NIGHTCRAWLER: SPOILER-FREE MINI-REVIEW:

Click here to listen to this review on Sound Cloud
 
One of my students the other day said that they thought that Jake Gyllenhaal would make a fantastic Joker, to be honest; I’m inclined to agree with him. And all of the evidence to support this can be found in Gyllenhaal’s new film ‘Nightcrawler’.

Unfortunately, for fans of X-men, this is not a spin-off film featuring the blue-skinned teleporter with a German accent, but thankfully this film is much cooler.

Jake Gyllenhaal plays Louis Bloom, a down on his luck guy with self-help guru positivity who, desperate for work, starts forcing his way into L.A. crime journalism by filming local crime events and selling the footage to one of the local news broadcasters. Eventually Gyllenhaal’s character moves from being an observer of the crimes to an active participant   as he tries to cement his value and worth to local TV news veteran Nina Romina (played by Rene Russo). Louis Bloom does admit that “he never really had a formal education” however what he does have is an amazing ability to research and retain copious amounts of facts and figures that he always uses to his advantage.

Ultimately the movie seeks to answer that question we have all wondered at one point or another: What if self-help guru Tony Robbins was an emaciated insomniac with borderline autism who free-lances as a sociopathic asshole cameraman? Now that might sound like I’m selling the film very well but I cannot emphasise enough just how much Jake Gyllenhaal sells this character to the audience. Everything is in the performance here, from his gaunt appearance, sunken dark eyes, the intonations in his voice and delivery and just that look that he could snap at any point and do unspeakable acts of violence.

The film itself would really have fallen apart without a good supporting cast so thankfully you have Rene Russo matching Gyllenhaal in performance. She is so strong and determined yet so vulnerable at other times. There is a moment in the film when she and Gyllenhaal are sitting down for dinner and he is just using textbook business tactics to negotiate her into sleeping with him. Your jaw will drop a couple of times during this scene but mostly you’ll have an overwhelming desire to shower after this scene because you feel so violated and dirty.  

Beyond the performances, one of the other great aspects of the film is its dark visual style. The film is set in Los Angeles but this is not the kind of Los Angeles that we are used to seeing in Hollywood films. This is the dark and gritty side of L.A. with director Dan Gilroy focusing on the dark recesses and crevices of the streets, even during stark daylight L.A. looks course and unwelcoming.

I believe this is an Oscar-worthy performance from Gyllenhaal and I do hope he does win accolades for this performance however the truth is this may be too dark a role for the Academy to acknowledge which is unfortunate for Gyllenhaal, if no one else.

Nightcrawler gets five out of five Joker-petitions.

HUNGER GAMES: MOCKINGJAY PART 1: SPOILER-FREE MINI-REVIEW:

Yes, it started as a lightweight version of Battle Royale.
Yes, it is yet another in a long line of Young Adult fiction turned into a mega-blockbusters to entertain mostly pre-teens.

However, it’s actually not that bad...

This is the third in the series and already the first two films have earned over $1.5 Billion worldwide. So naturally, what do you do when you have such a successful franchise? Milk it for everything it is worth by splitting the final part in two and essentially get people to pay twice for seeing one film. Harry Potter did it, Twilight has done it, Peter Jackson is just taking the piss by adapting a 300 page story into three films so why not do it here as well?

Mockingjay Part 1 sees our hero, Katniss Everdeen (played by Jennifer Lawrence), recovering from the events of Catching Fire in the underground bunkers of District 13. Whilst here Presidents and publicists attempt to use her as a pawn in their propaganda programs against the Capital’s evil leader President Snow (played by Jack Bauer’s Dad Donald Sutherland). Unfortunately for Katniss, President Snow is using her Reality Television “lover” Peeta (aka the most useless person ever to have on your side when you are fighting other teenagers in a battle to the death for the televised amusement of the public - see previous two films for more details) as a tool for propaganda as well.

As a film based on a Young Adult novel it is leaps and bounds above Twilight and isn’t bogged down by all the unnecessarily complicated rules of The Divergent series and that is probably where this series finds it’s greatest strength: the hyper-real representation of things that happen in our society. The first two films focused heavily on how far “reality television” could go if not kept under control, whilst Mockingjay focuses on the structure and thought-process behind propaganda. This is often spelt out to the audience through the late great Philip Seymour Hoffman (for whom the film is dedicated to) and rising star Natalie Dormer (Margaery Tyrell from Game of Thrones and the future Captain Marvel - I’m calling this one early).

