JCVD

As curriculum vitaes go, Van Damme's is down there with your Seagal's and Lundgren's of the world as one of the worst. Comprising mainly retrofit fight films with futuristic robot movies he barely deviates from DTV territory. I would rather eat glass than watch 90% of his offerings.
JCVD bucks that trend with aplomb. The problem now is that it stands out on his filmography like a sore thumb. Its such a shame "The Mussels from Brussels" wasn't able to capitalize on the success of this film and reinvent himself, instead finding himself in The Expendables 2 and Universal Soldier 3, the same shit he was peddling before we knew he could act.
Make no mistake, JCVD is fantastic with a performance that is better than 90% of performances you will ever see from JCVD himself. Expect big things from this up and coming......wait a minute that's wrong. Expect more of the same rubbish for a few more years now he's gained a bit of credibility.
****

Point Break

What makes Point Break stand out from the crowd of action flicks that seemed to flood cinema in the late eighties and early nineties? The answer is nothing. This is a film so distinctly average in every way you come away feeling like you might as well have not bothered. Time has not served the film well as I couldn't watch it without thinking of 'Hot Fuzz' and the way it perfectly lampoons over the top action scenes and sliding electric guitar scores. The sky dive chase is spectacular, and Patrick Swayze makes Bodhi come to life and really makes a likable a character out of a prick. Lori Petty is so attractive that its distracting but she isn't the most watchable screen presence, probably due to me not listening to a word she said as I was counting down to the obligatory 90's sex scene between the two leads. Keanu Reeves is one who seems to just be taking it all a little too seriously. You can't help but feel that his role would have benefited from somebody playing it tongue in cheek, somebody who might actually generate some chemistry with the Gary Busey character.
An enjoyable film but as soon as the credits roll you know you will never watch this film again. Until 2020 when we have the Back to the Future inspired version with hoverboard instead of surf boards. I look forward to it. ***

Life During Wartime

Todd Solondz isn't afraid to push the boundaries in his movies, focusing on themes such as suicide and paedophilia, with mixed results. Welcome to the Dollhouse was a brilliant portrayal of an outcast trying to fit in during adolescence and Happiness (the precursor to this film) was a ensemble story focusing on three sisters and the pitfalls that blight their lives and their families. Wartime is a semi sequel to Happiness in that all the characters are present although they are played by different actors. This is a rather jarring choice for people to comprehend if they are familiar with these characters already. In some cases such as Shirley Henderson replacing Jane Adams or Paul Reubens replacing Jon Lovitz the change in personnel is less obvious due to the physical similarities of the two parties sharing the roles. In other cases the change of cast is not only distracting but ruins the film. The decision go completely left field and replace Philip Seymour Hoffman with Michael Kenneth Williams strikes as having been made just to add a bit of.controversy to proceedings.
Happiness owes a lot of it's plaudits to the central role of Dr. Maplewood being played by Dylan Baker who turns a character who could have been one of cinemas all time most disgusting villains and adds heart and soul to it that in Wartime Ciaran Hinds cannot match up to, being somewhat underwritten as the part is in the latter.
Overall, although Life During Wartime has its problems you have to given Solondz his props for pushing the envelope and using his films as a vehicle for his own voice rather then compromising his vision, which rarely seems to be the case.
***

Stop-loss

I had no idea what a stop-loss was before I saw this film. I thought it was the tap that controlled the water supply for your house. I think that's called a stop-cock though. Close enough.
It actually means that when a U.S. soldieris due to leave the army in a timeof war, they can be issued with a stop-loss order and be redeployed to the front line.
It seems like a ridiculous notion to me, I can't imagine any other workplace getting away with that. "Excuse me sir" he said to his manager at McDonalds "I'm handing in my notice as i'd like to further my career, better myself and possibly discover the cure for Aids". The manager would look him up and down, laugh whilst handing him his burger flipper and apron and say "Stop-lossed bitch, get back to work".
The film starts with an ultra-realistic combat scene on the streets of Afghan as the troops are drawn into an ambush, resulting in numerous casualties. So far so good. The film then relocates to Texas and the homecoming of the soldiers, where they unwind with booze, girls and fights. Much the same as any other Texan relaxes.
The acting talent on show is some of the best of the up and coming crop of actors including Channing Tatum, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Abbie Cornish. Ryan Phillipe also gives his best performance to date as the soldier on the run.
Its just a shame that after half the film, what was a gripping character piece resorts to being just another two bit chase movie, with Phillipe trying to avoid being stop-lossed. Its a shame because this looked to be in the same league as The Hurt Locker, being a gripping look into the mindset of battle scarred U.S. soldiers. Director Kimberley Pierce also mishandles a scene involving a severely disabled troop who's injuries are a result of the opening ambush which Phillipe blames himself for, and she seems to insist on hammering home the fact that he's not changed, he's still the fun loving guy he was regardless of lack of sight and limbs. It seems a bit patronising.
I did like this film as a whole, its well made, the acting talent is remarkable and it is an original take on the modern war story. The ending is pretty good as well, even if it does undermine the whole of the film that came before it. Plus its got Abbie Cornish in it, surely the most naturally beautiful actress to grace our screens this century.
Four stars.

