Crimson Peak (2015)

A problem with the ghost genre, is that all has been done to death. The rattling doorknob, the dog that doesn't like certain people, the sudden movement and sound to create a shriek and a gasp for the audience etc. Del Toro doesn't really hit a nerve with any of this, as you could expect. Furthermore it's hard to create a notion of something horrible, using small hints throughout the film, when you show the apparition twice early on.

The casting pretty much centres around Wasikowski and Hiddlestone, with a dash of an extremely boring Jessica Chastain. The former have a good chemistry, and particularly Hiddlestone makes the best out of his part, as his character is the only one with layers. The problem with not lining up a stronger ensemble is of course that you have fewer strings, and furthermore that you rely too much on your stars. The biggest drawback though, is that the director fails to pay adequate attention to the other characters. And with his extreme focus on costumes and scenography, Del Toro falls into that trap as well.

 Though the aforementioned provides a beautiful frame for the characters, one must admit. Dark, gothic, lush with satin and velvet, and of course quite ominous in the right places. Del Toro does dark best, and we get to see a little remake of his own funeral of Hellboy. The lighter scenes are more average, if that.

Furthermore, Del Toro fails in the art of subtlety, using too broad a brush for many of his "little" omens. The clues are easy for all to see, thus making the omens and ghosts moot. And when it comes to the violence, it's brutal in a Tarantinoesque way. But not in any way as entertaining.

The music by Fernando Velázquez is one of the more stunning scores of this year, and worthy of a point in itself. Del Toro doesn't make the best use of it, relying too heavily on the main theme, even where it does not really fit in. And often not using it at all. But you really should take the time to listen to it on its own.

It's not totally without its shivers, such as the scene where Wasikowski listens to old cylinders, but all in all, this is a vast disappointment. The story is virtually non-existent, the casting curious, and Del Toro doesn't seem to know what he wants to focus on, never mind what he wants his actors to do. Apart from the wrapping, he misses on almost every level.

 

2/10

The Accidental Tourist (1988)

So you take a Pulitzer-price winning book about loss, grief, loneliness and emotional distance... And cast Geena Davis. Now, there's a gamble.

The pace of the movie is set perfect through the monotonous muttering of William Hurt, cast as Macon Leary, director Kasdan giving us a couple of minutes in quirkiness before his first unpleasant scene. Made a bit more pleasant by Macon "holding steady". As he does.

A high-point of the film is Macon's voiceover of his own books. A travel guide for how to avoid any experience of the destination itself, all with total lack of self-irony. Another is the chemistry between Hurt and Davis, particularly her blatantly direct approach to dating him, encountering only aloofness, and some painfully clear hints for a long while.

So Davis and Hurt are outstanding together, but the casting of Macon's family is breathtaking, with Amy Wright, David Ogden Stiers and Ed Begley jr. shining as the most dysfunctional family quirkiness could muster in the 80's. Then in comes an adorably smitten Bill Pullman, to make them even better. His teasing of, and immediate taking to, their strange ways is a treat. As watching them from the outside, through him. 

The story, based on the novel of Anne Tyler, is quite good, though as earlier illustrated, it's the characters that excel. Muriel sees all the world with wonder, and Macon surfs that wave, finding joy and wonder through her, though borrowed at first. And for a dog-lover like myself, to centre the story around a cute dog is for extra credit, particularly since their classes together are very amusing. 

Williams' music is wonderful. A very sombre, piano and flute-based composition. Unlike most his other scores. Though, like most his scores, this was Oscar-nominated.

For those loving characters and quirkiness more than plots, this slow-paced drama is a little gem. Yes, the ending is a bit lame, but it's so wonderfully casted and acted, you should live with. And it has perhaps the most quiet hug in cinematic history. As for Davis. An Academy Award no less.

8/10

The Negotiator (1998)

How do you start off with maximum tension and action? Well, I suppose a hostage situation with a shotgun and some snipers should do the trick. Tone set. 

Generally the tension is very high for almost the entire movie, and you can almost smell the sweat of the hostages spending hours in a high-stress situation in a cramped environment. At times there is a bit of frantic shouting going on, that seems overabundant for both the action and suspense. But nothing is perfect, I suppose

Samuel L. Jackson is given a couple of scenes to show some versatility, but mostly he's (understandably) stressed and (even more understandably) angry. Fortunately, few actors can better portray stressed anger in an action film than SLJ. 

