A new exhibition at the Ulster Museum shows Queen Elizabeth II in a series of portraits.  This display is to mark her Diamond Jubilee as the Queen of England on the throne.  In collaboration with the National Portrait Gallery, the touring collection is an eclectic mix that ranges from rare, intimate photographs to world famous art pieces. 

BY LAURA SHEARER

What seems like a small gallery space is thronged with images, bold and minimalist, powerful and delighting. Divided into sections of her reign, starting in the 1950s and ranging to the present day, each portrait offers a stunning and often very personal interpretation of the famous lady.

In photography, the formality of her life is met with jarringly simple posed family group shots.  Shining examples of rare photos include the unseen moments caught on camera as she takes shelter from the rain, unknown to the public on the balcony above her.

Full of heart are the interpretations of her iconic image, from the set of four Warhol prints to the poster art of the Sex Pistols album cover God Save the Queen.  Modern masterpieces featured incorporate an odd 3D image that watches you walk by, a multi-media figure bust and the oil on canvas image made up of hundreds of miniature portraits of Princess Diana.  Humility is explored with delicate painting skills, and where new media art offers styles that will divide opinions, rest assured there is something to suit every palate.

These images are familiar all over the world, but are presented in a way that is original and extremely pleasurable. The young at heart meet with the old to marvel at the presence of an iconic woman.  This is not an appreciation of her achievements, nor does any political diversion arrest the vision; this is the life of a queen through images.

The Queen: Art & Image is free and on show to the public in the Ulster Museum until 15 January 2012.

Finally Disney made the wise decision to return this lovable classic to the distribution lists. Available to all, re-master

BY LAURA SHEARER

The story of Simba the lion cub has been remarked upon as one of the greatest Disney narratives of all time. Likened to that of Shakespeare’s Hamlet and widely discussed the world over for its ease of appeal, The Lion King is unlike the average Disney where the Princess gets her well deserved prince and they all live happily ever after. Family betrayal, a plot to overthrow the king, murder, and revenge are unlikely central themes for a children’s tale, but in 1994 The Lion King made history with its first and only animation to date that involves absolutely no human characters.

In Disney’s peak of fine tuned animation that adapted culturally anywhere, The Lion King broke the rule book with its conceptually strange characters from the Serengeti. Culturally specific and universally applicable, how they managed that will always be part of the magic. Mind boggling as it is trying to condemn Disney for flaws, few critics at the time could find any fault, so this time round it’s equally as difficult to seek out anything unfavourable. The Lion King is one of Disney’s most untouchable gems.

Toe tapping musical numbers by Elton John and Tim Rice, accompanied by a score from none other than Hans Zimmer, won the feature two Oscars and two Grammys. The award winning music is matched mirrored by an unforgettable voice cast that power their way through the impeccable timing and characterisation. The visuals are something to marvel at, but all of these elements combined equate to a filmic wonder that will bring tears to your eyes and warmth to your heart.

Take advantage of this re-release, as often as they come with Disney, this is a film particularly worthy of the status and hype. Seeing it on the big screen again, as I did as a child years ago, I was again overwhelmed by just how extraordinary The Lion King is. Truth to be told, The Lion King rightfully deserves the wide eyed wonder, excitement and enjoyment of audiences in line for a second chance delight.

Not another Holocaust drama? Kristen Scott Thomas (The English Patient, I’ve Loved You So Long) stars in this thought provoking new Holocaust drama centred on the events of 1942 Paris. 

BY LAURA SHEARER

Scott Thomas plays Julia, a journalist in present day Paris, who finds herself more deeply involved in the research she has undertaken for an article than perhaps she would have hoped.  Delving into unrecorded history Julia tries to unravel the French scandal of the notorious Vel’ d’Hiv Roundup in which over 13,000 Jewish French citizens were mass arrested by a Nazi decree.  The more Julia finds out, the stranger her research becomes and her life bizarrely becomes entwined with a young girl Sarah whose family was torn apart by the 1942 roundup.

In the same vein as Schindler’s List and the more recent The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas, Sarah’s Key again attempts to recreate the horror of the Holocaust in narrative driven drama form.  From a film studies theory perspective, trying to represent the unrepresentable trauma of the events of the Holocaust, events that even to comprehend are imaginable, it just cannot be given the correct justice, or dealt with the appropriate level of respect when demoted to character focused drama.  Yet I’m willing to stand up for what could be considered by most film critiques as Hollywood drivel.  Showing a new story that hasn’t yet been given the narrative treatment on mainstream cinema screens yet, Sarah’s Key does not pull the common denominator of demonising the Nazi involvement.  Instead the roles of the French police and civilians are developed as the questionable territory of ‘if in that situation how can you judge what you would have done’ is offered up as after screening discussion fodder.

There’s nothing terribly original in terms of narrative intent, but it’s the narrative delivery, the believable character acting and the luxurious attention to period detail that makes Sarah’s Key unique in its own deliverance.  As usual the narrative leaves nothing to the imagination with predicable outcomes, but what’s really good is how it develops the notion of never escaping the deep trauma of the Holocaust, leaving all its characters profoundly affected.  The period costumes are of a respectable quality and the sets in the flashback sequences are perfect for the drama unfolding.

Overall I loved it because it does exactly what it says on the tin, but not in a really patronising way that other narratives end up with as their lasting resolve.  Given the popular history of this vein of film many film theorists often denounce them. This overlooks the fact that they do have a place and as they continue to get funded and attract huge crowds, at least attempting to keep the horror of the Holocaust recurrent in the minds of viewers, or perhaps even educating younger generations is enough to make them worthy of a cinema ticket.

Mel Gibson plus hand puppet… and this is meant to be his great return since he went biblical.  That’s right, the man who decided that he never again wanted to use film as a means of just making money, he wanted to get his message across.  Never mind the huge money making successes that ‘The Passion of the Christ’ and ‘Apocalypto’ were, he’s returned to being in front of the camera and firmly positioned himself in centre stage with his new role.

BY LAURA SHEARER

Directed by Jodie Foster, and also starring Jodie Foster, ‘The Beaver’ sounded like another Hollywood backed and Hollywood made film, made in mind of the Academy Awards.  What’s really surprising is the seemingly endless list of backers at the opening credits, all of which are smaller film production companies and look more suited to independent film.  So what’s gone wrong in Hollywood that Gibson and Foster have had to turn to any means possible to fund their film? It’s very dark, so there’s a start.  Not something Hollywood likes to focus on or see too much of, unless it’s large scale disaster flicks with heroic events and lots of happy faces at the end when everything bad has been resolved.  If you’re expecting this, swap your tickets now.

Walter Black suffers from severe depression and he’s tried everything to get back on track.  When the pills, the therapy and the self-help books prove to be utterly useless, his wife Meredith decides it’s time to make a change and save what remains of her family.  Walter packs his life into his car and heads to a hotel, on his way dumping boxes in a bin outside a garage, where he picks up a beaver hand puppet.  After an unsuccessful suicide attempt, Walter seeks a new beginning with the beaver as his sole means of communicating with the world around him.  The beaver fixes things, life gets better and perhaps it’s even an improvement on Walter’s previous life.  Yet he’s still a middle aged man with a hand puppet who refuses to communicate otherwise.  Things take a turn for the worse and after a certain traumatic self inflicted incident, Walter finally gets the much needed help.

There is an element of comedy to the alter-ego of the beaver hand puppet, but it’s by no stretch of the audience’s imagination a hugely engaging performance from Gibson or Foster.  Relying on the clichés of family life, there’s nothing original about the narrative other than the situation of the hand puppet.  The beaver as a device and character merely becomes a way of exploring the already explored territory of family relationships and corporate professionalism.  Nothing new, nothing to see here, move along.

BY LAURA SHEARER

The group of assassins are assembled to bring justice and restore the order that Lord Naritsugu has destroyed by his selfish and brutal climb to the top of the Shogun rule. Not far off the plot of Kurasawa’s ‘Seven Samurai’, we see the horrors that Lord Naritsugu has inflicted upon those in his path and the helpless that he has no mercy for.  This is all with a Miike twist of course.  Involving some brutal death scenes, lots of completely honest seeming revelations of torture and naturally lots of blood, when one of the samurai comments that ‘this village will be a bloodbath’ he’s literally not lying.  Not for the faint hearted, this is a samurai film with extraordinary vision.

At the heart of the film are the central themes to most samurai features.  Honour, courage and loyalty are themes anybody can relate to and themes most people would link with their knowledge of the samurai feature.  Miike’s decision to maintain these ideals upholds something of the tradition that began in the 1940s with the samurai film master Akira Kurasawa.  To be honest, the narrative has upheld the best elements of these themes and used them to dramatic advantage.

