Seen at the 1930s Majestic Cinema in The Entrance, Central Coast, NSW
Bea says: I was interested in seeing this as I had read and heard that the screen versions of John Green's books were attracting a new, young audience into cinema (The Fault in our Stars), and indeed, of the numbers making up the audience on a chilly off-season weeknight in The Entrance, many were young people in their teens and early twenties.
I wasn't overly impressed with the film however, The story was rather weak overall I thought, although it did have some nice moments (the road trip sequence is probably the best); the early girl-next-door dynamic is pretty hackneyed, and the "rebellious" teenager the girl next door (Margo Spiegelman, played rather averagely I thought by Carla Delevingne) grows up into is frankly unbelievable. I did have a moment of feeling rather old when I basically agreed with Margo's mother's assessment of her actions (she's attention seeking and will come back when she runs out of money, or people stop talking about her). Her character is not particularly likeable - the night of taking revenge on people who were in her view somehow involved in her teenage boyfriend's betrayal of her made me feel uneasy actually. I did not at all like how Margo was being portrayed in the film at that stage, and only began to feel more comfortable when her friends began to develop a more realistic and rounded view of her.
The film is really a coming-of-age tale, mostly of Q, a swotty, earnest young man trying to get into university to study medicine. I related much more to him than to Margo. The story's hook or device is to use Margo to introduce Q to a wilder side of his nature, and in searching for her, he finds parts of himself he was previously not aware of, and ultimately comes to value his friendships with other ordinary people all the more. Other characters in the film go on similar journeys - Radar learns to be open about himself rather than hide, and Lacey finds that who people really are matters much more than how popular they are, or how they look. These are quite nice messages, and I was much more interested in these characters' developments than I was in the wooden and two-dimensional Margo.
I am aware that the Margo character is basically a device, and is not "real"; but I still felt that the film was trying to focus on her a little too much, particularly as its bankable star, to the detriment of the other characters and storylines. I may give the book a read...
**1/2
Cecil says: None of the characters really spoke to me, to be honest; not even the straight and boring Q, particularly once he went on that voyage of discovery. Life was really much more ordinary and banal as I reached the end of my school days than anything going on in Paper Towns.
Actually the whole notion of parting from long-held friends and starting new journeys only really kicked in for me as I left university, not school. And of course in 1970s Britain, there was no end-of-school Prom (whereas we did organise a big End of Uni party). That's all changed now and the notion of 'Prom' has made its way across the Atlantic into most UK schools these days to an extent I could never have imagined in my day.
Of course the best ever coming-of-age movie was American Graffiti, made in the 1970s and set in the 1950s. But that had plot, music and cars. It was a fantastic film I could see over and over again.
There was a very middle-American car moment in Paper Towns, when the three boys part and go back to their (very safe and conventional) cars before driving off in different directions. But it had none of the impact of those 1950s car scenes.
Like Bea, I found Margo rather tiresome, and very far from the Robin Williams Dead Poets Society type of character coaxing teenagers out of their shells. She did indeed come across as very egotistical and not someone I'd chase after, however long I'd admired her.
And those last scenes, as Q catches the bus back from New York State to Florida... really! Anybody who has ever taken long-distance buses in the US knows that that would require two or three changes of coach and there is absolutely no way he'd make it back in time to join the Prom fun for the final scenes.
Having said all that, I did enjoy the film and would give it a slightly higher rating than Bea.
***
Saturday, 18 July 2015
Saturday, 4 July 2015
Love & Mercy
Seen at the Roxy Cinema in Nowra, NSW
Bea says: A fantastic film which I really enjoyed - this tells the story of Brian Wilson of the Beach Boys through the making of Pet Sounds and afterwards and then again in the 1990s when, after years of drink, drugs and medication for supposed schizophrenia, he meets his second wife-to-be and slowly breaks free of the grip of his "doctor", who has come to control all aspects of his life.
John Cusack plays Wilson well. This is a packed storyline which doesn't drag at all - we see aspects of Wilson's childhood with his critical and sometimes brutal father, the difficulties he experienced with his fellow Beach Boys as he tried to carve out a creative musical direction for himself and them, and the extreme difficulty he had in breaking free of the people controlling him later on, as well as how all these experiences may have related to each other. The story is open about Wilson's experiences hearing voices throughout his life, and is an interesting, and at times quite positive, exploration of mental illness, with good portrayal of the crude and often over-used medications of the 1980s and early 90s. It is pointed out in the closing credits that Wilson's diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia was overturned, and there is some great, relatively contemporary footage of Wilson performing his solo work at the end too.
