Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 12 May 2011

The Snowtown murders are a very dark chapter in Australia’s history.  Between 1992 and 1999, John Bunting orchestrated a total of 11 murders in South Australia.  He targeted those he thought were paedophiles, drug users and homosexuals.  Bunting and three others were arrested when several bodies were found by the authorities in an unused bank vault.

This film brings these events to the screen but not in a conventional manner.  For starters, the focus isn’t on John Bunting (Henshall).  It is told from the perspective of Jamie Vlassakis (Pittaway), a shy teenager who Bunting took under his wing and trained as his accomplice.  Writer Shaun Grant took this approach to help distinguish the story.  Instead of being a factual retelling of events, he explores the characters and leaves you with questions.  Was Jamie a born killer or was he merely John Bunting’s puppet?  Did Jamie’s mother know all of this going on and if so, what did she do to stop it?

The second time I saw Snowtown was at a special screening held by the BIFF Film Club.  Director Justin Kurzel may have been in attendance but it didn’t stop roughly 25 people from walking out before the end.  They weren’t leaving because it was a bad movie (at least I don’t think so) but because of its shocking content.  I can’t blame them.  This is one of the most unsettling films that I’ve seen in a long time.

I was lucky enough to host the Q&A session with Justin Kurzel after the screening and we spoke about the graphic nature of several key scenes.  He noted that many other filmmakers had tried to bring the Snowtown story to the big screen without success.  They wanted to follow in the Wolf Creek mould and make something that was part horror, part entertainment.

Kurzel chose a different path.  He didn’t want to “sugar coat” this tragic story but rather, wanted to provide a realistic portrayal of John Bunting, his family and the local community.  You can choose not to see this film but you can’t deny that these events took place.  Kurzel is merely opening our eyes to a part of Australian society that many try to keep from public view.  To borrow an analogy from a friend on Twitter (Sarah Moran), “it’s The Castle of fucked up lives around Australia.”

The fact so many people left the preview is a compliment in my opinion.  It shows what a powerful job Kurzel has done in recreating the story.  There were more killings in Scream 4 but those in the audience didn’t walk out because they knew it was “movie violence”.  The strong performances (all from unknown actors), the lack of music and the gritty cinematography make this feel all too real.

The film’s only major weakness is the way in introduces its characters.  The opening 15 minutes is particularly fragmented.  It takes a while to work out “who’s who” and figure out their place in the story.  The arrival of John Bunting and a disturbing "neighbourhood watch” meeting help make things clearer.

Having been selected to screen as part of Critic’s Week at the Cannes Film Festival, Snowtown is a film you’ll be talking about long after you’ve left the theatre… whether you like it or not.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 04 May 2011

Captain Colter Stevens (Gyllenhaal) wakes up and finds himself aboard a train heading to Chicago.  He has no idea how he got there.  The last thing he can remember was being on a mission in Afghanistan.  Before anything has a chance to sink in, the woman seated opposite (Monaghan) starts up a conversation.  He doesn’t know what she’s talking about or why she’s calling him by a different name.

He slips into the bathroom to compose himself and on looking in the mirror, sees a completely differently reflection.  Panic starts to set in.  He opens his wallet and finds identification belonging to a Mr Sean Fentress.  The photo matches the reflection in front of him.  Who is Sean Fentress and why has he found himself in his body?  Before he has a chance to process anything further, the train explodes.

What I’ve described is the first 8 minutes of Source Code, a slick thriller from director Duncan Jones (Moon).  I’ve got mixed feelings about the film as a whole but to its credit, it is trying to offer something a little different.  It wants to keep the audience thinking and it wants to surprise us with a few twists.

It turns out that Colter Stevens is being used by the military in a secret new project.  A scientist (Wright) has found a way for people to relive the final few minutes of another’s life.  It has something to do with “source code” but most of it went over my head to be honest.

