Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 15 December 2006

Night At The Museum is a cool family movie.  It’s not trying to tell us a message and it’s not trying to make us feel warm and fuzzy.  All it asks is that you sit back, relax and enjoy.

Larry Daley (Stiller) is a divorced father who is struggling to make ends meet.  He’s been fired and it looks like he’ll have to move out of his apartment.  Worst of all, Larry just found out that his son, Nick (Cherry), didn’t invite him to his school’s career day.  It seems that Nick is embarrassed by his dad’s inability to hold down a job.

Desperate to win back his son’s respect, Larry goes to a job agency looking for anything that’s available.  The only position is that of a nightwatchman at the Museum of Natural History.  The previous three guards leave Larry a book of instructions and a set of keys.  They also give him an important piece of advice – “don’t let anything in or out”.

Larry realises the significance of their comment when the sun sets and the front doors are closed – the museum comes to life!  The human statues and the stuffed animals all start to move.  As you can imagine, mayhem ensues.  He is attacked by a dinosaur skeleton, has his keys stolen by a monkey and is chased by Attila The Hun.  Larry sums it up best when he mumbles to himself that “this is so not worth $11.50 an hour”.

Many viewers will see the obvious similarity in the story with that of Jumanji (the Robin Williams flick released in 1995).  I can forgive the lack of originality because of the wonderful characters that make Night At The Museum so entertaining.  Ben Stiller is great as Larry.  After getting over the initial shock of the situation, Larry has a few laughs by trying to outsmart the museum’s inhabitants.  He doesn’t always find success but his ridiculous plans are amusing to watch.

The funniest scenes in the film are those between Stiller and English actor Ricky Gervais (The Office).  As the museum’s curator, Gervais gives new meaning to the word “eccentric”.  He’s always trailing off and you never know what he’s trying to say.  It’s a shame he only appears in a handful of scenes.

Rounding out the diverse cast are legends Dick Van Dyke, Mickey Rooney and Bill Cobbs who play the three former guards.  With an average age of 79, their appearance will bring back many memories for older members in the audience.

There are two types of “family films”.  In the first category, we have films targeted purely at kids – those where children go to have fun and adults go to keep an eye on them.  In the second category, we have films targeted at everyone – those where both children and adults can have a good time.  Night At The Museum easily falls into the later category.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 06 December 2006

I’ve been sticking the boot in family films all year.  I’m sick of talking animals, predictable humour and limited storylines.  Luckily for the studios, kids don’t care.  They just want to go to the movies, run up and down the aisle and scream a lot.  Okay, so I don’t fit into the target audience but what can I do?  I can’t sit here and praise a boring kid’s flick with no originality.  I call it as I see it.

I point this out because I really enjoyed Charlotte’s Web.  It surpasses all other family releases in 2006.  If I had to give one reason why then it’s because this is a great story.  It’s based on a beloved novel which has been read by millions of children since first published in 1952.  This isn’t a half-baked screenplay cooked up to sell happy meal toys at McDonalds (call me a cynic).

If you’re struggling to remember the tale, Charlotte is a spider who lives in a barn with an assortment of animals.  Over the summer, she becomes friends with an unwanted pig named Wilbur.  When the naive Wilbur learns that he’ll be cooked for Christmas dinner, Charlotte’s takes it upon herself to help out.  What web can she spin up?

I’ve greatly simplified what is a rich and emotive story.  There’s not a positive adjective that hasn’t already been used to describe it.  Thankfully for us moviegoers, the essence and heart of the film haven’t been lost on its translation to the big screen.  The events unfold at a perfect pace – it’s never rushed but there’s never a dull moment.  Screenwriters Susanna Grant (In Her Shoes) and Karey Kirkpatrick (Chicken Run) have done a top job adapting E.B. White’s novel.

The film is shot with live action as opposed to animation.  The animals talk with the help of wonderful special effects.  The look is very similar to that created for Babe, the classic which 7 Academy Award nominations in 1996.  The similarities don’t end there.  Not only is a pig centre stage but both films were shot here in Australia.  Babe was filmed in New South Wales with Charlotte’s Web filmed across the border in Victoria.

Many Hollywood stars have leant their voices to the production.  They include Julia Roberts (as Charlotte), John Cleese, Oprah Winfrey, Kathy Bates and Cedric The Entertainer.  My favourite was Steve Buscemi as Templeton, a self-absorbed rat who loves to eat.

Released to coincide with the Christmas school holidays, Charlotte’s Web is a true family movie.  Furthermore, you don’t have to be a kid to enjoy it.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 13 December 2006

It may be more than 200 years old but Marie Antoinette’s story continues to fascinate those who hear it.  She was born in Austria in 1755 as the last of her mother’s fifteen children.  To help secure the alliance between Austria and France, it was arranged for her to marry Louis-Auguste, the heir to the French throne.  She was only 14 years old on her wedding day.

When the king died four years later, Louis-Auguste (as Louis XVI) and Marie Antoinette became the new King and Queen.  There were constant rumours (such as why they didn’t immediately have children) but despite this, Louis and Marie were loved and respected by the people of France.

Times soon changed.  By 1789, France had slipped into a deep depression.  Food was scarce, unemployment was high and most were poverty stricken.  Unhappy with the King’s increased taxes and the Queen’s spendthrift ways, the people revolted.  A mob broke into the Palace forcing the King and Queen to flee.

It was the start of the French Revolution.  The monarchy would collapse not long after and both Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette were found guilty of treason.  Marie Antoinette was executed by guillotine in 1793.

