FILM REVIEW: Maleficent (Robert Stromberg, 2014)

Turning the well-known story of Sleeping Beauty on its head, Wicked-style, Maleficent tells the story of two lands. One is ruled by a vain King, and inhabited by discontent mortals, unhappy at the extent of inequality facing them (an apt parable for society today, perhaps). The other is full of mythical creatures, including pixies, walking trees and lots of fairies, one of the most prominent of which is the titular Maleficent.

At the start of the film, Maleficent is but a girl, and, given her advanced magical powers, already somewhat of a protector of her land and those in it. She is alerted of a human boy of about her age, Stefan, who has crossed boundaries to her land, and tried to pickpocket a diamond. Confronting him, she forces him to return the diamond, but, despite the compromising circumstances in which they meet, she comes to like him. He, like her, is an orphan, and, when he accidentally singes her with his iron ring, throws it away as a gesture of goodwill. Maleficent is deeply moved by this, and the two become friends, and then lovers.

However, whilst the young Maleficent is a romantic, Stefan is more of a pragmatist. After he hits adulthood he leaves her to fulfil his ambitions, and makes his way up to become one of the King’s cronies. On his deathbed from a failed siege of Maleficent’s land, the King promises he will name his heir and betroth his daughter to anyone who can slay Maleficent. Stefan is fond of Maleficent, but he is much, much fonder of power and glory, and, whilst he stops short of killing her, abuses her trust, drugging her to sleep, and cutting off her wings so as to give the impression that he did indeed slay her. And that is where our good girl turns into the embittered, malevolent figure of villainess that we remember from the Disney cartoon.

Hot on the heels of last year’s multiple-Oscar-winner Frozen, Maleficent is another Disney movie that subverts the conservative ‘girls need a Prince Charming to swoop in and save them’, and instead, promotes solidarity between sisters.

The central dynamic here is between Jolie’s horned fairy ruler and Elle Fanning as Aurora, the good-natured, trusting princess whom she had cursed as a baby. Both are well-cast; Jolie’s English accent is spot-on and she delivers her sarcastic lines with relish and genuinely instills fear into the audience. We genuinely believe hell hath no fury like a fairy scorned.

Elle Fanning impresses in a role that, in just about every other young actress, save perhaps Hailee Steinfeld, I would have found extremely grating. Aurora is naive, bordering on gullible (in one brilliant display of dramatic irony, she calls Maleficent her ‘fairy godmother’), but Fanning's winning smile and sweet performance keeps her endearing rather than dopey. The relationship between the two is the strongest part of the film, and when Aurora comes to learn the horrible truth, it is genuinely emotional; we feel as disappointed as she does.

Whilst the leading ladies are well-cast, the supporting men is more of a mixed bag. As Diablo, Maleficent’s sidekick raven, Sam Riley is an inspired choice. I’m so used to seeing him in offbeat indie movies like On The Road and Control, so to see him in such a high-profile blockbuster was a delight in itself. Diablo is a bird Maleficent rescues, with the view to becoming her wings after her’s are stolen from her, and whilst Diablo goes about his tasks, he is not afraid to question his mistress and give her lip back, elevating him into a much more interesting character than the standard Crabbe/Goyle-type yeomen.

However, as King Stefan, Sharlto Copley is a bad, bad choice. I feel the film’s casting directors missed a trick, because, whilst we’re obviously not supposed to sympathise with the man who broke Maleficent’s heart and betrayed her trust, there’s nothing wrong with making him dastardly handsome, just to yo-yo with our loyalties a bit. Copley is unattractive, and sports an angry Scottish accent. As such, I was firmly on Maleficent’s side, no matter how horrible her actions. Not ideal.

The middle act of Maleficent dragged, and some of the dialogue is pure cheese (such as when Aurora meets the young pup who we believe to be her Prince Charming). I was also somewhat underwhelmed with the three good fairies; I adore Imelda Staunton and Juno Temple, and cheered inside when I saw them. But whilst I found them amusing, I feel their foolish antics somewhat outstayed their welcome in the film, as did the meandering sequences where Aurora gets to see Maleficent’s kingdom.

