conjunctions: (Default)
A low budget gay movie which is better than it has any right to be, which begins with a hustler (Ben Bonenfant) having sex with a trick and then running into someone who knows him in the same apartment building. We've already had it suggested that both hustler and client are playing roles, and we see the hustler changing character to suit this presumable stranger, and give him what he wants. When he tries to leave, he runs into someone else, and someone else after that... There's a hint of horror - the apartment building is almost a character in itself, trapping him, emphasised by the splendid shots of a spiral staircase toward the end, which you wonder if the character will descend forever. There's a Bunuel movie in which the bourgeoisie remain trapped somewhere (a dinner party? a church?) and then, uh, leave. Bonenfant is utterly convinced as the chameleon central character, and he takes you into this world.

Spoilers )

conjunctions: (Default)
I'd thought that I'd fallen off watching Almodovar when I saw La piel que habito
(The Skin I Live In (2011)) in Sheffield, but I caught up with Los abrazos rotos
(Broken Embraces (2009)) late last year on DVD and I did actually see Volver in the cinema. My favourite Almodovar films have always been the ones with Carmen Maura - the Johnny Depp to Almodovar's Tim Burton - and it is great to see her back here, I think for the first time since Mujeres al borde de un ataque de nervios (1988) (which Los abrazos rotos borrowed from). In twenty years, she's graduated from the strong woman spinning plates to the crazy grandmother, but she is a luminous as ever. I recognise a few other bit players, too.

The Almodovar universe is consistent - here we have the strong central female (Raimunda (Penélope Cruz)) with a waster and abusive husband Paco (Antonio de la Torre), odd sister Soledad (Lola Dueñas) and impressionable daughter Paula (Yohana Cobo). The death of Raimunda and Soledad's aunt Paula (Chus Lampreave) in the village where they grew up coincides with Paco's murder in Madrid, and the need for Raimunda to hide his brother. Meanwhile, their mother, Irene (Carmen Maura), presumed dead in a fire with their father some years earlier, starts appearing to Soledad. Raimunda is dealing with ghosts of one kind or another. It's perhaps not as melodramatic as it would have been in 1988 - there are prostitutes but fewer random drug taking incidents, and Raimunda avoids a potential for an affair when a film crew visits her suburb. This is the mature Almodovar, and perhaps I prefer the early comedies. But it is shot beautifully, and Maura I could watch in anything.
conjunctions: (Default)
I watched this on the recommendation of a friend - well to be accurate the mother of a friend, or pedantic the mother in law of a friend - who has kept asking me if I've watched a film called The Kid yet. Now I have - I could have been put off it by the director being Nick Moran, from that mockney masterpiece Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, but that would have been a shame.

It's an adaptation of a true story, told in two books by Kevin Lewis, who grew up in an abusive and neglectful family, escaped into a bar and boxing, and finally made it after he found someone to believe when he hit rock bottom. On paper it really shouldn't work - it is grim stuff to be heart warming, and daily headlines tell us about the ones who did make it. And the climax is botched.

The film begins with the young adult Lewis dumped on the street outside the house where he used to live, and him breaking in to his old bedroom, and making an attempt at suicide. Of course, as he's narrating we have a fair idea how this will turn out, but first we get young Kevin and then we get teen Kevin and finally back to adult Kevin. The early scenes are genuinely harrowing - not so much the alcoholic, neglectful father (Con O'Neill), but the violent and remarkably uglified mother, Gloria (Natascha McElhone, unrecognisable from The Truman Show), and apparently the abuse is toned down from the real story. There are saviours - a diligent teacher (Ioan Gruffudd), a smart fosterer (Bernard Hill) and a kindly couple (James Fox and Shirley Anne Field), but bad luck and poor choices dog Kevin. It could have ended a lot worse.

Moran gets pretty convincing performances out of his inexperienced cast members, although you miss the star cameos once their roles are over. There are some good flourishes to show the passage of time, but it suffers from what I call the tin bath syndrome - you interrupt your viewing of a harrowing scene to be nostalgic about that tin bath, just like one you used to have... Well, in this case it's Rubick's Cube and other ephemera of the 1980s and so forth, the fetish for period details sometimes too likely to shock you out of the film.

