Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 18 December 2010

Who ruled Great Britain before Queen Elizabeth II? She’s been on the throne for so long that many people wouldn’t have the slightest idea.  The answer is King George VI.  He was Britain’s monarch from 1936 until his death in 1952.

His unlikely ascension to the throne is chronicled in this amazing film from director Tom Hooper.  Known within the family as “Bertie”, Albert Frederick Arthur George (Firth) was never expected to be king.  This was because he was the second son of King George V.  His older brother, Edward (Pearce), was first in line and had been impeccably groomed to take the throne when the need arose.

That situation presented itself in January 1936 when their father died at the age of 70.  The charismatic Edward became king and Bertie could breathe a sigh of relief.  He never really wanted the throne.  He was happy to leave the mantle to his more outgoing, more charismatic brother.

Unfortunately for Bertie, a constitutional crisis was about to present itself.  King Edward wanted to marry an American divorcee by the name of Wallis Simpson.  The government threatened to resign if the marriage went ahead and so Edward abdicated the throne.  As they say, the rest is now history.  Bertie, now known as George VI, became King of the United Kingdom in December 1936 and ruled during World War II.

Much of this story is told in The King’s Speech but the film’s focus is on Bertie’s relationship with an Australian speech therapist named Lionel Logue (Rush).  Ever since he was a child, Bertie had suffered from a terrible stutter.  The pressure of his role and the fact he often had to speak publically only made things worse.  His wife (Carter) had found numerous therapists but none had made an impact.

Lionel Logue was different however.  His methods were unorthodox and he had a somewhat odd sense of humour.  A trust developed between the pair and Bertie’s stutter started to improve.  Their friendship had to be kept a secret however.  The palace didn’t want it known that George was being helped by an unknown Australian with few credentials.  Even Lionel had to keep it a secret from his wife (Ehle).

Writer David Seidler had wanted to tell this story for a long time.  He originally envisioned it as a play but that changed when Geoffrey Rush first laid his eyes on the script.  Left on his doorstep in a brown paper envelope, Rush read the script and immediately spoke to his agent in Hollywood.  He suggested that the film would make a better movie than a play.  Judging from the fantastic early reviews which have been received for The King’s Speech, I guess he was right.

Seidler and Hooper undertook a large amount of research to help get to know these characters.  They had spoken with Lionel’s son but an amazing stroke of luck occurred just 9 weeks prior to shooting.  They located Lionel’s grandson living in London who had a diary that Lionel had written while treating the King.  It offered incredible insight and the script went through a quick re-write.  A few of the jokes which were actually shared by the real King and the real Lionel made their way into the final film.   They give the movie a nice balance of comedy and drama.

The power of The King’s Speech comes from its performances.  Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush and Helena Bonham Carter have been perfectly cast.  All three appear on track for an Academy Award nomination with Firth a strong frontrunner in the best actor category.  You’ll develop a great deal of sympathy for his complex character and be hoping that he finds a way of overcoming his frustration and insecurity.

One of the most highly regarded prizes in cinema is the People’s Choice Award at the Toronto Film Festival.  Hundreds of films are screened each year with the audience (as opposed to critics or a jury) picking the best film.  Winners over the past decade have included Precious, Slumdog Millionaire, Hotel Rwanda, Whale Rider and Amelie.  The King’s Speech took the honours in 2010 and so if my glowing review isn’t enough to get you to the cinema, may you instead be guided by the wider public.

You can read my interview with director Tom Hooper by clicking here. 

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 01 December 2010

It’s back to Narnia we go for another adventure.  This time around, it’s just Edmund (Keynes) and Lucy (Henley) making the journey.  Peter and Susan have grown up and moved on to the next phase of their lives.  There is a new addition however.  Their doubting cousin, Eustace (Poulter), has been unwillingly taken along for the ride.

On arriving in Narnia, the trio find themselves aboard the Dawn Treader and under the protection of good friend Prince Caspian (Barnes).  Nothing seems to be amiss and this leaves Edmund and Lucy puzzled.  What’s going on?  Why have they been called back to Narnia?

They soon realise that their renowned courage will again be required.  A strange green mist has been sweeping its way across the kingdom.  It plays on people’s darkest fears and causes them to hallucinate.  It has also been responsible for the disappearance of many townsfolk.

