Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007) - 27/01/08 - *****

Review of the Film Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007) (18).

Warning: this review contains some plot spoilers. The rating is out of five stars.

Tim Burton’s long awaited bloodthirsty musical does all but disappoint the legions that have been looking forward to it’s release. Anyone doubting the singing abilities of the leads Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter will be very pleasantly surprised within the opening few minutes…

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007) is about human nature; and it makes a very bold statement about the truth of that, which I am sure many people who see the film will either just subconsciously ignore, or be so repulsed by the notion of admitting it that they will form an unchangeably negative opinion of the film. That point, which the film makes all too well, is that the apparently wicked and twisted Todd himself is in fact the one person in the story who has even the slightest inkling as what humanity really deserves. Death, suffering and painful slaughter… and for anyone to deny that is one of the very most incredibly and disgustingly pompous expressions of self-inflicted moral blindness possible. A lot of people are finding this film very enjoyable and even saying that it is one of their all time favourites, but I suspect that they can surely not be seeing the ultimate point of the tale for this reason. Of course there is much else to ‘like’ about the film other than the expert way that it makes it’s taboo point, such as the breathtakingly charismatic turns given by the two popular lead actors, Johnny Depp who has been nominated for an Oscar as Sweeney Todd, who’s best friends are his silver handled razor blades, and Helena Bonham Carter who plays Mrs. Lovett, Todd's sexually charged landlady and the creator of the worst pies in London… Also the Oscar nominated, inspiringly gloomy art direction is really something to behold, which along with the fittingly demented cinematography makes Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007) a truly unique visual experience. Of course though, it is the magnificently electrifying music and lyrics by the legendary Stephen Sondheim that makes the film what is, and the full soundtrack CD has gone straight onto my own personal wish list!

The film is definitely not flawless though. I can’t quite put my finger on the reason for it, but I found myself struggling to become enough emotionally connected with the characters to really feel their pain, unlike in many other truly great films… perhaps it’s because I was reacting to the story in a way that wasn’t quite as expected by the filmmakers, as the message of humankind's deserving of suffering and damnation was so plain to me unlike it probably was to most people, but I’m not at all sure and will have to think about that more on my second viewing. That I’ll be seeing the film again though says a lot, and this is a masterpiece by Tim Burton… it’s cynical and truly insane, but it is a real masterwork.

It will probably be confusing to a lot of cinema goers whether or not they are supposed to sympathise with Sweeney, and I think that the film creates the right balance in his character of portraying the truth of his motives, along with the inappropriateness, impracticality and ultimately pointless nature of his actions. The fact that so many of his victims seem to go totally unmissed is quite saddening but also very eye-opening… it puts to bed the idea of a single human life having any say in the ultimate scheme of things, which is powerfully reflected in Sweeney’s own final fate. He realised the truth of the problem, but found the wrong solution and so was left as if in a boat with one paddle… and he ends up in an even worse place than when he first begun.

On another note, don’t believe everything you’ve heard about the unparalleled levels of blood and gore in the film, making even Saw (2004) look like Toy Story (1995) … it’s just not true. There is actually very little ‘gore’ as such, and although there is quite a lot of blood squirting around at various stages, on the whole it is not on a level that most people won’t have seen before. What I will say though is that unlike with a lot of films, the camera doesn’t turn away and/or the shot doesn’t cut away at the ‘moment of impact’. In my opinion that is a much more honest way to depict violence, especially in a story like this. There are many films out there with stories featuring much more violence than this, but in which we aren’t actually shown anything more than the build up to a violent act, followed by the effect of it… with the ‘moment of impact’ completely omitted. That can be far more desensitising and unhealthy to watch I think than the way that the violence is shown here.

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007) is a tragic and soulful film, but more importantly it is also extremely refreshing and bracingly non-single-minded, so that the bleakness of it does not darken your outlook on life, but in fact opens new doors of opportunity for the viewer who truly watched it with their eyes wide open! What you should go away with after seeing it is this: we all deserve to die… murder is not the answer. So what is…?

Rating : *****

Written by,

.Peter.D.Marsay.

Originally completed: 27/01/08.

No Country for Old Men (2007) - 20/01/08 - *****

Review of the Film No Country for Old Men (2007) (15).

Advanced warning: this review contains some plot spoilers.

