My Week With Marilyn (2011)

At first glance, My Week With Marilyn might seem like a behind-the-scenes look at a mostly forgotten movie that had its fair share of off-camera drama. However, a closer examination of the film reveals an incomplete study of icon-in-the-making Marilyn Monroe. Although still six years away from her 1962 death when she travelled to England to make The Prince and the Showgirl with Sir Laurence Olivier, Marilyn displayed many of the characteristics that would later damage her career and personal life. My Week With Marilyn chronicles the difficult process of getting the film made while exploring the enigma that was Marilyn Monroe at the height of her fame.

In 1956, Marilyn Monroe (Michelle Williams) arrives in England to star in the film, but 23 years old third assistant director Colin Clark witnesses the clash of titanic egos and forms a brief intimacy with the emotionally fragile screen goddess.

The 'my week' in director Simon Curtis' entertaining tale obsereves that Marilyn Monroe was a movie star who wanted to be a great actress, and Sir Laurence Olivier was a great actor who wanted to be a movie star. He ruefully concludes that The Prince and The Showgirl, a lack-lustre adaptation of Terence Rattigan's comedy The Sleeping Prince would serve neither's purpose.

Based on two books written by Colin Clark, it wasn't until the 1990's that Clark, who died in 2002, published the accounts of his time spent with Marilyn Monroe. His claims of a chaste love affair ring true and his portrait of the actress meshes with other accounts from that era. My Week With Marilyn is a fairly accurate take on Clark's experiences. However, although the narrative is presented from his point-of-view, this isn't his story.

Of course the hype surrounding the film centres on Michelle Williams' performance. Williams pretty much nails the three faces of of Marilyn in popular culture: little lost girl, sexpot and spontaneous actress. Marilyn's indefinable magic proves more elusive, but Williams does a good job shedding her own mannerisms to channel Marilyn's. Eddie Redmayne does a good job as the endearing Clark, his enchantment with Marilyn showing not just in the way he acts around her, but the way he shows it whilst everyone else is watching her.

There is rich irony in the casting of Kenneth Branagh as Olivier. For much of his professional career, Branagh has been compared to Olivier, so it's fitting he gets to play the part. The character is thinly-written - Olivier is third fiddle to Monroe and Clark - so Branagh opts more for mimicry than attempting to develop a three dimensional personality. Essentially Branagh steals the show. His desire for Marilyn turned to hot indignation with her chronic insecurites keeping troopers like Dame Sybil Throndike (Judi Dench) waiting around for hours for Marilyn to do a spot of acting. Whenever she does appear she is always accompanied by her method mentor Paula Strasberg (Zoe Wanamaker), whose coaching from the sidelines cranks up Olivier's rage.

Eddie Redmayne is probably the least known member of the cast that also includes Emma Watson (an underwritten role as Clark's would-be girlfriend) and a cameo from Derek Jacobi, but he holds own. His portrayal of Clark feels gentle and unforced. On those occasions when he fades into the background, it's by design, for Marilyn to shine.

My Week With Marilyn is a sweet, slight affair that should have award nominations for both Williams and Branagh. Just don't go expecting a full blown autobiographical tale.

Read More

Moneyball (2011)

Based on Michael Lewis' 2003 book Moneyball: The Art Of Winning An Unfair Game, this effective movie version has a smart script, solid direction from Bennett Miller and great performances from all the cast. This true story of Oakland A's Genreal Manager Billy Beane and his unorthodox winning formula is a role that has Brad Pitt on the top of his game. Pitt plays Beane with the smooth assurance of Robert Redford (Pitt has been compared to Redford many times in his career) and the coolness of Paul Newman. Baseball movies have always been a hit and miss (especially in England) but Moneyball is certainly one of the shrewdest takes on the game, as it has appeals that reaches beyond the game of baseball.

Its fair to say that a sports movie of any kind has many marks to hit if it wants to be taken seriously. Not so much clichés, just parts that are essential to make a sports movie work. For example; there must be at least one game in which it seems like the central team will lose everything, but come good in the end. Also, there must be a game in which they seem to have in the bag and then it all goes wrong. You also need to have a cocky player or two who gets taken down a peg or two, and not forgetting the token speech in the locker room. If a sports film didn't have these keys moments, then it would basically suck. Moneyball has all these things which is great. But it actually doesn't show much sport, which makes it even better.


