Starring: Robert Downey Jr, Jude Law, Noomi Rapace
Director: Guy Ritchie
NOW that the hype over the TV series of Sherlock (the one with Benedict Cumberbatch, or Cumbercob if you’re from Nuneaton) is beginning to die down, it is worthwhile taking a look at the recent film.
Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law are back at it again, investigating super crimes by super villains. This time they’re up against the dreaded Moriarty, the Blofeld of the Holmes world.
What Downey Jr and Law brought to the first film, they bring again to the sequel. In Law, Downey Jr has found another collaborator and like his partnership with Gwyneth Paltrow in the Iron Man series, these two complement each other, bouncing off each other’s charisma.
And director, Guy Ritchie, is on fine form too, showing off his bravado with magnificent sets, shot in the same muted colour as his previous films.
Secondary cast members help us along our journey, this time with Swedish actress Noomi Rapace playing Gypsy girl Madam Simza Heron searching for her brother; Stephen Fry as Sherlock’s elder brother and statesman Mycroft; and Jared Harris as the evil Professor James Moriarty.
They all play to the backdrop of an impending war between France and Germany.
So the pieces are in place but does the action meet the hype?
The first film in this interpretation of Sherlock, did not grab me like it did other people, but I understood its popularity.
Game of Shadows opens with Sherlock running into old flame Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) but gets into trouble when he finds himself surrounded by hoodlums, under the pay of Moriarty.
This is the first of the well choreographed set-pieces, and they must be impressive. I say that because the action was going far too quickly to absorb it all in, so I couldn’t tell what was happening between each cut. All I was aware of was that Sherlock was able to despatch the four men he was fighting. I’m not against fast editing, so long as the eyes a chance to take it all in.
And unfortunately this set the tone for what happened throughout the rest of the film. Like the complex plot, the audience were forced to keep up with what was happening on screen. There was no chance to catch your breath and work out what was happening. Yes, the audience were swept along with action, but it was more frustrating than exciting.
And despite all the set-pieces, some of which were spectacular – the scene on the train is a terrific gambit – there was not enough observation, and a bit too much explosion, a case of bigger and better and the action was spectacular.
But it all detracted away from why we loved Sherlock Holmes in the first place, not enough detecting, too much fighting. It seemed as if we were watching a 19th century James Bond rather than our beloved super-sleuth.
Thursday 2 February 2012
The Woman In Black
Director: James Watkins
Starring: Daniel Radcliffe; Ciaran Hinds
THERE’S the old saying that less is more, and when it comes to The Woman In Black, that is certainly true.
The premise for star Daniel Radcliffe’s latest film is pure gothic – set at the end of the 19th century, solicitor Arthur Kipps (Radcliffe) is ordered to head to Northumberland to negotiate the sale of a derelict house.
The grieving solicitor (he lost his wife Stella in childbirth four years ago) is given this last chance to redeem himself in the eyes of his employer.
But on arrival in Northumberland he finds that the locals are not very welcoming and when he makes it known that he is there to negotiate the sale of the house, the villager are even less charming.
From the moment Kipps arrives at Eel Marsh House at the end of Nine Lives Causeway, the tradition of Hammer Horror comes alive.
The approach to the house is brilliantly atmospheric with an eerie, nauseous feeling as the cab makes it’s way along the path.
Then Kipps arrives at the house which appears like Edgar Allen Poe’s House of Usher – a sense of dread pervades the viewer.
Once inside Radcliffe sets about going over the paperwork but inevitably he gets distracted by the sounds of the brick body that he is trying to sell.
Be warned, despite being a 12A this is one of the most terrifying films for a long while. It is more than just jumpy, there are moments of pure horror which will cause psychological damage with children.
Director James Watkins has perfectly mastered the composition and style of the genre. With previous work Eden Lake behind him, he has once again proven to the suits that less is more.
Rocking chairs, freaky wind-up toys and exploding pipes add to the atmosphere. Then there’s the appearance of our monster.
Flashes of the Woman are all that is needed and we never really see her features until the very last moment.
