Dredd is the best B-movie you'll ever see.
I mean that as a compliment: whilst Hollywood has been inundated with comic-book movies of late, so many of them take themselves so seriously that they risk disappearing up their own cape. Dredd, on the other hand, embraces the excesses of its source material, channelling the brutal violence and exaggerated visuals of the original 2000AD comic strip "Judge Dredd" into a tight, exciting action-fest that's also surprisingly involving (especially given that all you ever get to see of the main character is his scowling chin).
From the start, it's clear that this isn't going to be the kind of comicbook movie where an emotionally-conflicted pretty-boy superhero is called upon to save the world. Instead - as the bloody and disorienting opening car-chase sequence makes clear - Judge Dredd is an uncompromising, hard-edged and ruthless authority figure who lets nothing stand in the way of doling out punishment to the criminals that deserve it. And far from saving the world, he's just trying to impose order on a small part of it.
All of these qualities are summarised briskly in the opening minutes of the film, which establishes the wider world of Dredd quickly and efficiently. This includes a worrying vision of a future police-state run by gun-toting "Judges", set against the backdrop of a giant sprawling metropolis called Mega-City One (which matches my many-years-old memories of the original 2000AD version pretty well).
However, no sooner than we've been introduced to these elements, the film bravely pares everything down to a very simple concept: Judge Dredd and his psychic sidekick - the rookie Judge Anderson in her first day on the job - manage to get themselves locked in a giant apartment block filled with criminals who are out for their blood, and they have fight their way to the top to survive.
If this concept sounds a little like another well-known recent action-movie (The Raid), then this can be chalked up to coincidence - and in any case, there's enough that's unique about Dredd to distinguish it from its rivals.
For one thing, there's the cast. Karl Urban's Dredd is a pitch-perfect take on the character, a cold-blooded dispenser of justice who carries himself with a grim seriousness that's dryly amusing, without ever pushing things so far that it feels like a parody. It's a world away from the campness of the old Sylvester Stallone version, and (unlike Stallone) Urban isn't afraid to keep his face concealed under his judge's mask for the entire movie, maintaining the enigmatic and slightly inhuman qualities of the character. It's even more impressive, then, that through limited facial expression and body language alone, he's able to turn in such a memorable and distinctive performance. I'd even go so far as to compare his Dredd to classic sci-fi characters like the Terminator, as he manages to capture that same unstoppable and inhuman quality that Schwarzenegger did.
Supporting players also turn in good performances: the character of Judge Anderson is leant a huge amount of humanity and heart by Olivia Thirlby, who strikes just the right balance between vulnerability and hard-assed-ness. The main villain of the piece, gang leader and drugs baron Ma-Ma, is played by Lena Headey (who you might recognise as Sarah Connor from the Terminator TV show), sporting a disfiguring scar that only adds to the sense of menace and danger that's already present in her intense performance. And henchman Kay (played by Wood Harris, who also portrayed Avon Barksdale in The Wire) manages to seem threatening yet also slightly inept, allowing him to veer between being a figure of fun and a genuine problem for Dredd and Anderson to overcome.
Yet for all the great performances, solid writing and impressive special effects (in particular, the movie is occasionally punctuated by unexpected moments of extreme-slow-motion beauty, courtesy of a plot device involving a drug that makes you perceive time as passing at a different speed), the movie remains commendably committed to a very simple, straightforward structure: Dredd and Anderson rising through the floors of the apartment block, bumping off bad guys, and getting closer and closer to the villain who's pulling all the strings.
This allows the movie to maintain a constant sense of jeopardy and momentum (even when Dredd and Anderson are able to catch a breath, there's really nowhere for them to safely hid) whilst also introducing enough variety - in terms of the villains, allies and weapons that the judges encounter - to stop the film from feeling repetitive or stagnant. By the time it reaches its explosive climax, you'll wonder where the time went, as its (already reasonably short) 95-minute running time passes incredibly quickly: a sure sign that you're being wholeheartedly entertained.
And that, ultimately, is where Dredd excels: as a piece of entertainment. Sure, it's not going to win any Oscars, and it's not backed by an A-list star or director, but isn't there room in the movie industry for an unpretentious and satisfying slice of resolutely adult-oriented action-based Friday-night fun? Dredd convincingly makes the case that there is. And don't argue with him: after all, he is the law.
Ravi Nijjar
The Hunt directed by Thomas Vinterberg tells the story of Lucas, superbly played by Mads Mikkelson, a nursery worker wrongly accused by the 8 year old daughter of his best friend for sexually abusing her. Set in a rural Danish town where everyone knows everyone, it chronicles the journey freshingly told from the victims point of view as Lucas does his best to hold his world together. The brilliant script has a solid character back story to propel the film forward and your empathy firmly lies with Lucas. At certain points you feel like screaming at the screen in of show support but that's when the true meaning of the film hits you. How much can you really trust the friends in your life to defend your honour when you have been wrongly accused? The cinematography, production and direction make this film a must own for every film fan.
A return to form by Quentin Tarantino, who rides into town guns blazing with an epic, slave-trade era Western that sees freed slave Django (Jamie Foxx) team up with eccentric German bounty hunter Dr. King Shultz (Christoph Waltz) to rescue his wife (Kerry Washington) from the clutches of Southern slave trader Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio) and cunning Uncle Tom; Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson).
Tarantino's last film was the entertaining but somewhat below par 'Inglorious Basterds' and fans were beginning to wonder whether the controversial director's best days were behind him, 'Django Unchained' proves those fears were unfounded and hits the mark more often than it misses: A straight shooting, expectedly brutal journey through the American badlands; the first hour focuses on Django and Dr. Shultz's violent misadventures hunting down criminals. Act II sees the duo down in Mississippi to infiltrate notorious slave plantation 'Candieland' en route to a bullet ridden, blood soaked finale.
Now as with every Tarantino film, there are nods to all the movies that inspired him, so look out for references to Fred Williamson's 'The Black Bounty Hunter', Jacopetti & Prosperi's 'Goodbye Uncle Tom', Takeshi Mike's 'Sukiyaki Western Django' and, of course, Sergio Corbucci's 'Django' (1966).
