Contents
"The Madness Of King George" "Magnolia" "Mamma Mia!" "Man On Fire" "Man On Wire" "The Manchurian Candidate" "March Of The Penguins" "Martha - Meet Frank, Daniel And Laurence" "The Mask Of Zorro" "Master And Commander: The Far Side Of The World" "The Matrix" "The Matrix Reloaded" "The Matrix Revolutions" "Maybe Baby" "Me And You And Everyone We Know" "Meet The Parents" "Memento" "Memoirs Of A Geisha" "Men In Black II" "Miami Vice" "Michael Clayton" "Million Dollar Baby" "Minority Report" "Mission: Impossible" "Mission: Impossible 2" "Mission: Impossible 3" "Mona Lisa Smile" "Mongol" "Monsoon Wedding" "The Motorcycle Diaries" "Moulin Rouge" "Mr and Mrs Smith" "The Mummy" "Munich" "Murder By Numbers" "Music & Lyrics" "My Best Friend's Wedding" "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" "My Name Is Khan" "My Winnipeg" "Mystic River" "The Net" "Nikita" "9 Songs" "Nathalie" "The Negotiator" "Night At The Museum" "Night At The Museum 2" "Nights In Rodanthe" "Notes On A Scandel" "Notting Hill"
Never can a filn script have laboured so much over the state of the stools and urine of a monarch, but then the scriptwriter is Alan Bennett - who penned the original stage play - and the king in question is George III who suffered from porphyria which is a serious illness evidenced by blue urine. Nigel Hawthorne is simply magnificent as the monarch who has already lost the American colonies and is now losing his mind, but Helen Mirren (as Queen Charlotte), Rupert Everett (as the Prince of Wales) and Ian Holm (as the king's physician) are leading members of a uniformly excellent cast, blessed with incisive dialogue. Handel's music and classic locations are the finished touches to a quality production.
Months before it reached Britain (why do films take so long to cross the Atlantic?), my American friend Michael Grace recommended “Magnolia” – and it proved to be a sound tip. Rarely will one see such an unusual and such a character-driven movie. Paul Thomas Anderson, who both wrote and directed “Boogie Nights”, carries out the same creative tasks here in a veritable tour de force that tells the stories of a complex of individuals all inhabiting the same Los Angeles’ San Fernando Valley in a 24 hour period and all connected web-like in ways that are only really clear at the end of this long (3 hours 8 minutes) but, satisfying, work.
The cutting and the camerawork are stunning, while the pacing is unusual since – like Tchaikovsky’s Sixth Symphony – the fastest action comes two-thirds of the way through and the last third is the most thoughtful and melancholic. Anderson has collated a wonderful cast – no less than eight of them from “Boogie Nights” – and there are so many impressive performances, but Tom Cruise deserves to be singled out for an Oscar-nominated display in a most unsympathetic role.
The film is not flawless: I would have preferred quieter music and clearer dialogue at times and a couple of the scenes - involving even dying characters singing and a plague from on high – were a little too surreal. But it is an immensely thought-provoking work of great power and poignancy. So, what’s it all about? Michael believes it is about “broken dreams, hopeful dreams, and maybe dreams”; I saw it essentially as about regret and redemption. Judge for yourself. And the origin of the title “Magnolia”? I still haven’t a clue. Finally, quiz-time: what other film refers to the same flower in its title? Answer: “Steel Magnolias” in 1989.
Link: official web site click here
I'm not a big fan of musicals, but I enjoyed the stage version of "Mamma Mia!" and, in its own way, the movie version is just as much fun. OK, the plotline is thin and contrived but the music and the dancing are so uplifting. the On the screen, British director Phyllida Lloyd - who directed the original Broadway production - is able to open out the work with soaring shots of Greek island locations. The other major difference between the two versions is the star quality of the movie.
Meryl Streep is excellent as the Bohemian Donna with Julie Walters (particularly funny) and Christine Baranski playing her friends. The male stars - Stellan Skarsgård, Colin Firth and Pierce Brosnan as Donna's one-time lovers - do not really have the voices for the songs and it's just so difficult to take on board James Bond singing. In fact, newcomer Amanda Seyfried has the best voice as well as an engaging personality. The repertoire of Abba songs in this film adaptation is not identical to that in the stage show, but all the favourites are here and there are some simply joyous numbers, most notably "Dancing Queen".
This is one film where you shouldn't leave the cinema until all the credits have rolled if you want to see all the performances and hear all the music.
On the morning of 7 August 1974, Frenchman Philippe Petit did the seemingly impossible: after six years of planning, for 45 minutes, he walked a tight rope slung between the two towers of the still-uncompleted World Trade Center, spanning the 140-foot (43 metres) gap at a height of 1,368 ft (417 metres). On 11 September 2001, terrorists perpetrated the absolutely unthinkable: they flew two aircraft into the towers, bringing them down and killing 2,750. In 2008, British director James Marsh produced the award-winning account of the 1974 feat which has gained a special poignancy in the light of the 9/11 attack.
The documentary is a mix of homemade footage of Petit's early career, some contemporary coverage of the walk, re-enactments of the entry to the towers, and extensive interviews with Petit and his key accomplices, skilfully cut together in a gripping narrative with atmospheric music by Michael Nyman and others. The amazingly colourful characters could not have been invented, most notably Petit himself whose impish facial expressions, heavily-accented English, compulsiveness and humour shine through this literally incredible tale. Neither Petit nor Marsh put a foot wrong.
Link: Wikipedia page on Philippe Petit click here
All of director Tony Scott's trademarks are here: above all, his frenetic editing, but also his camera pan across a large tower, his featuring of a dog, and his keenness on casting Denzel Washington and Christopher Walken (in this case, both former CIA operatives now making a kind of living in Mexico). Washington plays Creasy, the eponymous man on fire, who reluctantly takes on a job as bodyguard to Pita, the young daughter of a Mexican City businessman - played by a preciously talented 10 year old Dakota Fanning - and learns to value his shattered life once more, only to suffer her abduction in an operation in which there are a surprising number of players, all of whom Creasy intends to rub out. This is violent, vigilante-style retribution - but it is delivered with passion and style that constantly jolts the viewer.
The 1962 version of "The Manchurian Candidate" - starring Frank Sinatra and Lawrence Harvey - caught the conspiratorial mood of the time when so many Americans saw a commie round every corner. The current 'war of terror' might have seemed like an apposite time to attempt a remake. I've been a fan of Denzel Washington since he played Steve Biko in "Cry, Freedom" and I regard Meryl Streep as the finest actress of her generation, so the chance to see the two starring together for the first time was an attractive one. Since I'm a political animal, the vehicle of a political thriller appeared to add to the attraction. But Jonathan Demme's remake of John Frankenheimer's classic, although it has a certain style, is overall a real disappointment. Frankly it is lacklustre when it is not simply silly.
