Coming soon...



Showing posts with label John Malkovich. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Malkovich. Show all posts

Monday, October 27, 2008

BURN AFTER READING (2008) - Ethan & Joel Coen

The Coen brothers are riding high on success, both financially, and critically of No Country For Old Men. The film was a dark thriller, so to follow it up, the Coens shot a comedy, something they have had success in the past with The Big Lebowski and O Brother Where Art Thou. In Burn After Reading, they set up a premise that sounds like a thriller, but fill the cast with characters who are both incredibly stupid and belong in a screwball comedy.

Osbourne Cox is a CIA analyst. His alcoholism has caused the powers that be to review his work situation and downgrade his status. Enraged, Cox quits the agency and begins his memoirs, which threatens to expose certain ‘explosive’ elements in his career. Cox’s wife, Katie is sick of Cox, plans to divorce him and hook up with Harry Pfarrer, a serial internet dater she’s been having an affair with. Katie makes a data CD of Cox’s computer information which inadvertently ends up in the hands of Chad Feldheimer and Linda Litzke, two idiotic fitness centre employees who decide to use the information to blackmail Osbourne Cox for money so that Linda can get cosmetic surgery.



And so the ensemble cast have a great time getting laughs and hamming it up. It’s just a shame they’re the only ones really having a laugh. The trailer for Burn After Reading was very promising. It showed some of the craziness of the cast and provided a few laughs. But unfortunately they showed pretty much all the laughs. I warn you, if you’ve seen the trailer for this movie, you will see everything, and I do mean everything coming way before it happens. The little plot twists are blatantly obvious, the laughs are already had and there is little left in the way of mystery. It’s a prime example of why trailers should be kept to the very minimum of footage.

Firstly, the story is very thin. It’s not that complicated despite the many prime characters and their various motivations. The characters themselves are a mish-mash of the sort of dumb secondary characters that have populated the Coens’ films over the years. They’re eccentric and have little quirks that set them apart from the average joe. In this respect, it feels like the Coens are at a stretch to fill the film. There’s not quite enough plot, so the characters are there to distract the audience. Having said that, the characters do provide some laughs. But it’s just not enough to bolster a rather weak script.



The performances, from a very very impressive cast are pretty good. Everyone has played a version of their character before, so they’re in relatively comfortable shoes. There are highlights, though. John Malkovich’s Osbourne Cox is a well-spoken, but dangerously on-edge kinda guy. He’s the person you don’t want to piss off, and Malkovich does this very well. It’s great to see him play this kind of role outside kids’ movies. It’s just a shame there’s not much more of him. Richard Jenkins, a brilliant character actor who’s been around for years has the role with the most meat, despite how little his screen time is. Jenkins’ character really is the most normal character in the film, with motivations that are more real. And Jenkins’ creates a character that’s actually believable amongst many cartoons. And Brad Pitt’s Chad Feldheimer provides most of the laughs in the film. He’s a blonde, idiotic, image-obsessed personal trainer. Yet he does have something of a heart of gold. He’s got ideas that he cannot execute and really dodgy plans. And Pitt plays this brilliantly. He makes Feldheimer someone you feel sorry for when things go wrong for him. Yet you pray for things to go wrong so that the laughs begin. George Clooney’s played the idiot before. In both O Brother Where Art Thou and Leatherheads. His character feels like an extension of those roles, so we’re seeing nothing new there. Tilda Swinton, as Katie Cox also has played the no-nonsense ruthless business type before, and it’s something she does well. And Frances McDormand, who plays the other idiot of the piece has a few choice moments and a few laughs.

Burn After Reading is rather smug. But it’s just not that funny. The ending is far too abrupt and is told to us rather than shown. Which breaks the cardinal rule of screenwriting- show, don’t tell. It’s not a remarkable film, and considering it’s from the Coens, I had hoped for far better. It won’t really jump out in the cannon of Coen films. There are a few entertaining moments, and Brad Pitt continues doing some of the best work of his career. But other than that, it’s all kind forgettable. Burn After Reading is an appropriate title. Because you most likely will forget after watching.