Visually the film uses a lot of hand-held footage and at times, the special effects look a little too obvious, however it is some of the other visual choices that I find most interesting. In particular, I don’t know if this was deliberate or by accident, but Director Francis Lawrence has filmed the underground bunkers of District 13 to have the look and feel of Fritz Lang’s Sci-Fi classic Metropolis complete with thousands of extras in grey suits walking and moving in unison.

Overall, this film does leave you with a sense that you have been constantly teased. With the exception of one action scene in the middle of the film often a lot of the actual action happens off-screen with moments building to something and then cutting to a bunch of people sitting in a room reacting to something we can’t see. Having not read the books and not knowing what is supposed to happen in Part 2 it is hard to tell if splitting the film in two was necessary beyond the milking the proverbial cash-cow. Thankfully, strong performances from Lawrence, Hoffman, Moore, even Hemsworth and a completely underused Woody Harrelson do at least make you feel that you are not being completely ripped off by paying for only half a movie.

Three and a half volunteers of tribute out of five. 
Listen to this review on Sound Cloud

INTERSTELLAR: SPOILER-FREE MINI-REVIEW:

This film banks on two things:
1) That you are a Christopher Nolan fan.
2) That you really really really like science.

The new film from Christopher Nolan, the man behind the Dark Knight Trilogy, Inception
and Memento brings us one of the BIGGEST space travel adventures ever committed to
film. I really don’t know how I can truly explain just how BIG I mean when I say
BIGGEST, this film has pulled out all the stop with regards to size, scale and stakes.
Matthew McConaughey stars as a former engineer/space pilot turned farmer out of
necessity when Earth stops being sustainable. A series of events lead him to a space
program that is planning to save the Earth and McConaughey must make the gutwrenching
decision of either staying with his kids or saving the entire human race.

The first hour establishes our characters and the stakes and we then swiftly move to
outer space, and this is why you need to see this film in IMAX. Remember when people
told you that you needed to see Gravity on the big screen and you waited until it came
out on Blu-Ray and then wished you had seen it on the big screen? Gravity is a pretty
good comparison for this film and to be fair Gravity shows the beauty of space far better,
however you have never seen wormholes depicted on screen in this way before. They
are beautiful, vast, and at times a little nauseating due to how much you are visually
taking in during the sequences.

Interstellar wears a lot of its influences with pride but it is when the drama and action
kick into gear that is when Nolan pulls ahead of the pack by giving us large scale, all or
nothing, do or die sequences. Whether it’s a fist-fight on an icy planet, mid-space
explosions or mountain-size tidal waves everything has been structured to make sure
that you’re not just on the edge of your seat but that you are holding your breath trying
not to pass out from lack of oxygen.
The soundtrack, much like the rest of the film, borrows from other science-fiction
masterpieces and Hans Zimmer, as always, does an excellent job. The only real issue
with the film though is the soundtrack. Often it is very overpowering and at times when
important pieces of information are being delivered to the audience. Sometimes it was
so loud that I could not hear what was being said and had no idea why a character was
now doing what they were doing.
Nolan has been accused of being very mechanical with the emotional side of his
storytelling however, this time the emotions are just as big as everything else in the film
is. Emotions are just flying everywhere on screen and we get crying, but not just your
run of the mill cinema crying but the ‘ugly crying’ most of that is brought by
McConaughey who really brings his A-game to the emotional stuff.

The films ending is really going to divide people and this is probably the reason this will
be known as Nolan’s most divisive film to date. Unlike 2001: A Space Odyssey,
Interstellar decides to remove any mystery or ambiguity and gives us a very clean and
tidy ending. It is easily too clean and too tidy. Unlike Inception, Interstellar leaves us with
a very clear cut understanding of what has transpired and what will happen, I personally
feel that that is a missed opportunity to give us a real bold ending to match many of the
bold choices provided in the previous 2 hours and 40 minutes.

Overall, this is one of the best films of the year and for the most part, it lives up to the
hype. Inception has a broader appeal than this but it is still good to see a director who
gives us a blockbuster that respects the audience’s intelligence.