A definite must-see for fans, this is also a really interesting bio for those who are not fans, or weren't aware of the back story behind this interesting musician.
****
Cecil says: A very enjoyable way to spend a Sunday morning. I always liked the Beach Boys' music anyway (though funnily enough I've never bought any of their records - something I might change having seen this film).
As someone who sings but actually has no musical background or training, I was fascinated also by how Wilson worked to put together some of his best work in the studios. And it was great to see some of the backing musicians they used, who were mostly blokes much older than Wilson and, as one of them said, had worked already with all the greats: Sinatra, Martin, Spector etc, and Wilson was something else!
The film misses out key moments in his life: what happened to him (and to the whole Beach Boys thing) in the 70s and 80s? How did he get involved at all with the quack psychologist? How on earth did the psychologist get himself so tied up in Wilson's affairs that he had a new will made out leaving everything over to him (and what on earth can a psychologist have been thinking to go down that path)?
I guess Wilson had some say in what sections of his life were revealed, and that's fair enough. The story they put across is compelling and very engaging.
The horrendous father reminds me of other celeb fathers who influence their offspring in such negative ways (I'm thinking Michael Jackson, and a certain tennis player in the news at the moment over here). But as Wilson himself says, there's something about his father's violence that led him to the creative heights he reached.
Elizabeth Banks is very believable, as the car saleswoman who falls for him and eventually helps him escape.
****
Bea says: A fantastic film which I really enjoyed - this tells the story of Brian Wilson of the Beach Boys through the making of Pet Sounds and afterwards and then again in the 1990s when, after years of drink, drugs and medication for supposed schizophrenia, he meets his second wife-to-be and slowly breaks free of the grip of his "doctor", who has come to control all aspects of his life.
John Cusack plays Wilson well. This is a packed storyline which doesn't drag at all - we see aspects of Wilson's childhood with his critical and sometimes brutal father, the difficulties he experienced with his fellow Beach Boys as he tried to carve out a creative musical direction for himself and them, and the extreme difficulty he had in breaking free of the people controlling him later on, as well as how all these experiences may have related to each other. The story is open about Wilson's experiences hearing voices throughout his life, and is an interesting, and at times quite positive, exploration of mental illness, with good portrayal of the crude and often over-used medications of the 1980s and early 90s. It is pointed out in the closing credits that Wilson's diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia was overturned, and there is some great, relatively contemporary footage of Wilson performing his solo work at the end too.
A definite must-see for fans, this is also a really interesting bio for those who are not fans, or weren't aware of the back story behind this interesting musician.
****
Cecil says: A very enjoyable way to spend a Sunday morning. I always liked the Beach Boys' music anyway (though funnily enough I've never bought any of their records - something I might change having seen this film).
As someone who sings but actually has no musical background or training, I was fascinated also by how Wilson worked to put together some of his best work in the studios. And it was great to see some of the backing musicians they used, who were mostly blokes much older than Wilson and, as one of them said, had worked already with all the greats: Sinatra, Martin, Spector etc, and Wilson was something else!
The film misses out key moments in his life: what happened to him (and to the whole Beach Boys thing) in the 70s and 80s? How did he get involved at all with the quack psychologist? How on earth did the psychologist get himself so tied up in Wilson's affairs that he had a new will made out leaving everything over to him (and what on earth can a psychologist have been thinking to go down that path)?
I guess Wilson had some say in what sections of his life were revealed, and that's fair enough. The story they put across is compelling and very engaging.
The horrendous father reminds me of other celeb fathers who influence their offspring in such negative ways (I'm thinking Michael Jackson, and a certain tennis player in the news at the moment over here). But as Wilson himself says, there's something about his father's violence that led him to the creative heights he reached.
Elizabeth Banks is very believable, as the car saleswoman who falls for him and eventually helps him escape.
****
Strangerland
Seen at Roxy Cinema in Nowra, NSW
Bea says: I was keen to see this little known (to me anyway) Australian film starring Nicole Kidman and Hugo Weaving. The action takes place in small outback town in what is presumably western NSW, and centres on a family who have recently moved there, as the husband/father has just taken up a position as a pharmacist. The family have recently arrived, a heatwave is underway, and before long the reasons behind the move and the cracks in family relationships become apparent. Both teenage children go missing, and a dust storm rolls in. A search takes place and yet more mystery is revealed, both in family relationships and in the local indigenous mythology.