5/10

Friday, November 23, 2007

BEOWULF (2007) - Robert Zemeckis


Cinema certainly has come a long way since the Lumiere Brothers first terrified Victorian audiences with images of a train arriving at a station. But the evolution of the art form has sped up in the last three decades, due in part to the use of computers. Director Robert Zemeckis has done plenty to promote the use of special effects. And with Beowulf, Zemeckis pushes the boundaries once more, using motion capture to create a film entirely out of CGI. It’s not the first time this process has been used, but Zemeckis raises the bar with his reimagining of the Old English heroic poem.

Beowulf opens with a celebration of the opening of King Hrothgar’s new meade hall, Heorot. The noise from the celebrations attracts Grendel, a monster that is the son of a water demon. Grendel attacks the hall and kills many of Hrothgar’s men, then disappears into the night. Hrothgar is at his wit’s end and needs a hero. Arriving from the sea is a host of men led by Beowulf, a brash, arrogant warrior who claims he will destroy Hrothgar’s monster and return peace to the land. Grendel once again attacks the hall, but becomes unstuck when battling Beowulf. Grendel limps back to his cave and dies in the company of his mother. Beowulf and Hrothgar celebrate Grendel’s demise, but during the night, the halls are once again attacked and many die. Hrothgar tells Beowulf that the second attack was perpetrated by Grendel’s mother and that Beowulf must also destroy her. Beowulf sets out to once again battle monsters. But his arrogance and lust for power may be his own undoing.



Obviously the main attraction of Beowulf is going to be the spectacle of seeing the film created entirely of CGI. And it is quite impressive. The landscapes are almost photo-realistic. The special effects are amazing. The production design is fantastic. And the CGI is the best in the industry. But while all this is great, I found myself asking what the point of the film is. The part of it that has me vexed, is that all the actors are all motion captured and then the models are made to look exactly like their human counterparts.

It is a showy piece of cinema. A kind of ‘look what we can do!’ exclamation. But again, why? I don’t really get what the point in motion capturing an actor and making him or her look exactly like they do in real life is (with the exception of Ray Winstone, who’s made look a lot slimmer and younger in the film). Either you film the actors, or you animate in CGI. As an animator myself, I’ve never been too impressed with motion capture. While it’s almost true to life, there’s always something missing from the motion that makes it feel unreal. And that’s pretty much what I felt watching Beowulf. It’s impressive, but something ain’t right.



As for the direction, well it’s pretty good. Unfortunately there are some rather silly moments in the film that had me laughing when I shouldn’t. Beowulf battles Grendel naked. While this is a good idea in the context of the movie, Zemeckis takes some drastic steps to ensure we don’t see Beowulf’s ‘sword’ and by doing this, the scene becomes a bit laughable. The battle with Grendel himself is a bit of an anti-climax. I’d heard bits and pieces about this poem over the years and I expected something a little more... epic, I guess. In fact, Beowulf’s battle with a dragon, the climax of the film, is far more impressive.

The acting, if you can really call it that, isn’t too bad. But the characters look soulless, so this kind of kills any nuances the actors may have brought to their roles. And that’s a little disappointing considering the cast includes Anthony Hopkins, John Malkovich and Brendan Gleeson. The script by Neil Gaiman and Roger Avary translates pretty well into modern English, even if there are one or two silly moments that are a little too modern. The story itself is pretty basic. Monster kills man. Man kills monster. Other monster kills more men. Man must kill other monster. But there’s plenty of visual moments to keep you interested.

Beowulf is an interesting benchmark in terms of cinema. It’s a good place to look back at how far the art form has come. And a good place to glimpse into the future at where it’s going. And if you get to see the film in 3-D, as I did, it’s a fairly amusing film to fill two hours. But as a film, it’s nothing really spectacular. More of a portfolio piece for a special effects company than a brilliant cinematic film.


6/10