Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 14 March 2002

Poor Kate.  Meg Ryan is in New York 2001 and has broken up with her boyfriend Stuart (Schreiber) and is fighting hard at her marketing job to gain an important promotion.  It’s leaving her stressed and rundown.  Maybe she needs more iron in her diet?

But then something “extraordinary” happens.  Stuart finds the secret to time travel and goes back into 1876 and accidentally brings Leopold back with him.  Leopold meets Kate who goes through the whole “you’re not from the past” routine but they fall in love and she realises he is telling the truth.  Throughout this, whilst Kate has been at work, Leopold has been learning the ways of the 21st Century with the help of Kate’s brother, Charlie (Meyer).

I forgot to mention that Stuart fell down an elevator shaft and was taken to hospital.  He’s not allowed to make a phone call (um, why?) and so is trying to get out by Monday because that’s the only time frame at which Leopold can be transported back to 1876.  But will Kate and Leopold be able to cope with being separated again forever?

The film is a lighthearted romantic comedy.  Unfortunately, there’s no chance to lose one’s self in the romance because of the many inconsistencies in the subplot.  The finale is a perfect example.  I’m sure it went through many rewrites and it’s very, very stupid.  How can one make a film these days and not know the ending before starting?  It puzzles me too that DVDs feature alternative endings.  Seriously, if you don’t know how a film should end what’s the point of making it?

Our two leads give contrasting performances.  Hugh Jackman is fantastic and the only reason to see the film.  There’s no hint of an Australian accent and adds a sense of humour to the film.  On the other hand, Meg Ryan is flat.  Her hairstyle is dreadful and I’m sick of her taking these ditzy romantic roles too seriously (ala Hanging Up, You’ve Got Mail, City Of Angels, Addicted To Love). 

A few women in the audience laughed during this film.  I don’t know why.  Maybe they’ve been screwed too by men who gave them the old “sorry but I have to go back in time tonight” routine.  I wish I could go back in time.  Then I could travel back to the exact time when Miramax executives green lighted this project and hand them the above critique.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 14 March 2002

Despite their high-profile status, those upstairs hide many secrets.  Some are in loveless marriages, some are cheating on their spouses, some are facing financial ruin, and some are hiding their true identity.  These people are only concerned with their appearance and keep things well guarded to maintain their reputation.  Downstairs in the servants quarters, things are the exact opposite.  Despite their social status, they hear all of their employer’s secrets and aren’t afraid to spread information amongst themselves.  It’s a simple pleasure they get from their demeaning employment to make them feel superior to those they serve.

Midway through the film, Sir William is killed.  No one really cares.  The guests and servants care more about removing suspicion from themselves.   Inspector Thomas’s (Fry) arrival serves as a catalyst to the exposing of many hidden truths.  That’s the adorable essence of Gosford Park - it’s not a typical “who done it” story.  It’s a subtlety comedic tale of secrets.

Not once during the 137 minute running time was I distracted or disinterested.  The multitude of characters and subplots provides enough ammunition for more than one film.  Many storylines are left open and I love the way the film implies much without telling you the real truth.  Every time I saw two people alone together I immediate suspected a hidden relationship.  Isn’t it fun to speculate?

At the recent Golden Globe Awards, Ian McKellan introduced himself as one of the “very small group of British actors who are not in Gosford Park” and he wasn’t far wrong.  This the largest, most well-rounded cast I have seen assembled in perhaps ten years and all were rewarded with the best ensemble prize at the recent Screen Actors Guild Awards.  Maggie Smith and Helen Mirren have received Oscar noms but it seems almost unfair to single them out of the flawless matrix.  Of the remainder, Emily Watson, Derek Jacobi and Ryan Phillippe were particularly exceptional.  The underrated Phillippe was an odd choice but his performance brings necessary attention to his intriguing character.

Let it be known that director Robert Altman is 77 years of age.  It’s incredible to envision someone of his age crafting such a film.  It’s very busy and in many scenes, you will be subconsciously following events in the foreground and background looking for more clues to help figure out who these people really are.  Altman’s prior credits include Short Cuts, The Player, Nashville and MASH.  All four earned him Academy Award nominations without success but Gosford Park gives him the chance to close an outstanding career with a final win.

People associate period piece films with images of slow romantic dramas featuring characters talking prim-and-proper English whilst wearing overly-extravagant costumes.  If that’s what you’re thinking then it’s time to open your mind.  Gosford Park is an intelligent, complicated, sly, intricate, hilarious, satirical film that simply must be appreciated.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 14 March 2002

The Royal Tenenbaums is a movie ahead of its time - it has no genre.  It opens like a comedy but then it becomes something else... or does it?

Royal and Ethel Tenenbaum (Hackman and Huston) married and had three children who all showed gifted promise as a child.  Chas (Stiller) became a business entrepreneur and ran his own successful company.  Margot (Paltrow) became a playwright and wrote several well-critiqued productions.  Richie (Wilson) became a tennis player and his natural ability saw him turn professional and hit the circuit.

Just prior to the children reaching their teen years, Royal and Ethel separated (although they never divorced).  Royal moved to a hotel where he remained for 22 years and in that time, had little to no contact with Ethel or their children.  Now, Royal is broke and kicked out.  At the same time, he finds that his wife’s accountant, Harry Sherman (Glover) has proposed to her.

