Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 10 July 2005

Sin City is adapted from the comic book series written by Frank Miller.  The film focuses on three of Miller’s stories and you’ll easily be able to distinguish between them.  It’s like watching 3 separate films which run for roughly 40 minutes.

Most importantly though, it’s the first time I’ve seen a film which really felt like a comic book.  Shot mostly in black and white, there’s no way this film could have been made prior to the 21^st Century.  The reason is because what you see is 100% special effects.  The entire cast performed in front of a green screen and just did whatever director Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller asked of them.  If you think that’s amazing, some cast members appear together on screen and yet never met in the studio!  They filmed their scenes separately and it was all woven together in the editing room.

The first of the stories sees retiring police detective named Hartigan (Willis) and his partner Bob (Madsen) try to hunt down the kidnapper of a young girl.  The clues lead Hartigan to an old warehouse by the docks where he finds the girl with Roark (Stahl), the son of a leading politician.

The second tale sees a disfigured giant named Marv (Rourke) framed for the murder of a prostitute (King).  Consumed by rage, Marv goes on a city-wide hunt to find who is responsible.  The man he will find is a slippery customer – a cannibal named Kevin (Wood) who will prove to be a difficult opponent.

The final story follows Dwight (Owen) and a strong group of ladies who have inadvertently killed a police officer (Del Toro).  If discovered, the slaying will shatter the fragile peace of the town so it’s up to Dwight to dispose of the body where it will never be found.  It won’t be easy.

Every spoken line is Sin City is corny but it’s just like it would be in a comic book and why the film is so entertaining.  One character comes with a witty line and then the other character tries to out do them.  It’s all so deliberately spoken too – the dialogue isn’t rushed and there are some beautiful pauses.

The cast and crew are a who’s who of Hollywood.  Quentin Tarantino (Pulp Fiction) guest directs a scene featuring Benecio Del Toro and Clive Owen.  For the remainder of the film, we can lavish praise on Robert Rodriguez (From Dusk Till Dawn, Desperado) in what is a fantastic directorial effort.  With no sets, he and writer Frank Miller initially drew every scene out on paper and then turned it over to the effects wizard.  The end result is undeniably seamless.

I am told that a lot more filming was done and that the directors’ cut, which will feature on the DVD release, will be much longer.  It all sounds very enticing.  But in the interim, let’s cut straight to the bottom line – Sin City is a cool, hip motion picture that you need to see on the big screen at any cost.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 06 July 2005

I just love watching a great film which I know nothing about.  You have no expectations and no idea which way the story is heading.  Then again, I should have known more about My Summer Of Love.  It won the British Academy Award earlier this year for best British film.  The field included Harry Potter & The Prisoner Of Azkaban, Shaun Of The Dead and Vera Drake.

The film revolves around two teenage girls, Mona (Press) and Tamsin (Blunt), who spend every moment of their summer holiday together.  They make a strange pairing because their lives are almost a complete contradiction.

Mona lives with her brother Phil (Considine) in a run-down pub.  Phil is an ex-criminal who has now discovered God.  He’s continually involved in prayer and has shut down the pub on God’s wishes.  She has few friends and has been caught up in a foolish relationship with a married man who only wants her as a cheap lover.

Tamsin attends boarding school and has returned for the summer to spend time with her family’s in their lavish mansion.  She has a horse which she rides across the countryside and amuses herself by getting drunk on her father’s wine collection (which I’m sure is worth a dollar or two).

The common link between the Mona and Tamsin is that they are bored.  They stumble upon each other by chance and a friendship is formed.  This may sound like some schmaltzy teen comedy but it is anything but.  Together, they engage is a summer of self-exploration that might please some and shock others.  They have created their own blissful world and no one else can penetrate it.

This beautiful story has all been immaculately captured by writer-director Paul Pavlikovsky who has based the film on the novel by Helen Cross.  It is the cinematography from Ryszard Lenczewski which struck me most.  The colourings are perfect and the close-ups and camera angles incredibly precise.  Instead of having the characters tell us how they feel, you have to gauge for yourself by watching their eyes and facial expressions.

My Summer Of Love is a wonderful character study and stars Nathalie Press and Emily Blunt also deserve praise.  It’s likely you will have seen neither on screen before but you will certainly see them again in the future.  The only known actor of the cast is Paddy Considine who you may recall from 2003’s In America.

When the British get it right, they sure know how to make a great motion picture.  As voted by the British Academy, the best British films of the past five years have included Touching The Void (2004), Gosford Park (2002), Billy Elliot (2001) and East Is East (2000).  That’s a superb list and I’m overjoyed to see My Summer Of Love added to the list.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 10 July 2005

I really wish I had written a comic book.  I would then have Hollywood studios at my footsteps begging for the rights to turn it into a movie.  It wouldn’t have to be a good comic book either because all the half-decent ones have already been transferred into a cinematic form.  Who cares if the movie turns out to be garbage?  I’d be stinking rich!

Fantastic Four is one of the worst films of 2005.  I didn’t expect much based on the trailers but not even I could foresee such a pitiful script.  If you’ve seen the film you’ll know exactly what I’m talking about when I ask – what was the point of this?  There is no story here at all!  It’s a two hour long introduction to the characters that never goes any further.  Save your money and wait for the inevitable sequel.  If we’re really lucky, this film will tank at the box-office and the concept can be cremated.

Five scientists/astronauts travel to a space station and are exposed to some inter-galactic radiation which alters their DNA.  They now find themselves with superpowers and about half-an-hour is wasted watching them develop their new abilities.  The reason they are only the Fantastic “Four” is because one of those exposed becomes the villain – Victor Von Doom (McMahon) wants to take over the world!  Muhahahahaha.