Given directions by an old lord, the crew of the Dawn Treader set off for a distant island that holds to the key to the mystery.  To rid the kingdom of the powerful mist, they must find seven special swords and place them on Aslan’s table.  Caspian, Edmund, Lucy and Eustace will all be tested en route.  Their biggest challenge may not be defeating a “physical” demon but rather those that lie within.

The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader is slow to start.  I just wasn’t that excited by the storyline.  As a result, I found myself easily distracted by the stiff dialogue.  It’s hard to watch great actors like Australian Gary Sweet (who plays the ship’s captain) trying to deliver such cringe-worthy lines.  Don’t even get me started on the deliberately annoying Will Poulter (as Eustace).  I wish I could have jumped into the screen and punched him.

Some of the early action is also unconvincing.  I can only assume that director Michael Apted (the 7 Up series) is trying to keep this as a family-oriented flick.  This is nothing new but I’m always puzzled as to how to friends can have a “playful” sword fight.  If two people are thrashing sharp objects about, isn’t there a chance that one of them will get seriously hurt?

Ok, that’s enough of my petty ramblings.  The good news is that the film improves in the third act.  There’s a great action sequence (which I won’t spoil) which will get the heart pumping.  I throw out a warning that it might be a little too scary for young kids.  I attended the screening with a friend who felt that it wouldn’t be suitable for his 7-year-old daughter.

What follows is an emotive climax with surprisingly strong religious overtones.  I haven’t read any of the novels myself but those more informed have told me this is also the case in C.S. Lewis’s novels.  I’m not sure if kids will pick up on the religious references but they might generate discussion amongst adults.  It was the part of the film I found most interesting.

Most cinemas in Brisbane are flooding their screens with the 3D version of this movie but my suggestion would be to attend a 2D screening.  Very little is added in terms of 3D effects and it’s not worth the extra price tag.  I think the film would be better served with more colour (by not wearing the dark glasses) as opposed to the alternative.

The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader was filmed here in Queensland but don’t go trying to find any visible landmarks.  Much of it was shot in a studio with a heavy reliance on visual effects.  I should have auditioned as an extra when I had the chance!

There’s nothing really special about this latest instalment in the Narnia franchise but it finishes strongly and is worth a look.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 12 December 2010

Sam Flynn (Hedlund) is a wealthy 27-year-old who can pretty much do whatever he wants.  He is the largest shareholder in ENCOM, one of the world’s biggest video game companies.  Sam doesn’t like the way that ENCOM is being run but he’s not the kind of guy who will put on a suit and sit in a boardroom.  He’d rather have fun by making trouble – hacking computer systems and speeding on his motorbike.

He inherited his shares 20 years ago when his father, company founder Kevin Flynn (Bridges), mysteriously disappeared.  Sam can remember his dad sitting at the foot of his bed and telling him about an “extraordinary” discovery that the company had made.  That’s the last memory he has of his father.  Kevin Flynn vanished the next day.

Tipped off by an old friend, Sam decides to check out his dad’s old video game arcade.  He finds a narrow passageway which leads him into his father’s secret lab.  It’s dirty and it’s dusty.  It’s clear that no one has been there in a long time.  Sam switches on the computer and types in a few codes.  There’s a quick flash of light… and he suddenly finds himself in a different world.  It’s bizarre, like something out of a video game.

What I’ve described is roughly the first 20 minutes of Tron: Legacy.  Once you get past this obligatory background material, the “awesomeness” of the film kicks in.  The next 100 minutes are spent in this cool fantasy world.  Sam locates his long lost father but finds that he’s being kept prisoner by an evil dictator.  Can he formulate a rescue and return them both to reality?

I’ve been critical of many movies this year that have been screened in 3D.  There’s often little need for the 3D effects but studios persist anyway.  They simply want the additional takings at the box-office.  That’s not the case here.  Tron: Legacy is a film you must see on the big screen in full 3D.  When you mix the striking visuals with the heavy sound effects and booming score from Daft Punk, you’re provided with a reason to go to the cinema.

