We decide what artistic endeavour passed approval to earn the Scorcher label from the past seven days & what also had the dishonour of being that week's Torture...
Now there will be some people who look at my choices this week and wonder how on earth the roles aren't reversed. I can understand those reactions but I will stand by my ruling and go on record as saying that they are deserving of their placement.
The Scorcher
What is this a former member of a boy band's first solo single being nominated for Scorcher of the week? While boy bands are not my forte I can say hand on heart that this song has struck a chord with me. 'Sign of the Times' reminds me of Suede and has a certain 70's sensibility about it.
The format is nothing new and a cynic would say that the writers have used a tried and tested formula for success. That may well be the case and if so then mission accomplished because they have created a song that I find myself singing along to whenever I hear it. Harry Styles might not be everyone's cup of tea but there is no denying that this is one catchy tune.
The Torture
How can I include last year's best picture winner at the Academy Awards for Torture of the week? Well one reason is because my expectations for this film were raised to a rather high level due to all the positive reports surrounding this movie. The synopsis had intrigued me and the casting of Mahershala Ali had also piqued my interest.
Overall I was left feeling disappointed with the final outcome. Yes it is a well-made film and the acting is reasonably good. It just didn't inspire me or leave any lasting impression. I can't say it was an enjoyable watch either; most of what happens is quite tragic and by the end you can't say anyone is in a better place although there is a certain amount of closure for Chiron I guess.
The whole way through I kept thinking how did this beat some of the competition to win best film? The only film that I haven't seen from the nominees is Fences so I am unable to comment on that one. From the other nominees however I felt there were at least four that would have been more deserving winners.
I love Ali as an actor and he is magnificent in his very limited role here; and that in itself is an issue, he is onscreen for roughly quarter of an hour at best. Once more I questioned the wisdom of his award win when compared to Dev Patel or Jeff Bridges in their respective roles.
I can't help thinking that the #OscarsSoWhite controversy of 2016 had something to do with this movies success at those awards. It would be a shame if true; but no more of a shame than some of the people who deserved the accolades in 2016 that missed out on even being nominated.
So yes this is a movie that failed to live up to my expectations and had me baffled when I consider all the love it did receive.
The Witch Trial:
I do love putting witches on trial. This particular enchantress who is using magical means to make lovesick fools out of the men she meets definitely deserves to be put in the dock. Who:
Director: Anna Biller
Starring: Samantha Robinson, Gian Keys, Laura Waddell, Jeffrey Vincent Parise What:
Horror/Thriller Why:
Original story When:
Set in modern day but with massive leanings to the 60's & 70's Where:
Arcata, California
The Case For:
The first thing that grabbed my attention for The Love Witch was the beautiful hand painted movie poster (not the one included above; I went for one with more of a retro feel). It immediately brought to mind the old horror films of the 60's. Upon further investigation I discovered that this was wholly intentional as it was this very aesthetic that Anna Biller was aiming for.
Biller has created a lovingly crafted homage to 60's/70's horror films but set events in the modern day, tackling feminist themes and using the witchery as a metaphor for female empowerment.
I will admit that IMDB threw me off as I was expecting a parody film that would do for old horror what Black Dynamite did for Blaxploitation movies of the 70's. This did affect my enjoyment at first as I couldn't see any comedic moments. It didn't take long for me to realise that it was in fact a different type of film altogether and so settled in to view what it had to offer.
The most striking aspect is the colour and the way it just pops off the screen. Biller intentionally wanted the audience to feel like they were watching an old Technicolor movie and her cinematographer David Mullen certainly achieved that aim. Every scene is beautifully lit and framed; with vivid reds and creams contrasting lovely with different greens, purples and browns. The film is literally dripping with colour. It brings to mind the look and feel of the Italian giallo genre as well as horror movies like Suspiria that use colour to their advantage.
Another aspect that compliments each scene wonderfully well is the orchestral arrangements. Again giallo's like The Bird with the Crystal Plumage were the first thing that came to mind, but also some of the more folk horror films such as The Wicker Man that incorporate musical numbers so well. The tunes help immerse you into the scene without feeling your emotions are being manipulated in anyway. I wonder if some of these choices were preselected before filming. The tempo matches up so well at times I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the music was playing whilst filming took place on some scenes.
There are so many classic techniques utilised as part of the filmmaking process that you can see Biller really has an appreciation for what she is mimicking. Close ups of lips and eyes or the different camera angles used for a certain shot are all frequently seen throughout the era Biller is paying homage too.
A film like this has to get its lead role spot on and the casting of Samantha Robinson as Elaine nails it hands down. She has such classic beauty you can totally believe that these men would be falling all over themselves for her attention. I could not help look at her and not think of how similar she is in looks to Edwige Fenech one of the go to girls from the films this aspires to be compared too.
Robinson embodies Elaine with all the deadly charm this femme fatale presents to her victims. She also displays the sweetness and fragility of someone who has feels she has been wronged before; who only really wants to find a suitable partner. You can see that she has a vulnerable side, although if you upset her then be prepared to feel the full force of her wrath.
I was left very impressed with Robinson's performance. As she appears in the majority of the scenes she has to be able to hold your attention and she does this ever so well. Considering the acting style overall is quite stilted in the delivery of dialogue and the action is a bit staged; Robinson makes it look natural and not out of place. This was obviously a style choice to keep in the spirit of the films being emulated and out of all the cast Robinson carries it off the best.
Jeffrey Vincent Parise as Wayne is another who handles the stage direction very well. His carefree teacher looking for free love in a very 60's hippie kind of way totally fits the mould. Of Elaine's conquests his interaction with her was the most enjoyable for me. His forest cabin with the open fireplace felt like the perfect setting for someone like Wayne to take a potential love interest to try and woo her.
That is another aspect that Biller gets so accurate; the set design. Everything feels like it has been lifted from an older era. It might feel a little anachronistic at times; especially when viewing some of the vehicles or the clothing on the extras, but that is only a minor distraction. Biller was responsible for the set design and she definitely has an eye for detail.
Likewise her costume choices also felt on point. Elaine goes through a number of outfit changes and each one compliments the setting or event taking place. Once more Biller chooses the colour of each costume to accentuate the beauty of the overall shot. This is a gorgeous film to look at.
I don't want to go into the messages or issues that Biller is trying to put across as there are many. Some I felt were done well, others a little heavy handed or I felt sent out some mixed signals. What it does do is provoke some interesting conversations afterwards and I expect many people will debate the rights and wrongs of what they take away from Elaine's pursuit of a perfect partner.
The conversation between Elaine and Griff about her guilt prior to the final scene is so well scripted it really makes you think just how guilty is Elaine in the end scheme of things? Sure she is indirectly responsible for what has taken place but you can see the points in her argument. It would be very easy to take the simple way out at the end of the movie but I loved the way it finished. No spoiler but the final outcome was quite satisfying indeed.
