London Boulevard

Screenwriter William Monahan’s directorial debut London Boulevard is a gritty little film that makes the most of its fairly standard storyline. Colin Farrell starts as Mitchell, a recently released prisoner, who in trying to go straight is thwarted by the actions of his old friends and enemies in the criminal fraternity and his hard to suppress desire to be back in with the bad boys. This is pretty much the outline of all recently released prisoner story lines in books, TV series or films. However, feelings of over familiarity are just about overcome by a series of decent performances, though there are quite a few caricatures on show. This film is pretty much the Farrell show as he’s in virtually every scene. He does a good job showing Mitchell’s struggle to live a normal life against his tendency to resort to violence to solve problems as quickly as possible. Though this is good stuff by Farrell, he does spend a lot of the film just looking moody and it doesn’t really capture why just the mention of his name has people running for cover. The rest of the mainly Irish and British cast pop up every now and then throughout the story and the actors and actresses limited screen time means each doesn’t have that long to make their mark on the film. For some it works, for others it doesn’t. Anna Friel and Ben Chaplin are good as Mitchell’s sister and ex-criminal partner, respectively. Eddie Marsan is great as a bent copper, but his minimal screen time is a disappointment. Ray Winstone is also wasted as an East End gangster who Monahan just has swearing a lot (though Winstone still provides the needed gravitas) and, despite being second billing, Keira Knightley brings nothing to the show as a washed out actress. They say criminals only end up in two places, the prison or the morgue. Monahan’s film doesn’t deviate from that at any point and despite the screenplay plodding along at times, and a somewhat cruel ending, his direction is pretty much on the mark throughout and he gets great performances from a number of his actors.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Nothing new here, but this is well acted and even has a number of laughs amid the grimness. Rating: 6/10.

Hereafter

After a good run of well received films, Clint Eastwood’s latest film as director, Hereafter, breaks that run in spectacular fashion. Hereafter is pretty abysmal from start to finish and people who enjoy the many factual errors contained in Eastwood’s films will have a field day here. The worst (best?) being a tour guide at Charles Dickens’ London abode mentioning his novel “Edward Drood”. Huh? You really think someone would pick up on these things when reviewing the rushes (or whatever the equivalent is these days). Or are they too scared to approach The Man With No Name? Anyway I digress, which is, ironically, what happens with the screenplay to this film, which goes off in tangents, leaves many story lines hanging and comes to a limp conclusion. Principally a story about life after death we follow three main characters, a French woman (Cécile de France) caught up in the tsunami, a kid from London, who loses his twin brother and Matt Damon, a former spiritualist who can speak to the dead, but has long since retired doing readings. The three story lines eventually interact, but the film gets off to such a bad start it never really recovers. Taking an actual disaster, in this case the aforementioned tsunami is always walking a tightrope in films if building a storyline around it, but in this instance it really is unnecessary. de France is caught up in the disaster, appears to drown and then comes back alive. Couldn’t this have been depicted in a swimming pool or something? It’s bad enough anyone wants to relive such a disaster anyway, but this is done with such cheap and awful special effects it’s pretty insulting to the memories of the thousands that died. A similar error of judgement occurs later on with a tube bombing. That’s entertainment folks! There are some bright moments (a collection of dodgy spiritualists raise a wry smile) but the message of the film is never really clear. Damon himself actually does a good job up to a point, but even he seems to realise what a mess he’s in and is coasting long before the baffling finish. The worst bit is the portrayal of Europe though and Eastwood’s depiction of London, all shot through with some very murky filters. It’s so depressing you’re amazed that there aren’t suicide booths on the corners of the streets. The weather is grim, the people look miserable, they wear dull clothes and act as if just being alive is a punishment handed down from above. As for the accents, they are ridiculous, bordering on the farcical. The worst cockney Charles Dickens-esque mumbling possible ever committed to celluloid. What I don’t get is surely Clint must have noticed that people in England don’t speak like that when he spent months filming in the country? (or indeed the many times he’s been here over the years) This isn’t the rantings of an Englishman either as Eastwood also manages to make Paris look as appealing as an abandoned mid-west steel town. Paris, for goodness sake! All I can say is wait for this to come out on DVD. Then don’t rent it.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
What could have been half decent is lost amongst some dire direction and acting. Arguably Eastwoods worst film either in front of or behind the camera. Rating: 2/10.