The rest of the cast is absolutely stellar. J.T. Walsh died before this film was released and of all the actors on display, he really takes centre stage when given the chance. In addition, Jackson is good and Spacey at his smartest and most intense. When you add the mix of Rifkin, Spencer, Morse and Giamatti, this has "rock solid" written all over it. And it is.

As Spacey enters, the cleverness and human drama increases tenfold. Spacey and SLJ have fantastic sparring from the first scene, measuring each other, testing each other, not to mention bluffing each other. Playing a quite brilliant, and most lethal, game of chess. And some very nice twists and surprises to boot. Chemistry on screen makes such a difference.

Another thing that makes a difference, is the music, and Graeme Revell delivers full-on this time. An uncharacteristically sombre score, with a few beautiful themes. Perfectly timed for key scenes. Revell's best score by a mile. 

I usually don't like thrillers as they are a dime a dozen, and most of them have an excessive amount of twists, increasing in stupidity, rather than one very good one. This thriller has a very good spread of tension all through, and doesn't overdo the twists, nor the action (apart from the shouting), albeit it has a very frantic pace. Hence it's both satisfying and entertaining to watch.

And to see Jackson and Rifkin line-dance to "Cotton Eye Joe" is something... You'll never see anywhere else.

8/10

Eye of the Needle (1981)

 

Ah. A spy-story with roots in WW2 starring Donald Sutherland. Now this should be a treat.

There is no guesswork necessary as, after a deceptively slow start, Sutherland as "The Needle" very callously disposes of his landlady, thus exposing himself as ze German agent. Moments thereafter, another character, played by Christopfer Cazenove, drives off the road, losing the use of his legs as a result. So much for a slow start.

Director Richard Marquand is very meticulously building the feeling that our allied friends are closing in on The Needle. First by random chance, later by increased effort.  

The flow of the film is at times rather slow, as older spy-movies tend to be, portraying the patience good agents must employ. I rather like authenticity and Ken Follett's script surely provides a fine basis in that regard. It adds to the realism that all of Sutherland's kills are most quiet and efficient. 

Another thing that tends to be true for older films, the plot is quite clever. Which is the case for this film as well, though it loses itself in that respect after about an hour.

Sutherland is delectable as always. A quiet, cautious and frighteningly calm character when amongst those who know his true mission, and a jovial, friendly and chatty man when interacting with the general public. Shifting in a heartbeat if necessary. Smart move by the director as it adds tension even to the most friendly of dialogues and warmest of smiles. 

About halfway in, the film changes from a classic spy-thriller to more of a psychological thriller. This development allows Sutherland to revel even further, as his interactions with Kate Nelligan are exquisite down to the finest detail, as The Needle takes full advantage of the lonely and depressed housewife with the bitter and loveless husband (aforementioned Cazenove).

So the plot is great, though underused, the tension is superb most of the time and the acting is wonderful. My problem is with the script as a whole. The film doesn't seem to quite know what it is trying to be, as the ending undermines the plot and buildup. 

Still, there are more than enough qualities here to make it worthwhile.

7/10

The Bridge at Remagen (1969)

There's something pure about war movies made before all special effects were CGI. Not very environmental, though. So many gasoline bombs...

The premise is quite simple: Ze Germans are to destroy a bridge to prevent the allied forces from crossing the Rhine and setting foot on German soil. 

The build-up is slow and doesn't always seem to have much of a point to it. The problem is that while some films have done a great job portraying the tediousness and waiting games of war, this doesn't really do that either. Things just seem to happen here and there to fill the time, not really relevant to the plot as it is, nor to any visible development of the characters. 

Ze German officers are portrayed as weary and realistic, which was a nice change of pace at this point. Robert Vaughn and Peter van Eyck provide us with very nice American nazis. The former's desperation and disbelief as to the chaos created by Hitler's refusal to accept defeat, and his generals' subsequent failure to report a truthful and correct number of troops, growing throughout. In itself, this film gives a very interesting insight into that particular area.

None are as weary and cynical as George Segal, however. A gruff, but effective man, regularly promoted by the untimely deaths of others. Segal even looks tired in his motions, and his patience is growing thinner as we move towards the climax. His lack of trust towards the excellent and irreverent Ben Gazzara the best chemistry on screen. 

"The Bridge at Remagen" does have it subtle point eventually, as we can feel the fatigue and hopelessness on both sides as we (literally) crawl towards the end. 

So it's not a classic, and not among the best war movies of its time either. It lacks a bit both in suspense, story (apart from the plot itself) and characters. But it's a decent flick, and has marvellous performance by aforementioned Segal and Vaughn. So not bad either

6/10

Stan & Ollie (2018)

I remember Laurel & Hardy from some old shows my grandfather had on VCR, and I adore John C. Reilly, so this should be a treat. 