Kidman plays her role as somewhat purposeless and slightly driven mad mother and wife well, and there are also good performances from Hugo Weaving as the very convincing town sheriff. Kidman's character is the centre of the film, in a fruitless search for her lost youth (perhaps symbolising her search for her daughter), although some of the subplots and storylines would have benefited from fuller exploration rather than hints.
Ultimately the film leaves the plot partially unresolved, but the complex relationships are interesting to watch and it is nicely shot so quite a feast for the eyes - the dust storm itself particularly.
Worth a watch.
***
Cecil says: Actually, Bea has said all it's possible to say without spoiling the plot.
As a non-Aussie, I was struck by how well the film portrayed the feel of small town outback Australia, though I have only ever really experienced it from the safety of the long-distance bus, with my nearest contact being those roadside stop-offs you get in the middle of nowhere.
Kidman is fantastic in this role; she really is the incarnation of woman settler in Australia (coming after her role in the wonderful Australia five years ago). Who else can possibly play these sorts of roles? And how long can she go on playing them herself?
Her character is slightly disturbing, as in fact are all the characters portrayed, in particular within the family who take centre stage. Hugo Weaving's sheriff is probably the most likeable of the characters.
I've never actually been in a sandstorm like that, and am thankful having seen how it was portrayed in the film. But I can really imagine the Wild West feel that followed in this small country town, with teenagers on the rampage making it very unsettling for an urban-type like the family in this piece.
The uncertainty over the ending leaves you, well, uncertain, but I guess that is the point the director was trying to get across. In families such as this, are things ever fully resolved? Do they need to be?
***.5
Bea says: I was keen to see this little known (to me anyway) Australian film starring Nicole Kidman and Hugo Weaving. The action takes place in small outback town in what is presumably western NSW, and centres on a family who have recently moved there, as the husband/father has just taken up a position as a pharmacist. The family have recently arrived, a heatwave is underway, and before long the reasons behind the move and the cracks in family relationships become apparent. Both teenage children go missing, and a dust storm rolls in. A search takes place and yet more mystery is revealed, both in family relationships and in the local indigenous mythology.
Kidman plays her role as somewhat purposeless and slightly driven mad mother and wife well, and there are also good performances from Hugo Weaving as the very convincing town sheriff. Kidman's character is the centre of the film, in a fruitless search for her lost youth (perhaps symbolising her search for her daughter), although some of the subplots and storylines would have benefited from fuller exploration rather than hints.
Ultimately the film leaves the plot partially unresolved, but the complex relationships are interesting to watch and it is nicely shot so quite a feast for the eyes - the dust storm itself particularly.
Worth a watch.
***
Cecil says: Actually, Bea has said all it's possible to say without spoiling the plot.
As a non-Aussie, I was struck by how well the film portrayed the feel of small town outback Australia, though I have only ever really experienced it from the safety of the long-distance bus, with my nearest contact being those roadside stop-offs you get in the middle of nowhere.
Kidman is fantastic in this role; she really is the incarnation of woman settler in Australia (coming after her role in the wonderful Australia five years ago). Who else can possibly play these sorts of roles? And how long can she go on playing them herself?
Her character is slightly disturbing, as in fact are all the characters portrayed, in particular within the family who take centre stage. Hugo Weaving's sheriff is probably the most likeable of the characters.
I've never actually been in a sandstorm like that, and am thankful having seen how it was portrayed in the film. But I can really imagine the Wild West feel that followed in this small country town, with teenagers on the rampage making it very unsettling for an urban-type like the family in this piece.
The uncertainty over the ending leaves you, well, uncertain, but I guess that is the point the director was trying to get across. In families such as this, are things ever fully resolved? Do they need to be?
***.5
Friday, 15 May 2015
The Devil's Violinist
Seen at the wonderful Roxy Cinema in Nowra, NSW, Australia
Bea says: Cecil and I both like classical music so we thought this film, about Paganini - who neither of us knew very well - would be a good Sunday afternoon diversion.
The film's title and one its storylines focuses on the fact that Paganini was reputed to be in some kind of contract with the devil in order to play the violin and compose as he did (his music and playing were way ahead of his time, although the information on Wikipedia was better on this than that contained in the film actually!)