That being said, the fantasy action sequences are nothing short of breath-taking: hyper-energetic and thrilling without being overly violent, and the showdown finale was brilliantly staged. All in all, a good popcorn movie that was a little on the indulgent side, but it promoted empathy and girl power. And that’s never a bad thing in my eyes.

6.5/10

Lovelace (Rob Epstein, 2013)

Given the current furore over David Cameron’s proposal that we bad porn completely, the release of Lovelace, which charts the story of America’s most celebrated blue movie actress, could not have come at a more topical time. Starring Amanda Seyfried as the eponymous character, the film shows how she came to make porn movies, the ensuing glitterati that followed, before revealing how she was manhandled into it every step of the way, posing the question of just how “liberating” porn really is.

Linda Lovelace, real name Linda Boreman’s beginnings are no different from many an American good-girl-gone-bad. Raised by a Bible-bashing mother (an unrecognisable Sharon Stone, commendably playing against type) and a meek, hardly there father, Linda’s only bouts of having fun are at her local roller-disco with best friend Patsy (the ever-lovely Juno Temple, adding another independent movie to her growing collection). It is there that her shy, wide-eyed charm captures the attention of Chuck Traynor (Peter Sarsgaard).

Traynor is an extremely seedy fella, owning a stripclub where he casually turns a blind eye to his strippers’turning tricks, as well as hitting on Patsy the second Linda’s back is turned. But he can be the most charming man in the world when he wants to be, and that is how he cons Linda into being his betrothed. A few months down the line and Chuck’s various shady dealings land him in serious debt, and it is here that Linda tentatively stars in the movie “Inside Deep Throat”, about a woman who’s clitoris is inside her throat. The first part of the movie makes porn seem like no big deal, almost fun, with its witty sex jokes and repartee among the cast and crew, not to mention the glamour parties with Hugh Hefner. The second part, however, shows us the ugly scenes after the parties, where we discover that Linda was not a so-called empowered woman embracing her sexuality, but rather the victim of her controlling, monstrous husband.

The movie poster for Lovelace boasts a litany of Hollywood A-listers as well as independent movie darlings, but blink and you’ll miss a couple of them. Chloe Sevigny, horrifically underused as one of Lovelace’s various interviewers, is in it for the best part of 10 seconds. However, that’s not to say there aren’t some great performances. The Simpsons’ Hank Azardia as the director who pompously thinks his movie “transcends porn”, is a riot. Sharon Stone is completely dislikeable as the overbearing mother who won’t give her daughter an inch of freedom, but her personality is exactly the type that would drive a girl to porn, and thus, is utterly believable. She's so caught up in her Bible readings that she can't see that her little girl is getting abused. Stone's branch of Christian crazy channels Piper Laurie in Carrie, and we all saw how well that turned out.

Seyfried is pretty good in the lead, although she’s let down by one element that’s not so much to do with her acting per se: Seyfried has usually played it safe with her movie roles, such as Mamma Mia!, or pretty Cosette in Les Mis, so to see her wide-eyed as America’s most famous porn star is a bit of a stretch. Linda Lovelace herself definitely had a bit of a “been around the block” look about her, whereas Seyfried spends the entire movie looking virginal, which doesn't quite go with the image of her character. Peter Sarsgaard is fantastically odious as her partner. I doubt there’ll be a single person watching Lovelace who can like or sympathise with Chuck, but Sarsgaard is completely committed to his oily, disturbing performance. Mao Zedong once famously said, “power grows out of the barrel of a gun”, and it’s with a little handgun that Traynor wields his influence over his poor wife, pimping her out to strangers in clubs and coercing her to give blowjobs on screen. He’s a terrible person, but Sarsgaard gives an excellent performance.

In the end, I was left feeling far too sorry for Linda Lovelace to have any kind of impression of this as a piece of art. Although we as the audience are happy that Linda escaped the chain of violence at the end, as a biopic, it had no message other than “don’t stand for abuse”. Pertinent as that is, I like my biopics to say something more, for example, 2005’s Capote about Breakfast at Tiffany’s writer Truman Capote cannily captured just how much of yourself you have to sacrifice for the sake of your art. Tonally, it was also suspect. Sex jokes in one scene, then brutal depictions of spousal abuse in the other… it didn’t sit with me. So, because of the lack of message, as well as the movie being so completely at void of redemptive characters apart from the lead, and the terrible tonal modulations, I left Lovelace feeling short-changed.