But the true star is neither the Woman, nor Daniel Radcliffe, who is convincing as a subtle solicitor trying overcome his own demons, but that of Hammer Horror.
It is back to basics before they went down the road of lesbian vampires, and this feature shows they can make ‘em like they used to.
There are a few moments where the film loses it a bit, such as towards the climax where Kipps vows to make amends for past misdeeds, and the ending is bit clichéd.
But, armed with a great script by Jane Goldman, adapted from Susan Hill’s original book, with Watkins at the helm they have created a proper horror movie, and one that is not only jumpy but will linger long in the mind. You won’t look at a rocking chair in the same way again.
You can also see this review on Boolean Flix. Here's the link:
http://www.booleanflix.com/2012/02/02/the-woman-in-black/
Starring: Daniel Radcliffe; Ciaran Hinds
THERE’S the old saying that less is more, and when it comes to The Woman In Black, that is certainly true.
The premise for star Daniel Radcliffe’s latest film is pure gothic – set at the end of the 19th century, solicitor Arthur Kipps (Radcliffe) is ordered to head to Northumberland to negotiate the sale of a derelict house.
The grieving solicitor (he lost his wife Stella in childbirth four years ago) is given this last chance to redeem himself in the eyes of his employer.
But on arrival in Northumberland he finds that the locals are not very welcoming and when he makes it known that he is there to negotiate the sale of the house, the villager are even less charming.
From the moment Kipps arrives at Eel Marsh House at the end of Nine Lives Causeway, the tradition of Hammer Horror comes alive.
The approach to the house is brilliantly atmospheric with an eerie, nauseous feeling as the cab makes it’s way along the path.
Then Kipps arrives at the house which appears like Edgar Allen Poe’s House of Usher – a sense of dread pervades the viewer.
Once inside Radcliffe sets about going over the paperwork but inevitably he gets distracted by the sounds of the brick body that he is trying to sell.
Be warned, despite being a 12A this is one of the most terrifying films for a long while. It is more than just jumpy, there are moments of pure horror which will cause psychological damage with children.
Director James Watkins has perfectly mastered the composition and style of the genre. With previous work Eden Lake behind him, he has once again proven to the suits that less is more.
Rocking chairs, freaky wind-up toys and exploding pipes add to the atmosphere. Then there’s the appearance of our monster.
Flashes of the Woman are all that is needed and we never really see her features until the very last moment.
But the true star is neither the Woman, nor Daniel Radcliffe, who is convincing as a subtle solicitor trying overcome his own demons, but that of Hammer Horror.
It is back to basics before they went down the road of lesbian vampires, and this feature shows they can make ‘em like they used to.
There are a few moments where the film loses it a bit, such as towards the climax where Kipps vows to make amends for past misdeeds, and the ending is bit clichéd.
But, armed with a great script by Jane Goldman, adapted from Susan Hill’s original book, with Watkins at the helm they have created a proper horror movie, and one that is not only jumpy but will linger long in the mind. You won’t look at a rocking chair in the same way again.
You can also see this review on Boolean Flix. Here's the link:
http://www.booleanflix.com/2012/02/02/the-woman-in-black/
Saturday 7 January 2012
The Artist
Director: Michel Hazanavicius
Starring: Jean Dujardin, Bérénice Bejo
SOMETIMES all you can say is they don’t make ‘em like they used to – and The Artist proves that.
Superlatives have been thrown at this film with many tipping it for Oscars, others claiming that it is the greatest movie ever made.
Both those statements are a little premature but there’s no denying that Michel Hazanavicius’s is a tour de force but I will try not to harp on about how great it is rather than just describe it.
The film is a riches-to-rags tale about silent movie star George Valentin (Jean Dujardin) who refuses to adapt to the new technology of sound.
Opening with his latest film being screened to acclaimed response and rapturous applause, Valentin is a man who appears like a caricature of the era – handsome features, slick back hair and pencil moustache.
He is at the top of his game, he can command anything in Hollywood and no one can turn him down. He has fame, friends, a career and an adorable and loyal companion in his dog, Uggie, (seriously, just watch it for the dog). The only thing that’s wrong is the loveless marriage he is stuck in.