The movie itself is a little too long at 2 hours 45 minutes but its very well paced and every scene serves a purpose. There's plenty of action and black humour throughout and I'm glad Quentin's gone back to using some original songs on the soundtrack as opposed to the distracting use of music from other films, which annoyed me no end in 'Inglorious Basterds'. For Tarantino's always had an ear for what songs work best where, so much so, that audiences tend to associate the song with the scene long after they've seen the movie e.g. Urge Overkill's 'Girl, You'll be a Woman Soon' will always conjure up the image of Uma Thurman dancing around her living room before finding that bag of drugs in 'Pulp Fiction', Bobby Womack's 'Across A 110th Street' will forever be the theme to which Pam Grier's Jackie Brown walks through the airport and no matter where I hear it, Steeler's Wheel's 'Stuck in the Middle With You' will never divorce itself from Michael Madsen's Mr Blonde shuffling around that warehouse with a cut-throat razor in 'Reservoir Dogs'. Django Unchained's soundtrack is as good as any in the Tarantino back catalogue with Franco Micalizzi's 'They Call Me Trinity', Luis Bacalov's Elvis Presley style ballad 'Django', Jim Croce's 'I Got A Name' and John Legend's 'Who Did That To You?' as stand outs.
The cast are excellent: Christoph Waltz plays Dr. King Shultz with just the right blend of wit, charm and an air of disdain for the appalling racism he sees around him. Jamie Foxx is a cool and understated hero: wearing Sharon Stone's shades from 'The Quick And The Dead' and Michael Landon's green shirt from 'Bonanza', he's every inch the classic gunslinger on a mission to set right some wrongs. Leonardo DiCaprio turns in another impressive performance as bourgeois sadist Calvin Candie but its Samuel L. Jackson who very nearly steals the show as Candie's menacing but smarmy stooge; Stephen. Samuel L. Jackson hasn't made a good film in over five years (2008's 'Lakeview Terrance') so its great to see him put in a memorable performance that really makes you hate his character and more so the system that produced such an odious individual. This is a powerhouse performance that's up there with his take on Ordell Robbie in 'Jackie Brown' and though not quite on a par with Jules Winnfield in 'Pulp Fiction', still ranks as one of his best roles.
Hollywood and the American establishment don't like to discuss slavery for obvious reasons, which is why so few films have been made about the era. 'Django Unchained' doesn't go into the gory details or even begin to cover all the issues relating to the slave trade. For that, I'd advise reading Alex Haley's 'Roots', Louis Farrakhan's 'The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews' and Walter White Jr.'s heavily suppressed treatise 'Who Bought The Slaves to America?' but if you want to see Jamie Foxx battle some KKK henchmen and utter a couple of amusing one-liners, then this is the film for you. A must for Tarantino fans.
The Doctor Who Series 7 Part 2 DVD contains the 2012 Christmas Special and the eight episodes that finishes Series 7 It also contains the prequels and Children in Need episode and an exclusive scene featuring characters from the season finale. I really enjoyed the series as a whole with only one or maybe two episodes that left me a little disappointed.
"The Snowmen"(the 2012 Christmas Special) is a brilliant snow-filled Victorian adventure that perfectly fits the time of year and the series as a whole. I think this is the first time that the Christmas Special has actually led back into the series and it works really well Beautifully shot, this is an ice-tinged fairytale with psychic snow, a governess made of ice and a simply stunning spiral staircase that reaches through the clouds to where a certain blue box is waiting. Matt Smith gives a great performance of an, at first cold and remote, Doctor showing his gradual thawing as he is drawn into another adventure by a girl and a mystery he can't resist. Jenna-Louise Coleman does a fabulous job of portraying a slightly different version of Clara/Oswin to the one we first met in "Asylum of the Daleks" Add to that the always appreciated appearance of Madam Vastra, Jenny and Sontaran butler Strax and this is definitely one of my favourite Christmas Specials.
"The Bells of Saint John" is a colourful, smart episode and the perfect (re)introduction to Clara Oswald. Set in modern-day London the story makes perfect use of the setting with Doctor and Clara racing across Tower Bridge on motorbike before a ride up the outside of The Shard results in a confrontation with the villain of the piece played wonderfully by guest star Celia Imrie. With a plot involving something dangerous lurking on the Wi-Fi and a cast that can more than handle the sharp script this is a great opening episode for the second part of Series 7.
"The Rings of Akhaten" is the second and, in my opinion, the worst episode of Series 7. It's written by Neil Cross who created and wrote BBC1s Luther and starts with a wonderful look back into Clara's past so I was expecting good things. Although there are some great visuals and the music is spectacular, the story itself didn't hold my attention and I was much more interested in watching the relationship between The Doctor and Clara develop. This is a story that is very much saved, for me, by the chemistry between the two leads and a terrific performance by Emilia Jones as the young Queen of Years.
Next up was ?The Cold War? by Mark Gattiss. A feeling of claustrophobia sets in as soon as the Tardis disappears and leaves The Doctor and Clara trapped on a Russian nuclear submarine with an old enemy from the past thawing out nearby. As I was only 4 the last time the Ice Warriors appeared I can't really comment on how the new version compares to the old but I think it was very effective with enough solidity and muscle to provoke fear and more than a little relief when it is safely contained. Then it escapes leaving its chains and its body armour behind. This adds a new dimension of fear to an already scary episode where every hiss and creak could be an escaped Martian creeping up behind you. This episode boasts some excellent guest stars with David Warner as eccentric scientist Professor Grisenko a highlight. This is a surprisingly gripping episode with chills aplenty.
The next episode ?Hide? was written by Neil Cross who wrote my least favourite episode of the series, so I was expecting the worst. I needn't have worried I really loved it. Maybe because this episode focuses more on human beings instead of aliens and, of course, Neil Cross has proved he can write believable human beings (see BBC1s ?Luther?) This is his strength and it shows in the two guest characters Alec Palmer and Emma Grayling and their oh-so-slowly building romance. Even The Doctor and Clara are shown in a new, deeper way with Clara questioning The Doctors view of humanity after a quick trip from the beginning to the end of the Earth. From a spooky, shadow-filled mansion to a pocket universe smothered in mist via the beginning and the end of the Earth, the sets are fantastic and really pull you into the episode. The monster in this story, The Crooked Man, is beautifully realised and a lovely twist at the end turns it from a monster into a three dimensional being. As The Doctor himself says ?This isn't a ghost story. This is a love story.?
?Journey To The Centre Of The Tardis? was a much-anticipated episode just from the promise of that title So can this episode possibly measure up? Well, maybe not, but its a solid episode that shows previously unseen parts of the Tardis and provides some good old-fashioned corridor-running scenes. In an episode with only five people in it (not counting monsters) the only real let-down were the guest stars. The Van Baalen brothers were not great and I really didn't get the point of the "joke" they played on youngest brother Tricky. Convincing someone they're an android seems a very difficult thing to pull off for minimal laughs. Not only that, it added nothing to the episode. Luckily there was plenty going on already with some beautiful scenery and plenty of timey-wimey stuff to keep me watching. Okay, maybe the re-set ending was a bit convenient but as long as it helps in the build-up to the season finale I can live with it.
