The Muppet Christmas Carol looked like anything but a safe bet when it was released twenty years ago. Eight years on from their previous big screen outing, 1984's The Muppets Take Manhattan, the film was a notable departure from the more straightforward stage musical style that the Muppets were known for. It was also the first major release from the characters since the death of their creator, Jim Henson, two years previously; the film is dedicated to Henson, and his son Brian took on the director's role. These factors combined meant that a Muppet version of Dickens' famous festive ghost story could at the times of its release be considered a sizeable risk. Two decades later and the film is one of the most well-loved film versions of the tale and, arguably, the Muppets' most successful feature film.
The film recounts the well-known story of Ebeneezer Scrooge (Michael Caine), a miserly misanthrope who detests Christmas. However, during a visit from the ghosts of his deceased business partners Jacob and Robert Marley one Christmas Eve, Scrooge is warned to change his ways and informed he will be visited by three further spirits throughout the night.
The Muppet Christmas Carol gives you an awful lot to like about it all the way through. The casting, both human and Muppet, is spot on: Kermit is the perfect fit for humble optimist Bob Cratchit, with Miss Piggy overacting tremendously in the role of his wife; Statler and Waldorf heckling from beyond the grave as the Marley brothers is simply superb, as is Fozzie Bear in the small but key role of Scrooge's first employer Fozziwig; the best piece of Muppet casting, however, has to go to Gonzo narrating the whole thing as Charles Dickens himself, forming a perfect double act with Rizzo The Rat (as himself) and providing plenty of laugh-out-loud moments throughout.
The way in which the three Christmas ghosts are realised through original Muppet creations is wonderful, with acute attention to detail and incredible faith to the source material; only the Ghost Of Christmas Present is softened up a little, working to the film's benefit by providing a much starker contrast to the Ghost Of Christmas Yet To Come. Whilst this is a Muppet film, much of the film's success must also be attributed to a faultless central performance from Caine. His Scrooge is the perfect balance of cruel taskmaster, lonely and bitter old man and, becoming more and more evident as the story wears on, a sympathetic figure with some serious emotional damage. His transformation from the start to the end of the film, coupled with the chemistry he consistently demonstrates with his Muppet co-stars, shows just how skilled an actor Caine is.
The combination of fidelity to Dickens' novella, sharp and intelligent humour and some incredibly catchy tunes (you'll have "Marley And Marley" stuck in your head for days after you watch) make The Muppet Christmas Carol a near comprehensive success. It occasionally becomes a little too sentimental for its own good, with some of the scenes involving Tiny Tim (played by Kermit's nephew Robin) laying on the schmaltz a little too heavy-handedly, but the story's pervading morals coupled with this being a Christmas tale allow this to be mostly forgiven. Overall, this is a charming, well made and incredibly enjoyable treat that deserves to be revisited every year during the festive season.
9/10
Showing posts with label Michael Caine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael Caine. Show all posts
Saturday, 8 December 2012
Sunday, 16 September 2012
Film Review | The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
It's difficult to comprehend, after the runaway success of The Dark Knight and Heath Ledger's iconic performance within that film, that Christopher Nolan originally intended for Batman Begins to be a standalone film. The Joker card tease at the end of Begins was put in as a nod to Batman's most infamous foe, not as the perfect lead into the second film it turned out to be. After The Dark Knight, it was difficult to imagine that Nolan and Warner Bros. wouldn't want to follow things up and make Nolan's Batman franchise into a trilogy. A third film would allow Nolan to tie up thematic and emotional threads, and would allow Warner Bros. to again make a ridiculously large amount of money as they had done with the first sequel. But after creating two of the most important comic book adaptations in cinematic history, the hype for The Dark Knight Rises was through the roof, and the question of how Nolan could possibly better - or even match - the acclaim of the first two installments was on the lips of many.
Set eight years after the events of The Dark Knight, Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) has become a recluse, shying away from both his business life at Wayne Enterprises and the vigilante life of his alter-ego, Batman. However, after a powerful terrorist known as Bane (Tom Hardy) makes his presence known in Gotham, Wayne is lured out to help protect the city once more as the caped crusader.
There's an awful lot to like about The Dark Knight Rises. Nolan feels at home bringing Gotham back to the big screen, producing some of the most impressive cinematography seen in any part of the trilogy. Evoking images of Soviet Russia, a barbaric and mystical Asia, and a bleakly paranoid post-9/11 Western society, Nolan sets a captivating backdrop for both his crisp dialogue and charged action sequences in which to take place. There are set pieces contained within, such as Bane's breathtaking hijacking of an American football match, that are contenders for the best action sequence in any Nolan Batman film.
