Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 02 April 2003

Banned from school, Liam’s life consists largely of hanging around with his older sister, Chantelle (Fulton), who is now a single mother, and his best friend Pinball (Ruane).  All their lives are heading nowhere but the platform they were all given by the parents gave them almost no hope to begin with.

With his sixteenth birthday approaching, Liam yearns to create the loving family setting he’s always dreamed of.  There’s a small caravan with a seaside view on the market for 6,000 pounds.  If he could find the money to make this purchase, it would impress his mother, she would move in with both him and his sister, dump the abusive husband, and all would be perfect for the first time.

With the best intentions, Liam turns to the drug industry to fund his purchase.  He initially steals drugs from his father to sell on the open market but impressed by the eagerness of this kid, a big-time drug lord asks Liam to join his “organisation”.  The financial troubles are soon solved but his new employment and the release of his mother brings new problems for which the unsuspecting Liam is not prepared for.

Over the past few weeks, there’s been a wave of films released which first premiered at the Cannes Film Festival.  The Pianist won the top prize with Punch-Drunk Love winning best director.  Sweet Sixteen took home the best screenplay award and appears worthy of the honour.  There’s a noticeable lack of stereotypes and predictable plot developments.  Liam is a good decent kid but some of the ill-informed decisions he makes will leave you squirming with discomfort.  The ending is surprising but not because it’s unrealistic, but rather because it is.  Few films dig so deeply as this by Ken Loach.

Filmed in Glasgow, the thick Scottish accents will be too much for any viewer.  Thankfully, subtitles are provided just as they were for Loach’s last film, My Name Is Joe.  Interestingly, both Joe and Sweet Sixteen debuted here at the Brisbane International Film Festival and both made the top ten list as voted by the audience.  Loach is a strong filmmaker who is taking his own slice of home and exposing it to the world.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 23 March 2003

To all, the identity of the Daredevil remains hidden but we all know he is Matt Murdoch, a blind lawyer by day, and superhero by night.  Like all such heroes, there’s a story as to how they became so “super” and writer/director Mark Steven Johnson begins accordingly.  Matt’s father, Jack Murdoch, was an aging boxer, who at the age of 42, was trying to resurrect his once illustrious career.  Known in boxing circles as “the devil”, his advice to his son was to not follow in his footsteps and study hard.

Riding his skateboard home from school, Matt’s life is changed in a freak accident.  A hazardous chemical is spills onto his eyes and he is blinded forever.  For reasons which aren’t exactly made clear, his other four senses become super-enhanced which compensate for his loss of vision.  Finding his feet again, Matt’s life takes downward twist when is father is killed by gangsters and Matt is left an orphan.

Next thing we know, Matt has become Daredevil, a guy in a costume who roams the streets at night trying to avenge his father’s demise.  I’d like to think the theatre projectionist inadvertently forgot to show a reel of the film at this point but sadly, not so.  In their haste to get to the guts of the adventure, valuable lead-up information has been overlooked.  How did he learn to harness his powers?  How did he come up with all the weaponry he uses?  How did he make his secret hiding place with the locks and secret compartments?  How did he first begin his quest for removing evil from the streets?  And um, how did he become a lawyer?  The film didn’t need to dwell on these points but a quick series of scenes showing his “evolution” wouldn’t have gone astray.

Moving on to the current time frame, Matt meets his token female interest, Elektra, played by the stunning Elizabeth Garner.  Elektra is soon to be an orphan herself when her billionaire father is killed by a mystery “kingpin” who seemingly controls the streets of the city.  Putting two and two together, they understand the same person was responsible for each of their father’s deaths – it’s the wealthy Fisk (played by Michael Clarke Duncan) who has sent his best henchman, Bullseye (Colin Farrell) to finish them off.

To continue my criticism, there are further inconsistencies through this part of the film.  Daredevil is able to jump off 50-story buildings and land safely on his feet without explanation.  He’s also got an ability to dodge bullets and other projectiles by swerving all over the place and doing back flips.  It’s silly and is just an excuse for director Mark Steven Johnson to use more special effects (heavily borrowed from other films) and flashy editing.

Speaking of the film’s editing, the fight scenes are poorly cut and with an insanely large number of individual shots and a feeble mix of slow/fast motion.  The soundtrack doesn’t work either – there are at least two moments in the film when the pace of the story is broken only to show a montage of scenes backed solely by the soundtrack.  This technique is best served in a music video and not a major motion picture.