Aspiring actress Peppy Miller, played by the Argentinian wife of Hazanavicius, Bérénice Bejo, bumps into him and steals the show during a chance encounter outside the premier of his film, they meet again on set the next day where he gets her a part in his next film.
It is obvious the two are in love but the scrupulous Valentin is not going to let this fidelity get in the way of his marriage, no matter how terrible it is.
Inevitably the technology of sound comes along and changes everything and Valentin, a man who believes the innovation to be a fad becomes redundant while Miller, a woman who realises that people want to hear her, becomes a star.
When our two protagonists meet later on the stairs, she on the way up, he on the way down, we know exactly what it means and what will happen: she will be the most sought-after woman in town, he will plumb the depths of despair.
Knowing what is going to happen could turn people off, but Hazanavicius keeps us enchanted. Both he and Dujardin and Bejo know that less is more. The actors only have to raise an eyebrow, cast a glance, just move one muscle on their faces and the audience understands their thoughts. And Hazanavicius just has to angle the camera like so and that scene, that picture, tells a thousand words.
There are other scenes which linger in the mind – the climax is heart-clutching and edge-of-your-seat stuff, and another when Valentin sees his head reflected in a shop window over the top of a dinner jacket brings you to despair.
A refreshing take on an old tale, it is unmissable and Hazanavicius has made the glamour of Hollywood never look better and made today’s effects-laden films look superfluous. It is effortlessly warm and tender and despite harking from another age, its innovation could change the landscape of movies for the next few years.
Starring: Jean Dujardin, Bérénice Bejo
SOMETIMES all you can say is they don’t make ‘em like they used to – and The Artist proves that.
Superlatives have been thrown at this film with many tipping it for Oscars, others claiming that it is the greatest movie ever made.
Both those statements are a little premature but there’s no denying that Michel Hazanavicius’s is a tour de force but I will try not to harp on about how great it is rather than just describe it.
The film is a riches-to-rags tale about silent movie star George Valentin (Jean Dujardin) who refuses to adapt to the new technology of sound.
Opening with his latest film being screened to acclaimed response and rapturous applause, Valentin is a man who appears like a caricature of the era – handsome features, slick back hair and pencil moustache.
He is at the top of his game, he can command anything in Hollywood and no one can turn him down. He has fame, friends, a career and an adorable and loyal companion in his dog, Uggie, (seriously, just watch it for the dog). The only thing that’s wrong is the loveless marriage he is stuck in.
Aspiring actress Peppy Miller, played by the Argentinian wife of Hazanavicius, Bérénice Bejo, bumps into him and steals the show during a chance encounter outside the premier of his film, they meet again on set the next day where he gets her a part in his next film.
It is obvious the two are in love but the scrupulous Valentin is not going to let this fidelity get in the way of his marriage, no matter how terrible it is.
Inevitably the technology of sound comes along and changes everything and Valentin, a man who believes the innovation to be a fad becomes redundant while Miller, a woman who realises that people want to hear her, becomes a star.
When our two protagonists meet later on the stairs, she on the way up, he on the way down, we know exactly what it means and what will happen: she will be the most sought-after woman in town, he will plumb the depths of despair.
Knowing what is going to happen could turn people off, but Hazanavicius keeps us enchanted. Both he and Dujardin and Bejo know that less is more. The actors only have to raise an eyebrow, cast a glance, just move one muscle on their faces and the audience understands their thoughts. And Hazanavicius just has to angle the camera like so and that scene, that picture, tells a thousand words.
There are other scenes which linger in the mind – the climax is heart-clutching and edge-of-your-seat stuff, and another when Valentin sees his head reflected in a shop window over the top of a dinner jacket brings you to despair.
A refreshing take on an old tale, it is unmissable and Hazanavicius has made the glamour of Hollywood never look better and made today’s effects-laden films look superfluous. It is effortlessly warm and tender and despite harking from another age, its innovation could change the landscape of movies for the next few years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)