Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 30 November 2014

11-year-old Alexander Cooper (Oxenbould) has been having a bit of a bad run.  He tripped over and landed on his face when trying to impress a girl.  He set fire to a poster at school while conducting a science experiment.  Now, he’s just found out that a super-popular classmate has scheduled his 12^th birthday party for the same date and time as his own (meaning no one will come to his).

Alexander’s family aren’t offering a lot in the way of sympathy.  They’ve taken the optimistic view that “there’s no such a thing as a bad day, it’s all how you look at it.”  I guess it’s any easy philosophy to buy into when things are going well.  His dad (Carrell) is set to get a better job at a cool company, his mum (Garner) is up for a big promotion at work, his older brother (Minnette) is set to get his driver’s licence, and his older sister (Dorsey) is about to star in a high school play.

So as the clock reaches midnight and his 12^th birthday begins, Alexander makes a simple wish – that his fellow family members realise what it feels like to have a bad day.  Sure enough, it comes true in spectacular fashion.  The next few hours will see the cheerful Cooper family go through a wild assortment of dramas that provide a very different perspective on life.

This is a good, old-fashioned family comedy.  It reminds me of similar live-action films I enjoyed growing up in the early 1990s including Home Alone, Mrs Doubtfire and Jumanji.  Kids will have no trouble following the simple storyline.  Adults will be able to relate to the broad premise – let’s be honest, we’ve all had terrible, horrible, no good, very bad days at some point in our lives.

This may be a high-profile Walt Disney Studios production but the film’s star is Ed Oxenbould, a 13-year-old Aussie with limited acting experience.  He went through a raft of auditions and beat out more than 500 American youngsters to land the title role.  Director Miguel Arteta described him as a “real kid” who was “not too over-the-top and fake” and yes, I agree with him.  It’s a neat way of summing up what makes Oxenbould’s character so fun and likeable.

The movie is loosely based on the 32-page children’s book of the same name written by Judith Viorst (it was first published in 1972).  I’ve had a few people look at me quizzically when I’ve mentioned the title but I’m glad to see they’ve stuck with it here.  It’s catchy... and it also captures the film’s essence – something that’s fun, silly and crazy.  A great choice for the family as the Christmas school holidays kick off here in Australia.

You can read my chat with Aussie star Ed Oxenbould by clicking here.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 19 November 2014

To borrow the term from a friend, this latest instalment in the Hunger Games series is suffering from “part-one-itis.”  It’s an affliction that has plagued other successful franchises including Harry Potter, Twilight and The Hobbit.  I enjoyed the first two Hunger Games flicks.  I’m confident I’ll enjoy the final chapter (due for release in November 2015).

Unfortunately, this one isn’t up to scratch.  By splitting Suzanne Collins’ concluding novel into two movies (so as to double the box-office), we’re left with a film that never gets out of first gear.  It’s heavy on padding and light on action.  Its finale isn’t even close to matching the excitement from the earlier releases.

To provide a quick refresher, the Hunger Games series is set in a world with much inequality. The capital city is home to a group of wealthy families who live a comfortable life full of many luxuries.  The neighbouring districts live in poverty and their citizens work like slaves so as to serve the capital.

Each year, the capital holds a televised “game” where two representatives from each district fight to the death in a huge arena.  At the end of the last film, Catching Fire, some of the competitors managed to escape the game and fled to a far-off district.  They were led by the heroic Katniss Everdeen (Lawrence).

That brings us to the start of Mockingjay – Part 1.  The actions of Katniss have helped spawn an uprising with the districts.  They are now united in their attempts to fight back against the controlling capital and to overthrow the villainous President Snow (Sutherland).  Don’t get too excited though.  You’ll have to wait until Part 2 before the uprising hits full stride.

Instead, this instalment is focused more on planning and preparation.  Katniss is persuaded to shoot some propaganda videos which will be broadcast to the other districts to help lift their spirits.  She also must work out how to rescue her “close friend” Peeta Mellark (Hutcherson) who is being kept against his will in the capital.  Oh yeah, and there are sequences where she rescues her sister’s cat and another where she goes walking in the forest with her old flame, Gale (Hemsworth).

I do like this franchise, honestly!  It’s taking some important concepts (controlling governments, tainted media, and supressed citizens) and packaging them up as an entertainment for younger audiences.  It’ll sell a gazillion more tickets than a documentary on the equally suppressive regime in North Korea.  It’s also provided the confidence for studios to adapt similar novels for the screen (e.g. Divergent, The Giver).

