Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 15 July 2015

For most of his life, 17-year-old Quentin “Q” Jacobsen (Wolff) has had a crush on the girl next door, Margo Speilgelman (Delevingne).  They were childhood friends but drifted apart during high school.  They’ve hardly said a word to each other in more than a year.  Margo is living her life – complete with a boyfriend and a sense of adventure.  Q is the opposite.  He studies hard and gets good grades… but his life is incomplete because he doesn’t have the “miracle” that is Margo by his side.

Their worlds reconnect in ridiculous circumstances.  Margo climbs through Q’s window late one night and asks for a favour.  She needs Q to help drive her around the city so that she can get revenge against a series of people who have wronged her.  Top of the list is her now “ex” boyfriend who has been sleeping with one of her close friends.

Suffice to say Margo isn’t the forgiving kind.  She turns up at her friends place and an elaborate plan goes perfectly, she ends up taking a photo of her ex-boyfriend as he runs naked across the lawn.  There’ll be no ramifications through.  It turns out he has an incredibly small penis and Margo (through Q) threatens to tell everyone (using the photographic evidence) if he badmouths her.  That’s classy.

It gets better.  It turns out another of Margo’s teenage friends knew she was being cheated on but didn’t say a word.  To get revenge on him, she breaks into his house, goes into his bedroom while sleeping, and waxes one of his eyebrows.  It would provide a great scenario to use in a criminal law exam.  As for Q, he is somewhat freaked out by the whole escapade but he goes along with it because (1) he loves Margo, and (2) she tells him that he needs to break out of his shell.

The next morning, Q wakes up and thinks his world is now peachy.  He and Margo are best buddies again.  Wrong.  She doesn’t turn up at school and after a few days, she is reported missing.  Her “deadbeat” parents aren’t too concerned.  They tell the cops that Margo runs away all the time as a means of getting attention.

The only person who concerned about her whereabouts seems to be Q.  He enlists his two best friends, Ben (Abrams) and Radar (Smith), and they start going through Margo’s belongings in search of answers.  Their efforts put  Sherlock Holmes and Miss Marple to shame.  They piece together some ridiculously obscure clues and set off on a road trip to find her.  Oh, and they have to make sure they get back in time for their high school prom (a more important priority).

The overwhelming message that is shoved down the audience’s throat throughout the film is to get out there and take a few chances in life.  It’s a nice message but the execution is poor.  Some of the material in this film is quite serious (criminal acts, uncaring parents) but the screenplay shrugs it off as something minor.  Other moments don’t make much sense.  There’s a bizarre scene where they stop at a petrol station and rush through their purchases to save a few minutes.  When you’re travelling more than 3,000 miles, there are plenty of better ways to make up that time.

I’d also argue that these characters are shallow and moronic.  They spend an inordinate amount of time yammering about the prom.  Despite the fact they’re looking for a missing person, they have to make sure they get back for their pre-prom haircuts.  Radar talks about how it’s going to be the first time he and his girlfriend will have sex.  Ben is trying every move he has (and they’re not very good ones) just to find a date to go with.  Q is perhaps the biggest bore.  There’s a scene near the end where he has a quasi-meltdown about Margo.  I reiterate that this is a girl who has ignored him for years.

If Paper Towns is representative of the youth of today, our species is truly doomed.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 04 July 2015

In the space of a month, we’ve had the chance to see two films that have been set in the mid-to-late 19^th Century and that centre on a young woman pursued by multiple suitors.  The first was Far From The Madding Crowd, based on the novel by Thomas Hardy and starring Carey Mulligan.  The second is Madame Bovary, based on the novel by French writer Gustave Flaubert and starring Australia’s own Mia Wasikowska (Alice In Wonderland, Tracks).

Emma (Wasikowska) is a well-educated woman who has married Charles (Lloyd-Hughes), a successful doctor (well, her father helped set them up).  They have a nice home with beautiful views in a small French town.  It comes complete with a hard-working maid and a finely tuned piano.

It may sound like an idyllic life but Emma is bored stupid.  She laments that “every day is the same.”  Charles works hard and when he finally gets home, he’s usually tired with little to say.  Emma is also frustrated by her husband’s lack of ambition.  She wants him to start a business in a bigger town like Rouen as it would give her so much more to do and to see.  It’s not Charles’ desire however.  He’s content with his quiet country life.

As the famous saying goes – “idle hands are the devil’s playthings.”  Emma finds herself interested in two men who appear to be much more sophisticated than her husband.  The first is Leon (Miller), a young law student with a fondness for literature, theatre and music.  The second is a wealthy, handsome nobleman (Marshall-Green) who loves to mingle with the upper echelon of society.  Both men leave her confused and vulnerable.  Should she leave her reliable Charles and take a chance on someone new?