Enter the dark, cloaked and bearded figure of Urbani, who "manages" Paganini, and in fact reminded me a lot of the stories of Elvis' manager "The Colonel", with addictions to drugs (opium), gambling and women blighting Paganini's life until he meets the daughter of an English musician and tries to clean up his act. Urbani foils the plot, and the two go their separate ways, and (spoiler alert), Paganini dies young from illness and addiction, and Urbani confusingly states that he is not the devil, just one of his workers....
A diverting enough story indeed, but I rather felt the film couldn't quite decide whether it was going to focus on the devil's contract part of the story, or the love story, and ended up doing neither particularly well. It might have been better if there had been some stronger performances, and a better script, or if perhaps less had ended up on the cutting room floor (although it certainly did not need to be any longer).
Best part of it? Fantastic costumes and beautiful music!
**
Cecil says: The trouble I had with this film was that I didn't really warm to or relate to any of the characters in it, and as Bea suggests, the plot and script were not strong enough to draw me in.
I was convinced throughout that two of the main actors, playing Urbani and the Times journalist, were familiar to me and that I'd seen them in some TV soap like Eastenders. It took s a search of their respective careers to reveal that Jared Harris was of course the English partner in Mad Men, so an interesting previous role, whereas Joely Richardson has been in a lot of things, but none of them appears to have been starring in Eastenders.
But there's something about the fact that this distracted me through the film that goes to show how little I was involved with what was going on. Sure, the music was beautiful, but the Paganini character far from attractive and basically a pain in the bum; his own attraction for the young English daughter of his host was also a mystery: she was pleasant enough but didn't come across as someone you'd fall madly, deeply in love with.
**.5
Bea says: Cecil and I both like classical music so we thought this film, about Paganini - who neither of us knew very well - would be a good Sunday afternoon diversion.
The film's title and one its storylines focuses on the fact that Paganini was reputed to be in some kind of contract with the devil in order to play the violin and compose as he did (his music and playing were way ahead of his time, although the information on Wikipedia was better on this than that contained in the film actually!)
Enter the dark, cloaked and bearded figure of Urbani, who "manages" Paganini, and in fact reminded me a lot of the stories of Elvis' manager "The Colonel", with addictions to drugs (opium), gambling and women blighting Paganini's life until he meets the daughter of an English musician and tries to clean up his act. Urbani foils the plot, and the two go their separate ways, and (spoiler alert), Paganini dies young from illness and addiction, and Urbani confusingly states that he is not the devil, just one of his workers....
A diverting enough story indeed, but I rather felt the film couldn't quite decide whether it was going to focus on the devil's contract part of the story, or the love story, and ended up doing neither particularly well. It might have been better if there had been some stronger performances, and a better script, or if perhaps less had ended up on the cutting room floor (although it certainly did not need to be any longer).
Best part of it? Fantastic costumes and beautiful music!
**
Cecil says: The trouble I had with this film was that I didn't really warm to or relate to any of the characters in it, and as Bea suggests, the plot and script were not strong enough to draw me in.
I was convinced throughout that two of the main actors, playing Urbani and the Times journalist, were familiar to me and that I'd seen them in some TV soap like Eastenders. It took s a search of their respective careers to reveal that Jared Harris was of course the English partner in Mad Men, so an interesting previous role, whereas Joely Richardson has been in a lot of things, but none of them appears to have been starring in Eastenders.
But there's something about the fact that this distracted me through the film that goes to show how little I was involved with what was going on. Sure, the music was beautiful, but the Paganini character far from attractive and basically a pain in the bum; his own attraction for the young English daughter of his host was also a mystery: she was pleasant enough but didn't come across as someone you'd fall madly, deeply in love with.
**.5
Saturday, 28 March 2015
The Theory of Everything
Seen at the wonderful Roxy Cinema in Nowra, New South Wales
Bea says: I was keen to see this as I have a professional interest in people living with long term conditions, and enjoyed the Brief History of Time television series in the ?late 90s/early 2000s. Stephen Hawking's long survival with MND, and his work, are often both discussed in the media, but his early life is not so much.
This was a great story of a marriage - in many ways the challenges that Stephen's condition presented were just part and parcel of the challenges that come with marriage, and particularly marriage in the late 60s/early 70s for women. The film is an adaptation of the book of the same name by Jane Wilde, Stephen Hawking's first wife, and covers their courtship, early married life and the birth of their children, all while Stephen's physical condition declines, his fame increases and the pressures on Jane increase leaving her little, if no, space for being her own self as well. Unsurprisingly, the marriage cracks under the strain, and the break up scenes are very well done, as are the amicable later years meetings. The early involvement of the people that both Stephen and Jane move on with is very interestingly and well done too.
