Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 07 April 2007

Have you seen Alfred Hitchcock’s Rear Window?  If so, the following plot device will sound very familiar.

One year ago, Kale (LaBeouf) and his father were involved in a car accident on the way home from a fishing trip.  Kale survived but his father did not.  The resulting trauma saw his grades slip at school and culminated with Kale punching a teacher in the face.  The assault saw him appear before a judge.  Despite his previous convictions (which aren’t detailed), Kale gets off lightly.  He is sentenced to three months of home detention.

Kale cannot leave his house during this time.  To make sure that is the case, an electronic device is locked to his ankle.  If he strays more than 100 feet from the kitchen (where the central transponder is located), it will set off an alarm and the police will be on the way.  The time at home won’t be as easy as Kale first thinks.  Spending every minute at home can be very, very boring.

After an overly long introduction (which sets up the above premise), the film enters its “thriller” phase.  Kale starts using binoculars to spy on the neighbouring houses.  At first, his attention is drawn to the cute girl next door (Roemer) but it soon changes to the strange man in the next house over.  His name is Mr. Turner (Morse).

Having spent so much time watching television, Kale knows that police are looking for leads in the case of a missing woman.  The car she was last seen in matches the car that appears in Mr. Turner’s garage.  There’s also a small dent in the front left corner of the car – just as the police described.  Is Mr. Turner the kidnapper?  Kale sets up his video camera, uses his binoculars and spends almost every moment looking through the windows of Mr. Turner’s house.  Can he find a clue?

I didn’t mind the film in places but Disturbia didn’t create the thrills I was expecting.  Why?  Because I never believed it.  Some scenes left me shaking my head.  The characters do not behave like normal people and the events do not unfold like they would in real life.  It makes you appreciate how good Alfred Hitchcock’s Rear Window was.

I won’t elaborate too much for fear of ruining the ending but here are a few examples.  There’s one scene where Kale gets his hands on both the current and original plans of Mr. Turner’s house.  How is this possible?  There’s another scene where Kaleb spots something incredibly miniscule on his video camera.  How did he do this?  I know “it’s just a movie” but I’m still annoyed.

Now speaking positively, I enjoyed Shia LaBoeuf (Holes) in the leading role.  He came across as a regular, normal teenager – not the kind of stereotypical teenagers we see in so many movies.  I don’t know if that makes sense but there’s something about his mannerisms and the way he speaks which makes him look like he’s not even acting.  There is talk that LaBoeuf will be cast as Harrison Ford’s son in the new Indiana Jones movie.  I hope he does as it’d be a great break-out role.

Let me finish up by saying that I saw this film at an advance screening with almost no prior knowledge of the storyline.  For this reason, I had no idea where the film would head and how it would end.  Having seen the trailer subsequently, I am horrified by how much of the story it gives away.  I say this every few months but if you’re going to create a thriller, what’s the bloody point of revealing the plot twists beforehand?  If you’re thinking about seeing Disturbia, I strongly urge that you don’t download the trailer first.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 27 March 2007

Jane Austen wrote only six novels before her death in 1817.  It has taken time but Austen has become one of history’s most popular authors.  Many have read her books but even more have seen the adaptations made for television and cinema.  My personal favourites were Sense & Sensibility in 1995 (with Emma Thomson and Kate Winslet) and Pride & Prejudice in 2005 (with Keira Knightley).

The time has arrived for a film to be made about Jane Austen herself.  Becoming Jane chronicles the pressure that was placed on her to marry a wealthy gentleman.  If you’ve read one of her novels, this storyline will sound familiar.  I guess she drew on her own experiences when creating her works of fiction.

In this film, the wealthy Mr. Wisley (Fox) has asked Jane (Hathaway) to be his wife.  Despite the pleadings of her family, Jane rejects the offer.  She refuses to marry a man she does not love – even if he can provide financial stability.  She’d rather go unmarried and try to make a living as a writer.

A budding lawyer from London then enters the picture.  His name is Tom Lefroy (McAvoy) and he has been sent to the country by his high-profile uncle (Richardson).  The first meeting between Jane and Tom is anything but pleasant.  He thinks she’s boring and she thinks he’s arrogant.  The two keep bumping into each other however and romance is in the air…

I really struggled to enjoy this film.  One of my major grievances was the casting of American actress Anne Hathaway in the leading role.  She has a decent accent but she looks out of place alongside the otherwise English cast.  Was she selected to help give the film a boost in the United States?  I can only think so because there are many talented English actors who could have done a better job.

I’m usually a fan of period piece movies.  I love the simplicity of their stories and the elegance of their dialogue.  Becoming Jane didn’t live up to my expectations and it couldn’t maintain my interest.  It left me thinking that Austen’s novels were far more exciting than her actual life.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 04 April 2007

The Namesake begins in India in the late 1970s.  Ashoke Ganguli (Khan), a man in his mid-twenties, talks to an elderly gentleman on a train.  He his told that he shouldn’t use books to learn about the world – he needs to travel and see it for himself.  At that moment, the train derails and most of the passengers are killed.  Ashoke survives.

Thinking it is an omen, Ashoke travels to New York and finds a successful job.  The United States provides far more opportunities than those available to him back home.  The only thing left to do is to find a wife.  After spending two years aboard, he returns home so that his parents can find him a suitable bride.

He marries Ashima (Tabu) and the two return to New York.  It’s a difficult transition for Ashima as she is leaving her family behind and speaks very little English.  Her quiet nature makes it even more difficult for her to make new friends and settle in.

