Friday night double bill: "Class Of 1984 / Class Of 1999"

Tonight's double bill: Mark Lester's quite good violent high school exploitation thriller 'Class Of 1984" and its sequel in name only 'Class Of 1999' which is a piss poor Terminator rip off.

Olympus Has Fallen From Grace

Is it possible to write a review of 'Olympus Has Fallen' without mentioning 'Die Hard'? Well, as a technical exercise I'm going to try. Then I'm going to review it entirely in the context of 'Die Hard'.

'Olympus Has Fallen' is a tediously nasty, derivative, racist, right wing piece of shit that exists only to shoot it's load over the military-industrial-complex machine and serve as a narrative of comfort for people who find current affairs a bit too troublesome. That in itself is not enough to make me dislike it. It's pretty much what I expected. It doesn't help that "GERRARRRRDDDD BUTTTTLLAHHH!!!" is Hollywood's most charisma free badass. It doesn't help that the violence is amped up to new levels of realism when cartoonish action is all that was required. It doesn't help that everything is leading up to a big metaphorical jingoistic ending but worse than that it actually concludes with a very literal pledge of alliegance.

What's so ultimately disappointing about this film is that there's nothing much to it. If you've seen even one movie like this before you know how the pieces are going to fit together. This film leaves you with the odd feeling that some of those pieces were missing and some more should have been added. Everything pans out in a simplistic fashion. There's no real twists, no character development, no straying from the template. It's just lazy tick box screenwriting that doesn't even follow through on some of its own set ups.

*spoilers*

There's a powerful opening where Butler's character Mike Banning, a Presidential bodyguard, makes a split second decision that enables him to save The President's life but as a consequence he's powerless to save the first lady from drowning. It sets up a powerful character relationship. Banning you guess will be haunted by remorse and will doubt himself when called upon to act later in the film. The President is now a single parent, who you now expect will grudgingly respect Banning but definitely have issues trusting him. The film does nothing with this set up dramatically. The President has total confidence in Banning; Banning is a bit mopey before the action starts. That's it.

The plot also makes it clear that finding the President's young son is essential to the bad guys' mission as it will give them a bargaining chip when trying to torture the launch code from the President. What happens? Nothing.  Banning helps the son escape before the bad guys have even seen him. Similarly, the chief villain makes it known that he knows who Banning's wife is and where she works. You expect a tense cat and mouse chase in the hospital or a race against time to save her or that the wife will be used as a hostage to make Banning back down at the final. Nothing happens. He phones her, they tell each other they're having a bad day; she goes back to work. Lazy, lazy stuff like this happens throughout.

Don't get me wrong , I love this sort of movie. I'm a sucker for the siege scenario and the whole rogue hero up against insurmountable odds thing. I'm more than willing to give these films a chance and overlook their flaws. I think there's a real art to constructing this type of film. But this one just left me feeling annoyed and disappointed.

Okay, so now let's get that 'Die Hard' thing out of the way. Olympus Has Fallen is "Die Hard in The White House". There's no getting away from it and nothing wrong with that. It's a premise so simple you wonder why it hasn't been done before, you can understand why two recent films have run with the same premise and you wonder how come this one manages to fuck it up so  badly.

Let's think about 'Die Hard' a minute. It's a classic that still stands up despite a quarter century of immitators. It still sets the standard by which other action films are measured and yet some people still don't appreciate just how good it is. It is like the Swiss watch of action film plotting. It's the sort of thing that looks easy until you have a go at it. The story is great, the action innovative, the characters are charismatic and the whole thing purrs like a formula one racing car. It's a fun and exciting ride.

