Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 15 August 2002

In the space of three years, Shyamalan has become one of the world’s prominent directors and with ascendancy has come power.  Without divulging its secrets, Signs is a very different film that if pitched to a studio by a first-time writer, would never make it past a first reading.  It’s unconventional and frustrates the audience by not showing them want they want to see.  In the wake last year’s terrorist bombings and in an era when studios hate taking even the slightest financial risk, only a writer-director like Shyamalan would have the clout to see Signs reach the big screen.  Thank goodness.

So what can I tell you about the film?  Not much I’m afraid.  I’ve spoken out recently against trailers that show every key plot twist and every important line of dialogue.  As an exception to the norm, the trailer for Signs gives nothing away and to reward Shyamalan’s efforts to keep the film’s identity hidden from us, I’ll keep my trap shut.  Concealing the truth only adds to the intrigue.  Aren’t you just the slightest bit interested by the part of the trailer where Mel Gibson’s daughter calmly says to him “Daddy, there’s a monster at my window, can I have a glass of water.”

Given that I refuse to speak about the film, I will spend the remainder praising the efforts of its creators and collaborators.  M. Night Shyamalan makes a more effective use of sound than any current filmmaker.  If you minimise dialogue, amplify background sounds and craft a subtle yet tingling film score, you can create tension amongst your audience.  As In The Bedroom showed back in January, a quiet cinema provides an eerily uncomfortable feeling - the perfect amphitheatre for a thriller.

With cinematographer Tak Fujimoto, Shyamalan also makes dynamic use of his camera lens.  The cameras are placed in deliberate locations and moved with precision to ensure we see only what they want us to see.  As you yourself will see, a reflection off a television screen or an expression on a character’s face can create more suspense than a conventional shot.  Nothing is rushed.

Both Mel Gibson and Joaquin Phoenix give intense performances but to an extent, are overshadowed by their supporters.  Poorly cast children can ruin best efforts (ala Jake Lloyd in The Phantom Menace) but Rory Culkin (younger brother of Macaulay) and Abigail Breslin are equal to their elders.  I also enjoyed the serious, somewhat doey demeanour of a police officer played by Cherry Jones - the most memorable of the cast.

With a mandate to improve cinema, M. Night Shyamalan is doing just that.  The “signs” are all good for the future.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 01 August 2002

As expected, Marine Joe Enders (Cage) has “demons” in his past.  He recently botched a land mission that left most of his crew dead and himself badly injured in hospital.  Foolishly, he wants to get back out in the action to avenge the mistakes of his past.  He bluffs his way through a fitness test and is about to be given an important assignment.

Just arriving to the camp is Ben Yahzee (Beach) - a Navajo Code Talker.  Few people know the Navajo language, least of all the Japanese, and the Americans, despite being horribly outnumbered, plan to use this to their advantage in seizing control of the island of Saipan.  Enders mission is not to protect Yahzee but to protect the code.  If Yahzee were to be captured by the enemy, he was to be killed at all costs.

The film goes through the obligatory ups and downs.  Enders is unforthcoming about his mission and the whole crew doesn’t like working along side these Navajos.  Then the prove their worth by saving a few lives, and suddenly their part of the gang.  Of course, there’s always one who still doesn’t like them but you know he’s going to have his opinions changed in a defining moment late in the film.

I’m tiring of war flicks.  I know they have a purpose and teach us the horrors of battle but aren’t there other interesting topics worth exploring?  Since Saving Private Ryan and The Thin Red Line perfected the genre in the modern era, studios are striving to churn out even more graphic images in search of a “prestige” picture.

Then again, there’s no point continuing this argument because Windtalkers is not a war film.  It is an action film.  Director John Woo made one of my all-time favourite action flicks, Face/Off, but disappeared off my radar after making Mission: Impossible 2.  As bad as it was, at least M:I-2 was just unrealistic action.  Windtalkers tries to disguise unrealistic action in a realistic setting.

I wonder if a film like this gets released in Japan?  The Japanese body count is farcical.  The Americans seem to be able to kill everyone with dead aim and yet their enemy cannot hit a single person.  The only Americans killed are the background extras and those second tier stars in the film who set themselves with stupid comments like “if I die, can you give this to my girlfriend”.  That’s an invitation to die in my book.

The career of Nicolas Cage is officially finished.  Since his Oscar winning turn in Leaving Las Vegas, only Face/Off has made for worthy viewing.  He is pathetically one-dimensional but so is the whole cast against the backdrop of this highly cliched screenplay.  As I’ve said about other poor war flicks, it’s insulting to the actual people who fought and represented their country.  And no, it is not just entertainment.

At 133 agonising minutes, the film hangs around like a bad smell.  I knew within 15 minutes it was trash and then spent the remainder of the evening wondering if I should just walk out.  Someone I saw the film with went to the toilet during with 10 minutes to go and instead of coming back in, chose to wait outside.  He made the right choice.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 08 August 2002

From the outset, you can see the obvious differences and sense those that are to follow.  There are no opening credits - this includes logos, studio information and even the film’s title!  The film just... begins.  Set in Australia 1922, we follow five people who are never named or identified - they are just faces.  There’s an Aborigine who being used by three police officers to track another Aborigine who after being accused of raping a white women, fled into the outback.

There are few words spoken by any of the cast.  The eerie silence (during which you won’t want to be munching away on your popcorn) is interrupted by unexpected musical numbers.  It’s like a mini-musical with the songs telling us more about the characters than their words and actions do.  An inventive technique which would have required much planning and deliberation before shooting.  Top credit to De Heer for not only taking a chance but for pulling it off.

