Much More Than A Little Spark

"You're only given a little spark of madness. You mustn't waste it..."

That was Robin Williams, the legendary (an over-used eulogy nowadays but, in this case, oh-so-accurate) comic-actor who sadly passed away August 11th, 2014. 

It's a death that many will mourn for some time, as is testament to the flux of anguish and grief as the news first broke. For once, a celebrity death hoax was much needed, but, alas...

Robin Williams did not commit to a handful of good movies, no, he took part and elevated a plethora of great ones. Throw them in as you will: Good Will Hunting (his well-deserved Oscar), Good Morning, Vietnam, Mrs. Doubtfire, Flubber, Awakenings, One-Hour Photo, Insomnia, The Fisher King, Aladdin, Dead Poets Society, Hook, The World According To Garp, World's Greatest Dad, What Dreams May Come, Jumanji, The Birdcage, and many others, religious to the fact that this man wasn't just a wild, eccentric genius, but also a solemn, calculating and convincing advocate of the trade that regarded him in such esteem.

He began a glittering career as an alien in sit-com Mork and Mindy and developed into a raucously funny comedian with a set of serious acting chops when it was required. He could navigate his way through a film, switching from one persona to another effortlessly, as he displayed so vehemently as airman Adrian Cronauer in Good Morning, Vietnam, a role that distributed the actor's witty, sharp rapid delivery and penchant for comedy alongside his refined, troubled dramatic side. Other films, One-Hour Photo and Insomnia stripped the humour away entirely, proving that Williams could stand up alongside juggernauts such as Pacino and shine bigger and brighter.

There's a time and a place to delve into detail and whatever Williams struggled with, his inner demons, they were sadly left to him and him alone. For now, though, it's time to celebrate and herald a genius, a legend, a captain, my captain.

Amazing, Spider-Man Was Not

You're running a risk of unsettling every film reviewer's wet dream when you release a film with the adjective 'AMAZING' running prominently in the title. Specifically when the movie is a massive blockbuster that is going to garner a number of reviews, a number of divisive reviews, something that Spidey has commanded since Sam Raimi's infamous trilogy.

Many argue that a reboot of Spider-Man wasn't needed, certainly not so soon after Raimi's movies and the reason was simply the fact that Sony's rights to the character are limited and they'll certainly milk it for all its worth before it returns to the Marvel Universe and, dare I say, The Avengers?

No, the movies weren't needed but I take a sullen enjoyment out of different incarnations of the same character and casting Andrew Garfield was a step in the right direction - no offence to Tobey Magure, a decent actor, but his Peter Parker was a crybaby; no one likes a crybaby - and his chemistry with real-life girlfriend Emma Stone (as Gwen Stacy) anchored the first movie and elevated it above its silly comic-book narrative. It works even better with the second, sweeping away the poor, formulaic nature of the movie and its incredibly flimsy portrayal of supervillains.

Jamie Foxx stars as Electro, a man who takes a tumble into a vat of electric eels, wiping away every ounce of human flesh and matter, replacing it with surging electricity. There is no science to it (phew!) and you pretty much take it as is. His primary scene in Times Square is actually very good; it's large in scope but works well, showcasing director Marc Webb's abilities at setting the stage. From then on, however, it's a mad descent into anarchy - not enough time is given to develop Electro and he side-steps from misunderstood sap to Batman and Robin in the space of a couple of scenes.

Then we have Harry Osborne, the Green Goblin. Dane DeHaan is, again, a better casting decision than James Franco was. He has the right look of charm and unhinged ferocity. However, he seems to be succumbing to his genetic illness far too quickly (again, it's lazy writing, convenient plot ordering and given light by the odd line of exposition) - I'm not even going to start on how quickly it took for him to become accustomed to the latest in high-tec weaponry forged by his father's company - again, take it with a large handful of salt.

The movie rumbles on, showdown after showdown (the lack of creativity in the final act is overlooked due to the emotional conclusion of the movie), never really offering anything new or exciting; as a superhero movie, it's remarkably dull - has the trope become a fad after all these years? I doubt it.

