It's Complicated

This has been marketed towards the older cinema viewer, and, if you’re in that demographic and a Nancy Meyers film floats your boat, you’ll probably have a good time. That isn’t to say this film is any good though. Meryl Streep and Alec Baldwin star as a divorced couple who, during their son’s graduation, begin an affair ( Baldwin ’s character has re-married). Errr…and that’s about it really. Steve Martin pops up as a potential love rival, but there are few jokes to be had throughout the whole script. The film falls into that old trap of not being sure whether it’s a comedy or a drama and fails to be either, or at least either up to an average level at best. Streep seems to be everywhere these days and she doesn’t disappoint again, though she may be a bit too OTT for some in this. Baldwin fares less well, gurning his way through the film and failing to capture the heart or sympathy of the audience (Glengarry Glenn Ross seems a long way off now). Overall, if this looks like a film you’ll like, then get in that cinema queue. If not, it certainly isn’t a complicated decision what to do…..

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
If you like this sort of thing then you’ll probably go home satisfied and can add an extra mark to the rating. For the rest of us, you may actually want to deduct a mark. Rating: 5/10.

The Road

John Hillcoat follows up the blistering The Proposition, with his adaptation of Cormac McCarthy’s novel The Road. The Proposition was brutal, but entertaining. The Road is similarly brutal, but the entertainment factor is it a premium due to the heavy content of McCarthy’s novel. The story concerns Man (Viggo Mortensen) and Boy (Kodi Smith-McPhee) trying to survive in a world post an unspecified disaster of some kind. The relationship between Mortensen and his son is the focal point of the story, as Man paternally tries to protect his son and make sure neither of them fall into the desperation (basically cannibalism) that has affected many of the other survivors. Mortensen gives a solid performance and there is believable chemistry between himself and Smith-McPhee. Be warned though, this really is a grim film at times, with the cannibalistic scenes particularly disturbing. Talk has been made of this being one of the most depressing films ever made. It’s certainly not uplifting, that’s for sure. Not that this makes it a bad film, but it doesn’t really help, especially as the film drags for long periods. The usual message in a film like this is “What would you do in such a situation?”. The problem being this is hardly an original concept for a mainstream film and, especially, with the glut of similarly themed films in recent years, you kind of feel like you’ve been here before. Perhaps this was best left as a novel.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Beautifully shot, but apart from a decent turn from Mortensen, that isn’t really enough for you to see a film that is just as effective on paper. Rating: 5/10.

Nine

Following on from Chicago Rob Marshall would seem the right man to take another stage hit from the boards to the big screen. It seems that a who’s who of Hollywood actresses were falling over themselves to star in this as well. The people who auditioned makes interesting reading. However, I’m not sure it really matters who won the roles in the end as the film struggles to capture the imagination that Marshall showed with Chicago and the musical routines are basic at best. The story revolves around film director Guido Contini and his struggle to make a new film while trying to control the many relationships he has with the various females in his life. This isn’t all that exciting to watch. Only a few of the musicals numbers have dramatic choreography, with the rest being standard solos. Amazing to listen to live in a theatre no doubt. Not quite so good in a cinema. In between songs we get Daniel Day-Lewis faffing around as Guido. Apparently Day-Lewis did his usual immersive preparation for the role, but his accent comes across as something akin to ‘Allo ‘Allo. On the plus side, the film is beautifully shot, with some stunning lighting and cinematography. However, the overall feeling of when a successful musical / play is transformed to the big screen is usually “why?”. That is definitely the case in this instance.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Far too slow between the numbers, and not enough of them get the pulse racing. Should have stayed on Broadway. Rating: 4/10

Spread

Beyond the slightly amusing tag line (“It’s a business doing pleasure”), there’s little thought or originality that has gone into Spread. Primarily it seems to be a vehicle for Ashton Kutcher to provide a few shocks with some juicy sex scenes. To be fair to Kutcher he isn’t all that bad, but the storyline of his wandering LA gigolo is so vacuous and hollow that I’m not too sure what the intended audience is (apart from AK fans after a cheap thrill). Kutcher and the rest of the characters are so caught up in their own lives and deceits you have no compassion for any of them. The film then completely loses it at the end and instead of following through with its convictions tries to redeem Kutcher’s character with such a personality turnaround it’s quite laughable. If the storyline is meant to be a comment on the battle of the sexes, then neither males nor females come out shining in this. There is a kernel of an idea here but it remains dormant and unheated, meaning the only response you feel as the film progresses is lukewarm apathy.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Tries to be callous, but then ridiculously looks for redemption in the final reels. Though you probably will have given up caring long before then. Rating: 3/10.

Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll

Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll is an account of the life of Ian Drury from his childhood in a disabled children’s home up to fame and fortune with The Blockheads. Director Matt Whitecross starts the film with an eye hurting mix of animation, jump cuts and general confusion. It’s not a great start. However, things improve when the film settles down into a more narrative structure and we get to enjoy Andy Serkis’s uncanny portrayal of Drury. Visually and vocally, Serkis puts in a great performance and his more OTT roles from his previous films are quickly forgotten. However, despite a strong supporting cast portraying his family, the film suffers as it concentrates on Drury’s relationship with them at the expense of any sort of analysis of his music. The film makes Drury come across as some sort of talentless sixth form student, and on the occasions some of the hits are used in the film they barely resonant, despite being some of the biggest songs of that time. Take away the music and you have a film that is actually a bit of a struggle to watch as there actually isn’t much to make us warm to Drury. Not that having a successful music career is an excuse for his selfish behaviour, but the film needs more balance between private life and public life. Worth watching for Serkis as Drury, but the film lacks clarity and fails to portray just how big Drury was at his peak

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Sex? Yes. Drugs? Plenty. Rock & Roll? Far too little. Rating: 5/10.

Daybreakers

Another bloody vampire movie? Wait, come back! For while this is another bloody vampire movie it’s also clever, enjoyable and a very bloody vampire movie. The concept of Daybreakers is fairly original. In 2019, due to a plague, the majority of the population are now vampires, who harvest the remaining humans for their blood. However, the humans, and the blood, are running out. Writer/Director combo Peter and Michael Spierig take this idea and flesh it out with some smart twists, some enjoyable hammy acting and some outrageous gore. Ethan Hawke stars as the main protagonist, a blood researcher looking for a solution to the shortening supply of claret. Sam Neill takes up the reigns as the villain of the piece and takes the acting gong with a nice display of heartlessness. There are quite a few jumps to be had, but the over reliance on cheap tricks to obtain them does begin to annoy after a while. Unfortunately the whole she-bang does fall apart very quickly at the end as the Spierig’s turn the splatometre up to 11 (you’ll need a strong stomach) as the screenplay becomes all mixed up. Overall though, you may sick to death of vampires, but Daybreakers provides more bite than most and I expect it to gain a cult following.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
A smart script, plenty of gore, only let down by the confused ending. Rating: 7/10.

Nowhere Boy

Sam Taylor-Wood’s Nowhere Boy is an account of John Lennon’s latter teenage years, before fame and fortune beckoned with The Beatles. It mainly concerns the relationship between himself, his mother and his aunt. Though it does include the meetings with Paul and George, any fans looking for a musical slant to the film will be disappointed. However, don’t be put off as Taylor-Wood gives us an enjoyable film, though it does have its down sides. The first being that Aaron Johnson, who plays Lennon, bears little resemblance to the man at all (piercing blue eyes!). Though obviously not a deal breaker it is somewhat distracting, especially as Johnson, though only 19, also looks about 10 years older than he actually is. Secondly, though Taylor-Wood gives us one nice little montage and a few jump cuts, the overall feel of the film is a bit stagey. Luckily, this is mostly forgotten due to the great acting on show. Johnson gives a great performance as the ever more confused Lennon (plus points here to Taylor-Wood as well, as she doesn’t shy away from the darker and mean side to Lennon) and Kristin Scott Thomas does unemotional stiff upper lipped Englishness as only she can do. Throw in some amusing dry scouse wit and you’ve got a film that definitely more A Day In The Life than Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Funny, well acted, with a strong emotional core, but you feel this film could just as well be about a random person as opposed to one of the most famous people that’s ever lived. Rating: 7/10.

Did You Hear About The Morgans?

Anyone who regularly buys music albums will be well aware of the concept of an “album filler”. This film can be best described as something along those lines. In Did You Hear About The Morgans?, Sarah Jessica Parker and Hugh Grant star as an (ex)-couple who, after witnessing a murder, are re-located from their New York high-rises to cowboy country via the witness protection programme. Does hilarity ensue? Of course not. Yep, this really is as bad as it sounds. Tired fish out of water gags constantly fall flat, not helped by limp direction and some awful acting. SJP seems more game, but doesn’t do much to prove she’s one of the more bewildering actresses to have success. Grant seems bored and distracted and almost annoyed that he’s got to dig out his bumbling Englishman routine once more. There are a couple of gags to be laughed at (only a couple I assure you) but the whole package smacks of going through the motions. However, if it still pulls in the punters, then do the studios care? As to whether you see it or not, you need to decide if you wish to see a film that is so dumb that when SJP and Grant go into the witness protection programme their characters keep their Christian names.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Totally harmless, but completely hapless as well. Rating: 3/10.