Mark Gattiss's second episode of the season is called "The Crimson Horror" and its a brilliantly written Victorian romp. The beginning of the story belongs entirely to Madame Vastra, Strax and Jenny with the Doctor only appearing at least ten minutes into the episode with a wonderful flashback told in the style of a grainy, silent movie. This was a fun episode that everybody seemed to be enjoying from the writer through to the cast and the viewer. With the villain being masterfully played by Dame Diana Rigg and the addition of her real life daughter Rachel Stirling this story had extra class which only added to the fun. Finishing with a scene that leads straight into the last two episodes, this was a great romp that I will gladly watch again.
The penultimate episode of Series 7 was "Nightmare in Silver". Written by author Neil Gaiman and bringing back the new and improved Cybermen this was probably one of the most anticipated episode of the series. Guest stars Warwick Davies and Jason Watkins are wonderful additions to the cast with Davies, in particular, shining in his role as Porridge. Matt Smith also gets a chance to stretch his acting muscles with a lengthy sequence where he plays the dual roles of The Doctor and the Cyberplanner as they fight for control of The Doctor's mind. This episode is nowhere near as good as Gaiman's previous episode the marvellous "The Doctor's Wife" but its a fun new look at an old favourite that kept me entertained throughout.
And so to the series finale. "The Name of the Doctor" had the internet buzzing with rumours and speculation right from the start. So was it worth it? Yes. This episode was my favourite from this series and one of my Top 5 of the Doctor Who series as a whole. The wonderful pre-titles sequence with Clara taking us on a journey through The Doctors time-line is enough to hook in any fan. With Vastra, Strax, Jenny and River Song and even The Great Intelligence all appearing, there is plenty to watch and enjoy Even with all these guest stars, however, it's a surprisingly quiet episode. This episode belongs to Matt Smith and Jenna-Louise Coleman with both of them putting in excellent performances. With the mystery of The Impossible Girl finally explained in a beautifully simple way and that final surprise guest appearance, this will remain one of my favourite episodes and one I shall watch again and again.
I am really looking forward to November 23rd and the 50th Anniversary Special. In the meantime, this DVD box-set will be watched and re-watched many times.
Available from May 20th 2013 on DVD and Blu-ray, Django Unchained has to be high on the list of contenders for top release of the month, and possibly the entire year.
Django (Jamie Foxx) wins his freedom from slavery when bounty hunter Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz), in need of vital information about his next targets, frees Django from his 'owners' in order to deputise him, before the pair face off against Mr Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio) in order to attempt the rescue of Django's enslaved wife, Broomhilda (Kerry Washington), who had also been sold into slavery.
Until now Kill Bill was Tarantino's premier uber-vengeance movie, so soaked in blood were the Bride's hands that they could have turned the multitudinous seas incarnadine, but now Kill Bill has been surpassed -perhaps not in blood and body count but certainly in movie-craft and story-telling.Once again this is a tale of vengeance but this is Tarantino's homage to the classic Western rather than a love letter to classic Kung Fu movies. However unlike Kill Bill, that Tarantino failed to bury in one outing, deciding instead to indulge himself with two bloated instalments, Django Unchained is a taut, well crafted, sublimely written and expertly directed film.
I had wondered if Tarantino had long ago become a film maker more interested in fulfilling his own weird, if sometimes wonderful, fantasies through his chosen medium of film - to the detriment of his faithful audience - but with Django Unchained he proves beyond refute that he is a filmmaker of such singular talent that he is uniquely worthy of his Oscar win.Tarantino's directing skills are unparalleled, and as a writer he is the foremost linguist in his field. His grasp of various vernaculars is beyond comparison. Quite simply no one writes dialogue like Tarantino except perhaps with the notable exception of Kevin Smith. And the raw talent that he displayed in earlier films such as Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction has not been lost over the intervening years.
But viewer beware, despite the fact that prolific use of the n-word, extensive scenes of brutal torture and mandingo boxing and a depiction of an escaped slave being ripped apart by vicious dogs, are all (horrifically) period-appropriate they will nevertheless undoubtedly spilt audience opinion about whether they are acceptable or not in modern cinema.Indeed the brutality and realism of the violence is, at points, overwhelming but then in the climactic shoot-out is, contrastingly highly stylised - bullets fly with reckless abandon, blood spurts and gushes from gaping bullet holes in slow-mo - it's almost comic-book. I'll leave you to make up your own mind on that particular facet of Tarantino's distinctive and highly individual style of film making, but I can say that everyone will have a visceral response to this piece of cinema.Tarantino has always had a gift for casting and here his performers do him proud. Jamie Foxx produces a flawless performance in the title role of Django, embuing his character with unquenchable hatred, touching devotion and poignant pathos Leonardo DiCaprio and Samuel L Jackson are given less screen time but still produce faultless, perfectly measured performances. Yet it's Waltz that shines brightest as the enlightened, German-born, bounty hunter, disgusted by the slave trade, who frees and educates Django.
Django Unchained is a near perfect piece of film making. Intelligent, boundary-pushing and brimming with bravura performances.
Ruben Fleischer's Gangster Squad desperately, desperately wants to be The Untouchables. Its plotline hits every one of the same beats, bringing together an immensely likeable cast to form a ragtag, off-the-books police squad and pitching them against a revered Hollywood heavyweight in the role of an iconic outlaw with all the scenery he could ever want to chew and it takes just as much delight both in its period setting and its genre, recreating prohibition America with meticulous detail and packing it full of blazing Tommy guns and swanky cars in much the same way as Untouchables did some twenty-five years ago. In short, it follows the exact recipe DePalma used back in 1987 to the letter and uses similarly impressive ingredients as Fleischer himself is joined by Josh Brolin, Ryan Gosling, Sean Penn & Emma Stone. And yet, the end product is almost entirely flavourless.
Though the film has no shortage of little problems - supposedly snappy dialogue that fails to pop, an over-fondness for CGI and the absence of a single main character worthy of the actor playing them - the essence of its failure is simply that the man behind the camera seems like he would rather have been making a different film altogether. Back in 2009, as the rage for all things horror got into full swing and a hoard of zombie fiction was rampaging through society, devouring brains across the globe, Fleischer cunningly seized the opportunity to make his directorial debut and drop the entire genre on its head with the cleverly subversive Zombieland. In doing so, he took a much beloved but greatly oversaturated sub-genre and energetically dissected it: mocking its little absurdities and oddities without sneering at or belittling it but simply as a fan finding the fun in its more ridiculous elements. The premise of Gangster Squad is so deliciously clichéd that it would seem the perfect opportunity for him to bring his satirical talents to one of the most iconic genres in American cinema but, unfortunately, this potential goes entirely untapped as the film never quite enters the realm of actual parody, instead occupying a kind of dead zone between sincere gangster epic and sardonic caricature. In doing so, it becomes laughably clichéd and predictable without ever actually asking the viewer to laugh at its clichés and predictability.