There is also a strong returning cast, led by Christian Bale's protagonist. Bale, now the actor who has donned the Dark Knight's costume more times on the big screen than any other, is once again a strong presence. Bale feels comfortable and reliable in the dual role, whilst at the same time bringing new dimensions and development to both Wayne and his crime-fighting persona. Michael Caine puts in possibly his strongest performance of the entire trilogy as Alfred Pennyworth; it's just a shame that the plot dictates he be absent from a significant proportion of the film. The same can be said for Gary Oldman's Commissioner Jim Gordon: a strong performance, but necessarily sidelined for much of the first half of the film. It's a truth that can again be applied to Morgan Freeman as Lucius Fox, always a welcome presence but whose role here is reduced from that in the first two films.
Filling the gaps left by the reduced roles of Caine, Oldman and Freeman, as well as non-returners from The Dark Knight Maggie Gyllenhaal, Aaron Eckhart and, of course, Heath Ledger, is a wealth of new talent. Hardy as Bane is a domineering presence throughout; his performance, although not comparable to Ledger's enigmatic Joker, is strong and provides a satisfying physical threat to oppose Batman not seen previously in Nolan's films. That's not to say Bane is all brawn and no brain; his plans for Gotham are meticulous and Machiavellian, and he is arguably the most successful of all the enemies Nolan's Batman has had to face. Anne Hathaway, at least initially a controversial casting decision, is also strong as the ambiguously aligned Selina Kyle, her performance entertaining throughout and fitting superbly into the universe Nolan has created. The character feels slightly underdeveloped in the script at times, but thanks to Hathaway's confidence in the role this can largely be forgiven.
Perhaps the strongest of the new cast members is Joseph Gordon-Levitt as police officer John Blake. Gordon-Levitt continues to carve out a reputation as a strong and reliable presence on screen, here bringing both toughness, emotion and depth to the role, making Blake a welcome addition to the franchise. Less convincing is Marion Cotillard's Miranda Tate. Cotillard does well with what she is given, but the character unfortunately receives too little development and screen time to believe or invest in, a problem exacerbated by her elevated role in the film's final act.
The biggest problem for The Dark Knight Rises is, ultimately, the two films that precede it. It's an excellent action film and a confident and assured comic book adaptation. But by following Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, the most significant franchise reboot made so far and one of the most acclaimed action films ever made respectively behind it, The Dark Knight Rises possibly appears more flawed than it actually is. There are flaws: a couple of underdeveloped characters, stemming from Nolan possibly trying to pack in too many characters altogether, being the main issue. The reduced roles of three of the franchise's key players in Caine, Freeman and Oldman is ultimately a weakness too. The film is also a little too long, causing the pace to slow on a few too many occasions. But although this is the weakest overall of Nolan's Batman trilogy, it's still a mesmerising and thoroughly entertaining piece of cinema, and provides a strong and incredibly pleasing conclusion to what is sure to be remembered as one of the best cinematic comic book adaptation series ever made.
9/10
Set eight years after the events of The Dark Knight, Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) has become a recluse, shying away from both his business life at Wayne Enterprises and the vigilante life of his alter-ego, Batman. However, after a powerful terrorist known as Bane (Tom Hardy) makes his presence known in Gotham, Wayne is lured out to help protect the city once more as the caped crusader.
There's an awful lot to like about The Dark Knight Rises. Nolan feels at home bringing Gotham back to the big screen, producing some of the most impressive cinematography seen in any part of the trilogy. Evoking images of Soviet Russia, a barbaric and mystical Asia, and a bleakly paranoid post-9/11 Western society, Nolan sets a captivating backdrop for both his crisp dialogue and charged action sequences in which to take place. There are set pieces contained within, such as Bane's breathtaking hijacking of an American football match, that are contenders for the best action sequence in any Nolan Batman film.
There is also a strong returning cast, led by Christian Bale's protagonist. Bale, now the actor who has donned the Dark Knight's costume more times on the big screen than any other, is once again a strong presence. Bale feels comfortable and reliable in the dual role, whilst at the same time bringing new dimensions and development to both Wayne and his crime-fighting persona. Michael Caine puts in possibly his strongest performance of the entire trilogy as Alfred Pennyworth; it's just a shame that the plot dictates he be absent from a significant proportion of the film. The same can be said for Gary Oldman's Commissioner Jim Gordon: a strong performance, but necessarily sidelined for much of the first half of the film. It's a truth that can again be applied to Morgan Freeman as Lucius Fox, always a welcome presence but whose role here is reduced from that in the first two films.