Amongst the mess, there are positives.  One particular side character of interest was a news reporter played by Joe Pantoliano who is trying to gain information on the Daredevil for his newspaper.  But like so much of the rest of this story, he isn’t fully explained and we have no sense of whether the public, as a result of his articles, are pro or anti Daredevil.

There’s very little “daring” about Daredevil.  The screenplay mirrors everything expected of the genre, which to a limited extent is pleasing, but it doesn’t offer any chance of growth.  And with superhero films being churned out at their fastest rate ever, this doesn’t make the grade.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 01 April 2003

Action without substance – as much as I’d like 2, I just can’t get excited about a film like Cradle 2 The Grave.  It’s directed by Polish-born Andrzej Bartkowiak who three years ago, made a similar film starring Jet Li, Romeo Must Die.  The only other film Bartkowiak has made was last year’s Exit Wounds with Steven Seagal.  Here’s a guy who isn’t going 2 be winning any critical acclaim but has found himself a small action niche 2 focus his attention and specialise his craft.

There’ll be more such films 2 come in the resume of Andrzej Bartkowiak because Cradle 2 The Grave debuted on top of the box-office chart in its opening week in the United States.  We can’t always sit through emotional heartbreaking dramas and the success of Cradle is validation that unrealistic action films are a permanent and necessary feature of cinema.

Here, Tony Fait (DMX) and his crew orchestrate a huge diamond heist.  The authorities however receive a tip-off from an undercover Taiwanese agent, Su (Li) and Tony and his crew lose most of their loot in fleeing the scene.  The only item they retain is a bag of “black diamonds” and unsure of their value, they turn 2 friend Archie (Arnold) 2 suss out the market place.  Within 24 hours, Archie’s place is ransacked, the diamonds stolen and Tony is back where he started.  But it gets worse when a mysterious gang kidnaps Tony’s daughter and demands the diamonds for her safe return.  Of course, he no longer has them.

The agent Su reveals himself and he and Tony form an unlikely partnership.  The guy with the goods is Ling (Dacascos) and the content of these “diamonds” are not only valuable but dangerous – the world is in jeopardy.  Su and Tony need 2 stop Ling before it’s 2 late.  Yawn…

I’m not directly criticising the plot but it’s just so typical and unadventurous.  As for the action, it’s also unrealistic.  There are many marital arts scenes but it’s so obvious people are suspended from invisible ropes.  How else can people jump so high?  How else can people suspend themselves for so long in the air?  How else can people do so many somersaults and back flips?  It’s becoming oh so boring and it’s time 2 lose this silly novelty.  Another common action flaw is followed here – fast editing.  The camera is chopping and changing and it makes it look fake and difficult 2 follow.  Of course, this is done so we don’t tweak 2 the fact stunt doubles are being used. 

I’m not sure about that title either.  I think it’s trying 2 be cool with the use of the number 2 instead of the word but that’s the only reason I can think of.  What about a sequel called Cradle 2 The Grave 2?  Woah, I’m freaking out here.  At least this train of thought is providing more stimuli 2 my brain than the film itself.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 18 March 2003

“Great aspiration without contribution is of insignificance.  What will your contribution be?  How will history remember you?”  The words of teacher William Hundert as he addresses his class for the first time at the St. Benedicts School For Boys.  As assistant headmaster, Mr Hundert passionately preaches the importance of honour and virtue in living one’s life.  Teaching his students the valuable lessons learnt in classical history, he aims to mould the character of his students into something they can be proud of.  This is his contribution.

In the summer of 1972, a new arrival to the school would leave Mr Hundert questioning his ideals for the rest of his life.  The son of a senator, Sedgewick Bell was a disruptive brat (marginally over-played by newcomer Emile Hirsch) who used his smart mouth to ridicule teachers and earn popularity from his classmates.  Drawing on his own personal experiences, Mr Hundert sensed the unspoken pressures being applied to Sedgewick by his famous father and reached out to help him.

Mr Julius Caesar is a title bestowed on the student of the school who demonstrates the best knowledge of Roman history.  The competition has been in existence for almost a century and photos of the winners line the walls of the long corridors.  A series of challenging essays are set to determine the three top students before these finalists compete in a public shootout with increasingly difficult questions being posed by Mr Hundert until one man remains standing.  Could the improving Sedgewick make the final cut and satisfy Mr Hundert’s belief in his ability.