For Moneyball, key members from Social Network (2010) team including producers Scott Rodin and Michael De Luca and Screenwriter Aaron Sorkin reunite to make another true life tale that pays attention to the details and behind-the-scenes manoeuvring. The good new is, not only does Moneyball succeed in taking us on a tour of the business side of Baseball, it humanises the talk between the scouts to keep it from crashing into a sea of statistics. Again, we have to thank Sorkin and original writer Steven Zaillian for keeping their eye on the ball in this story of baseball-obessed kid Billy Beane whose career takes him to the front office. He shocks the baseball world by ditching his star players and hiring replacements that most teams wouldn't look twice at. Credit of his new protocol must go to a Yale-grad named Pete (Jonah Hill) who devises a system that throws at the value of star power for research, cold hard statistics and cheap players. Pete is a very non-athletic type character, and his scenes where he is able to explain his theory to the grizzled veteran coaches are some of the best in the film. But of course the film is about Beane and Miller's direction carefully weaves in the no-nonsense man's struggle to keep his career and personal life together despite a divorce and a job that doesn't let him spend much time with his daughter.

We don't really get to know the players especially well in the film, because they don't really matter. We meet one, to establish that Beane's little experiment is changing the lives of some people, but their personal triumphs is of no interest. What is important is whether Beane and and Pete's gamble pays off, whether they can prove to numerous old men of the game that new thinking can work.

Pitt has stuck with this movie through several directors (Steven Soderbergh and David Frankel both came close to making it) and several years of studios being unsure whether the film would sell or not. His persistence has paid off handsomely and his performance is of one that will surely be one of the big plus points in an already glittering career. Jonah Hill is his perfect counterpart, deadpanning and underplaying at every turn. Pitt and Hill certainly make a good pair, with Hill proving he can do more than just comedy. Philip Seymour Hoffman is also perfectly cast as the manager who clearly doesn't want things to change.

I can see Moneyball being one of the great sports film in recent times (especially if you're a baseball fan). For everyone else, it's simply a very entertaining film.

Read More

Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1 (2011)

The Twilight saga heads towards its conclusion in Breaking Dawn - Part 1 with the promise of a dramatic, life-changing finale for its heroine Bella Swan. Harry Potter showed just how to close a popular fantasy with its Deathly Hallows two-parter, but Twilight has a lot of work to do in Part 2 if it's to reach the same heights.

Human Bella (Kristen Stewart) and vegetarian Vampire Edward (Robert Pattinson) finally tie the knot and engage in some nookie (sex). But when she becomes pregnant, they face a life-threatening dilemma. The neighbourhood wolf-pack circles, determined to prevent the birth of a potentially uncontrollable bloodsucker, and Bella's admirer Jacob (Taylor Launter), tries to protect her.

Most people reading this review already know if their going to see this film or not. The Twi-hards of the world will enjoy this film that is a faithful adaptation of the first half of the book. Haters, meanwhile, will hate this more than any other Twilight film released to date. They will bemoan the heightened emotional pitch and endless staring into the distance. As for the tiny few in the middle, this starts off strong, then takes a turn for the weird.

What the film ultimately amounts to is characters standing around talking and filling time until the next 'big' event happens. It's the least dynamic Twilight movie in the series and, despite clocking in at less than two hours, about as exciting as watching paint dry.

There are effective elements. The wedding scene manages to inject some humour into a series that's often po-faced, these lighter moments largely thanks to the criminally underused Anna Kendrick and Billy Burke, and Bella shows some amusingly human insecurities on her wedding night. Robert Pattinson and Taylor Launter, meanwhile have never been better in these roles, the latter leavening his grimaces with much needed sarcasm and the former relishing the flaws in the romantic ideal.

Unfortunately from here it only gets weirder, with a unique C-section and Jacob's imprint incident getting carried over from Meyer's novel. The movie suffers from awkward tonal shifts, too, veering off from soppy romance to hysterical body horror. It's a transformation that is far from seamless, as director Bill Condon and screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg struggle to wrestle this schizophrenic story into a satisfying cinematic film. The big moments the film tries to build up to are gone in a flash, leaving you with a deflated feeling. At least they put the ending in the right place, creating just enough of a cliffhanger to get the fans back for the final instalment. Hopefully part 2 will have more action and less weirdness.

The acting from the 3 main characters has never been better, but this film will only be enjoyed by the biggest fans of the series.




Sign up to the 30 day trial with LOVEFiLM and watch movies online for free! There is a huge database of movies available to stream. You can also rent new released DVD's and Blu rays including the newest installment of Twighlight, Breaking Dawn.

Read More

Rum Diary (2011)

A sweltering bout of sex is interrupted by a vinyl-covering recording of Hitler's greatest speeches; Johnny Depp swigs gulps of 470-proof booze in order to use his mouth as a flamethrower; Psycho-tropic substances used by heroes to shape the world in their own image. After Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, Hunter S. Thompson's other novel "The Rum Diary" has finally been converted into a film.