Set in 19^th Century Japan, the film has a very classical feel to it.  Great attention to detail is placed in the recreation of the Edo period of Japan.  Miike’s choice to keep the narrative within this timeframe is both wise and inspiring, as he could well have taken a very different route and made a modern conversion of the samurai plot in say modern Tokyo.  The set designs and landscapes are beautiful and eloquent with a real sensation of nostalgia for ancient Japan.  The cinematography doesn’t ever make light of this aspect, often creating a few seconds of still frame for the audience to enjoy the luxury of the scenery.  Looking at any of the media releases of images from the film, it’s clear that the cinematography is justifiably indulgent in the fabulous sets.

It’s not the samurai epic in run time as it could have been so hardcore samurai fans may feel a little cheated, but there’s plenty crammed into every shot to make even the most critical walk away satisfied.  Those new to Japanese cinema will have their eyes opened wide by the glory that is this feature.  It’s a huge achievement for Miike and there’s not a single sequence that’s less than instantly impressive.  As much as I feel it must be seen on the big screen to get the full impact, it’s going to be in DVD collections the world over in no time.  ’13 Assassins’ is a sure fire winner for anybody who loves period features, blood and battles, or even just a well written, steady moralistic plot.  The success it’s already enjoyed doesn’t seem enough to evaluate the brilliance.

Girl Interrupted meets anime inspired action. Mix in some racy costumes and gaming style action sequences and you’re on to a winner surely. After the death of her mother and sister, a young girl is locked away in a mental asylum by her abusive stepfather. As her new nightmare begins she is faced with the threat of a lobotomy in five days’ time. Retreating into an imaginary world where she must fight to retrieve five items to win her and her new friends’ freedom the plot thickens into a peril filled fantasy adventure. This isn’t the light hearted romp that the trailers might suggest, it’s dark and dense, fraught with issues it’s uncomfortable tackling.

BY LAURA SHEARER

Emily Browning takes centre stage as Baby Doll, the cute protagonist who packs a punch. Known most recently for the elder sister role of Violet in Lemony Snicket’s A Series of Unfortunate Events, this is a big step for Browning into a whole new world of sexualised, mainstream film castings. Dressed in their skimpiest, her cohorts are the provocatively named Rocket, Amber, Sweat Pea and Blondie (played by Vanessa Hudgens of Disney channel fame). Together they wreak havoc with the mental institutions standardised norms and play their way through the arcade style levels of the game to fulfil Baby Doll’s plan. Whilst being eye candy for the average teenage boy in the audience, the costumes are comic book fashion extreme in a manner that any cosplay geek would give his right arm to have his photo with at a convention. Sadly, as effective as these are on the actresses, they are after all on the tiny bodies of little girls, not women. The 12A UK rating is dubious and for adult audiences this aspect is not only questionable, but oddly dysfunctional of a mainstream film narrative.

An anime element seems to be at the heart of the barely clad girls taking on huge robots and dragons in battle. This is a bold move for the representation of the female protagonist in those Hollywood dominated Cineplex’s, but perhaps a good one. Maybe it’s high time the strength and positioning of the young female received a revamp in the West. Hopefully this prospective progress will not be disregarded by audiences or too badly disassociated from its intentions.

Aside from the uneasy sexual presumptions of the story, there are smaller problems that are hinting at discrepancies in the film as a whole. The arcade style gaming is badly structured and looks not only cheap but out of date. The format of the imaginary fight scenes in game mode could have been downsized and given a fresher look for the same amount of money, making them not just more believable but giving them a rightful place. The imagination of the ideology behind the narrative is so powerful it’s hard to imagine what a well budgeted version could take the form of on the big screen. It seems that money has been unevenly spread on this project and, as a result, some parts, such as camerawork and scenery, look flush and vibrant but the action lacks. As a selling point for the whole film and thus targeting the main niche audience of young males, many will come away disappointed.

To some extent it’s successful as it fits the bill of a slightly controversial, dark tale of suffering and revenge mixed with the superhero fantasy. On the other hand it’s a failure as the hype continues to build and it fails to deliver the enjoyable tat of over-the-top trailer promotions taking over websites worldwide. Director Zack Snyder’s previous films Watchmen and 300 have been fifty/fifty with regards to success and fan base, but he always manages to sell those essential tickets. Where this will take his career seems to lie in the fact that it will divide audiences again.

For fans of the famous Haruki Murakami novel, it was a very mixed reaction at the announcement of a film adaptation. With negative remarks from his readership in Japan and a somewhat more welcomed success worldwide, Norwegian Wood is one of the most talked about films to be released outside of Japan this year.

BY LAURA SHEARER

Watanabe is a disillusioned college student unshaken by the 1960s’ student rebellions, as he seeks something greater which he doesn’t fully comprehend yet. He becomes unwaveringly devoted to the beautiful Naoko, a childhood friend with whom he shares the tragedy of their best friend’s death. Naoko’s strange and sudden disappearance is matched by the enchantingly confident Midori who marches unassumingly into Watanabe’s life. Watanabe soon begins to come to terms with the gravity of his feelings for the two women and unknowingly embarks on a quest for soulful gratification.

Murakami is considered a literary genius, both in Japan and worldwide due to the universal nature of his themes. His works translate into languages without diminishing any of his narrative developing skills or dissolving the intimate detailing of his familiar yet surreal characters. It’s just about time that somebody took a hold of the reigns and attempted to translate Murakami for the big screen. That unfortunately is where the problem lies, in translation to the filmic form.

The novel is fast paced, witty and stunningly sad, but there’s only room for so much in the space of just over two hours. Trying to cram in all the elements that make Murakami’s novel a spellbinding read is just too daunting a task it would seem. Narrative aspects are completely neglected in favour of a slower narrative pacing and prominence of some beautiful cinematography. Director Tran Ann Hung is best known for his captivating cinematography in The Scent of Green Papaya so his mark will surely be felt in his ideals of how film form functions. Nonetheless, it looks stunning and without being overtly orientalist in its gaze, Norwegian Wood definitely has the inspirational warming quality that is at the heart of Murakami’s work.

What is lost altogether is the intimacy that transcends the barrier between reader and characters. It’s deeply unsettling that there was no genuine misery shared alongside the protagonist, Watanabe, as he struggles through love and loss. Almost wooden acting is forced upon the viewer as an artsy distance is given the go ahead by director Tran Ann Hung, so much so that a growing unfamiliarity develops. The essence of the novel is how the themes of love and loss are something everybody shares experiences of and can become attached to the narrative in a sympathetic understanding.

Featuring an original score by Radiohead’s Jonny Greenwood, the music is a treat. Well edited, it explores the purpose of the soundtrack, but comfortably allows an entertaining viewing. Don’t go expecting edge of your seat experimentation with the score, but awareness is more than toyed about with, at times serving as the often too needed nudge to revitalise your focus.

The merits of Norwegian Wood are few, but endearing qualities and the signs of skilful filmmaking practise help pull the wool over your eyes. Fans will be disappointed by the adaptive format, but then considering a novel this charming, is it even possible to present an impersonal representation? Not the reaction audiences will be hoping for, but as the damage is already done, it deserves in its own right some creative acclaim. Perhaps Tran Ann Hung has bitten off more than he can chew.

Surprisingly not presented by a well-known animation company, Rango shows that its independent flourish of originality is on a par with the big studio contenders. Possibly the best animation this year so far, Rango is a little bit of what you know muddled up with the enigmatic. A creation to be proud of, it’s surely a work worth the box office success it’s receiving.

BY LAURA SHEARER

The simple tale of Rango, just your ordinary chameleon living inside his desert island of a fish tank, he spends his days dreaming of what could be and questioning who he is. When an unexpected incident occurs he finds himself stranded in the desert alone in desperate need of water. A quirky character with a passion for acting, he’s not exactly the survival expert that the native creatures of the desert are. Rango’s adaptability is put to the test when he rides into the town of Dirt, the real Wild West seemingly stuck in the heart of American history.

Directed by Gore Verbinski, there’s no huge reveal to learn that Johnny Depp is voicing the lizard in question. Working to and relying on those eccentric previous roles, Depp is not at all out of his depth, seemingly more than comfortable as the self-interrogating chameleon.

A surrealist element feels too delicate at times and in places too much for younger audiences to completely understand, this lizard is an individual on a quest for reinvention.  Having lived alone for as long as he can remember, there’s a great social commentary that comes as unexpected from a cartoon chameleon. Depp provides a wonderful array of emotional development and opens up his full voice acting skills for this hilariously awkward colour shifter.

Nothing negative can be said about the acquired level of scripted humour, backed up by the consequential slapstick humour and background jokes that audiences familiar to popular culture and the Westerns film genre will adore. Sit back and relish the beauty of the intricate details in this animation as introverted strangers of the desert are brought to life in a way that makes sure you notice the finer points. Every little aspect of the characters are there for your enjoyment, be it the stereotypical spoon playing old man in the hairy mouse or the on-the-loose gunslinger formed in the evil rattlesnake.

The soundtrack is well utilised with anthems that will get the film buffs nodding at their clever interaction with the script.  There’s plenty there for the children to giggle at, but what really spoke volumes was the laughter coming from the parents and the variety of audience members drawn in. Released at half term time in the UK, it’s become a favourite for its unique style that offers something you’ll find truly refreshing. Worth a watch while still in the cinemas, you won’t feel embarrassed for catching yourself laughing aloud.