Sofia Coppola’s film on Marie Antoinette is strange to say the least.  It features a varied cast (with two Americans in the leading roles) and a soundtrack that mixes classical with rock.  It’s a bold project – one that is try to be cool and trendy whilst still somehow maintaining the aura of 18^th Century France.  It’s similar to what Baz Luhrmann did with Romeo & Juliet 10 years ago.

Unfortunately for Sofia, her gamble has not come to fruition.  Marie Antoinette is a jumbled mess of repetitive scenes.  Based on what’s in the film, you’d think that Marie Antoinette only did four things – eat, drink, party and pressure her husband to have sex.  Even if this is an accurate portrayal of her life, how should it keep my attention for two hours?  Why do I have to watch her party so often?  What is this telling me?

The film ends with Louis and Marie being kicked out their Palace.  Her death and the battles in the years leading up to it aren’t covered.  Sofia Coppola has tried to be original in telling the story from a different angle.  She wants to look at how Antoinette came to be instead of focusing on her famous death.  Again, it doesn’t work.  So many scenes felt the same.  It was only in the final 15 minutes (when France starts to revolt) that I had any interest.

My criticisms won’t be a startling newsflash for those who’ve followed this film’s release.  When in premiered in France at this year’s Cannes Film Festival, it was greeted with “a thunder of boos”.  That said, some critics have been are fond of its audacious style and have lavished the film with praise.  I can only assume that the film fits into that special category where “you’ll either love it or hate it”.

Sofia Coppola’s last film, Lost In Translation, was brilliant.  I’ve seen it many times and the Academy Award she took home (for best original screenplay) was well deserved.  In stark contrast, Marie Antoinette is a yawn-fest.  I intend never to see it again.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 26 November 2006

I saw The Guardian at a special charity screening to raise money for Surf Life Saving in Queensland.  It’s worth noting because the job our surf lifesavers do is very similar to that of the U.S. Coast Guard, the group of brave men on which the film is based.

Ben Randall (Costner) is one of the best rescue swimmers in the Coast Guard.  Over the course of his long career, he’s saved hundreds of people in treacherous situations.  Putting his life on the line every week has strained his relationship with wife, Helen (Ward).  She’d prefer that he retire or take an easy desk job.

Ben is in for a change but it’s not one he was looking for.  After seeing his long-time partner die in the field, Ben is asked to take a break by the powers that be.  They think he needs time to recover from the emotional scarring that comes with such an event.  Ben disagrees of course but orders are orders.

Asked to help train the latest Coast Guard recruits, Ben reluctantly accepts.  It is here where most of the film is set.  Ben toughens the recruits with an unorthodox training regime which separates the best from the rest.  Along the way, he becomes particular close to one – a gun swimmer named Jake Fischer (Kutcher).  There’s no doubt that Jake has talent but Ben can’t quite figure him out.  Why has he joined the Coast Guard when he could just as easily be an Olympic swimmer?

The film has a climax but it takes a long time to get to.  The bulk of the film is spent getting to know the characters during the training regime.  There are some light-hearted moments but this area of the movie should have been shortened.  You may also agree when you consider the running time is 136 minutes.

It wasn’t until after I’d seen the movie when I first saw the trailer.  Like so many films these days, it gives away 99% of the story.  Why do studios keep doing this?  Given that it’s a fairly standard Hollywood blockbuster, the advertisers should be looking for any way possible to make it look fresh and unpredictable.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 09 December 2006

Dreamworks Animation has put together two animated flicks in 2006 – Over The Hedge (released in June) and now Flushed Away.  The quality of computer animation has improved greatly over the years but it sure has come at a cost.  Flushed Away cost a staggering $149m to produce.  How could a film with no live performances cost so much?

It’s a question that kids won’t care about.  They’ll be more interested in seeing the tale of Roddy St James, a loveable rat who lives his life as a pet.  With plenty of food and lots of space to play, Roddy’s existence is one of luxury.  Unfortunately, it is also one of loneliness.  There are no fellow rats to talk to.

That soon changes with the arrival of Sid, a sewer rat who has been unexpectedly shot up the garbage disposal.  Sid makes himself at home but his lack of hygiene and etiquette has left Roddy disgusted.  Looking to get rid of the new guest, Roddy suggests that Sid go for a swim in the toilet.  His plan is to pull the lever and watch Sid disappear.  It all backfires however and it’s Roddy who finds himself being flushed away.

At the end of his journey down the pipes, Roddy discovers a world he never knew existed.  Thousands of rats, slugs, toads and other creatures have created their own city deep in the sewer.  They go about their business just like humans do on the surface.  It’s all a bit scary for Roddy who just wants to go home.  Is there anyone who will be able to help?

The film has its moments but is it memorable enough to see a second time?  No.  I’ve said this about so many films of late.  My apathy is becoming monotonous.  A post by a viewer on the Internet Movie Database sums up my thoughts – “if we see one more CGI animal who has found himself placed outside of his usual circumstances with hilarious consequences we are all going to vomit to death.”

The best characters in the film are a band of shy slugs with a knack for good singing.  Also amusing is a team of French frogs who try to prevent Roddy from returning to the surface.  Sadly, the main players in the story don’t have the same humour and charm.  I smiled a couple of times but that’s about it.  Call me a cynic.

There’s an obvious message to the story which children should pick up on.  Those with a keener eye might also detect hidden references to other popular films.  There’s no denying that much effort has gone into Flushed Away but it lacks the originality and wit that I am craving.  Those judging the film on a different basis may find it more to their liking.