What begins as a beautiful woven feel-good drama then takes an incredible (yet totally believable) series of shocking twists.  Most modern-day filmmakers put little thought into “twists” - they think an audience will be impressed by something startling despite the fact it doesn’t fit the story, makes little sense and lacks in realism.  This crafty screenplay from Neil Tolkin keeps luring the audience into a satisfied sense of comfort before having them suddenly revaluating their position on the virtue of these characters.

Kevin Kline is at his brilliant best in the leading role.  It’s such a controlled performance – he speaks with exuberant vigour in his classroom, clinging to his deeply held principals and transfixing them onto those in front of him.  He utters invaluable quotes based on decades of experience – the kind of advice which few teens are exposed to.  Mr. Hundert will leave a lasting impression on his students but so to will these students leave a lasting impression on Mr. Hundert.

The stylish Michael Hoffman (Restoration, A Midsummer Night’s Dream) uses his soft, precise direction to textbook effect.  Hoffman himself has a background in the subject having studied the classics at Oxford University, and in fact is a Rhodes scholar.  But his true attraction to the project I couldn’t agree with more – in his own words “the film has the ability to turn the genre on its ear”.

The script itself is based on a short story penned by Ethan Canin known as The Palace Thief.  Backed by Hungarian cinematographer Lajos Koltai (Malena), Academy Award winning production designer Patrizia Von Brandenstein (Amadeus), and the underrated composer James Newton Howard (My Best Friend’s Wedding) the director effortless takes us into this picture-perfect 70s campus and the world of Mr. Hundert.  We are the students in Hoffman’s cinematic classroom.

No more highly can I recommend The Emperor’s Club but expect the unexpected.  A valuable reference Mr. Hundert leaves his class is that “it is not living that is important, but living rightly.”  To see this film, would be living rightly.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 30 March 2003

As I learnt as part of the primary school curriculum, Kelly was born in Victoria 1854.  Growing up, he saved the life of a drowning boy and was presented by the boy’s parents with a green silk sash.  The death of his father in 1867 resulted in Ned leaving school and finding work in the bush to support the family.  The police were not kind to the Kelly clan who were equally resentful.  In 1871, Ned was sentenced to gaol for being given a stolen horse by a friend.

Released in 1874, his relationship with the authorities had not improved.  Some horses had been stolen and sold in New South Wales and an officer by the name of Alexander Fitzpatrick turned up at the Kelly property to question Ned and his younger brother Dan.  With Ned not home, Fitzpatrick waited and made a pass at Ned and Dan’s sister, Kate.  A fight then broke out, and Fitzpatrick accidentally shot himself.  Back at the station, he claimed Ned had shot him and hence the trouble began.

Ned and Dan fled to evaded police but soon learned their mother had been charged and sentenced to three years herself for assisting in the murder.  Ned sought revenge and began a long campaign against the police.  Robbing banks to fund his activities, the Kelly gang found notoriety in the papers but were loathed by the authorities who soon offered a massive reward.  A massive man hunt began and he was finally caught in a massive shootout at Glenrowan in 1880.

Gregor Jordan, the director of the AFI award winning Two Hands, seems overwhelmed by the subject material and shows snippets of Ned’s life which don’t give the story a flowing feeling.  He includes many unnecessary references to Australian flora and fauna which I can only assume are to help overseas viewers appreciate our country.  I guess he overlooked the important point that it adds zero to the story.

The music from Klaus Badelt is extraordinarily bad and doesn’t suit the film’s style at all.  It looks like a small independent Australian film and yet the score would be more appropriate in a multi-million dollar action blockbuster.  Speaking of appropriateness, where did they find these supporting actors?  Stars Heath Ledger (who needs a good role soon or else) and Orlando Bloom are bearable but as for the remainder… yeesh!  At one point there’s a kid who sees Ned riding in a horse and cries out “look, it’s Ned Kelly!”  If you’ve seen it, you’ll understand just how hammy many of the lines are.

Also note that this is an “interpretation” and shouldn’t be declared as hard truth.  It is very one-sided towards Ned and whilst I’m sure he was harshly treated, the film includes few references to the bad things he did and the innocent people who were killed.  Don’t be too quick in swallowing the story.

For such a renowned Australian icon, you’d think the film would be more exciting.  I was bored stupid and completely uncaring towards these folk.  I fear many others both at home and abroad will be united on this opinion.  I just hope they don’t subject those influential primary school kids to this nonsense when teaching the Kelly legend in the future.