The film's identity crisis is manifested most obviously in its cardboard cut-outs characters. When your following the well-worn "assembling a team to defeat the villain" story structure, it's okay to make use of certain archetypes but building your squad exclusively of them, and of particularly uninspired iterations of them at that, is never going to end well: Gangster Squad might have been better eschewing names altogether and simply referring to its heroes as "The Old One", "The Ethnic One", "The Handsome One" etc. Each character is introduced with a single defining attribute and never for a moment threatens to grow beyond it.
It's always a shame to see talent going to waste and here Fleischer has assembled a great cast and then given them nothing to work with: Josh Brolin is asked merely to brood quietly and spout the odd righteous cliché, Emma Stone to smile slyly in a scintillating red dress and Michael Pena simply to look sufficiently Mexican. The only highlight is Sean Penn's cartoonish portrayal of Cohen which, whilst utterly over-the-top and seldom genuinely menacing, is an awful lot of fun as we see one of Hollywood's more serious thespians blow of some steam as a good old fashioned bad guy. On the flipside, it's particularly frustrating to watch Gosling & Stone's stilted romance after seeing them sizzle together in Crazy, Stupid, Love. Having to witness the chemistry these two share sapped by a lifeless script might just be the worst of this movie's sins.
The vacuum of original thought extends to the visuals as well. Though it's clear that a lot of time and no small amount of cash has gone into lusciously recreating forties LA, the movie suffers from that same fallacy which trips up a lot of modern filmmakers: the notion that expense is a substitute for style. The entire film is drenched in a glitzy gloss, the costumes are gorgeous and the action sequences are overflowing with slow-motion shots of things exploding but it's all done in a rather workmanlike fashion. Each scene is perfectly presentable in itself but it's completely forgotten by the time the next one has arrived: there's no inspiration, no flair and nothing really to catch the eye or inflame the imagination. It's not an ugly film, it's just not very interesting to look at.
By refusing to take advantage of the familiarity of its story and characters to satirise cookie-cutter crime films, Gangster Squad unwittingly becomes one. A rigid adherence to a story we all know and characters we couldn't possibly care about is too much to be rescued even by the collective talents of Fleisher, Gosling et al. As current "King of all Hollywood", when even Ryan Gosling can't save you're film, you've really messed up bad. Fleisher still retains enough of the credibility Zombieland bought him to make whatever he turns his hand to next worth checking out but another misstep of this magnitude could see that well run dry.
What Tom Hooper achieved in bringing Les Misérables to the big screen will be remembered for decades to come.
It's the greatest musical I think I've ever seen, worthy of the three Oscars, three Golden Globes, and four BAFTAs that it won earlier this year. And having now seen it many times, both in the cinema and since its recent DVD/Blu-ray release, I can say that it really lives up to the repeat viewing that is a necessary trait of a five-star film.
We open in the early 19th Century. Jean Valjean (played by Hugh Jackman) is being released on parole by the prison guard, Javert (Russell Crowe), and Hooper introduces us to these characters fantastically. The scene is magnificent, with the water crashing down on Valjean and his fellow prisoners on an epic scale, and Javert standing tall above them. And thus begins the film with the powerful musical number, Look Down.
Almost a decade later, and Valjean has utterly transformed from the emaciated prisoner we first see - a transformation that saw Jackman drop over a stone in weight, and then gain a further two whilst filming. And it is here that we meet the tragedy-fated Fantine (Anne Hathaway), who loses her job at the factory owned by the now-successful Valjean.
Forced to sell her teeth, her hair, and ultimately her body, Fantine pours her heart out with the song, 'I Dreamed a Dream', and it is this heart-rending performance that I think won Anne Hathaway her Oscar. Because it is nothing less than perfect, and nothing less than incredible. The raw power of Hathaway's voice on this track is absolutely mesmerising, and it's that much more impressive knowing that, like every note throughout the film, it was sung live on the set.
In her greatest moment of desperation, she seeks out Valjean and entrusts him with the safety of her daughter, the young Cosette. All this and more takes place over the course of one of the most memorable first acts, with the film reaching greater and greater heights as it progresses towards its astounding final act.
Again, the film moves forward in time to a period of revolution in Paris, when the youth of the city a plotting a rebellion against the monarchy. It is here that we hear another of the original stage musical's iconic songs, 'Do You Hear The People Sing?' The original is a natural favourite amongst audiences, and the screen version is no different. The piece is one of the most rousing I can recall, serving brilliantly as a call to arms, and one which leads to the climactic Barricade scenes, pivotal to the film and to what I can't help but think will be its longstanding memory for years to come.
The young actors in Hooper's Les Misérables are every bit as impressive as the likes of Hathaway, Jackman, Crowe, and the hilarious duo of Helena Bonham Carter and Sacha Baron Cohen as the Thénardiers, whose rendition of 'Master of the House' is a side-splitting bag of laughs.
Amanda Seyfried has a wonderful voice and a delicate presence as the older Cosette. Eddie Redmayne is perfectly commanding as Marius.
Samantha Barks makes a fantastic debut as an actress (having starred in the stage musical), giving a flawless performance in her character's solo, 'On My Own'. Aaron Tveit is both charming and hot-headed as the politically-inclined revolutionary, Enjolras. And Daniel Huttlestone has a great blend of cheek and spirit as the young Gavroche.
Brilliantly cast from top to bottom, Hooper's Les Misérables is a masterful adaptation, and it's one that promises to revive the musical genre in cinema.
With the backing of a big budget behind him, Hooper is capable of bringing to life the big sequences from Victor Hugo's original 19th Century novel of the same name that simply isn't possible on the stage. The medium is so different - both to literature and to stage musicals - and it allows Hooper to bring together for audiences the best elements of each. The power of Hugo's words, the vibrancy of the musical's music, and the emotive intimacy and spectacle of film.
As I've said already, Les Misérables will not be soon forgotten. From the powerful opening to its climactic close, it is a tour de force of remarkable performances so rarely seen in films these days, worthy of every single award and nomination it's received in the past six months. The decision to have the actors and actresses sing live on set was an incredibly brave and bold one, and it truly pays off; the spontaneity brings a magic to the film unlike any film musical you have ever seen, or are ever likely to see in the years to come.
100% essential viewing.