Grade: C+/B-

Film review: THE DARK KNIGHT RISES (Christopher Nolan, 2012)

After eight years of relative inactivity in the streets of Gotham, mainly thanks to a Harvey Dent act – constructed in false honour of Harvey Two-face from The Dark Knight, Bruce Wayne is a recluse in his manor, hobbling around with a walking stick and never showing his face. However, he’s kicked back into life – quite literally – by Selina Kyle, a swish, sassy cat burglar who’s also not bad to look at. 

It soon transpires she’s working for a greater evil, Bane, a hulking badass who was born in a prison known as “hell on earth”. Walking around with a hugely creepy gas mask in front of his face and casually disposing of anyone who gets into his way, Bane christens himself “Gotham’s reckoning.” But Bruce Wayne, never one to take attack to his beloved city lying down, fancies letting Batman reckon with him.

Nolan’s final instalment of his epic Batman trilogy is the most ambitious of the three, and no shortage of love nor money has gone into creating it. Action sequences which would be hard to direct at the best of times are made ten times more so with the almost unmanageable size of the quantity of extras employed – the American football game stands out in particular here. 

There are one-on-one fight scenes, as well as thousands-on-thousands, and some of the martial arts sequences (particularly involving Selina Kyle aka Catwoman) are thrillingly choreographed. But the real challenge didn’t lie in any part of the action, but bringing the trilogy to a close in both an emotionally satisfying way, and one that did justice to the massive Batman franchise. Other critics have been left wanting by the ending, the direction of the film (at 164 minutes, it will test your bladder), as well as the sprawling nature of the screenplay.

Indeed, Nolan co-write this film with his brother Jonathan, and at times, the dialogue (between Batman and Bane in particular) feels twice as portentous as that of Inception, and, considering I sure-as-hell was no fan of Inception, that’s certainly saying something. Another aspect of the film that has bugged some people is that the majority of time, it was difficult to decipher what Bane was actually saying due to the mask in front of his face. 

This was infuriating and confusing, definitely, but overall, I was quite impressed with how it contributed to the eerie, ominous sense of the film. Then there are the plot holes. Usually when I watch a film, I choose to suspend belief and just go with it, but there were a few subtle things that even I couldn’t ignore – for example – how policemen who had been trapped under rubble for months were suddenly as sprightly and energetic as ever. I won’t reveal any others at the risk of spoiling the plot, but plot holes are so rife in the film that some wags have taken to giving TDKR the moniker “The Plot Holes Rises.”

But all this pales in comparison in the grand scheme of things, when the end product is so epic. Chris Nolan recruited the majority of the cast of Inception for The Dark Knight Rises, so he must really enjoy working with them. 

Of the Inception crew, Marion Cotillard impressed me the least here. There were times when her facial expressions were borderline Drama GCSE, and considering the amazingly accurate depiction of Edith Piaf she has given before, we all know she can do a lot better. 

Michael Caine was very good, as he has been throughout the trilogy, and he has a few heart-rending scenes in which he tells Bruce how much he means to him. But my favourite performance of the Inception bunch is Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who plays a John Blake, cop, who, like Wayne, is an orphan, and thus sees him as a kindred spirit. Blake is very resourceful and comes to Batman’s aid at various points throughout the film and makes for a commendable supporting hero. And as the baddy, Tom Hardy is absolutely terrifying. He had a thankless task, having to follow-up Heath Ledger's terrifying Joker as the Batman villain, but he gives Bane genuine malice when the character could have easily become a hilarious caricature and for that, Laurels should be given to Hardy (boom boom :p).

Christian Bale, surely one of the most versatile actors in Hollywood, takes the lead role again wonderfully. It doesn’t quite match up to his work in The Fighter, The Machinist or my personal favourite, All the Little Animals (remember that film? lol), but in a role that is so easy to get wrong, he gets pretty much everything right. 