But it works as a post-Loach film, and its heart's in the right place, even if it is perhaps a little too in love with bare knuckle boxing in junk yards.
conjunctions: (Default)
I suspect that this and Submarine (Richard Ayoade, 2010) are the closest we'll get to the movie of The Wasp Factory, in terms of sensibilities anyway - I can't claim that either of them would warrant the original novel's video nasty tag. Then again, neither did the novel. Submarine is probably distant - I just had a feeling.

Anyway, Hallam Foe - adapted by David Mackenzie and Ed Whitmore from Peter Jinks's novel - is an Oedipal gothic tale, full of incest, intrigue, fear of murder, voyeurism and desire. Hallam's (Jamie Bell) mother has drowned in suspicious circumstances, and his father (Ciarán Hinds) has rather rapidly married his secretary (Claire Forlani - from Mallrats). After spending time spying upon lovers from his tree house (in the grounds of a castle) and his neighbours, Foe is confronted and semiseduced by his stepmother. He runs away to Edinburgh, where he starts spying on Kate (Sophia Myles), the double of his mother.

It's a variant on the Hamlet/Oedipus theme - when I first saw the film I nearly applauded when the father reappears with crutches (oedipus = swollen foot, and all that) - with a the object of desire being murdered, apparently by the object of his father's desire. Foe's seduction by step-mother and quasi-mother are both against his will - they break too many taboos - and it is perhaps inevitable that he feels more comfortable as a voyeur than a participant, and even then attempts to disrupt the primal scene. Both mother substitutes have clay feet - or, rather, neither are the angel of the house he perceives his mother to have been, but this is a perception he learns to question through the course of the narrative. At the same time, it's not entirely certain how far the narrative can be trusted - he might not understand what he sees (although occasionally, and wrongly I think, we move away from his experiences) and we only know what he is told, and we are told he has been lied to. When we see him giving a thumbs up to himself through an attic window, we know that at least some of the film is fantasy.

What makes the film - aside from a series of impressive performances, and rather brave shifts between melodrama and comedy - are the locations. It's a truism that the locations of gothic narrative are representative of character psyches - notes how Elizabeth Bennet falls in love with Darcy the moment she sees the size of his stately pile - and the loch-side castle and tree house are clearly fertile symbols. In a curious inversion the escape is to the city to sort out the problems of the country, and with the city as Edinburgh we get a whole metatext of Knox, Hogg, Brodie, Burke and Hare, Jekyll and Hyde and Rebus, of dual identities and the damned and the elect. Foe can ascend and descend in the hotel he works in - he is meant to be circumscribed by the bowels of the building and its kitchens, his progress to porter gives him a free rein around the hotel and his bolt hole is in an attic, with most freedom being on rooftops. There's metaphors of class here (although he is clearly of upper middle class origin) as well as the Freudian/Zizekian scheme of id/ego/superego as spatialisations through architecture.

There's more thinking through to be done - the names are also symbolic: the father Julius (Julius Caesar), stepmother Verity (truth), sister Lucy (light), double Kate (Kiss Me/Kismet Kate?), Alasdair (the Gaelic Alexander - homage to Gray, perhaps?) and Hallam Foe as ... enemy of some kind. But why Hallam? Sheffield steel? Hall am Foe points to more architecture (his father is an architect, just to confront some more superego issues)

I think there's a lot more to unpick here, and I definitely need to go and find the book. I also want to go and check out the director's other films
conjunctions: (Default)
I liked Moon (2009), Jones's feature debut, and plan to write on it soon, but I suspect it isn't as clever as it thinks it is, and the mug and Post-It notes on WALL-E GERTY kept appearing and vanishing in annoying continuity glitches. It was clearly heavily influenced by Silent Running (Douglas Trumbull, 1972) and was essentially a two-hander. The trailer for Source Code didn't look promising, and so I ended up waiting for the DVD. I'm glad I waited, although it's a film whose discussion clearly risks spoilers. You may wish to look away now. If you haven't seen the film, this might not make sense. (It might not make sense anyway.)