Filling the gaps left by the reduced roles of Caine, Oldman and Freeman, as well as non-returners from The Dark Knight Maggie Gyllenhaal, Aaron Eckhart and, of course, Heath Ledger, is a wealth of new talent. Hardy as Bane is a domineering presence throughout; his performance, although not comparable to Ledger's enigmatic Joker, is strong and provides a satisfying physical threat to oppose Batman not seen previously in Nolan's films. That's not to say Bane is all brawn and no brain; his plans for Gotham are meticulous and Machiavellian, and he is arguably the most successful of all the enemies Nolan's Batman has had to face. Anne Hathaway, at least initially a controversial casting decision, is also strong as the ambiguously aligned Selina Kyle, her performance entertaining throughout and fitting superbly into the universe Nolan has created. The character feels slightly underdeveloped in the script at times, but thanks to Hathaway's confidence in the role this can largely be forgiven.
Perhaps the strongest of the new cast members is Joseph Gordon-Levitt as police officer John Blake. Gordon-Levitt continues to carve out a reputation as a strong and reliable presence on screen, here bringing both toughness, emotion and depth to the role, making Blake a welcome addition to the franchise. Less convincing is Marion Cotillard's Miranda Tate. Cotillard does well with what she is given, but the character unfortunately receives too little development and screen time to believe or invest in, a problem exacerbated by her elevated role in the film's final act.
The biggest problem for The Dark Knight Rises is, ultimately, the two films that precede it. It's an excellent action film and a confident and assured comic book adaptation. But by following Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, the most significant franchise reboot made so far and one of the most acclaimed action films ever made respectively behind it, The Dark Knight Rises possibly appears more flawed than it actually is. There are flaws: a couple of underdeveloped characters, stemming from Nolan possibly trying to pack in too many characters altogether, being the main issue. The reduced roles of three of the franchise's key players in Caine, Freeman and Oldman is ultimately a weakness too. The film is also a little too long, causing the pace to slow on a few too many occasions. But although this is the weakest overall of Nolan's Batman trilogy, it's still a mesmerising and thoroughly entertaining piece of cinema, and provides a strong and incredibly pleasing conclusion to what is sure to be remembered as one of the best cinematic comic book adaptation series ever made.
9/10
Labels:
2010s,
2012,
action,
Anne Hathaway,
Christian Bale,
Dark Knight Trilogy,
films,
Gary Oldman,
Joseph Gordon-Levitt,
Marion Cotillard,
Michael Caine,
Morgan Freeman,
review,
sequels,
superhero,
Tom Hardy
Thursday, 6 September 2012
Film Review | The Dark Knight (2008)
The Dark Knight is both a continuation of, and a reaction to, the perfect reboot of the Batman franchise that Christopher Nolan created in 2005's Batman Begins. Whilst furthering the realistic edge of the first film, Nolan goes in an almost entirely different direction in his choice of Batman's enemies. Whilst Batman Begins is notable for featuring some of the Caped Crusader's least theatrical villains who had limited mainstream recognition before their appearance in the film, The Dark Knight features two of Batman's adversaries who are not only amongst his most well-known and extraordinary, but who have also featured prominently on the big screen in the past. Casting the late Heath Ledger as The Joker also appeared to many as a risky decision when first announced considering the acclaimed performance given in the role by Hollywood heavyweight Jack Nicholson in 1989's Batman, not to mention the character being undoubtedly Batman's most notorious and well-loved nemesis.
The film takes place some six months after the events of Batman Begins, as Batman, the crime-fighting alter-ego of Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale), works with Lieutenant Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman) and other members of the Gotham Police Department against bizarre criminal mastermind The Joker (Ledger). Joining the fight is newly appointed district attorney Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart), determined to rid Gotham of crime however he can; whilst Bruce sees Harvey as holding the potential to lead Gotham into a brighter future, matters are complicated by Harvey's relationship with assistant district attorney, and Bruce's childhood friend and love interest, Rachel Dawes (Maggie Gyllenhaal).