The Case Against:
The first question that came to my mind was why set this in the modern day but spend so much energy reflecting the style of films from the 60's & 70's? If you were watching this with no knowledge of horror films from this era, particularly ones dealing with devil worship and witches, you could easily be forgiven for wondering what the hell was going on.
The problem is that it mimics those films so well at times that it could very well be an old movie. Suddenly though a modern vehicle will appear in a scene and straight away that nostalgic façade is broken. It can be a bit jarring. I imagine budget constraints had a lot to do with the decision not to go full on 60's and I can appreciate that. However would it have been easier to locate the story in a more isolated location to help avoid some of these anachronisms?
I have mentioned how Robinson nailed her performance and the tone Biller was going for. The rest of the cast certainly understood the filmmakers theme but didn't quite reach the same level. If that was down to the individual acting ability of the supporting actors I don't know. I felt some of the other performances just felt a little bit more forced when trying to hit the mark.
This would also affect the films appeal to a wider audience and again it comes down to knowing the source material. I love old movies and know what to expect from the actors performing in them. But if you are viewing a movie made now you expect a less stilted performance and the action to be a bit more dynamic. Once more the modern setting is what brings this more to your attention.
Elaine's seduction of Richard felt like a repeat of how she seduced Wayne. While the setting and her costuming are different; the scene itself is a very similar striptease that takes place after drugging her victim. Don't get me wrong I could watch both strips on repeat as Robinson is a very attractive girl! However with a bit more thought I am sure the writers could have come up with a different way for her to use her womanly wiles and magical means to ensnare one of these men.
Maybe we are supposed to believe this is Elaine's modus operandi but she doesn't use the same technique on Griff. This romance is a little rushed and not as believable without the use of a magical potion. I also wasn't keen on Gian Keys who plays Griff so that might have influenced my opinion of this particular relationship.
I did feel the film could have been a bit shorter. At two hours in length it does have moments where it sags. The visits to the bar for example feel totally unnecessary; or at the very least don't need to take so long to get to the point. The films it is emulating would generally have a running time somewhere between ninety minutes to an hour forty. It would have been more in keeping with the theme if this too was of a similar length. Some more judicious editing would have resulted in a tighter, tauter thriller.
Verdict:
She isn't a harmless witch but I am loath to let such an irresistible temptress burn at the stake. After all I doubt I would be able to resist having a drink if Elaine was to offer me one.
We decide what artistic endeavour passed approval to earn the Scorcher label from the past seven days & what also had the dishonour of being that week's Torture...
So this week I explored an old story about a tyrant terrorising Ye Olde England and then went on to watch a film about a true tyrant causing genocide in the Ukraine. One of these was well written; the other, not so much.
The Scorcher
I do like to discover books from a different age that are able to still get your pulse racing and have you turning each page in eager anticipation. One such author who often is able to get my attention in this way is Edgar Rice Burroughs. I have previously enjoyed John Carter's adventures on Barsoom; as well as his Caspak series. So I was more than happy to dive into one of his historical adventures The Outlaw of Torn.
This is a book about a master swordsman who betrays his king by kidnapping his son and leaving the king and queen heartbroken; not knowing if their son is alive or dead.
The reasons for the villain Jules De Vac's treachery are paper thin but every story has to start somewhere. Why didn't he just bugger off back to France years ago if he had such a problem with the English he was serving, that's my question? Anyhow far be it for me to judge the mind of an insulted proud French knight.
De Vac kidnaps the kings son Richard who he renames Norman and raises him as his son. He teaches him swordsmanship as well as hatred towards all Englishmen. He becomes an outlaw and terror to all who venture near to the territory of Torn where they choose to live; hence the title.
A kindly priest that Norman befriends adds balance to his life and opens his eyes to some of his harsher ways. Norman's inner turmoil is one of the most enjoyable aspects explored in this character. It is his upbringing that has made him what he is but deep down there is that moral conflict eating him up. He questions the true motivations of De Vac and comes to realise there is more to his life than banditry.
His life takes on true meaning once he meets Bertrade who he will fall madly in love with. This in turn will send events in his life spiralling to the final conclusion as he heads towards redemption or oblivion.
I love that you can read this and question the whole way through if you want to see Norman succeed in his quest for Bertrade's hand in marriage; or if you want to see him hung as the criminal he was raised to be. You want De Vac to get his comeuppance certainly; but by the same token opinions will vary from one chapter to the next on Norman.
As formulaic as some of the story is; there are still a couple of surprises that you might not see coming. I don't want to spoil any but a couple of gruesome things take place that really took me by surprise.
There are many books that have a similar pattern to The Outlaw of Torn. Much like a lot of sci-fi and fantasy that follow Edgar Rice Burroughs blueprints; you have to wonder if this book has had similar influences on more modern works. If anything this novel has me more convinced what a true master storyteller Edgar Rice Burroughs was in life.
The Torture
I don't think I have watched a film that has dragged on and on like this in a long time. Bitter Harvest is only 103 minutes in length but feels like an eternity. That is because there is nothing, absolutely nothing endearing about this heavy handed; overly melodramatic (historical) movie.
You might wonder at the parenthesis used there and I am not denying the horrific events of the Holodomor in any way shape or form. What took place during the early 1930's between Russia and the genocide of the Ukrainian population was terrible and deserves to be brought to the attention of the wider population.
Using these tragic events as a backdrop to a story about a romance is certainly not the way to do it; especially when the execution is so poorly handled. This could have been set during any devastating event in history and would have still told the same tale. None of the events occurring in the Holodomor have any real impact on the story. It could just as easily been French resistance fighters during WWII; or Scottish highlanders during the Jacobite risings.
The point here is that the filmmakers wanted a setting that hadn't really been used before; a harsh environment to place this couple in; and against all odds have them survive to be together at the end. The care and compassion shown to the subject matter should be at the forefront; making the final reunion all the more satisfying, but the filmmakers treats the Holodomor with irrelevance.
Instead they throw in a few vignettes of a wagon of crops rolling past a few supposedly starving people (no one actually looks like they have missed one meal, let alone not eaten in days). Or they will have a Russian soldier carry out a murder and we then view the subsequent funeral that has to be shown in slow motion for extra dramatic effect. All of this misses the mark completely of really portraying the atrocities committed.
The films style and execution has the look of a bad midday telemovie. The happy moments are all colourful and brightly lit. Once things start to sour the colour pallet changes to dark grey and monotone colours. None of this is done with any subtlety. Just in case you missed the tonal shifts the music is there to constantly remind you what sort of scene you are watching and how you are supposed to feel about what is onscreen.
Added to the poor direction are the sub-par performances from all the actors. Max Irons isn't a strong enough actor to carry this film on his own; which he pretty much has to try and do being the main focal point. He is drab and bland and looks like he can't be bothered half the time.
Terrence Stamp is totally unbelievable as a sword wielding Cossack and looks all of his 78 years of age. This is all the more comical when he has not one, but two sword fights with the physically imposing and much younger Tamer Hassan's Sergei. Hassan looks like it would take him all of five seconds to take care of Stamp. You almost feel embarrassed for him as he holds back on swinging his sword so his much older opponent can get back into a fighting stance.
