Change Your Image
ben-345-739716
Reviews
Mary Queen of Scots (2018)
Glenda & Vanessa did it better
In the 70s when I was quite young I adored the romantic sweep of the Jackson/Redgrave Mary Queen of Scots with its is brilliant tear-jerking John Barry score. Later I realised it was not a great film, but it does always have movement and conflict on the screen - mad kings galloping, Queens shouting, lutes getting broken. It was pretty unhistorical but at least it attempted an answer to the glaring enigma of Mary's life, the colossal failure of judgement that blights any attempt to portray her as a rational sympathetic person - why did she marry Bothwell just weeks after Darnley's murder? - by depicting a previous romantic relationship between the two of them, prior to the murder (for which there is at least some historical evidence) and showing Bothwell as a caddish charismatic Rhett Butler-like figure. Here there is none of that, and Bothwell is a particularly dour member of a platoon of black clad courtiers. It beggars belief that Mary allows him to rape her with her ladies in waiting standing outside. This makes a nonsense of all the feminist historical re-engineering that is done earlier in the film. But story and drama take second place to ideas here - this director was busy interpreting the script as she might with Shakespeare, but the trouble is this script was nowhere near ready to film. The structure is so slack, there is no exposition. Nothing has been set up before Mary is randomly washed up on the beach like Viola in Twelfth Night. Some positive points - personally, I had no problem with the race-blind casting. I liked the idea of Lord Randolph being black - it makes him an outsider and suitable emissary between the two courts. With Darnley I liked the fact that this time his father Lennox appears, pulling his strings. Whether Darnley was bisexual is certainly debatable, though the idea that he had to kill Rizzio to cover this up is a crude intervention. Saoirse Ronan has a fascinating face (not at all the 16th century idea of beauty though) and puts across the emotion despite some rather strained dialogue. And I did like the way Elizabeth was conceived, having to consciously give up her very gender, as she admits, to keep the Crown. Unfortunately Robbie is no Glenda Jackson, too pretty for a start, doesn't have the voice of a Queen. The whole point is that Mary should be the better-looking of the two. Too much time was spent on drone shots of Highland landscapes, spectacular but pretty recognisably wrong: Glencoe *was* not the scene of major incidents in Mary's life. The effect of these landscapes and the ruined castles (instead of the rennaisance elegance of Holyrood Palace) make it a Westeros version of history. The one battle scene at the bridge is at the wrong part of the story, too early, and based on a frankly crude suggestion of England funding an uprising by Moray. However having *one* battle is in fact an improvement on the 1973 film. What I can't understand is why both films skip so many well documented real adventures from Mary's life: her escape from Borthwick Castle disguised as a man, the showdown on Carberry Hill, imprisonment at Lochleven Castle and Island and escape again, the battle of Langside. There's enough real melodrama in Mary's life to make a mini series, not just a film. The enigma of Mary will always continue to fascinate, and if it fascinates you, go and see this film. But then go back to your DVD of the Hall Wallis production. (Hal Wallis, remember, was the producer. In the days when films had *one* producer, not a committee of them. One of his previous credits is Casablanca...)
