Monthly Archives: December 2010

The summer before I went to secondary school my auntie came to stay with us for three weeks. This may or may not have been because of a ‘family emergency’. One day she took us to the cinema. I decided that I wanted to see Godzilla in which Matthew Broderick wandered into tents and fiddled with whinging oscilloscopes. My Auntie meanwhile took my cousins to see Paulie, a film about a talking parrot and a film which, having crested the hump of my first decade, I had judged as entirely too frivolous. How wrong I was. Paulie is heartbreaking. The parrot sits on the shoulder of a blind and dying woman and describes the sunset to her. He talks with a janitor who yearns for a love with books on her table and flowers in her hair. Grown men will crumble. This is the Shawshank Redemption of talking animal movies.

Screen 1: Transcendent

Paulie . 1998 . John Roberts

Reviewed by Matthew Hull 

Shake, roll and wobble; zoom in; quirky framing. It’s probably cutting edge film making but it makes for difficult viewing. This is sad as effort has gone into costume and casting, a few zingy lines of dialogue, some good schmaltz as only the Americans can do but why oh why is there all this awkward camera?
If this was an unashamedly indie film, shot on the cheap then perhaps it would be okay, but with the scenery this lush, the costumes so bright and vivid, the constant playing of the band so good, couldn’t they have used a tripod or dolly for at least one scene?
There is a scene where this all works – during the wedding party. It brings the audience into the revelry, dancing and swaying with the rhythmic movements of the artsy crowd.
Hidden behind shudder, there’s a good story and plot lurking somewhere in this film.

Screen 1: Wobbly

Rachel Getting Married . 2008 . Johnathan Demme

Reviewed by Aaron Gow

The main of many reasons this film fails is a weak starting concept that neither produces comedy nor intrigue. Perhaps in the hands of Gilliam or Jonze the idea of a world where it is biologically impossible to tell a lie may become an interesting and amusing dark social fantasy, but in the hands of agenda-hungry Gervais, backed by high-fiving studio execs, it’s idiotic and boring. The frank fact is this is a world that cannot conceivably exist and therefore cannot be positioned as a place to comfortably suspend disbelief. This is a basic thought-experiment rushed into narrative without a pause for creativity, which is then boldly hidden behind one weak, unfunny joke. Then we get the atheist agenda, beaten into our thick skulls so hard it almost made me ashamed to be an intelligent atheist. Ricky, the cinema is an art form; please don’t treat it as anything less.

Screen 1: Sacriligious

The Invention of Lying . 2009 . Ricky Gervais and Matthew Robinson

Reviewed by Screen150

…and when it’s as hot as this, I like it as well! Some elements of the comedy may have dated a little, but there is still enough wit that tastes fresh and performances from the main duo Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon to revel in. And then of course, there is Marilyn. As she jived and giggled and swayed through her scenes, it was easy to see why she captivated so many during her brief life. The sexual chemistry sizzles through the celluloid and it’s all thrust from her – with Curtis and Lemmon on the very lucky receiving end. But there’s much more going on besides; a light-hearted but deft polemic on gender difference, a cautious approach to exploring beyond heterosexuality (that may poke fun, but never ridicules) and a perfect lesson in Hollywood narrative structure that is in dire need of reiteration for those dabbling in modern rom-com.

Screen 1: Sizzling!

Some Like it Hot . 1959 . Billy Wilder

Reviewed by Screen150

There’s something quite endearing about the fact that the toys actually came first with this money-making Steven Spielberg-driven franchise. Yet despite them having been around since 1984, I had no idea there were names for each of the cars-what-become-robot-thingies, or indeed any kind of back story. Imagine my surprise when I learnt that there are two factions of Transformers, the goody Autobots (which transform from old bangers and lorries) and the baddy Decepticons (cunningly disguised as military hardware and sportscars). The baddies are looking for their leader, superpowerful Megatron, who crashlanded in the Arctic when he came to take over the Earth some years previously having laid waste to the aliens’ home planet of Cybertron. Led by truckers’ delight Optimus Prime, the Autobots are out to stop the Decepticons and save the human race. Cue lots of car chases, explosions, general silliness and product placement. So bad it’s kinda good.

Screen 1: Daft.

Transformers. 2007. Michael Bay

Reviewed by Sarah-Clare Conlon

Keanu Reeves.

Is good.

Discuss.

I think he is perfect as Neo in The Matrix. Young, dumb, and full of mumb(le) he convinces as both the confused office drone and the computomessiah he becomes. My favourite scene is a bored-looking Reeves watching his own arms kung fu fighting, fast as lightening, with expert timing.

But can you avoid shouting ALIENS USE US AS BATTERIES? THEY DO WHAT NOW? THAT DOESN’T SEEM A PARTICULARLY EFFECTIVE USE OF RESOURCES NOW DOES IT? or HIS NAME IS NEO. AN ANAGRAM OF ONE. OF COURSE HE IS THE BLOODY ONE?

This is the major failing of The Matrix; it presents a ridiculous premise not as a silly story but as a thought-piece. What if we are in a Matrix?

We aren’t.

So, a massive failure at social commentary, a minor action classic, a delicious slice of the marvellous Mr. Reeves. This is The Matrix.

Screen 1. Computomessiah

The Matrix . 1999 . Larry and Andy Wachowski

Reviewed by Benjamin Judge

Iconic, exquisitely beautiful, ageless, and with a haunting soundtrack, I simply cannot fault Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner.

This latest Final Cut version has fixed all the little continuity errors that you may have spent hours theorising over. With some subtle redubbing the ‘missing replicant’ is gone, rain-soaked spinner wires have been magi-digitally removed, and the mismatched snake scale serial number is fixed.

In some ways, it’s a shame – I enjoyed those quirks! But at least the film now looks how Scott intended it to, and he always believed Deckard was a replicant, even if Harrison Ford didn’t agree.

Blade Runner is the film that I come back to again and again. I’ve been watching it for over twenty years and I still love it. Every time I see the LA skyline and I hear that Vangellis track, I get goose bumps.

“My mother? Let me tell you about my mother.”

Screen 1: Perfect

Blade Runner . 1982 . Ridley Scott

Reviewed by Craig Pay

NB: This is by no means the last you will hear of Blade Runner – Screen150

I can’t relate to Walter, Donny, Maude, Bunny or Woo. I dislike nearly everything about the Dude too, except perhaps his love of Creedance. However, I wasn’t always like this. There was a time that I would happily while away the days with friends, sipping Caucasians and reciting the Dude’s every line, as if he was a French renaissance poet. This film made me laugh out loud, even before LOL was invented. This film was part of a defining period of my life; it was the last ever item I bought on VHS. To me, it smacks of a bygone era, of a time of plenty, when the booze flowed and the women danced. Now, I have deadlines and a mortgage, an overdraft and aches. Maybe I should’ve been more like the Dude and opted for the horizontal life, staying off radar and hanging with moustachioed men in bowling alleys.

Screen 1: Abide

The Big Lebowski . 1998 . The Coen Brothers

Reviewed by Aaron Gow