If you're going to do a "Die Hard on a bus/plane/boat/" type film there's only a couple of things you really need to get right: try and contain the action to one claustrophobic setting, have a hero who just happens to be someone in the wrong place at the wrong time but who will do the right thing, an intelligent villain with a meticulous plan and....well, that's pretty much it. But it has to be said that even the 'Die Hard' franchise can't get these basics right and has now more or less abandoned the template. This is why the promise of 'Olympus Has Fallen' was so enticing an idea for the action fan. It suggests one location with lots of secret tunnels and ventialtion shafts to crawl through, a bold villain with his eye on the biggest prize, a task so Herculean that it can surely only be achieved through methods of diabolical cunning. What we get is some bunker scenes, some rubble in the oval office, an attack that basically involves storming the white house through force of numbers and a villain we know is monstrously evil because he takes his glasses off.

It's rubbish but it's still the film that 'Die Hard 3' or '4' should have been. Imagine John McClane being awarded a Congressional Medal of Honour in the Whitehouse just as all hell breaks out. That would have been good. Well, it would have been better than what we got for the dire 'Die Hard' sequels and it would have probably have been a whole lot more fun than this 'Die Hard kicks the Koreans out of The White House' nonsense.

A Cappella Lips Now. Pitch Perfect

*ahem* 'Pitch Perfect' is quite good.

Aca-scuse me??? This lethal cocktail of Glee, Bridesmaids, Mean Girls, High School Musical and Best In Show is actually quite funny? How did that happen?

Well, it helps that it has a smart script (30 Rock contributor Kay Cannon wrote the adaptation of a novel), great acting, funny lines, good improv, a healthy cynicism, reverance for 'The Breakfast Club', compelling sing-off scenes and isn't necessarily aimed at kids. It's closer to comedy than musical but the a capella renditions of contemporary hits might just make you re-asess the craftsmanship of modern pop and it is consistently entertaining and watchable throughout. Even the puke scenes are good.

It's not pitch perfect (I know, I know...) by any means. I think Anna Kendrick is a terrific actress but her character Beca is a spoilt brat who doesn't really learn any life lessons along the way and ends up getting what she wants by being stubborn and selfish. Even so, she's still a more rounded female lead than you usually get and all the characters step just the right distance away from stereotypes to be interesting. The plot is pretty much paint by numbers but it never feels laboured. There's some weird lesbophobia stuff going on and some casual racism. Some of the songs are too well arranged to be believably spontaneous but hey, it's a musical, so I'll cut it some slack. The good stuff outweighs the bad and it's a fun film with more laughs than most out and out comedies.

I'll say it again. Pitch Perfect is quite good.

Friday night double bill: Sisters / Dead Ringers

Friday night double-bill.

The first of an occasional series. Fantasy programming for my fantasy cinema. Tonight, I would be screening Brian De Palm's 'Sisters' and David Cronenberg's 'Dead Ringers'. Both are still impressive, creepy and disturbing.

Double bill. Double trouble:

The Wisdom Of Psychopaths. 7 Psychopaths.

I finally caught up with Martin McDonagh's '7 Psychopaths' last night on DVD.  It's good but I wasn't overly impressed; it felt vacuous where his previous film 'In Bruges' felt transcendent. Mostly it reminded me of all those films that came out in the wake of 'Pulp Fiction' but were pale imitators of it. Remember 'Things To Do In Denver When You're Dead',  'Go',  '2 Days In The Valley'? It's like that: very sub Tarantino fan wank with an ensemble cast of great actors playing hitting men, low lives and (obviously) psychopaths. There's lots of crazy quotable dialogue, graphic violence, "hilarious" profanity, musing and pissing about with genre/Hollywood expectations. It's very meta. Very 1995. Worst of all it falls back on that most irritating of tropes - a story about what it is to tell stories - but does nothing more with it than kick it around the parking lot a bit to see if it's dead. It is.

Colin Farrell's scripwriter character says early on:

 Yeah, I'm sick of all these stereotypical Hollywood murderer scumbag type psychopath movies. I don't want it to be one more film about guys with guns in their hands. I want it... overall... to be about love... and peace. But it still has to be about these seven psychopaths, so this Buddhist psychopath, he... he doesn't believe in violence. I don't know what the fuck he's going to do in the movie.


