Film Review: The Painted Veil

Our resident film buff Renee A is chuffed with pretty landscapes and rebuffed by a truckload of cliches in The Painted Veil:

Well, first of all, let’s look at the things I liked about The Painted Veil:

1) It was pretty to look at – lots of sweeping shots of rural China at sunrise, lovely period costumes and attractive actors.
2) It had a fairly decent plot: British doctor travels to China to help fight against a cholera outbreak in a small Chinese village. Doctor brings along spoilt brat unfaithful wife who doesn’t love him and the two of them try to make the best of things.
3) It has Edward Norton in it.

And the things I didn’t like:
1). The lead characters were distinctly unlikeable and unsympathetic for most of the film.
2). Both lead actors stepped onto the set of this film and promptly forgot how to act. Naomi Watts and Edward Norton have done some very good things in their careers, but for some unfathomable reason they decided the best they could do for this movie was to act as though it was amateur play night at the local theatre.
3) From about halfway through the film, the plot begins to feel as though it’s a join the dots sort of affair. You can almost feel them ticking off the boxes as they go along. “Right, take spoilt brat wife along. Check. Find a convenient place for her to begin to redeem herself. Check. Have her fall in love with her husband. Check. Get them drunk at a convenient time after they’ve begun to sort out their issues and get them to have passionate sex. Check. Have something happen to one of them soon after this discovery of love that allows for maximum drama and tragedy. Check.”
4) The very last scene is unnecessary and a bit twee. It assumes the audience are incapable of individual thought and the ability to use their own imaginations. For a film that had some lovely subtle moments throughout, the complete lack of subtlety in the last five minutes makes you feel as though you’re being smacked in the head by a panicking director who doesn’t trust in the intelligence of his audience.

Despite my issues with it, I actually enjoyed watching this film. Well, most of it anyway. The first half of it is good. It’s all dreamy and pretty and sad. But slowly, as the film continued, I began to get the distinct impression I’d somehow ended up on the Hallmark Channel and I was about to see an ad for Dr Quinn, Medicine Woman. Which is disappointing, because it had the potential to be so much better.

Two out of five pretty Chinese sunsets.

By the way, despite having not bothered to write a review for it, I highly recommend Juno. It rocks.

Ed's note: please write one dear wench, I missed it at the flicks and my local video store smells like wee, so I haven't bothered to rent it out yet, but I feel I need to.....

Film Review: The Dark Knight

I have to eat my hat. Pity, cos it has little beads on it and I might choke. Our resident film buff Renee A reckons Heath Ledger's performance in The Dark Knight is worthy of the hype - and I'm truly glad the rave reviews aren't just posthumous pandering.....

I know the world has gone kind of Heath Ledger crazy of late and I’m sure I’m not the only one to have thought this is only because the Joker was his final complete performance. In fact, I think Kat mentioned somewhere in a previous post the annoyance of the hype about Mr Ledger. However, having just seen The Dark Knight, I can say with absolute conviction that the hype is deserved. Ledger creates a complicated and nuanced character without ever entering over-the-top land. His attention to detail – the mannerisms, the way he speaks, the hysterical laugh – makes for a terrifying performance. Right, now I’ve gotten that out of the way I can move on, because as brilliant as the Joker is, he is by no means the only good thing about this movie.
In 2005, Christopher Nolan (Memento, The Prestige) threw Batman Begins from left field. Nearly a decade earlier, the fourth in the movie franchise (Batman & Robin) appeared to have ended Batman’s run; and on a ridiculous note. So to have this mythic, achingly beautiful origin story appear, completely free of cheese, was a joyous surprise. With The Dark Knight, Nolan has again created a cheddar-free zone, but has amped up the action and replaced Katie Holmes with Maggie Gyllenhaal as Bruce Wayne’s love interest Rachel Dawes. Where Batman Begins dealt with Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) overcoming his fears and becoming Batman, this film deals with him becoming comfortable with Batman’s place within Gotham City and becoming willing to lose his ego and do what is needed. The strength in Nolan’s Batman films lies in his focus on the people within the story and the struggle of good people against the increasingly more prevalent bad guys.

What I most love about this film is that it weaves action sequences into the story (really well choreographed ones, might I add) without sacrificing character development and without resorting to buckets of blood and gore. Nothing turns me off a film faster than blood and guts (hence my aversion to horror movies or crime shows of any kind). Sure, there’s a lot of implied violence, especially when the Joker pops into the scene, but usually the camera cuts away before the Joker, ah, cuts away...(sorry).