Sergei is such a stock standard moustache twirling bad guy that at any moment you expect him to turn to the camera and start laughing maniacally. All of the Russians are portrayed as such. Then again the Ukrainians aren't treated much better; the rural populace are clearly gypsy peasants and the residents who live in Kiev are obviously more refined middle class citizens. The stereotyping is mind-blowing.
Honestly this film has nothing that I can recommend about it. It is 103 minutes of my life I won't get back. All in all the historical events deserve a far better cinema representation that will treat this tragedy with the care and integrity it deserves.
We decide what artistic endeavour passed approval to earn the Scorcher label from the past seven days & what also had the dishonour of being that week's Torture...
I was a bit torn as to what film to include as my scorcher this week because I thoroughly enjoyed A Monster Calls which is a different beast to the film I opted for in the end. Whilst it isn't as uplifting as this week's scorcher; it certainly has a positive message at its core. Something else I considered including was Salem having just completed watching season three. I am still deliberating exactly what side of justice that show falls. Might have to consider it for a full review in due course...
The Scorcher
You know how sometimes you watch a film and know straight away that the film makers are playing with your emotions to gain your favour towards their protagonists; but you just don't care because you are having fun going along for the ride? Well that is exactly how I felt watching Hidden Figures.
This is a film that straight from the moment you are introduced to Katherine Goble, Dorothy Vaughan and Mary Jackson that you know whatever happens here; you are going to want them to come out on top. Our three leading ladies of Taraji P. Henson, Octavia Spencer and Janelle Monae all give excellent performances that endear you to these wonderful; smart and most of all courageous women. They are not alone though as both Kevin Costner and Mahershala Ali in particular ably support in their respective roles.
A lot has been said about this being a film about a person's colour and the segregation of the times and make no mistake it most definitely covers these topics. It is also a film about misogyny in general and the negative attitudes of this era towards women; never mind those women being black, which creates a whole other level of contempt on screen. All of this is handled with due diligence and care by director Theodore Melfi. You get enough of a sense of what these ladies are experiencing without it becoming overbearing. The message isn't rammed down your throat as can often happen when handling this type of subject matter.
The heart of the story is one of triumph over these negative attitudes as well as the bigotry and adversity faced by not only the three central ladies but also the other members of their department. While it might not be 100% historically accurate it still covers the relevant events. Overall it does a great job of conveying the positive message that it sets out to do. Hidden Figures is by far one of the better 'feel good' movies I have seen in recent times.
The Torture
It has been seven years since the release of Plastic Beach and I like many others thought this would be the last release from Gorillaz. So to hear that they had been working on new material with a planned album release later this year had filled me with a bit of joy.
I must say this first single Saturnz Barz has left me feeling a little underwhelmed. It isn't a terrible song mind you. But after barely containing my excitement I am a bit disappointed not to have a new Clint Eastwood assailing my ears. Not that I want the same sound but I was hoping for something with a bit more pizazz! Anyhow watch the cool clip and see what you think. I am hoping that it grows on me after a few more listens.
We decide what artistic endeavour passed approval to earn the Scorcher label from the past seven days & what also had the dishonour of being that week's Torture...
War and Mobsters have been the order of the day over this last week. My scorcher is full of material ripe for a film adaptation. I would love to see a screen version of No. 46 Squadron and all the triumph and tragedy associated with Tom Cundall and Co.
Sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for as not all book adaptations work out as my torture this week did not live up to expectations. I haven't actually read the novel but I am keen to give it a perusal.
The Scorcher
There are many books covering the events of World War I but not too many that focus solely on the newest form of warfare of the time: war in the air. Author V.M. Yeates was a fighter pilot with No. 46 Squadron and wrote his novel Winged Victory based on his and his fellow pilots experiences during the Great War.
Whilst this is a work of fiction, it is based around actual events and draws extensively from Yeates' memory for detail of the reality of war. His exposure to the ghastly goings on around him and the other flight crew are told in great detail through the eyes of the main protagonist Tom Cundall. Some of the supporting characters are heavily influenced by the people who fought alongside Yeates.
Yeates puts across the differing views of the pilots and the debates they share about the futility of war. Some of these views are unfortunately still as relevant today when compared with the conflicts still going on around the world. It is quite confronting to realise that soldiers had similar opinions about world leaders and the money grabbing ways of people who are out to profit from war. They are the same sentiments that many people feel today.
There is an awful lot of repetition in this story as Cundall goes on flight after flight, often with no real purpose or result. This can make the book quite a grind to get through but I chose to view it differently. I put myself fully into Cundall's position and treated it as an opportunity to experience the monotony and drudgery of war that he had to go through day after day. It helped me gain a better perspective of the character and allowed me to feel his frustration more as he questions what it is that he is actually achieving; other than constantly putting himself in danger of being killed.
Normally when people think about WWI the first thing that pops into mind is the endless trench warfare and the other types of battles that took place tend to be forgotten. It was very refreshing to get a real understanding of how these pioneering pilots fought in a new theatre of war.
It was fascinating reading about the dogfights and the fragile nature of these early aircraft. The everyday life on the ground was just as enthralling as the descriptions of the flights. It appears that their living conditions are a million miles away from what the average Tommy was having to put up with as they buried their heads in a foxhole; hoping that the next mortar shell would pass them by. By comparison Cundall and his friends live in relative comfort when not flying and are often found spending their evenings in drunken debauchery.
That isn't to say that they aren't under duress as shelling often occurs close to their quarters but nowhere near the same levels as the trenches. It is once the pilots take to the sky that their lives are truly in danger and because they are living with the knowledge that each day could very well be their last; you can excuse their excessive behaviour.
I would describe this novel as an aerial version of All Quiet on the Western Front with its pessimistic views about the ensuing conflict. The real tragedy with both novels is that the two authors were writing from the heart in the hope that tales such as these would help prevent more wars in the future. Yeates passed away before WWII commenced; I can only imagine what his thoughts would have been about the terrible events to come.
The Torture
I have an inherent fondness for gangster flicks. Give me a Wiseguy and a Tommy gun and usually I am already in the ticket aisle. The trailer for Live By Night had me all excited and having enjoyed the films that Ben Affleck has directed found this film ticking all the right columns. The end result however was a bit of a letdown.
This film is just so slow with endless amounts of time spent basically setting things up just so we can get a massive set piece close to the end of the movie. It is filled with cliché after cliché and doesn't stray from any average, formulaic gangster flick. It is such a shame that Affleck couldn't inject the film with some more life as the story itself is a solid one; which makes me think that the book would be much more entertaining than this adaptation.