This new technology is being used to identify the terrorist responsible for the train explosion.  The unwilling Stevens has been transported back in time and into the body of Fentress so that he can piece the puzzle together.  He needs to determine where the bomb is located, who planted it and how it was detonated.  Time is of the essence as in the “real world”, further terrorist threats have been made.  The authorities need to know what they’re up against and only Stevens can provide the answers.

All “time travel” flicks face reality hurdles and it’s critical that the screenwriters get us past them.  We can then focus on the broader story and the characters contained within it.  I wanted to enjoy this film for what it was but the little voice in the back of my head kept picking out the plot holes.  For example, I couldn’t understand how Stevens kept dying after 8 minutes, even when he decided to get off the train.  Was this a coincidence or part of the design of this alternate universe?  The ending was also befuddling.

There are elements of the film that deserve praise and in particular, the casting.  Jeffrey Wright always has a distinctive presence on screen and he delivers once again in this quirky role.  I love listening to his voice.  Michelle Monaghan is great too.  She offers some much needed charisma and it’s a shame her role wasn’t bigger.

At a nicely paced 93 minutes, Source Code is hard to go along with at times but it's an intriguing thriller that will hold your attention.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 11 May 2011

I’m not exactly sure how much James Wan and Leigh Whannell have got in their bank accounts but I believe they’re doing very well for themselves.  These two Australians created one of the most profitable and recognisable movie franchises in recent memory.  I haven’t liked most of the films in the Saw series (it was all downhill after the squeamish original) but they continue to draw a crowd.  The last instalment (Saw 3D) took in roughly $136m around the globe.

It’s nice to see these guys sinking their teeth into something new.  They’ve crept away from the horror genre and crafted a supernatural thriller.  The film was shot in the United States but they’ve shown their support for home grown talent by casting two Aussies – Rose Byrne in a terrifying leading role and Angus Sampson in a humorous supporting role.

It begins as many of these films tend to do.  A family move into a new house and go about their life in an ordinary, everyday fashion.  Next thing you know, strange things start happening.  There are creepy noises, spooky apparitions and doors that open in the middle of the night.  It’s reminiscent of Paranormal Activity 2 and I’m sure a few scenes will leave you shrieking.

The story starts heading down a different path when one of the kids falls into a coma.  The doctors put him through every medical test imaginable and yet can’t find anything wrong with him.  Months pass and out of sheer desperation, they seek out an elderly woman who has experience in dealing with the supernatural.  What she tells the family will only add to this frightening situation…

I enjoyed the set up of the story and its characters but the film falls flat in the middle stages.  It feels like you’re just going through the motions, waiting for the big finale.  The introduction of comedy doesn’t work either.  Watching two morons stumble around the house with their silly instruments (Ghostbusters style) was an unnecessary distraction.

The ending is worth the wait.  You won’t be “jumping out of your seat” but it will keep you intrigued.  We’re almost being teased by the director.  He’s not going to show all his cards at once – Wan uses the lack of lighting, shaky camera and creepy music to keep us watching intently.  That’s about all I can say on that without giving away too much.

Insidious seems to have struck a cord with audiences.  The film has spent 5 weeks inside the top 10 at the box-office in the United States and chalked up over $50m in earnings.  When you consider it only cost $1.5m to produce, that’s a very healthy return.  James Wan and Leigh Whannell have done it again.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 01 May 2011

I don’t know about you but I hated music class when I was in primary school.  I couldn’t sing and it got even worse if you put an instrument in my hand.  Our teacher was a real Grinch too.  She always seemed angry and seldom had a smile on her face.

Mrs Carey’s Concert left me reflecting on those days.  It’s an insightful documentary put together by Bob Connolly (Rats In The Ranks) and Sophie Raymond.  The idea arose back in 2007 when Bob was asked to film the performance of the MLC School at their bi-annual concert at the Sydney Opera House.  He was moved by these talented young performers and decided they would be the perfect subject matter for a feature film.