It is generally thought that the Coen brothers quality of work has seen a significant dip in recent years. Well, if that is true, that time is now over. No Country for Old Men, based on the book by Cormac McCarthy, is a one of a kind, truly transcendental piece of work. It is nothing like any other film that it is possible to see at the cinema nowadays, with characters, ideas and a story structure that would surely (and apparently is…) confusing the living daylights out of most average multiplex attendees. The trick is to not see this film as a straight forward thriller… that is not what this film is at all. It is about ideas, themes, and philosophical questions as timeless and grandiose as chance, change… and inevitability. Now, even after doing some significant research after watching the film I do not in any way claim to myself understand exactly what No Country for Old Men is all about… what each character means and what each twist of fate in the plot points at; but I do claim to be one of the relatively few to have seen the film and realised that part of the point and intent of it, is to leave you with shreds of ideas and meaning, to encourage you to go off afterwards, think and research what it’s all about in your own time… and even to make you need (and want) to see the film again, far from only in a money grabbing sense.

The pacing and structure of the narrative are crucial elements in the telling of this tale and the portraying of the themes and ideas that the film makers wanted to get across and cause the viewer to dwell upon. On the whole, the film is actually quite slow moving, but the tension, created by careful editing and the order in which different plot elements are introduced and/or revealed, makes it feel a lot faster, in much the same way that fear and alertness can make even long drawn out situations in real life, fly past as though they were hardly even really happening. Now there’s another key, a good deal of the events depicted and even the characters in the story, are at certain points and moments indicated through dialogue or particular choices of camera angles, that perhaps they do not really exist in the reality of the film, in the sense of being actual physical beings… maybe they are just parallels and/or representations of the mental struggles that the other ‘real’ characters might be going through; or perhaps they represent something else entirely… The whole thing really hinges on one of the least seen characters in the film, that of an aging Sheriff played by Tommy Lee Jones. To avoid giving too much away, I will just advise you to keep a careful eye on this character, and to ensure that whenever he is on screen and especially when he is speaking, that you pay particularly close attention to every scrap of information that the filmmakers are feeding you through the screen and speakers of the cinema that you are in, via this cornerstone character.

On to a less abstract analysis of the film now, the performances of all the actors involved are each floating comfortably somewhere above top notch level… The most obviously revelatory performance is given by Javier Bardem as the films most compelling character, a totally inhuman, incurably evil killer. To highlight a moment that I think is important relating to what we can learn about this character, I just want to point out his response to another character who says at one point that he can go to hell: “Okay.” The film’s advertising campaign really milks the publics lust for cold hearted brutality and murder by constantly showing Bardem’s character and his actions and not much else to sell the film by; it is probably best for this reason that if you are able to you avoid seeing and/or taking too much note of the content of the trailers and T.V. spots for the film, as they will give you the wrong impression of what the story concentrates on, and will warp your expectations for the worse. As I have said before, Tommy Lee Jones’ character is very much the key to what the film is all about, and he gives one of the best performances of his career by portraying the character with all the delicacy and thoughtfulness that was required in order for the Coen brothers to really pull off their vision for the film. Josh Brolin is also perfect in the lead role as a hunter who finds himself having bitten off more than he can chew, in a highly volatile situation… The only options that the character seems have are to either spit ‘it’ out before it’s too late, or choke on ‘it‘. …And, perhaps because of greed, apparently favourable chance and/or sudden ambition, he doesn’t want to just spit it out.

The soundtrack is a very unusual one, overall the film is coated in silence… a silence which slowly but surely oozes out of the screen and wraps itself around you, until it is broken by various bouts of the constantly threatened, impending violence… and the danger and edginess that the film has cast upon your psyche is paid off. Yes, I am talking about atmosphere, something which is disappointingly not to be found in very many films these days. By contributing to No Country for Old Men’s gripping atmosphere, the soundtrack by Carter Burwell succeeds beautifully, although very little actual ‘music’ is ever heard.

In conclusion, and to risk putting things more (or too) simply, No Country for Old Men is to me about an aging Texas Sheriff, coming to realise that one cannot always keep up with changing times, that the only thing that anybody can be sure of is their own eventual deaths… and that fear and uncertainty of what comes after death, along with the near impossible challenge of accepting that inevitable event, are seemingly universal in their pressing on human kind. But, the film is complex and about many things, and I suspect that it perhaps will not be possible to ever say what all those things are… but it does get your mind hooked on some intriguing and fundamentally important facts, thoughts… and musings. The Coens have reached back in time, past their recent dwindling efforts, past even their finest hour which is the real marvel of a film, Fargo, back to their very first film, Blood Simple. There is no other film in the Coen brother’s filmography that No Country for Old Men is more like… and so may this be a new beginning for them which will trigger another long string of terrific, quality films just like the one that followed their cinematic debut, and better even! Now that would be marvelous.