No, what elevated the movie to something other than mindless, meandering action is the coming-of-age story hidden beneath the special effects and multi-million dollar shots. Spider-Man is a teenage at heart, a high-school outcast that gets the superpowers and the girl. His relationship with Gwen is here and there at times as he fights with his own warped sense of morality, torturing himself with the promise he made her father in the previous movie - keep away from Gwen, keep her safe. It's an interesting direction and takes a number of turns throughout the movie, culminating in, arguably, the best moment of the movie. Garfield and Stone have incredible chemistry, very much acting like a young couple in love, figuring out their places in the world they occupy, troubled by the extraordinary circumstances. Within that aspect, the movie works quite well, but, ultimately, it's hampered down and bloated by the influx of maniacal villain that don't belong - unfortunately, this is, once again, a movie that has been stuck inside an upside-down glass and I fear that, like Raimi's trilogy, the third film may be the one to kill it off.

The Wolf Of Wall Street

It's hard to look away from Martin Scorsese's cautionary tale of greed, guts and Gecko-esque monologues. Leonardo DiCaprio plays Jordan Belfort, a young, hungry stockbroker who, through a series of dodgy dealings, ascends Wall Street, conjuring up a small fortune for himself whilst hastily indulging in a life of hookers and blow. Those who've done their homework will know it's based on the real-life memoirs of the real-life Belfort (who also snags himself a cameo at the end of the movie, introducing DiCaprio at a seminar).

A lot of criticism has been aimed at the movie, the focus straying on how it, potentially, could be seen as glorifying Jordan Belfort's lifestyle and his dirty, aggressive methods. He sure has a lot of fun but I question whether any sane person would opt to live that way. He's got the money, a beautiful wife, a luxurious yacht yet he's never portrayed as a happy person - his bitterness and rage is released towards the end of the film in a shockingly visceral scene as he attempts to remove his daughter from his wife's care, with force. There's no glorifying of any kind there.

Many will draw comparisons with Scorsese's Goodfellas and, in truth, the two travel side-by-side for a considerable length. In both movies, there is little hint of a plot, but a tugging to go one way, as far as bad taste will possibly dictate, before highlighting the spectacular fall from grace. Both sets of characters are criminals, one group are gun-toting and maniacal, the other group pearly-white grins and, also, maniacal. There are no friends on Wall Street, a harsh fact but an understandable truth given the context, particularly in this movie. Jonah Hill takes on the role of Belfort's best friend, Donnie, once again proving that Moneyball was no illusion. He's as unhinged as Belfort and enjoys the lavish lifestyle, replicating as little remorse as possible - there's no time for sentimental reflection here, highlighted by Belfort's gung-ho decision to fight the FBI and continue making money when all good sense demands he step down, cut a deal and live off his millions. Belfort's deranged view: where's the fun in that? And so says Scorsese's audience.

The Wolf Of Wall Street is a good film, perhaps even a great one. Whether or not it'll stand the test of time and deserve utterance amongst the likes of Goodfellas, Taxi Driver and Raging Bull remains to be seen. You'd be hard-pressed to find a Scorsese movie that deals in such outrageous set-pieces and situations; it's definitely his funniest film though we're mostly laughing at Belfort, his senseless addictions and his habit of consuming and devastating everything around him. Scorsese deals in mindless excess here and many will raise an eyebrow at the movie's length (two hours, fifty-nine minutes), though it flows well, packed to the brim with twisted entertainment. It could have been condensed but when dealing with such outrageous source material, Scorsese was never liable to toe the line, he jumps head-on and encourages DiCaprio to the do the same (an Oscar with this guy's name on it is waiting down the line, though perhaps not this year), dealing out an unblinking performance, in terms of directing and acting. When the camera could choose to cut away, it doesn't (a trend that's becoming increasingly prevalent nowadays, thankfully), and like it, we, the audience, have the choice to look away but never do.

Whether you like it or not (and it's met a very stubborn disapproval amongst some circles), there is little morality to be found here. DiCaprio's on-screen charisma and hi-jinks are enough to anchor an audience onto his side though it's Scorsese who, after navigating us through a torrid series of depravity, is able to effortlessly remind us of who this man is behind the curtains.

12 Years A Slave

12 Years A Slave starts its harrowing journey by reminding us that the following tale is based on truth. It then proceeds to recount a story of betrayal, violence and utmost survival. It tells of Solomon Northup, a black man living in the northern territories of 1800s USA, a free man, until he is unceremoniously duped, thrown into shackles and sent to work across a series of plantations and cotton fields, turning this antebellum tale on its head.