Journalist Paul Kemp (Johnny Depp) travels to Puerto Rico to write for a local newspaper, The Suan Jan Star. Immersing himself in the islands Rum-soaked lifestyle, he soon becomes obsessed with Chenault (Amber Heard), the fiancee of American entrepreneur Sanderson (Aaron Eckhart), a shady property developer. Sanderson recruits Kemp to write favourable things about his latest scheme, and it's down to Kemp to take the money of the high road.

America's in the doldrums as the 60's dawn. Eisenhower's grasp on the country is dwindling and Richard Nixon's march to power is on the rise. Sensing the switching allegiances back home, Hunter S. Thompson fled America for Puerto Rico to take up the post on El Sportivo magazine, and while there wrote a small manuscript for The Rum Diary. Depp coaxed hunter to publish the book (which is a great read and I thoroughly recommend it), Depp also coaxed Bruce Robinson out of semi-retirement to script and direct this adaptation.

Kemp pops up like a hungover animal, naked down to his boxers in a devastated beachfront hotel room. His clotted eyes are less bloodshot then broken, and it's his first day of work. We've seen Depp do this kind of thing before-he describes stepping into the role of Kemp as, "like playing the same character from Fear and Loathing" Depp is a lot less affected and rattled as Kemp than he was as Raoul Duke, and he operates with such precise control of his craft that the muscles in his face seem as if he's first discovering the most iconic movements we've become accustomed to. His compatriots , the down-at-heel photographer, Sala (Michael Rispoli), and the burn-out basket case and sometimes journalist, Moberg (Giovanni Ribsi), add ballast to Kemp's craft.

Robinson retains the story's formative feel by presenting Puerto Rico as a playground, but more pivotally as a detour. Robinson also proves he can still carry a film. The script is robust, witty and sharp. Choosing to shoot the film in 16mm too gives the interiors a dusky, vintage tone. Plus, he can do physical comedy as well, bringing an absurd yet murderous car-chase to life, all the while conveying the despair and austerity of the times.

Robinson's approach to the film is nothing more then a loving tribute to a dear friend and the demise of the American dream, but it's also a thrilling snapshot of a reporter finding his way.

Read More

Immortals (2011)

Immortals cast Superman-in waiting Henry Cavill as Theseus, a poor peasant boy who rises up to lead an army against Mickey Rourke's King Hyperion, an evil leader who will do anything to find the location of the Epierius Bow, a weapon from the heavens that will give him unrivalled power.

The 300 comparisons for this ultra-stylish Greek epic are inevitable. But Immortals is far more expansive, embracing Mythology and abandoning historical fidelity in favour of more grotesque fantasy. By some distance this is Tarsem's most commerical film to date. His previous efforts have been The Cell and the somewhat overlooked The Fall. Those people who enjoyed the bone-crunching action and graphic novel look of 300 will no doubt find much to admire with Immortals, but like Zack Snyder and his spartan epic, Tarsem finds himself and a loose end when it comes to storytelling. For all his artfully-composed shots and beautiful looking digital scenery, writers Charley and Vlas can't conjure him up a script that has characters that are more then just cannon fodder.

The costumes and set designs are breathtaking but are more helpful then overwhelming. There's no denying the film is gorgeous to look at but I couldn't help feeling that I was simply just looking at a sound stage and not a wonderful Greek city.

However, the cast do quite well with the material they have been given, but Frieda Pinto's Virgin oracle and Luke Evan's Zeus feel like nothing more then plot devices rather then real people. As war rages on Earth, the Gods decide not to interfere, yet this changes when the story is sagging and needs a shot in the arm.

You can always tell when Mickey Rourke is having fun in he's movies and he definitely enjoyed playing King Hyperion. One scene in particular has King Hyperion ordering one of his Minions to put a sledgehammer to a mans testicles! (a few men screamed in the cinema).

Cavill also proves a capable action star as the hot-headed hero. He shows leadership and has a great physical presence that bodes well for Superman:Man Of Steel (2013).

Immortals has some bizarre moments that will stay with you long after the film has ended, and on some occasions the plot feels like it's been cut up and put back together again. But the films leaves you wanting more. The 3D has been done better but it's also been done a lot worse (Clash of the Titans), but it still feels like its been forced on a film that never needed it in the first place.

Immortals won't do anything to win over new fans and 300 is certainly a better film. But it has enough action to satisfy an audience on a Saturday night and makes you feel optimistic about Tarsem's Snow White and Henry's Superman.

Read More

In Time (2011)

In time is the latest film from Andrew Niccol, who's previous film was the very underrated Gattaca. You could argue that In Time is Niccol's most intriguing idea yet as it certainly is a great concept on paper. Unfortunately, it struggles to convert into something dynamic and truly ground breaking. 