Spectre (2015)
Great in parts but so patchy
This film has incredible mise en scene, tremendous command of the cinematic medium, a long-take opening to rival Touch of Evil, and breathtaking set design. It also has dingy cinematography that won't show up well on TV, an annoyingly hand-held camera style in some static two-shots, and, most frustratingly, a sadly weak story. The initial plot spring is Bond's urge to tie up a loose end left for him in a video message by the late M (Judi Dench). This is not really enough. It's not really a mission – since she's already dead she's not in dire peril any more. This takes him to Mexico, then Rome, then Austria. He's getting involved in one thing after another, people are trying to kill him and he's running away, but he's not really seeking a fixed objective, just following little clues. The clues do of course help him penetrate the villain's evil lair - as if, as in the old days, this was key to saving the free world. There are tremendous car chases in deserted nighttime cities (Rome and London), yet another snow scene (a vertically- boarded barn that appeared first in OHMSO and then again, to the same design in The Living Daylights, has been rebuilt again here, and is again knocked down), and it all looks and sounds tremendous. There are some great sound effects – we have a train fight much improved by natural sounds and no music. In amongst all this, there are also various scenes that seem just plain odd. There is an elderly baddie-with-regrets in a derelict lakeside house in Austria, where every room is equipped with internal CCTV cameras that look like those in a corner shop to protect the sweets. Monica Bellucci's celebrated senior 'Bond girl' moment seems to be a character who (in looks, clothes and plot purpose) merely reprises Mrs Beckerman in The Italian Job; I was reminded of Michael Caine's mock reproachful 'And you in your widow's weeds,' as he undresses her. Bond's longterm leading lady, Lea Sedoux, is apparently an expert psychiatrist with a very expensive private practise (on top of a mountain) yet she turns out to be unable to handle a few glasses of wine. This was odd, as there is usually plenty of drinking and very little drunkenness in these films. Even stranger, Bond does not take advantage of her when she drops off to sleep. Instead he starts talking to a mouse. This is about the dullest moment of the film
The dialogue is too spare, not funny enough. Some lines, I'm sure, are word for word retreads from Bond's previous outings, like 'Psychiatric wards are full of visionaries', and the Villain's ubiquitous 'Shall we?' which always means 'Walk this way, Mr Bond, poke your head even deeper into the lion's mouth.' There is a supposedly surprising twist about how old arch enemies can turn out to be childhood friends or family under the skin - a tired plot device, this reminded me of TV series such as Dr Who or Sherlock (there's a casting connection with the latter.) Christoph Waltz is of course excellent though he has to make up, with charm and great timing, for the shortcomings of the dialogue - Tarantino's flowery language serves him better. For most of the story, Bond is going rogue. This has happened before, and a prolonged period of disloyalty to his own organisation can retain our sympathy if we can see he has a good reason why. But here there is no obvious motivation, so audience interest suffers. Ultimately circumstances come to Bond's rescue: Spectre has penetrated the Secret Service. A lot more could have been done with that idea, but it seems to have been 'bolted on' late in the day - so that, in the climax, while Bond is running through a ruin looking for the leading lady, it's left to the new M and Q to save the world through their fighting and computer skills. The final scene is the most improbable of all – Bond has reclaimed his Aston Martin DB5 from Q's workshop, where it has been renovated for the umpteenth time with public money. He then drives away down a Whitehall so deserted I can only assume a plague has struck London, or else the English Tourist Board are using this film as the main plank of a misleading marketing campaign aimed at Americans... It's a beautiful shot, though. This is one of the most British of Bond films - so I wish I could have liked it more.
Cul-de-sac (1966)
All your nightmares - with laughs
A totally far fetched situation is made utterly credible by the sheer craft of the filming - from the first scene where the Morris Minor collapses on its suspension every time Dickie sits down again - and the meticulous attention to detail in performances, dialogue and setting. Lionel Stander (like a Spaghetti Western thug) invades the home of George and Theresa, and whilst of course George is a wimp and possibly impotent too, as a middle class, middle aged married man I can't help wondering what the hell *I* would do in that situation. And given Pleasance's superb performance, that brings out George's vulnerability, he had my sympathy (if not liking) all the way through. The playing is incredibly naturalistic, and I suspect there may be some improvisation there, particularly in that exceptionally long shot beach scene (a remarkably long take for a dialogue scene shot out of doors in England). The language is very natural, the conversation follows its own course, as is so often the way when people are drunk. Dorleac is absolutely gorgeous, playing straight into the camera (it stands in for the bedroom mirror) as she puts on her dress and makeup, and the tragedy of her loss - her early death - shines through with every breath she takes. And another star of the film is Lindisfarne Castle. What stunned me a few years ago when I was in Northumberland is that you can go over to Holy Island (tides permitting) and then you'll see the iconic outline of the Castle, then you climb up to it (up slopes much too steep to really push a Morris Minor!)and virtually every room is unchanged from the film. You still the big oak settle by the kitchen fireplace, you still see the curly wood posts on the bed, and those stairs with the column at the top, and lots of other places. Even settings that look like studio scenes are in fact real rooms you can see. There's nothing about the film in the displays in the castle though. Obviously this is not a movie that appeals to most National Trust members. That, I would say, is their loss. This has got to be one of the top ten best British films.
