This is a highly critical acclaimed film about a modern family that consists of a lesbian couple Nic (a superb Annette Benning) and Jules (Julianne Moore) who have both had a child each by the same sperm donor. At the age of 18, their daughter Joni, (Mia Wasikowska) encouraged by her younger brother Laser (Josh Hutcherson) contact their sperm donor father, Paul (Mark Ruffalo) and start up an awkward yet sweet realtionship with him. Jules and Nic aren't sure about the realtionship, and Nic is very disaproving, but Jules starts up an unorthodox and sexual relationship with Paul, which eventually causes problems and rifts for them all.
I really like films that are more like character studies, focusing on the people and their relationships, and potentially a family which could exist in real life. This film is not afraid to leave the hollywood ideal, and to leap head first into quite unchartered areas. Ruffalo and Benning shine in their indie and complicated roles, but Moore disapoints a little bit, not bringing much likability to a character that should be quite likeable. Waikowska and Ruffalo are fine as the kids, but are underused in a film that should maybe focus more on them. For me, there is also unnecessary drug use and references that don't go anywhere, and sex scenes which are more cringeworthy than appropriately passionate.
Overall, this film is an attractive character based look at a modern and contemporary family. It feels real, and is to the merit of Lisa Cholodenko (director) that it doesn't feel too Hollywood. My main criticisms are with the lack of use of the teens, and the lack of empathy that Moore should make people feel.
3 and a half out of 5
Thursday 28 April 2011
Thursday 21 April 2011
Your Highness
Erm...Yere not brilliant.
The adverts didn't look bad, there is some high potential acting power behind it (James Franco, Natalie Portman) and i did love the cheesy medieval adventure flicks as a child (Princess Bride, Willow), but it lacks the charm of these films and instead replaces likeability with swear words, sexual innuendos and finishing it off with a hefty dollop of general crudeness.
The story follows two princes, the charming and valiant Fabias (Franco), and the not so lovable brother Thadeous (Danny McBride). Fabias claims the virgin Belladonna as his wife (Zooey Deschanel), but on their wedding day the evil warlock Leezar (Justin Theroux) steals Belladonna, with the hope of impregnating her on the day when the moons collide in order to have a dragon child... Thadeous is sent on a quest with his brother Fabias in order to rescue Belladonna, and prove to the kingdom that he is not such a waster after all. Along their journey they meet the beautiful and feisty Isabel (Natalie Portman) who eventually helps them on their quest.
Apart from the unnessecary crudeness, nakedness and countless penis references, there are some very surreal and odd moments. Such as a fight with a five headed dragon and some quite gory killings, which just don't seem to blend with the type of humour that has been battered around thus far. In my opinion there are two saving graces which makes this film watchable, rather than atrocious. The first is Franco. The part isn't brilliant and there's not a lot to play with, yet he manages to make it playful and cheeky, rather than annoying and loathsome which a lesser actor could have done. And the second is Theroux playing Leezar. Again, it's a pretty rubbish character / baddie, but he manages to act it with a sarcasm and subtle wit that is quite funny.
There are some films that are crude and rude, yet still seem to be funny. 40 Year Old Virgin is one of these. The difference is that these films, amongst the sex jokes, still have a heart and charm. Unfortunately, Your Highness lacks both of these. I think Danny McBride should leave the writing to someone else (maybe Judd Apatow?) and work on the acting skills. Sorry love...
2/5
The adverts didn't look bad, there is some high potential acting power behind it (James Franco, Natalie Portman) and i did love the cheesy medieval adventure flicks as a child (Princess Bride, Willow), but it lacks the charm of these films and instead replaces likeability with swear words, sexual innuendos and finishing it off with a hefty dollop of general crudeness.
The story follows two princes, the charming and valiant Fabias (Franco), and the not so lovable brother Thadeous (Danny McBride). Fabias claims the virgin Belladonna as his wife (Zooey Deschanel), but on their wedding day the evil warlock Leezar (Justin Theroux) steals Belladonna, with the hope of impregnating her on the day when the moons collide in order to have a dragon child... Thadeous is sent on a quest with his brother Fabias in order to rescue Belladonna, and prove to the kingdom that he is not such a waster after all. Along their journey they meet the beautiful and feisty Isabel (Natalie Portman) who eventually helps them on their quest.
Apart from the unnessecary crudeness, nakedness and countless penis references, there are some very surreal and odd moments. Such as a fight with a five headed dragon and some quite gory killings, which just don't seem to blend with the type of humour that has been battered around thus far. In my opinion there are two saving graces which makes this film watchable, rather than atrocious. The first is Franco. The part isn't brilliant and there's not a lot to play with, yet he manages to make it playful and cheeky, rather than annoying and loathsome which a lesser actor could have done. And the second is Theroux playing Leezar. Again, it's a pretty rubbish character / baddie, but he manages to act it with a sarcasm and subtle wit that is quite funny.