As for Chas, Margot and Richie, their lives have reached the depths of misery.  Chas lost his wife in a plane accident, Margot lives a loveless uninspired existence and Richie suffered a nervous breakdown on the tennis court and retired.  To find themselves again, they have moved back to the family home.

It’s all about to be rocked though by the reappearance of Royal and he’s killing more than one bird with his stone.  He thinks he can just walk back in, reacquaint himself with his kids and reaffirm his love for Ethel.  They’re all in for a few surprises...

Despite the hilarity of these absurd characters, they all behave very seriously.  This contradiction gives The Royal Tenenbaums its quirky feel - you’re not sure whether your supposed to be laughing or crying.  Royal’s fate in the finale is proof enough of that.  The film has no formula and I can understand the frustration the audience feels in not knowing what to expect or feel.

I love it because film has become too formulaic.  Subconsciously, we know what’s going to happen.  We usually know when a conversation has ended by the way the final sentence is worded.  We usually know when something thrilling is happening by the music that precedes it.  Think about it and then imagine the opposite.  Now you’re in the ballpark when trying to describe The Royal Tenenbaums.

Gene Hackman won a Golden Globe for his performance and is remarkable.  Just as impressive is the ageless Angelica Huston.  All of the cast play their comedic roles with downplayed originality.  Humour comes naturally and jokes aren’t set up - this will divide many audiences.  Compare it to Gary Larson’s Far Side comics - some jokes are obvious but others require an absurd sense of humour to understand.

Wes Anderson’s last film, Rushmore, was another underappreciated flick that has a growing cult status.  The Royal Tenenbaums will most likely follow in a similar vein but it’s nice to see minds opening up with this unconventional screenplay receiving an Academy Award nomination for both Wes Anderson and star Owen Wilson.  So what’s the best “genre” to categorise this film?  How about... hilariously depressing.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 07 March 2002

This film is a great illustration when teaching people about bad films because there are so many specific examples that can be highlighted.  Let’s start with the most noticeable aspect of a movie - the performances.  I dislike actors who talk with unrealistic precision - each line is too perfect.  Justin Chambers is D’Artagnan and his seriousness is laughable.  Mena Suvari is his romantic conquest, Francesca, and talks like a pompous ice queen.  Stephen Rea and Tim Roth are the villains.  Why do bad guys always have to be so over the top?  Do they think we can’t understand that they are the bad guys?

Now for some simple lessons in direction.  The Musketeer features many stunts and sword fighting duels.  These scenes are very weak and have tried to be concealed by over editing.  It’s all edited so quickly, that you can’t understand what’s going on.  A perfect example is the bizarre finale where D’Artagnan and his enemy, Febre (Roth), fight in a “barn” on top of moving ladders.  The idea is stupid and it looks even stupider on screen.

What about sound effects?  This really pissed me off.  The same repetitive metallic sounds are used during all the sword fighting battles to signify the sound of metal hitting metal.  Why is it then that the same sound is heard when metal hits concrete or when metal hits wood?  Give me a break.

Time now for some general negative comments.  The opening credits stink and look like they belong in a Hallmark telemovie.  Opening credits of recent years have been very creative which the credits of The Musketeer even more surprising.  The music is hopelessly over-the-top.  A good film score should complement the film and not distract the audience but composer David Arnold seems to have accomplished the later.

It seems I’ve forgotten to mention the plot.  Don’t worry, there isn’t one anyway.  A few musketeers save the day, yadda, yadda, yadda.  Boy, what creativity in choosing the musketeers to make a movie about.  About how many times has it been done before?  If you check the Internet Movie Database, the word “musketeer” appears in the title of 78 different films.  Certainly a big gamble by Miramax and Universal Pictures (please note sarcasm).

Thanks for paying attention during my informative lesson.  For those interested in making a film of their own, this should provide a few helpful tips to win over both audiences and critics.  Class dismissed.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 14 March 2002

The quintet play the members of the Spurbury Highway Police.  They’re under the control of boss Captain O’Hagan (Cox) who isn’t impressed with the bad rap the unit is getting in the media.  There’s talk that the police station will be shut down and this is all good news for the local rival, the Spurbury Local Police led by Chief Grady (von Bargen), who will benefit from much additional funding.

The highway police are a crafty lot - they’re always playing practical jokes on those they pull over and they’re developing a bad reputation.  After a lady with a mysterious tattoo is found dead in a campervan and a truck is pulled over carrying a large drug shipment, the opportunity to impress and save the station may have presented itself.  If they can show up the local police in front of the governor (who just so happens to be dropping by) then perhaps they’re problems will be solved.

The film was made for just $1.2m and I give credit to the Broken Lizard team for not only making a decent comedy, but for showing you don’t need a billion dollar budget to make a decent movie.  After its premiere at the 2001 Sundance Film Festival, 20th Century Fox bought the rights to the film and released it worldwide.  In its first three weeks of release in America, the film has grossed $15m - a nice return on their investment.

I wasn’t rolling down the aisles with laugher but the humour is sarcastically funny.  I’d say for every joke I found funny, there was one that fell flat - about a 50/50 ratio.  The film seems destined for cult status very much like the films that inspired it.  Across the board, the cast are all amusing but the film benefits from the help of regular actors Brian Cox (Rushmore), Daniel von Bargen (Snow Falling On Cedars) and Lynda Carter (yes, TV’s Wonderwoman). 

This won’t be the first and last time we hear of Broken Lizard.  20th Century Fox has already commissioned them to make another film.  Are we looking at the start of something?