I mentioned the strength of Ledger’s performance before. But the other performances are not to be sneezed at (I love that saying. Why would you sneeze at a bad performance? It makes no sense. But I digress). Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Gary Oldman, Aaron Eckhart and Maggie Gyllenhaal have much straighter dramatic roles than Ledger, but all give strong performances. Eckhart in particular is interesting to watch; his character Harvey Dent beginning the film as an absolute good guy and finishing up as, well, a not so good guy.

The bar was set high with Batman Begins. I’m not entirely sure if The Dark Knight has succeeded in reaching it (it will require a second and third viewing to be certain), but I’d say it is pretty damn close. 4 out of 5 crazy Joker giggles.

Film Review: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford

By guest reviewer, film-wench Renee A:

Usually I like watching movies about criminals about as much as I like listening to Celine Dion warble. But the criminal in question for this film is long dead and has a mythos surrounding him that made the concept seem mildly more interesting to me. Also, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (honestly, who thinks up these ridiculous titles? It takes longer to read the title than to watch the film!) has Brad Pitt in it. And let’s face it – Brad Pitt is hot (when not nanced up for such wastes of time as Troy and Legends of the Fall). He also, on occasion, acts rather well. I was further enticed by the trailer and by the fact that Andrew Dominik’s previous film (Chopper) had gotten some decent reviews. So, why not, I said to myself. (Yes, I often overanalyse whether or not I want to watch a film almost to the point of sucking the fun out of it. I can’t help it. I will make a promise that for all future reviews I won’t spend half the time justifying my decision to watch, and thus review, the movie in question). So, on to the review.

To say I enjoyed watching this film would be a lie. I found it impossible to connect to the characters, their actions or find anything to like in any of the events of the film. However, I suspect that this wasn’t really the point.

TAOJJBTCRF examines Jesse’s final descent into madness and shows the uneasy relationships he has with the members of his gang. I will give the movie a point or two for how well this is done – the acting is superb, particularly Pitt, Casey Affleck (as Robert Ford) and Sam Rockwell (as Ford’s brother), whose near hysterical retelling of family anecdotes at the dinner table while expecting Jesse to kill him at any moment was almost painful to watch. In fact, most of the characters looked as though they would happily jump off the screen and hide under my blanket at any moment, the threat (imagined and real) of Jesse is so great.

A heavy sense of dread permeates the film, helped by the slow pace and limited colour palette. The moments of actual violence happen sparingly, but the impact of each incident is heightened by the expectation that yet more violence could happen at any moment.

The film was incredibly unsettling and it left me with the unpleasant feeling that I needed to go and scrub my soul clean afterwards. However, it was mesmerising enough to keep me watching even as I was repulsed by it, so I suppose I shall say that I think it is worth watching. Even if it is just to see that Brad Pitt can still act.

Film Review: Atonement

By guest reviewer Renee A (the loveliest film-buff wench on the planet):

Despite the recent rush for promoting this movie on DVD in time for Mother’s Day (yes Blockbuster, I mean you), the sort of commercial bullshit that usually puts me off wanting to see a movie, I was rather looking forward to seeing this fillum. I hadn’t read the book, but the trailer and the people involved convinced me it was necessary to check it out. I felt some trepidation towards the inclusion of Keira Knightley in the cast – she has in the past given me the irritations, possibly due to the tendency of her omnipresent pout to take over any scene she’s in. But, while the pout was in full force for this film, I found that she was perfect for the role (probably because looking pouty worked for the character), and had fantastic chemistry with James McAvoy, a point that was crucial.

Without giving away too much of the plot, Atonement is about a love affair between Cecilia (Knightley) and Robbie (McAvoy)*, which is interrupted when Cecilia’s younger sister Briony (Saoirse Ronan) lets her childish imagination run away with her and dobs on Robbie for something he didn’t do. He gets sent to gaol, then to war.

The cinematography is stunning (with some beautiful symbolism that will be studied in Year 12 English for years to come) and a score that blends and weaves its way organically into each scene. The use of different points of view and jumps in time are done refreshingly well – if used badly these techniques can be clumsy, irritating and pretentious. In the hands of director Joe Wright they serve only to deepen the impact of the story.

Atonement is in turns passionate, beautiful, heartbreaking, depressing and hopeful. A day later I’m still feeling emotionally raw from the ending, which in my book is a good thing. And finally: bonus points for the best use of a naughty word I’ve ever seen – I dare you not to gasp when you realise what Briony is about to read in Robbie’s note.

I give it four out of five pouty Keira lips.

*Might I just take this opportunity to point out that their sex scene was the best I’ve seen in a movie for a long time. This is due to three main reasons: it was executed well, the chemistry between Knightley and McAvoy was spot on and the scene itself was so integral to the story, not, as with far too many movies these days, added for the extra interest a famous actress getting her kit off will garner.