Review: Catch-22

I'm having a hard time writing this review, as I think I'm in the minority who simply didn't get what the hype is all about?


Catch-22 is a 1970s war satirical comedy, created by the director behind The Graduate and based off the book by the same name. It follows a soldier who wishes to be declared insane so he can leave the military and escape the unjust chain of command, but the "catch" to this is that you have to be insane to fly into battle. To leave you must be insane, but to be insane you have to fight.


The film is a lot more than this however. Captain Yossarian is plagued by memories of a young officer killed in action, while everyone else around him seem utterly crazy themselves; from selling everyone's parachutes, to having men sliced in half, or even impersonating dead men.
I get satire, I really like Black Adder Goes Forth for example, but I was not expecting Catch-22's backwards, upside down, totally non-linear story structure. It disconnected me from the characters, and from most of the humour; I had no idea what was meant to be funny half the time, I think the first time I laughed was forty minutes in with Orson Welles character arriving on the scene!

I will say though, seeing real live World War Two machinery and aircraft taking off and flying was pretty amazing, and I won't say I didn't find several parts goofily funny. I certainly "got" the messages being thrown at me, but I simply couldn't engage with the choppy narrative structure. I've not read the book... I hear it is similarly "crazy".

Perhaps one should read the book first, or watch the film twice!

Review: Season of the Witch

Okay so "Nicolas Cage movie" is a genre of its own and perhaps I shouldn't have expected much from Season of the Witch... but really, this was the best they could do?

I like Nicolas Cage, in a nonsensical way, I also like Ron Perlman who's alongside him, and they are playing two outcast knights of the Church given the task of escorting a witch so she can stand trial. But is this woman really a witch? Is her innocence merely a façade of evil?
Yes.
The problem with this movie is that there's opportunity for character morality and development. We have five men escorting a woman who may, or may not, be evil and the cause behind the Black Plague. While there's disagreements, no one ever sides with her (not even Cage's character, who tries to kill her several times!) mostly they agree she cannot be trusted. It is made worse by the film opening with witches clearly turning evil and murdering people, removing almost all sense of doubt the film might try and establish later.
The film eventually runs out of this "padding" and has its climax with silly winged demons incinerating people, zombie priests and the line "We are going to need more holy water." Yep, I suppose the Plague wasn't caused by witches so much as demons of the Underworld.


There isn't much going for it, I'm sure actors like Perlman and Cage could have better chemistry than this. While I enjoyed Sorcerer's Apprentice because it was silly, Season of the Witch just feels predictable. Heck, even Black Death was better than this.


So yes, the combo of Perlman and Cage doesn't work as well as it should here, the plot is transparent and the climax uninspired. I'd look elsewhere!

Review: The Conversation

From legendary writer/director Francis Ford Coppola comes a morose and quiet thriller about an introverted but brilliant surveillance operative who finds himself looking too deeply into the sensitive case he is monitoring.

Gene Hackman excellently portrays Harry Caul, an undercover agent who bugs communications, records and monitors members of the public, a man who let's his career dominate all aspects of his life. As such, he is socially recluse and awkward, unable to express himself as his mind prefers to race with the recorded conversations of others rather than his own.
Paranoia plays heavily in the film also; Harry's expertise makes him wary of sharing any and all information with anyone, no matter how small. While this complete lack of feedback makes the film incredibly slow paced, Hackman's subtly and body language sell the image of a man tormented by his own talents.
While the story focuses around Harry's increasing fear for the lives of the individuals he his spying on, Coppola maintains a neutral pace, scarcely giving away many details until the end. Many may find the film critically flawed in its lack of information, but it is unique in its silent, drawn out scenes; making even the slightest sound become critical - as is Harry's profession - in turn adding great contrast whenever Harry's lively friends are around him.


Made me think of Hitchcock's Rear Window, only with sound rather than visuals. It is incredibly slow and likely not for everyone, but I enjoyed it as an example of subtle film-making... not much of that nowadays.

Review: Species 4

You are asking yourself... why, why would I do something so stupid as to watch this movie? (a movie you likely didn't know existed and/or prayed did not exist) Well, for perspective... for frame of reference, to remind myself what bad movies really are!

Species was an entertainingly stupid horror B-movie from 1995, its sequel was a horrible mess of overacting, while the third film was so dull, so mind-boggling that I call it "Species III: Give Small Pox a Chance", paraphrasing the lead character's ethics (it was that messed up).
Somehow someone scraped together the money for a fourth movie, and while it is at least more interesting than the third one (that's not saying much) it remains one of the most confusing, incoherent and miserable examples of storytelling I could imagine.
How you overcomplicate "female aliens disguised as beautiful women so they can breed" is beyond me, but this manages it within the first ten minutes. This is more like a werewolf tale; a woman made of human and alien DNA needs help before the monster inside her takes over. The plot leaves you utterly bamboozled; nothing makes sense, things simply happen for convenience, characters are irrational and without foundation. I can't even think why this film was made; it didn't even have the first film's basic sex appeal, it just drones on without purpose or self-belief.