The performances from David Gulpilil, Gary Sweet, Damon Gameau and Grant Page are exemplary and I expect several will receive recognition when the Australian Film Institute announces their award nominees in early October.  For that matter, I expect the film to receive recognition across most all categories.  The lack of dialogue forces the audience to focus on other, usually unappreciated, elements.  The desolate landscape is the ultimate backdrop and the cast are completely in touch with their characters evidenced by the many facial close-ups.

Another little quirk of the film is how De Heer uses Aboriginal art to illustrate key scenes.  For example, there’s a scene where Sweet kills a group of Aborigines.  Rather than show the brutal shooting, as Sweet fires his gun, we cross to a piece of art that shows the killings whilst still hearing the gunfire in the background.  Just another original element to an already special piece.

Rolf De Heer was born in the Netherlands but moved to Australia age the age of 8 and has become one of our leading filmmakers.  He won an AFI Award and received a special mention at the Venice Film Festival in 1993 for his unbearably shocking Bad Boy Bubby.  Twice he has had films selected to screen at the prestigious Cannes Film Festival -  The Quiet Room in 1996 and Dance Me To My Song in 1998.  Most will be unfamiliar with both De Heer and his works but the opportunity for you to become a fan has arrived.  All you need do is see The Tracker.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 01 August 2002

Introduced to a divorced woman with a young child, Will has a revelation.  Not that there’s more to life than just himself, but that single mums are a market he hasn’t explored.  So he goes to a meeting where single parents can talk about their problems.  Of course Nick doesn’t have a child so he makes one up to win a date with one of the women he meets.

It backfires of course but from within the group, he meets a 12-year-old named Marcus (Hoult) and his mother Fiona (Collette).  Fiona is suffering from massive depression and unsuccessfully tries to take her own life.  Being bullied at school and with nowhere else to turn, Marcus turns up at Will’s door and starts hanging out with him in his bachelor pad.  Will wants no part of it but Marcus insistence sees them become best buds.  Both have their troubles but together are finding an unspoken comfort in each other.

Not long after, Will meets Rachel (Weisz) at a New Year’s Eve party and after a couple of dates, a relationship starts building.  Will’s world is changing way too quickly and he’s struggling to come to grips with it all.  It’s been a one-man ensemble for so long.  Is he prepared to break his long standing routine and give in to the feelings he’s long surpressed?

In recent cinema, we go through phases where writers gain sudden notoriety.  In the early 1990s, everyone was obsessed with John Grisham and his crime stories such as The Firm, The Client and A Time To Kill.  Then, Jane Austin was all the rage with her elegantly crafted love tales including Sense And Sensibility, Emma and Mansfield Park.  Now, English writer Nick Hornby has arrived with his fresh comedic wit lacing the screen in Fever Pitch, High Fidelity and now About A Boy.

The trouble with any book adaptation is that it’s not a matter of what to include in the story but rather what to leave out.  Unfortunately, some parts of the story are glazed over but the essence of Will’s coming of age still comes through.  A surprising choice to adapt an English tale, American directors Paul and Chris Weitz (American Pie) make this a great follow up to their original smash hit.  Both films epitomise the importance of life and the importance of friendship.

Impossible to dislike, it’s a perfect feel good movie with a realistic feel.  There are times when we all wish we could be independent like Will but as he learns, and we’ve learnt too, it’s not a permanent lifestyle.  Many people see Hugh Grant as a one-dimensional fluffy actor but he’s the right person to tell this story About A Boy.  The most difficult role belonged to youngster Nicholas Hoult who has certainly made his first impressions count.

There’s nothing better than popping along with some friends, kicking back with a bucket of popcorn and appreciating a movie without once having to glance at your watch.  It’s also great to see someone on screening going through the dramas and learning the lessons that we can all relate too.  And it’s true - life is always better when you let other people in.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 08 August 2002

Emily was fascinated by dragonflies and collected anything related to them.  In fact, she even had a small birthmark in the shape of a dragonfly.  When at home, she worked with her husband at the local hospital and whilst Joe worked in the high-tech emergency room, Emily was caring for sick kids in the children’s ward.  Joe never showed too much interest in Emily’s work but now pays these kids a visit to see the great work his wife did.

From this point, the film takes the wrong path.  Joe sees several of these kids die only to be brought back to life thanks to resuscitation.  They return with stories of Emily in the afterlife and draw unusual swiggly pictures with the instructions that Joe must go there.  When other bizarre events start occurring with dragonflies, Joe realises that Emily is trying to reach him but what his message and what does she want?

The film fizzles out with a limp conclusion that is highly illogical.  Rather than focus on Joe’s story, I wanted to know more about these kids and what they saw on the other side.  There’s a nun (Hunt) who was studying these kids only to be ostracised from the hospital for stirring up too many religious issues.  She has a tiny role in the film but I had more interest in her than poor Joe.

Kevin Costner is struggling to find decent films these days and will disappoint fans again here.  It’s a forgettable flick that misses its opportunity to score.  Director Tom Shadyac is responsible for Ace Ventura, The Nutty Professor, Liar Liar and Patch Adams.  Dragonfly is his first chance to branch out from comedy but it doesn’t “fly” and isn’t as creepy as I expected.

Not without some claims, Dragonfly needs more work and a fresh angle.