Four out of 5 star-devouring wormholes.

TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES: SPOILER-FREE MINI-REVIEW

Shell-shock, but not in the good way.

Yes a new iteration of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles has been out at cinemas for
over a week now and it is brought to us by the man who has already ruined our
childhood once, producer Michael “who needs a script” Bay. The good news is that all
those crazy rumours about the Turtles being aliens instead of mutants, a white guy
playing Shredder, and a brunette playing a famous red-head turned out to be mostly
untrue. The unfortunate thing though, the film is still an incredibly awful piece of shit.
Megan Fox does her best impression of Megan Fox in a yellow jacket, which to be fair is
a step up from her performance in Transformers where she didn’t have a yellow jacket
(note: the yellow jacket exudes a lot more personality than Megan Fox.) Even though
Megan is playing the lead in the film, she is solely there to provide forced exposition
throughout the entire film using some of the clunkiest dialogue ever committed to paper
using crayon. Outside of this we also have the voice of Tony Shalhoub (Splinter) and
William Fichtner (not Shredder) delivering more forced exposition, as a matter of fact
95% of dialogue in this film is either explaining what has just happened or what is
happening on screen at that very moment. Granted Fichtner delivers his lines with some
skill, in respect to the fact you can see him smirking the whole time like he knows the
films a joke, but Fox delivers her lines like she’s reading them for the first time before
saying them out loud. The last of the human cast is Will Arnett, who I normally like, but
when you watch this film you realise that he serves no purpose, you could literally write
him out of the entire film by just establishing that Megan Fox can drive.

The film suffers many of the repetitive flaws found in every single blockbuster that’s
been released over the last 8 years such as the over-use of slow-mo shots featuring
physic-defying acrobatics/choreography and the old “magic blood” maguffin. The most
frustrating element of the film is the “Avi Arad” art of filmmaking by making all the
character linked for no apparent reason at all. Because let’s face it, when you’re selling
the idea of six foot tall roided-up talking turtles who know ninjitsu that they learnt from a
book, the audience won’t buy into the concept unless all the key characters are
intimately linked to the origin story. Of course, the villain, Shredder, is a walking knife
factory and a highly trained ninja who looks like Edward Scissorhand fucked a cheesegrater
and had a baby. As the “main villain” he makes very little impact on the story
overall and despite having knives sticking out of every orifice does not manage to cut a
single person nor use said knives when he has a clear upper hand.

With some simple tweaking for the sequel, we could have a great Ninja Turtle movie
that long-time fans deserve to see. Until then, we have one elevator scene to keep a
smile on our face, but that is still not enough to warrant watching this before it is on freeto-
air TV.

One and a half violated cheese-grater.

SNOWPIERCER: SPOILER-FREE MINI-REVIEW

Do yourself a favour and see this film anyway you can, preferably legally so that the
creators get their well-deserved royalties.

The Korean science fiction action film based on the French graphic novel starring an
international cast and filmed in the Czech Republic could have been a complete clusterfuck
but it is easily one of the best films of the year... well technically last year. The film
was originally released in South Korea in August 2013 and it has taken this long to
make it to Australia, and even then Perth had to petition to get it in cinemas.
In the near future, a last ditch effort to combat global warming has the opposite effect
and the earth becomes so frozen that you almost expect to see a saber-toothed squirrel
trying to get some nuts. The last remaining humans all live on a perpetual-powered train
where the passengers have been broken up into a class system where the rich bask in
excess in the front carriages, whilst the poor inhabit the tail of the train. Amongst the
poor is a reluctant leader of a rebellion, Curtis Everett (played by Captain America), who
has been planning a revolt for some time. So when the tension hits boiling point the
revolt begins and Cap and his team must make their way to the front carriages in to take
control of the train.

The film is layered with amazingly killer action sequences and deep character moments.
The most amazing scenes are actually when characters are just talking to one another
and reveal things about themselves. When you hear things like “I know what people
taste like” and what they say next then you will struggle to pick your jaw up off the floor.
But at the end of the day that is what separates this film from many other blockbusterfare:
you either get the spectacle or the character moments, very rarely do you get both
and that’s why this film is a must-see.