This could be the most important film of the Harry Potter franchise. Leaving behind the happy confines of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, our indefatigable trio are on the run to save Mr Potter’s life.

BY LAURA SHEARER

After the death of beloved school headmaster Dumbledore at the end of the last film, we know Harry must find and destroy the powerful horcruxes if he is to come close to defeating the evil Lord Voldemort. Fans of the book or films will already know the plot-line and can suspect what direction it will take, but this is one of those films that could work even as a wonderful introduction to the world of Harry Potter. Everything in the series is explained as the plot develops, this being one of the main successes of the film.

In a way this film is very different to its predecessors, the only magical props are the wands and weaponry. Without hidden alleys, magical shops, and boarding schools keeping weird and wonderful creatures, a more earthy, mature environment develops. The audience is called upon to believe that the very modern feeling locations are part of a world that is far removed from our everyday lives, but the director succeeds in creating a dark and gloomy realm that plays beautifully with the audience’s preconceptions.

This film is definitely one which will be enjoyed by older viewers, plenty of whom will have grown up reading the novels. It is well structured, begins with fast paced action and progresses into a deliciously dark drama. Just when you think you’re close to figuring out the trials and traumas of Harry, Hermione and Ron, you’re sucked right back into the middle of some wand-fighting fantasy action. Overall it’s an achievement and I can’t wait to see what ‘Part 2’ brings in 2011. Until then, this remains most deserving of credit and definitely not something you’ll want to miss.

BY LAURA SHEARER

When asked by director Stephen Frears to play her role as Lesbian crime fiction novelist in Tamara Drew it was purely down to her quirky history in the industry and based on her esteemed credentials. Bronagh was first introduced to the comic strip in casting where they were all handed a copy to give them some background. On first opinions Bronagh saw it as a well transposed piece, with a good bit of tongue-in-cheek humour which she adores and postcard picturesque at the same time. She describes her role as Frears as extremely enjoyable and acknowledges it has  encouraged a lot of improvisation and personal reactions.

Bronagh says that her acting career really started at age 5 when she played the gingerbread queen in a school play. From that moment of stepping on stage and being the centre of the audience’s attention she knew that was what she loved doing. Accepted into a London drama school she was cast by none other than Micheal Winterbottom, but her first accomplished role was in Dublin based film The Commitments.

The role she likes to speak of most, and is perhaps most remembered for, is her small part in Quentin Tarantino’s legendary Pulp Fiction. Bronagh plays Trudi, the friend of a piercing fanatic, and can be seen in the scene were Vincent goes to get himself some more cocaine at a dealers’ house. How she came to be in this role is a fascinating tale of sheer luck and determination. After following a friend who was already cast in Pulp Fiction out to L.A. with the intention of sponging off the lovely hotel room for a few weeks, Bronagh was scouted by a casting director who thought Tarantino would like her strangeness.

Gallagher later met Tarantino at auditions and still complains that the film took months to cast due to the stars involved. Three months down the line nothing was happening, and feeling homesick she returned to Ireland for a weekend music festival. As soon as the festival ended she was whisked back to America on Tarantino’s personal request, and greeted with cash in hand and flowers as a welcome to L.A. Star struck by some of the cast, she asked to use the bathroom and ended up in Danny Devito’s tartan bathroom and dresser where she promptly phoned her parents to boast.

Glad to still be in the acting business, she says it’s down to the director to gain that confidence and trust that’s essential to getting the most out of an actor. Admittedly she loves being on stage, in the theatre most of all. She’s got a few films in the pipeline. The recent role which she hails above many others is her position as ambassador for the City of Culture 2013 festival in Derry/Londonderry. She feels this is a great opportunity to embrace local talent and looks forward to seeing everyone get involved.

BY LAURA SHEARER

The sumptuous Dorset landscapes come to life in full-bodied colour. Screaming dream-like idealism and vitality, it’s got a quality the tourist board would approve of. Shot with an honest feeling, the cinematography of the area is stunning and whisks you away to the small village. It’s an odd mix between realism and a powerful pop-art aesthetic, but this isn’t the films focus.

This tiny town is full of energy. A strange passionate negativity flows through, driven by circumstance the characters have become stuck in through their own attempts at embracing the small town ideal. In a countryside writers’ retreat, we meet local crime writer Nicholas Hardiment and his wife Beth (played by comic genius Tamsin Greig of Black Books and Green Wing). The small bunch of writers includes Derry-born Bronagh Gallagher as a lesbian crime novelist and much hilarity ensues from the bizarre collection of people who stay at the retreat.

Tamara Drew is the one that got away. She left for London, became a columnist, had a nose job and now returns to start her autobiograph.y Having geographically left her past behind, however, sense eventually catches up with her on her return. She’s the latest gossip tool for the locals. Gemma Arterton is funny, but her role isn’t a stretch for her skills; all the humour is in the film’s smaller characters.

Two gossip-obsessed teenage girls who live inside trashy weekly magazines begin a personal vendetta against Tamara. When she beds their beloved Ben, the drummer from their favourite band to whom they’ve been in love with since like March, they begin to dish out their own form of social havoc. Easy to relate to and a joy to watch, it’s difficult to say a word against the supporting cast who create such a wonderful atmosphere and truly drive the events of the film along.

Told from several perspectives, featuring many enjoyable little sub-plots that all blend together perfectly. It’s past the mark of a good comic strip adaptation. The enigmatic characters are well presented and are the tell-tale signs of a decent screenplay treatment of the original source. Scandal abound as life in small town England becomes increasingly suffocating for those who live there. It’s a very clever comedy and genuinely entertaining.

BY LAURA SHEARER

Uncomplicated dialogue, basic reaction acting and a quick, simple to follow narrative are keys to the success of this film. Delusional and ridiculous from start to finish, in an odd way it’s a masterpiece. It is everything that you expect teenage boys to dream up when high on a Friday night. It’s full of outlandish gore, softcore pornography, cheesy action and rehashed CGI piranha fish.

It’s not a woeful attempt at a horror; director Alexandre Aja previously worked on The hills have eyes and knows a thing or two about tension and how to make you yelp out loud. The most enjoyable aspect is the legendary Christopher Lloyd (the doc in Back to the future) with his role as an eccentric aquarium/fish tackle salesman and specialist.

It’s spring break on Lake Victoria and due to an underwater tremor, prehistoric piranha are unleashed from an underwater cave. It’s down to the sleepy town’s sheriff to take the situation under control. Her son, supposed to be babysitting his two younger siblings, is out on a yacht location scouting for porn, and that’s when the trouble starts.

Not for the faint hearted but definitely a must see – if only to believe it. One to remember for this year, perhaps it’ll even find a place in your DVD collection. It’s utterly outrageous.

BY LAURA SHEARER

The interplay of visual importance in the exhaustingly well developed costumes and the allure of the perfectly apt soundtrack is something you simply will not be able to resist at any cost. The stylish suave of the overall film completely immerses you in the worlds of the creative minds at work and in love. Placing itself as firm competition for any much loved classic period novel to screen adaptation, the mise en scene is engrossingly befitting for the narrative. The sets are exuberant and lavish with fine detailing at the core of their success, but by no means the only achievement. Huge scaled theatres are brought to life in full colour and charismatic density that’s simply captivating.

The cinematography is of first class standard. Every element from sweeping tracking shots to dramatic stills and, of course, superb editing, places you right there in the moment – sharing heartbeats in this rollercoaster of emotions. It’s that sort of rare fiction that resembles a niche, behind the scenes, fly on the wall viewpoint. In a flirtatious way it develops your growing need to see. So vividly aesthetic you’ll long to literally reach out and touch the fabrics, walk inside the sets and feel the power of the music played first hand.

A new weight has been introduced that wasn’t present in Anne Fontaine’s enigmatic Coco Before Chanel. So much of the mysterious, sultry and work obsessed Chanel is embraced in Mouglalis’ performance. After a few scenes she becomes irreplaceable, the definite Chanel, so mesmerizing you can almost smell her No.5 as she wafts past without a care or second glance.

It’s bizarre that such an open imposition can feel natural, but as the narrative continues and as you gain more of an understanding of the characters, the quicker the surroundings and events are purely experienced and enjoyed. The sheer amount of energy put into the film from all creative participants shines through in every beautiful sequence. It’s eloquent and possesses a great warmth that lingers long after.

BY LAURA SHEARER

The typical corporate Mexicans and suave American stereotypes aside, it definitely connects with the original political impulses of the TV series, naturally where else could it have gone in retrospect? The punchy and charismatic introductions for each of the famed team-members relates to that striking credit style of the cult hit, but also functions comfortably as a decent start to an action flick. Getting all the familiarities in quickly and out of the way so that the outrageous explosions can take centre stage seems to overthrow what could have been a much more narrative driven first few sequences.