It is hard to review something so bland and unmemorable. It may have had glimpses of credible visual effects, but the story, characters and narrative (even connections with the basic franchise) are completely non-existent, making it all distinctly irrelevant.


So yes, I wasted 90 minutes.

Additional Marshmallows: Our lead hero, "uncle" and creator of the alien, is played by Ben Cross who also played Spock's father Sarek in the 2009 Star Trek film.

Review: Attack the Block

As the tagline says, "Inner City Versus Outer Space", and you know what, I enjoyed this film.


Aliens are invading Earth once again, except this time they find themselves landing in one of London's council estates! They are huge, savage creatures with neon-glowing teeth, yet they meet their match when faced with England's very worst youths!
The film opens on November fifth, bonfire night, and immediately makes villains of our lead characters, who mug a young nurse before butchering an alien life form that crash lands. Pride quickly changes to fear as the aliens (and their drug boss) hunt them down relentlessly, and soon extreme situations could make heroes out of them.

There are a lot of alien movies out there, some of them work (District 9) others do not (Battle: Los Angeles), and this is somewhere in the middle. Attack doesn't shy away from showing us the monsters, which is great because they are quite cool to look at, and of course the setting is so unorthodox that it really does deserve some merit! If an alien attack happened in such a place... I'd bet these sorts of kids would fight back! It is fun to watch such a "versus match" unfold.


Yes, the sorts of characters may well be anti-heroes and quite fun, but I could understand some viewers finding them annoying; it is a social matter, but I think the film tries - in its simple way - to suggest they could be decent people deep down.
It is loaded with silly one-liners and pop culture references that will undoubtedly make it a time capsule of sorts, but it is an entertaining hour and a half!

Review: The Artist

I don't normally go hunting for Academy Award Winners... but even I must admit that The Artist is a pretty exceptional piece of craftsmanship.

One could argue that this is backwards thinking; why rejuvenate cinema nearly 100 years old? Well, the film itself explains why these little detours into the past are important.
The film's set in the late 1920s, where George Valentin is a massively successful, charismatic and confident Silent Film actor. But upon meeting an upcoming starlet called Peppy Millar, the advent of sound in cinema arrives, and while Peppy rises in fame and fortune, George's career comes crashing down around him.

The one crucial element I most enjoyed about The Artist - and the most unexpected - was it being about cinema at this game changing era, and how this Silent Film-style film actually implements the sound revelation so effectively. There's a dream sequence that works this message better than any dialogue or text screen ever could!
The film isn't so romantically hinged as posters might lead you to believe either. While George and Peppy have a relationship, it is vastly overshadowed by their careers turning tables on them; the story becomes bleak in the second act as George's pride begins to destroy him.


The underlying message though is the changing shape of cinema, and there is no greater example than the advent of sound. The Artist's existence may seem phony to many, but the fact that it is implemented at all and so accurately and uniquely, proves looking back is as valuable as looking forward.
You might be intimidated by the concept of "silence", but these films always have musical accompaniment (and I might add that this film breaks the rules once or twice) and sure, it might be the quietest experience you've had in the cinema, but you'd be surprised how endearing things can be when stripped of all their distractions.
Overall, it was definitely a good experience, I can't think of many things wrong with it!

Review: The Muppets

Nostalgic Nonsense!


I didn't know what to expect going in to The Muppets, I have seen the Muppet's Christmas Carol and Treasure Island (I enjoyed those a great deal) but this movie is entirely original material based around the old Muppet Show on television.

Kermit the Frog and co have split up after their old studio and theatre closed down, and the land is about to be given to a ruthless oil tycoon, this devastating news forces their "number one fan" Walter (also a muppet) to bring them back together and make one million dollars to save the studio.
The movie heavily relies on nostalgia of the original TV show, and fans who grew up with it will enjoy the concept the most! Certainly when the Muppets are brought together again is when the fun begins; a landslide of self-conscious gags, such as poking fun at people who would even watch such nonsense. It even laughs at its own sporadic music numbers! (that's something I approve of, with the little love I have for musicals)

While all of our favourite characters return in great "post-fame" scenarios (Animal at an anger management clinic, great stuff) the three new characters... Walter and his human brother Gary (... I... what even happened in that family...?) and Gary's girlfriend Mary, were almost needless. While Walter fought for acceptance from his... weird family situation... the two humans go from in-your-face music numbers, to hiding in the background so the Muppets can get on with the story. I hate to say it, but Amy Adams did well in Enchanted, but she was just bewildering here.