A thrilling new mystery is unfolding in the TARDIS as the doctors death date draws closer and closer ,can he avoid death again. In the second part of the series the doctor goes on a farewell trip running into many of aliens like the c******* or meet some famous faces like hit***. A breathtaking conclusion for series 6 a must have for any doctor who fan.
one of the best films ive ever seen. if youve never watched this, youve missed out. get it
awesome film, one of the best classics
It feels good to be back in Atlantic City with Boardwalk Empire's second season - even if that positive sentiment is unlikely to be shared by many of the show's central characters. After all, season one ended with both the brother and surrogate son of gangster-kingpin Nucky Thompson conspiring to lead a secret rebellion against him, at the same time as the authorities began to close in on him for election fraud, and a gang war was continuing to brew between Nucky's crew and the gangs of Chicago. And that's not to mention the show's other dark turns (including prohibition agent Van Alden descending into murky moral areas through murder and marital infidelity) and deep-seated psychological angst (including Jimmy Darmody's increasing awareness of how his mother was abused by the men in her life).
So where can the show go from there?
The answer, it seems, is even darker and even deeper. Because Boardwalk Empire season two manages to add even more depth and shade to its characters, pushing them all into ever-more-difficult circumstances whilst continuing to plough forwards with the larger narrative surrounding the gangsters, politicians and law-enforcers who battle to keep control of Atlantic City and Chicago during the heyday of prohibition.
But despite the added complexity that's inevitable with the second year of an ensemble show like this one, the sophomore season of Boardwalk Empire somehow feels like it gives us even more of an "origin story" for the show than the first. That's possibly because the writers feel more comfortable in stepping away from the day-to-day affairs of Nucky, his friends and his enemies, instead focusing in greater detail on the characters themselves. So, we get a much more detailed look at Margaret's Irish family; we learn more about Jimmy's upbringing and his wartime experiences; we see Nucky put in positions where he's no longer the most powerful player in the room and has to really fight to survive; and we witness Van Alden's incremental corruption as his past sins conspire to find him out.
Yes, by the end of this season, you'll feel like you have a much fuller understanding of all the characters of Boardwalk Empire and how they relate to each other, including relatively minor players like Chalky White (who is one of those characters that I wish we saw more of in this show) and the burgeoning criminal activities of Al Capone (who's another).
However, my one criticism of the show is that there's a nagging feeling that all of this extra depth comes at the expense of a truly compelling central plot. Rather than hanging everything off a relatively central core storyline (as in the first season) we get lots of intersecting subplots, most of which take several episodes to play out in their entirety - and even then they only lead to more intrigue and backstabbing, rather than getting a truly satisfying payoff. It's a sophisticated web of storytelling, certainly, but it's missing a little of the visceral thrill that made the first season so enjoyable.
That said, perhaps it's unfair to hold season two of Boardwalk Empire to the extremely high standards of the first, because I'm not sure anything could really top what the show achieved in its first year. And to give the series its dues, the final episodes of this season do in fact manage to pull off some genuinely daring and unexpected developments, with certain characters rising in prominence at the same time as others are shuffled off the stage (and I'll say no more than that to avoid spoiling the shocks and twists). I just occasionally wish there was something a little more substantial and fast-moving to get your teeth into. Perhaps that will come in season three.
Ironically enough for a film called Total Recall, Len Wiseman's bland summer-action-movie remake is completely forgettable.
To be fair, it was a film that was always going to have the cards stacked against it. Because if there's one thing that's guaranteed to raise the ire of science-fiction fanboys, it's the unnecessary remake. Trying to recapture past glories is a tricky business at best, and it's rare to find a "re-imagining" of a classic franchise that has ever surpassed the original. After all, you only need to look to movies like Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes or Stephen Hopkins' film version of Lost In Space to see how badly wrong it can go.
Total Recall isn't quite as egregious a remake as those examples, but neither does it succeed in bettering the Arnie vehicle that was originally released way back in 1990. Retaining the same basic paranoid-thriller storyline (involving a man called Douglas Quaid who's not sure whether he's a secret agent who's been programmed to believe he's a regular Joe, or a normal guy dreaming he's a super-spy), the film seems somewhat schizophrenic when it comes to deciding how closely to stick to the original. Because whilst it jettisons many of the significant details of that movie (such as the colony on Mars, or the mutant sub-species of humans) it also retains several key scenes or lines of dialogue that only serve to keep reminding you of the earlier story that this one is aping.
So, you get reprises of classic Arnie lines like "If I'm not me, then who the hell am I?", you get another appearance by a three-breasted woman (which is particularly conspicuous here because she was meant to be a mutant in the original - so what's the explanation for her here?), you get the memorable "shoot me" scene and you get a cameo from a lady passing through a customs check who looks suspiciously similar to Arnie's disguise from the earlier film. All of which is presented in such a half-hearted way that it makes you wonder why you're not watching that version of the story instead of this inferior facsimile.
That's perhaps a little unfair: there are one or two neat touches that are unique to this movie, most notably in the impressive production design and special effects, all of which outclass the more primitive efforts of the Arnie version by quite some degree. But even here, there's a sense that the new version of Total Recall is imitating more than it is innovating. So, you get futuristic video displays and technology that feel as though it's been lifted from Minority Report, you get a multicultural rain-soaked and neon-lit urban environment that evokes Blade Runner (complete with flying cars), and you get an army of robotic police drones that feels oddly reminiscent of the Star Wars stormtroopers crossed with the droids from I, Robot, but dressed in a colour scheme and mask that makes it look as though they're doing an impression of Top Gear's Stig.
There are also some interesting new details added in terms of location. Rather than sharing its action between Earth and Mars, this version of the story takes place in a futuristic British empire inhabited by the upper classes, whilst the lower-class citizens dwell in a giant overpopulated slum in Australia. The characters commute between the two via a giant elevator through the middle of the Earth, which allows for some (again) impressive special effects, including a neat mechanism that sees the passengers experience a gravity-flip halfway through the journey. But this is all just window-dressing, and doesn't really help the story along to any great extend.
However, one thing that the new Total Recall does have going for it, compared to the original, is its cast. Colin Farrell is an improvement over Arnie in one critical department: he can actually act. And Kate Beckinsale and Jessica Biel turn in good performances as the two women in Quaid's life, with the former playing the good-wife-turned-bad with great relish, and the latter managing to stand around and look vulnerable and pretty when the script demands it. Bryan Cranston (who you might recognise from Breaking Bad and Malcolm in the Middle) is also great fun as the scenery-chewing nasty president, whilst Bill Nighy makes a fun extended cameo as the leader of the resistance for whom Quaid believes he is working.
But as good as the cast is, they can't elevate the material above the mediocre, even with their all-round decent performances. As a result, this sci-fi remake joins the list of "why did they bother?" movies, ending up feeling derivative, predictable and unimaginative, even when taken on its own merits.