Surprisingly the camera work is up close and confrontational, ensuring that you will always be right in the middle of the tension, comedy and shark kicks of adrenaline. The structure of the feature manages to retain a lovely sectionalised sensation which is much like watching a back to back TV marathon. The darker and slightly heavier gravity to the performances and the weight of the action scenes is surprising because it somehow has developed a great adaption of the TV classic.

Touching at an already weak spot in politics, the modern narrative is set in Bagdad. The main mission is to stop the illegal printing of US dollars, so it’s pretty basic and nothing that’ll make your head hurt. The strategic planning of their mission demonstrates some admirable knowledge and, of course being completely kitted out ,it’s ensured that you back the rebellious team with their honourable reasons. Strangely, even though we aren’t given a narrative alternative, it doesn’t feel overly forced siding with the team, but that’s what makes it feel natural and a real pleasure to watch.

Never mind that Mr T doesn’t star, Liam Nelson provides a good helping of cheese with his scripted catch phrase. The A-Team is everyone’s favourite do-good renegades, but with a difference. Yet the enlightened way each actor brings our heroes to the big screen is amazingly familiar to who and what we have grown to love over many an hour in front of the small screen.

BY LAURA SHEARER

Think of summer and you think of the chilled melodies of sunny reggae. Jimmy Cliff is up there with Bob Marley and the other giants of the genre, so what better way to get into the Caribbean vibe than with The harder they come, a retro 1972 flick following the rise of country boy Ivanhoe Martin in Jamaica’s reggae fame after his criminal ways come to light. If the name Jimmy Cliff isn’t terribly familiar then it will surely to be lodged firmly in your musical vocabulary by the time the end credits roll. Those of you who are fans, your hearts will swell with love for the music.

This is a tale of musical freedom, with a genuine search for the quality of truth. Perry Henzell’s debut film is a real spiritualist piece. Ivanhoe’s bohemian radical spirit is his drive, his passion knows no bounds and his self belief is immeasurable. Striving to keep his girlfriend happy, his new life in the city is tough, his turn to drug dealing inevitable and hence he becomes a stereotype.

Violence ensues in true 70’s chic, so don’t expect anything impressive, but there is plenty of giggles with the unskilled editing style and interesting cinematography choices. Sequences of Ivanhoe’s ridiculous escapades are intercut with scenes of the search for him, and all of a sudden the producer that wasn’t interested in his music can’t wait for him to reappear. Some iconic photographs offer an insightful glimpse and are surely the most technical aspect of the whole film. Like so many, this is a film that has aged terribly, but that’s half the pleasure.

Set in the heartland of reggae, Jamaica is both beautiful and fraught with troubles, much like the life of our protagonist. Living mostly in poverty and struggling to make ends meet, surrounded by richness and gospel preaching, the  reggae roots are clear and apparent in wonderfully colourful dramatics. Footage of recording and performing has the same energetic exuberance that the whole soundtrack offers. You just can’t help it as a grin creeps from ear to ear, and before you know it you’re bopping along in the dark of the cinema, much to the distain of fellow viewers.

 BY LAURA SHEARER

The tense vampire hunt of the opening scene takes viewers back to the original vampire narrative style, with much heavier and darker motifs than the two previous films have dared to include. From the rainstorm to the overhead shots of the forest landscapes, it’s all very high spec, while the deep focus photography of director David Slade gives it a fresh edge. The chase sequences are finally the bold and graphic scenes that fans of the novel have been waiting for, scenes which the other films didn’t have the creative drive to produce.

If watching giant, CGI wolves fighting glass-like vampires doesn’t tickle your fancy then the main action scene will not excite. Yet it is impressively choreographed and the rapidly changing camera angle certainly makes it a more interesting sequence.

The usual lack of depth to the novel’s characters yet again leads to black dialogues and a distinct absence of mystery in the actors’ deliveries, although the inclusion in the plot of the mysterious new born vampires goes some way towards readdressing this. As newcomers to the saga, not much is revealed about their past or what they are exactly; Slade masterfully transforms the same basic reaction and establishing shots into something unfamiliar within the saga’s filmic style.

Slade’s involvement results in an interesting synthesis of the structure and familiarity of the Twilight saga films with his own unique visual style. His work on Hard Candy gives this film more subtlety and impulse, but 30 Days of Night has given him the advantage of experience with action scenes and the vampire sub-genre. It’s thrilling and exciting to watch the action unfold, but as usual most of the narrative focuses on the love triangle of Bella, Edward and Jacob. Edward still charms his way around discussions with his smouldering stare and Jacob, always half-naked, huffs his way through the run time.

There’s no fear of the so-called “twihards” feeling neglected in any respect. Mass “oooh”s as Bella and Edward share that kiss and “aaah”s as the characters make their first respective onscreen entrance will occur at almost every screening. However, this time Twilight doesn’t seem to be solely targeting an already familiar audience. Adding to the feeling that this is easier for new viewers to enjoy, the narrative is quickly explained so there are no shocking gaps for the uninitiated.

Slight alterations to the fan-loved moments of previous instalments, such as the flowery meadow Bella and Edward share, seem like improvements and the whole feature has an added pizzazz. Slade has upped the game considerably. It’s going to be difficult to see this film followed up in such a skilfull fashion.

BY LAUARA SHEARER

Unsurprisingly we are given the option of watching in 3D format, the same audience dazzling gimmick that passed mass audiences by during the fifties and again in the eighties. Speaking out about why they’ve used this format to their advantage, Pixar have stated that they wanted to offer fans something completely new in 3D. Instead of just giving off the normal spectacle tricks of things appearing to come out of the screen before your eyes, they have developed a style that perfectly suits Pixar. One of the first films enjoyable in 3D, it’s possible to be immersed in the scenery with the characters as the plot commences. To keep young viewers focused there are those moments of eye-popping props, but overall the feel is much more sophisticated.

Toy Story 3 is a lot more themed towards older viewers, perhaps eager parents, or film buffs that grew up with Woody and Buzz, with hugely admirable genre referencing. Touching on the darker tones of film noir, gang crime and jailbreak, as always these are used cleverly and bulked out with quick gags and a sharp wit that keeps the mood light. Definitely there for the more mature viewers is the Barbie meets Ken subplot, hugely entertaining and it plays wonderfully on all the stereotypes we expect.

It is difficult to stretch a critical eye far enough to find flaws with any Pixar film and this is no exception. Like any decent sequel should do, it re-ignites all the joys of the original, suitably adds to the enjoyment and somehow makes it even more impressive. Take the whole family, go with your friends and then go once more for sheer indulgence.

BY LAURA SHEARER

www.queensfilmtheatre.com

Instantaneously exciting, we are enveloped in his world, starting in World War II Paris as a young boy in a Russian Jewish home.  Everything he does and sees is bounding with bold life and colour, giving us intimate glimpses of an imaginary world into which he reverts for entertainment and the salvation of his sanity during the Nazi occupation.  Young Lucien Ginsburg (Serge Gainsbourg is his stage name) takes with him a giant-headed figure of the terrifying Jew from a Nazi propaganda billboard poster, something which at first he fears, but realising it looks very similar to his own reflection it becomes a companion.  Brash and proud to wear his Star of David, it’s evident from the first few minutes that this young boy has the eccentric potential of the future artistic legend.

Famed for his womanising ways, Gainsbourg’s daring and ability to charm begins in the Montmartre Art Academy where he sneaks glances at female life models.  He progresses to the insatiable and suave genius, able to tweak his talents from painting to song writing as each beautiful woman desires.  Laetitia Castas is marvellous as Brigitte Bardot, acting with such enjoyment that she seems to emphasise all the fantasies her presence gives way to.  Anna Mouglalis takes the role of Juliette Greco and the late Lucy Gordon stars as Jane Birkin, both dazzling actresses that have their own very unique sultry charms in these powerful roles.

From his early watercolour comics doodled late at night he creates a fairytale creature version of himself, who becomes his partner in crime and devil on his shoulder for the rest of his life.  Magically depicted by obscure puppets, his alter-ego gets the luxurious treatment of Doug Jones, who played the fawn in Guillermo del Toro’s Pan’s Labyrinth.  In a way Gainsbourg becomes the literal embodiment of the French artist stereotype as he smokes constantly, tires easily, is very melodramatic, and is barely ever satisfied with himself.

Joann Sfar states that he didn’t want to make a realist, journalistic account of Gainsbourg’s life; he wanted to make a cult film.  Sfar’s background is of telling stories through images, so it’s only natural that his film is so visual, but this is what makes it such a huge success and accomplishment.  Production designer Christian Martí was directed to study Russian paintings and films such as Murnau’s Nosferatu, Carné’s Les Enfants and Fellini’s Amarcord for points of reference.  It’s a distinctive style that has been created on screen, but an easily subtle one that makes good references to expressionism.