It's clearly the manifesto for the writer/director. He's good enough to make it work but it is a bit like having your cake and eat it time. It's all a bit: "Look at me having a great time deconstructing those awful Hollywood scumbag type psychopath movies whilst having a blast making a Hollywood scumbag type psychopath movie."
"Look at this, here's a screenwriter trying to write himself out of a hole - do you get it? Do you see what I'm doing here?"
"Look at me pointing out how women characters are always underdeveloped and then whilst providing motivation for the men with some bitches and whores I'll give the ladies one line whilst the men get monologues to die for. "

The fictional script becomes a self fulfilling prophecy; the actual script becomes a self indulgent tease that deliberately never really pays off.

I still enjoyed it for what it was and McDonagh still has the potential to do something really amazing in the future but he's got to make me connect with the characters again rather than just making them mouthpieces for smart arse dialogue.

Leader Of The Pack. The Wolf Of Wall Street.

Martin Scorsese on drugs: "I did a lot of drugs because I wanted to do a lot, I wanted to push all the way to the very very end, and see if I could die."

Jordan Belfort (DiCaprio's character in Wolf Of Wall Street: "On a daily basis I consume enough drugs to sedate Manhattan, Long Island, and Queens for a month. I take Quaaludes 10-15 times a day for my "back pain", Adderall to stay focused, Xanax to take the edge off, part to mellow me out, cocaine to wake me back up again, and morphine... Well, because it's awesome."

Martin Scorsese is 71 and has just made one of the best films of his distinguished career with a vigour and vibrancy that shames just about about every contemporary director who has ever stolen from him, which is all of them. Yes, The Wolf Of Wall Street. is "Goodfellas with brokers" but that's not the sort of thing you can knock out in your sleep. This is the work of a master still very much at the top of his game and his best work for two decades.

It's a three hour film about stockbrokers.  Nobody wants to see a three hour film about stockbrokers but Scorsese leads you into temptation and shows you their orbit of greed and excess and fantasy and makes it all seem so attainable and seductive without judging and then builds everything to a final scene punchline that is just brilliant; holding up a mirror to the audience and telling you more about yourself than you might want to acknowledge.

There's vicarious thrills to be had here for sure, even though it's three hours of horrible people being horrible; three hours of contempt; three hours of men being shit to women. This is how these people are. Their world hasn't come crashing down. They're still out there and still taking your money. Some parts of the audience will aspire to this life; what's more frightening is that maybe some part of you will too.

Scorsese himself is no stranger to excess and I think he recognises a lot of himself in Dicaprio's character and is effectively wrestling some autobiographical demons out on film. You suspect that the self indulgence of a few brokers pales into insignificance compared to the decadence of Hollywood. Scorsese, I bet you, has been there, done that and will sell you the T-shirt.

Leonardo won't get an Oscar for this, but he is on a career roll at the moment and anchors this film without ever being showy. For the most part he basically repeats Ray Liotta's wiseguy act with a little less charm. He has a wonderful standout scene that shows he could switch to physical comedy effortlessly. Jonah Hill shows he can stretch himself in serious roles, Margot Robbie does wonders with a thankless part. Every scene of this film contains more wit, class acting and focus than the entire extended running time of 'American Hustle'.

It's a fun ride, a rush of cocaine to the system and will have you asking troubling questions about why it all felt sooooo good.

Bushido Blades. 47 Ronin.

January is traditionally the month when the studios highlight their prestigious award nominated movies (say "Hello" to  'American Hustle, 'The Wolf Of Wall Street', 'Twelve Years A Slave' etc) and quietly try to sneak out embarassments they don't know what to do with in the hope that nobody will notice. When a film like '47 Ronin' which has a big name star and an astronomical budget barely has any marketing behind it you know the studio has no faith in it and sure enough it's the latest title to become a by-word for studio excess and is being reported as a blockbuster flop. However, like 'John Carter', like 'The Lone Ranger' it's really not that bad. It's certainly more enjoyable than 'Hansel and Gretel' or 'The Man With The Iron Fists' or 'Riddick' that have all been championed by the same studio (Universal Pictures). I enjoyed it more than 'Pacific Rim' and 'Wolverine' and 'Superman: Man of Steel" and other forgettable summer movie fare. It's better than the dire "Conan' or 'Clash Of The Titans' remakes.