Ravi Nijjar
Set during the U.S. recession of 2007-08, 'Killing Them Softly' is an inspired gangster movie from director Andrew Dominik ('The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford') that takes place in the aftermath of a robbery at a mob run card game. The film doubles as a pointed satire on American culture and examines the underbelly of small-town Mafioso, think Matteo Garrone's 'Gomorrah' in the age of austerity.
Soft spoken hit man, Brad Pitt, is called in to find and take care of the pair of amateur stick-up men who ripped off middling mobster Ray Liotta's card game. But can't seem to get much done what with all the toing and froing, calls to the bosses back home and the general sense of disorder in the crime business. 'Killing Them Softly' is a film where words are as deadly as bullets, where life & death is casually discussed over a Scotch or in a parked car in the rain. Dominik directs with a sure hand and gives the characters plenty of room to manoeuvre with the detached, almost dreamlike, slow burn approach he used in the 'Assassination of Jesse James...'. This visual style and pacing tends to divide audiences but I think it works here, developing the personalities and making the brutal bursts of violence all the more jarring. The cast are uniformly excellent and Pitt's brilliantly written and delivered monologue makes it worth your while. 'Killing Them Softly' won't appeal to everyone and requires a bit of concentration to pick up on the undertones, but its' certainly one of the more creative crime movies to come out of Hollywood for a while. Worth a look.
Another month, another cop drama. You could be forgiven for skipping it out of hand but that would be a shame because End Of Watch really is quite different. The film follows two LAPD cops Brian Taylor (Jake Gyllenhaal) and Miguel Zavala (Michael Pena) as they carry out their duties. At first the action is viewed through Taylor's handheld camera which he is using for a film project. But viewers need not fear two hours' worth of shaky screens and poor image quality. Director David Ayer himself admitted in an interview that he did not want to be tied to a particular style, so normal cameras are increasingly deployed as the film unfolds. This proves to work well because it adds to the steadily rising dramatic tension.
Camerawork aside, it's the sheer quality of the scriptwriting that immediately stands out. The film's early scenes are a burst of originality; when our two cops respond to a house disturbance, the intimidating perpetrator challenges Zavala to a square, no-weapons fight, which to the surprise of everyone, he duly takes up. Instantly we warm to these two officers, who refuse to hide behind their uniforms and weaponry as they engage with the public in LA's notorious south central district. The dialogue is also sharp as knives and we are treated to buddy-banter as witty as anything seen in previous films of this genre. In one example, Taylor declares to Zavala that he wants a daughter, to which Zavala says "Just don't let her date cops" and Taylor responds "She's not dating anyone.ever!" Even the taboo of race is tackled head-on in a humorous way. Mexican-descended Zavala playfully mocks Taylor for his supposedly white predilections to which Taylor responds by offering to bring him back a burrito after attending a symphony concert. Critics often like to talk about chemistry between actors in romantic films but End of Watch is surely a masterclass in the cinematic portrayal of friendship.
And it's this aspect which helps the audience feel so involved when the film takes a more serious tone. We fear for our heroes as they become embroiled in dealing with a Latino gang linked to the Mexican cartels. This is genuinely frightening because the police appear powerless to respond against a tidal wave of heavy weaponry, faceless crime bosses, drive-by shootings, decapitated bodies and human trafficking. One disturbing sequence sees Taylor and Zavala's fellow officers inadvertently run into this element with profound consequences. It also leads the viewer to conclude that Mexico's cartel problem is coming to America - it's no longer a matter of if but when. Our two cops are soon themselves targeted and even warned by the FBI that hampering the cartels' activity will lead to reprisals against them. Without spoiling the ending, this plays out violently and tragically but with a heartwarming twist at the end.
More broadly, the film carries a strong political theme, vividly portraying an American underclass in crisis as it struggles under the burden of drugs, crime, urban deprivation and lack of opportunities for minorities. The scene where the crack addict mother hides and duct-tapes her children to keep them quiet is particularly difficult to watch. Maybe for this reason, David Ayer has consciously eschewed tackling the corruption of the LAPD (as per 2011's Rampart starring Woody Harrelson), instead keeping our two heroes clean and honest - but never boring - in order to heighten the contrast between the good guys and the ever-worsening patch they have to police. The film is also undoubtedly a tribute to law enforcement officials in America who do a tough job in the face of sometimes enormous risks. It's worth remembering that in 2012 alone, a staggering 120 officers died while on duty in the country.
End Of Watch may have all the standard ingredients of a police-based action drama, but it also brings much, much more to the table. The characters are so believable you sometimes think it's a documentary, while the plot pulls off the feat of simultaneous unpredictability and plausibility right to the end. Jake Gyllenhaal's performance is undoubtedly excellent but it's Michael Pena's unpretentious cop who accepts life as he finds it which proves the more honest and endearing portrayal. This in turn helps generate the audience sympathy required for the film's final, devastating scenes. End Of Watch narrowly misses redefining the genre but the caliber of its plot and acting easily place it in the top five of its category.
David Ayer's new cop flick electrifies the genre
Best musical film in years. Would not have been as good without Rebal Wilson aka fat Amy. Her sense of humour will bring tears to your eyes with laughter.
You watch with shock and anitcipation as the village of Broadchurch goes through a murder investigation.
The acting is phenominal and the storyline is extraordinary. It is not to miss
A brilliant show
'Game of Thrones' has become something of a phenomenon in the US. A complex story of inter-family conflict revolving around various factions - all of whom want their respective leaders to rule the fictional medieval realm of Westeros - it somehow hasn't caught on in quite the same way in the UK. Perhaps that's because it's only accessible through the Sky Atlantic channel, which has a limited audience - or perhaps it's because it just hasn't been marketed in a way that catches the public's imagination. After having watched this second season, however, I'm struggling to think of why anyone *wouldn't* enjoy this excellent show.
Picking up from the aftermath of season one - in which one major character lost his life (no spoilers here!) and many others were left in very changed circumstances - this season immediately throws us back into the build-up to a great war involving the Stark family, the Lannisters, and various other players who all have designs on the Iron Throne. If you were confused by the large cast of season one, then you'll probably be even more intimidated by this follow-up, as the number of characters continues to expand exponentially, adding a real sense of scale to proceedings but occasionally making it difficult to keep track of exactly who everyone is and where their loyalties lie.
Still, the show manages to anchor things by giving each faction just one or two lead characters around which most of the action revolves. And even if the early episodes of this second season require a bit of concentration and a good memory from the audience to be followed, there's never a sense that the unfolding action is unclear - just that it's so epic and wide-ranging that it's sometimes difficult to hold it all in your head at once.
As the war between the various families begins to heat up, we see all sorts of interesting political manoeuvering and horse-trading, reminding us of one thing and one thing only: everyone in Game of Thrones has their own interests at heart. And it's watching how these interests clash - and how the various conflicts are resolved - that makes for the most interesting parts of the show.
In this second season, everyone becomes a little bit more closely interlinked, with lots of characters travelling between different locations and meeting up with other groups, reinforcing the idea that Westeros is one big web of personalities that's getting more and more tangled as time goes on. The only exception to this increasingly incestuous network of relationships is Daenerys Targaryen, the widowed white-witch who also has a claim to the throne, but who spends most of the season traipsing around the desert with her baby dragons, completely separate from the rest of the action.
Still, that's not the end of the world, because Game of Thrones is definitely a series that's playing the long game, and I fully expect Daenerys to become a more important player in future seasons. And the same goes for some of the other slow-moving subplots, too, like the Night's Watch group in the North - who, by the end of this season, are only just beginning to pay off ideas that have been in play since the very first scene of season one. This big-picture approach only serves to make the show feel all the more epic, coupling the intimate Shakespearean family drama of the Starks and Lannisters with grander, more impressive ideas (including the increasing prominence of magic and fantasy elements).
It seems mean to single out one actor for special praise among such a great ensemble cast, but it's difficult to ignore the wonderful performance of Peter Dinklage as the diminutive yet razor-sharp Tyrion Lannister. Tyrion started off as something of a comic character at the beginning of the first season, but he has gradually grown in stature (figuratively, if not literally) to become one of the most important and likeable characters on the show. Yes, there are other fine performances - Jack Gleeson as the enormously unpleasant young king Joffrey Baratheon is particularly watchable, in a love-to-hate way - but it's Dinklage who really anchors the show in this second season, and provides something approaching the moral compass that the series lost when it offed one of its key players at the end of season one.
By the time you finish watching season two of Game of Thrones, you'll find yourself anxiously awaiting the third - because the last few episodes of this boxset set up some even more intriguing circumstances for the characters next year, as well as providing some of the most dazzling action sequences that the show has yet seen: for example, the penultimate episode, 'Blackwater', provides a sea-battle and a castle siege that can stand comparison with the likes of 'Lord of the Rings', despite the limitations of the show's TV budget. Hopefully that's a sign that things are only going to get bigger and better for Game of Thrones - and my only complaint about the show is that I'm going to have to wait another year now until I can devour the season three boxset.
Ben Affleck's Argo marks only his third feature behind the camera, cementing his status as one of the finest directors of his generation. Affleck has been rising to fame as a director in recent years after making his debut with Gone Baby Gone, and following it up with The Town.
His third feature finally won him his incredibly well-deserved second Academy Award, taking home the Best Picture Oscar alongside George Clooney and Grant Heslov, with screenwriter Chris Terrio winning Best Adapted Screenplay and editor William Goldenberg winning Best Film Editing on the night as well.
The three Oscar statues that Argo won back in February are a good indication of how brilliant a film this is, on all sides of production.
Based on a true story, Argo opens in late 1979, portraying events when militants stormed the US embassy in Tehran, Iran, taking control of the site and holding the workers there as hostages. What the militants didn't then know, and what Argo is centred on, is that a handful of Americans managed to escape from the building and into the city, and desperately seek a way to get out of the country.
Enter, CIA exfiltration specialist, Tony Mendez (played by Affleck).
With the US State Department at a complete loss as to how to handle the situation accordingly, Mendez devises the answer. He'll fly into Tehran, under the guise of being a Canadian film producer, and fly straight back out with the escapees, giving them all new identities as his Canadian crew.
The plan, of course, is far easier said than done. And what is most remarkable about Argo - which I think is one of the many reasons it won the Best Screenplay Oscar - is that it manages to keep the tension constantly on high for the full two-hour duration.
There aren't many films capable of sustaining such a high level of tension, keeping you nerve-wrackingly on the edge of your seat, for quite so long. But Argo pulls it off spectacularly. You cannot help but be drawn into its narrative, desperately hoping the plan will succeed at every step of the way, despite the multitude of problems these characters face, with the odds ever stacked against them.
Affleck's career has taken an incredibly impressive new direction since making his directorial debut with Gone Baby Gone, and after confirming his status as a prominent new director with The Town, he's really proven himself once more with Argo. For years to come, it will remain the talk of many that Affleck's work didn't earn him an Oscar nomination in the Best Director category, for this truly deserved such recognition.
His camera work is impeccable, choosing his moments brilliantly, finding and bringing out the inner and most affecting emotions from his characters.
What matters most to Argo is that it really makes you feel that the stakes are real. This isn't just a movie you're watching. This is actually unfolding before you. It breaks down the barrier between audience and screen so well. And whether or not you know how events transpired in history, you still find yourself hooked right through to its immaculate conclusion. These characters are more than just characters; they're real people, with real lives, and real fears.
Affleck makes them come to life in a way that few directors seem capable of in recent years.
Certainly, it helps that he assembled one of the finest casts of all time, with Affleck leading the way alongside the likes of Bryan Cranston (Breaking Bad), John Goodman (The Big Lebowski), Alan Arkin (Little Miss Sunshine), and Scoot McNairy (Monsters). Each of his cast gives him a hundred per cent on camera, and there isn't a single moment in the film that lets the film down to make it feel like it's being acted.
For that to happen, you need a remarkable director, capable of having the cast's trust placed entirely in their hands. And, for that reason, so much credit here belongs to Affleck for what he did bringing Argo to life, to the big screen. It is by far one of the most powerful and affecting movies committed to film in recent memory, and with its basis in fact, it is therefore one of the most important. Such a story needed to be told, and Affleck was the one to tell it. If you see just one movie this year, let it be Argo.
Science-fiction. Why can't it be more realistic, more involving, and more relevant to our day-to-day lives? Why can't it be (for want of a better term) more human? Well, David Mackenzie's Perfect Sense seeks to answer those kind of complaints about the genre by presenting a very sci-fi idea - a global epidemic of a disease that gradually strips away your senses, one by one - but viewed through the lens of a very grounded and relatable love story between two very sympathetic and likeable leads.
Set in Glasgow (again, eschewing the glamour and Hollywood-ness that would be offered by more high-profile locations), the movie sees a chef, Michael (Ewan McGregor), begin a romance with a doctor, Susan (Eva Green, perhaps best known as Vesper Lynd from Casino Royale), at the same time as they try to cope with the effects of the weird sense-sapping epidemic. But whilst the disease certainly plays an important role in the movie, underpinning everything that happens from beginning to end, it isn't really the focus of the film. Rather, it's merely the backdrop against which Michael and Susan's relationship plays out: the film is far more interested in the smaller human details of how their romance and their daily lives would be affected by such a condition.
(You just know that somewhere else in this world there's a story about a Tom Cruise-type character who's running around trying to uncover the source of the illness, and save humanity by finding a cure - but this isn't that movie.)
Indeed, it's the smaller moments that really hold the appeal of the film. For example, Michael's restaurant constantly finds itself having to adapt to the changing needs of its patrons. When they lose their sense of smell, the food has to become much spicier; and when they lose their sense of taste too, the restaurant survives by offering people food that has an interesting texture, or which makes an interesting sound when eaten. It might not sound particularly thrilling, but it suggests that writer Kim Fupz Aakeson has given a certain amount of thought to what the real-life repercussions would be for a disease that affects people so fundamentally, and how to present those problems in a thought-provoking way.
The film also benefits from a (slightly contrived) device that sees people experience a burst of extreme emotion immediately before they lose one of their senses, as a side-effect of the disease. The nature of this emotion varies: sometimes it's euphoria and joy, but sometimes it's depression or anger. The device leads to the movie's quieter periods being regularly punctuated by moments of high drama, enabling some painful revelations about both of the lead characters that help to add substantial depth and shade to their personalities, and to the pair's relationship.
Interspersed between the film's scenes are some flashy montages narrated by an unseen character who muses on the nature of humanity and human relationships, and on the importance of senses as our conduit to experiencing the world. Occasionally these segments get a bit cod-philosophical, and address the film's themes in a slightly too on-the-nose manner, but they make for a refreshing (and visually interesting) break from the rest of the action.
In conclusion, then, this is an interesting and thought-provoking little film that takes a subject that could come off as depressing and imbues it with a certain sense of wonder and hope. If there's any core message to the film, it's that life goes on; that humanity finds a way; and that the pleasure and pain of our relationships is more important to us than any tangible sensations. That it manages to convey this message through blending a big sci-fi idea and a very grounded, personal story is to its credit. Even if you don't think of yourself as a fan of science-fiction, Perfect Sense could change your mind.
Ravi Nijjar
It's perhaps a little perverse to complain that a biopic gets too close to the character of the person that it's about. But that's my main problem with The Iron Lady: a film about the life of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher that relies far too heavily on a fictionalised account of what the filmmakers think Thatcher might have been like in private, at the expense of giving us any great insight into her public and political career.
Framed by present-day scenes that show an elderly Thatcher reflecting on her life, the film immediately made me feel uncomfortable by portraying her as extremely disoriented, suffering from severe dementia and haunted by hallucinations of her dead husband, Denis. Whilst we know that Thatcher did suffer from this kind of illness towards the end of her life, the way it's depicted here - and the extent to which it affects her - feels like it's been completely invented by director Phyllida Lloyd and writer Abi Morgan.
It's suggested that Thatcher has trouble distinguishing the past from the present, hears voices, sees 'ghosts', doesn't remember that her children are now grown-up, and generally behaves like an out-of-touch and mentally-ill old woman. Whilst it's possible that this was true in her later years, these aren't details that were ever made public about Thatcher - and it immediately starts to ring warning bells that the filmmakers might be letting their dramatic licence get in the way of a faithful biopic.
Because it's not as though there isn't enough meat in Thatcher's life story to make for a good movie without having to invent things. As Britain's first female Prime Minister, she oversaw such crucial political events as the miners' strikes, the Brixton riots, the Falklands war and the poll tax - as well as making waves in her own party to such an extent that she ultimately triggered a leadership contest whilst she was still in office. But sadly, much of this is skipped over far too quickly, almost as an afterthought .
And when these matters are finally given a bit of screentime, they're beset by minor errors and a lack of correct chronology that further obscures the most important events of her premiership for anyone who might be hoping to learn about them. There's also a frustrating lack of detail that leaves many significant episodes of Thatcher's life unresolved: for example, despite finishing its account of her career with the leadership contest that ultimately deposed her, we're never actually told the final outcome of that contest - and we barely get to see her successor, John Major, depicted in the film at all.
So what are the film's redeeming features? Well, despite the weaknesses in the script that I've already touched upon, the movie is almost - but not quite - saved by some fine performances from all of its leads. Most notably, of course, Meryl Streep completely transforms herself to play an uncannily convincing version of Thatcher that manages to reign itself in from the exaggerated hyperbole that could so easily have accompanied the role. Rather than trying to do a straight impersonation of Thatcher, Streep instead gives us a very believable impression of her, and effectively turns her into a three-dimensional person (rather than a caricature) through some unexpectedly human touches.
Of course, it's easiest to compare Streep to the genuine article during the scenes that focus on actual recorded events (which the actress presumably studied to prepare for the role). But it's also surprising to note just how realistic the more private scenes feel, too, especially when it comes to her interactions with her family. Whilst I've already stated my problems with including so much invented personal detail in the film, Streep almost manages to sell us on it through the strength of her performance alone.
And the supporting cast is excellent, too: Thatcher's husband Denis is played wonderfully by Jim Broadbent, who strikes a daring balance between absurd buffoonery and disturbing darkness - especially during the scenes in which he appears to his widow in spectral form. In these scenes, Broadbent manages to offset Denis' goofy charm with a more sinister side, hinting at a more complex character than most audiences will imagine from the man's public appearances in real life.
And Olivia Coleman (perhaps best known as Sophie from Channel 4's 'Peep Show') is also excellent as Carol Thatcher, bringing some heartfelt angst to the scenes in which she deals with her mother's illness, but without ever pushing things so far that they become saccharine or overly sentimental. Add a couple of scene-stealing cameos from the likes of Richard E. Grant (as Michael Heseltine, which turns out to be an inspired choice), and you have a truly impressive cast that almost manages to overcome the film's other problems.
Almost. Because no matter how good the cast is, they can't quite outweigh the sense that this dramatisation of Thatcher's autumn years leans too heavily on invented scenarios and imagined dialogue, and doesn't give enough credence to the real-life events that were so critical to her success as a politician and her management of the UK. I was no fan of Thatcher's politics, but she was undeniably one of the most important British political figures of the 20th century - and from a historical point of view, it simply doesn't feel as though this film does her justice.
The Movie:
This TV movie usually doesn't get a fair deal and is not that popular, however I found it enjoyable. Granted, it's not Morecambe and Wise at their very best however it has funny moments, Eric and Ernie still have that magic touch even if the story is a little slow at first. This is Morecambe and Wise's last work on television together and as they walk off to their next gig they are still joking until the very end.
The DVD:
The picture quality is good. Shot on video tape, I didn't notice any video drop outs or any other problems. However this DVD has no menu or chapter points.
This site uses cookies.
More details in our privacy policy