ROCKNROLLA (2008) - Guy Ritchie

Guy Ritchie's Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrells kicked off the sub-genre of London gangster films. Films about geezas, right royal hard bastards. After the success of the film, innumerable imitations, rip-offs and Ritchie's own follow-up, Snatch, the genre got tired and dull. Ritchie himself tried his hand at something different, and made two films so poorly received that people began to wonder if Ritchie had actually lost his mind. He returns to the genre he's most comfortable with in the film RocknRolla, released this week.

RocknRolla follows the same old formula as Ritchie's other gangster films. We have an artifact of some sort. This time, instead of a pair of shotguns or a diamond, it's a painting. The artifact is in the hands of a 'godfather' of a London gang, Lenny Cole played by Tom Wilkinson. The painting is knicked and a whole slew of gangsters, cheekie chappies, hard-nuts and whatever other description you want to use for these character are charged with getting it back before the claret flows. Cole's stepson, rocker, junkie, and suspected dead-man Johnny Quid has stolen the painting and everyone must get use their contacts on the streets, fists and guns to return the painting to Cole so he can complete a deal he's making with a Russian football-club-owning billionaire.



If you've seen Lock, Stock and Snatch, then you've pretty much seen RocknRolla. Which is actually unfair to the previous two films, because they were actually pretty entertaining. RocknRolla is more of the same old, same old. There's very little subtlety, character development or story. There's a voice-over which just seems to be a cop-out in terms of letting the story tell itself, and the snazzy camera flourishes just distract from what is a simplistic and brainless plot. Instead of developing characters, Ritchie just gives people hats and kooky names which are never explained and never seem to describe the characters they're attached to.

The acting isn't really up to much either. Tom Wilkinson is awful, and I do mean awful as Lenny Cole. Wilkinson seems to have overdosed on The Long Good Friday and is regurgitating Bob Hoskins' role from that film. Gerard Butler breezes through proceedings with a wry smile. But it doesn't take much to do that. The rest of the cast is filled with a couple of familiar British faces, two small roles for Jeremy Piven and Chris Bridges playing the token Americans, and Thandie Newton who adds nothing to the proceeding other than a female face. The only really notable performance is from Toby Kebbell as Johnny Quid. But it's not really the fault of the actors that none of them have much to do. The film is just written that way. I wouldn't be surprised if the character description in the screenplay consisted of 'he wears a trilby hat' or 'he has a Scottish accent.'



1999 called and it wants RocknRolla back. The film is part of a sub-genre that has long ago run out of steam. It has elements that relate to London today. Especially the addition of a Russian billionaire who owns a football club. It's that kind of ham-fisted subtlety that is all over RocknRolla. It's neither original nor innovative. Just a step-back in Guy Ritchie's career. It seems that he cant even make a decent version of a genre piece he once was the poster-boy for. It's not rubbish. But it's not particularly good. And it feels a helluva lot longer than 114 minutes. I weep for Sherlock Holmes.*

*Guy Ritchie's "Awight Guvna', It's Right Royal Sherlock Holmes" coming 2010.


5/10

THE KINGDOM (2007) - Peter Berg

Now that the western masses have gotten used to the fact that the middle east is the new ‘enemy,’ we’re going to see a whole slew of films that attempt to tackle the issues at the heart of this global conflict. Some of the films will actually make a concerted effort to explain and understand what’s going on in the world. Other films will attempt to cash in. And in between, there’ll be films like Peter Berg’s The Kingdom. The actor cum director’s film is an attempt to tell us that, ya know, the folks over there are just as normal and conflicted as us. But instead, the result is a boring, patronising and clichéd thriller.

The film opens with a montage that briefly explains how the relationship between Saudi Arabia and the US has developed over the years. A montage that ends with a CGI plane crashing into a CGI World Trade Centre. Just so the audience is reminded what happened on that terrible day six years ago. It’s a rather stupid thing to put into the film, as it has little bearing on what follows other than to let us know that US-Saudi relations are well, strained. But we don’t need to be reminded of this. In Saudi Arabia, we see a heavily defended US compound that is home to the workers and families of an American oil company. They play softball, have barbeques and enjoy life. Two terrorists dressed as guards initiate an attack on the compound killing many. But this attack is only a precursor for a larger and more devastating attack on the people who try to help the injured and dying. In the US, the FBI is eager to investigate the attack. But due to the strained relations with the Saudis, they’re reluctant to send a team. After some political wrangling, four agents, led by Jamie Foxx jet off to Saudi Arabia to investigate. They team up with a colonel in the Saudi police force who also wants to find out who’s behind the attacks.



I’ve nothing against films with political subtexts. Films like that walk a VERY thin tightrope between uber-jingoistic shoot em ups like Rambo and preachy holier-than thou films. Sometimes these films can be very interesting and open the audience’s eyes to issues they might have only a scant knowledge of. However, The Kingdom, while not jingoistic, does pander to the lowest common denominator in it’s political subtext. The film breaks down into three distinct parts, which is the first problem. Instead of layering the screenplay, the film starts off getting the political part out of the way. The wrangling and red tape is dealt with, the agents find a way to work WITH the Saudis instead of against them. Next up is the CSI Middle East part, with the agents doing their parts to investigate who’s responsible for the attacks. And finally, the action part kicks into gear, where the rest of the film is entirely forgotten about and a ridiculous amount of bullets fly.

When the film does attempt to tackle US-Saudi relations, it does so in an extremely patronising manner. There is no subtlety about anything at all. Foxx and Ashraf Barhom, who plays the Saudi colonel bond over pop-culture. And then we have the breakdown in communication where the US characters use language that the Suadis misunderstand with ‘hilarious’ results. It’s the kind of thing that belongs in Brett Ratner movies and is neither funny nor appropriate in this movie. In fact, Barhom’s character himself is a rather shallow move. He’s absolutely dedicated to finding who’s responsible for the attack, but we don’t need him to tell us he feels that way for the whole time. It’s all too clear the filmmakers are determined to know that he’s a good guy too. Absolutely unnecessary.



As for the acting, the cast with includes Chris Cooper, Jason Bateman, Jennifer Garner, Jeremy Piven and Danny Huston should all be on form. However, their characters are badly written clichés and therefore, they cant do very much with them. I don’t think their performances are their fault. Bateman, who was brilliant in Arrested Development is the ‘comedy relief,’ yet isn’t funny but incredibly annoying. Exactly the kind of person you wouldn’t want with you in the Middle East. Cooper, who is usually brilliant is the grizzled explosives expert that badly written films of this type always have. In fact, the only actor who is remotely interesting in the film is Ashraf Barhom as Col. Faris Al Ghazi. But again, it’s an incredibly shallow character and leave the actor with very little to do.

I’m sure there will be a good film that tackles the political situation with the Middle East. It’s a subject that has plenty of room for exploration. But The Kingdom is in no way, shape or form, that film. Badly written, paced, acted and directed, it’s a bad film.


3/10