Adding Emma’s woes is her penchant for shopping.  She has been seduced by a local merchant (Ifans) into buying beautiful clothes and homewares using the newfound concept of “credit”.  The debts are piling up and it’s become yet another secret that Emma must keep from her husband.  She’s finally found a way of filling her free time – with stress and worry.

The story may be 160 years old but the messages contained in Madame Bovary feels just as relevant today.  Just like Emma, too often we think “the grass is greener on the other side.”  We lament about our imperfect lives and we forget about all the good stuff.  It also explores the flawed concept that money makes you happy.  Emma’s attempts to appear rich and successful only further add to her demise.

French-born writer-director Sophie Barthes has done a wonderful job fleshing out the novel’s themes inside of two hours.  Mia Wasikowska deserves praise for her leading performance which skilfully shows her character’s strengths and weaknesses. It’s also great to see the sharp Ezra Miller on screen for the first time since 2012’s The Perks Of Being A Wallflower.

The film’s hasn’t been particularly well received by critics since its premiere at Telluride last August but as someone new to the story of Madame Bovary (I haven’t read the novel or seen any of the earlier films), I was lured by its setting, its colours, and its ideas.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 13 July 2015

Pop quiz.  Which Australian has won more Academy Awards than any other?  Costume and production designer Catherine Martin (Moulin Rouge, The Great Gatsby) set a new benchmark in 2013 with her 4^th win.  Up until then, the record had been held for more than 50 years by costume designer Orry-Kelly who won for An American In Paris, Les Girls and Some Like It Hot.  He could have won a lot more if not for the fact the Academy didn’t introduce the best costume design category until 1949. 

If you’d have mentioned the name Orry-Kelly to me a few weeks ago, my first response would have been “who?”  Many others would have a similar response.  That answer is a big reason why acclaimed director Gillian Armstrong (My Brilliant Career, Little Women, Oscar & Lucinda) wanted to bring Orry-Kelly story to the screen.  How did an unknown from a small town in New South Wales end up designing costumes for Bette Davis, Olivia de Havilland, Ingrid Bergman and Katharine Hepburn in Hollywood?

The title may lure you into thinking this is simply a two-hour film about great costumes.  It offers much more than that.  Orry-Kelly’s career began in New York during the Roaring Twenties.  An openly gay man, Orry-Kelly embraced the era’s cultural progression.  He found work in the clothing industry and ended up designing extravagant sets and costumes for Broadway shows.  He spent several years living with Cary Grant and many believed they were in a relationship.

Orry-Kelly moved to Hollywood in the early 1930s and his career took a rollercoaster-like path.  The highs were high.  He was employed by Warner Bros. in 1932 and he designed the costumes for hundreds of films including Casablanca, The Maltese Falcon, and 42^nd Street.  The lows were low.  He battled alcoholism and found himself subject to discrimination because of his sexuality.  Hollywood was a lot more repressed than New York.

Considering that Orry-Kelly died in 1964, trying to put together a well-informed documentary was a challenge for Armstrong.  Many of the people he worked had also passed away.  Thankfully, she was able to speak with the likes of Oscar winning costume designer Ann Roth (who worked with him on Oklahoma!) and actors Jane Fonda and Angela Lansbury (who worked with him in the early 1960s).  There are plenty of other costumers and film buffs who share their own thoughts on Orry-Kelly’s legacy.

Armstrong didn’t feel it best to use a traditional narrator to tell the story.  Instead, she’s used an actor (Darren Gilshenan) who appears on screen from time-to-time.  Armstrong believed this would provide better insight into Orry-Kelly’s mindset.  It’s a little clunky but it’s hard to suggest a better alternative.  There isn’t much in the way of photos or videos of the real Orry-Kelly.  It was nice though to see Armstrong include one of his Academy Award acceptance speeches as one of the final scenes.

A major part of the film’s allure is that you feel like you’re accompanying Armstrong on this journey of discovery.  She’s deliberate in the way that information is revealed.  Just when you think you have an understanding of Orry-Kelly, she throws in a surprising twist that sends the narrative on a different path.  Make sure you stay through the closing credits because it includes perhaps the biggest discovery of all.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 01 July 2015

Senna, released in Australia back in 2011, was a brilliant documentary that recounted the life of the late Ayrton Senna.  Director Asif Kapadia included no narration track, no re-enactments and no modern day footage.  He utilised previously unseen footage, and he made something that felt more like a drama than a documentary.  It was riveting from start to finish.

I had the chance to speak to Kapadia back in 2011 and he spoke about his interest in the documentary genre.  Kapadia has directed several dramas (The Warrior, The Return, Far North) but he gravitated towards documentaries because of their simplicity.  You don’t need to rely on actors, writers, set designers and visual effects artists.  A doco can be put together in a shorter time frame with a smaller unit and a smaller budget.