Streep gives a bravado performance as the manipulative mother of the Vice-Presidential candidate who is under external control and Washington is always watchable, but Liev Schreiber as the brain-drilled war hero and politician is robotic even when he is not 'activated'. The 'up-dating' of the story to make corporations rather than Communists the enemy is a well-worn theme, ranging from the Peter Sellers' movie "Being There" to the more recent television series "24". What this new version of Richard Condon's 1959 novel tells us is that Americans are no less fearful and paranoid than they were in the Cold War and Hollywood is no better at remakes than it ever was.
This a brilliant work made by the French director Luc Jacquet and shot in the French-owned part of Antartica. The English language version is narrated by Morgan Freeman. The 1 hour 20 minute documentary shows with wonderful cinematography the utterly amazing feat of how emperor penguins waddle on their little feet and slide on their rotund bellies in single file across the ice for 70 miles to reach their breeding grounds and then how male and female birds take turns to do what needs to be done to hatch the egg and feed the chick in some of the bitterest weather on earth.
"Martha - Meet Frank, Daniel And Laurence"
Unusual title but predictable, if engaging, romantic comedy from Film Four. American Martha is played by Monica Potter, a cross between Cameron Diaz and Julia Roberts but obviously much cheaper. Trying to win her favours are three Brits portrayed by Rufus Sewell, Tom Hollander and Joseph Fiennes respectively. There is some good location shooting in central London - my town.
Anthony Hopkins plays a ‘retired’ Zorro, the charming Antonio Banderas is his protegé, and feisty Catherine Zeta Jones discovers – and learns to love – both in this perfect family entertainment, full of swashbuckling action, good stunts and some humour. The sound is superb and, if you can’t see it on the big screen (as I did first time), then try to see it on DVD (as I did the second time).
"Master And Commander: The Far Side Of The World"
Following his magnificent performance as Maximus, Russell Crowe is well-cast as the tough, yet tender, commander of a British warship during the Napoleonic wars - Captain 'Lucky' Jack Aubrey, a man who can have an insubordinate crew member whipped, yet make haunting music with a violin. I don't know if such multi-faceted heroes existed in real life, but this is a creation of the best-selling author Patrick O'Brian from whose first and tenth novels the story and two titles are taken. Crowe is ably supported by his co-star from "A Beautiful Mind", Paul Bettany, as the captain's friend, ship's surgeon and amateur naturalist, Dr Stephen Maturin. Strangely this is a battle movie in which only at the very end does one see the faces of the French enemy, the rest of the time a glimpse of sails and the crash of cannon balls being the only sign of their presence.
This focuses the attention on the British ship and its crew of 197. Indeed it is totally a man's world with a lingering glance being the only feminine element in two and a quarter hours. The attention to detail and the fine sets give a real sense of authenticity that makes one really feel acutely the immense privations of being at sea for so long in 1805. The sound is superb too, making me almost duck as rifle shots and cannon balls seemed to whizz over my shoulder.
Director and co-writer Peter Weir has crafted a gripping movie, but it is marred by poor pacing which contrasts adversely with a classic adventure movie like "Gladiator". After a tense opening 20 minutes, we don't see any further action against the enemy until the end, when the attack on the more formidable French ship is too quick, too confused and made to look too easy - following which there is a limp final ten minutes that ends the work on too low a note.
Written and directed by the Wachowski brothers (Andy and Larry) who made the lesbian heist film “Bound” [for review click here], it was clear from before release that this was a sci-fi movie that would change the face of cinema. It has perfect pacing - an exciting opening and then a steady build-up to a thrilling climax. But, most memorably, it has immense style (down to the dark glasses, long leather coats and Nokia phones), the shooting and fighting sequences are brutal yet balletic, and the special effects - especially "bullet time" - are simply breathtaking. Certain scenes - such as the shoot-out in the lobby - have become classic.
The film stars Keannu Reeves as Neo (the one - get it?) in a rather wooden performance, Lawrence Fishbourne as Morpheus who leads the resistance, and the sexy Carrie-Anne Moss as Trinity for whom love ultimately conquers all. This intrepid trio lead a battle against control of humankind by Artificial Intelligence devices in a world which looks familiar but is certainly not what it seems. And what is the Matrix? Morpheus tells Neo: "The Matrix is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth".
Footnote: All films have continuity errors, but "The Matrix" holds the all-time record with 151 gaffes [for details click here].
Lock and load! The Matrix is back. We've waited four years for its return and been subject to the most intense hype since the revival of the "Star Wars" saga in 1999, so can it possibly fulfil expectations? If those expectations are realistic, then essentially it does.
No sequel could be as mindblowingly original as the first offering with the basic concept of all our world as a virtual prison or of the body-twisting, gravity-defying special effects or of the super cool characters in black leather and shades. Yet technically this is another amazingly accomplished work with some sequences - the opening one with Trinity, Neo's fight with 100 versions of Agent Smith, the conflict on the twin staircase, and above all the spectacular freeway chase - being enormous fun, even if the last looks like a video game (which, of course, much of the film's material now is).
The eroticism which was latent in the first movie is now much more explicit, possibly reflecting the complicated sexuality of at least one of the Wachowski brothers. One-time model Carrie-Anne Moss looks more gaunt this time (although more capable than ever as a fighting machine) and we have to look to another former model, the delectable Monica Bellucci who presents Neo with his most original challenge, to admire genuine feminine curves. Meanwhile the rave scene in labyrinthine Zion is an odd sequence for a sci-fi movie and looks more like a slot on MTV.
Neo's powers - already extraordinary by the end of the previous movie - have now become awesome, even God-like. Crew member Link refers to him "doing his Superman thing" and seemingly he can raise a woman from the dead. This makes him appear less heroic and more comic book. However, the main weakness of the sequel is the pretentiousness of its repeated philosophical expositions. There are already patients in American mental institutions who only speak Klingon and no doubt soon there will be some who think that "The Matrix" is a new religion. Finally, it's as well to be forewarned of the abrupt ending, à la "The Empire Strikes Back", which leaves us hanging and gasping for "The Matrix Revolutions".
Footnote : "The Matrix Reloaded" was later released in an IMAX version - which I've seen and it was mega.
On the day that the final segment of this hugely ambitious trilogy opened simultaneously in 65 countries, I was there, eager with anticipation for a clever and satisfying denouement, but it was as I feared - visually stunning but plot-wise a real disappointment. It's still cool: the sunglasses, the long coats, the balletic fighting, the heavy armoury - but we've seen this twice before. The ferocious sentinel attack on Zion is the best part of the movie, reminiscent of the last-ditch massacre that concluded the 1969 western "The Wild Bunch", while deploying technology that seems to be borrowed (but further enhanced) from "Aliens". The titantic battle between Neo and agent Smith that ends the story is fun, but not a long way from Superman's encounter with General Zod in "Superman II".