Me And Orson Welles

Richard Linklater’s back catalogue is full of hits and misses. This time out, and much like Orson Welles and his 1937 New York theatre production of Julius Caesar, he scores a hit. Linklater’s film tells the back story of Welles’ production up to and including its glorious opening night. Thrown into the mix is out of town teenager Richard (Zac Efron) who convinces Welles that he can play the part of Lucius in said production. Linklater’s film is high on charm as he plays up the theatrics of both producing the play and the theatrics of the highly strung actors. Zac Efron is fine as the easy going Richard, but he is blown off the screen by Christian McKay’s towering performance as Welles. McKay is superb, nailing Welles to a tee, as the film revolves around him and his effortless charm. The irony is that when McKay is off screen we miss his presence and can only pay token gestures to the other strands of the story as we wait for his return. This presents somewhat of a problem at the end as the storyline turns on an incident involving Welles and his darker side. Though representative of the more unpleasant traits of Welles’ personality, it comes so out of the blue after all the bonhomie that has gone previously it throws the final act of the film totally off the rails and we’re left twiddling our thumbs until the limp finish. Shame.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Very enjoyable, but the film is almost overshadowed by McKay’s storming performance which in turn leads to the somewhat abrupt ending. Rating: 7/10.

Best and Worst Films of 2009

You’re always on a hiding to nothing doing these lists, but I thought I’d do them anyway. Tricky to get them in an order as well, as an opinion you have about a film the day after seeing it can sometimes totally differ from how you recall it a few weeks down the line (hence some films may be out of sync with what I gave them as their original rating). Anyway….the ten, in my humble opinion, best films of 2009 were…

1) Let The Right One In
2) In The Loop
3) Slumdog Millionaire
4) Up
5) Inglourious Basterds
6) District 9
7) The White Ribbon
8) Mesrine: Killer Instinct
9) Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs
10) 500 Days Of Summer

…and the turkeys of 2009 were…

1) Gamer
2) The Spirit
3) The Invention Of Lying
4) Knowing
5) Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen
6) Synecdoche, New York
7) Blood: The Last Vampire
8) The Final Destination
9) The Taking Of Pelham 123
10) Couples Retreat

Sherlock Holmes

Guy Ritchie, especially in the UK, gets a bit of a kicking at times from critics. Amongst all the accusations of being a “Mockney” and the razzmatazz of being Mr Madonna, it seems to be forgotten that he is a film director first and foremost. Having said that, the brickbats thrown at Swept Away and Revolver are well directed. However, which director doesn’t have a few bad apples on their CV? At least Ritchie did well to recover from that double whammy with the encouraging return to form that was RocknRolla. He now follows that up with another respectable effort in the shape of Sherlock Holmes. This doesn’t look like the usual Ritchie source material, but the film displays all his usual traits. We get sharp dialogue, flashbacks, slow-motion and neck breaking camera angles. Ritchie really does make great use of the camera in this film. This is backed up by a smart script which, though at times is pure hokum, makes for an entertaining caper. Having said that, if you’re a Baker Street (ir)regular you’ll be pretty unimpressed with Ritchie’s take on Holmes. In terms of the acting Robert Downey Jr. plays the title role with Jude Law taking the part of Dr John Watson. Both roles are well played, with the two coming across as a bickering couple, albeit with an underlying and unspoken bond between them that one cannot cope without the other. Mark Strong seems to never give a bad performance and continues his run here providing menace as the possibly supernatural Lord Blackwood. Less successful are the female characters, which isn’t unusual for Ritchie’s seemingly male dominated worlds. Also missing are the comic touches that Ritchie has given us in the past with the film being a bit too much of a reimagining a la Bond and Batman, when a lighter touch at times would have given a greater package overall.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Like Holmes himself, rough round the edges, but enough nous to achieve a satisfying conclusion. Rating: 7/10.