On top of the great fight choreography, the film’s narrative structure is propelled through
the characters making their way through the carriages, with each carriage having its
own personality. The carriages always represent a challenge for our characters, each
time in a new and inventive way, however each carriage also doubles as a mirror for
different aspects of modern society from local, national and international perspectives.
How often do you get that in a blockbuster nowadays?

The film does border on bat-shit-crazy at times but it is so beautifully shot and well acted
that those moments are fleeting and still work in the context of the film. Granted this film
may not be for everyone but if you are looking for something different, that shows what
happens when the biggest powerhouses in cinema (Korea, America, and the United
Kingdom) work together then you are in for a treat.

So once again, do yourself a favour and see this film anyway you can, preferably legally
so that the creators get their well-deserved royalties.

4 and 3 quarter out of 5 well-deserved royalty-cheques.

SIMPSONS/FAMILY GUY CROSSOVER: SPOILER-FREE MINI-REVIEW

“The Simpsons hasn’t been funny since Season 8.”

“Family Guy is just a poor-man’s version of The Simpsons.”

These things are definitely acknowledged in the episode, some more caustically than
others, however with the combined writing power of The Simpsons and Family Guy you
have probably one of the strongest episodes either series has seen in a long while.
Granted I believe both shows have seen there best years but each has their strengths:
even the weakest Simpsons episode has biting satirical wit, Family Guy will still hit you
with at least one laugh-out-loud moment. Unfortunately both shows do have their
weaknesses: The Simpsons, having run for so long, has begun to run dry in the story
department and Family Guy has moved from fast-paced surreal comedy into the meanspirited
soap-box rantings of Seth McFarlane.

The crossover has some funny moments that play to both of The Simpsons and Family
Guys back catalogue and really hammers some great visual gags along with a Peter Vs.
Homer fight that makes all the previous Chicken fights appear limp in comparison.
To Family Guys credit, they have really been brave to highlight all the similarities
between them and The Simpsons. To be honest I never realised how many similarities
there were in relation to the characters in both shows. The unfortunate thing though is
that this episode really does highlight many of the issues with Family Guy: tongue in
cheek references that often can come off as very bitter and mean-spirited. They take
constant digs at The Simpsons and even Bob’s Burgers (a low blow considering Bob’s
Burgers has some of the best back and forth banter on TV right now.)

A lot of this cynicism towards The Simpsons can be traced back to Season 6, Episode 2
of Family Guy where, if you listen to the commentary track, Seth McFarlane shares his
animosity for producer James L. Brooks that led to both him and the writers listing all
the issues with The Simpsons. The most frustrating issue when listening to this
commentary track today is that a lot of the things they ranted about The Simpsons is
now true of Family Guy: they don’t know how to tell a story anymore, they can’t give an
episode a proper ending, and they have really lost their way. If the writers of Family Guy
could keep this level of quality from this crossover episode, they just might move from
strength to strength.

This is a pretty good episode if only for the fact that the crossover makes so many
strong references to both shows best elements.

However, for now I will stick with Archer, American Dad and Bob’s Burgers.

GONE GIRL: SPOILER-FREE MINI-REVIEW

David Fincher is one of the last great directors of adult films.

Not those kinds of ‘adult films.’

Gone are the days of films like The Godfather, adult dramas that were produced by
studios with a decent budget to match. Nowadays if you pitch an ‘adult drama’ to the
studios it better have guns, explosions, car chases and big f*ck-off robots beating the
sh*t out of each other if you want to get a big budget, otherwise you’re relegated to
‘indie-adult-drama.’

The guy who brought us Zodiac, The Social Network and the U.S. version of The Girl
With The Dragon Tattoo (yes I know he made Se7en and Fight Club) still makes quality
adult dramas with a solid budget, and Gone Girl is no different. Based on the 2012
bestseller, the film stars Ben Affleck as a bar owner whose wife goes missing, and as
the film progresses he is put under severe scrutiny by the public, the police and the
media over his involvement in the case. Telling you anymore would be spoiling things.
The narrative is non-linear at the start and this has been done deliberately to cleverly
reveal things to us as the audience. As the film moves along you begin questioning
which characters to side with and sometimes whose story is more believable. The film
shifts focus between characters throughout the runtime and helps to keep the film
engaging but most importantly keeps you on your toes.