The story was paper thin (perhaps deliberately so, since it makes fun of the fact!) as were the new characters, but the humour was classic and the film has a big happy vibe throughout.

Additional Marshmallows: The Muppets did indeed win an award at the 2011 Academy Awards for Best Original Song "Man or Muppet". Competition was slim, and I know I was perplexed while watching that song!

Review: Into the Wild

Based off a true story that was also novelised, Into the Wild tells the story of Chris McCandless and his very personal endeavour to escape society and the suffocation of modern life.
Upon graduating with excellent grades, Chris abandons the parents he had grown to despise and takes to the road without a word. Under the alias Alexander Supertramp, he travels across America's wilderness, hitch-hiking and sleeping rough, meeting other wayward souls who both influence him and are affected by his free thinking manner.
This film will likely spark a lot of debate between those who have seen it; on the one hand, freedom from the systematic and the mundane is primal and longed for by all, but on the other hand... one might see Chris' decisions and outlook on life quite selfish.

This adaptation is incredibly well made (asides maybe being a little too long) photographing the wilderness beautifully while paced delicately to invoke both yearning and concern. The characters, from lead roles and bit parts, are real and the interactions are heartfelt - often bleak. Chris' endless spirit and self-confidence is infectious; making you want to live each day the way you want to.
As further testimony, my only problem with it is how genuine Chris' conviction is... to the point where he becomes unlikeable. While his motivations are just, the ends he is prepared to go to, and with the people he abandons, rapidly feel foolish. 


But, no one is perfect, and the story is a "yin and yang" of this gorgeous independence and bleak loneliness. It is a great film about living, the world which we live in, and some of the social absurdities we take for granted.

Additional Marshmallows: The film is directed by actor Sean Penn, proving to me at least that he is very competent behind the camera!

Review: Everything Must Go

Having surprisingly enjoyed Will Ferrell's Stranger than Fiction much more than I could have imagined, I was intrigued to see a trailer for another low-key, thoughtful film from him. Everything Must Go is certainly well acted through and through, but it was very morose, and eventually felt like one of those films you don't exactly "enjoy".
Ferrell plays an every man who has everything, only to lose his job, his car, his wife and his home in a single day. This is where the film begins, with Ferrell living on his front lawn with his scattered belongings around him. With only a new neighbour and a boy to keep him company, he procrastinates and kills time hopelessly, not willing to face the reality life has given him.

While I had no preconceptions (I wasn't expecting a comedy either) I was surprised how mellow it was as a whole experience; very little happens as our perspective is completely settled with an introverted individual. The best dialogue comes between Ferrell and Christopher Jordan Wallace playing the young boy, everything is downplayed, quiet, and jokes are left to linger, bringing chuckles rather than laughs.
Ferrell's character is in a dark time in his life, and I wasn't aware of this bleaker tone, but what it sets out to achieve it achieves in abundance. A very sombre, honest and simple story about life and picking yourself up after disaster.
Not exactly a film for me, but it is well made and worth a watch.

Review: Fahrenheit 451

As the film explains, Fahrenheit 451 is the temperature in which book paper burns, and this 1960s film (based off the book by Ray Bradbury) tells of a near future where books are outlawed and destroyed.

In this future, fire fighters no longer put out fires, “Firemen” are now a zealous law enforcement department “451”, given the whereabouts of books by anonymous public tips, and raid the target houses, instantly burning the books they find. The film follows a fireman who meets a young teacher, and is inspired to read one of the books and question the ethics society has adopted.

While the film has dated in places, there is still an eerie, unsettling mood throughout; it feels dreamlike, more than Lucas' THX because of its near-future settings, you can imagine this sort of society forming over the next twenty years. It is a restricted, simplified lifestyle where television controls all forms of entertainment. One of the most stinging scenes involves our hero's wife playing an interactive television programme (as if Xbox Kinect and Facebook combined forces) and later she and her friends are described as being “zombies, not living but just killing time”.

Some of the concepts involved are questionable, there's an unsettling medical procedure (stressing society's dependence upon coloured pills) midway through the film  that is virtually glanced over, and “fireproof housing” is not fully explained as we clearly see a lot of wood paneling.

But, ignoring some 60s trappings, I found this film remarkably arresting, mostly as an eerily accurate vision of the future.

Additional Marshmallows: The opening credits are spoken rather than written on the screen – in keeping with the story.