Affleck's Joe Coughlin isn't a nice guy and at no point does he appear to be a nice guy; so I had a hard time rooting for him. He starts out like "I don't want to be a gangster, just a bank robber," then goes to "I want to be a gangster, but only for revenge," and then just ends up as "I am a gangster and revenge will come second now". His motivation shifts dramatically from start to finish; so much so that you have a hard time understanding his thinking. It had me wondering if all along he did in fact secretly want to be part of the mob.
The supporting cast are all given little to do as they flitter in and out of Coughlin's life. Actors like Chris Cooper and Brendan Gleeson are wasted in the small roles afforded them. Those roles are nothing though compared to the short shrift given to the female cast members. None of the women have much to do and it hurts the end product.
Zoe Saldana is supposed to play the love interest; or more accurately the replacement love interest after the first one, Sienna Miller, is disposed of. However she has such a small amount of screen time that you don't feel any emotional connection to her or her relationship with Coughlin. Once their romantic subplot played out I felt next to no sympathy for the outcome because they spent hardly any time building her character.
I will admit the final shoot out that the film builds to is impressive, but it is too little too late to salvage your interest. By the time it reached this stage I didn't care who lived or died. This confrontation isn't the end though as the movie then pulls a The Return of the King on us and keeps going and going; showing more of Coughlin's story that also fails to hold your attention.
Affleck goes for a Film Noir feel with the look and style of the 1930's setting that mostly works. His Coughlin narrates during the entire film which is distracting in itself, but also gives you an early indication that this guy will probably make it out alive come the end. What it also does is show that Affleck couldn't come up with a better way of telling the story, other than through a narrator. That should have been enough of a warning to make me reach for the book instead.
We decide what artistic endeavour passed approval to earn the Scorcher label from the past seven days & what also had the dishonour of being that week's Torture...
Welcome to the start of 2017's Witch Hunts. This last week I took great pleasure in raiding along the English coastline; but then ruined it by visiting a small pocket of London. Read on to find out more.
The Scorcher
The second half of season 4 of Vikings recently concluded so I went on a typical binge watch so I would be able to pass judgement on this bunch of heathens. It might not be the most historically accurate of shows but my word is it entertaining.
When I first decided to start watching Vikings I was hesitant because I was unsure how they would keep such a story interesting. The characters are based on Viking legends; made up of ones that we know existed and ones where we are not so convinced about their overall legitimacy. So the basis is there for a good story.
However these legendary warriors all existed at different times throughout Viking lore so how do they accomplish a historical telling of these tales and still manage to educate about their historical significance? Well the History Channel has taken the novel approach of condensing the actions of these Norse heroes into a much smaller timescale so that they can all interact with one another. You still get a sense of the impact each had in their culture and the wider world at large.
It works surprisingly well. The historical events are depicted with the filmmakers taking similar liberties with accuracy that you see in many "based on a true story" movies that are released.
Where the show does excel in keeping up interest levels; is in the ability to not follow normal conventions. You can be watching a scene and think you know exactly what is going to take place and the complete opposite can happen. This is totally refreshing and in many cases mimics the actual events from the Norse saga of the time. Season 4, more than all that have come before it, certainly takes these curveballs to the next level of surprise.
I will be very keen to see how season 5 develops from here and whether it can maintain the momentum.
The Torture
Have you ever felt like slashing your wrists after watching a particularly depressing film? If you answered no then this one might put you in that frame of mind. Okay so it isn't all doom and gloom but it's a pretty bloody dismal movie. 100 Streets focusses on three different stories with no connective tissue joining them up; or what little there is, is very tenuous at best. The title refers to the characters of the storylines all living within one hundred streets of each other so there you go.
This feels like three stories that weren't fully developed being cobbled together to form one film. The only one with any substance that I really wanted to see more of involved George the taxi driver as his had the makings of something intriguing. His tale however was the one we saw the least of.
Idris Elba and Gemma Arterton are recognisable names so it is only fitting that they get the most screen time. Their story is one of the most relatable too as it involves a marriage breakup. It doesn't really go anywhere though and by the end you don't really know if either of them is any better off than when we were first introduced to them.
Franz Drameh's Kingsley is one of the most commonly used redemption stories; where a young black man is on the wrong side of the tracks and realises the error of his ways. You can tell instantly when Ken Stott's Terrence starts interacting with Kingsley that it won't be all sunshine and rainbows. It holds no surprises in the least to see how this one ends up.
I was ready to torch the whole lot of them when it ended on a typical Hollywood style high note after watching an hour and a half of complete drabness beforehand. This is not a film to watch for the suicidal!
The Witch Trial:
Is this a film about tree hugging hippies, freeloading off the land; or a comment on the consumerism that envelops the majority of people's lives? Let us delve deeper to see what we can uncover. Who:
Director: Matt Ross
Starring: Viggo Mortensen, George MacKay, Frank Langella, Kathryn Hahn, Steve Zahn What:
Comedy/Drama Why:
Original script When:
Released 2016 Where:
Set in the forests of the Northwest of America
The Case For: Captain Fantastic is a simple story about a family who have turned their backs on modern society in favour of raising their six children in an idyllic forest home; subsisting off the land. Into this idyllic lifestyle choice tragedy occurs when the mother of the family takes her own life while she is away in hospital for treatment.
Viggo Mortensen is Ben, the father of this family. He decides to take his children across country to attend the funeral against his father-in-law's wishes. What follows is a road trip movie of discovery for the children as they see the country and life they have been sheltered from.
The story is both uplifting and tragic at the same time. On the one hand you can see in what ways these children are better off; being taught by Ben and learning life skills that would not be taught in the real world. At the same time you also get to see everything that they are missing out on by being so isolated; things that we take for granted.
One of the great strengths of the story is the lengths the writers have gone to portray these characters in a way that doesn't make them seem like outcasts. They might have some queer practices and certain foibles that aren't all that common but on the whole they are normal, well-adjusted individuals.
It is more often than not people around this family who view them as outcasts and are unaccepting of someone who don't live in a traditional way. This is very evident when Ben stops off at his sister's house and her children are amazed at their cousin's behaviour and mannerisms. These are the type of scenes in particular where the filmmakers are asking the audience to judge if what Ben is doing is acceptable. It gets you thinking as you observe the ways in which society expects us to interact with one another and what would generally be considered unusual; when this family acts in a way which is completely natural for them.
The assembled cast are excellent, even the youngest children perform admirably which isn't something too often said when kids are involved. The focus isn't on the little ones though; the crux of the story revolves around Ben and his eldest son Bodevan, played by George MacKay. Kielyr and Vespyr, the two eldest daughters are also prominent; but it is the relationship and the conflict that occurs between Ben and Bodevan that is central to the overall arc.
It is only in Bodevan's awkwardness around strangers that we really get an insight into how this different upbringing has affected his social interaction. You start to realise that if the isolation that they have all been forced to endure can affect such a clever young man; then it will have the same, and possibly worse, consequences for his siblings.
These conflicts between father and son are fascinating and help show that even though Ben thinks he is doing something good for his children that, in actual fact, there is no right or wrong way to raise your kids. What one person does is not always going to be right for another.