Fifty Shades of Grey (2015)
A two hour trailer
I have never seen such a lifeless, underwritten script make it to the screen, let alone with such a budget. A slow build up, I was expecting, but where was the suspense? This is a story about sex and yet there was no obvious reason why they would have sex. It was all mechanistic tease, no enjoyment, no orgasms. When Christian finally gets Anastasia in his Playroom he doesn't seem to enjoy himself anymore than when they did it 'vanilla' style. There could have been so much more detail here, so much more characterisation - we can assume that Gray can only orgasm in a bondage situation, but where was the evidence? Think of 'Some Like it Hot', with Tony Curtis feigning lack of interest while Marilyn Monroe lies on top of him - and that was a far sexier film. I like this director's work - her film about John Lennon was funny and poignant - but this script was almost unfilmable. The depressing thought is, and this evidence proves it, that box office failure was inconceivable, however bad the end result. Dakota Johnson does her best and brings some humour and vulnerability to the role, and manages to make the abrupt changes of mind (mostly) believable, despite minimal support from the dialogue. But Jamie Dornan is just pleasant, a nice looking boy like you might find waiting at your table in a Dublin restaurant. Totally miscast, too young, merely eye candy. (Reminded me of George Lazenby in On Her Majesty's Secret Service. But that was a movie with a *story*.) Meanwhile, if you want the eye candy then there's plenty of pics of Mr Dornan available on the web in various stages of undress. There's plenty of pics, and indeed films, where you can see people having sex and giving a damn sight better impression of enjoying it. Save your money. Please.
Kajaki (2014)
A *war* film (not a Sunday afternoon round the telly war film)
Incredibly tough and gritty film, the least glamorous war film I've ever seen, but the portrait of a group of men coping with the most horrendous suffering - because they're all in it together - is something that utterly transcends the banal clichés of the form (cliches that we glimpse in the early scenes, the familiar rookie arriving and having everything explained, the safe and cleanly photographed long distance fire fight), and raises it to an extra level. Their patience is almost Christlike; the 'Happy Birthday' scene is something totally unlike anything else I've ever seen in a British movie. (I can only compare it with some of the old Polish films about the Warsaw uprising - but this is funnier!) Brilliant, brave and grimly funny. I took my sixteen year old son - this should be compulsory viewing for kids of the video game generation, specially if they're thinking of any kind of uniformed career. A hundred times better than such recent fare as 'Lone Survivor' or 'Fury' - I can't recommend this enough.
Matka Joanna od Aniolów (1961)
Bleakly beautiful
A slow-burn horror for the imagination, atmospheric and superbly acted, the players get more expression from their eyes than I've seen in any film since the silent days. Yet the voices of the 'devils' as they speak through Mother Joanna are all scarily differentiated. A great setting, empty and expressionist, which I believe was a rubbish tip or an old quarry near Lodz. The convent set was, like Black Narcissus, entirely a studio construction. I can't remember the last time I saw such crisp pellucid black and white photography. In plot terms, this is a sequel to Ken Russell's The Devils, near the beginning we see the stake where Grandier (his name changed to something a bit more Polish-sounding) had been burnt. There are no more burnings in this film, but the shadow of the stake overhangs the action, underlining that even when a story ends, the characters go on. As they will go on in your mind after you've watched this film. You'll talk about it - What will happen to them next?