Stephen's poor prognosis and worsening condition is well drawn - particularly the scene where he has come round after having a tracheotomy and the realisation that he will never speak again dawns on him. From this scene, and a few others, the film also documents the advancements in technology that have helped him so much.
A good portrayal of relationships beginning, during and ending, with the added complications of a long term condition, and genius thrown in, all with a middle-class Cambridge backdrop. Essential viewing and excellent performances from the cast.
***
Cecil says: I was very moved by this film, more than I had expected actually. I guess this maybe because really until this film, I knew little about Hawking, except that he was that clever bloke in a wheelchair with the electronic voice. I'd read none of his books, seen no TV series about him, so really knew nothing about the guy.
But this is a wonderful portrayal of his life, or as Bea says, his marriage and relationships above all.
It's hard to add much to what Bea said on this one. But I guess my own perception of degenerative diseases has been shaped by living for a while with someone who had MS, and reading the extraordinary autobiography by Jill Tweedie, who also had MND, but did not survive as long as Hawking. And I think there's something overwhelmingly powerful about how people deal with the slow progression of such illnesses (though quite how Hawking has managed just to go on and on is in itself an example to us all).
Bit of a cliché really, but it's the kind of film that makes me appreciate what I have in life.
Beautifully acted also by Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones (was trying to remember where else I've seen her, but looking back through her filmography, can only see 'Like Crazy', a 2011 movie that I don't think I rated as highly as this one).
****
Bea says: I was keen to see this as I have a professional interest in people living with long term conditions, and enjoyed the Brief History of Time television series in the ?late 90s/early 2000s. Stephen Hawking's long survival with MND, and his work, are often both discussed in the media, but his early life is not so much.
This was a great story of a marriage - in many ways the challenges that Stephen's condition presented were just part and parcel of the challenges that come with marriage, and particularly marriage in the late 60s/early 70s for women. The film is an adaptation of the book of the same name by Jane Wilde, Stephen Hawking's first wife, and covers their courtship, early married life and the birth of their children, all while Stephen's physical condition declines, his fame increases and the pressures on Jane increase leaving her little, if no, space for being her own self as well. Unsurprisingly, the marriage cracks under the strain, and the break up scenes are very well done, as are the amicable later years meetings. The early involvement of the people that both Stephen and Jane move on with is very interestingly and well done too.
Stephen's poor prognosis and worsening condition is well drawn - particularly the scene where he has come round after having a tracheotomy and the realisation that he will never speak again dawns on him. From this scene, and a few others, the film also documents the advancements in technology that have helped him so much.
A good portrayal of relationships beginning, during and ending, with the added complications of a long term condition, and genius thrown in, all with a middle-class Cambridge backdrop. Essential viewing and excellent performances from the cast.
***
Cecil says: I was very moved by this film, more than I had expected actually. I guess this maybe because really until this film, I knew little about Hawking, except that he was that clever bloke in a wheelchair with the electronic voice. I'd read none of his books, seen no TV series about him, so really knew nothing about the guy.
But this is a wonderful portrayal of his life, or as Bea says, his marriage and relationships above all.
It's hard to add much to what Bea said on this one. But I guess my own perception of degenerative diseases has been shaped by living for a while with someone who had MS, and reading the extraordinary autobiography by Jill Tweedie, who also had MND, but did not survive as long as Hawking. And I think there's something overwhelmingly powerful about how people deal with the slow progression of such illnesses (though quite how Hawking has managed just to go on and on is in itself an example to us all).
Bit of a cliché really, but it's the kind of film that makes me appreciate what I have in life.
Beautifully acted also by Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones (was trying to remember where else I've seen her, but looking back through her filmography, can only see 'Like Crazy', a 2011 movie that I don't think I rated as highly as this one).
****
Pride
Seen at the Gerringong Pics & Flicks, Town Hall Gerringong, New South Wales
Cecil says: I'm not normally that keen on films that remind me of the 1980s, which was perhaps my least favourite decade politically. And in a sense what happened during the miners' strike hardened me in my hatred of all things Thatcherite, but also made me weary of the antics of the far left. Now a mellow, vaguely moderate leftie, I'm not keen on reminders of that divisive period of our recent history.