Bodevan is an interesting character. He is extremely loyal to his father, even though he questions his motives and methods. That loyalty is also extended to his family and it has to be said that the loyalty is reciprocated from each member; this is definitely a close knit family, one of unity and solidarity. We get a couple of glimpses of him wanting to break away from this life. Bodevan also gives you a clear indication of how he feels torn as he contemplates leaving what is probably the only existence he remembers. Apart from Ben, his is the most interesting story arc.
Mortensen is perfectly cast as Ben, I can't think of another actor more suited to this role. He has that bohemian look about him and you could well imagine Mortensen going all method and living this lifestyle to prepare for the part. He gives Ben so much depth, generally just from a facial expression or by using his body language; he is able to show the audience what he is thinking and how he is feeling. So much of this film is riding on Mortensen being able to pull this off and he gives yet another stand out performance.
The story isn't solely about their life choices, hidden amongst this living off the land are some pertinent social comments surrounding commercialism and consumerism. Here is a family, seemingly happy on the whole with what they have been given in life. In contrast to this once again, is Ben's sister who is part of your average two adults, two children family living in modern suburbia. The message is pretty clear that not all is well with the standard family who seem to have everything. Of course we come to learn that not all is right with Ben's family too; but it is intriguing to see the comparison.
I like the pacing of this film. It doesn't rush to the funeral scene; the director takes his time getting us there which allows us to get to know the characters. We then care about what the final outcome will be and what will occur once they reach their final destination. While the film might have started under tragic circumstances by the end there is a sense of hope that the family will end up in a better place.
The Case Against:
The opening scene has a deer being hunted and finally killed by Bodevan in what appears to be a coming of age ceremony; one that Ben has possibly borrowed from some native custom. This opening is slightly confronting and doesn't really portray how the rest of the film will pan out.
What it does do is show that this family are capable and possibly dangerous. Some of the practices that Ben has his children performing are very cult like. The fascination that each one seems to have with knives is disturbing. You can understand it to a certain extent as they have to fend for food from the land, but it is still a little unnerving.
Ben's rigid authority and regimental nature work against you warming to his character. On the one hand you can see that he clearly loves and cares for each of his children; but you sense an undercurrent of his overly possessive nature towards them. It looks like he is missing a vital point about parenting, which is providing your child with the necessary tools to allow them to discover things for themselves. A person achieves this from the encouragement and guidance offered by the parent. It appears however that Ben wants to control every aspect of their lives.
The children have to learn what he chooses, they have to exercise the way he wants and they have to do as he says. Now while most children have to obey their parents; generally speaking they are allowed a certain amount of freedom. With Ben that is not the case and his indoctrination of his beliefs is his attempt to create people that think and act the way he does.
This practice backfires later on once Bodevan confronts him. These scenes are played well by both actors and it does make you realise what a manipulative person Ben has been towards his family. To the writers credit you can see that Ben does realise the error of his ways but it is definitely a character flaw that doesn't make Ben particularly endearing. Of course having such a complex character is also more refreshing than having someone who is just straight forward; where everything is black and white.
Ben also has to deal with a very upset father in law. Jack, played by Frank Langella, shows his disdain towards the lifestyle he feels was forced upon his daughter because of Ben's controlling nature. He feels a lot of anger towards Ben which you can sympathise with. Langella is very convincing and has an intimidating presence. His attitude is only natural when someone is looking for someone to blame after a person close to them chooses to take their life. Jack is mourning the loss of his daughter and Ben is the obvious choice to shoulder that blame.
As a consequence some of Jack's ire seems to extend to his grandchildren and I found this a bit odd. They shouldn't share any portion of his resentment; they have no say in how and where they live. This could be a consequence of Jack not knowing the children and not being a part of their lives for such a long time. It did seem strange that he would act this way towards people who are no more at fault than his daughter was.
While I was okay with Jack's behaviour towards Ben, I was not so convinced by Harper, Ben's sister. Once again you can understand someone thinking that what Ben is doing is unconventional and Harper certainly feels this way. I would have just liked for the writers to have one person have the balls to stand up for him and say they admired him for his convictions. Who better to fulfil that role than his own sister?
Instead we get another person telling him what he is doing is wrong and how it is having a detrimental effect on his children. Speaking of children, Harper's own brood act exactly how I expected them too towards their cousins. They couldn't have written these two annoying brats any more conventional if they tried. In much the same way I would have liked Harper to show some compassion towards Ben's choices; how refreshing would it have been to see her offspring behave in an inquisitive way towards their relations, rather than in the derogatory manner displayed?
Everyone can agree that the way Ben has chosen to bring up his kids is certainly different. By showing some people commend him for his convictions would have just put a twist on the angle. These are the type of tropes that if the writers had chosen to avoid; would have resulted in a stronger film that possibly would have had more impact. These differences of opinion would have added to any debate on the rights and wrongs of what Ben is trying to do when discussing the film after it ends.
One final comment on Mortensen: did we really need to see his little Viggo on display in yet another role? He must have it written into his contract these days that he is allowed to appear nude in at least one scene. Just because Ben has chosen to live a lifestyle close to nature doesn't make him a nudist. It felt randomly thrown in just to get a cheap laugh.
Verdict:
Although dark and disturbing at times, I can't fully condemn a man for sticking to his principles when trying to do the right thing. I just hope he isn't indirectly raising children who will become the next Manson Family! As you can see I do have some reservations about letting this get off completely free; which I feel is exactly what the filmmakers intended.
We decide what artistic endeavour passed approval to earn the Scorcher label from the past seven days & what also had the dishonour of being that week's Torture...
It feels like I keep bringing up Western's in this section, both good and bad!
I was tempted to include the Absolutely Fabulous movie but realised it would have been for purely sentimental reasons. It really isn't that great a film but it did bring back a lot of nostalgia for a much loved British comedy. Instead we do have something darkly humorous tickling my fancy this week.
The Scorcher
Finding the right balance in a horror comedy is not an easy task. Too much comedy and it can become parody. Too much horror and the comedy can feel like it has been shoehorned in. Having just watched season one of Scream Queens I can confidently say that Ryan Murphy, Brad Falchuk and Ian Brennan have found the right combination.
This show has some great comic moments spread through every episode. The horror doesn't go for gore but instead shoots for the Scream film franchise level of surprise horror. In fact I would bet that particular film franchise heavily influenced the tone of this series.
The Red Devil killer definitely shares some of the same traits as the Ghostface killer from Scream as they are both equally inept when it comes to attacking their victim. I would also suggest that the costume of the Red Devil killer took a little inspiration from Ghostface too; both using a mask to conceal the identity of the murderer.
Emma Roberts is particularly nasty in her role as the leader of the Chanel's. This is an obvious tribute to Heathers; naming the four sorority girls of Kappa Kappa Tau all Chanel. The overall tone of the show shares so much in common with Heathers actually, in a good way. In Roberts they couldn't have picked a better leading lady; she seems so genuine when dishing out her brutal lines.