One must marvel at the nostalgic feeling from the studio scenes. It's always a treat seeing that kind of attention to detail and mood. Perhaps the perfect example is at the final performance. An anticipating crowd in glee over the memories from their youth by the mere theme the pair were so known for, The Dance of the Cuckoos. 

The directing is mostly quite brilliant as Baird knows the strength of both his actors and the source material. One could argue that he could have used a few more sketches, rather than repeat the same 3, but then you would also miss the point of the repetitiveness of theatre comedy work.

Where this film really has a home-run, is in the acting of its to stars. Reilly is predictably excellent as the whimsical has-been that fully depends on his partner for jokes, logistics and life-advice (that he doesn't take very often). His fear of conflict, his pride, his gambling and his lack of self-control, making him in many ways a lesser husband, friend and man. It's later in the film he truly stars though, showing how underappreciated his dramatic talents are as Hardy's health deteriorates and everything becomes very real.

Shockingly, however, it's Coogan who still finds a way to steal the show. His razor-sharp wit, whether for humour or verbal malice is pitch perfect, as are his constant facial antics whether on stage, or waiting for a meeting in a lobby, making random eye contact with a stranger. Coogan also manages to portray the tired, ageing Laurel that's well past his prime in fame and money. But unlike his partner, he has long since realised how washed-up their careers are. Thus he protects his partner from bad news throughout, letting him live in his childlike hopefulness. Though it was never necessary.

And so they go about their business of  illusory rejuvenation. Until their wives show up and present their hatred towards each other, as vented by their husbands over decades to them over dinners and late evenings. From that point, nothing can be the same. Speaking of the wives, for a piece of sheer art, observe their faces at the last performance of their husbands. One in utter joy over her man's performance and the revival of his genius. The other, panic-stricken and scared to death, fearing hers will fall dead on stage at any given moment. 

The old sketches still work a charm, Coogan and Reilly delivering perfectly as the old cooks knowing their routines in and out (Laurel in particular), but still doing them with pride and gusto. Cuter still is how they both keep up parts of their personas in their private lives when communicating with each other. 

As the drama increases, naturally the comedy eludes director Jon Baird. Though it's hard to avoid, I still feel it makes this film a bit more of a "game of two halves" than necessary. 

But it's still nostalgic, funny, heart-warming, and very, very good.

8/10

Death at a Funeral (2007)

You know there's going to be personal drama, when the entire intro is about the characters' petty problems and neuroses. But are they fun, or at least original? Well... The plot of the drug taken by mistake, is a piss poor approach to that question. Now they'll have to work harder to convince me.

Let's start with some good news. Peter Vaughan as Uncle Alfie is fun, though not in an original way. Matthew McFadyan is decent as the calm and collected amongst the gang of neurotic wankers, until he finds his limit. The Peter Dinklage angle, is though obvious from the start, quite original and funny for a very limited time. I pity Alan Tudyk though. Such a versatile actor. He tries to do his best with the aforementioned unoriginal drugmix-story, but the writing of it is just so unoriginal and daft, that he can only keep it going for a few minutes. After that, it's endlessly excruciating to watch. In every conceivable way. Then they actually make someone else take the drugs by mistake. And a third time (though the third time isn't half bad).

They really have a great cast for a repressed family, thinking more of themselves than they should. With the friends to match. The problem is there is not a single likeable character, and no real plot to speak of. Just a random series of events, egotistical morons galore, and a general lack of good gags. There is a great scene (involving Vaughan and poo, naturally), that had me in stitches. And the late increase in pace really does wonders for the film, due to the aforementioned problem with all characters.

The eulogy really is brilliant and self-aware, considering its contents vis-a-vis the tiresome characters.

So is it original? Hell no. Is it funny? Mostly not. But it has a couple of good moments, and a small piece of genius, so I suppose it could have been a lot worse.

5/10

The Ipcress File (1965)

Just after there was James Bond, there was Harry Palmer. Your down to earth agent, who has no glitz nor glamour what so ever. And that's not the only thing that separates Len Deighton's involuntary, impertinent and insolent agent with his small flat and his boring stake-outs, from the most suave of them all.

Whereas Bond's adventures usually start off with some huge chase and a female with huge... ehrm. Well anyhow, this film starts with Palmer struggling to find his glasses before getting out of bed, taking his sweet time making perfect coffee, and walking from his at best mediocre apartment to an even worse one, to replace his colleague at aforementioned stakeout.