Avatar

Despite being one of the most anticipated films of all time, Avatar almost feels like it has slipped in under the radar now it’s finally here. With the film being years in the planning and making, and with very little info being leaked, interest was beginning to wane. That was up until a few months ago when people suddenly realised there was only a few months more to wait, then a few teaser clips appeared, followed then by the endlessly player trailer, and before we knew it we were all sitting there on opening day with our 3D glasses on. So, how to review such a film? First of all, the storyline. Sam Worthington stars as Jake Sully, a paraplegic marine, who, via the use of an avatar, infiltrates a colony of humanoid like beings (the Na’vi) in order to persuade them to abandon their planet so humans can mine a precious ore that is buried there. So, to the special effects first then. You can breath a sigh of relief. They are amazing. In addition the overall look of the film has a look (almost like a sheen) of quality not seen before. A couple of scenes where the backgrounds disappear off into the distance are draw dropping. Oddly though, the 3D isn’t as stunning as other 3D efforts this year (A Christmas Carol being a prime example). There is a reason why this is, but I’ll let you surf the net to find the technical explanation. So does the rest of the film back up the effects? Yes and No. The storyline is fairly predictable. As soon as Sully (in his avatar) meets a female Na’vi and starts to understand the Na’vi way of life, you don’t need to be Poirot to guess what’s going to happen next. The acting is hit and miss. Worthington is fine, but a few people struggle to bring life to their underwritten parts. Two parts not underwritten are Giovanni Ribisi’s as the company man determined to get the Na’vi out of the way, and Stephen Lang as the military man in charge of the troops who are more than happy to help him. Both characters are terribly written, laden with awful dialogue and as stereotypical as they come. Lang’s character in particular seems to have dropped in from some mid 1980’s action film. The good news is that regardless of this, the film is still a blast anyway and extremely enjoyable with enough emotional pull for you to feel a connection with the Na’vi as things turn bad. Obviously the film has pretty unsubtle references to the environment and racial and political history. However, as you’re watching the film, you’re probably wise to let these messages pass over your head and just enjoy the ride. Is this the future of film then? At the moment it would appear unlikely. Only a director with James Cameron’s passion (and past successful track record) is going to spend years nurturing a project such as this. In addition, not many studios are going to stump up the current costs associated with such an effects laden film (a rumoured $280,000.000 for this one). Obviously as the years go on the technology will be refined and overheads will come down. And though the visuals are stunning, there is some irony in the fact that the film does actually demonstrate that human acting is always more emotive and engaging than effects could ever be. In addition to this, it does prove that it doesn’t matter whether you’re watching a CGI blockbuster or a low budget independent film, the screenplay is king, and will always be the measure by how a film triumphs or falls.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
This is a visual treat on the eyes. Unfortunately, this enjoyment is counter-balanced by a screenplay that is an assault on the ears and offers little in the way of surprises. Rating: 7/10.

Where The Wild Things Are

Spike Jonze’s adaptation of Maurice Sendak’s 60’s children favourite Where The Wild Things Are has had a troubled development. When the first cut was delivered to Warner Brothers back in early 2008, they were pretty unimpressed by what they saw. The film was going to be shelved, but Warner stumped up some more dosh for Jonze and put the film on a years delay while he re-shot. Was it worth the money? Opinion seems to be split, but for me it’s a resounding no. For those that don’t know, the story concerns Max, a nine year old boy who, after an argument with his mother, dreams up a fantasy land full of furry creatures who treat him as their king….and…err…that’s about it really. The film falls down for me on a number of factors. First, and the problem that Warner had with it originally, is that even this final version of the film fails to make it clear who the target audience is. Secondly, Max comes just comes across as a brat in the film so why do we care enough about him to indulge in his fantasy world? Finally, once in the fantasy world, nothing happens apart from a few trite lessons in life. It really drags along. I actually don’t blame Jonze too much for this. He was always on a hiding to nothing with this sort of material and at least (apart from the creature’s faces) he’s tried to utilise as little CGI as possible. One final thought occurred to me towards the end of the film. It was rumoured to cost $75M, even before the re-shot scenes. Looking at the product on the big screen, I could only think “Where on earth did all that money go?”.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Not a bad film per-se, but far too dull to entertain kiddies or their parents. Rating: 3/10.

The Informant!

Hey, look at Matt Damon! He’s old(ish)! He’s fat (a bit)! He has a silly moustache! Though it might be a curiosity, I doubt whether Damon’s physical appearance in this film is enough to entice people in as it hardly looks like an entertaining night out. However, appearances can be deceptive (which is also pretty much the story of this film) as Steven Soderbergh crafts an enjoyable, if dry, little film. Matt Damon stars as Mark Whitacre, a vice president at an agricultural firm, who turns informant for the FBI in respect of price-fixing across the board. As The Informant! is based on true events, if you already know what’s coming in the film, then you won’t be all that astounded by what happens. However, if you have no idea of the Whitacre story then you are in for a few surprises. Soderbergh deftly lets the story unfold with subtle references to the head-scratching incidents that occur as opposed to spoon feeding the audience the information. Damon gives a decent performance as Whitacre, but all the make up in the world can’t disguise the fact he looks like a freshman at a CEO fancy dress party. Damon scores best in his scenes with a couple of FBI agents (played by Scott Bakula and Joel McHale), who feel they have hit the big time with Whitacre’s help. Their looks of disbelief and exasperation as their dealings with Whitacre become more than what they thought are one of the highlights of the film. There is also some wry amusement to be had at the early 1990’s setting ranging from outrageous clothing to mobile phones the size of bricks. However, the awful soundtrack Soderbergh’s selected grates to the point of distraction.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
This is hardly edge of the seat stuff, but if you stay with it you will be rewarded as the layers of deceit on all levels slowly reveal themselves. Rating: 6/10.