Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 15 August 2011

You’d think that a movie that covers both the science fiction and western genres would be a lot funnier than this.  That was my first thought as the closing credits started to roll on Cowboys & Aliens.  It’s an interesting idea for a movie and the producers deserve credit for trying to come up with something a little different.  Unfortunately, the screenwriters (6 of them in all) haven’t done enough to create a plot that is both humorous and engaging.

The story is set in a small gold mining town in the year 1873 but it doesn’t begin like a traditional western.  A man (Craig) wakes up in the middle of the desert with a deep wound in his chest and a strange metal device strapped to his wrist.  He doesn’t know how it got there and he can’t even remember his own name.  After fending off a group of attackers, he slips quietly into the town in search of medical attention.

His arrival hasn’t gone unnoticed however.  The sheriff immediately recognises him as Jake Lonergan, an outlaw who recently stole a large sum of gold from the wealthy Woodrow Dolarhyde (Ford).  Lonergan is confronted in the town’s saloon and puts up a brave fight but he is knocked unconscious by a mysterious woman (Wilde) and wakes up in jail.

With the stage set, it’s time for the aliens to arrive.  A series of spaceships start firing an array of advanced weaponry on the townsfolk just as Lonergan is about to be sent off to the courthouse.  Much of the town is destroyed and many of its residents vanish after being sucked up into the spaceships.  Those remaining must work together to go in search of these aliens and locate their missing loved ones.

It has a few nice moments but for the most part, this is a forgettable adventure.  As I alluded to earlier, this isn’t a story to be taken seriously (nor should it be) but I’m surprised as to why the writers didn’t slip in more jokes to spoof these two well trodden genres.  The plot is weak and too many loose ends were left hanging.

None of the cast make an impact and I was particularly disappointed by Harrison Ford (who I liked recently in Morning Glory) and Daniel Craig.  They are restricted by their clichéd characters and they don’t get the chance to have fun with their roles.  At times, they looked as unenthusiastic as me.

Having struggled at the box-office in the United States, I suspect a similar fate is in store for Cowboys & Aliens here in Australia.  Maybe it’s because the concept is too strange but then again, maybe it’s because the film isn’t good enough.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 01 August 2011

You can forget about revisiting Tim Burton’s Planet Of The Apes, released back in 2001.  This new Apes flick is following in the footsteps of Batman, Spiderman and Star Trek in that it’s a reboot of the franchise.  We’re starting again from scratch in the hope that this will reignite interest in the series and spawn a bunch of profitable sequels for 20th Century Fox.

The plot is straight forward.  Will Rodman (Franco) is a scientist who believes he has discovered a cure to Alzheimer’s disease.  The drug can not only repair damaged brain cells but also improve a user’s intelligence.  It’s a cause he’s passionate about given his father (Lithgow) has long suffered from the debilitating illness.

Will had been testing the ALZ-112 drug on apes but a botched exhibition to potential investors saw his boss (Oyelowo) shut the program down.  It forced Will to go rogue – smuggling a baby chimpanzee named Caesar out of the lab so he could continue his research at home.

The focus of this story is not on the human characters however.  Caesar (played by Andy Serkis using motion-capture CGI) is the creature you’ll care the most about.  When he is forcibly removed from Will’s care and placed in a dodgy animal habitat, Caesar asserts his authority over the other apes and starts preparing them to attack.

I had high expectations for this film but I found the human characters to be so wishy-washy.  As the film begins, we see Will testing his ALZ-112 product on a numerous apes in the laboratory.  He’s determined to find a cure for Alzheimer’s disease and is prepared to bend his ethical standards to do so.  He sneaks the baby Caesar into his house and raises him for close to a decade (don’t ask me how).  He also uses the drug on his suffering father despite not having tested it properly.

Having established that Will is a strong-minded yet reckless individual, the writers have then tried to change him into someone more caring and level-headed.  We pan 8 years into the future and see Will pleading with his boss (who has also had a personality transformation) to slow down the testing of the wonder drug.  He is worried about things getting out of control – rather hypocritical given his own actions.

Throughout this, Will’s girlfriend (Pinto) is ignorant to the fact that his pet ape has super intelligence despite herself being a veterinarian.  Will confides in her years later but I’m not sure why it comes as such as shock.  Further, she doesn’t seem to have too many concerns about the fact Caesar spends much of his life cooped up in suburbia.