Everything that makes you fall head over heels in love with Paris is sumptuously exposed before your eyes with an appealing allure unlike that found in any other city and in few other films.  The lighting is mood driven, with jazz clubs temptingly dim and always filled with the eccentric and beautiful people Paris is all too well known for.  The whole film is full of characters that embody art in what they do and in their image, a truly fascinating array that Gainsbourg fits into eloquently.  It’s just such a pleasure to watch from start to finish and I can’t see this project in the hands of anyone else. Joann Sfar has done justice to the man that so many claim inspiration from.

BY LAURA SHEARER

Sadly, swearing doesn’t compensate for the lack of dialogue strength. The plot is very basic and thinly spread out over the run time. There’s very little to think about. Any evidence to the narrative mysteries is laid bare with a mere scene or two in between explanations from the characters. Any topical thought process is quickly pushed to the side, as the Arnie replacement figure points out “it’s not important why we’re here, it’s how we get out.”

There are a few moments that encourage viewers to think that the group might stand a fair chance of survival. Their past knowledge of warfare and their revealing brutality sparks the suspicion that there may be more than just the usual single survivor. Surely with such a simple plot line this idea cannot stretch very far?

The ethnic stereotyping makes a bold 1950’s Hollywood statement, which honestly has no positive impact on the film. For fans of martial arts films, the Asian samurai warrior fight scene is a key example of this stereotyping, but highly enjoyable as a new take on the defeat of the predator character.

The homage to the original is very enjoyable and the geeky additions of other aliens, a new planet and some new predator figures really set this sequel apart from the rest. Arnie’s original is still much loved and will always have a place in many people’s filmic hearts, so it’s difficult to assume that this was a necessary production.

Predators is definitely a crowd drawer, and surely a crowd pleaser at that, but lacks the substance of the original. If you’re just looking for a nice slice of cheese to while away an afternoon, then this space romp is sure to do the job.

BY LAURA SHEARER

Curb Your Enthusiasm star Larry Davids is a huge let down, despite being given an undemanding role. Davids plays the same self-centred, easily annoyed old man role that has become monotonous within Allen’s films. At least with Vicky Cristina Barcelona Allen pushed himself away from this style of characterisation. Allen’s comic scripting ability is lost when the characters speak directly to the audience. By staring down the camera lens and seemingly straight at the viewer, Boris attempts to engage our interests in his miserable view on life. The rate at which he rabbits on incessantly about himself and his ideas quashes any form of response to his horrible comments. It is clear that this is Allen’s form of dark comedy, simply meant to be passively forgiven. What happened to Allen’s much loved and hilarious nonsensical situations and blathering? This is too dull to pass off as the same directing capability.

In an attempt to relive his glory days Allen rehashes his cinematic love of Manhattan. However, instead of showing lots of superbly desirable landscape shots, we are quickly whisked into the path of Boris again. Allen’s involvement with the city is fair, but he has opted for a bohemian approach. He appears to mock New York with the southern belle come photographer/artiste/mother-in-law, who undergoes an abrupt change in lifestyle after encountering the bustling city. This seems to be a bid to depict Allen’s own infatuation with New York City, but if so, he mocks himself and not in a way he would like.

The typical love affair impulse features in Boris’s affair with young runaway, Melody. This gives the film a sense of romantic idealism and confers new meaning to the film’s title. However, the main romanticism does not centre on Boris, completely isolating him from what becomes the key impulse of the film, even though it is presenting his theory on life. Ultimately, this begs the question of why Boris is our protagonist, a man of such ritual that the compassion of love is irregular to him.

If Allen had set out at the beginning that Whatever Works is a series of love filled tales, with Boris simply narrating and explaining his theory, then it would have made perfect sense. Instead, the film fails to show Boris’ theory working on a practical level, and the central idea of the film is lost by the finishing speech. Larry Davids fans might be disappointed by Whatever Works, but Woody Allen fans will feel robbed.

BY LAURA SHEARER

Taking the audience to the heart of the legend, the film opens with a candlelit scroll of medieval script that defines the era and sets the audience up for huge historical inaccuracies.  The action of the film begins like a hazy memory, depicting a land not so far removed from the typical English countryside scenery of today and we are launched straight into a battle scene.  The political dramas of England at this time are weakly addressed and this is surprising given the attention paid to making a statement as a film that wishes to be themed as a historical epic.

The characters float past our eyes, each specifically allocated a different amount of screen time on their introduction that points out how important they will be to the narrative.  As boring as this is for a well-oiled film viewer, it’s completely stereotypical of the actors involved.  Adequately fulfilling the blockbuster familiarity of course, but surely the average audience is a lot more intelligent than Scott has identified with and don’t need to be told all the time where they are viewing.

Early on in the feature Scott shows huge gaps in his storytelling technique, but perhaps I should give him credit for trying to cram so much history and folklore into tiny sections.  Yet even his decision to include so much is quite clouded by his love of lengthy action sequences.  The most appalling aspect of the narrative structure is the constant descriptions of our hero’s travels.  Each place Robin arrives at is introduced by subtitles and the same long shot of the characters arriving in that area.  Not only is this relentless, it’s horribly pointing out the very disjointed narrative.

When little pieces of extra characterisation are bluntly slapped into the dialogue then I fear I’ve little patience for such a lack of creative enthusiasm.  Russell Crowe’s dubious accent is hugely confusing and to see such a well paid actor make a mess out of the film’s continuity demonstrates a shocking lack of skills in relation to the amount of vocal training he undertook in preparation.  The only semi-interesting or mildly complex character is Mark Strong’s role as Godfrey.   This is purely because he has more depth than the others, leading a dual identity as a spy and a fraud and only working for his own means.

What I failed to understand are the adjustments that Scott felt necessary to tell his adaptation.  Besides all the historical and political aspirations of the film, the love plot between Marian and Robin has been stubbornly switched for a misjudged rom-com affair that clumsily fumbles through as a discourse.  Rather than the major draw as the folklore eludes, instead we are faced with the uppity style of an Austen novel and not even much of a source of humour in their growing relationship.

Instead of a hero with a good sense of pride and clear path of justice we are given an angry and lost soldier as he attempts to find himself, and on the way gets caught up in issues far greater than can comprehend.  It just passes that he can believably bring some sense to the commotion, yet he doesn’t seem to have such a major angle on his beliefs as the legends tell.

Watch out for the single moment of cinematography and editing that develops a bit of skilfully planned camerawork in the final battle sequence.  It’s a brief few seconds but it’s colourful and effective.  It’s not a key edit or anything withstanding but it’s really well put together and it’s dramatic.  Big hint is that it’s in the tide and provides a huge contrast to the otherwise predictable and lazy use of equipment in this epic scene, there’s others very similar so blink and you’ll miss it.

Well done to Disney, who in my eyes still hold the title of the most entertaining and enjoyable adaptation of the legend, Scott should have taken heed of what viewers understand of the legend.  Instead of attempting to offer a moody and bleak interpretation, I’m suggesting that perhaps the more inevitable light heartedness of Robin Hood, Men in Tights has taken away from the depth that Scott has tried and failed to depict.  When Gladiator still remains one of the most inventive period narratives in mainstream cinema, this version just doesn’t compare.  Too many farfetched changes have been made to a loved narrative and it just doesn’t show the same strength as previous Scott films.  Sadly the artistry of the end credits perfectly outline the ideology of the legend, as well as romanticising the hero, so as the most impressive sequence, there’s small hope for the feature itself.

BY LAURA SHEARER

Director Mike Newell’s previous big budget accomplishments, including Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005) and Mona Lisa Smile (2003), make him the ideal addition to the team as he proves he can handle large scale, but also studio pressure.  All that built the empire that is the Pirates of the Caribbean saga can be found here, so brace yourself for a well rounded presentation of that infamous winning formula that Bruckheimer has eloquently mastered.

The opening looks very reminiscent of The Mummy trilogy, with the narrator and the maps, a rough attempt at historical placement, and a dreamlike quality from the soft focus of the camera.  Very quickly we are enveloped in the exoticism of the ancient land and for a moment we forget the origin of the film.  Yet even early on the film kind of tries to permit a small homage to its game source.  The strategic planning of the castle attack is accompanied by a camera that swivels around the prince’s descriptions, giving the sensation of moving around models.  During storming the castle there is that nostalgic game quality, but instead of the player having control, the passive viewer witnesses with little thrill.  As the prince looks around the camera takes his point of view, shakily depicting the game player moving the joysticks to gain a scope of the area.  This is a fairly adequate look at how a game can be turned into a film, but it doesn’t stand for much in this adaptation sadly.

On a more positive note, there’s that entertaining lightweight feel to the script, even if it is quite cheesy.  Some sources of comedy include a ringleader slave who loves his duty free and racing ostriches, but then there’s the love plot between our two protagonists.  What immediately struck me as a bad career move for Jake Gyllenhaal and Gemma Arterton, because it really doesn’t involve much acting, turns out to be perhaps what their careers needed in mainstream terms.  These are successfully mixed in with a strong heroic narrative, an almost confusing time travel theme and the mystical undertones of the main storyline.  You’ve got yourself a modern blockbuster that is the perfect warm-up to the forthcoming huge budgets of this summer.