Reed (Gruffudd) can bend his body into any shape, Sue (Alba) can become invisible, Johnny (Evans) can turn himself into a fireball, and Ben (Chiklis) has super-human strength.  They comprise the Fantastic Four but I found them all so unbelievably dislikeable.  Johnny is easily the most annoying but I’ll understand if you have your own choice as to which is the biggest jerk.

I’m finding it hard to elaborate more on the plot because there isn’t much more to say.  There’s a cheesy romantic subplot but that’s about all I can think of.  When you compare it against some of the better comic book adaptations in recent years such as X-Men, Spider-Man and the new Batman, you’ll have an appreciation for where I’m coming from.

Fantastic this is not.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 30 June 2005

It begins with an electrical storm.  The strange looking skies and bright flashes of lightening have brought many into streets with their cameras.  Ray Ferrier (Cruise) is surprised to see the fierce winds blowing towards the storm’s centre, rather than away.  His daughter, Rachel (Fanning) is terrified and wants to get back into the house as soon as possible.

The storm quickly passes and Ray walks down the street to see if there’s any damage.  He leaves his younger daughter with his teenage son, Robbie (Chatwin).  The lightening has left a deep crater in the middle out of the road outside the town church.  The gathering crowds look with curiosity and ask, how could lightening strike the same place so many times?

 The ground then starts to rumble.  The road starts to break apart.  Ray suspicions that something is not right have now been confirmed.  An enormous mechanical creature rises from the huge crater.  There’s not much time for reality to sink in however.  The creature begins its attack, killing everything its path with a simple laser beam.  The Earth is under attack.

Watching The War Of The Worlds reminded me very much of 2002’s Signs (with Mel Gibson).  The similarity is that it’s the story of an alien invasion told solely from the perspective from one man.  We only see what he sees.  Ray suspects the whole world is under attack but he just doesn’t know and so neither do we.  All communication has been cut – he’s on his own with his two kids in a survival battle.

Tom Cruise is fine in the leading role.  A little over-the-top perhaps but that’s what we expect from him.  My favourite performance was from 10-year-old Dakota Fanning (Man On Fire).  She is exceptionally annoying and I say this in a positive way.  I just wanted to punch her sometimes but she acts how a scared girl would in such a situation.  She isn’t your standard 11-year-old who speaks like a 31-year-old.

Steven Spielberg is the director and you should know that this isn’t the first time he’s delved into the alien world.  From Spielberg, we’ve seen Artificial Intelligence, E.T. and Close Encounters Of The Third Kind.  War Of The Worlds is substantially darker and shows graphic images of humans being obliterated (with simplicity).  Don’t go thinking this is an action-comedy ala Independence Day.

I liked Signs slightly more because it felt creepier and more suspenseful.  War Of The Worlds though still has a lot of intrigue.  Details about the mechanical monsters are kept to a minimum (for better or worse) and you’ll be wondering until the very end as to how they are going to defeat these impregnable beasts.  Then again, if you’ve seen an earlier version of this film or read H.G. Wells’ novel, you may already know.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 08 July 2005

This film could have been a complete disaster.  I’m tired of seeing unoriginal TV remakes litter the big screen.  Thankfully for us all, writer-director Nora Ephron has flipped the concept on its head and crafted a surprisingly distinctive motion picture.

Jack Wyatt (Ferrell) is a well-known movie actor who is going through a slump.  On the recommendation of his agent, Ritchie (Schwartzman), Jack has agreed to play the role of Darren in a modern-day television remake of Bewitched.  This doesn’t sit too well with Jack as he knows it was Samantha’s character who was the most popular and beloved in the original series.  He’s determined to make sure that this time around, Darren will have the biggest part.

His first step is to cast a completely unknown actress in the leading role.  It all comes together for Jack when at a bookstore, he finds Isabel Bigelow (Kidman).  She has the perfect nose wiggle and soon finds herself as the lead actress in a high-profile television show.

What Jack doesn’t know of course is that Isabel really is a witch!  Isabel has grown tired of magic tricks and against the wishes of her father, Nigel (Caine), has decided to try to live a life with out them.  Most importantly, she wants to find someone who will love her for who she is and not have to resort to hexes and magic potions to woo them.

The fact that Isabel now finds herself acting in a role which mirrors her own life is beautifully ironic and one of the reasons I enjoyed the film so much.  It’s an insanely funny mix of fantasy and reality and this contrast really provides a lot of good humour.  It reminded me of 2000’s Shadow Of The Vampire which had director F.W. Murnau directing a vampire movie only to find his lead actor really was a vampire and was eating some of the cast and crew.

The only small flaw in the story was the ending.  It’s rushed and we don’t get to see what happens to many of the supporting cast (particularly Shirley MacLaine who plays Endora on the show).  I have no doubt these scenes were filmed and can only assume they were left on the cutting room floor.

Nicole Kidman’s over-the-top sweetness is a touch annoying but you’ll adore her by the end.  The real star though is Will Ferrell.  He has a great, sarcastic sense of humour and I’m only just starting to realise just how talented he is.  What I like most is that he delivers amazing one-liners whilst staying completely in character.  He’ll say something right out of left field that you won’t see coming.  Comedy is such a hard genre to be consistently good in but if you’ve watch Melinda & Melinda, Anchorman, Starsky & Hutch, Zoolander, Austin Powers 2 and A Night At The Roxbury, you’ll see Will Ferrell at his best.

Previous films from director Nora Ephron have included You’ve Got Mail and Sleepless In Seattle.  If you’re therefore thinking this is another “chick flick”, you can cast aside your misgivings.  The casting of Ferrell with Kidman should see the film appeal to both the male and female audience.