If, once you’ve seen the film, you disagree with me as to what exactly it is about… so be it. But! If you disagree with me as to the quality and essentiality of it, then may you be barred from ever entering a cinema again for committing such an indefensibly heinous intellectual crime! So, go and see the film. Then if you have seen what I have seen… go and see it again.

Rating : *****

Written by,

.Peter.D.Marsay.

Originally completed: 20/01/08.

Shaun of the Dead - 12/01/08 - *****

Review of the Film Shaun of the Dead (15).

Advanced warning: this review contains some plot spoilers.

The 2004 so called romantic comedy with zombies, Shaun of the Dead, is probably both the most critically acclaimed comedy and also British film of that year. On the surface it might seem to be just an excuse to have a few laughs with some squirm-inducing gore thrown in, but for the viewer who is willing to become more fully immersed in this work of entertainment it is so much more than that, and for none more so than those who live in the capital of the United Kingdom! Let us begin now by getting the largest part of this review out of the way… on to the good points.

Before we even get into any of the zombie/horror action in the film, we are treated to some slightly stylised portrayals of typical Londoner’s walking the streets. Funnily enough… their manner is frequently reminiscent of a classic horror film monster, the zombie. …And later on when these same characters reappear but now dead and re-animated, they really don’t seem very different from when we first saw them, apart from perhaps some blood on their faces, and also various missing chunks that have been bitten out of them.

The humour in this film is so biting (pun intended) and spot-on in it’s satire of the average middle-class South Londoner’s way of life, that writing as a South Londoner myself the odd in-joke that I can particularly identify with makes me feel as if I know the characters involved like they were my own dear mates! If this is transferable to viewers who are not South Londoners, or even not from England at all, (and judging by the positive reaction of most international critics and audiences it is,) then this is not just a film for it’s most obvious target market, having a far more widespread appeal.

Of course the issue of blood and gore is off putting to a lot of viewers, and there are indeed plenty of incidents featuring incredibly violent and shocking dismemberments as well as other grisly happenings and much blood-letting. For the most part though this is done in a way that spoofs the horror film genre, and in particular of course zombie films, as is most obviously demonstrated by the films very tongue in cheek title which references probably the most famous (or perhaps infamous…) zombie film, 1978’s Dawn of the Dead. (Shaun in this film is in fact the main character, played with wonderfully life-like normality by the marvelous Simon Pegg.) One could argue that in certain scenes the filmmakers did go too far with the blood and gore filled moments of horrific carnage, but they really are just moments on the most part and the real fun to be had here is in ‘recognising’ figures who might as well be people that you know, in the crowds of shuffling, hungry un-dead.

Shaun himself does not want to believe that they are in fact zombies… and whenever somebody says that they are he gets annoyed with them for using the ‘z’ word. His real opinion on the matter however is never revealed… but it is indicated through various hilarious news reports in the film that religious groups are hailing the phenomena as a sign of the coming apocalypse. These news broadcasts that film’s characters listen to on the radio or watch on television at certain points, also include advice to the public on how best to deal with said ravenous assailants walking the streets… such as this piece of advice given by none other than the real Sky News presenter Jeremy Thompson, and to which the main characters seem to take most heed! “…remove the head, or destroy the brain.”

The film does have it’s weaknesses, with a couple of secondary characters who are really only there to help move Shaun’s story along. The plot basically revolves around him attempting to redeem himself to his ex-girlfriend at the same time as surviving in the zombie infested streets of London. Another slight weakness is perhaps that the numerous cleverly set-up ‘jump’ moments do begin to get a tad predictable after a while, and also the film’s ultimate ending feels a little too neat and convenient to be entirely satisfying.

But fortunately, this is definitely a case of a film where the good points massively outweigh the bad, and when you are in the right mood, and particularly on repeat viewings the bad points fade into near non-existence. So I say to you, feast your eyes on Shaun of the Dead and if you can stomach it you will be far from disappointed!

Rating: *****

Written by,

.Peter.D.Marsay.

Originally completed: 12/01/08.

The Golden Compass - 06/01/08 - **

Review of the Film The Golden Compass (PG).