It’s therefore no surprise to see Kapadia sticking with what he does best.  Amy is a 2-hour documentary that focuses on another high profile individual who passed away far too young – Amy Winehouse.

In the mid-2000s, the world put Winehouse on a pedestal.  She was a talented British singer-songwriter who won several Grammy Awards and played in front of sold-out crowds.  When her addictions to drugs and alcohol became widely known, the world laughed and tore her down.  She was hounded by the paparazzi and became a subject of amusement to comedians such as David Letterman and Jay Leno.

Kapadia follows Winehouse’s career using a chronological timeline.  In one of the film’s early scenes, we see a 14-year-old Winehouse hanging out with her best friends, making jokes, and singing Happy Birthday.  It’s surreal to think that this footage, shot on an old hand-held camera at home, is now part of a film that premiered at the Cannes Film Festival.  No one knew then how famous she would become.

Just as he did in Senna, Kapadia avoids “talking head” style interviews.  He has conducted recent interviews with those close to Winehouse (her father, her husband, and her best friends) but we don’t see them on screen.  Rather, we hear their voices as we watch archival footage of Winehouse at her best… and also at her worst.

It’s not an Earth shattering message but Amy firmly reiterates that “celebrities” are no different from the rest of us.  Fame and fortune doesn’t exempt you from the effects of addiction and depression.  Winehouse was a troubled woman forced to endure her problems publicly.  The film also points the finger at those close to Winehouse and asks whether they did enough to help.

It wasn’t easy getting everyone to talk but Kapadia conducted roughly 80 interviews as part of the filmmaking process.  Like any good documentarian, he wanted to ensure his representation of the subject matter was “honest and truthful”.  Not everyone agrees.  Amy’s father, Mitch, has voiced his disapproval for the way that both he and Amy are portrayed.  He stated on BBC radio that he may even “sue for damages.”

There’s plenty to take away from Amy.  It’s a celebration of her musical talents and the way in which her song lyrics have created a soundtrack to her life.  It’s also shows us the world of a mega-celebrity and the difficulties they face in remaining sane and grounded.   

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 08 July 2015

Channing Tatum rose to stardom as a 26-year-old with his breakout role in Step Up, released in August 2006.  There was nothing ground breaking about its premise.  He played a guy from the “wrong side of the tracks” who befriended a young dancer looking to forge a career with a professional dance company.  After a bit of friction, they hooked up – both on and off the dance floor – and developed a new, revolutionary routine to impress talent scouts at a major audition.

When you break it down, Magic Mike XXL isn’t all that different.  It’s a simple, entertaining, light-hearted romp that doesn’t require much thought.  You can just sit in your chair and let the strippers do all the work (metaphorically of course).

Magic Mike XXL kicks off three years where the last movie left off.  Mike has retired from the “male entertainer” industry and is trying to forge a more orthodox career.  He’s running a furniture making business but you wouldn’t really call it a success.  Sales are slow and he can’t even afford health cover for his only employee.  Adding to Mike’s woes is the fact that he recently came out of a long-term relationship (she was the one who broke it off).  The bottom line – things have been better.

Out of the blue, Mike gets a call from his old stripping team.  They’re passing through town on their way to an annual stripper convention (which apparently is a real thing) in Myrtle Beach.  Mike’s hand doesn’t take much twisting.  He agrees to join them for one last hurrah and in the process, they design a completely new show that will pleasure women like they’ve never been pleasured before.

Academy Award winning director Steven Soderbergh (Traffic) directed the original Magic Mike but he’s stepped aside here to allow his good friend Greg Jacobs to “strut his stuff”.  Jacobs has a good eye.  He makes great use of costumes, colour, lighting and camera angles to give the film a not-so-modern look.  When you throw in a few lengthy dialogue-driven sequences, you’ve got something reminiscent of Paul Thomas Anderson’s masterpiece, Boogie Nights.

Matthew McConaughey and Alex Pettyfer haven’t returned for this sequel but this has allowed the supporting players to get more screen time.  The dialogue doesn’t have that over-scripted Hollywood feel and credit belongs to the cast (there must have been great chemistry on set) and writer Reid Carolin (who also wrote the original). 

The film’s female presence has been given a significant boost with the addition of Amber Heard (Friday Night Lights) as a sharp photographer who doesn’t want to sleep with Channing Tatum (gasp), Jada Pinkett Smith (The Nutty Professor) as a strong-willed club owner who knows what women want, and Andie MacDowell (Groundhog Day) as a scene-stealing mother who doesn’t mind telling people what’s on her mind (especially after a drink).  All make a great impression.

The film’s weak point are the stripping scenes themselves.  We keep seeing shots of adoring women screaming loudly and throwing $1 bills all over the place but I’m not sure how they maintain their excitement given the stripping routines are rushed and repetitive.  I won’t pretend to be an expert though.  My stripping days are long behind me.