The Dark Knight is just as successful as its precursor, partly because many of the things that worked so well in Batman Begins are retained. The returning cast again put in superb performances: Bale is given the opportunity to flesh out both Bruce Wayne and Batman further, building on his strong performance in the first film; Michael Caine as Alfred Pennyworth is predictably excellent, the chemistry between his character and Bale's even more palpable and authentic; Oldman as Gordon is again a genuine highlight, continuing the character's development arc with subtlety and humility; and Morgan Freeman as Lucius Fox is, unsurprisingly, a joy. All of these performances tied together by Nolan's captivating direction, adrenaline-charged action sequences and polished script (again crafted with brother Jonathan) gives The Dark Knight a strong foundation upon which to build the film's new elements.
The new cast members are comprehensively excellent, their characters fitting perfectly into Nolan's Gotham. Gyllenhaal takes on the role of Rachel Dawes capably, developing the character and making it her own, to the extent that when recalling the character it is Gyllenhaal who comes to mind first, despite Katie Holmes originating the character in Batman Begins. Eckhart's turn as Harvey Dent is flawless, delivering the many shades of Dent's character effortlessly, and playing out his tragic story arc with such class and pathos that it can't fail to impress on the highest level.
Of course, the film's biggest and most successful addition is that of Ledger's Joker. It's hard to say anything that hasn't already been said about Ledger in The Dark Knight. The character's introduction in the film's opening sequence lets you know that what you are witnessing in the combination of Ledger's performance and Nolan's script is something very special, and once The Joker lays his intentions bare to Gotham's gangland leaders (opening with a simple "magic trick" you'll never forget) neither Nolan nor Ledger let up until the closing scenes. It's a performance which captivates, redefining one of the most iconic antagonists ever created, striking the perfect balance between The Joker's overtly comic book foundations and Nolan's real world aesthetic.
The Dark Knight may be less epic and more episodic in its structure when compared to Batman Begins, but this never counts against it. In salvaging the Batman franchise, Nolan pulled off what many thought impossible and struck gold. Through The Dark Knight, Nolan manages to produce a film against which all comic book adaptations are likely, nay deserve, to be measured. It soars as an action film, broods with psychological drama, and reaches heights neither this comic book franchise nor any other has achieved before or since.
10/10
The film takes place some six months after the events of Batman Begins, as Batman, the crime-fighting alter-ego of Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale), works with Lieutenant Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman) and other members of the Gotham Police Department against bizarre criminal mastermind The Joker (Ledger). Joining the fight is newly appointed district attorney Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart), determined to rid Gotham of crime however he can; whilst Bruce sees Harvey as holding the potential to lead Gotham into a brighter future, matters are complicated by Harvey's relationship with assistant district attorney, and Bruce's childhood friend and love interest, Rachel Dawes (Maggie Gyllenhaal).
The Dark Knight is just as successful as its precursor, partly because many of the things that worked so well in Batman Begins are retained. The returning cast again put in superb performances: Bale is given the opportunity to flesh out both Bruce Wayne and Batman further, building on his strong performance in the first film; Michael Caine as Alfred Pennyworth is predictably excellent, the chemistry between his character and Bale's even more palpable and authentic; Oldman as Gordon is again a genuine highlight, continuing the character's development arc with subtlety and humility; and Morgan Freeman as Lucius Fox is, unsurprisingly, a joy. All of these performances tied together by Nolan's captivating direction, adrenaline-charged action sequences and polished script (again crafted with brother Jonathan) gives The Dark Knight a strong foundation upon which to build the film's new elements.
The new cast members are comprehensively excellent, their characters fitting perfectly into Nolan's Gotham. Gyllenhaal takes on the role of Rachel Dawes capably, developing the character and making it her own, to the extent that when recalling the character it is Gyllenhaal who comes to mind first, despite Katie Holmes originating the character in Batman Begins. Eckhart's turn as Harvey Dent is flawless, delivering the many shades of Dent's character effortlessly, and playing out his tragic story arc with such class and pathos that it can't fail to impress on the highest level.
Of course, the film's biggest and most successful addition is that of Ledger's Joker. It's hard to say anything that hasn't already been said about Ledger in The Dark Knight. The character's introduction in the film's opening sequence lets you know that what you are witnessing in the combination of Ledger's performance and Nolan's script is something very special, and once The Joker lays his intentions bare to Gotham's gangland leaders (opening with a simple "magic trick" you'll never forget) neither Nolan nor Ledger let up until the closing scenes. It's a performance which captivates, redefining one of the most iconic antagonists ever created, striking the perfect balance between The Joker's overtly comic book foundations and Nolan's real world aesthetic.