Advanced warning: this review contains some plot spoilers.

The new film The Golden Compass has stirred up much controversy in Christian circles, mainly because of the apparently heretical series of books by Philip Pullman, the first novel of which this film is an adaptation of. It should be noted that I have not read these books, all though I have researched their general content. In this review I am not going to touch on the religious debate surrounding the story as in my opinion these issues have not translated from page to screen, and are therefore quite irrelevant.

To start with the film’s good points then, much of the acting is excellent; in particular the performances of Daniel Craig, Nicole Kidman and Eva Green stand out. Disappointingly though they are all underused, barely scraping about twenty-five minutes of screen time between them of the films near two hour running time. But it has to be said that in their own little parts they each stand-out, giving a sincere face to characters who otherwise it would be difficult to take seriously.

The special effects are consistently brilliant, highlights being the well rendered talking polar bears, some sweeping scenery of icy landscapes and highly imaginative cityscapes. Combined with an above average music score for a Hollywood film, there are moments that should not fail to send freezing shivers of cinematic magic down even the most cynical of spines.

Unfortunately that is already the end of the good points, and so now we move on to the more numerous and complex bad points.

Firstly, the young leading actress Dakota Blue Richards really isn’t up to the task in this, her first ever screen role. She frequently stumbles on difficult dialogue, and the part definitely required a more skilled and experienced performer who could portray the main character more naturally, and stimulate more empathy for her. While Richards isn’t dreadful, she simply isn’t good enough for a film like this.

In relation to the story, to me the film doesn’t have much of one at all. There is something about some mysterious ‘dust’, parallel universes and a quest to find some lost children… but in the end the film doesn’t make it very easy to figure out. The purpose and importance of the object to which the title of the film refers is itself rather vague and difficult to understand, and when a film cannot even make sense of it’s own title then you know that it’s in trouble! Chris Weitz, who both wrote the adapted screenplay for and directed the film really has missed a golden opportunity to make a terrific, epic cinematic experience, if all of the accolades that the books have garnered are to be believed. He has made a film that is a baffling mix of cinematic magic and meaningless content… like putting icing on a stale cake.

As the film was specifically billed by New Line Cinema as the successor to The Lord of the Rings series, I am going to compare the two. One of Weitz’s main short fallings in the quality of this film is that he failed to instil a sense of epic scale. Peter Jackson did a fine job of this in his films, and it really does make a huge difference for a story of this kind. The Golden Compass has too much switching between locations with little sense of the journey between, and too many rotating aerial shots that are blatantly trying to emulate those in The Lord of the Rings, which combine to create something that feels strangely small and insignificant. The budget of this film was almost two thirds of that of Jackson’s entire trilogy, which just seems criminal! It’s performance at the box office has been rather mediocre, and because of that there is doubt as to whether the sequels will go ahead at all.

All religious kafuffle aside, this film is quite a let down. It is up to you though to decide whether or not it’s worth seeing, and if you are a fan of the books then you’ll probably want to find out for yourself what it’s like. But bring some tissues. There there… the next one might be better, if it even gets made.

Rating : **

Written by,

.Peter.D.Marsay.

Originally completed: 06/01/08.

Little Miss Sunshine (2006) - 29/10/07 - ****

Review of the Film Little Miss Sunshine (2006) (15)

Advanced warning: this review contains some plot spoilers.

The story behind the 2006 film Little Miss Sunshine has many similarities to the plot of the film itself. Both had a bumpy ride to the finish, both had a sudden and unexpected chance of glory right before the end, and finally… both were let down an inch short of the finish line. But, importantly, those involved did not care. It did not matter. So much had been gained from so little, and completely unexpectedly, (undeservedly?) The film was independently made and struggled to find a distributor, which mirrors the film’s story of a little girl and her family putting so much effort into having her hearts desire fulfilled; competing in the Little Miss Sunshine beauty pageant, many miles away from where they live. As they reach it just in the nick of time, so also did the films producers find it a distributor just in the nick of time. The films unprecedented success and glorious spiralling of award winning mirrors the success of the family in the film in getting the girl to compete in said beauty contest. But it all falls apart at the end, those others attending the contest do not want people like them there, and kick them out. But they are not left feeling defeated and deflated, quite the opposite in fact! Having come so far and learnt so much along the way, the family is happy enough with what they have managed come away with, which was after all far more than any of them had expected in the first place. The way that this part of the film mirrors the reality of the story behind it is that after being critically acclaimed and stealing away with so many unexpected awards, the films hope for ultimate glory was lost when it missed out on the Academy Award for Best Picture at the 2007 Oscars, for which it had (very surprisingly in my opinion,) been nominated. But of course the film’s makers were far from disappointed, and were in fact simply very surprised and happy to have gotten as far as they had.