However, every scene he shared with Anne Hathaway’s Catwoman was stolen from her, for she was sensational. I had my qualms about seeing wholesome Princess Mia from The Princess Diaries playing such a sexy, amoral role, but Hathaway nails it. Her fight scenes are electrifying, and she deserves further plaudits when you consider she’s doing them in six-inch stiletto heels. Like a real cat, Hathaway slinks about the film like she owns it, and as a result, it really feels like she does. There’s also an engaging turn from English Rose Juno Temple as Catwoman’s friend and possible lover. Temple doesn’t do much, but it’s a proud moment to see her in such a huge blockbuster.

So engrossing that I did not check my phone once throughout the viewing of The Dark Knight Rises, I honestly couldn’t recommend it enough. It definitely has flaws, and several blog entries could be dedicated to the inconsistencies alone. But the overall good in the film – and boy, there is a lot of it – more than counterbalances it. 

Christopher Nolan has really done himself proud here, and for this alone, I am willing to forgive him for Inception (incidentally, Hans Zimmer’s score at points really do sound Inceptionish throughout the film (528491 from Inception sounds like it was played in every scene in TDKR), but we’ll allow). His brooding direction has given Batman what was seriously lacking in the previous cringeworthy George Clooney-starring Batman Forever films – soul. 

Much like Bruce Wayne, I haven’t been fulfilling my film critic duties much this year. But The Dark Knight Rises is my very own Bane, in that sense. The passion for cinema is back, all thanks to this film. 

And at the end of the day, there is no bigger compliment I can pay a film than that.

8/10

Every night I go, I go sneaking out the door.

Brothers (Jim Sheridan, 2009)
Vaguely interesting re-make of Brødre, with some strong performances from Gyllenhaal and Maguire, but Portman was lol-worthy. I strongly disliked the uglier daughter in the film as well; the things she said to Tobey Maguire over the dinner table deserved a slap.

Shutter Island (Martin Scorsese, 2010)

I'd read the book beforehand so knew the twist, but even so, I adored this film, a lot. Not my favourite from Scorsese, mind, that’s The King of Comedy, but it was really tense and well-sculpted, and Leonardo DiCaprio reminded me why he’s one of my 3 favourite actors with a characteristically strong performance. The sequences with DiCaprio and Williams were terrifically staged and dead depressing. The music was reallllly intense (albeit heavy on the usage of the double bass), which added to the impending sense of doom of the film. I don't think I like it quite as much as The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, but I prefer it muchly to Mulholland Dr.  Anyway, recommended.

Shank (Mo Ali, 2010)
Oh dear. I'm not exaggerating when I say this was one of the worst films I've ever seen in my entire life. I only watched it in the first place for Kaya Scodelario (Effy from Skins), but, aside from looking quite slutty and skinny, she didn't do anything. The male characters were all major pains in the backsides and I found myself, more than once, thinking "just die already". There was also a quite terrible scene in which two dogs beat the crap out of each other. Shit acting, shit direction and animal cruelty to boot. Piece of shit.

Cracks (Jordan Scott, 2009)

I'd been looking forward to watching this film for ages, and it didn't disappoint! Eva Green oozed charisma and it wasn't hard to see why Juno Temple and her fellow classmates idolised her so. Relative unknown María Valverde impressed me greatly and I felt for her in her plight. The "seduction" scene, wherein Green misuses her teacherly role was classily and darkly handled, and the score from Javier Navarrete (the guy that scored Pan's Labyrinth) was beautifully haunting.

Saw VI (Kevin Greutert, 2009)
Disappointing and not even terribly scary. I just thought Saws I-III did it a lot better, and some of the tortures (a man getting his insides incinerated with hydrochloric acid) were just beyond grim. Saw I was brilliant because it was so groundbreaking, but now everything was done and nothing surprised me.

Pretty Persuasion (Marcos Siega, 2005)

My main problem with this film was that it quite patently couldn't decide what it wanted to be more like: a Heathers of the noughties, or a slightly meaner Mean Girls. As such, it couldn't quite deal with its own tonal modulations. Some of the banter was fun, but on the whole, it turned my stomach to think about 15-year-old girls doing some of the things that Evan Rachel Wood's character did.

I also watched the Easter special of Jonathan Creek, called "The Judas Tree", and I was reminded of why I love this show so much. Whilst I still haven't quite accepted Sheridan Smith as his sidekick, the mystery, plotting and denouement were all brilliant, and there was a fair dose of heartbreak in the finale. <3