Yet the Wachowski brothers have let us down on so many levels. Although we are spared most of that philosophising from "Reloaded", the dialogue is pathetic and The Oracle in particular spouts meaningless nonsense. The twin love stories and the heroics of the 16 year old kid are toe-curlingly trite. Lambert Wilson (Merovingian) and Monica Belluci (Persephone) are appallingly underused. There are so many loose ends (or false trails) - what was the point of capturing The Keymaker and visiting The Architect in the second segment? Above all, what does it all mean? As one character states towards the end: "It doesn't make sense". We wanted more. We deserved more.
Only read these further thoughts if you've seen the three films:
I was hoping that writers and directors Larry and Andy Wachowski would provide a neat, but clever, ending and explanation to their hugely ambitious, but somewhat self-indulgent, three movies. But, it seems to me that it’s all little more than a basic, if loose, reworking of the Bible for modern times.
Neo - an anagram of (the) One - is obviously Christ and, from one movie to the next, develops God-like powers, including the ability to bring Trinity back from the dead. We are told that there have been other Ones, but then Christ was the last in a line of prophets such as Moses. When in doubt, Neo goes off on his own, in the same way that Moses went off into the desert to seek guidance. Like Christ, Neo gives his life to save humankind and at the end he is seen stretched out, as if on a crucifix, before he ascends into some kind of heaven.
If Neo is Christ the saviour, that makes Morpheus John the Baptist, the one who discovers the saviour and has the most faith in him. Presumably The Architect is God in the sense that he controls all the programs that govern both the machines and the matrix. Agent Smith must be Lucifer, a rogue program that used to be under God’s control but decided to strike out on his own and create others in his own image. The Oracle - bless her - represents all the religions and cults and all the astrologers and faith healers who seem to offer some sort of explanation to concerned souls, while in truth knowing no more than anyone else. I’m not sure about Trinity - perhaps she is the Holy Spirit, the embodiment of love.
The world of the machines is the dark side of human nature, the cold, unfeeling, mechanical, manipulative part of our psyche. In this scenario, Machine City is a kind of hell. Zion is humankind at its best, free thinking and collaborative, spurning comfort and exhibiting bravery - an ascethic kind of Heaven on earth. The matrix is the seductive consumerist society in which we exhibit moral blindness, live the dreams of others, and never ask questions or challenge the system. The empty train station that we saw in the final film must be some kind of purgatory.
“The Matrix Revolutions” ends with a truce between the machines and the people - but we know that this won’t last (more sequels?). Perhaps this represents the uneasy and unstable balance between good and evil that is present in every individual and every society.
For many cinema goers, the conjunction of the words “British” and “film” is about as promising as that of “military” and “intelligence” and the ignominious reception for “Honest” will have done nothing to undermine this image. However, “Maybe Baby” should recoup its £3M investment.
In my capacity as Chair of the Internet Watch Foundation, I was invited by the Post Office to a preview with various e-commerce types at the British Academy of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) in London. It is the directorial debut of British comedian Ben Elton and based on his novel “Inconceivable” which in turn was inspired by the infertility problems suffered by himself and his wife Sophie. Infertility is a serious business which affects a surprising number of couples, but Elton gives it a characteristically slapstick treatment with some good lines and at least a few laughs. The British have a fascination with the comedic potential of private parts and body functions (remember all those “Carry On ..” films) and “Maybe Baby” comes on hard (“Oh, behave!”) in that department.
Hugh Laurie plays Sam Bell, a commissioning editor at the BBC, in a role that is a little more variegated than his usual performances. Joely Richardson is his wife Lucy who displays a wide selection of sexy lingerie in an undemanding part. Various other British performers – Emma Thompson, Joanna Lumley, Dawn French and Rowan Atkinson – have cameo roles. Most of these people are much better known to British television viewers than American cinema audiences and the film may find its rightful position on the ‘box’ on a wet (aren’t they all?) Bank Holiday weekend.
Link: Hugh Laurie site click here
“Me And You And Everyone We Know”
From its title (a line of dialogue) to its actors and (above all) to its subject matter and script, this is an independent movie for which the word "quirky" was invented. Like "Crash" - the film I saw before this one - it is set in southern California and involves several interrelated personal stories but, whereas "Crash" is full of familiar stars, "Me And You" has only one recognisable face (John Hawkes) and, whereas the mainstream movie centres on race, the indie work barely mentions it, instead focusing on loneliness and the bizarre relationships that can overcome it.
The heart of "Me And You" is Miranda July. She is the writer and the director and this is her début at both, while she plays a performance and installation artist not unlike her position in real life. One of the (many) unconventional features of the movie is that most of the adults are insecure and even neurotic, while the children generally speak and behave in a manner belying their few years. The real triumph of the film is that it features elements of sexuality that come close to being perverse, yet are dealt with in a gentle, caring, funny and ultimately life-affirming manner. The movie has won an succession of awards from film festivals and rightly so. ))><((
It was the idea of my son’s partner that we see this comedy as a family (perhaps she’s trying to tell me something?), but it was a real disappointment to us all. It may have done brilliantly in the United States, but I found the plot slight and the humour forced. We know from “Analyze This” that Robert De Niro can do comedy and we know from “There’s Something About Mary” that Ben Stiller has a wicked way with domestic animals, but neither De Niro as the anally-retentive potential father-in-law nor Stiller as the earnest but unfortunate suitor of de Niro’s daughter can overcome an inadequate script with too few real laughs. The humour around the name of the Stiller character (Greg Focker) is both contrived and repetitive and that concerning his ethnicity (Jewish) almost offensive.
His problem: following the rape and murder of his wife and a savage assault on him, he can no longer retain short-term memories and recalls nothing after the murder - yet he is determined to kill the man responsible. His solution: to have key facts about the case tattooed on his body and to record other information through instant photographs and written notes. Our problem: the whole film is constructed in a series of flash-backs in reverse chronological order. Our solution: concentrate on every scene when the film is rolling and then think like crazy when it's all over.
He is played compellingly by Guy Pearce who was so good in "L.A. Confidential". He might be being assisted by a bartender (Carrie Ann-Moss in a rare foray out of the "The Matrix") and an undercover police man (Joe Pantoliano who was also in that sci-fi classic). In only his second film, British Christopher Nolan - who both wrote and directed - has created a truly original work which forces us to confront the fragility of memory.