Surprisingly there is a lot of skilled choreography in the fight scenes.  Well rehearsed blade-work is always impressive on a large scale and there are some lovely fast paced archery shots.  The editing of the action sequences goes beyond expectations and is clearly enhanced by the settings.  Regardless of how accurate, the locations are well presented and look extremely lush as far as fantasy scenery goes.  From the barren desert landscapes to the highly detailed props, even if it’s not very believable, they do definitely bring an extra hint of luxury to the screen.  I fail to see how money hasn’t oddly enough been well spent on this production.  The time spent in the cinema is pure indulgent escapism, which isn’t at all challenging or thought provoking, so in many respects a great popcorn flick.

Deemed by the Australian press as a film that Australia could be proud of, and winner of the Camera D’Or award at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival, ‘Samson and Delilah’ is a love story told unlike any other.  The small world in which the lovers inhabit is suddenly shaken when they are forced outside their comfort zones by their aborigine community.  Mistaken as social outsiders, the two youths are confronted with a very foreign environment and their relationship is the building block that keeps them going.  Director Warwick Thornton offers a truly original portrayal of young love and the struggle to come to grips with modernity in the midst of tradition.

BY LAURA SHEARER

www.queensfilmtheatre.com

One of the foremost striking components of this film that is evident from the very opening sequence is the great use of natural lighting.  It is an aspect that is introduced with such ease and the simplicity of its inclusion reflects the atmospheres in each scene perfectly.  Within the outback scenes it is representative of the estranged but peaceful community’s home life, but in the city space it becomes a showcase of the youths fear and lack of understanding.  Masterfully filmed, the lighting decisions are a clear creative control; always giving the viewer that little bit extra, quite efficiently lulling the audience into the romance of the narrative.

The sound design is simply astonishing.  The quality of the sound editing keeps a distinct sense of humanity and realism as well as maintaining the really moving subtle humour of the film.  It’s inherent from the first few mesmerising scenes that the skilfully crafted sound will play a huge part in our viewing experience.  Viewers won’t be let down by the well developed gripping tensions and will be taken aback by the vastly enjoyable easy flow of plot that the sound design helps along.

The cinematography is graphic, keeping audience attentions transfixed on the unfolding events.  As the continuity editing flickers by seamlessly, the camera angles and subject matters show an avid sense of artistry with the filmic mode.  There isn’t a single second of this film that won’t have you incredibly lost within its inspiring imagery.

The tale is cute in an endearing way, making it a real indie love story classic.  The superbly engrossing aesthetic feeling of young love is more than the key draw.  The lover’s tale is oddly not made relative to its western viewership, yet it effortlessly presents itself as something we can all understand on a compassionate level.  The exoticism of the film’s locations aids the developing sensation of distances within this tale of intimacy, overall giving a vastly rewarding consciousness that even by the roll of the credits is maintained as an almost numbed awareness.

The moody changing of the landscapes openly matches the emotions of the couple as they power along in their journey of personal development.  Equally, the narrative is haunting and perpetually sad, but always fresh and intriguing.  Thornton’s work is gritty and harsh, but it’s immensely watchable and is definitely deserving of more attention.

BY LAURA SHEARER

The major complaint is the clunking attempt to mesh together the action genre with good old fashioned slapstick humour.  Supposedly meant to add to the genre, offering viewers a more intensely comic experience, yet it falls short revealing a lack of seamless authenticity.  The ridiculousness of the referenced slapstick does help in emphasising character stereotypes, but these are already pretty inherent in the minds of the viewer and those who haven’t seen the first won’t struggle to work out who stands where. 

Perfectly suited to the role of Ivan Vanko, Mickey Rourke is immediately introduced as the brooding bad guy.  An over the top western ideological presentation of the vodka swilling Russian underground thug that holds a grudge is done justice by Rourke’s lack of dialogue and rough physical presence.  His accent is by-passable and those little evil chuckles really give him a genuinely mysterious edge.  The costumes are one of the elements that have been treated with care, so when Rourke unravels invention after evil invention, it’s thrilling to see how much fun he’s had filming. 

Scarlet Johansson plays the feisty Black Widow come Russian spy with such ease it’s difficult to see how this was anything but a cleverly executed career choice.  She does her usual feminine chic style, roughed up with a mysterious alter-ego superhero personality that is delivered with a high level of professionalism.  Clearly a good casting decision for an injection of sex appeal to the film, but the expected indie quirk so apparent in Johansson’s other film roles is severely lacking. 

Lots of weaponry, cars and boys playing with toys leaves mixed audiences divided on the inclusion of female characters placed so far into the foreground of the narrative.  The typically moral negatives that come with the progression of a corporate company is shown in the egotistical Tony Stark of Stark industries and as much as these aren’t exactly righted, they are challenged by the underdog Ivan Vanko who’s aim is to topple Stark industries.  This is all too typical of the mainstream narrative, and without giving away much of the soppy ending, lessons are expected to be learnt.  The narrative puts a heavy weight on the political implications of the story, with claims to world peace and rivalry between the democratic USA and the almost soviet Russia.  An interesting debate between art and egos is presented in the flimsy conflict dialogues between Stark and Pepper Potts, but this is just another element of the film that makes it gravitate towards the attention waiving run time.  In all, do go see for that extra comic to film fix, but with news of a third film, it’s nothing to get excited about.

Lee Daniel’s film adaption of the novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire has been critically acclaimed ever since its first appearances at the Sundance and Cannes Film Festivals as far back as January last year.  It’s taken a long time to reach UK screens and even still, isn’t being as widely shown as I’d like to think it deserves.  This touching emotional rollercoaster follows the story of Precious, an uneducated abused teenager living in Harlem New York, pregnant for a second time by her own birth father, as she tries to make her way in the small world around her.

BY LAURA SHEARER

Audiences have gone in expecting a gritty and honest portrayal, perhaps fans of the novel who are well aware of the brutality, but overall it’s shockingly easy to watch.  The scenes that could have developed into potentially unwatchable material have been neatly spliced by clever editing.  This allows for the awkward displeasure of the most graphic scenes, put together in a rapid tension of camera lens focus and misty unclear camera angles.  Subject matter that could have defined this movie as beyond the mainstream sensibility has been fascinatingly transformed into something that gains that nail-biting unease and yet deals with the topics admirably.

Whereas many will be offended by the level of swearing, others will appreciate the stunning performance by Oscar winning supporting actress Mo’Nique who plays Mary, the abusive mother of Precious.  Gabourey Sidibe’s debut as Precious shows huge potential and is a superb casting choice as she really holds the movie together.  Precious acts as both narrator to her own tale and main figure, but what Sidibe brings out in the character is an unexpected level of professionalism from the chance found untrained actress.  Offering her performance a true-life suspense of desire to better herself, Sidibe shines through with her downtrodden teen who escapes into daydreams.  Mariah Carey’s small role sees her successfully take on a completely alien performance, without make-up and her usual glamour and diva attitude.  Lee Daniel’s film really stands out in the performance stakes and it’s clear that the critical attention has been driven by his ability to bring out strong performances in his female cast.

The only aspects that make this film perhaps not the usual multiplex cinema film of choice is the fantastic cutting room floor element that is refreshingly displayed within the skilful editing.  Lots of alternative camera work is consistently played alongside the usual close-ups and reaction shots that are so typical of the life-story drama film genre, making it original and a delight to watch.  The hasty style of the film is blunt and makes its own medium recognisable to its viewers, but this works effectively as it aids the progression of the narrative.  The sequences never stop for too long on any viewpoint, allowing a more interpretive outlook, yet it pauses on moments of reflection and nicely rounds up with a positive ending.  It’s a grim story, but Lee Daniel’s stylish twist is what makes it intriguing and a hugely enjoyable watch.

Certainly quirky, ‘Ditching‘

BY LAURA SHEARER

On the island that has forgotten its own past, we are introduced to the unfamiliar idea that the present is disjointed and cannot necessarily be placed.  Readers of the free newspaper The Vacuum will be pleased to see the first feature film by the local Northern Irish arts organisation Factotum.  It’s a perfect addition to their already impressive creative project achievements.

The filmmaking techniques are subtle but very effective, so it’s unfair to dismiss the final piece as premature.  A truly wonderful use of natural lighting makes every scene fascinating to watch.  Instead of opting for expensive studio equipment, Factotum has intuitively made use of its basic resources.  The overall effect of this brave choice is suitably striking and at the same time inspiring for any local film enthusiasts.

Very familiar landscapes are presented as disturbingly foreign.  Instead of the lush green environment that floods our childhood memories of countryside picnics, all that is left is a startling wilderness.  Under the uncomfortable lingering atmosphere of a stark and chilly, bleak and greying autumn’s day, the travellers’ tale unfolds.  Typically of this appearing stable thematic narrative in contemporary cinema, they encounter the expected clan of cannibals.  This version is nothing stereotypical past the name that they are coined by, offering a really bizarre take on a conventional characterisation.