The Dark Knight may be less epic and more episodic in its structure when compared to Batman Begins, but this never counts against it. In salvaging the Batman franchise, Nolan pulled off what many thought impossible and struck gold. Through The Dark Knight, Nolan manages to produce a film against which all comic book adaptations are likely, nay deserve, to be measured. It soars as an action film, broods with psychological drama, and reaches heights neither this comic book franchise nor any other has achieved before or since.
10/10
Labels:
10/10 reviews,
2000s,
Aaron Eckhart,
action,
Christian Bale,
Christopher Nolan,
Dark Knight Trilogy,
films,
Gary Oldman,
Heath Ledger,
Maggie Gyllenhaal,
Michael Caine,
Morgan Freeman,
review,
sequels,
superhero
Sunday, 2 September 2012
Film Review | Batman Begins (2005)
Batman Begins is arguably the most important reboot of a franchise made so far. Only Casino Royale, 2006's restart of the Bond series, contests it for that title. But in hindsight, with twenty Bond films in the can, 007 was merely hitting a stale patch, something which had happened before and the secret agent had managed to come through. Bat-fans will be well aware that Bruce Wayne and his crime-fighting alter-ego were firmly in the doldrums at the turn of the 21st Century thanks to Joel Schumacher's so-bad-it's-painful 1997 effort Batman And Robin. Batman was seen by many as an untouchable, irreparable commodity. Neither was Christopher Nolan likely to be at the top of anyone's list in 2005 to helm the reinvigoration of the character; after his breakout feature Memento, Nolan's most recent work had been 2002's Insomnia, a skillful remake of a 1997 Norwegian psychological thriller with Al Pacino and Robin Williams. The risk factor seemed through the roof to many; they may have been right, but the risk was well worth it, and the payoff was phenomenal.
Batman Begins takes us right back to the hero's roots. Witnessing the murder of his parents at the hands of a petty criminal, a young Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) exiles himself from Gotham City and travels the world, cutting himself off from all who know and care for him including butler to his parents Alfred Pennyworth (Michael Caine and childhood friend Rachel Dawes (Katie Holmes). After being rescued from a prison in the Himalayas by Henri Ducard (Liam Neeson), Wayne is trained as a member of the League Of Shadows, a mysterious organisation utilising ninjitsu and advanced martial arts techniques. It is this training which Wayne uses to develop his vigilante persona, Batman, upon his return to Gotham, a city now swathed in fear and corruption.
Batman Begins is successful in pretty much everything it attempts. Nolan's script, written with brother Jonathan, brings depth to the story of Batman, something which hasn't really been seen before in the franchise, even in Tim Burton's acclaimed efforts in the late '80s and early '90s. In fact, this isn't really the story of Batman at all; this is Bruce Wayne's story told with notes that are epic and extravagant as well as intimate and personal and in which Batman is one aspect of the character. Wayne's masked alter-ego isn't actually seen until around halfway through the film, and it makes his entrance all the more thrilling.
Nolan's choices for the film's antagonists are spot on, shying away from the caped crusader's most notorious and flamboyant enemies in favour of a rogues' gallery more grounded in reality. Carmine Falcone, portrayed by an excellent Tom Wilkinson, is a superb choice as the first genuine criminal threat to Gotham seen in the film bringing a largely real world, mafioso flavour to proceedings. Cillian Murphy as slimy, corrupt criminal psychiatrist Dr. Jonathan Crane is also fantastic, marrying the more flamboyant comic-book style of the character perfectly with Nolan's more realistic take on the franchise. And, without revealing too much about the plot's twists and turns, Neeson's character provides a fantastic counterpoint to both Bruce Wayne and Batman, underpinned by the actor's strong performance.
With so many bad guys in attendance, it would be easy for a lesser film to fall into the trap of losing focus and denying any of them enough development or screen time; Nolan however interlinks the antagonists brilliantly, fitting them together in such a way that each feels genuine and worthwhile on their own, but also allows the creation of a criminal hierarchy within Gotham that adds depth to the city not seen on screen before.
Things are just as impressive on the side of good. Bale is excellent as both Bruce Wayne and Batman, bringing a complex cocktail of emotions and facade to the former, and palpable power and ingenuity to the latter, finding the right balance of drama and humour in both personas. The supporting good guys are also strong, with Caine and Morgan Freeman reliably excellent and Holmes doing well as Wayne's estranged love interest. The strongest support however, and arguably the performance of the film, comes from Gary Oldman as police officer Jim Gordon, rising through the ranks to lieutenant as the film progresses. Understated, sympathetic, and charged with an incredibly strong sense of right and wrong, Oldman's Gordon is perfect, and will surely go down as one of the actor's most memorable performances.