As the lead, Ben Affleck has gone from strength to strength over the last few years: as
an actor he’s chosen wiser roles, as a director he’s just getting better with each film, and
as a person he’s learnt to manage the media and his personal image. So the casting of
Affleck as Nick Dunne seems so right for this stage of his life, sans the missing or dead
wife of course. When the end credits roll you’ll realise that this film is just what Affleck
needed in the lead up to his role as the new incarnation of the Dark Knight. However,
the real star of this film, sorry Batfleck fans, is former Bond girl Rosamund Pike. She is
just amazing as she morphs within her character over and over again that is almost
impossible to keep track of who she really is - and it’s more than just a physical
transformation, you have to do a double-take sometimes to realise that it’s still the same
character.

Like any Fincher film, it is beautifully shot with so much attention to detail with regards to
set dressing, the lighting and camera work. This meticulous attention to detail is so
thorough that the pay-off just draws you into the film even more so. And like any David
Fincher film, it is dark, sometimes so dark it borders on pitch-black, but it is also funny,
darkly darkly funny.

Four and a half out of five non-linear stars.

TUSK: SPOILER-FREE MINI-REVIEW

The promotional hashtag for this film is #WalrusYes, after seeing Tusk I’d rather say

#WalrusMeh

Yes this is Kevin Smith’s 11th feature film, the man who brought us Clerks, Mallrats and

Chasing Amy in his early career who once stated that he would retire from directing

after 10 films, and maybe, just maybe, he needs to possibly reconsider this.

Tusk is based on a random Gumtree advertisement that Smith and his long-time

producer buddy Scott Moiser discussed on one of their many Smodcasts about a

person seeking a companion to dress as a walrus. From here the Gumtree ad has been

fleshed out into the story of a Podcaster who travels to Canada in search of a story

which results in him becoming part of an old mans sick and torturous games.

I wonder how many other films have been created based on Gumtree ads? Was

Christopher Nolan searching for a second hand chair when he stumbled on the idea for

Inception? Or were the Wachowski Brothers searching for spare parts for a bike when

they found an ad that inspired The Matrix? (because that might definitely explain the

sequels.)

Now I know Smith has an army of loyal fans (2.66 million Twitter fans and counting) and

I run the risk of angering said fans but sometimes you’ve got to call a spade a spade

and this spade is a completely uneven mess. The film doesn’t really know whether it

wants to be a comedy or a horror movie and unfortunately the balance and the skill-set

is not there to make both the horror and the comedy work together. Mostly because the

comedy is entrenched with in-jokes, that only Smith’s inner circle of listeners would

understand - leaving the rest of the audience out of the loop.

There are some good points: the reveal of the “walrus” is not dragged out and the reveal

is pretty horrifying and disturbing. Michael Parks is absolutely brilliant in this film as the

menacing and completely deranged Howard Howe, his drawl and stories will echo in

your head and send a chill down your spine.

The rest of the cast, with the exception of Genesis Rodriguez, are actually quite

annoying, especially the “mystery” cast-member. This cast member is not properly

credited in the film at first it feels like it is going to be a cameo but they remain for the

rest of the film - this unfortunately becomes incredibly tiresome and annoying which is a

pity considering which actor it is. I don’t want to spoil who it is but I will say that he’s a

51 year old actor, who has played a famous pirate - a lot, who also works with Tim

Burton - a lot, so maybe the annoyance is just par for the course based on the many

roles he has played over the last couple of decades.

The film is filled with lots of monologues, lots and lots and lots of monologues. It can

build up tension at times but often it shows just how little story was actually there for

fleshing out.

Don’t get me wrong I was a huge Kevin Smith fan back in the day, and I emphasise

‘was’, I don’t have anything against the guy, I just don’t think he has made many good

film choices over the last 13 years. Sure the guy gave us Clerks II in that time but that

was him, in his own words, ‘retreating back to the well‘ after the failure of Jersey Girl. I

think that it is great that Smith is working outside of his comfort-zone however I can’t

help but think that there were ‘better’ stories that he has discussed in Podcasts,

Smodcasts, Comic-Cons, Q&A Evenings, drunken or stoned rants, etc.; that could have

been turned into a film...

One and a half out of five thinly stretched ideas.