But Pride is fun. It's the story of a London-based lesbian and gay group numbering half a dozen or so who wanted to do their bit for the miners, but were struggling to find any miners wanting their help.
It's an interesting portrayal of the gap between traditional working class communities and the more middle class movements that grew up around single issues, and how certain individuals in those groups enabled the gap to be bridged, if very very slowly.
Sitting there in 21st century Australia (especially so close to Australia's gay capital, Sydney) it's hard to remember a time when attitudes were so entrenched that a gay person walked into a bar and half the drinkers walked out. But I guess that's how it must have been in the mid 1980s, even though it isn't THAT long ago.
Since I worked in an office that was only a few yards from Gay's the Word bookshop a few years after the miners' strike, the story felt very resonant for me, as did all the bitchy back-biting as different sections of the group broke off because the action wasn't happening the way they wanted it to.
Great performances yet again from Bill Nighy and Imelda Staunton, though the whole cast seemed well suited for their roles and pulled it all off well. This was an enjoyable evening and the film well worth seeing.
I had mixed feelings, though, about the round of applause at the end from the Gerringong audience. Is it a positive sign that Thatcher's legacy is clearly one of how awful she was (even though she doesn't appear more than once in the film); or is it just easy in 2015 to clap the well-meaning losers, and just how much connection do the people of Gerringong have with miners from Wales, Yorkshire or any other community that suffered so badly during and after the strike?
Nice film, though. I'd recommend it, whether or not you have memories from the period.
****
Bea says:
I was a bit younger than Cecil during the miners' strike - at school - and Thatcher and the grey, grim streets of the UK's industrial villages, towns and cities were something I saw only on the evening news. But I was, like many people my age, surrounded by the UK music scene of that time, and everything from there seemed so, so much cooler than suburban Adelaide...
I loved the nostalgia of this film, and the bittersweet part of the story that is about young people finding out who they are and pursuing that. But it also made me feel - not in a bad way - quite old, that this time was so different to now, that young people's lives are so different now, and when the young woman in the Welsh mining town stood up to sing a traditional song, I thought "that was the last of that, that time has now passed forever" and felt so old, a different generation entirely to the young people of today.
I hope it is easier for young people today to be gay, or just "different", than it was for "Bromley" and his acquired friends. I hope there are still causes that make people want to group together, take risks and try to make the world a better place.
I felt uplifted by this film, but sweetly sad too. Bill Nighy is fantastic in everything, and this is no exception.
***
Cecil says: I'm not normally that keen on films that remind me of the 1980s, which was perhaps my least favourite decade politically. And in a sense what happened during the miners' strike hardened me in my hatred of all things Thatcherite, but also made me weary of the antics of the far left. Now a mellow, vaguely moderate leftie, I'm not keen on reminders of that divisive period of our recent history.
But Pride is fun. It's the story of a London-based lesbian and gay group numbering half a dozen or so who wanted to do their bit for the miners, but were struggling to find any miners wanting their help.
It's an interesting portrayal of the gap between traditional working class communities and the more middle class movements that grew up around single issues, and how certain individuals in those groups enabled the gap to be bridged, if very very slowly.
Sitting there in 21st century Australia (especially so close to Australia's gay capital, Sydney) it's hard to remember a time when attitudes were so entrenched that a gay person walked into a bar and half the drinkers walked out. But I guess that's how it must have been in the mid 1980s, even though it isn't THAT long ago.
Since I worked in an office that was only a few yards from Gay's the Word bookshop a few years after the miners' strike, the story felt very resonant for me, as did all the bitchy back-biting as different sections of the group broke off because the action wasn't happening the way they wanted it to.
Great performances yet again from Bill Nighy and Imelda Staunton, though the whole cast seemed well suited for their roles and pulled it all off well. This was an enjoyable evening and the film well worth seeing.
I had mixed feelings, though, about the round of applause at the end from the Gerringong audience. Is it a positive sign that Thatcher's legacy is clearly one of how awful she was (even though she doesn't appear more than once in the film); or is it just easy in 2015 to clap the well-meaning losers, and just how much connection do the people of Gerringong have with miners from Wales, Yorkshire or any other community that suffered so badly during and after the strike?
Nice film, though. I'd recommend it, whether or not you have memories from the period.