The ensemble cast tied together with Nolan's script, balancing heroic gravitas with comedic quips, gripping action set pieces with intimate character interaction, makes Batman Begins pretty hard to fault. It is often the sequel, The Dark Knight, which receives greater critical acclaim than this film, unfairly overshadowing one of the most important action blockbusters and comic book adaptations of all time. Without Batman Begins, The Dark Knight would not exist. More importantly, the action landscape now would look quite different, and Batman as a franchise might still be mouldering in a dank corner of Hollywood. In Batman Begins, Nolan not only saved an untouchable commodity, but brought new life into it in a way that many never thought possible.
10/10
Batman Begins takes us right back to the hero's roots. Witnessing the murder of his parents at the hands of a petty criminal, a young Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) exiles himself from Gotham City and travels the world, cutting himself off from all who know and care for him including butler to his parents Alfred Pennyworth (Michael Caine and childhood friend Rachel Dawes (Katie Holmes). After being rescued from a prison in the Himalayas by Henri Ducard (Liam Neeson), Wayne is trained as a member of the League Of Shadows, a mysterious organisation utilising ninjitsu and advanced martial arts techniques. It is this training which Wayne uses to develop his vigilante persona, Batman, upon his return to Gotham, a city now swathed in fear and corruption.
Batman Begins is successful in pretty much everything it attempts. Nolan's script, written with brother Jonathan, brings depth to the story of Batman, something which hasn't really been seen before in the franchise, even in Tim Burton's acclaimed efforts in the late '80s and early '90s. In fact, this isn't really the story of Batman at all; this is Bruce Wayne's story told with notes that are epic and extravagant as well as intimate and personal and in which Batman is one aspect of the character. Wayne's masked alter-ego isn't actually seen until around halfway through the film, and it makes his entrance all the more thrilling.
Nolan's choices for the film's antagonists are spot on, shying away from the caped crusader's most notorious and flamboyant enemies in favour of a rogues' gallery more grounded in reality. Carmine Falcone, portrayed by an excellent Tom Wilkinson, is a superb choice as the first genuine criminal threat to Gotham seen in the film bringing a largely real world, mafioso flavour to proceedings. Cillian Murphy as slimy, corrupt criminal psychiatrist Dr. Jonathan Crane is also fantastic, marrying the more flamboyant comic-book style of the character perfectly with Nolan's more realistic take on the franchise. And, without revealing too much about the plot's twists and turns, Neeson's character provides a fantastic counterpoint to both Bruce Wayne and Batman, underpinned by the actor's strong performance.
With so many bad guys in attendance, it would be easy for a lesser film to fall into the trap of losing focus and denying any of them enough development or screen time; Nolan however interlinks the antagonists brilliantly, fitting them together in such a way that each feels genuine and worthwhile on their own, but also allows the creation of a criminal hierarchy within Gotham that adds depth to the city not seen on screen before.
Things are just as impressive on the side of good. Bale is excellent as both Bruce Wayne and Batman, bringing a complex cocktail of emotions and facade to the former, and palpable power and ingenuity to the latter, finding the right balance of drama and humour in both personas. The supporting good guys are also strong, with Caine and Morgan Freeman reliably excellent and Holmes doing well as Wayne's estranged love interest. The strongest support however, and arguably the performance of the film, comes from Gary Oldman as police officer Jim Gordon, rising through the ranks to lieutenant as the film progresses. Understated, sympathetic, and charged with an incredibly strong sense of right and wrong, Oldman's Gordon is perfect, and will surely go down as one of the actor's most memorable performances.
The ensemble cast tied together with Nolan's script, balancing heroic gravitas with comedic quips, gripping action set pieces with intimate character interaction, makes Batman Begins pretty hard to fault. It is often the sequel, The Dark Knight, which receives greater critical acclaim than this film, unfairly overshadowing one of the most important action blockbusters and comic book adaptations of all time. Without Batman Begins, The Dark Knight would not exist. More importantly, the action landscape now would look quite different, and Batman as a franchise might still be mouldering in a dank corner of Hollywood. In Batman Begins, Nolan not only saved an untouchable commodity, but brought new life into it in a way that many never thought possible.