As you would expect of a fantasy film with a Japanese flavour, it's visually striking and colourful and exotic. It relies too much on CGI, but what doesn't? It has Samurai and dragons and sorcery and battles. It lacks humour and strong characters but it's not bad. Keanu is just okay, but is that a surprise. He doesn't disgrace himself.

You can see why a major studio would have been excited by the project and sank so much money into it. They thought they were getting a mystic Lord Of The Rings with Samurai. They've got a Japanese legend that they don't know how to market. Maybe,  just maybe,  giving such a project to a first time director was a mistake but even so the film has an epic sweep to it, a unique grandeur and I think captures the essence of a mythical and magical Japan.

The real problem for audiences I think is that it's not an American story. It's not your typical three act structure, it's more of a tableaux exploring destiny and honour and it has a very unusual ending that packs an emotional punch. In short, it's not your standard Hollywood popcorn fare. For that it should be commended and not condemned.

If you're not expecting too much from it, like beautiful photography and set design and are ready to roll with the fantasy elements then I think you'll like this a lot. See it on the big screen if you get the chance.

The First Of The Gang To Die. Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones.

I've not seen any of the other Paranormal Activity films so I don't how this one compares but I sort of liked this one. It's got a kind of a Blair Witch, shaky cam, indie film, superhero, time travel, 'Kill List' "El Barrio" thing going on. It's a bit bonkers.

What I really liked about it and what sets it apart is that it's set exclusively in a Hispanic neighbourhood in California. I don't know why that should be the case. In the same way that American politicians reach out to the Latino vote to win elections, are film studios now trying to appeal to ethnic groups to perpetuate their horror franchises? Whatever the reason for it, it makes a refreshing change to be well away from the usual high school and middle class suburban settings. Here's an American  film where you don't even see a white face until an hour in, it's a film that isn't about rich people, that pretty much features only Latino actors, slips into unsubtitled Spanish dialogue, and has a wide range of character types, and good non-stereotypical female characters.

The male protagonists are called Jesse and Hector which is hilarious and endearing. It's still a horror movie though and they're just as immature and horny and clueless as the guys in these things always are but at least hanging out with them is a little bit more fun than usual.

Of course they do things a little differently in the Barrio, so instead of talking to the dead with a ouija board they use a Simple Simon toy from the 80s; instead of calling in paranormal investigators to fight witchcraft they call on the local gangbangers to "smoke them bitches", instead of building weird Pagan totems in the woods they just set them up in domestic kitchens. Another thing that's different is possession. Normally when you get possessed in the movies your hair grows long, your head spins round and you vomit a lot. When you get possessed in the Latin Quarter you get superpowers. Cool.

In terms of the plot I have to admit I don't really know what was going on; something to do with a coven of old lady witches building their own army of the dead and making a time bending tardis door, or something. But who cares about plot? It's a horror movie. What you want to know is...does it deliver any big scares? I have to say for the most part it doesn't but the last twenty minutes are quite intense and there was a really big "boo!" moment that did literally make me jump up in my seat. It doesn't sound much but it's more than any horror film in 2013 managed to achieve.

The run up to the big finale is a showdown between gangbangers and witches in an impressive new show home. It's like a weird spin on the 'Kill List' final act; crazed women run towards you out of the darkness and get blown away with shotguns as if it's a first person shoot 'em up game. When I say "blown away with shotguns" what I mean is that they do that thing they do now in films where the buckshot victim gets tugged back quickly on a bungee rope. It's probably accurate (I don't know, I've never shot someone with a twelve gauge at short range) but it looks a bit silly and raised a few unintentional laughs. However, it has to be said that the final minutes, where a scared Hector cautiously tries to escape the house using only the 'night vision' setting on his camera is surprisingly effective.