Snagging Jamie Lee Curtis who is truly one of the original iconic Scream Queens is a real coup. She is terrific as the bitchy dean of the campus. She shows her comic chops, as well as returning to her horror roots, although this time around she isn't the type of girl to run away in high heels!
If there is one character that I could pick out who has the best lines it would have to be the completely naïve, sexually perverted: Chad Radwell. Nearly everything that comes out of his mouth is comedy gold and Glen Powell nails his performance. Equally amusing and just as welcome every time she appears is Niecy Nash as Denise Hemphill; the security guard out to protect the members of Kappa Kappa Tau.
I will say that this isn't a show that you should binge watch. To get the most benefit I feel it is a show where you need to view one, possibly two episodes at a time; otherwise it loses some of its appeal. The humour is great but in smaller doses and watching them one after another kind of dulls your senses and some of the smarter, quick witted jokes will pass you by.
The story itself keeps you guessing as to who the murderer is. This is one busy killer; barely an episode goes by without someone being done away with; and in some rather inventive ways. I have a confession to make: I was unable to solve the mystery of who was the main culprit. Yes I failed as an Inquisitor in this instance and I have dutifully been punishing myself with self-flagellation since!
The Torture
Well a second entry in the Torture category for a Matthew McConaughey film! I like Mr McConaughey but I am afraid that Free State of Jones did not live up to my expectations. Being a fan of the Western I was looking forward to this with eager anticipation. I especially love films about the American Civil War and the premise of this intrigued me.
This film ended up being just so flat and underwhelming; I was left feeling really disappointed with the final outcome. It is such a shame because I am sure that the source material is worthy of a movie adaptation but this does not do justice to the story. A quick look at the history of Newton Knight shows that there are at least four books on the subject, so how they didn't manage to come up with a more cohesive script is somewhat of a surprise.
There may be a lot of conjecture across these books but with a bit of research they should have been able to decide on the story that they wanted to tell. Instead what we get is a film that goes too big on scope; whereas it would have been better served by narrowing the focus to possibly just the war years. I think they lost the core of the story which should have been about Jones County and instead made it more of a biography of Newton Knight.
The film is interspersed with historical photos from the Civil War detailing what events were occurring to help move the narrative along; this is used in place of a narrator. While this is a different way of showing the passage of time it does give the film a television movie of the week feel. There is generally no lead up to any of these time jumps either, they just seem to be thrown in at random when the director feels it is time to move to the next stage in Knight's life he wants us to see.
To confuse matters there is the completely unnecessary inclusion of a court case involving one of Knight's descendants Davis Knight. He is fighting for his marriage to be recognised as he is considered to be of African-American descent and at the time interracial marriage is still not recognised in the state of Mississippi. The scenes of this trial are also strewn in at irregular intervals throughout.
They have no effect on the main plot and only serve as a distraction to the story you want to see unfold. If I was editing this, these scenes would have ended up on the cutting room floor. It is merely an interesting footnote and could have been included as such in the end credits if they felt it necessary to bring the audience's attention to this matter.
As you can see there are a few gripes in regards to how disjointed the whole thing feels. On top of that we have the length of time the director wants to cover. It starts in 1862 and finishes, if you include Davis' story, in 1947! Of course it doesn't include all events during this period and I am exaggerating but it does show that they try to incorporate too many parts of the Knight family story.
The concentration should have stayed on the fourteen skirmishes Knight and his followers had with the Confederate forces in Jones County. Instead we have Knight establishing a farm after the war has finished; Knight's fight alongside his African-American friends to establish their right to vote; Knight's estranged wife returning to his farm; Knight rescuing Moses' son from a new form of slavery after abolition and finally Knight and the freedmen practicing their right to vote. It is just too much to fit in and makes the film just drag on and on, testing ones endurance.
Disappointed is the word that best sums up my feelings towards this, I hope that one day this interesting story gets a much better telling than what was on offer here.
The Witch Trial:
I am hearing reports of three burglars breaking into the home of a defenceless blind man. This sounds like something that must be investigated. Who:
Director: Fede Alvarez
Starring: Stephen Lang, Jane Levy, Dylan Minnette, Daniel Zovatto What:
Crime Thriller Why:
An original script When:
Released 2016 Where:
Set in a rundown suburb of Detroit
The Case For:
Fede Alvarez was responsible for the, not particularly terrible but not particularly great, remake of Evil Dead released in 2013. This was a valiant attempt at updating a true horror classic; but also one where people were asking why this is needed. While I thought it was alright I did feel that Alvarez had missed the most important aspect of the original and that was in retaining the humour to go along with the horror. For a directorial debut though, it was a solid effort.
Sam Raimi helped produce that remake. He must have been suitably impressed as he returns as one of Alvarez's producers on Don't Breathe. To me that is a sign of true faith when someone with the reputation of Raimi is keen to help further the career of this young director.
Alvarez once again shares scriptwriting duties with Rodo Sayagues as they did on Evil Dead. They have produced something that is a bit different for a genre that is used too many ideas being recycled. The home invasion theme might be something that has been done before but this has enough fresh concepts to plant its own originality.
Jane Levy could be considered a muse for Alvarez after her lead appearance in Evil Dead. Once again she plays the central character of Rocky; who along with Dylan Minnette's Alex; and Daniel Zovatto's Money, form the trio of burglars. They use information gathered from Alex's father's security company to help them plan and break into homes that contain items of wealth.
Acting on some of this information they target the home of a war veteran who became blind on active duty. He is said to be stashing $300,000 in his home; compensation he received after the death of his daughter in a motor accident.
Using an abandoned Detroit neighbourhood for the setting is an inspired choice. It allows the characters to make all the noise they wish; without the chance of a pesky neighbour sticking their nose where it wouldn't be welcome.
The Blind Man is a particularly intriguing character. He appears both frail and capable at the same time. His unshaven face and haggard looks belie the abilities that he is still able to bring to the fore from his muscular frame. The eyesight might have left him but his overall strength is still there when needed.
Stephen Lang's portrayal is much nuanced; playing a person who remains virtually silent throughout the whole film could not have been easy. We get a man who at different stages appears vulnerable, pitiful and in need of your sympathy. On the flip side he can also become sadistic; vicious and deadly. In many ways he reminds me of Mick Taylor from Wolf Creek; only without the smart quips. Both of these people appear on the surface to be regular Joe's, but both have their hidden sides and are capable of acts of extreme violence.
Alvarez has created a memorable fighter in the Blind Man and I hope he isn't ruined in future sequels by becoming a one note character. At the moment he is someone in the grey area: not all bad but definitely not all good. It would be a terrible shame to make him a wholly black hearted person.
I am at pains to not call him a villain or antagonist. In much the same way I would not call Rocky the hero or protagonist. Either one could equally switch labels. The film does a decent job of giving both the Blind Man and Rocky different aspects to their persona that pigeon holing them in one category would be a great disservice.