Based on the best-selling book by Arthur Golden and directed by Rob Marshall who did such a fine job on "Chicago", this is a really beautiful looking movie, although it is filmed almost entirely in California with only a tiny segment in Kyoto, the real home of the geisha (which I have visited). Also it sounds good with much traditional Japanese music and additional material from the acclaimed John Williams. However, the narrative is jerky and even confusing at times, while the characters are generally small-minded and cold, making the work as a whole disappointing dull.
The memoirs are those of peasant girl Chiyo who becomes the stunning geisha Sayuri (the delightful Ziyi Zhang in her first English-speaking role). Her mentor is portrayed by Michelle Yeoh (Zhang's opponent in "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon"), while Gong Li has a meaty role as Sayuri's rival. These three are ethnically Chinese playing traditional Japanese characters which has caused some controversy in both China and Japan, but one cannot be too purist about these things and there are plenty of Japanese actors on show - notably Ken Watanabe as The Chairman.
Ultimately what dooms the movie to lack engagement is the subject matter: the geisha is more exotic than erotic and it is a terribly unliberated, even enslaving, objectification of woman.
In 1997, I enjoyed the original movie enormously and, five years later, the boys in black are back, but this is a tired and disappointing sequel. On paper, it probably looked like easy money: the same director (Barry Sonnenfeld who has a tiny, non-speaking role), the same stars (Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones with some role reversal), and some of the same creatures (Worm Guys and Frank the Pug have expanded parts). But, if there is a plot, it's as disguised as many of the aliens and, if you go to the cinema as often as I do, you've already seen many of the best bits in the trailers.
Link: official web site click here
Nobody does crime thrillers like director Michael Mann. "Heat", then "Collateral", and now "Miami Vice" secure his reputation as in a class of his own for brilliantly stylish and immensely atmospheric movies combining the urban with the criminal in a masterclass of composition.
Mann was an executive producer on the 1980s television series "Miami Vice" but, for this large screen work, fortunately he has borrowed very little besides the title itself: essentially just the location (beautiful shots of the city by night and ominous flashes of lightning) and the main characters - police officers Sonny Crockett (Colin Farrell sporting a terrible moustache) and Ricardo Tubbs (Jamie Foxx, a little underused). Other location shooting takes place in Uruguay and Paraguay - including the fabulous Iguassu Falls - and the Domican Republic (standing in for Havana).
From the very first moments in a noisy night club to the final ferocious shoot-out in a boatyard, Mann demands and gets our attention. The dialogue is frequently inaudible or unintelligible, while the plotting is often incomprehensible or implausible, but one is carried along by the sustained tension and explosive violence of the whole thing. Not all the criminals are caught and not all the romances are fulfilled, but enough of the conventions are followed to satisfy our sense of revenge and the loose ends of the rest perhaps reflect an element of 'real' life.
Not that much is that real here: the technology and firepower at the command of Crockett, Tubbs and colleagues are not available to many law enforcement officials and the relationship between Crockett and the gang member Isabella (the beautiful Gong Li) is like something out of a James Bond movie. So this falls short of classic, but it is intelligent and satisfying and, for me, Mann's the man.
For me, knowing that George Clooney is in a film is enough to make me want to see it, even if the title gives no indication of the genre or subject. In fact, this is a thriller in which Clooney as the eponymous 'fixer' for a powerful New York legal firm is rarely off the screen and gives a performance both commanding and compelling. I'm a great believer that the opening and closing of a movie are critical and this movie could be a textbook case of how to do it. Our attention and interest are seized from the opening seconds and the conclusion is satisfyingly sharp and redemptive.
This is not an obviously commercial work: the title is utterly prosaic, the dialogue is wordy, the plot is often ambiguous and the whole production concedes little to traditional entertainment values (no car chases or shoot-outs or special effects here). Instead the viewer is treated as intelligent - someone who wants tight direction, clever photography and above all fine acting rather than showy effects.
Although it is unquestionably Clooney's film, the support performances from Britains's Tom Wilkinson and Tilda Swinton plus that from veteran director Sydney Pollack are all excellent and such a character-driven movie would never have happened without Tony Gilroy who both wrote it and - in an immensely able début - directed it.
Clint Eastwood is a unique icon of American cinema whom I have admired even before he reached the big screen when I enjoyed his performances as Rowdie Yates in television's "Wagon Train". The longevity of his career (the first of his films as an actor was years 50 ago), the commercial success of his 58 films as an actor (whether as cowboy, cop or comedian) but, above all, the critical success of the 27 movies he has directed (especially the later work such as "Unforgiven" and "Mystic River") make him a singular figure in the cinematic firmament. In many cases, he has both starred and directed and so it is with "Million Dollar Baby" which - at the incredible age of 74 - is set to consolidate his already formidable reputation.
I went into the cinema expecting to see "Rockette" - a female version of Stallone's triumphalism in the boxing ring - but came out feeling I'd seen "Who's Fight Is It Anyway?" - a searing examination of the meaning of life and relationships. Eastwood, as the laconic and irascible boxing trainer Frankie Dunn, and Hilary Swank, as a 32 year old trailer trash waitress who wants to find herself in the ring (she put on 19 lb for the role), are individually commanding but, in their subtle interaction, they are most impressive, as she finds the father who died too early and he connects with the daughter who will not receive his letters.
The third character is a friend to each and the one who understands both from the beginning. Morgan Freeman plays Frankie's assistant Scrap in a dual role in which he is also - as he was in "The Shawshank Redemption" - the mellow-voiced and knowing narrator. Unusually for this type of movie, a considerable amount of time is focused on the training gym and the actual fight scenes are very different from "Rocky": fast, furious, and short. Indeed the fighting is essentially a metaphor for feelings and the whole work is simply a knock out.
The first-time pairing of director Steven Spielberg and producer-actor Tom Cruise promises something really special, but their ambitious work only partially delivers. The premise of this sci-fi movie, based on a Philip Dick short story of 1956, is that in a Washington DC of 2054 special humans called "pre-cogs" (the most important played by the androgynous Samantha Morton) can forsee future murders so accurately that a Pre-Crime Unit, with Cruise as top cop, is able to intervene and arrest the potential murderer before he kills his victim. If one can go with this bizarre idea, it's still hard to understand how, at the end of the day, the assailant apparently has a choice. There are other plot incredulties, such as how the Pre-Crime people neglect to withdraw Cruise's corneal security clearance once he himself is identified as a future murderer and goes on the run.
However, if one can overlook these plot weaknesses, a tendency to introduce unnecessary humour, and a couple of sentimental final scenes, the film has much to commend it, above all a roller-coaster action-packed ride with some sharp twists in the tale. The feel of the movie - dark, washed-out colours and hi-tech gadgetry & equipment such as a wall-screen for constructing digital evidence - and the sound of it - music from four classical composers plus John Williams - create a world reminiscent of "Metropolis" or "Blade Runner" and there are some terrific sequences such as the chase by jetpack-enabled police and a reconnaissance operation by robotic spiders. In short, "Minority Report" is going to have majority support, but the aforementioned "Blade Runner" it isn't.