Some really outstanding characters and superbly masterful acting make up the rest of this extraordinary story.  Along the way we meet several unexpected anonymous strangers that provide little insight to this dysfunctional and vague world.  Taking on larger and perhaps more difficult topics such as religion, superstition and social acceptance, Factotum manages to really push the boundaries of the viewers’ expectations.  Without seeming to struggle with its decided concepts, the narrative is successfully naive and is brilliant at retaining the interest of those who might already be slightly put off by yet another post-apocalyptic tale.

Tim Burton’s over anticipated re-making of the children’s classic tale finally reaches our screens in full 3D format.  The expected Burton twist takes a somewhat dreary look at the magical world of wonderland. This time we follow Alice years after the first forgotten visit, in her return to the nightmarish Underland.

BY LAURA SHEARER

Unlike the extreme uses of colour of the advertising posters, Burton’s vision of wonderland is obscurely bleak and almost unbecoming of previous borderline acid-trip imaginings.  This is definitely not a child-friendly film because of Burton’s defiantly dark interpretation, so fans of his recent adaptations will find themselves in a very comfortable seat.

Burton seemingly enjoys pushing the boundaries of familiarity and delights in deploying discomfort.  Some scenes are not for the squeamish, and perhaps Burton explores the possibilities of the grotesque too much in his environments and props.  The unexpected high level of animal cruelty by the queen of hearts is hurtfully absurd, even with CGI creatures it makes for difficult viewing.  This is a controversial topic that Burton could have taken much further.  Instead what Burton sets up are plenty of narrative opportunities that could have made this film exceptional, but he opts for the uncomplicated heroine who withholds the quirk of his best loved earlier filmic characters.

This remake is a perfect choice for Burton; his protagonist Alice is bored with reality and so it’s only natural that she’s the type of intuitive young mind that is fascinated by the fantastical and highly imaginative.  Supplementing her almost torturous reality Alice follows that famous white rabbit into the mystical unknown, not caring what she leaves behind, merely focusing on what enticing alternatives lie ahead of her bold choices.  The spirit of the Burton film, as well as his mainstream audience, can be found in the ever attractive and self-assured Alice.

Sadly not much of the same can be said for the other characters.  Helena Bonham Carter aptly takes on the wicked role of the queen of hearts, or as Burton has renamed her, the Red Queen in an attempt to contrast with Anne Hathaway’s role as the White Queen.  The rest of the star studded cast, including Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter, Alan Rickman as the caterpillar and Matt Lucas as Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee, give an impressive “pull out all the stops” effect.  Perhaps a little too suited to their roles, and all too nonchalant about their performance believability, the cast aren’t really stretched and retain a by-passable slump in what could have been career highlights.

The narrative changes are so numerous that it’s easy to get lost in Burton’s confusing fantasy ideology.  A depressing change to the cheeky grinning Cheshire cat, finds him blue rather than pink, empathetic and less persevering than his perky persona.  The scared-cat image is delivered alongside the removal of a source of humour; Chess here makes good use of his big blue eyes to swindle his way through the plot.  The addition of an almost irrelevant threat leads the narrative into an odd medieval tale of old fashioned knight-hood, whilst in the middle of a bizarre war of sibling rivalry.  Probably just a little too much, displaying clearly that Burton felt the original tale was just too plain.

The hostile world of Underland is gloomy and another perfect opportunity for that well-known trip through the misty moonlit woods of Burton’s recent production endeavours.  As the Mad Hatter says to Alice, “you’ve lost your much-ness”, this adaptation obviously lacks a penultimate new perspective.  If the film had taken a simpler understanding it would have been much more grounded and less of a disjointed viewing experience.

Disappointingly not worth the hype, especially in 3D.

BY LAURA SHEARER

Under the tagline ‘when the last angel falls, the fight for mankind begins’, this messy narrative captures the topical post-apocalypse format, but with the added rouse of religion at its core.  God has forsaken mankind and it’s up to the fallen Archangel Michael (Paul Bettany) to rebel, save the unborn messiah and validate his remaining faith in the human race.  In a rundown dinner in the middle of a desert, no-man’s-land lies the only hope that mankind has, featuring a cast of  relatively C-list actors, it’s clear from the start that this action-fantasy-thriller won’t quite make any comparison to the films it references.

The terribly confusing narrative is rooted in ideas of anarchy and agnosticism.  It greatly misses the opportunity to explain itself. God has already sent us an unborn messiah, but for some unknown reason, this time he’s decided to abort mission save humanity.  At what point have we reached a stage that history couldn’t possibly repeat itself in spiritual terms?  Surely the selfless Michael who cuts off his own wings in a very detailed scene, is a reminder to the apparent creator that humanity isn’t too far removed from his own image?  The plot doesn’t even explore these ideas, leaving viewers stumped as to why it’s the main grounding for the narrative.  Lots of cheesy one-liners conclude that the dialogue has the main purpose of attempting to show what exactly is going on, but it’s very basic structure is constantly interrupted by huge explosions and ample gore.

In a lot of the scenes it’s obvious that it wants to expand into the familiar zombie horror B-flick, of such straight to DVD fame, but this is just another one of its allusions that it doesn’t follow up.  The complex pastiche of other films, e.g. Omen reference with the small child scene, just shows the makers up as there is so little in the narrative that it really needs to continuously reference.  The spot-the-reference game does pass a lot of the time in the cinema, but that’s more of a play along at home style of entertainment.  The sometimes diabolical editing features some really unnecessary jump cuts that clearly are due to the issue of keeping a restraint on the film length rather than adding style.   Never mind the astonishing finale scene on the cliff with its unbelievable rushed attempt to add in some interesting cinematography, that’s just something today’s cinema viewers begin to dread.  Honestly, it ends on a swear word and that would suffice as a quick description of this film, but you’ll have to go see it to find out what that is.

BY LAURA SHEARER

Jeff Bridges stars as the charismatic and secretive Bad Blake, a man of life’s pleasures, womaniser, alcoholic, chain smoker and apple of his fans’ eyes.  He’s reached an unstable point in his career where he’s no longer making money from song writing and relying on the corporate agent to set him up with small town gigs in bowling alleys and such like to scrape a living. Bad Blake is a laid back man who knows how he wants to live and hates being told otherwise.  This is a film about what a country music star might do when at this stage, when he has known nothing but his music and has nothing left.  He’s lonely but satisfied with his almost rock ‘n’ roll lifestyle, still living the dream, yet this time without the money.  Bridges has a really remarkable opportunity and shines through with his truly fascinating characterisation.  Bridges natural subtlety allows him to embrace those moments in the film that procure a seamless comic style, created out of the small everyday mistakes and disappointments.  This element is not only extremely enjoyable, but makes Bad Blake uniquely humanistic and hence we empathise with him and somehow find him gravitating towards the grey areas of appeal.  It’s perhaps all too easy to relapse into the durability of Bridge’s character The Dude, and love this film in the same spectrum.

Maggie Gyllenhaal is the very cute struggling journalist that becomes the perfect match for Bad Blake.  Sharing the same loneliness but of a different sort and through different life situations, she’s his polar opposite.  She’s selfless and for Bad Blake represents all that he’s been running from, until now.  Gyllenhaal gives another enigmatic performance, with a graceful empathy and a strikingly genuine level of emotional devotion.  Colin Farrell is the detestable boy who represents all that Bad Blake hates about the music industry.  He’s the literal embodiment of selling power and provides the audience with a validated reason for rooting for the perhaps otherwise unlikable Bad Blake.  Robert Duvall has a very interesting role, offering him the suave slightly more than cameo part that really seals the deal in a film that puts so much emphasis on the star system.

The on stage performance sequences are shot similar to concert footage and has the inexcusable style of a country music video.  Emphasis is placed on lighting effects and the singers are central to the camera lens, with several swirling 180degree angle shots keep the style instalment fresh and entertaining.  The idea of exciting first hand viewing of the gigs is evident in the camerawork, plunging the viewer into the unexpected fan position, deploying the idolising perspectives of his fans.  As based on the novel by Thomas Cobb, who also co-wrote the screenplay, the dysfunctional world of the fading country artist has never been made so intriguing.

Jun Ichikawa’s stunning film launched the QFT Girls on Film festival last night.  The festival is a touring programme by the Japan Foundation that promotes contemporary Japanese cinema and sometimes by women in the foreground.  The unique collection is only showing in five cinemas during February and March, so it’s a real cinematic treat that the QFT are offering.  With more than a modest Filmography in both directing and writing, Jun Ichikawa seems the perfect choice to open with, and the film is one of the most interesting studies of society I’ve seen in a long time.