In terms of narrative, what we have is relatively straightforward, though it begins en media res, an overused but efficient cinematic technique. Solomon's experience gradually wears him down, though, early on, he proclaims he will not wallow in sorrow or fall into despair. He's a remarkably strong character, accentuated by a remarkably strong performance by lead, Chiwetel Ejiofor - you hear that? Oscar bells a-ringing. It's a subtle performance and much of the story relies on the way director Steve McQueen has the camera linger on Northup for an extra 30 seconds or so, letting him do his work as well as lingering, rather uncomfortably (that's the point) on the atrocities committed by the slave-owners and their overseers. A scene late on stands out, but rather than let the audience use their imagination, McQueen allows us to experience it in its entirety, barely any cuts thrown in, one continuous moment of pain, grief and despair.

McQueen has made note of the lack of films depicting slavery in Hollywood (I love it, but I don't think Django Unchained rings the same bitter truths) and he's certainly gone a way to creating the essential entry that others will aspire to and be judged by. This movie has something of a happy ending, maybe bittersweet is more apt, considering what comes before, but it ends assuring the audience that this was an anomaly, a 1 in 1000 lightning strike, a story worth telling. There is no almighty push for the others on the plantation that Northup leaves behind - for many of them, worse off than him with his education and talents, things will only get worse - and we're meant to remember them the most. Aside from Ejiofor, Lupito Nyong'o plays Patsy, a unique slave, shown a warped affection by vicious, drunk slave owner Edwin Epps (McQueen regular Michael Fassbender). Her performance is stunning and captures both sides of the spectrum, a willingness to please, to survive, to do what is required of her as well as a dark turn of hopelessness, beginning Solomon to end her life. The final shot of her desperately trying to cling to him as he leaves for a better life, knowing her own will probably be over soon, packs a punch. 

Aside from all this, there are a fair few solid performances from household names in here - Benedict Cumberbatch continues his launch as benevolent slave owner Ford, an odd character who seems to be living the way a southerner is expected, but with a clear conscience. Fassbender is terrifying and hard as Epps, alternating between a soft-spoken, veiled menace to an explosion of rage, seemingly with ease. Brad Pitt has seen a lot of marketing for this film, the film he's produced, and he has a couple of good, important scenes. He's something of an aberration as well, a white man who calls Epps out on his actions and promises something better for Solomon. It's an important moment as we've got to this point, with Solomon, not knowing who to trust, but like him, we've been through so much that the sheer desperation is all we've got, all he's got. The score chimes in every now and then, representing the movie in its entirety; subtle, but not afraid to pack a punch, always inspirational and morbidly uplifting.

It's a favourite come Oscar season and it brings with it some uncomfortable truths (again, the point) but it's impossible to deny the significance of the film, as well as the technical brilliance and star turns. It's a long film, just over two hours, but it's hard to look away, running down the time with scene after scene, never wasted, never lingering too long in one place, always ready to shock and awe. It's an inspirational story, one that needed to be told, one that, all too sadly, could be considered as relevant today as it was back then. It's a total triumph of cinema and evoking emotion - I doubt many will chatter excitedly as they leave the cinema and many will remain silent as they shuffle out the doors, long after the final credits roll. But, again, that's probably the point.

American Hustle

David O'Russell's had a busy year; fresh off the success of The Silver Linings Playbook, he's back, reunited with Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence, as well as Christian Bale and Amy Adams (from O'Russell's greatest effort, The Fighter). It's a fantastic cast and each member contributes in their own unique way, adding an element to the film, playing off one another with precision, flair, humour and that surreal slice of Scorsese-ism that, ultimately, makes the film something of a success.

Somewhere around the mid-point of the movie, the moment I realised that the director's selection of tunes was stylishly obvious, I made sure to note how surreal the movie truly was. Essentially, it was all a con, it never really happened - nothing was real. Of course, that's one way of looking at it. With a layered story such as this one, who really knows what was going on - Richie (Cooper) didn't seem to have a clue and I guess we've been planted with him for this one. How long were Irving and Sydney plotting all this? Did it come to them late on or was it always in the works? It's never actually answered though there is one scene which seems to point to the former. Either way, you make your own assumptions - this is not a story, it's a character-piece, like most of O'Russell's films, and he'd have it no other way.