In the future, everyone stops ageing at 25-but has to work to earn extra time for the rest of their lives. When blue collar worker Will (Justin Timberlake) is given a hundred years by a suicidal man he saves, he sets out to shake up the system.

Time zones separate the rich (who can live for centuries) and the poor (who scramble around day-to-day, trying to find enough time to stay alive). The rich hike up prices in the ghettos, meaning they keep most of the time for themselves and the poor are left to die. This is what is known as the balance.

For the first 45 minutes In Time is a movie that is taut and intriguing. The whole time thing really works-physically and metaphorically. For example, Olivia Wilde is cast as Timberlake's mother but Justin is 3 years older then Olivia In real life. It must of been very hard to try and cast people who all look the same age, yet play very different ages in the film (Amanda Seyfried was the only actor who was actually 25).

Unfortunately after the first half, the film takes on a more sci-fi Robin Hood/Bonnie & Clyde feel. It turns into a noisy chase movie. Timberlake and Seyfried's relationship is far too thin to make us believe they are a powerful outlaw couple, and the plot, once you get past the premise, turns into a movie full of clichés. It feels as if In Time ran out of gas when it came to imaginative ideas.  

Niccol's direction lacks urgency in certain parts of the film, which is slightly underwhelming when the ticking of a clock should provide all the tension you'll ever need for a film like this. You always have a feeling that they'll manage to find enough time to stay alive (even if that means randomly stealing from a rich woman who just happens to be passing on the highway). Additionally, there's also a needless plotline involving Timekeeper Raymond (Cillian Murphy) and Will's Father.

Justin Timberlake and Amanda Seyfried are both very capable actors with potentially strong screen presence, but are somewhat underused here. They make a very cute couple but aren't given much more to do then play your generic on the run action characters. After the first half of the film all they pretty much do is, run, shoot, kiss and play strip poker (I can only assume this is so we can see Justin and Amanda with their shirts off). It's a shame because the more In Time turns into a chase movie, the less interesting it becomes. The film is far more engaging in the first half and has some top notch performances from the supporting cast. Including; Olivia Wilde, Cillian Murphy and Matt Bomer. It's just unfortunate the conclusion is muddled and rushed as time constraints force it to end quickly.

In Time has interesting ideas and an excellent first half, but the Robin Hood style of the second half feels rushed. However, Timberlake certainly shows he can do more then just sing, dance and sing.

Read More

The Girl Who Played With Fire (2010)

The follow-up to the fantastic 'The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo', suffers from the middle part of the trilogy syndrome. The film starts straight after the first film whilst trying to set-up the story for the third, without really having a story of its own to tell. Dragon Tattoo is simply one of the best thrillers in recent years. It was confidently cinematic, and took its time telling the complex plot. The trilogy was originally planned as a longer TV serial and it really shows in this film as key parts feel rushed and is no where near as cinematic as Tattoo.

Lisbeth Salander (Noomi Rapace) returns to Sweden, becomes a suspect in three murders and goes on the run. Journalist Mikael Blomkvist (Michael Nyqvist) is sure Lisbeth is innocent, but realises she is being pursued by dangerous criminals who have a connection to her troubled past.

Delving deeper into the turbulent background of heroine Lisbeth Salander, the story bears the same potent combination of detective mystery, emotional yearning and physical brutality that propelled 'Dragon Tattoo' to success around the World. Unfortunately the sequel doesn't quite hit the same heights. The first film was more a mystery, where as this film is more an action film with a storyline thrown in. Lisbeth is now at the heart of the story, with a present-day plot about sex trafficking and political corruption turning out to be a way into Lisbeth's mysterious past. She gets a sort of Empire Strikes Back stand-off with her Father but she also has to face her step brother Ronald Niederman (Micke Spreitz) who has a condition where he doesn't feel pain!! Originally the part of Ronald was offered to Dolph Lungdren but he turned it down. If he decided to take the part it would have been his first role in his native Sweden. Lisbeth also gets a helping hand from a famous boxer (Paolo Roberto) who used to spar with her when she was younger. Boxer Paolo Roberto is featured as a character in the original novel, and now plays himself in the movie. As far as I know this is only one of the few times in film and literature that this has happened.


The catalyst for the plot is a story Millennium is planning on sex trafficking. When the writers of the story are murdered, Lisbeth is implicated when her fingerprints are found on the murder weapon. As the readers of the novel will know, it's Lisbeth's Father-a man the 12 year-old Lisbeth torched after he beat her mother-who holds the key to her destiny.

No doubt this film is still powerful and entertaining, but the story is hurried. The performances are still at a high standard but the third film needs to improve on this if it's to become a great foreign trilogy. If the American remake of 'Dragon Tattoo' is successful, it'll be interesting to see their take on the sequel.

Read More