Whether the film deserved to be quite as financially and critically successful as it was is a topic that is open to debate. In the opinion of this reviewer, while the film is a decently enough made satirical comedy, it is really not that great a film by any stretch of the imagination. Starting at the beginning, with the screenplay, (which did in fact actually win the 2007 Oscar for Best Original Screenplay), I think that it is in fact a rather weak and predictable plot that the film follows, and that much of the structure of the film is far too methodical in a step by step manner to make it possible for an audience to jump into it with both feet… there is always the feeling that the reality created by the film is not quite real enough, the family just seems a little too conveniently appropriate for the film, with all of its different elements of dysfunction and quirkiness. There is the Father who is living in a dream world where any problem can be overcome by following a simple series of steps, who is present in the story for no other purpose other than to show us that positive thinking isn’t enough when it comes to crunch-time. Then there is the grumpy old Grandfather, who is there largely just for comic-relief but also to teach us a lesson or two along the way… thanks Gramps. Next is the very, very typical teenaged son, who only seems to be there in order to demonstrate to the audience that even though adolescents may look like idiots, they actually do have brains and are just going through the process of working out how to use them. Then we have the Mother, who is the backbone of the family, and a crooked one with slipping vertebras at that, as she struggles to hold everyone together and keep them friends… Penultimately is the suicidal and gay Uncle, apparently there to show us that gays are ’normal’ people too and suicide isn’t stupid, adding more lessons to the films already packed curriculum of them… as if the Grandfather’s weren’t patronising and numerous enough. Finally, of course we have 'Little Miss Sunshine' herself; well, not quite. The strenuously cute, screaming little ball of fun who is the cause of her unusual families road tripping adventures serves to teach us the biggest lessons of all: it’s the taking part that counts and nothing matters more than family! Oh, and that supermodels can eat ice-cream too. These message bearing characters really do nothing more than indicate their creator to be an unnecessarily cynical and tiresomely easygoing member of the human race.

Whilst decently well made, expertly acted (Alan Arkin in particular stands out as the Grandfather, and he won an Academy Award for the role,) as well as enthusiastically directed, the real core of a film is it’s story, and beyond that… it’s message. To me, the message of this film is painfully shallow and hopelessly useless. So long as we’re all friends and we‘ve all done our best, the outcome doesn‘t matter! Surely anyone can see the foolishness in that. To add another positive point to pad out this paragraph, and because I don’t want to come across too harshly as I did actually enjoy Little Miss Sunshine on the whole, (especially on the second viewing…) the choice of music and scoring is generally very good indeed, particularly the pieces performed by the musical ensemble DeVotchKa.

There are a few half decent moments for out-loud laughter, all though not nearly enough for a film that’s been billed as a comedy as well as a drama, and many of it’s jokes fall flat as either clichéd or simply not funny, and when a joke that is obviously meant to be a funny falls flat like that the few seconds afterwards that are there to allow the audience time to finish laughing before the story is continued, can feel very empty indeed… The film’s genuinely disturbing finale makes the most effective but least important (and perhaps most irrelevant…) point of all, as it shows how a child beauty pageant must surely be a huge magnet for paedophiles. But that point is really a bit lost among the films bigger but more poorly portrayed themes and ideas.

The fact that little Abigail Breslin was actually nominated for a Best Supporting Actress Oscar just seems to demonstrate that the film really didn’t deserve many of it’s awards or nominations, as it just seems rather ridiculous that she was nominated because there were many more accomplished and just far better performances by actresses in supporting roles that year. For example, what about Maggie Gyllenhaal in Oliver Stone’s World Trade Center, or Hilary Swank in Brian De Palma’s The Black Dahlia…? To name only two. It just seems ridiculous.

In finishing, I would like to summarise this review just by saying that this is one of very few films that I recognise as being technically well-made on most levels, but that I do not personally actually like… and in my opinion that reflects badly on the film as a whole; a little like an empty swimming pool… it is a swimming pool, but you can’t swim in it. The films ideas hold no water!

Rating : ****

Written by,

.Peter.D.Marsay.

Originally completed: 29/10/07.