Link: official web site click here
I'm a bit of a sucker for action-adventure movies like this, loosely inspired by the 1960s television series, and I enjoyed the location shooting in Prague (my favourite European city) and London (my home city). The break-in at the CIA's Headquarters to obtain the NOC (non official cover) list is really well done, but the sequence in the Channel Tunnel is rather silly. Tom Cruise and Jon Voight do well enough, but two of my favoutite French actors - Jean Reno and Emmanuelle Béart - are miscast. On first viewing, the plotting is confused and, on repeated viewing, it proves weak. In my view, the sequel was better.
When I saw the original Brian de Palma “Mission: Impossible” in 1996, I found the plot confusing but the action sequences thrilling – and I especially enjoyed the Prague locations (because I know the city so well). In the case of “M:i 2”, there is very little plot, but – thanks to director John Woo (“Broken Arrow” and “Face/Off”) - the action scenes are even more explosive and even more visceral with some superb stunts and a pounding soundtrack. I could have done without the repeated use of a particular prosthetics trick, but the thrilling final bike chase sequence is vintage Woo and worth the admission price alone.
This time round, we have a very different Tom Cruise as Impossible Missions Force agent Ethan Hunt: he looks different, with his long hair flaying all over the place; he fights differently, displaying flying drop kicks at every opportunity; and he feels differently, almost immediately falling in love. Cruise can act, as we know from “Magnolia”, but here his thespian talents are not really needed. However, the guy did do virtually all his own stunts and he was co-producer, so I suppose he deserves his rumoured 30% share of the profits.
I would like to have seen half British half Zimbabwean Thandie Newton (“Beloved”), as both the agent and the villain’s love interest, given a more physically resourceful role and the great Anthony Hopkins is sadly underused – although he does have the best lines – as the head of the IMF. At least the Scottish Dougray Scott is suitably chilling as the renegade with an original use for his cigar cutter.
The critics have been pretty cynical about this movie – “More Tom foolery with Mr Cruise” and “Cruising on empty” were just two of the British headlines – but, when I saw the film on its opening weekend at the largest cinema in London (the Empire Leicester Square), every performance that evening was sold out and, at the end of my showing, the audience actually applauded. Sure, it’s a triumph of style over performance – but what style. And, if you’ve had a tough week at work (as I had), it’s a terrific antidote.
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to suspend credibility and just enjoy the ride. It might help if you had previously had a minor explosion in your brain, perhaps utilising a miniature version of a device twice blown up the noses of Impossible Missions Force agents in “M:i 2”. The opening is cracking and totally attention-grabbing and the action jumps from Berlin to Rome to Shanghai & Xitang with plenty of thrills and spills, although the narrative is banal when it is not confusing and the ending is limp.
Directed and partly written by J J Abrams (who has given us such fun and fascination in the television series "Lost"), there's nothing really new here and at times it's rather bewildering (indeed we never find out what the "rabbit's foot" is and why anyone would want to die for it) but, as the first summer blockbuster of 2006, it's going to win a decent return on its investment.
As agent Ethan Hawke, Tom Cruise still looks good in the part, a decade after he first made it his own, and hopefully this movie will remind his fans that there is more to the man than mad protestations of love and weird views inspired by Scientology. If he can learn to keep his mouth shut off-screen and pick more roles like "Magnolia" and "Collateral", he still has a future.
Link: official web site click here
For Hollywood, there are only two types of classroom drama: privileged students who are taught the value of independent thinking and the underprivileged who are persuaded of the empowering value of education. "Mona Lisa Smile" is an example of the first category and is very much a female version of "Dead Poet's Society". Set in America's New England in the early 1950s, liberal teacher of art history Catherine Watson (Julia Roberts) struggles to convince her clever students (Kirsten Dunst, Julia Stiles, Maggie Gyllenhaal & Ginnifer Goodwin) that there's more to life than husband, children and home. From a distance of five decades, the targets are easy and, while this is worthy enough movie, it has little original to say.
Films don't come much more exotic than this: the early life of the 13th century warlord Genghis Khan portrayed as an adult by a Japanese (Tadanobu Asano), directed by a Russian (Sergei Bodrov), with music from a Finn (Tuomas Kantelinen), spoken in Mongolian, shot in Mongolia, China and Kazakhstan, and financed by Kazak investors. In fact, it is the first part of a biographical trilogy and traces the early life of Temudjin, as he was then called, from 1171, when at the age of nine he finds his bride Börte (Monglian student Khulan Chuluun as the adult), to 1206 when in his mid-40s he defeats his blood brother Jamukhato (the Chinese Honglei Sun) to assume leadership of all the Mongols and the name Genghis which means 'supreme warrior'.
This is a dramatically revisionist work which transposes the cruel and ruthless image of the man who came to lead the largest empire in history into a loving husband who shows extraordinary loyalty to his young bride, a father who finds time to play fight with his youngsters, and a religious individual who puts great faith in 'the God of the Blue Sky' (who does him proud). Although the movie is said to be based on leading scholarly accounts, applying 21st century values to a 13th century leader about whom we know few hard facts is undoubtedly an over-correction but it does make it much easier to identify with him and see this period of history somewhat differently.
The script is rather leaden and the narrative episodic and jerky, but these weaknesses are more than compensated by great faces and costumes, stunning scenery and photography, and exciting battle scenes that deploy computer graphic as good as most Hollywood blockbusters. The blood almost literally splashes in your face and the violence is visceral in this accomplished and visually rich work that is such a refreshing change from so much that dominates the multiplex. It invites high expectations for the next two segments.
Link: official web site click here
British films "East Is East" and "Bend It Like Beckham" have examined the inter-generational culture problems of families originally from the Indian sub-continent bringing up a family in urban England. But "Monsoon Wedding" makes it clear that one does not have to leave India to find clashes of values within the Indian family. Punjabi director Mira Nair uses the device of a large-scale arranged wedding - an event lasting some days and involving much expense, ritual and tradition - to explore a range of inter-personal relationships, skillfully woven together in a screenplay by Sabrina Dhawan.
This is a vibrant and colourful movie full of contrast: between the relative peace and affluence of the Verma family home and the endlessly noisy and teeming streets of Delhi, between the normally dry and dusty weather and the regular monsoon downpours, between the candles, flowers and saris of a joyous wedding and the discovery of awful inter-family abuse. Even the dialogue is a contrast, constantly shifting between English, Hindi and Punjabi. Finally there is something of the music and dancing that one expects of a traditional Bollywood product. In short, this is a rich and rewarding work that deserves a world audience.