Mockingjay – Part 1 is sure to have its passionate fans.  I’m thinking of those who loved the novel and will be thrilled just to see it realised on the big screen.  There are also those who are embracing this newish concept of splitting a novel into multiple parts.  It allows you to create cliff-hanger type endings similar to what we see when a popular television drama is wrapping up its season.

The themes are appealing, the characters are intriguing and the visuals are impressive.  It’s just a shame about the unnecessarily slow pace.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 25 November 2014

The way in which people connect has transformed significantly over the past decade.  That’s certainly a key theme in Men, Women & Children – the latest effort from writer-director Jason Reitman (Juno, Up In The Air).  There isn’t really a leading character.  Drawing from Chad Kultgen’s novel of the same name (first published in 2011), the film weaves a group of loosely related stories together.

Starting with the adults… Don (Sandler) is a middle-aged man who seems to be more interested in downloading pornography than sleeping with his wife.  Helen (DeWitt) is a married woman who has found a website designed for those looking to have an affair.  Patricia (Garner) is an overprotective mother who checks her teenage daughter’s internet use every day.  Kent (Norris) is a football-loving father who doesn’t understand why his son has lost interest in the sport.  Joan (Greer) is a single mum who is nurturing her daughter’s aspirations to become a reality television star. 

Moving on to the teenagers… Tim (Elgort) is a former football star who has reached out to a new group of friends through an online video game.  Allison (Kampouris) is a cheerleader who is using tips from an ill-informed “extreme dieting” website to lose weight.  Chris (Tope) is an introverted kid who has become addicted to a series of porn sites.  Hannah (Crocicchia) is a wanna-be actress who will do anything to achieve her goals.  Brandy (Dever) is a sheltered youngster who opens up about herself through a secret online blog.

There’s a lot of troubled characters and to the film’s credit, most of them are quite interesting.  The common link is that they’ve all turned to the internet in search of interaction – sometimes in a positive way, sometimes in a negative way.  People often lament about the “good old days” where you met people face-to-face or spoke to them over the phone.  Reitman’s film shows how much the world has changed through the advent of social media, dating apps, blogs, adult websites, and shared video games.  There’s plenty of food for thought here.

In terms of the performances, it’s the younger cast members that shine most brightly.  They deftly illustrate the complexities of finding friends, discovering love and exploring their sexuality in today’s age.  I wasn’t as enamoured by the adult storylines.  Jennifer Garner feels too over-the-top as a mother who essentially stalks her own children.  There are still some nice conversations though and an exchange between Judy Greer and Dean Norris in a restaurant springs to mind.

Much of the film’s hard work is undone by a weak finale.  Most of the characters go through a life-changing epiphany that doesn’t ring true.  It’s as if writers Jason Reitman and Erin Cressida Wilson are trying too hard to wrap everything up neatly for the audience’s satisfaction.  I’ve a hunch that if we revisited these characters in a year’s time, not all would be as happy and as stable as the conclusion suggests.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 13 November 2014

American author Dennis Lehane has some powerful fans in Hollywood.  Three of his novels have previously been brought to the big screen by top-notch directors – Clint Eastwood for Mystic River, Ben Affleck for Gone Baby Gone and Martin Scorsese for Shutter Island.  The catch is that while these intriguing films were based on Lehane’s work, other writers were responsible for the adaptation from lengthy novel to two-hour screenplay.

That’s not the case this time around.  Based on his own short story (entitled “Animal Rescue”), Lehane has crafted a script that bears all the trademarks of a traditional crime drama.  It centres on a quiet, unassuming guy named Bob Saginowski (Hardy).  He doesn’t seem that bright and his social skills are lacking.  That said, he’s somehow found a job working at a small bar named Cousin Marv’s.

Marv’s (Gandolfini) name may still be on the front door but he’s no longer the owner.  He sold out years ago to a group of wealthy Chechens who are using the bar as part of a money laundering operation.  Bob and Marv take home their small salary and turn a blind eye to all the illegal activity.  It’s not like they have a choice though.  Those who have double-crossed the Chechens have a knack for disappearing… permanently.

Things start to get messy when the bar is held up late one night.  The two masked thieves escape with only about $5,000 in cash but that’s not really the point.  The question is – who would have the audacity to steal from the wealthy Chechens?  Did they simply not know who owned the bar?  Or is there something much more devious going on here?