So it began.  Over the next two years, Bob and Sophie shot 263 hours of footage chronicling the lead up to the 2009 concert.  Unlike most reality television shows, one of their major objectives was to be as unobtrusive as possible.  They didn’t want any interviews with the students or the teachers.  They didn’t want any moments they missed to be re-enacted.  They simply wanted to hide in the corner with their cameras and watch the action unfold.

Central to the story is the school’s music director, Mrs Karen Carey.  She has a passion for music… that isn’t necessarily shared by the 1,200 students.  Mrs Carey’s role is challenging to say the least.  Trying to get teenagers to put in the effort and to continually turn up for practice is not easy.  It gets worse than that though.  There are a small group of troublemakers in the choir who are deliberately trying to sabotage her efforts.

The most impressive feature of this documentary is the breadth of material it covers in its 95 minute running time.  We get to peer inside the offices and hear the healthy debates shared between the staff.  We get to know many of the students and watch them change over time.  Most importantly, we get to see the whole story come together in a stunning finale at the Sydney Opera House.  Listening to the beautiful music created by these teenagers sent a tingle down my spine.

There are a few scenes that felt overdramatised (like when Mrs Carey loses her folder at the concert) but for the most part, this is moving documentary with much to say about the value of music programs in schools.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 08 May 2011

The year is 1931 and Jacob Jankowski (Pattinson) is aboard a train with a travelling circus troop.  A long-time member of the group offers him some friendly advice - “If you got any kind of life to go back to, that’s what you should do.”

Unfortunately for Jacob, he has nothing else.  His parents were killed in a car accident and the bank took possession of the family home.  With next-to-no money, he was forced to give up his veterinary studies and accept this job caring for circus animals.  The pay is dreadful (just $9 a week) and his living quarters are even worse.

The show’s star attraction is a beautiful woman named Marlena (Witherspoon).  She enters the arena on horseback and puts on a dazzling acrobatics display.  Always watching is the troop’s manager, August (Waltz).  He’s all smiles in front of the audience but things are very different behind the scenes.  August runs the business in a ruthless, domineering fashion.  While he sips champagne in his luxurious cabin, his employees and animals suffer in filthy working conditions.

There’s another reason that August keeps a close eye on Marlena.  She’s his wife.  The film doesn’t go into their background but you'll sense their marriage wasn’t based on pure love.  August wanted a striking young blonde to parade as his own.  Marlena wanted a distinguished suitor to provide wealth and security.

You should know where this story is going by now.  Jacob and Marlena become friends and with the help of a little flirtation, it threatens to develop into something much deeper.  It leaves Marlena searching her heart for answers.  Her life with August isn’t perfect but does she really want to give it all up and take a chance on a guy she hardly knows?  It reminded me of the dilemma faced by Kate Winslet’s character in James Cameron’s Titanic.  

I was pleased with the traditional, simplistic style used by director Francis Lawrence (I Am Legend) in bringing the film together.  The delicate score and softly-focused camera lens help transport us back into 1930s America and into this fulfilling tale of romance and circus animals.  The closing credits serve as a final confirmation that Lawrence wanted to make an “old school” movie.

I’ve quickly grown tired of the Twilight series and so it’s nice to see Robert Pattinson in a juicier role.  I enjoyed watching his relationship develop with Reese Witherspoon.  Instead of blurting out every feeling and emotion (which tends to be the norm in such films), these two go about things a little more slowly.  You’ll see the connection but also the trepidation as they struggle to gauge each other’s feelings.

I wasn’t a fan of the short, current day storyline (involving Hal Holbrook and Paul Schneider).  It felt unnecessary and as if the writers were trying to turn the film into some kind of “fairy tale”.  The time should have been used developing the supporting characters instead.  Others within the circus troop have a role to play but we don’t get to know them very well at all.

It’s not a movie that will blow you away but Water For Elephants is warm, comforting and easy to watch.