Gentlemen Broncos

Jared Hess is the new master of quirky comedy. Napoleon Dynamite was an absolute masterpiece of teenage awkwardness and angst whilst Nacho Libre, although maybe not the greatest film, was still full of originality. Gentlemen Broncos isn't quite as good as Napoleon but its a damn sight better than Nacho Libre.
Although this film didn't get a theatrical release in the UK, I still went into it expecting big things purely because of Hess' name on the director's chair. The screenplay's he writes with his other half Jerusha are the epitome of indie quirk. Every character is unique and every interaction between two people comes across as awkward, intentionally of course.
The presence of Jermaine Clement is probably the best bit of casting this side of Heath Ledger's Joker. He channels the presence of the Mighty Boosh's Dixon Bainbridge into the body of Serpico. The entertainment scale is cranked right up every time he appears and it is surely just a matter of time before he is a proper comedy superstar.
Halley Feiffer is an interesting choice for the leading lady being neither conventionally beautiful nor that gifted an actress, however she is still one of the most interesting young actresses i've witnessed for a while. I can't work out if her stilted performance was part of the act but she is certainly most alluring.
Although it may sound like I thought Gentlemen Broncos was perfect, believe me, it ain't. The scenes with Sam Rockwell set in the Yeast Lords story are way off the mark, bringing the films momentum to a halt every 15 minutes or so. Even the always reliable Rockwell is nothing short of irritating.
To summarise what I know is quite a hurried review, this is a great film if you like Napoleon and Nacho but if you didn't its probably best to steer clear. There's also a scene with a snake having a shit on a mans crisp white shirt if that counts for anything.
Four stars.

Vertigo



As I have mentioned before, it's difficult for me to watch classic films without feeling as if I have to like them. There was no problems in that area with Vertigo.

I'll be honest, being relatively young I have only actually seen three Hitchcock films including this one. The other two are Strangers on a Train and Psycho. Vertigo takes certain elements from both, arriving between the two as it did. For example the famous dream sequence in Vertigo is quite reminiscent of the carousel scene from Strangers on a Train in that they are both dizzying in the extreme. Combining clever camera work with startling imagery, Hitchcock manages to create an environment on the screen that would rival anything of today in terms of film making.

The strength of Vertigo is that it moves so slowly and the suspense grows, at points, to an almost unbearable level. Like when James Stewart begins to tail Kim Novak, the scene is so stretched out and plods along at such an unbearable pace that you really are clueless as to what is going to happen next.

This is the first time I have been exposed to the sheer beauty of one Kim Novak also and my word she is stunning. I actually spend a good ten minutes during the film trying to think of a movie star today who rivals her for looks or even comes close to that classic mould of shapely sirens rife in Hollywood during the 50s and 60's. She actually also forms part of the only distraction in the film with her pairing with James Stewart adding a somewhat unsettling air to proceedings, with Stewart looking like he could easily pass for Novak's Grandfather. But I suppose that still goes on in movies today, although I can't think of any cases where the sexes are reversed. Just imagine Meryl Streep was cast playing the girlfriend of Jake Gyllenhaal  or Ashton Kutcher playing the toyboy of Demi Moore, give me a break.

That being said it takes nothing away from a certain masterpiece of suspense cinema, and the fact that Alfred Hitchcock can make a film to rival any thrillers being churned out today and have it rated as PG by modern day standards is nothing short of remarkable.

Now i'm off to see how many other ridiculous and definitely hypothetical Hollywood couples I can think of. Hahaha, Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore. Ridiculous.

5 stars

Australia

Up until Australia I had always managed to avoid Baz Luhrman's films. Not purposely, its just that the sequins and dancing of Strictly Ballroom and Moulin Rouge, and the Hollywood sheen of Romeo + Juliet,  never appealed to a teenage boy. Go figure. Well there isn't anything in Australia to turn me onto them.
It starts slowly, with the arrival of Nicole Kidman's English upper class madam arriving in the land down under. Through a variety of incidents she befriends a small mixed race Aboriginal boy and fires the crooked workers from her ranch, resulting in her having to drove her cattle across the outback to be sold and get the ranch back on its feet. Luckily, Hugh Jackman is on hand to provide some assistance. They really, really, really hate each other so I don't expect they'll end up together. Oh right, thats exactly what happens.
And thats where Australia goes wrong. Its just a mismatch of a lot of different ideas, done a lot better elsewhere. Its clear this is a passion project for Luhrman but it feels like he's tried to hard to make the Australian "Gone with the Wind". The running time is absolutely ridiculous considering that the story only justifies half that amount. Theres a point after the cattle drove where it could have finished, around the 90 minute mark. But then we have about 15 minutes of filler setting up a second story. It absolutely bored me to tears.
Two stars. It would have been one but for the beautiful Australian landscapes lovingly shot. If there had just been a boomerang scene or a Harold Bishop and Lou Carpenter cameo, it could have been five.