Credit for the film’s innovative style must go 36-year-old director Joseph Kosinski.  Most budding filmmakers follow a well-worn path en route to breaking into the industry.  That wasn’t the case with Kosinski.  Instead of going to film school, he studied architecture at Columbia University.  His expertise with 3D modelling and graphics helped him nab the director’s chair.  I believe he was a good choice.

Before you get too excited, I admit that the story could use some work.  Explaining this parallel world and how it operates gets quite technical.  There isn’t time to go into much detail.  You won’t feel much emotion either.  The writers have tried to build the relationship between father and son but it’s hard to generate empathy for them in such a strange situation.

It’ll be interesting to see how Tron: Legacy fares at the box-office.  I’d like to see it succeed but is there enough to attract the female audience?  Will the video game look be a turn off for others?  We’ll find out over the next few weeks.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 29 November 2010

Catherine (Moore) has spent months organising her husband’s surprise birthday party.  The big night arrives and all the guests are waiting but alas, David (Neeson) doesn’t show up.  He was due to fly in from New York but David tells his wife that he missed the flight by “a few minutes”.

Catherine isn’t convinced however.  When she sees an odd text message on his phone, she suspects that he’s having an affair.  Instead of confronting him directly, she decides to play a dangerous game of entrapment.

The bait is a high profile escort named Chloe (Seyfried).  Catherine gives Chloe details about her husband and then asks her to seduce him.  It’s a test to see just how faithful he is.  Will he ignore Chloe’s advances or will he be tempted by her flirtations?

Chloe is based on the French film Nathalie, released back in 2004.  I’m not often a fan of remakes but this intriguing tale has been beautifully told by Oscar nominated director Atom Egoyan (The Sweet Hereafter).  Unlike many films we see today, you’re never quite sure where the story is going to head next. 

Perhaps this is due to the complexity of the characters.  The always amazing Julianne Moore (Boogie Nights, Far From Heaven) portrays Catherine as a very insecure woman.  Is it a persona that has developed due to her husband’s suspicious activities?  Or is she a naturally paranoid person?  As the film progresses, you’ll learn she’s not the only character experiencing self-doubt.

Amanda Seyfried is also very good as Chloe.  You get the sense that this is an attempt to diversify herself as an actress.  Fans of films the family-oriented Mamma Mia! and Letters To Juliet may be shocked to see her nude in several scenes.

Critics have been dividend on Chloe but I found it to be a seductive thriller.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 04 December 2010

You might have heard the saying that every hero needs a villain.  Well, I guess it stands to reason that every villain needs a hero.  That’s the basic premise behind Megamind, the latest animated film from Dreamworks.

For many years, the evil Megamind (Ferrell) has been trying to defeat the city’s beloved Metro Man (Pitt).  Their battles are reminiscent of a Wile E. Coyote and Road Runner cartoon.  No matter how much planning Megamind puts into his devilish schemes, Metro Man always comes away as the victor.

Then… the unthinkable happens.  Megamind wins.  He kidnaps journalist Roxanne Ritchi (Fey) and lures Metro Man to the city observatory.  It turns out the copper lining the walls is Metro Man’s “kryptonite”.  His superpowers are useless.  Before Metro Man has a chance to escape, Megamind sets off the detonators and blows up the observatory.  The hero has been eliminated.

Megamind takes over the city but slowly starts feeling discontent.  Life was much more fun when he had someone to battle against.  Things just aren’t the same.  He comes up with the idea of creating a new adversary.  He picks out a bumbling cameraman named Hal (Hill) and starts grooming him into a caped crusader.  It won’t quite work out as he’d hoped.

Sadly, I could say the same thing about this film.  It didn’t provide the laughs that I was expecting from the trailer.  While I was sitting in the theatre, I kept thinking back to one of my all-time favourite animated flicks, The Incredibles (released in 2004).  It too looked at what goes on behind the scenes in “superhero world” but it was much funnier and much wittier.

Is Megamind just a vehicle for Will Ferrell to use funny voices and shout a lot?  That’s certainly the impression that I had.  So much more could have been made of this premise.  Audiences haven’t been too kind with their word of mouth either.  The last five Dreamworks animations have grossed at least $180m in the United States.  Megamind isn’t going too bad (with $130m over its first 4 weeks) but there’s no chance that it’ll reach that mark.