10/10
Labels:
10/10 reviews,
2000s,
action,
Christian Bale,
Christopher Nolan,
Cillian Murphy,
Dark Knight Trilogy,
films,
Gary Oldman,
Katie Holmes,
Liam Neeson,
Michael Caine,
Morgan Freeman,
review,
superhero,
Tom Wilkinson
Saturday, 9 June 2012
Film Review | Cars 2 (2011)
When praising Pixar, you're spoilt for choice as to where to start. For me, one of the key things Pixar get right time after time is their ability to create characters of depth and humanity, whether those characters are people, animals, toys, monsters, or even robots. Hand in hand with this go the worlds these characters inhabit. They feel real - the characters believe in them unreservedly, and therefore so do we - and they are always pleasurable destinations to which the audience can escape. The one exception to these truths is Cars, Pixar's 2006 effort depicting a world populated by anthropomorphic automobiles. The universe presented in Cars never quite rang true or appealed in the same way as, for example, Andy's toys or the employees of Monsters Incorporated. For Cars to become only the second film in Pixar's canon to spawn a sequel in some ways therefore seems an unlikely choice; by the same token, it could allow Pixar the opportunity to flesh out the characters and ideas introduced in the first film, bringing them closer in quality to what audiences have come to expect from the studio.
Cars 2 continues the story of racing car Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) who now lives in Radiator Springs with best friend Mater (Larry The Cable Guy), girlfriend Sally (Bonnie Hunt) and the other friends he made during the first film. After some goading from Formula 1 racing car Francesco Bernoulli (John Turturro), McQueen enters the World Grand Prix, a series of three races taking place in Japan, Italy and England. Meanwhile, secret agent Finn McMissile (Michael Caine) is working to foil a secret plot involving a new type of biofuel, in which Mater soon finds himself accidentally tangled up.
Reviewing any Pixar film is always what I classify as a "Godfather Part III" review. In the same way that the third part of Coppola's trilogy may pale in comparison to the first two but is actually pretty good in its own right, Cars 2 must be judged against both the studio's previous output as well as the wider spectrum of other films in its genre.
Taking the former point of view, Cars 2 falls very short of the benchmark Pixar have set themselves. Compare this to their most recent output and it simply doesn't stand up in any way. The script is uninspired and heavy-handed in delivering its moral messages. There are almost no traces of Pixar's trademark subtle humour that appeals to both adults and children, and the cultural references just feel tired - be prepared to see wacky Japanese advertising and Mater driving on the wrong side of the road in England. Yawn.
Any opportunity to develop the characters from the less-than-stellar first outing is squandered. Most of the returning cast are reduced to one-dimensional cameos, and big name new additions such as Caine and Eddie Izzard fail to inject any real energy into proceedings. The animation is fine, but often feels no more than functional. The CGI is at its best during the espionage-based set pieces, but things are woefully lacking elsewhere during the race sequences which feel pedestrian and really quite flat.
That said, Pixar at their worst is still quite good in comparison to a lot of the dross currently filling the children and family market. The animation may not be Pixar's best, but it's still relatively vibrant and detailed, in particular the panoramic shots of London and Italy. The story is simplistic, and the grand prix and spy mission strands never quite mesh comfortably, but the film remains fun and keeps the pace up. It's also clear that director John Lasseter is a fan of classic spy flicks, with many pleasing nods to everything from the Bond Films to Austin Powers.
But there are still one or two slip ups that can't be forgiven. Turturro's turn as the antagonistic F1 racer Bernoulli is potentially the film's most solid and entertaining performance. But, having been set up during the first two acts of the film as a credible rival to McQueen, the character is forgotten entirely during the climax; a half-hearted return during the closing scenes feels suspiciously as if Lasseter suddenly realised he'd left one of the film's key characters hanging in mid air.
Cars 2 therefore ends up as by far Pixar's weakest production to date, but still a couple of notches above the average contemporary family fare. All things considered, it's fun and will undoubtedly succeed in entertaining the younger members of the audience. Anyone looking for the humour, heart, charm, expert storytelling or breathtaking visuals of Wall-E, Up or Toy Story 3 will be sorely disappointed. It's hard to recommend Cars 2 when there are numerous five star classics in Pixar's back catalogue, as well as offerings from several other animation studios that are also superior to it. Cars 2 is by no means awful, just seriously disappointing.
5/10
Taking the former point of view, Cars 2 falls very short of the benchmark Pixar have set themselves. Compare this to their most recent output and it simply doesn't stand up in any way. The script is uninspired and heavy-handed in delivering its moral messages. There are almost no traces of Pixar's trademark subtle humour that appeals to both adults and children, and the cultural references just feel tired - be prepared to see wacky Japanese advertising and Mater driving on the wrong side of the road in England. Yawn.