This is a very different kind of road movie: South America instead of North America, Spanish language instead of English, political consciousness rather than sexual liberation. It is the tale of an eight-month, 7,000-mile trip made in 1952 by Argentinean friends Ernesto Guevara (Gael Garcia Bernal), then a 23 year old medical student but destined to become a revolutionary communist in Cuba, the Congo and Bolivia (where he was killed in 1967), and Alberto Granado Rodrigo de la Serna), then a 30 year old postgraduate in biochemistry and now (as the film shows in its final moments) an 83-year old still living in Cuba. The journey starts on a 1939 Norton 500 motorbike (hence the title), which they dubbed "The Mighty One", but the vehicle proved to be something less than almighty, necessitating less personal forms of transport.
The central performances are wholly convincing and the dialogue is crisp, credible and at times quite humorous. The film looks wonderful: shot largely in a documentary style, it features location shooting in Argentina, the Andes, Chile, and Peru and cinematographer Eric Gautier evokes a wonderful sense of time and place, while the use of non-professional bit players with marvellously expressive faces creates a real sense of authenticity. Above all, Brazilian director Walter Salles and writer Jose Rivera have ensured that the political messages are subtly understated. The viewer is left to observe the grinding poverty, yet quiet dignity, of the migrant workers, the itinerant miners, and the leper victims and sense - as young Guevera obviously did - the acute sense of injustice.
This is a movie which had resonances for my wife and me. She identified with the seriously asthmatic young Guevara, since her brother died of asthma when he was 21, and we have visited several of the locations featured in the film, including Cusco, Machu Picchu, and Lima. If this deeply impressive and memorable work has a fault is that that it treats its subject a little too reverentially. Guevara is portrayed somewhat one-dimensionally as uncompromisingly honest and almost saint-like in his concern for others and there is no hint of the ferocious rages and utter ruthlessness which was to mark his revolutionary leadership.
Link: official web site click here
My deep love of the cinema embraces most genres, but the musical is probably my least favourite. Yet Australia director, co-producer, and co-writer Baz Luhrmann has virtually reinvented the genre with this visual extravaganza which has furious pacing, stunning sequences and startlingly fresh versions of recent songs as well as older ones. Nicole Kidman has never looked more striking than as the French courtesan Satine, while Ewan McGregor, the writer, and Richard Roxburgh, the Duke, are fine if theatrical as the two suitors with their rival offerings of love and riches respectively. This is a movie which it’s hard not to like, such is its exuberance and charm.
Link: official web site click here
We've certainly been here before: assassin who hides occupation from spouse ("Prizzi's Honor" and "True Lies"), spouses who want to kill each other ("The War Of The Roses"), and final shoot-out against superior odds ("Butch Cassidy And The Sundance Kid"). But all the shooting and explosions - leavened with much humour - make this appealling entertainment when all one wants is some mindless action and fun (it was my birthday). I guess what makes the movie is the coupling - apparently in more senses than one - of the gorgeous Angelina Jolie (in effect reprising her "Lara Croft" role) with good-looking Brad Pitt (although his haircut is somewhat severe). There are a few sharp lines in Simon Kinberg's script. Just don't look for anything subtle or orginal.
This movie is very derivative of “Raiders Of The Lost Ark”, but it is still enormous fun with lots of action, plenty of humour, the odd scare, superb sound, and excellent special effects. It was written and directed with great panache by Stephen Sommers, the hero is played by American actor Brendan Fraser with a certain charm ,and the feisty heroine is the English Rachel Weisz (“I am a librarian!”). The success of the film was a surprise to Universal, but a sequel is now in production.
Link: official web site click here
Wonderkid turned Hollywood legend director Steven Spielberg makes three types of film: family entertainment ("ET", "Jurassic Park", "Indiana Jones"), action adventures ("Jaws", "Minority Report", "War Of The Worlds") and serious political works ("The Color Purple", "Amistad", "Schindler's List"). "Munich" is firmly in the last category and, in the sense that it picks up on his Jewishness, the book end to "Schindler's List". There is so much to commend this stunning work, but equally so much to cause reservations.
An examination of the Israeli secret service response to the 1972 massacre of 11 Jewish athletes at Munich, this is one of the best political thrillers in a long time, imbued with sustained tension, with some powerful action sequences, and literally exploding with mayhem and murder. The acting is of a high quality with five key roles: Eric Bana as Avner, Mossad agent and leader of the assassination team, Ciaran Hinds as the pipe-smoking planner, Mathieu Kossovitz as the Belgian explosives expert, Hanns Zischler as the German master forger, and Daniel Craig as the South African getaway driver. Each time, they - and we - doubt the reason for all this killing, Spielberg flashes back to that terrible time in Munich.
Above all, this is an honourable and worthy film that poses huge and topical questions about what leads terrorists to take innocent lives and what measures a democratic state can take to combat such terrorism before it betrays the essential values of that society and in the process corrupts those carrying out such revenge. If there was any doubt as to the contemporary force of these issues, we are reminded of them in the closing seconds as we see New York's World Trade Center standing in the background.
The major concern with Spielberg's narrative is the extent to which he has taken artistic licence with the known facts. Although the work is only said to be "inspired by true events", the constant reference to the memory of the reality of Munich and other touches such as the portrayal of Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir give the impression that this is almost a drama-documentary.
Every action in the film is carried out by one group, but in fact Mosaad deployed several. The operation is represented as funded by, but otherwise out of the control of, Mossad, whereas the secret service was totally in charge. Although some things go wrong in the film's account, essentially the killings are cleverly executed and the murder of an innocent Arab in Lillehammer in Norway is never mentioned. Information on the location of the intended targets is shown as coming from an odd French family of anarchists - this is taken from the 1984 book "Vengeance" by George Jonas - but there is simply no evidence that such an unlikely faction exists.
Above all, Avner and his team are shown as increasingly troubled by their actions. However, we know from a new Atlantic Productions television documentary featuring interviews with Mossad agents directly involved in "Operation Wrath of God" that they had no doubts and exhibited no hesitation. Perhaps Spielberg is entitled to refashion the operation somewhat in order that he can raise questions and challenge us to think through the moral issues involved, but some of this is just too contrived, such as when the Jewish team find themselves sharing an Athens safe house with Arab terrorists. Also the incident with a freelance Dutch female assassin seems included simply to provide some colour and sex.
Spielberg has had critics from all quarters. From the Jewish side, he has been branded as guilty of "an incorrect moral equation" and "the sin of equivalence" because he has characters articulating the Palestinian cause. From the Arab cause, a former member of Black September has accused him of focusing on "the Zionist side alone". Even George Jonas has charged him with "humanising demons". However, the families of the athletes slain at Munich have publicly praised the work. When all is said, "Munich" is an important and brave work that really should be seen and thought about. It may be 164 minutes, but there is never a moment of boredom and rarely has a film raises such sharp moral issues in such a considered manner.