That being said, it does meander this way and that for a large portion of the movie - Sydney and Irving are con-artists, taking advantage of a gullible nation that's looking to make a quick buck until, bam, they're caught by FBI Agent, Richie. He claims he'll provide them with leniency if they aid him to catch four other con-artist. That seems like a plot and a direction, yet, all of a sudden, we're introduced to politician Carmine (Jeremy Renner), who may, or may not, be a shady character - again, it's never really clear. He appears on and off throughout the movie as if the plot depends on it but it's never really that vital - it provides Irving with some form of emotional backdrop, though most of that is provided with his unstable wife, Rosalynn (Lawrence).

Perhaps it's a movie that has to be seen twice to be fully appreciated - my viewing seemed all too brief and for much of it, I was viewing it out of necessity as opposed to desire. It may have altered my viewing somewhat but I expected more. It's quite a good time and, as mentioned, the performances are good fun and though the music was painfully obvious and never really in-keeping with the movie, it added to the flippant tone the movie seemed to employ.

For me, this is your average 7/10 movie - it's not something special and won't be the movie O'Russell is remembered for but it follows a collection of offbeat, unique characters and has fun with it. Though, partly based on a real event, you're never so sure if what you see should be taken seriously. These are criminals after all.

Your Standard Film of 2013 List

What is the greatest movie of 2013? Who really knows, everyone has their own opinion, and that single fact makes the magical world of film one of the very greatest. My list is not comprehensive as my own viewing history this season, this year, hasn't been particularly thorough. A combination of poverty and sloth has contributed to a limited selection of movies so you may have to power through some of these choices with little more than a snicker and a shake of the head. Let's get to it:

Star Trek Into Darkness

Granted, Star Trek Into Darkness is constantly, and probably fairly, branded an incoherent space trip with a significant lack of plot, character and sense. But it's a great time at the cinema, a pure popcorn flick in the way The Avengers succeeded last year (and Batman failed...). Also, Hollywood woke up and noticed more British talent in Benedict Cumberbatch and, as many expected, he stole the show. JJ Abrams is a good director, lens flare aside, so I'm glad he's making this his final Trek film before moving onto another beloved franchise. Here's for 2015...

Captain Phillips

The comeback for Tom Hanks? Not that he really needed it. But, Larry Crowne...

Captain Phillips, based on a real-life story surrounding piracy of the Somalian coast, is a kinetic thriller, directed by Paul Greengrass, anchored by one hell of a leading performance from Hanks. It's practically a lock-in for Best Actor, as most Hanks performances should be. Again, the movie's relentless and, despite its run-time, it's good times.

Pacific Rim

Again, we're following on from Star Trek, Pacific Rim was pure spectacle, but thanks to the name associated with it, Del Toro, it was well-crafted spectacle. I enjoyed it for what it was and, after Pan's Labyrinth, I have a lot of time for Del Toro. I'm sure there's a mass of homage and cultural references that flew right by me, but it's a monster movie done well. Robots too...

Saving Mr Banks

This is a Disney production about Walt Disney - an element of sugar-coating is to be expected and it's what we get. Throwing that aside, we also have a very competent, heart-warming/heart-breaking movie about a two-week period before the ever-loved Mary Poppins was released as a movie. It's amusing, well-paced and amicable - it's not the truth, as has been highlighted in a number of media outlets over the past few weeks, but it's as much truth as an audience needs.

The Hobbit: The Desolation Of Smaug

I was a sucker for the first so the mere fact that the sequel was a hell of a great deal better made it inevitable the movie would make its way onto my list. I love that word - 'popcorn flick' - and the movie lives up to its reputation in every way. Once again, Martin Freeman proves he was impeccably cast as Bilbo and, though most of it focuses on the dwarves, he certainly gets his time to shine, particularly in the key scene towards the end with Smaug - another good year for Cumberbatch.

World War Z

This film makes the list merely because of the surprise factor that it was actually a darn good movie. I was scared, freaked out, on tenterhooks, on the edge of my seat, all of the above. It was rapid and frenzied and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Brad Pitt gives a good performance though, once again, it's something of a popcorn flick, moving from one set-piece to another. It's not high-art, but, on account of my limited cinematic viewings this year, it makes the cut.

Gravity

Gravity is a movie that is expected to be on most lists, a glorious example of spectacle film-making. It's not particularly substantial nor does it fall under Michael Bay's 'style-over-substance' category. It's remarkably beautiful and a lock for Best Cinematography during the awards season. In terms of performances, Sandra Bullock acts out her inner-Tom Hanks, left alone for much of the time despite George Clooney's sporadic space-ramblings. Is it the best movie of the year? Probably.

