went out with a whimper. Good effort initially, but it was too bizarre and shoddy. Never-the-less it’s certainly worth a watch to complete the series. You never know, you might like it overall.
“Witness the resurrection.”
EPISODE 5: A NEW HOPE
Prometheus (2012)
And now we come to the reason for this entire post. 20th Century Fox has just released the full trailer for the upcoming Alien prequel ‘Prometheus’. Have a look:
That’s incredible. I am now officially more excited about this than I am about ‘The Dark Knight Rises’. This movie seems to be going back to it’s roots, quite literally. They brought back Ridley Scott, the director of the first alien, to give us a deeper understanding of how the original Space Jockey came to be. It looks dark, it looks tense, and it looks epic. It appears, from the trailer, to be everything an alien prequel needs to be. Now, the only question that remains is if we’ll get to see another alien. Who knows? I have my fingers crossed.
If you haven’t seen all of the above films then I suggest you watch them before going to see‘Prometheus’. I promise you it’ll be a better film experience when you know the history. I’ve already given you the reasons why, now do your part. Treat yourself to a night of shrieks and thrills.
Rant Over!
Amore
So I just finished watching a movie from 2010 called ‘The Kids Are All Right’. Some of you may have heard of it, others maybe not. Let’s just say that if you’re a homophobic twonk you’re not going to want anything to do with this film. In that case; good riddance. Bye!
It’s important to note that the title of the film is ‘The Kids Are All Right’ as opposed to‘The Kids Are Alright’. It changes the meaning quite drastically, and also if you try to obtain ‘The Kids Are Alright’ you’ll get a 1979 documentary about the band ‘The Who’. Needless to say, 5 minutes in I was very confused.
It is my personal opinion that this film falls under the category of “quirky liberal comedy”. It’s very quirky, it’s very very liberal, and it’s kinda sorta funny sometimes.
Synopsis as follows:
Annette Bening and Julianne Moore play lesbian parents raising two children they have conceived using Mark Ruffalo’s donor sperm. One day the children decide to contact their biological father for the first time and introduce him to their little family. This situation begins to create problems and fracture the family in more ways than one.
I don’t know what message the filmmakers were trying to send with this film, all I can tell you is what I think it’s about:
Firstly and obviously, sex is a big part of this movie. Sexual orientation, sexual activity, and the consequences of these play a big role in driving the plot forward. Never-the-less, what the film appears to talk about is the distinction between sex and love. Despite the various sexual activity that people choose to engage in, what matters overall is the feelings and bonds the characters have with each other. A homosexual family can be just as dysfunctional as a heterosexual family, and vice versa.
Sexuality and orientation is not the driving force in the characters actions, nor does it act as a barrier to save them from their own mistakes. It is ultimately how the characters feel about each other and about life itself that makes them do what they do. I think it’s an important message in a day and age when a lot of people base their notions of morality on what people do with their extremities. If we instead judge people based on what they do on an emotional and social level we might be less divided as a society. Whether someone wants to have sex with someone else isn’t the issue, what matters is who and what they care about.
Sorry for going off on a tangent, back to the film:
Annette Bening and Julianne Moore give great performances that are stripped down in every sense of the word. Makeup-less and raw, they show a true level of self acceptance that one would come to expect from a proudly lesbian couple. Mark Ruffalo seems a bit stoic and doesn’t quite connect in the way i would have liked. His initiation into this alternative world seems a bit too smooth to be believed, but I went with it in the end. Both the children do a good job and manage to make replacement terms like ‘Mom’s” instead of “Mom and Dad” seem natural to their character’s vocabulary.
I have two gripes about the film, one big and one small:
- It isn’t that funny. I simply didn’t laugh the way a “comedy” should make me laugh. There was a certain amount of absurdist humour, but with the nature of the premise it seems to be a given.
- I’ve been bullied, I’ve been in fights. It doesn’t happen like this:
But all that aside, the film is one i certainly recommend. I shan’t rave on anymore about my own analysis, instead I’ll simply end by echoing wiser words:
“Homosexuality isn’t just a form of sex, it’s a form of love and it deserves our respect for that reason.”
– Christopher Hitchens
Final Score:
7.5/10
“Good”
Rant Over!
Cinema Rant 