The Tourist

Though I do my best to avoid mentioning Hitchcock in every review I do, The Tourist reminded me very much of some of The Masters not so great efforts. Similarity’s being The Tourist is a thriller, though you never feel anyone is really in any danger, there’s an innocent man on the run (natch), it’s got a fair amount of comedy in it, all the scenes look great, the actors are snazzily attired and there’s a twist at the end. Hmmm…To Catch A Thief, anyone? The Tourist is much like that film in the fact that it’s mildly entertaining, but doesn’t warrant any further viewings. Director Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck’s last film was the critically acclaimed The Lives Of Others so we’re in safe hands, but his calm direction means at times the film starts to wander. Luckily, a gag, action scene or plot twist comes along just as you’re at brain about to switch off mode. In said plot we have Elise (Angelina Jolie), who whilst being trailed by the police, befriends a tourist, Frank (Johnny Depp), in order to convince the coppers that he is her lover and criminal mastermind they want to apprehend. Before long mobsters are involved and we have the old classic of a couple on the run from both the police and gangsters. A lot of things in this film don’t work (don’t even bother to start picking through all the plot holes in this), particularly the non-existent chemistry between the skeletal looking Jolie (not sexy at all in this despite von Donnersmarck’s fawning camera) and Depp. Having said all that, its absurdity just about works in its favour and if you’re not too nit-picky you can enjoy some light entertainment whilst savouring the beauty of Venice.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
A non-threatening thriller, but whilst it all doesn’t add up to much there’s enough moments of enjoyment to help you get to twisty finish. Rating: 6/10.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader

I’m writing this review a few weeks after seeing The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader and I’m actually having a bit of trouble recalling what happens in it. Probably not the best endorsement of a film, but though it isn’t all that memorable it’s still a decent effort for Narnia devotees to derive some pleasure from. This is actually a salient point as it’s only the hardcore fans who will have a clue what is going on in this, as the film doesn’t really pander to any newcomers who have yet to watch either of the earlier films. Speaking of those films, after getting stung at the box office, Disney decided to ditch the franchise and its now 20th Century Fox that have taken up the reigns. Tone wise this doesn’t make any real difference when comparing the films but Fox do make the smart decision of making this film a good deal shorter than the last Disney outing and some of the effects, especially in the battle scenes, are a good deal sharper. In the film Lucy (Georgie Henley) and Edmund (Skandar Keynes) return to Narnia, this time with cousin Eustace (Will Poulter) in tow, meet up again with Prince Caspian (Ben Barnes) and get into all sorts of scrapes involving the usual cast of pirates, dragons, dwarfs etc. There’s no doubt that Fox put their heart and soul into this movie and veteran director Michael Apted does a decent job. The film feels more confident than its predecessors and is perfect family fun. However, it’s no more than that and people who find the whole fantasy world genre a bore certainly won’t find this any different. British viewers may also be distracted by Poulter’s “posh” accent which makes him sound like Sandy Toksvig is dubbing his part. I think young kids will love this film, I’m just not so sure that enjoyment stretches too far beyond that demographic. Finally, if you’re eating Nachos during the film make sure you save some for the end as there is some serious cheese dripping off the screen.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Pretty fluffy, but fans and the target audience should enjoy another couple of hours of escapism. Rating: 6/10

The Green Hornet

There was much raising of eye-brows when Seth Rogan was announced to be playing the lead role in The Green Hornet. An acquired taste at the best of times, it appeared the fan boys weren’t too happy. I’m no fan either way, but considering The Green Hornet was originally a radio show how can anyone say who should be cast or not? More interesting is the choice of Michel Gondry being sat in the director’s chair. Anyone who saw the mediocre Be Kind Rewind would be allowed a shudder at the thought of him helming this. However, Gondry was originally slated as a director for this back in the mid-nineties so it’s safe to say he doesn’t come to the film unprepared. Storyline wise we have a slim looking Rogan as Britt Reid who on the death of his father, and the discovery that one of his father’s employees, Kato (Jay Chou), is an expert at martial arts, making gadgets and seeing time slowed down (ahem) decides to clean up the streets vigilante style. Plot wise this is as thin as Rogan. However, and crucially, Gondry realises this and moves the film along at pace with a knowing wink at the ludicrousness of it all. It’s fair to say that whilst Rogan does a good job, it’s unlikely that disapprovers will be swayed by him in this. The main plus point though is his chemistry with Chou. Almost becoming a funny man / straight man combination the duo banter and bicker to such a delight its clear Gondry knew he was onto a winner and smartly decided to focus on them over the action scenes. Speaking of the action, apart from the standard shoot em up at the end, fans may be disappointed that the fisticuffs only come infrequently and are over too soon. Though, a hilarious, non-bloody, set to between Rogan and Chou in the middle of the film is worth the price of admission alone. Acting wise the only real disappointments are Cameron Diaz struggling in a poorly underwritten role as a secretary / love interest (though she does give another entry into the worlds shortest shorts competition) and Christoph Waltz (as the main villain) trying to channel the ghost of Hans Landa, but falling short in both humour and menace. At least these roles are slightly offset by a funny opening cameo from James Franco and another tick in the book for the Tom Wilkinson American accent spotters (has he used that accent now more than his English one?). Overall, this has the feel of the classic Friday night film. Instantly forgettable, but great fun at the time.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Great rapport between the leads and Gondry’s non-serious approach mean the film is a welcome and enjoyable surprise. Rating: 7/10.