The reason I've avoided the franchise so far is due to my aversion to shaky cam "found footage" movies. All the usual trappings of that style are present here. It looks cheap and amateurish; there is a lot of larking about with the camera in order to introduce the cast; the staged reality conceit soon becomes limiting and ultimately it distances the viewer rather than involves them. That said, I thought this was executed as well as any example I've ever seen.

As I've said, this is the first Paranormal Activity film to cross my path, but I'm betting that it's one more than international rock icon Morrissey has seen. However,  I can't help feeling he'd love it if he saw it; what with his penchant for Latino culture, ouija boads and doomed stupid boys called Hector.

Do The Hustle. American Hustle.

If this film were a person I imagine it would be preening itself in front of a full length mirror, taking selfies, whilst Van McCoy's 'Do The Hustle' plays on the turntable in the background. 

American Hustle is a conman “from the feet up” and the devil is in the details: the way the tan leather jacket fits just so, the length of the collars, the authentic wayfearers. People are going to notice when you enter the room because you're supercool, you're Tony Manero, you're Tony Montana, you're Tony Baretta. You've spent hours on your hair. The hair has to be perfect. People won't take you seriously unless you get the hair right. You tweak your locks once more and you're good to go. You can't play at the table with the big boys unless you've got confidence. You've got it and you know it. You're smarter and snappier than any of them as long as you keep telling yourself that. Now  turn back to the mirror and practice your Academy Awards acceptance speech.

 ...which is to say that American Hustle looks great, but is a bit of a bore. 

It's clearly an actors' movie. The stellar ensemble clearly love being in a faux Scorsese movie.  They strut around in slow motion and make big entrances to an array of aor hits. They get to do voice over narration and play people who are themselves trying on various personas. They have big emotional scenes together that they can sink their teeth into but it still lacks something. There's not much storytelling through action; we spend too much time in hotel rooms and offices. Despite being dialogue heavy it lacks quotable lines or Tarantino's ear for language or flair for making scenes come alive. It's feds vs cons but it's no 'Jackie Brown'. It's entertaining enough but it's no 'Boogie Nights'. It's not 'Goodfellas' or 'Casino'. It's not 'The Grifters'. Hell, it's not even as good as 'Blow'. It really, really wants to be all of these films rolled into one but it's not got enough smarts to do that but even so it still works really hard to convince you that this is something special. That's the hustle.
 

Christian Bale drops the growl, has a pot belly, plays with bad hair and makes himself unrecognisable to show that he's like really method man. Actually, he's great; it's his best work since 'American Psycho', but the character is monotone and hard to give a fuck about. Bradley Cooper does that manic talkingatyouathousandwordsaminute thing that he does in every single movie to show that he's crazy but vulnerable. Amy Adams and Jennifer Lawrence are the two best actresses currently working in Hollywood but their main purpose here is to forget to wear bras and look good in slinky dresses. They don't have many scenes together but when it happens it's like they're having a catfight for academy award nominations. They're both so good that you can almost ignore how hammy it all is.  Bob De Niro stares down the camera for his cameo as a Mafiosa. Jeremy Renner finally gets something to do other than point a bow and arrow at people. Everybody seems relieved to not be making a superhero movie.

The first scene of the movie is the best and you wait for the film to match it but it never does. The story is weak and thematically it's dull. The message is we deceive others and deceive ourselves because we all have to hustle our way through life but there's nothing within that to challenge you out of your comfort zone.  It's a 'con within a con movie' but it's not especially smart or interesting. There's no puzzle to solve.  If you strike 'American' from the title you're left with 'Hustle' and once you strip the fashions and the glitter and the big name stars away it does play like an overextended 70s set episode of the comfy BBC 'cons with a heart of gold' series 'Hustle'...but just not as much fun.

I'm being harsh. It's not a bad film by any means; just not the modern classic it so desperately wants to be acclaimed as. A whole lot of movie for very little story. Will probably win a bag of awards and then be forgotten about.

Barry Norman "Film" Theme tune

A New Year and a new resolution to post more consistently, review every new film I see in 2014 and finally get around to posting some of those older reviews I've still got in journals somewhere.