The film gradually pans into the future.  Ashoke and Ashima have two children, a boy named Gogol (Penn) and a daughter named Sonia (Nair).  As they graduate from high school and make their own way into the world, Ashoke and Ashima have trouble letting go.  They love their children deeply and will miss their company at home.  They also worry that their children have become “Americanized” and won’t respect their Indian heritage.

The Namesake is a simply story which has been beautifully presented by Indian born director Mira Nair (Vanity Fair, Monsoon Wedding).  Through her lens, Nair has captured the culture of both India and the United States.  They are different in many ways but the emotions that come with belonging to a family are the same.

The film provides moments of happiness and sadness.  Such is life and a large percentage of audience members will be able to relate to elements of the story.  The screenplay, written by Sooni Taraporevala, is based on the popular novel by Jhumpa Lahiri.  I haven’t read Lahiri’s book but I’d very much like to after having seen this movie.

The touching story is enhanced thanks to the quality of the cast.  As the two parents, Irfan Khan and Tabu are fantastic.  Their performances aren’t “flashy” but they are very effective.  You can always sense the apprehensions and insecurities in their characters.  For those looking for name recognition, two cast members you may know are Kal Penn (Harold & Kumar Go To White Castle) who plays Gogol and Australian Jacinda Barrett (Poseidon) who features briefly as his girlfriend.

I knew very little about The Namesake before seeing it and perhaps this is why I liked it so much.  It was a very enjoyable surprise.  I won’t build it up any further in the hope that you too will enjoy it as much as I did.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 24 March 2007

The last two German films to be nominated for the best foreign language picture Oscar were Downfall (in 2005) and Sophie Scholl: The Final Days (in 2006).  Both are set in World War II and both are terrific movies.  The Lives Of Others is another German film set in the past.  However it focuses on a different, but just as interesting, part of Germany’s history

Prior to the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, a secret police organisation known as the Stasi helped control East Germany.  Through an army of informants (whose identity was kept hidden) they kept files on roughly one-third of the entire population.  They did this by tapping phone lines, reading mail and bugging buildings.  The Stasi’s used its information to suppress anyone who was against the socialist government.

Georg Dreyman (Koch) is a popular playwright living in East Germany.  Artists are often suspected as being “subversive” but Dreyman’s has not attracted the Stasi’s attention.  His plays portray the government in a positive light.  Dreyman’s lead actress and long-time partner is Christa-Maria Sieland (Gedeck).  The pair live in a nice, well-to-do apartment.

Given her high profile, Christa-Maria’s beauty has caught the attention of a government official, Minister Bruno Hempf (Thieme).  The two start having an affair but it is not of Christa-Maria’s doing.  She deplores Hempf but knows there will be serious ramifications if she turns his affections down.  He is a very powerful man.

As Hempf’s affections grow, he decides that he wants Christa-Maria to himself.  He demands that Dreyman be put under surveillance with the hope of finding a reason to convict him of something.  Gerd Wiesler (Muhe) has been put in charge of the operation.  Now that the home has been bugged, Wiesler job is to listen to every conversation and report in on a daily basis.

I could continue but there are a few plot developments that I will let you discover for yourself.  The story itself is fascinating.  It’s amazing to think that this was actually happening in Germany less than 20 years ago.  It is more than just a history lesson though.  There is a “realness” to all the characters and you will become emotionally invested in their fate.  The ending is brilliant and the lose ends are tied in a fulfilling manner.

The Lives Of Others has been showered with praise since it premiered at the 2006 Berlin Film Festival.  It won the European Film Award for best film and it upset Pan’s Labyrinth to win the Oscar for best foreign language film.  The acclaim is well deserved.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 01 April 2007

In 1984, the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles started their adventures in comic books.  In 1987, they were part of a cartoon television series which ran for 10 years.  In 1990, their first feature film became a box-office smash and two sequels followed.  Suffice to say, they were very popular with younger audiences and plenty of money was made by their creators.

Having not been seen (at least by me) since the mid 1990s, the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles are back with a new movie.  They have been reinvented to capture the attention of today’s kids.  Fans of the original cartoon and movies might also be interested in seeing what this is about.

In this film, simply titled TMNT, the Ninja Turtles appear to have gone into semi-retirement.  Leonardo has gone AWOL and Donatello and Michelangelo aren’t doing much.  The only turtle still keeping the peace upworld is Raphael.  Despite the wishes of Master Splinter, he has been sneaking out at night and capturing the bad guys.  He wears a mask to conceal his identity and has become known as the Nightwatcher.

Some strange events then start occurring in the city.  They are strange because (a) they are out of the ordinary and (b) I didn’t really understand them.  My best interpretation is as follows.  A group of nasty monsters were released into the world 3000 years ago.  I’m not sure where they’ve been since that time but they have now congregated in New York City.  They aren’t a threat however as they have been captured by a mysterious army.  Was this army good or bad?  I don’t know.

Somehow, the Ninja Turtles have been caught up in the mayhem.  The focus of their exploits however is on a rivalry that has developed between Leonardo and Raphael.  They have different ideals and I really liked this darker aspect to the story.  They feature in a great battle sequence atop of high rise roof.  Donatallo and Michelangelo may as well have not even been in the film – they’re hardly seen.

The original movies were live-action but this new instalment has been made with computer generated animation.  The reasons given by the producers are that live action would have been too expensive and that computer animation gave more flexibility.  I have to agree.  I enjoyed the look of the characters and the city backdrop.

Despite the confusing storyline, TMNT should give younger moviegoers value for money.  If enough of them go to see it, then I’m sure the green light will be given for another sequel.