Brilliantly, this flick plays to the secret agent as an employee of the government. Mundane bureaucracy, long hours and low pay are amongst the very everyday grievances our hero must endure. Alongside an endless array of brown and grey office buildings. It gives it a kind of credibility as a spy story, that Bond never had. Thus making it entertaining in a wholly different way.

The plot is somewhat more fantastical as 17 top scientists all seem to quit for no reason. Without wanting to spoil too much, I will limit myself to saying the plot is optimistic as to the effectiveness of hypnotism. Since this is an old film with a stellar script from a great book, Palmer actually has to do some most clever detective work, based on observation and deduction. Always a treat.

Of all the things done well here, nothing is quite as good as the dialogues. Caine, Green and Doleman are all on exceptional form, and whatever combination of those three director Sidney Furie decides to bestow upon us, is pure class. The scene of the two latter in the park a pure feast of British implicitness and understatement in dialogue. 

The filming is at times experimental for its decade, but quite sublime, and never overdoes it. As an example two of the key scenes to a side plot, are shot through different kinds of glass as they both pertain to the same character. Subtle, cool and smart. Ipcress makes no excuses for knowing it's smart and making a point of it. One really most love the British arrogance of it all when it's so meticulous.

Even Palmer's incarceration and eventual torture is long and slow, and as there is an absurd form of realism to most of it, it holds up wonderfully in modern age. Thanks in no small part to the quality of Caine's acting skills as well as Furie's ability to not overdo anything.

Another reason it works a treat, is due to famous Bond-composer John Barry's utterly genius score. Barry's score to Ipcress is one of his most jazz-loyal, and one of his very best. Never downplaying that Palmer is a doing a grunt's job, he leaves the fanfares and big horns at home. Instead he opts for simple, haunting and often repetitive tones. 

To add to that, the endgame is riveting as the three main characters face off in a verbal game to the death. In a dark warehouse at night, under a single lightbulb so the director can play with shadows. Fantastic. 

9/10

Bumblebee (2018)

A Transformers-flick (almost; he is producing) devoid of Michael Bay! Count me in!

At least that means this time they have written a story-line. "Bumblebee" has a secondary angle, as it is a film about friendship and trust. Since the film actually has a side-story of interest, it's miles above the previous instalments, which don't really have any other agenda than to blow shit up and sell tickets. And as you actually care for the characters, you actually care what happens to them. For the first Transformers-film ever.

A perfect example is the scene in which Steinfeld meets Bumblebee. Travis Knight is simply better than Bay at things that don't explode, and uses the necessary time and angles to make the scenes between explosions worth watching.

The humour is better as well, particularly the scene where Bumblebee discovers what music he hates. Though I wish he hated something worse.

Having a director that isn't so driven towards shit, makes for a huge improvement on the music as well. Particularly the introduction of Steinfeld to the tunes of "Bigmouth strikes again" is pleasing, as well as Oingo Boingo of course. The soundtrack is 80's only (until some horrid piece during the credits, for some reason), and they didn't stop there. They even found room for some olden, goldies among the actors. Remember Fred Dryer? Didn't think so.

Speaking of actors, John Cena isn't exactly Oscar-material and proves as much here. Though the casting is hardly totally off. As a bad-ass soldier, he kind of fits the bill, regardless of limitations. Unfortunately his part is rather large, making the film suffer greatly. Another poor choice is the casting as Dylan O'Brien as the voice of Bumblebee, making the robot sound like a nerdy teen before his voice change. Thankfully, Bumblebee is mute for most of this film. A better piece of casting is aforementioned Hailee Steinfeld as the main character. Without the foot-in-mouth-direction of Bay, she is actually allowed to be charming and use some facial expressions, at which she is much better than Shia.

Knight doesn't really know how to balance his different parts though, and at times this film actually lacks a bit of action, until there is a bit too long a sequence towards the end. But hey! He doesn't rotate the camera, so this time you actually get to see the robots fight.

The biggest problem is that there isn't a shred of original thought anywhere in the film. The protagonist is of course an outcast that doesn't care much to fit in, but has a super-special skill (2 actually). And naturally, her dad is dead, thus (supposedly) making us care more. Well, people less cynical than me at least. And you can pretty much guess everything that's going to happen.

So this is infinitely better than any of the putrid instalments before it. Still, you can't help to think that the Marketing department has been involved too heavily in some of the decisions here, making it a bit more stupid than it had to be.

6/10