Cute, doe-eyed and snub-nosed Sandra Bullock came to our attention in action movies like "Speed" and "The Net" but has become best-known and well-liked in a string of romantic comedies such as "While You Were Sleeping" and "Forces Of Nature". "Murder By Numbers" - which she produced - is clearly her attempt to strike out into tougher characterisations, since here she is a homicide investigator, seemingly with a male attitude to sex, seeking to bring to justice two amoral teenagers who think that they have committed the undetectable crime. It doesn't really work and Bullock is either going to have to find better scripts or revert to type.
Link: official web site click here
I had a couple of hours to kill and this was the only movie I hadn't seen that was showing in the relevant time slot, so I didn't exactly choose to see it and my expectations were not high. Even so, I was disappointed by this limp offering of a romantic comedy. The stars are cute enough: Britain's Hugh Grant, playing a one-time performer with an 80s pop group who supplies the music element, and America's Drew Barrymore who's originally there just to water Grant's plants but turns out to be a budding lyricist. There's even some humour and wit. But the whole thing is so formulaic and predictable and the music is derivative while the lyrics are dire.
Dermot Mulroney has a tough (but enviable) choice to make in this romantic comedy set in Chicago: should his bride be his new-found love, the delectable Cameron Diaz, or his former lover and long-time best friend, the ravishing Julia Roberts? In fact, the British Rupert Everett - gay in both 'reel' and real life - almost steals the show with a wonderfully camp, yet sensitive, supporting performance. There are several terrific song sequences before one of the girls goes off on her honeymoon.
This was the summer sleeper of 2002, a small production ($5M) that surprised everyone by winning over audiences and raking in cash comparable with the blockbusters (over $200M already) to make it the most successful independent movie of all time and (in terms of its rate of return on investment) one of the most profitable movies ever made.
American films have explored Jewish and Italian families endlessly, so it's a pleasure to focus on a different ethnicity, the Greek-American, in a romantic comedy that has much less meat than a moussaka but as much syrup as baklava. That such a work has reached our screens is down to co-producers Tom Hanks and his Greek-American wife Rita Wilson, following her enjoyment of the one-woman stage show of Greek-Canadian Nia Vardalos. There are no big-name stars, just Nia Vardalos herself as ugly duckling Toula, John Corbett as her all-American suitor, and Michael Constantine as Toula's irascible father, who thinks that everything good in life and every word in our language come from the Greeks. This is a movie for a date or a diversion and we all need more of both.
Link: official web site click here
My wife and I were a couple of the very few white faces in an overwhelmingly Asian audience in a north-west London cinema for this Bollywood movie which is almost entirely in Hindi with sub-titles and was shown with a traditional Indian intermission. The film is very different in both style and substance to the usual American and British work, although it is clearly aiming to be a 'crossover' between east and west so that there is no dancing or onscreen singing. For western audiences, the acting will seem somewhat exaggerated and the storyline (by Shibani Bathija) rather simplistic and sentimental, but the powerful political messages - that traditional Islam is not a threat and that Muslims are not terrorists - are very effectively communicated and deserve a wide (especially American) audience.
Shah Rukh Khan - himself a Muslim married to a Hindu - is excellent as Rizwan Khan, a Muslim from Mumbai who suffers from Asperger's syndrome, and Kajol is convincing (as well as beautiful) as his Hindu wife Mandira. These two have starred in many Bollywood movies together but this is their first pairing for some years. Shot partly in Los Angeles and San Francisco as well as Mumbai with an atmospheric score, director Karan Johar has given us an Indian film with a global reach.
Link: official web site click here
Many of the critics much admired this documentary but, for me, it is a strong candidate for the worst film that I've ever seen in a cinema. The work was conceived, narrated and directed by Guy Maddin, a lifelong resident of the eponymous Canadian city (which I did visit once long ago) and he has used a mixture of archive footage, re-enactments and animation - all black and white and much discordant - to present a self-indulgent portrait of the city in which one has no idea what is fact and what is fiction (presumably intentional since Maddin calls this a "docu-fantasia") and after which one is left bewildered if not outright despondent.
This is an actors' film - no special effects, no car chases, no set piece speeches, just challenging roles for serious actors with an intelligent script. It is no coincidence, therefore, that the producer and director is Clint Eastwood who has so much experience of acting as well as directing. Eastwood has taken a script based on a novel by Dennis Lehane and crafted it into an intense tale of trauma and retribution. The compelling central performances come from Kevin Bacon, Sean Penn and Tim Robbins - who were childhood friends in working-class Boston before an incident changed their lives forever - but they are ably supported by Lawrence Fishburne, Laura Linney and Marcia Gay Harden who bear witness to the consequences a generation later of those awful few days.
The Internet really ‘took off’ in 1993 when the number of users doubled to 25 million and the media discovered the network, so it’s no surprise that two years later we see the first Hollywood movie where the Net is the prime focus of the plot. Sandra Bullock is the engaging software tester who finds her identity electronically erased when she stumbles across a plot to control corporation and government networks via a ‘trojan horse’ in so-called protection systems. As so often in American films, the bad guy is British, this time played by Jeremy Northam. The premise of the plot is perhaps not as outlandish as one might wish, but the execution is extremely derivative of so many other movies, not least in the sequence where Bullock is chased through a fairground by Northam.
This is the 1990 French movie that was remade by the Americans as "The Assassin" and then became the television series "La Femme Nikita". The orginal, written and directed by Luc Besson, is raw, violent and powerful - always on the edge and surprising. In the eponymous role, Anne Parillaud is totally convincing in a role which requires her to show very different character facets and there are able support performances from Tcheky Karyo as her minder, Jean-Hugues Anglade as her lover, and Jean Reno as 'the cleaner', with a surprise cameo from 62 year old Jeanne Moreau.
In the (admittedly unlikely) eventuality that someone wandered into a cinema expecting this to be a musical, a rude shock would ensue, since this is the most sexually explicit mainstream film ever exhibited in Britain. Indeed the only mainstream movie I've previously seen to compare in explicitness was the 1976 Japanese work "Ai No Corrida" ("In the Realm Of The Senses"), but this work goes further with a scene of ejaculation, as well as fellatio, cunnilingus and penetrative sex. Since this is the work of accomplished British director Michael Winterbottom ("In This World"), one cannot possibly regard this is as pornography - besides anything else, porn features far more voluptuous women and portrays the sex from an exclusively male point of view, whereas the sex here is realistic (as well as real) and as female-oriented as much as male.