Here the influences are Groundhog Day (Harold Raimis, 1993) and filmed Philip K. Dick, such as Paycheck (John Woo, 2003) and Next (Lee Tamahori, 2007), and Quantum Leap, thanks to Scott Bukula's cameo. Plus Jones has cast Jake Gyllenhaal from Donnie Darko (Richard Kelly, 2001), another film with lots of timey-wimey stuff. This one seems to be an exercise in how many unbelievable premises can be fitted into a single movie.

So there's a bomb attack on a train, which is the dry run for a dirty bomb attack on Chicago. Ex-porn star Afghanistan War vet Colter Stevens happens to be the right size of a passenger on the train, and can be projected into the passenger's body to find the bomb and stop it from detonating, hence preventing the second terrorist act. There's a woman, Christina Warren (Michelle Monaghan) who is travelling with the person he has piggy-back on, who he must avoid chatting up, and a military officer, Captain Colleen Goodwin (Vera Farmiga), who is doing the sending and who isn't telling him everything.He seems to be able to go back and try multiple times, until he succeeds, even penetrating the terrorists' cunning Plan B. At which point we can start objecting about the time paradoxes - if he succeeds, then they don't know there's been a train explosion (because there hasn't been a train explosion), so even though he's passed on information about the suspect, they don't know to send him back in time.

Ah... let's wave our hands, and go for the many-worlds interpretation and think back to Gregory Benford's Timescape (1980), a superior piece of work, and figure that Stevens's missions create alternate possibilities in which the train doesn't crash or Chicago isn't destroyed. But then if every time an event can happen differently a parallel universe is created, then there are plenty of universes where the world is saved without his intervention.

(I have a strong memory of a radio comedy by Cliffhanger, "The Assassination of Karl Marx": "Remember, you can only travel through time twice. Travel a third time, and a sausage will stick to the end of your nose.")

But this is one of the many things you are not meant to think about. Presumably the train bomb is meant to divert resources from Chicago city centre. Why can the contact with the dead person only be for eight minutes before their death? How do they know that someone of the size and weight of the veteran they just happen to have hanging around was on the train? Presumably they've found evidence that such a person was on the train - or may be it's that they were able to find someone of the right range to piggyback on. Perhaps he's not been told the truth about what's going on - in fact we know he isn't.

And the ending - well, talk about Hollywood bolt on. It is clear that the bomber did not work alone, so it is equally clear that there is someone else around. (The film assumes the bombers only had one plan b.) Does the bomber spill the beans? Did they have time to before the bomb didn't go off after all? I think not. In fact it's pretty clear whom the second bomber ought to be, although I'm not quite sure that works anyway, with someone else as a possible other candidate. That's the sucker punch ending. (Or are we meant to think that's who it is, and the plot's loss of this point is just careless?) Instead we get a cake and eat it ending, a eucatastrophe of all eucatastrophes, where Stevens gets to tie up loose ends, someone ties up his loose ends, and yet we are left with a gooey, bless...

I really enjoyed Moon. That too had plot holes, but I don't think it insulted my intelligence as this film did. Or perhaps I'm not smart enough to realise it.
conjunctions: (Default)
Essentially a two-hander which demonstrates its theatrical origins - Tim Whitnall's 2005 play The Sociable Plover - but also uses them to good advantage. The film is set in a hide on the Suffolk coast (actually the Isle of Sheppey and Pinewood), with some rather grisly flashbacks which brings a sense of the macabre which comes rather too close to foreshadowing.