At different points you find yourself rooting for each of them to win through in the end. Personally I was more on the side of the Blind Man but I can fully appreciate how someone would also be cheering for Rocky. This in itself is one of the major plus points of the film; you can debate rightly and wrongly for who exactly you would prefer to survive the ordeal.
The film score is eerily creepy and fits the tone well. It doesn't rely on dramatic crescendos for when you are meant to jump; instead it goes along at a steady pace, instilling dread in the viewer as the movie progresses. That isn't to say that there aren't moments where the music lifts up to hit the high notes; as it certainly does but it is used sparingly. There are so many horror films that require the music to help the impact of the scare that it was refreshing to have a score compliment the scene rather than embellish it.
A common trope in horror, especially these days, is to rely more on jump scares to get the reaction from your audience than utilising any other form of scare to create dread. Don't Breathe has a few but it isn't a one trick pony. Alvarez uses the location to great effect to raise the tension in the viewer. The way the Blind Man appears from the shadows or is revealed during the shot is excellent at raising the pulse. They are simple methods but work wonderfully well in making this man appear as menacing as can be.
The one star of the show I have failed to mention is the Blind Man's pet Rottweiler. This dog is truly terrifying in the best tradition of Cujo and he is probably an homage to that movie too. Some of the best scares come from this animal. The car scene is definitely one that will have you squirming in your seat.
For a small cast; a simple premise; filmed on mostly a single set and having an eerily written and tight script; this film is definitely worthy of attention. It isn't perfect by any means but it achieves its aim and that isn't something that can be directed at a lot of horror films.
The Case Against:
The one major hurdle this film has going against it; is how do you make three burglars sympathetic? These guys are breaking into people's homes and making off with their goods to raise cash to make a better life for one another. At the same time they are hurting the families whose homes they are raiding; maybe not physically but definitely emotionally.
I found it very hard to want any of them to survive; especially Money who is the most despicable of the three. You get a clear indication of his character in the opening robbery the gang perform; as he is the only one causing any kind of destruction. He is irredeemable in every way and I wanted him to get his just deserts sooner rather than later.
There is very little character development for any of the four players. At a running time of eighty-eight minutes that is understandable. No one wants to see half an hour of back story when the main aim of the game is to scare the pants off you! What little there is though I found to be a bit heavy handed.
Alex is shown as someone who does question the morality of what they are doing but still goes along with it anyway. This makes little sense as he is using his father's company to gather the details of each home they break into. If he was so conflicted about what they were doing then he wouldn't need to act on this information to begin with.
The script does its best to paint Rocky in a good light by including a scene showing her home life and what a terrible mother she has. There is also the added responsibility she feels towards her younger sister and the hope she has of providing her with a better life. It is a vain attempt to rally some to her cause by playing on your emotional heart strings. She seems like a smart girl though; I am sure there are other ways she could have achieved her aims without resorting to breaking and entering.
Overall these characters were a problem for me. I disliked Money from the first scene; I found Alex to be unrealistic and Rocky too switched on to be hanging out with these two losers. So how would I find the Blind Man in comparison?
Well at first I wanted him to kill them all, but then you find out more about his agenda; then it becomes a little more unclear. Without wanting to give too much away I didn't like what was going on with him in the basement. It made him just as unlikeable as the trio of robbers. His one saving grace was that the circumstances that had occurred in his life had driven him to this course of action. It may not excuse his behaviour but it does give him motive which played an important factor in making my mind up.
By the end, after some toing and froing, I did find myself wanting the Blind Man to come out on top. After all these three people had come to rob someone who they thought was an easy target. When opportunity presents itself for them to leave early on in proceedings the lure of the cash still prevails. Their motive outweighed their instinct for survival. That choice helped galvanise my opinion.
The one horror trope that does prevail is what I like to term 'Horror Strength'. It is when a person suffers an injury so severe it would normally cripple a regular human being; but somehow they find the strength and will to carry on. This happens to more than one character and while it annoyed me, it didn't have as much impact as it normally would on my overall enjoyment of the film.
The Blind Man did have an uncharacteristic ability to move around his home extremely quickly when the script required him too. On more than one occasion he would appear in a location that made me think how did he get there so soon? It might not have been a supernatural ability but it did seem an unnatural occurrence.
I would have preferred a different ending to the one we got. I am not going to spoil it at all; but it is obvious why it ended the way it did: it leaves things open for possible sequels. I would have preferred to have either had some clearer closure; or better yet, I would have closed off with the Blind Man and Rocky in the basement. I will assume you will get what I mean when you see the scene. Now in my opinion that would have given you an "Oh shit!" moment and it keeps it open for a potential follow up.
Verdict:
It is very difficult to allow these three delinquents and an old man of such dubious nature off with a warning; but I feel it has to be done. Be aware Fede Alvarez, I will be monitoring your future output with great intrigue.
We decide what artistic endeavour passed approval to earn the Scorcher label from the past seven days & what also had the dishonour of being that week's Torture...
I continued my sojourn into both the spaghetti western and martial arts worlds this past week and so we have an entry from each genre.
The Scorcher
I had the displeasure the other week of watching a really bad spaghetti western; this week I was pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed Johnny Yuma. A lot of spaghetti's follow similar themes without much difference so it is nice to occasionally come across one that plays with the formula a little bit. While not rewriting the rulebook this film does have enough of a departure from the regular format to make it more appealing than many others from this genre.
The story is a simple one about someone profiteering from committing a murder so they can gain a goldmine. The difference is the antagonist is a western femme fatale played with much gusto by the beautiful Rosalba Neri who is no stranger to the spaghetti western, having appeared in plenty during her career; as well as Jess Franco's infamous 99 Women.
Our hero of the piece is played with tongue in cheek relish by Mark Damon who looks like he is having a ball. I certainly enjoyed his portrayal and he had good chemistry with Lawrence Dobkin whose Linus Carradine is hired by Neri's scheming Samantha Felton to kill Yuma.
There is double crossing, bar fighting, cheating at cards and high noon shoot outs; all the things you come to expect from this sort of fare. But they are done with a smile and a slight nod and a wink at how ridiculous all this macho bravado actually is. They are definitely trying to capture the feel of For A Few Dollars More and surprisingly I think they more or less achieve it.
It is none more evident than the final set piece where Yuma and Carradine have a running battle with the Felton gang members. The Felton gang must have gone to the Stormtrooper school of shooting as none of them can hit a target but you don't expect them too. Some might consider this scene a complete rip off of For A Few Dollars More, but it was a common occurrence for spaghetti westerns to lift whole chunks from a previous film and rework parts into their own story.
While it is not amongst the best from the era; this one certainly captured my attention and contained enough surprises to keep me amused and entertained.
The Torture
I feel it is almost sacrilege to include the great Bruce Lee amongst the Torture category; but Game of Death warrants inclusion. It was only last week that I was wailing on a martial arts icon after abusing Jackie Chan's Skiptrace. This week I am going to pick on probably the most iconic of all; albeit the one person who is not responsible for the final outcome of his last work.