The problem is that the film appears to be utterly meaningless. A British research geologist Matt (Kieran O'Brien) goes to London gigs and has sex with American student Lisa (skinny model Margot Stilley), but there is no characterisation or plot or even a script (the dialogue was improvised and is banal). Even the music seems to bear no relationship to the lovers and - except for some haunting work from Michael Nyman - is dreary gunge. Shot on low budget digital video, the picture is as grey as the subject matter and the only light-hearted aspect is the rather unsubtle joke of the (mercifully short) running time (69 minutes). Come again? No chance - too much of an anti-climax.
An elegant middle-aged woman (Fanny Ardant), her errant husband (Gérard Depardieu), a beautiful call girl (Emmanuelle Béart), lots of talk of sex but nothing on show, plenty of coffee and cigarettes, no car chases, no special effects - it could only be a French film and a quintissential one at that. Of course, there must be a law that no French movie can be shown outside France (I saw it in London) without the inclusion of Depardieu and the most attractive feature of any French film for me is the starring of Béart (I've been captivated since she gambolled in "Manon Des Sources"). Female director Anne Fontaine seems to be complicit here in the notion that a French man can have affairs without it meaning much as long his wife can share vicariously in the excitement. Mon Dieu ..
No, this is not a film about collective bargaining – otherwise it would have been in the section on trade union films! Instead it is a movie about a Chicago police hostage negotiator who is forced – by false charges of murder and embezzlement – to himself become a hostage taker and deal with a police negotiator from the other side of the precinct. Apparently based loosely on an actual incident which occurred in St Louis, the stars are two of the finest character actors around: Samuel L Jackson (“Pulp Fiction) as the wronged Danny Roman and Kevin Spacey (“The Usual Suspects”) as the cool Chris Sabian. The chemistry between the two is important to the film’s success and much helped by an excellent script and the actors near 20 years of friendship. The plotting is intelligent with plenty of tension and twists and there are some exciting action sequences, all making for a must-see movie. So what does the middle initial stand for in Samuel L Jackson? The answer – Leroy – may win you a pub quiz sometime.
Links: six more reviews click here Kevin Spacey site click here
This is the kind of family movie that I used to take my son to 20 years ago and I only saw it because he (now aged 30) took me along as a Boxing Day frivolity. Ben Stiller is the hapless divorced father taking a job as night security guard at New York's Museum of Natural History (which I've visited) where, over three consecutive nights, he has to come to terms with history coming alive (literally).
There'a amazing array of talent here including Robin Williams, Owen Wilson, Steve Coogan & Ricky Gervais and even embracing veterans Dick van Dyke, Mickey Rooney & Bill Cobbs (average age almost 80). The cast of characters is amazing from Attila the Hun to Christopher Columbus, from minature cowboys and Roman soldiers to a dinosaur skeleton and wild animals, and the special effects are excellent. Entertaining enough - just don't expect anything clever or subtle.
This is a model of how a sequel should succeed in following up on the success of an original. Keep the same basic plot but relocate and develop it: so it is still one night in a museum but we move from the Museum of Natural History in New York City to the Smithsonian museum complex in Washington DC. Keep all the favourite characters but add some new ones: so we still have the pan-faced Ben Stiller as the one-time museum guard but now we also have Amy Adams as the feisty flier Amelia Earhart; we still have the cowboy (Owen Wilson) and the centurion (Steve Coogan) but now we have the Egyptian pharaoh (Hank Azaria) not to mention Ivan the Terrible, Napoleon and Al Capone; and we don't just have one president (Theodore Roosevelt) but two (add Abraham Lincoln).
This is film squarely aimed at children and we took two boys aged 8 and 10 who thought it was “fantastic”. The monkey face-slapping scene was the one that all the kids loved most. But young-at-heart adults will find much to enjoy too with much referencing of historic figures and incidents plus allusions to plenty of other movies. Personally I really enjoyed the scenes set in the National Air & Space Museum because this is my favourite museum in the whole world.
Terrible title for a movie that is not nearly as terrible as some critics have suggested. At a time when there are so many romantic comedies aimed at young viewers, it's no bad thing to have the occasional romantic story that eschews humour and involves characters in middle age - think something along the lines of "Bridges Of Madison County" (both are based on novels).
The (goodlooking) stars are Richard Gere, as a doctor seeking to establish a new relationship with his estranged son in Latin America, and Diane Lane, a mother in a deeply unhappy marriage considering whether to abandon it - two actors who were together in the earlier "Unfaithful". The (unusual) setting is the Outer Banks of North Carolina at a time of year when hurricanes are threatened. At times, it's a little silly and sentimental but still worth an evening in front of the television if not a visit to the cinema.
It is a sheer delight to see such a character-driven film with a sharp script and fine acting all round. It cannot have been an easy task to translate to the screen Zoë Heller's Booker-shortlisted novel, given its first person perspective, but Patrick Marber's screenplay does an excellent job, incorporating a lot of voice-over, especially at the beginning.
The setting is a north London school and the key relationship is that between Barbara Covett and Sheba Hart (two carefully-chosen names), the first a cynical history teacher close to retirement, a hard-looking and bitter woman, and the other a new and idealistic art teacher, beguilingly beautiful to a variety of her colleagues. These characters are played respectively by Judi Dench and Cate Blanchett who both give outstanding Oscar-worthy performances. Among an able support cast, Bill Nighy is especially impressive.
Barbara and Sheba are both missing something and think that they can find it in another person, in the case of Barbara – the diarist and narrator – in Sheba herself (“She's the one I have waited for”). But the working out of this relationship – and that between Sheba and her family and lover – involve many secrets, much pain, and some betrayals in this rawly emotional tale.
Although I enjoy the music of Philip Glass and thought that it enhanced “The Hours” considerably, here it is in danger of overwhelming the movie. But this is a minor criticism of a superb piece of cinema which brings much credit on its director Richard Eyre who tackled the life of another older woman in “Iris”. At barely one and a half hours, it does not seek the length of so many movies which is in a sense a relief since the subject matter is so intense.
This is from the writer (Richard Curtis) and producer (Duncan Kenworthy) of the phenomenally-successful “Four Weddings And A Funeral” and it is another romantic comedy with Hugh Grant leading a very British cast except for an American leading lady. All the performances are excellent and Julia Roberts is perfectly cast as the famous movie star who falls for the diffident London bookshop owner. It might not be for the cynical, but my wife and I found it totally charming with some enjoyable jokes. However, those of us who live in London know that a portrayal of Notting Hill without black faces is a serious misrepresentation.
All reviews by ROGER DARLINGTON.
Last modified on 13 February 2010
"Film Review" magazine
Ain't It Cool News
Internet Movie Database
6 Degrees
Four Word Film Review
American Academy Awards
British Academy Awards
Golden Globe Awards