A few other characters are brought into the mix to keep you guessing.  Detective Torres (Ortiz) is investigating the robbery and a handful of other crimes in the neighbourhood.  Nadia (Rapace) is a young woman from the neighbourhood with a hidden past.  Eric Deeds (Schoenaerts) is a local goon who is suspected of being involved in a much talked about murder.

This is a decent drama.  It’s not ruined by overly convenient moments or unbelievable twists (as tends to be case with such films).  You may be a little confused by these characters are first but as their motivations are revealed, you start to realise the sense in their actions.  It all leads up to a worthy ending and a particularly memorable line from the police detective (which sums it all up).

That said, it is a little slow in places.  A significant chunk of time is spent watching Bob bond with a puppy dog that he finds in a rubbish bin.  Yes, it’s a cute dog that will woo audiences but it feels like an odd plot device.  I’m not fully sold on its purpose.  I was also unconvinced by the budding friendship / relationship between Bob and Nadia.  It’s hard to figure out what’s drawn them to each other.

It’s worth noting that The Drop marks the final on-screen performance for James Gandolfini (The Sopranos) who passed away in June last year.  It’s nice to see him one final time and so yeah, that in itself is a good enough reason to see this film.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 23 November 2014

Unemployed for quite some time, Louis Bloom (Gyllenhaal) has found a new profession to sink his teeth into.  Using a police scanner and a cheap video camera, he drives the streets of Los Angeles at night and tries to capture exclusive video footage of “newsworthy” events such as fires and car crashes.  He can then sell the footage to television networks to use on their much-watched breakfast programs.

There’s an early sequence where Louis arrives at the scene of a brutal carjacking.  Paramedics are treating the victim who is covered in blood and in critical condition.  A rival cameraman (Paxton) is also in attendance and is capturing the events from a few metres away.  Perhaps this is out of respect for the driver.  Perhaps because he knows news stations don’t want footage that is too unsettling.

Louis seems to have a different view of things.  He jams the camera in the face of the victim and seems to be taking pleasure from the gory footage.  It’s a moment that sums up Louis.  He’s a strange, socially awkward guy who doesn’t seem to know the difference from right and wrong.

Adding to the film’s odd premise is the fact that Louis has an enabler.  Nina Romina (Russo) is the news director for a breakfast program that is struggling in the ratings battle and is keen to use Louis’s material.  She explains that the best stories are those that involve minority perpetrators and white, middle-class victims.  Her idea of the perfect footage would involve “a screaming woman running down the street with her throat cut.”

Nightcrawler follows Louis as his moral compass goes further and further awry.  He tampers with a crime scene so as to get a better camera angle.  He sabotages his competition so as to increase his industry standing.  He uses his newfound power as a way of controlling Nina and a newly hired intern.  The fact that he’s become such a success is truly scary.

Written and directed by Dan Gilroy (a screenwriter on Real Steel and The Bourne Legacy), Nightcrawler does have something to say about the public’s fascination with certain types of news stories.  It comes back to the old adage – “if it bleeds, it leads.”  I wasn’t fully convinced by some of the behind-the-scenes newsroom stuff but thankfully, this isn’t the real focus of the film.  It’s more of a character study… and an unsettling one at that.

Jake Gyllenhaal (Donnie Darko, Brokeback Mountain) delivers a chilling performance as Louis Bloom.  He speaks in a robotic like manner and continually uses phrases which feel like they’re straight out of a self-help book.  When you throw in his passive aggressive personality, you’ve got one of the creepiest characters that we’ve seen on screen this year.  You don’t want this guy getting the upper hand on you!

An interesting piece of trivia about the film are the number of family connections.  Working behind the scenes are Dan Gilroy’s two brothers.  Tony Gilroy, who most will know as the Oscar nominated writer-director of Michael Clayton, is credited as a producer.  John Gilroy serves as the film’s editor (building on his resume which includes films such as Warrior and Pacific Rim).  In front of camera is Rene Russo (Get Shorty, The Thomas Crown Affair), Dan’s wife of more than 22 years.

The screenplay gets a little too far-fetched during the concluding stages but the positives clearly outweigh the negatives with Nightcrawler.  It’ll give you a good, hard shaking.

You can read my chat with writer-director Dan Gilroy by clicking here.