Any opportunity to develop the characters from the less-than-stellar first outing is squandered. Most of the returning cast are reduced to one-dimensional cameos, and big name new additions such as Caine and Eddie Izzard fail to inject any real energy into proceedings. The animation is fine, but often feels no more than functional. The CGI is at its best during the espionage-based set pieces, but things are woefully lacking elsewhere during the race sequences which feel pedestrian and really quite flat.
That said, Pixar at their worst is still quite good in comparison to a lot of the dross currently filling the children and family market. The animation may not be Pixar's best, but it's still relatively vibrant and detailed, in particular the panoramic shots of London and Italy. The story is simplistic, and the grand prix and spy mission strands never quite mesh comfortably, but the film remains fun and keeps the pace up. It's also clear that director John Lasseter is a fan of classic spy flicks, with many pleasing nods to everything from the Bond Films to Austin Powers.
But there are still one or two slip ups that can't be forgiven. Turturro's turn as the antagonistic F1 racer Bernoulli is potentially the film's most solid and entertaining performance. But, having been set up during the first two acts of the film as a credible rival to McQueen, the character is forgotten entirely during the climax; a half-hearted return during the closing scenes feels suspiciously as if Lasseter suddenly realised he'd left one of the film's key characters hanging in mid air.
Cars 2 therefore ends up as by far Pixar's weakest production to date, but still a couple of notches above the average contemporary family fare. All things considered, it's fun and will undoubtedly succeed in entertaining the younger members of the audience. Anyone looking for the humour, heart, charm, expert storytelling or breathtaking visuals of Wall-E, Up or Toy Story 3 will be sorely disappointed. It's hard to recommend Cars 2 when there are numerous five star classics in Pixar's back catalogue, as well as offerings from several other animation studios that are also superior to it. Cars 2 is by no means awful, just seriously disappointing.
5/10
Labels:
2010s,
action,
animation,
comedy,
Disney,
Eddie Izzard,
films,
John Turturro,
Michael Caine,
Owen Wilson,
Pixar,
review,
sequels
Sunday, 18 March 2012
Film Review | Is Anybody There? (2008)
As my recent review of The Descendants stated, finding the balance between comedy-drama and "drama with a touch of humour" can be tricky. Is Anybody There? treads the line between sentimental drama and black comedy, potentially an even trickier one to get right, and, as it happens, manages to do so rather well.
Set in Britain in the 1980s, the film tells the story of Edward (Bill Milner), a ten-year-old obsessed with ghosts and the afterlife who lives in the old people's home run by his parents (David Morrissey and Anne-Marie Duff). Edward hates his surroundings and the people he lives with, apart from the opportunities it gives him to explore what happens when they die. When retired stage magician Clarence (Michael Caine) moves into the home, things change for Edward as the two gradually form an unlikely friendship.
The pairing of Caine and Milner in the lead roles gives the film a strong partnership around which to build the story. Caine is reliably excellent, striking the balance between crotchety old git and lonely widower expertly. Milner, impressive in Son Of Rambow, is again strong here, although his performance is not quite as memorable. There are some very touching scenes between the two in the second half of the film once their friendship has had time to develop.
Duff and Morrissey provide the other strong pairing of the film, with Duff a very likable and sympathetic presence throughout. The relationship built up between her character and Edward feels very genuine and provides some of the most authentic moments of the entire film, and a pleasant counterbalance to the distant and preoccupied father provided by Morrissey. His performance throughout is impressive, the awkward nature of his decidedly '80s midlife crisis excruciatingly compelling.
Ironically for a film about the elderly, the story takes its time to get going, feeling too dawdling during the opening act and only reaching a pleasing momentum once the relationship between Edward and Clarence has truly begun to develop. The film is also often at its best when at its most blackly comic - an early sequence of the body of a previous resident unceremoniously removed via stairlift sets the dark level of humour well, and the climax of Clarence's show for Edward's birthday is simultaneously tragic and hilarious.
When the humour takes a backseat, things occasionally become a little too mawkish, but not to the point of spoiling the film's many positives. As we reach the film's final act, some elements may feel a little predictable, others a little too "happily ever after", but both Edward and Clarence's stories reach a satisfying conclusion, and the closing scenes are some of the film's most poignant.
7/10
Labels:
2000s,
Bill Milner,
British cinema,
comedy,
David Morrissey,
drama,
films,
Michael Caine
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