I realise that action movies aren’t meant to be realistic but these characters needed to be far more interesting and believable if they were going to draw me in.  I struggled with the gaps and inconsistencies in the story.  I’ve alluded to some of my concerns above but I also had trouble with the apes and the ease with which they communicated (even without the drugs).  The use of subtitles in a couple of scenes left me laughing but I’m not sure that was the intent of director Rupert Wyatt (The Escapist).

Having spent close to 90 minutes trying to develop the characters and the storyline, we finally get to the action finale promised in the trailer.  The special effects are great and it makes the most of its setting atop the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco.  It’s clear though that the filmmakers wanted to keep things “family friendly”.  Wyatt shies away from the gruesome nature of the attack and sticks with the traditional Hollywood blockbuster formula of gun fights and explosions.  I wanted something edgier.

One of the sub-plots goes nowhere and it’s an obvious set up to a sequel.  If you don’t go rushing out of the cinema too quickly (as I was tempted to do), you’ll get an indication of what’s next in store... provided this film makes enough at the box-office, of course.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 09 August 2011

A search of the Internet Movie Database lists 21 results for the title “Jane Eyre”.  Starting as far back as 1910, Charlotte Bronte’s much loved book has regularly been adapted for both the small and big screen.  Aside from Shakespeare’s most popular works (Romeo & Juliet, Hamlet), I’m struggling to think of another novel that has received so many adaptations.

This begs the question – why make Jane Eyre into a movie yet again?  The best metaphor I can come up with involves cars.  When we buy a brand new vehicle, we tend to take a lot of pleasure from it.  It’s exciting to be driving around in something new.  Over time, that pleasure slowly fades away.  We become accustomed to the car and it becomes more functional in nature.  The only way to lift our excitement levels is to buy a new car!

That’s the case here.  I could easily head down to my video store and rent the 1996 movie version starring Charlotte Gainsbourg or the 2006 BBC mini-series starring Ruth Wilson.  That’s not what I want however.  I’d rather check out a fresh adaptation through the eyes of a different director.  I’d also like to see if this well-chosen cast can impart their own perspective on these famous characters.

To quickly bring those unfamiliar up to speed, the story is set in the mid 19^th century and centres on an 18-year-old named Jane Eyre (Wasikowska) who has left a troubled past behind and has accepted a job as a governess at the beautiful Thornfield Hall.  The master of the house is the dashing Edward Rochester (Fassbender) and he asks that Jane help educate a young French girl who has been assigned to his keeping.

There is an instant connection between Edward and Jane but both are unsure about how to deal with the situation.  Jane comes from a poor background and she can’t understand why a man with such a high social status would be interested in the affections of a lowly governess.  Her lack of experience with men further compounds her reluctance and insecurity.

Edward is much clearer with his desires and has become entranced by Jane’s simple beauty and candid honesty.  Unfortunately, he can’t find a way through to her well-guarded heart.  A series of strange events and the arrival of unexpected guests will make his efforts even more difficult.

The story is a little too compact at times but the exquisite performance of Mia Wasikowska makes this film stand out.  I’ve been following Wasikowska for the past 2 years having seen her in the great HBO television series In Treatment and in films such as Alice In Wonderland and The Kids Are All Right.  Through her timid demeanour, she beautifully illustrates the tortured, fragile nature of her character.  Those who have experienced the perils of unrequited love will know exactly how she feels.

With its striking set decoration and costumes, director Cary Fukunaga has crafted a worthy adaptation of Bronte’s novel.  This will be enjoyed by those with a fondness for period piece romances.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 31 July 2011

Hands up if you’ve been the town of Dampier?  It’s located on the north-west coast of Australia and has a population of just over 1,000 people.  At the entrance into the town, you’ll find a bronze statue of the kelpie known to everyone in the community as “Red Dog”.  The plaque reads “The Pilbara Wanderer died Nov 21^st 1979. Erected by the many friends made during his travels.”

Acclaimed British author Louis de Bernières (Captain Corelli’s Mandolin) was travelling through Dampier on his way to a literary dinner in 1998.  He saw the statue and started asking a few questions of the townsfolk.  The more he learned, the more intrigued he became.  It prompted him to put pen to paper and a novel loosely based on Red Dog’s life was the end result.