The Butler

Interesting trivia about The Butler, it was written by the cat who played Jonathan in Buffy The Vampire Slayer. That's not quite enough to push a mass audience towards the movie, that mainly deals with the struggle for civil rights in a torn nation, but it's an entertaining movie which flows freely from era to era, never settling for too long. And I appreciate that.

The Place Beyond The Pines

The narrative is certainly an odd one here, and I wasn't quite expecting it. I won't ruin it for those who haven't seen it but it may push both ends of the spectrum. Some may turn off after the opening hour whilst others may stray a bit further. It's ambitious, a flaw to some, but spells out an interesting story on legacy and the sins of our fathers, I don't know, something like that, but it's always intriguing to see a movie that includes a series of events that act as ramifications of previous events. Act and react.

Prisoners

This was a movie that came in from somewhere else, something really unexpected. You look at the cast and you automatically expect something special but it didn't get a triumphant release and, for many, it was a hidden gem. It's a subtle, minimalist story that plays on tension rather than thrills and energetic set-pieces.

A TV Show So Exciting, It Has Its Own Name & Theme Music...

Here we are, once again, blogging about the important things in life. This time around, it's CBS's Stephen King-adapted UNDER THE DOME. Next time, I promise to hark about some serious worldwide issues, such as Rice Krispie Marshmallow Squares: What flavour WILL they come up with next?!

UNDER THE DOME is a show that served as a summer mini-series for CBS. It's adapted from Stephen King's science-fiction novel of the same name and follows a small town and its folk as they become trapped...under a dome. THE Dome. The mother of all domes. Without spoiling anything for those who are leisurely strolling through the first season, it follows the plights of those within as they try to adapt to life...UNDER THE DOME. Bam, there you have it.

I feel it serves up a semi-adequate blog topic due to its surprising RIDICULOUS STORY AND CHARACTERS vs DECEPTIVE POPULARITY correlation. The truth is, the show is not great, has poor, poor, clumsy exposition-filled dialogue and senseless characters. Yet its ratings are good, very good. So good that it's been commissioned for another season. So, and this is the million-pound question, why...?

Audience Love-In
I haven't read King's original novel but I get, from common sense, that it's a lot darker than the TV show. Then again, this is a CBS channel and we're hardly going to see sex, drugs and rock'n'roll on the same network that provides us all with unhealthy dollops of 'Geeks Are Ridiculous & We're Going To Mock 'Em Silly' otherwise known as THE BIG BANG THEORY. So there's that, the show engages with a larger audience, embracing the prudes who turn their noses up at the likes of HBO, FX, Showtime and Walter friggin' White.

Hank Schrader
That being said, it's not short on its badass factor. The town's councilman, Big Jim Rennie (played by Dean Norris aka ASAC Hank Schrader), has evolved from ominously caring father figure to an eyebrow raisingly insane mass-murderer. Rolling off the success of BREAKING BAD, Dean Norris is in demand and his presence in a Stephen King associated sci-fi show will have no doubt brought in a few more viewers. It helps that he's, by far, BY FAR, the best actor on the show, the best character on the show, and the guy who seems most liable to take out everyone else, freeing us of their lunacy.

Brains-Off Approach
There's a lot to be said for those rare breed of TV shows, usually reserved for the cable channels, that engage an audience's mind. UNDER THE DOME isn't one of them, and that's mightily OK. Sometimes, you need a show to spell it out for you because, bluntly put, thinking is overrated and TV is meant to morph our fragile, tiny minds (thanks to the PTC for that one). This show is a gem at presenting subtle mythology in keen and creative ways and then following it up by surgically dissecting it for you in the form of clunky exposition and maddening dialogue. I say go for it - I've stuck with LOST for far too many years and I'm tired of having polar bears and hench, icy donkey wheels running through my mind all day.

Small Town Ambience
A sure-fire way to my heart, the show has this fantastic feel of community. Even better, it's an eerie community. Set apart from the rest of the world, no one can come in or out and everyone deals with their own problems together, as a team, an eerie team...

An element that this show has really nailed is that aspect of being alone in the world, properly detached from anything else resembling civilisation, built-up cities, commercialisation, Starbucks... This, of course, all culminates with Big Jim building his own gallows so he can hang those who do him wrong. Handy.












*Strawberry, I reckon