BY LAURA SHEARER

www.queensfilmtheatre.com

It’s a skilfully crafted film that completely immerses you in the narrative, although not a on the edge of my seat gripping plot, the intense mode of realism and the relatable here makes Ichikawa’s work a very enjoyable watch.  Taking the little looked at topic of school, we follow the story of two girls as they find their places, both in social positioning and within family expectations.  This is a captivating tale that is presented clearly and effectively, making it very easy for anyone watching to recall those awkward teenage feelings about finding your true self and your place in society.

The feelings of the protagonist, Juri, are masterfully portrayed with the aid of a voice-over narration, but on a deeper level, the characters almost melancholy state is shown through the impressive cinematography.  Slow motion shots of leaves and branches swaying in the in the wind offers a refreshing alternative to the dear diary answer of the mainstream cinema, whilst sweeping tracking shots of the suburban surroundings position the narrative in the ordinary and entrapping everyday environment that Juri begins to struggle with.  A wonderfully inventive use of split screens during dialogue shows the distance between the characters.  An intuitive use of smaller screens within the big screen we view from show events happening from several points of view at the same time, whilst placed within a changing full screen backdrop of suburban scenery, or in some cases a simple black screen to emphasise the characters emotions.

Ichikawa’s use of the jump cut (a single rapid edit from one image to the other) is almost revolutionary.  Usually used to speed up the pace of a sequence, constant jump cuts to close-ups of the characters and mid-shots of leisurely actions provide a completely new use for the editing style.  There’s something melodic about how Ichikawa uses editing to her advantage, giving an overall sense of calm when viewing the final product, which is so well put together its style is definitely effortless.  Perfect delivery is key to the workings of Ichikawa’s film, so it’s only fair to say that this remarkable tale plays out like a haiku poem: Pleasant and satisfying.

BY LAURA SHEARER

The first half of the film pays attention to its source, but the screenplay is bland and the intimate sophistication of Sebold’s narrative is lost. On a more positive note, this film exhibits what Jackson is as a director, a visionary and a genius, exuding his talent to take that which seems almost impossible to imagine onto film. It’s a must see for Sebold fans and anyone who’s the least bit curious. The ideas that remain fixed in your mind after viewing are the possibilities that both the novel and film explore.

BY LAURA SHEARER

Protagonist Tiana is the embodiment of the childish Disney spirit with her wide-eyed joy, a heart full of hope and her belief in fairytale stories. The essence of New Orleans’ culture has been magically brought to life on the silver screen.  All aspects of New Orleans are addressed, from the famous jazz scene to mardi gras carnival celebrations, to the dark underlying superstitions of voodoo and magic practise and a natural gravitation towards the typical Disney narrative influence of self-belief and love.  The sense of community within its inhabitants is strongly emphasised through a wide variety of characters that are quickly and effectively introduced, without overcrowding the plot. Each character is the brain child of typical and pure Disney genius, keeping the film fast paced but simple to follow and perfect for holding the attention of younger viewers. Music, as with every Disney Classic is at the heart of this film. The songs are as catchy as expected, but with a heavy soul vibe and relatively relatable topics. The most exciting element is the stereotypical villain, so the slimy and scheming Voodoo practitioner, Dr, Facilier, ticks all the boxes. Unbeknownst to the innocent and open hearted prince, his magic is misinterpreted for good doings, but to the understanding audience the ‘Shadow Man’ is deviant and is the threat of the film.  The artistic team that created Disney’s Aladdin are the geniuses behind this new release, that much is evident from the watching of the film alone, with ‘The Shadow Man’ stylistically and characteristically mirroring the much loved and loathed Jafa of Aladdin fame.  As a contrast the magnificent Madame Odi, the fairy Godmother figure, offers us a different perspective on voodoo and magic, allowing Disney to remain non-bias on the superstitions issue.  This is something Disney does well, delivering interesting ideology but not taking a deliberate stance. This postmodern take on a well-known fairytale integrates good morals, with Tiana the hard working dreamer and the rich leisurely living Prince Naveen displaying polar opposites. The typical evil which, always pays and the happy ending tradition of Disney is accompanied by the always resourceful Disney love plot. The magic and sparkle of Disney is evident throughout and is the main reason why The Princess and the Frog is so watchable. As far as the typical Disney animation stretches, this just simply demonstrates how impressive hand-drawn films are and how digital animation techniques just don’t compare.

BY LAURA SHEARER

www.queensfilmtheatre.com

‘The Road’ is extremely enjoyable, as without warning we are immediately immersed in the world of the father and son.   The film begins without introduction to the current situation, so even if you haven’t seen the trailer or know anything of the story-line, you are quickly transported into this strange environment.  Hillcoat’s genuine skill as a director is his ability to pleasantly force his audience into that nervous notion of ‘got to keep your wits about you’ that plays suitably into the major themes of the film.  The atmosphere of the environment that the characters inhabit is distinctly and very personally addressed to the viewer by infrequent flashbacks to the man’s peacefully serene life pre-apocalyptic event.  Those first few seconds that give an indulgent notion of awareness that we are in a strange and unexplored place, quickly give way to an odd realisation of the stark reality presented to us.

If anything, Hillcoat is perfectly capable of developing a remarkable tale of human bonding that interestingly questions man’s primal instincts and what we deem today as sophisticated culture.  The relationship of the father and son is both ordinary and undeniably unique as it is straddled with issues of domestic and social boundaries.  Likewise, the relationship between man and woman is complex under the given circumstances, but there is an obvious connection between the pair, as there is with the man and boy.  Viggo Mortensen is splendid and seemingly unchallenged by his emotionally difficult depiction of an unhinging man.  There are some surprisingly delicate performances from Robert Duvall, Charlize Theron and Kodi Smit-McPhee, all of which exhibit some wonderfully multi-dimensional acting.  More importantly, the characters are treated with unexpected depth and deploy a discursive element of humanistic tenderness.

The cinematography is astounding, plausibly depicting the immediate landscapes and situations both delicately and with an intense level of detail, which only makes the viewing experience so much more pleasurable.  The slow pace of the film is admittedly hypnotic and the soundtrack gives a heart-felt dream-like vibe to the entire piece.  The constantly changing camera angles offer a subtle quality that makes the film truly memorable from start to finish.  An unexpected aspect is the honestly photogenic aesthetic appeal of the film.  After every series of shots follows a perfect example of deep-focus photography that would impressively put Orson Welles to shame.  The dark colour palette of the film manages to follow through as descriptive, but it works so well with the style of the film that after a while it becomes unrecognisable, and determinedly unable to be detached from.

Whilst there’s umpteen films  released in the past few years that deal with the same post-apocalyptic, ending earth sort of idea, ‘The Road’ stands out as one of the most intense.  As many other critics have suggested,  it does reference quite a lot of the same possible events that these other films have dealt with, but it seems to do so in such a stylistic tone that it has defined itself as the film that in a moment, changed the world forever.

BY LAURA SHEARER

www.queensfilmtheatre.com

As much as modern crime cultures are complex, Audiard presents a very undercut and problematic prerogative in a shockingly interpretative manner.  The viewer is welcomed and delicately tempted right from the beginning of the film into seeing the unfolding events as relatively simple and even understandable to an extent.  Here it’s Audiard’s ability to present this predicament that’s a sure sign of talent as both writer and director, making his work a joy to watch as the narrative unfolds.

There’s definitely a touch of surrealism and strong hints towards the standard French New Wave cinema style, although this is expected from Audiard when considering his filmography (which includes the instant indie favourite ‘The Beat that my Heart Skipped’).  His artistic influences are a breath of fresh air for the ever popular Hollywood crime drama genre, allowing him to explore more of the criminal’s experiences than other films would perhaps have attempted to tackle.

The naturalistic camera movements keep our viewing of the world of the condemned to a brief minimal, but Audiard manages to use his fantastic techniques to suggest that there is much more than we could ever have expected to see already being shown.  The editing pace falters between rapid and an almost documentary style, impressively depicting both the respective thrilling action sequences and intimate moments that whisk the viewer away into the anti-realism before their eyes.

The resourcefulness of camera angles and footage shot in such a confined zone is one of the main draws of the film and what separates it from previous prison topical.  Audiard’s defined knowledge of the cinematic format is what keeps this film sharp with a sleek modern edge that ‘Mesrine’ introduced to the crime drama.  There are many references to the much loved crime thriller classics such as ‘The Godfather’ and ‘Blow’, but Audiard somehow manages to leave these resounding famous images untouched, and I’m sure that this is much appreciated by fans of the classics.  Audiard simply uses his knowledge of the crime thriller as a point to draw upon, cleverly developing the well known traditional notions of the criminal mind and giving us something hugely enjoyable and lushly creative.

The suspenseful secrecy that keeps the cogs of the prison machine turning is what drives Audiard’s visuals and what keeps his film that little step above the rest.  The plain view brutality is stark and bold throughout, but keeps the audience at a desired distance from the characters, as well as constantly drawing the viewer in, playing on their curiosity and encouraging them to demand more.  There’s definitely some odd pleasure in watching something that makes you both squirm and question what you’re seeing.  As far as thrillers go, it’s good enough, but in regard to the crime genre, Audiard has hit the ground running.