Screenwriter Daniel Taplitz and director Kriv Stenders (Lucky Country) have now brought the Red Dog story to the big screen.   The film is based on de Bernières’s novel but they decided to do their own research before kick-starting the production.  They too spoke with those who knew the famed animal and it helped them get a feel for the characters and the 1970s setting.

So who was Red Dog?  Put simply, he was a kelpie who roamed the rocky landscape of the Pilbara region.  He seemingly endeared himself to everyone.  There’s a scene early in the film where he sits in the middle of a dirt road and forces a car passing by to stop.  When the occupants get out and try to move him, Red Dog jumps up in their car and sits in the front seat.  It seems he just wanted a lift into town.

This film is split into two distinct halves.  During the early stages, we have fun getting to know Red Dog and the crazy stuff he got up to.  We also meet a curious assortment of characters and see the way in which Red Dog brought them together and put a smile on their face.  They include the animal’s pseduo-owner, John (Lucas), and his girlfriend, Nancy (Taylor).

After an unexpected twist (at least for those who haven’t read the book), the film takes on a more dramatic tone.  It was this second half of the film I enjoyed most.  The cheesy dialogue is left behind and we get to see these characters (including Red Dog himself) at their most vulnerable.  It will tug at the heartstrings of many in the audience.

The well-rounded cast includes Josh Lucas, Rachael Taylor, Noah Taylor, Luke Ford and Keisha Castle-Hughes.  The late Bill Hunter also makes a small cameo in what will be one of his final screen credits.  The strong cast is a testament to the film’s emotive story and beautiful setting.

He may not talk (unlike so many other dog movies) but the real star of the film is Red Dog.  The casting process took a while but it was a lovable kelpie named Koko who finally got the part.  There’s a humorous clip on Youtube (with close to 75,000 hits) where you can watch Koko auditioning for the role.  I was lucky enough to pat him when he was travelling through Brisbane on his “publicity tour”.  I only wish other actors would let me do the same!

You can read my interview with producer Nelson Woss by clicking here.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 07 August 2011

If you’d taken this story and turned into a re-enacted drama… most people wouldn’t have believed it.  That was certainly the option of director Asif Kapadia.  He could have cast a big name actor and created a Hollywood-style adaptation but it wouldn’t have had the same impact.  Audiences would have been sceptical and left the cinema thinking “as if that really happened”.  So instead, Kapadia and the film’s producers thought it best to tell the story by way of a documentary.  That way, no one could ever accuse the film of being unrealistic.

You don’t have to be a sports lover to appreciate this great film.  Yes, there are scenes involving Formula One but it’s just as much about Ayrton Senna as a person and the hurdles he had to overcome.  A simple internet search would tell those unfamiliar that Senna was a phenomenal driver who won the Formula One World Drivers’ Championship on three occasions.  His life was tragically cut short when he was killed in a crash during the 1994 San Marino Grand Prix.

Kapadia’s documentary goes beyond what you might expect and provides a very intimate account of Senna and his motivations.  The film’s producers helped negotiate a deal with Formula One rights holder Bernie Ecclestone to access his media archive and show this never-before-seen footage.  Kapadia and his team sifted through roughly 15,000 hours of video tape and painstakingly trimmed it into this 100 minute feature film.

Some of the film’s best scenes come from the driver’s meetings that were held before each race.  All the drivers are seated in a small room as the race officials and FIA President Jean-Marie Balestre lay down the ground rules.  You can see the tension between Senna and Balestre and it is no surprise that this footage hasn’t seen the light of day.  It illustrates the suffering that Senna endured because of his refusal to “play politics”.

Senna’s career was defined by his rivalry with French driver Alain Prost.  It’s fascinating to watch these two in action and the way their relationship changed over time.  They started out as teammates but that quickly changed as each tried to outshine the other.  You can tell they didn’t like each other but it seemed this hatred made them better drivers – it fuelled their passion and determination.

What I found most curious about this documentary’s style is that there is no narration track, no re-enactments and no modern day footage.  Kapadia wanted to avoid “talking head” interviews and make something that feels more like a drama than a documentary.  It was the right move by Kapadia.  The pictures tell the story and your eyes will be glued to the screen for the entire duration.

Before finalising any “best of” list for 2011, I’d strongly suggest you see this film.

You can read my interview with director Asif Kapadia by clicking here.