For those who do not know the history of the events surrounding this picture, let me give you a concise version. Lee had started work on this production and stopped to appear in his biggest hit, the Warner Bros. produced Enter the Dragon. This was the first big budget martial arts film from a major studio. Tragically Lee died not long after filming wrapped and so was unable to come back and complete work on Game of Death.
That wasn't the end of the film though, as Lee's director from Enter the Dragon was drafted in to complete Game of Death using two stand-in actors for scenes that should have had Lee appear. Whilst there was plenty of footage originally filmed by Lee, most of it was lost by Golden Harvest; the production company responsible for all of Lee's Asian filmed movies. The finished product only has just over eleven minutes of the original footage; everything else was filmed after Lee's death!
As you can imagine the final film leaves a lot to be desired. The stand-in actors may resemble Lee physically but facially are nothing like him. They try to copy his fighting stance and moves and also throw in the distinctive noises he would make during his fights. Even using different camera angles to disguise that it isn't Lee doesn't help.
The film stock is completely different and very noticeable when it switches from the earlier filmed footage to the later material. This is especially true during some of the fight sequences; which forms the bulk of Lee's actual appearances.
There is the sense of Deja vu in what seems to be foreshadowing what will become of Lee's son Brandon Lee. Bruce's character is shot by a prop gun during the making of a film within the film. The prop gun contains a real bullet which mimics what caused the death of Brandon while filming The Crow.
What was most disturbing of all though was the inclusion of recordings taken from Lee's funeral; which tied back in to the story taking place during the film. To say this was in poor taste does not really do justice to just how disturbing this actually is. How did they ever get permission from the family to include this?
It is both uncomfortable and inappropriate to watch. It makes you feel like a voyeur looking at something that you shouldn't be witness too; this should have been left as a deeply personal thing for the family. As soon as this came on screen my opinion of the film soured dramatically.
The story itself is a solid one and if it was filmed on its own without the Lee factor it would have made a decent entry for the Golden Harvest archives. But because of the baggage involved with Lee's death and the sickening inclusion of the film from his funeral; it just left me feeling cold.
It has to be said the fight scenes in the pagoda; which forms the big set piece finale; and does include the majority of Lee's eleven minutes are probably the strongest part of the film. It is just such a shame that this martial arts legend was tragically not able to come back to conclude what would have been a fine addition to his legacy.
We decide what artistic endeavour passed approval to earn the Scorcher label from the past seven days & what also had the dishonour of being that week's Torture...
I seriously considered including one of the Now You See Me films for this week's torture after giving them back to back viewing. I had seen the first one before and gave it a flogging; but I thought it deserved a revisit prior to seeing the sequel. My opinion didn't change. The second one, while being sillier unbelievable hokum, was actually more entertaining. However neither one is worth my ire as I decided to hang another terrible, terrible film instead...
The Scorcher
The old adage of 'good things come to those who wait' should be fully applied to The Avalanches album Wildflower. Sixteen, yes sixteen, years in development since their debut album Since I Left You. There are some albums that have a profound effect on a person and that debut was one such record for me. It opened up a whole new avenue of music and possibly changed my perceptions and definitely broadened my musical horizons.
To say that I had given up all hope of ever hearing any new material from The Avalanches would be an understatement. There had been so many rumours for years about possible releases; that I thought it was just record companies trying to maintain some interest in a band that had given up after one huge hit album.
All of a sudden from out of nowhere comes this new record with only two original band members still on board; all the others having left in less than good circumstances over the years.
I haven't rushed this record; I have taken a bit of time to get into it. I normally put a new album on repeat for a few days to really familiarise myself with it; but after waiting for this one for so long I wanted to savour the experience. So it was only over the weekend that I finally gave it a few repeat listens to immerse myself in the experience. Wildflower does not disappoint. Let's get one thing clear, it was going to be impossible to hit those lofty heights of Since I Left You again; so I had already tempered my expectations. I was hoping for something in a similar vein, with some subtle differences. On the whole Wildflower delivered on these hopes.
The first half of the album is definitely the strongest part with songs like Because I'm Me and Subways; both of which would not be out of place on Since I Left You. There are psychedelic influences peppered throughout; especially songs like The Noisy Eater. Frankie Sinatra has more of a European flavour which makes me want to drink Sangria and dance the Zorba!
The theme of the record and overall effect that it has is one of happiness and joy. Since I Left You invoked the same euphoric feelings. This is one record you can put on for a summer party and just watch as people start to tap along as the playful mood infects them.
It is a glorious return from obscurity and I only hope we don't have to wait so long for another injection of pure musical pleasure from these artists.
The Torture
Let me start off by saying that I am a big fan of Jackie Chan and his particular style of Action/Comedy movies. Being someone who particularly enjoys Asian cinema, it would be hard not to like one of its greatest exports. That is why it was such a big disappointment to see just how low Jackie Chan's star has fallen after viewing Skiptrace.
This film is awful on so many levels, in fact nearly every level it is hard to know where to begin.
Johnny Knoxville is passable in his role and Chan's acting is still mostly enjoyable but on the whole the acting is diabolical with so many caricatures, especially the villains of the piece. Eve Torres does a terrible mock accent which is a mix of evil Russian and evil German; but never settles on either. Incidentally she is playing a Russian but obviously the East Berlin kind from before the wall came down. All the Asian bad guys are from the Fu Manchu school of villainy.
It is left to the audience to guess who the mysterious 'Matador' kingpin is leading this gang of hoodlums. It doesn't take a genius to figure out who this is either for anyone who has seen a misdirection trope in any action film.
The comedy has all the common racial stereotypes you can imagine; it abuses the customs, diet, dress and economy of the region. There is also a smattering of misogynistic and homophobic jokes throughout. These might have been mildly amusing thirty years ago from a film set and made in the 80's but none of them hit the mark in this day and age.
Guess what though? The film will let you know when you are supposed to laugh by playing some cute little ditty in the background that sounds like it was lifted straight from a Bugs Bunny cartoon. This happens from the first minute to the last; there is hardly a scene where there isn't some music playing. And don't get me started on the Adele singalong; cringe worthy is an understatement.
Regardless of all this criticism; the one thing above all others that annoyed me was how much the action seemed staged. There were scenes where you could see the combatants waiting for their cue to throw a punch or swing into the fight. This to me is the worst offence one of his movies can commit. Unfortunately it is probably a result of our main action star being in his early sixties but still wanting to put on a show of someone at least twenty years younger.
Jackie Chan was The Man when it came to doing his own stunts and performing fighting feats that would leave you breathless. Age has caught up with him and he looks like an old man trying to recapture his glory days. It would be such a shame if he continues along The Expendables route. Please Jackie don't ruin your legacy by continuing to appear in more appalling movies of this nature, let us remember you from films like The Young Master, Project A or Armour of God instead.