There are some films that are crude and rude, yet still seem to be funny. 40 Year Old Virgin is one of these. The difference is that these films, amongst the sex jokes, still have a heart and charm. Unfortunately, Your Highness lacks both of these. I think Danny McBride should leave the writing to someone else (maybe Judd Apatow?) and work on the acting skills. Sorry love...
2/5
Tuesday 19 April 2011
Source Code
It has been a long, bleak, cinema lacking time, however last week i managed to hijack a friend and make them come see Source Code with me, so i can finally blog again :D - Definite Spoiler Alert.
I'd heard good things about this conceptually complicated film, and to say that it is an action flick with Jake Gyllenhaal in it and along similar lines to a pretty bad De Ja Vu, this is high praise indeed. The story starts with a man (an always lovely Jake Gyllenhaal) waking up on a train and not knowing where or who he is. Confusion follows, until 8minutes later, the train blows up and jake finds himself alone in a dark capsual. The story follows the idea of the "Source Code", a scientific revolutionary idea, that a certain part of a dead persons mind can be tapped into, in order to send them into a certain situation for 8minutes to obtain information. Jake is being sent to this train (in the form of another guy - confusing yes) in order to find out who set the bomb in order to prevent future bombings that are suspected to happen in the present. The idea is that jake is sent not into the actual past, but a paradigm, the scientists (a quite scary Jeffrey Wright, and Vera Farmiga) stress that the past cannot be changed.
Heres where it gets more confusing. Jake finds out who is behind the bombing and informs Farmiga, and asks if he can go back one last time (determined that he can change the past) and then be switched off the life support (which his actual dead, half a body is on). Farmiga agrees without Wright knowing, and Jake goes back into his 8minutes of bomb hunting before he is turned off on the life support. The whole premise so far has been pretty bleak. Scientists have developed technology that uses (arguably abuses) a practically dead bodies last bit of brain activity, and sends them on"missions" in order to get the information they need. The past cannot change, the missions are not real, it is not time travel.
So, how on earth, do we finish this film, with the life support monitor being turned off, and Jake having succeeded in not only changing the past - stopping the bomb, capturing the guy, getting the girl - but also in staying in the past (in some other guys body). For me, Duncan Jones (also the director of the highly critically acclaimed "Moon") copped out at the end of this movie, deciding that an unhappy ending, a film of fate, would not satisfy mass audiences, and therefore decided to soften up the ending by going against everything the film has been saying so far.
This film poses somereally good philosophical questions about the development of science and the worth of one human life against the massess. There are some top acting skills in it with an on form Gyllenhaal who manages to get the tone just right, and a refreshingly good Farmiga, as always showing versatility. However, a cop-out ending that goes against the whole idea of the source code, is a bitter disapointment.
Would have been 4 and a half out of 5, dropped to a 3 because of the end. Tut.
I'd heard good things about this conceptually complicated film, and to say that it is an action flick with Jake Gyllenhaal in it and along similar lines to a pretty bad De Ja Vu, this is high praise indeed. The story starts with a man (an always lovely Jake Gyllenhaal) waking up on a train and not knowing where or who he is. Confusion follows, until 8minutes later, the train blows up and jake finds himself alone in a dark capsual. The story follows the idea of the "Source Code", a scientific revolutionary idea, that a certain part of a dead persons mind can be tapped into, in order to send them into a certain situation for 8minutes to obtain information. Jake is being sent to this train (in the form of another guy - confusing yes) in order to find out who set the bomb in order to prevent future bombings that are suspected to happen in the present. The idea is that jake is sent not into the actual past, but a paradigm, the scientists (a quite scary Jeffrey Wright, and Vera Farmiga) stress that the past cannot be changed.
Heres where it gets more confusing. Jake finds out who is behind the bombing and informs Farmiga, and asks if he can go back one last time (determined that he can change the past) and then be switched off the life support (which his actual dead, half a body is on). Farmiga agrees without Wright knowing, and Jake goes back into his 8minutes of bomb hunting before he is turned off on the life support. The whole premise so far has been pretty bleak. Scientists have developed technology that uses (arguably abuses) a practically dead bodies last bit of brain activity, and sends them on"missions" in order to get the information they need. The past cannot change, the missions are not real, it is not time travel.
So, how on earth, do we finish this film, with the life support monitor being turned off, and Jake having succeeded in not only changing the past - stopping the bomb, capturing the guy, getting the girl - but also in staying in the past (in some other guys body). For me, Duncan Jones (also the director of the highly critically acclaimed "Moon") copped out at the end of this movie, deciding that an unhappy ending, a film of fate, would not satisfy mass audiences, and therefore decided to soften up the ending by going against everything the film has been saying so far.
This film poses somereally good philosophical questions about the development of science and the worth of one human life against the massess. There are some top acting skills in it with an on form Gyllenhaal who manages to get the tone just right, and a refreshingly good Farmiga, as always showing versatility. However, a cop-out ending that goes against the whole idea of the source code, is a bitter disapointment.
Would have been 4 and a half out of 5, dropped to a 3 because of the end. Tut.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)