In a sense we're in Pinter territory, as two strangers meet, each afraid of the other, and the dialogue shifts between black humour, obsession and menace, implied or otherwise. Losey's grandfather knew his Pinter, of course. On the one hand we have Roy Tunt, smartly dressed, looking older than his years, a birder in search of his final tick on his British bird list, the sociable plover, and ever so slightly anally retentive. On the other hand there's Dave John, possibly not a real name, who shows up at the hide, starving, with a bird tattoo, and seeming to have flashbacks. Tunt doesn't immediately warm to Tunt, and less so when he discovers (in a The Real Inspector Hound moment) than a wanted man is on the run in the area. We were right to fear John.

Curiously, though, his is the lesser role, and one originally played by Whitnall in the stage version. He is a character with secrets, which are slow to be given up, and I was left with the sense that he was less than he actually seems. Phil Campbell doesn't seem to have done anything else of significance. But I think this is largely because the screen is stolen by Alex McQueen as Roy - from The Thick of It and (apparently) Holby City, a regular as a one-off character representing humourless officialdom. Tunt is pedantic, nerdy, conservative, particular and clearly - having been cuckolded - on the edge of a nervous breakdown.

I confess that three-quarters of the way through I did begin to wonder if we'd been meant to jump to the conclusion that John was the man on the run, and that Tunt was the subject of the man hunt. Indeed, the balance of power does shift between the two, with not quite the ending you'd suspect. He is too good a character to be just a victim; it would be tedious for a hood to off the naif he'd stumbled across. And it's this sense of uncertainty with the obvious that keeps two men in a hut compelling for eighty minutes.
conjunctions: (Default)
Or, rather, Heat Wave, a title that sounds rather more like a Fritz Lang film than a Hammer production which, oddly has two surprises in it. Firstly, Sidney James is pretty good in a straight role (but then again, at this point he hadn't had the decade of Carry Ons), and secondly this is the noir version of The Great Gatsby. Or at least the set up reminded me of parts Gatsby, which I haven't seen or read for twenty years. But surely the British title offers an echo of it?

This is one of the Hammer attempts at noir - directed by Kenneth Hughes rather than Terrence Fisher - with two American import actors, Alex Nicol as writer Mark Kendrick and Hillary Brooke as the femme fatale, Carol Forrest. Kendrick, struggling to finish a novel, becomes friends with Beverly Forrest (Sidney James), who is clearly already disillusioned with his second wife, Carol. Mark and Carol have an awkward relationship which heads towards an affair, as she decides that it's time to murder her hubby to guarantee her inheritance. As in so many of these films, we have a screwed on over character (Mark) telling the story in retrospect.

James's performance is great - the man who has made it and is not comfortable, who has punched above his weight. It's a story that must exist in a hundred American variants (The Postman Always Rings Twice, to some extent Double Indemnity, but here we have a British version - I'd not heard of High Wray, Ken Hughes's own novel, named for a real place in the Lake District where this film (and presumably novel) is set. Mark clearly allows himself to be led astray - his lust for women and drink, or at least one woman, is what gets him into trouble.
conjunctions: (Default)
I've been watching several Hammer films over Christmas, a series of films noirs, and this one continues the practice of imported American star in British production. This is sf rather than horror or noir, and feels a little like two films bolted together. Simon Wells (Macdonald Carey) is lured by Joan (Shirley Anne Field) into a mugging by King's (Oliver Reed) biker gang. Joan later runs away with Wells, chased by the gang, and they seek refuge on a military base where they find a group of odd children who are at the centre of an experiment.

There seems to be an uncanny echo between the biker boys and the children, with both groupings being adrift from society, and a threat to society. In both cases youth is a threat to the adult population - although it turns out that the children could also offer salvation. It is not at all clear who the damned are - especially given the alternate title These Are the Damned. I think the poster is claiming it is the children, but it might be the bikers or the adults - especially the adults condemned by their discovery of the project? I suspect there's an echo of Village of the Damned, although thinking about it I'm not sure that title is referring to the children as the damned.

I suspect there's an article to be written on Hammer's sf - this looks gorgeous, aside from some poor back projection. Losey, of course, is more famous for other work.

Profile

conjunctions: (Default)
conjunctions

January 2013

S M T W T F S
   12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 7th, 2025 10:58 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios