Review : The Proposal

The Proposal : A pushy boss forces her young assistant to marry her in order to keep her Visa status in the U.S. and avoid deportation to Canada.

I would say when talking about this particular film is that it is definitely a directors cut which is definitively versatile and different to the average viewer who watches it. It can also be viewed as a  charming romantic comedy with a much talked-about scene in which the leads, both naked, accidentally crash into and fall down on top of each other. There's nothing like two naked bodies slapping together!

But since it's rated PG, all that's shown is a tumble of skin. There's also plenty of innuendo, as well as couple of passionate kisses and a comical scene featuring a flabby exotic dancer in a G-string. So this film is allowed to get away with a lot of things under a minor note of warning.

This was an interesting one to sit down and watch because my mood from starting this and my mood when it finished were two very different moods. It's very much like my mood towards 'A Dangerous Method' I didn't like nor dislike it, I just thought it was very weird and strange. With this I neither liked it or disliked it, just thought 'you know, it's ok'. In some cases and ok-ish type film is all you need to get you through an evening on Movie night! 

What on my thoughts as to why I feel this way about the film? Well, part of the reason is to do with the pacing of it and the content it has, it's not all that fulfilling or exciting in moments of dire situation or providing gripping drama. It's humorous to some extent but not laugh out loud funny, it is just simply a film which is dynamically cut and the overall feel of it is that of a type of definitively charming romantic comedy. 

There's nothing original about an uptight career woman who needs some lovin' falling for her gorgeous, put-upon assistant. But Bullock and Reynolds have a breezy chemistry that most on-screen couples hardly ever or never achieve. 

They're a pretty fine match it has to be said, and I'd go as far as to say they are both as good as each other and bang on par. They are equally believable as boss-and-subordinate as they are as reluctant lovers. Both have finely honed comedy skills, and they're bolstered by scene-stealing supporting co-stars who add to all that.

I wouldn't say there's a special spice in this which sort of jazzes the whole film up in terms of quality but perspective wise, the film is just okay. One's expectations can be quite low of a film and they think 'Oh that's not going to be very good' and then you go and see it and think 'It was ok and not as bad as I thought it would be'. 

In hindsight I think your stepping into the unknown when the film starts and then you warm to it throughout the course of it's lets face it slow pacing. Things could step up a notch for a film, which isn't far off from just over an hour and a half, by the end of it you feel that it was okay and nothing special. 

The directing is good to some technique that in some ways can be seen as dynamically interesting and the director showing diversity and interesting perspectives in the way she wants a scene shot but overall it doesn't help matters that the overall enjoyment of it is one of those 'romantic pop corn flicks'.

Perfect for Valentine's Day!

6/10!

Next Review : The Big Wedding.

Review : A Dangerous Method

A Dangerous Method : A look at how the intense relationship between Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud gives birth to psychoanalysis.

A Dangerous Method, it's been a while since I first saw this. I first saw this two years ago and it wasn't by choice. 

It was at a friends Halloween party (I know, bizarre) and my friend had all these 'scary' films which were meant to be 'scary' and we got board watching one of the 'scary' films and anyway we all said to my friend who was hosting the party 'can you get the worst film you've ever seen and put it on' so he did he got out 'A Dangerous Method' and we sat down and I watched the whole thing, some of the others fell asleep watching it because it was ten to 2 in the morning that we started watching it an attempt to do an all nighter but anyway point is. I stayed up to watch this and thought that it was a very weird film, with a lot of weird characters doing lots of weird things and the theories in it didn't seem to make much sense first time around watching it.

In it's simplest I enjoyed it, but probably would of enjoyed it a lot more if I understood it better, which is something I'm too committed to be doing any time soon it has to be said. This film is a tricky one to comprehend it has to be said so I'd put that out there as a word of warning that if you watch this film you are certainly going to develop your own views upon it, but feel quite uncomfortable or awkward watching it. This film is a challenge to watch all the way through without feeling slighting out of the typical comfort zone when it comes to watching a film.

Above all, I just wasn't entertained watching this. I didn't feel entertained, normally one watches a film for fulfilling that nourishment of entertainment however this never appeared to be the case when watching 'Dangerous Method' at all. After watching it the first time around I felt 'this isn't entertainment, this is strange.' and I was right, funnily enough.

It's a puzzling and problematic film amongst all the odds and is certainly not for children, I doubt even some viewers at the age of 16 or 17 will understand this. It is portrayed as a smart adult drama about Carl Jung, Sigmund Freud, and the early days of psychoanalysis and deals with frank sexual issues, an extramarital affair, and S&M. 

Keira Knightley is topless in this, and there are a couple of pretty graphic sex scenes in the film which adds to the weirdness of it. Scenes of a patient throwing tantrums and having seizures can be viewed as being frightening. 

Swearing is infrequent but includes "f**k," and characters often drink and smoke socially, including Freud's ever-present cigar. Given the film's subject matter and tendency toward talkiness, it's unlikely that teens will be interested or will want to understand, unless they're drawn to cult director David Cronenberg, who's best known for his horror and gangster films.

The storyline to 'Dangerous Method' is the setting is 1904, a sexually hysterical Russian woman, Sabina Spielrein (Keira Knightley), who is quite a weird character it has to be said and she is put under the care of Dr. Carl Jung (Michael Fassbender). 

He eventually cures her of her frightening seizures and, drawing upon her own interest in psychiatry, makes her his assistant. Despite the fact that Jung is already married, his wife pregnant, he starts an affair with Sabina, wherein pleasure is derived from violence. 

Later, Jung meets his hero, Dr. Sigmund Freud (Viggo Mortensen), and though at first they pleasantly argue over opposing theories, they eventually have a falling out over Sabina's fate. Vincent Cassel provides another layer as an analyst getting treatment for his tendency to give in to pleasure impulses.

The problem at the time of the films release is that when it came out, viewers in this country were only judging it upon the graphic sexual nature of it when in my view that was wrong for it to be all about those scenes and weirdly enough other countries aren't to startled by it, which I find interesting. 

For Director David Cronenberg to explore issues surrounding the human body, it would seem ironic of me to think that in his later, more mature films, he explores the theme of identity. He shows identity in this and goes for very intimate and basic shots which I think kind of help the film when coming to do the final edit, because you don't want to over complicate things but you want it all there so that the audience can view the basic underlined scope to get the gist of what your trying to tell them and in turn for them to understand. 

An interesting fact about this particular film is, in order for it to get made it was provided funding by BRITISH FILM FUNDING, and BFI had something to do with it I think as well.

Overall, this film is weird. 5/10!

Next Review : The Proposal.

Review : 12 Rounds

12 Rounds : John Cera and Aiden Gillan in a Renny Harlin film - Detective Danny Fisher discovers his girlfriend has been kidnapped by a ex-con tied to Fisher's past, and he'll have to successfully complete 12 challenges in order to secure her safe release.

This film just pumps up the adrenaline, it's exciting, it has that thrill factor and the suspense to keep the interest of the viewer entertained, there isn't so much complexity to the story which I like it's kept basic and simple and it's very coherent to whoever watches it.

If you like big explosions and high tense action sequences then 12 Rounds is the film for you. I like how the film contains a continuos beat to it, as soon as the action starts you've got the proper peril and you understand 'okay he's got to do 12 challenges to save his girlfriend' - fine. Simple enough to understand, and it keeps you hooked, it keeps you going and the anticipation is there because you beg the question of what's coming up next.

And Renny Harlin 'The Director of Die Hard 2" is really good at making the straight forward turned up to 11 and really going for it. I think of him as a satisfactory director who is really good at what he does and making the audience engage with the action from the word 'GO' and fulfilling that to the extent of withholding from keeping the anticipation from the audience, its very forward and on going so there's no holding back from the action once it's starts. It's very coherent and entertaining to watch, as well as that you've got good pacy soundtrack to back that up as well as strong visual effects.

In terms of quality and originality the plot of this is basically a recycling of "Die Hard With a Vengance" I'm not shy to admit that, but in which a maniacal criminal gives a cop a series of orders that feel like part of a crazy static game but actually have a more specific intent than just sowing chaos and despair for the sake of it, anyone can watch a film which has lots of mindless explosions and lots of fighting and death, just watch the opening scene of Expendables 2 and you'll catch my drift, to actually give this storyline and plot an identity of being much more than what is is a constructive contributing factor which benefits action films in general no just this.

John Cena's dedicated tough-guy cop is adequate as an actor, Cena's a heck of a wrestler and Aiden Gillen brings a fevered energy to his role as the master manipulator bad guy, an arms dealer who has more in common with comic-book geniuses like The Joker than real arms traders. While 12 Rounds is well-made and energetic, it isn't unique enough to go a long distance, but in my opinion it doesn't need to, if you can get through it and enjoy it, that's what counts above all things. I'll give it a 6/10! Not a bad film at all.

Next Review : A Dangerous Method.

Review : Dead Poets Society

"Show me the heart unfettered by foolish dreams and I'll show you a happy man." - McAllister, 'Dead Poets Society'. 

Dead Poets Society : English teacher John Keating inspires his students to discover their love for poetry and seize the day.

Peter Weir creates a rather influential and educational back drop to what is at the heart of the film a modest drama of the time of the late 80's going into the late 90's. In the time period of which it came out 'Dead Poets Society' hits the bar for me as almost marking classified as a film of the golden years. The 90's I feel was the Golden Years of film because it's in the 90's films like 'The Shawshank Redemption', 'Pulp Fiction', 'Goodfellas' and 'The Green Mile' came out. 

All of those four examples are just a list of few of my all time favourite films from that period, Dead Poets Society has elements of raw good drama and light hearted moments for any viewer to grasp on to and really run with it and you can see various quirks and enthusiasms in it which make me as a viewer consider it to fit into the category of really great films, because in some ways it is a truly great film. 

It also allows me to consider the possibility of what I expect the film to be about, the film of many broad general perspectives drawn into one specific dynamic, when you watch it you'll understand my meaning and elaborate on it in your way. But my point being is that it's more than what it says on the tin, it's perspective and actually viewing it is what counts.

On general perspective, Dead Poets Society is a great film. In my view it was a very interesting film to watch with lots of narratives and broad perspectives and Robin Williams is superb in this, there are lots of credible memorable things about it which tend to stick out amongst all the odds. 

The Story goes that Painfully shy Todd Anderson has been sent to the school where his popular older brother was valedictorian. His room-mate, Neil, although exceedingly bright and popular, is very much under the thumb of his overbearing father. The two, along with their other friends, meet Professor Keating, their new English teacher, who tells them of the Dead Poets Society, and encourages them to go against the status quo. Each, in their own way, does this, and are changed for life. And getting at this specific underline of "He was their inspiration. He made their lives extraordinary." 

It only takes something to make something extraordinary and out of the ordinary and successful and whatever way you wish to put it. I really like the way the film is directed, I thought the film was very well directed and contained continuous within both time and continuity, clean cut editing and I just think what this film has to offer is not just a perspective on what is to be exhilarated in terms of your understanding behind the film itself but of the parsecs in life as well. 7/10!

Next Review : 12 Rounds.

Review: Slumdog Millionare

SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE : A Mumbai teen who grew up in the slums, becomes a contestant on the Indian version of "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?" He is arrested under suspicion of cheating, and while being interrogated, events from his life history are shown which explain why he knows the answers.

I think I go as far as to say the Slumdog Millionaire is regarded by most people as some of Danny Boyle's finest films, but Danny Boyle is a very credible film maker and a terrific director. He made films like : Shallow Grave, Trance, Train Spotting, 127 Hours etc.

I think the key to Slumdog's success is the uplifting agenda at the heart of it, it's a film which follows the life of this Mumbai teen who starts off with nothing and watch how he progresses and by the end is a success in his achievements the common thing with following stories like this one is it's about the interest value in what your film has got and expanding that and developing that into something for which an audience will enjoy. 

Another point to raise on the subject is as well as wanting the audience to feel anticipated, on that part Slumdog does that really well. It keeps you interested it never boars and the last few moments before he gets the final question right are the most nerve racking moments of the film.

I thought the film was very well advertised and it was in the advertising that assisted in taking the public eye by storm because this is a film, I feel an audience will be able to familiarise themselves with in great interest not just for the investment of going to see it for the purposes of entertainment factor but because an audience can invest in it. If that makes sense, no one watches a film because they need to, they do it because they want to. It's one of those films which is about how the film tells itself and what you as the viewer can make from that.

The film uses dazzling cinematography, intriguing editing, driving music and headlong momentum to explode with narrative force, stirring in a romance at the same time. For Danny Boyle, it is a personal achievement. He combines the suspense of a game show with the vision and energy of "City of God" and never stops striving.  8/10

Next Review : Dead Poets Society. 

Review : Starred Up

STARRED UP

Starred Up is a well-made British prison drama about a troubled teen who becomes old enough to enter the adult prison system - the clue lies within the title being a slang term for that transition. 

The film is extremely hard and unflinchingly realistic, containing violence and full-frontal male nudity. 

Characters fight fairly frequently, and sometimes the fights come to blows, with blood shown.  Language is extremely strong and constant, including multiple uses of the f word and the c word. So I think you can tell that this is not a film appropriate for children, maybe when there older they can give it a watch, but at a young age perhaps not.

So what's the story? Well it's about this teenager called Eric Love (Played by Jack O'Connell) who is no stranger to prison in the slightest, but now he's old enough to be transferred from youth prison to the real big house, or as I believe the term is called "starred up," as it's known in prison slang. Guarded and coiled and already with extensive prison experience under his belt, it's not long before Eric's explosive nature gets him in trouble.

If you've seen prison films such as 'The Shawshank Redemption' you'd be able to familiarise yourself with Prison life as a viewer, how life on inside where you have no contact with the outside world and the only people you've got for company are a load of hardened criminals and killers who'd stab you in the back as soon as look at you. Knowing all this, I tend to find this British prison drama very thrilling. The drama is very real and exaggerated and therefore goes over the limit because it can. 

I think as a viewer the way that this film is made is it's done because it wants to you understand prison life and to make you understand prison life and the extraordinary extreme lengths of it for instance this done in such a way like the director David Mackenzie exaggerating violence, In one fight, a character bites down on a man's crotch and stays there until the fight is over. And also a contrast is made between moments of quiet suttle scenes to concentrate on the story telling in a bit more detail.

In summery this a bold film to watch for which everything shot and every scene counts, it all sets off on a perfect pace and is overly well executed. 8/10

Next Review : Slumdog Millionaire. 

Review : Bird man

B I R D M A N

A washed up actor, who once played an iconic superhero, battles his ego and attempts to recover his family, his career and himself in the days leading up to the opening of a Broadway play.

Bird man is certainly a different type of film, especially for today's standards.

It's one of those hybrid films which has it's main plot and it's own ideals to it, but also has many other subject matters surrounding it. And a hybrid film is a film made up of different genres because there is elements of romance in there, action, adventure and thrill to name a few. 

I think by watching Bird man if you go into intending to get not much out of it then that's exactly what your going to get. This is something which your concentration must be focussed on at all times, where you pay attention to every detail not because you should but because you want to, that's what is clever abut Bird man it wants to interest you and you can't help but be interested in it. 

It's clear direction from director Alejandro González Iñárritu demonstrates and shows moral and diverse perspective which dares to be any other than ordinary. I think this is a good film to watch to gain an experience because we have the films which we all know are classics and we have a comfort zone of films we like, but this is worth seeing to get out of that comfort zone and to actually see this one person's perspective and it's different things for different people which I hope a general audience will enjoy. After all it would be dull if an audience went to the cinema to watch something they know they were going to enjoy. 

In the opening shot, the viewing point is what appears to be booster rockets from a space shuttle shooting up through the sky.

And that's all you need because then for the rest of the film to go from here up until the final scene is designed to look like one continuous shot. A single camera in long takes edited together to make it look like one-take, a similar technique which Alfred Hitchcock used to do in his films, one of the most clever perspective's a director could have is trying to get one over the audience.

1. So the story goes that Former cinema superhero Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) is mounting an ambitious Broadway production that he hopes will breathe new life into his stagnant career. It's a risky business  however what he hopes to achieve from is creative gamble is that he's a real artist and not just a washed-up movie star. As opening night approaches, a castmate is injured, forcing Riggan to hire an actor (Edward Norton) who is guaranteed to stir things up a bit.

   
   

   It is quite a long film it's 119 minutes in length so the film has amble time to cover a lot and it's tricky to have a plot this complex and how do you pitch that to an audience of people who are sitting in a cinema and have given up their time to come and watch your film? You need to communicate with the audience in such a way that you hope will create the connection you want in order to get the right reaction and make the experience of watching your film worth while.

   
   

   In my view, I would of probably enjoyed this better if I understood it better, I got the gist of what was going on but this was a bit of weird and complex film for me which shows ambitious and passionate perspective from a keen director who knows what he wants from his actors.

   
   

   6/10.

   
   

   Next Review : Starred Up.