The Next Three Days

Paul Haggis’ The Next Three Days is a remake of the French thriller Anything For Her (coincidentally one of the first films I reviewed on this website. Click the title to go to the review). If the first film has been a decent watch, seeing a remake can be an odd experience. You don’t really want to see a scene for scene copy, but at the same time you don’t want it to go so far off what made the original great that the film ends up a poor imitation of its superior cousin. See Pelham and Let Me In for evidence of that. If you’ve see Anything for Her, or just read my review, then the plot for The Next Three Days is almost identical (that of a normal schmo planning to break his wife out of prison), with a number of scenes exactly mirroring the original film. However, this isn’t a problem as it’s well directed by Haggis and if you haven’t seen the first film its fairly riveting stuff. Russell Crowe and Elizabeth Banks take over the lead roles and give steady, if unspectacular performances. So, any improvements on the French film? Not many, but as the source material is so good that’s not really a problem. What is a problem is, at the end of the film, Haggis’s decision to show whether Banks’ character is guilty or not of the murder she has been jailed for. It’s a huge miss-step. Though it was hinted at in Fred Cavaye’s film it was left to the audience to decide. I honestly can’t believe an American audience wouldn’t have been able to cope with the same scenario. It’s one of the main talking points of the film! Just in case the screenplay didn’t spell it out clearly enough, Haggis then compounds the problem with an utter ludicrous scene revolving around a tiny piece of evidence, just to make we are comprehend whether she is guilty or not. Overall, if you haven’t seen the original, then this is still worth your time. You just have the nagging feeling though it could have been even better.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Loses a mark due to the ending, but for a remake this isn’t bad at all. Rating: 6/10.

Another Year

Has there ever been a more character driven director than Mike Leigh? You certainly don’t watch his films for any snappy camera work. It’s a good job then the majority of Leigh’s back catalogue is full of great performances in decent, if hard to enjoy films. Another Year is no exception. The film tells the story of Tom (Jim Broadbent) and Gerri (Ruth Sheen), a couple in their later years, and the family and friends they interact with throughout a calendar year. The film is split into four sections, that being the four seasons, and the cinematography, lighting and props give a great impression of the relevant seasons themselves and the passing of time. There are a few story lines on the go, but the main one concerns Tom and Gerri’s ditsy friend Mary (Lesley Manville) and her uneven lifestyle. Manville is superb here, running a gambit of emotions as she goes from bubbly and smiling to something much more emotional as jealously and depression take over as the realisation hits her that her crush on Tom and Gerri’s son will never prove to be more than just that. I’m actually writing this review the day after the Oscar nominations have been announced, and though most hardened film aficionado’s know the Oscars are a joke most of the time, the fact that Manville hasn’t even been nominated proves what a farce the annual back slapping ceremony has begun. Just as great on the acting front is Broadbent playing his part so effortlessly that during a background scene at a funeral it appears you are just watching a real life documentary. It’s not all brilliant though, an opening scene with Imelda Staunton is unnecessary and Sheen eventually just grates with her monotone “No / Yes, Mary” dialogue. Plus, some may find Tom and Gerri a touch smug and their relationship with Mary sometimes borders on the wrong side of teasing. A cropping of some scenes might have helped as well, but overall this goes to show that when it comes to actually directing actors Leigh is still one of the top operators around.

The OC Film Sting Final Verdict
Too slow at times, but this is an acting tour de force from Broadbent and, especially, Manville. Rating: 7/10.