****
Bea says:
I was a bit younger than Cecil during the miners' strike - at school - and Thatcher and the grey, grim streets of the UK's industrial villages, towns and cities were something I saw only on the evening news. But I was, like many people my age, surrounded by the UK music scene of that time, and everything from there seemed so, so much cooler than suburban Adelaide...
I loved the nostalgia of this film, and the bittersweet part of the story that is about young people finding out who they are and pursuing that. But it also made me feel - not in a bad way - quite old, that this time was so different to now, that young people's lives are so different now, and when the young woman in the Welsh mining town stood up to sing a traditional song, I thought "that was the last of that, that time has now passed forever" and felt so old, a different generation entirely to the young people of today.
I hope it is easier for young people today to be gay, or just "different", than it was for "Bromley" and his acquired friends. I hope there are still causes that make people want to group together, take risks and try to make the world a better place.
I felt uplifted by this film, but sweetly sad too. Bill Nighy is fantastic in everything, and this is no exception.
***
Monday, 17 November 2014
The Maze Runner
Seen on our own in a cinema in Kunming, China
Bea says: While I
was in the cinema watching this, I remembered either reading or hearing a
review of current films, which talked about one release as being so
ridiculously derivative that if you’ve seen any films at all over the past 20
years, you’ll spend the entire screening distracted by what it reminds you
of. And although I didn’t know it when
we decided to see it, this is that film.
It’s Lord of the Flies! It’s Labyrinth! It’s The
Beach! It’s The Matrix! It’s Memento!
It’s The Hunger Games! Need I go on?
I am not sure, though, if this film’s target audience would have these
reference points.
So – that probably explains the genre, which is fantasy
based, young adult, coming of age. The film
is adapted from a novel, and the story centres on a group of boys/young men,
who for reasons unknown to them have been sent to an “island” of sorts – a
piece of land surrounded by a complex, ever-changing maze, filled with
dangers. They need to survive, and also
to try and find their way out of the maze.
Every month a new boy arrives, and none (or few) of the boys have any
recollection of who they were before arriving.
This month it is Thomas, our story’s hero, who quickly upsets the
established patterns of the boy on the “island”, setting in chain a series of
events which lead to both danger and death for some, and liberation for others
As fantasy stories of
this genre go, it’s actually not bad – as a story, if not particularly
original. It’s interesting to think
about how similar this is to traditional coming of age rites that young people
would have done – finding your way home from an unfamiliar place was, I think,
a common coming of age ritual in tribal cultures for example. Survival skills and the importance of
remembering patterns and symbols in the landscape is also important in this
story. I found the section of the film
that deals with remembering the maze one of the most interesting bits. It deals with social structures and how these
can be created and then changed, and the need for maturity in managing these.
However, the fact that these themes made it into the film
seemed almost accidental, as if the screenwriter and director had never
actually read the book, or cared about it.
What they appear to have done instead is to rewrite every scene from a
film they could think of that related to these themes, and cobble them together
into a new film. When they ran out of
ideas or got worried it was too boring (about ¾ of the way through) they put in
a silly CGI sequence that adds nothing to the plot and nearly made me leave. I’m glad I didn’t – there is some good
story-related stuff afterwards! I am
also not sure what the point of the arrival of the girl was – she had barely
any scenes and was quickly relegated to the role of “nurse”!
I’m not sorry I saw it, as I would now like to read the
book, and I am interested in what will happen in the inevitable part 2
(although I might read the book for that too!), but, really, have some original
ideas please!!
**
Cecil says: The
most gripping moment in this film for me was when a guy on a silent scooter
rode into the auditorium about half way through and freaked us out for a moment
as we were watching this film completely alone and we wondered why he chose to
sit at the end of our row in an empty 500 seater cinema…
Trouble was I didn’t really care about any of the
characters; I found the ethnic mix tiresome and contrived by some committee
deciding on the politically correct casting, not to mention the key role played
by the overweight kid (which felt like another
have-to-show-fat-kids-can-contribute moment, though Bea tells me a character
like this was key to the story in Lord of
the Flies); and as for the puny, pale English actor who turns out to be one
of the strongest characters in the tribe, it just felt like poor casting, or
designed to appeal to those who like a pretty face.
Bea is right, the only other pretty face in the film is the
‘girl’ sent in half way through for no apparent reason and without any real
importance to the plot.
Ironically, given how little I cared, it was the ending
which intrigued me most and made me curious as to how they continue the story
in Part 2, so if I’m stuck somewhere like China again with no other English
language film showing, I may even watch the sequel…
**
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)