An Online Universe

SFF2013: The Way Way Back

chris — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:30:36 +0000

A teen coming of age story set in small town, beach side America, where a 14 year-old boy learns about love, life and that crazy notion of adults not having all the answers. Seen that film before? Would you want to see it again despite knowing the revelations the protagonist will probably have? What if Steve Carell, Sam Rockwell, Toni Colette starred in it and the show was run by Jim Rash and Nat Faxton, who won an Oscar for The Descendants? Could they do anything different with the familiar formula? My review of The Way Way Back after the jump.

Duncan (Liam James) is 14, and of course is going through teen angst. He has an oblivious mother, Pam (Toni Collette), a rude and inconsiderate step father, Trent (Steve Carrell) and an ungrateful and rude step sister, Steph (Zoe Levin). Much to his dismay,they’re spending the summer at Trent’s beach house. Duncan, at this point is quiet, moody and just wants to be with his father for the Summer, instead of with a family who doesn’t want to associate with him.

At the water park on the other side of town Duncan finds a place he can escape. There he meets Owen (Sam Rockwell), the manager of the park who takes a liking to Duncan. Owen is loud, crazy, immature but also very kind and friendly to just about anyone. He takes Duncan under his wing and gives him a job at the park. From here on in, he makes friends, grows confidence and learns the ways of the world from Owen and the other water park employees. The only thing preventing him from really enjoying it all is the dire situation at home. His stepfather’s getting worse and his mother’s becoming more and more submissive and ignorant of the state of their family. Will his mother see things from his perspective and see how horrible Trent really is? And just how much about life can Duncan learn from the employees at the water park?

From Almost Famous to the recent The Perks of Being a Wallflower, the coming of age tale is one that has to embrace clichés. You know the set up, and you can almost guess the conclusion. The success of these films lies in your understanding and liking of the protagonist – do we care about their dilemma? Are we hoping they find their moment of clarity or do we merely shout at the screen “You’re 14, shut up!”? The Way Way Back has a protagonist worth investing time in, but this takes time to develop. Initially Duncan offers us little but moping at angst and it’s hard to engage with him. However, as we spend more time with him (particularly away from Trent), he becomes a character we adore and admire.”

The performances are strong, especially those from Allison Janney as the friendly alcoholic neighbour, River Alexander as her kind son and Maya Rudolph as a considerate fellow water park employee. Above all, The Way Way Back is something special due to Sam Rockwell’s performance and the writing of his character, Owen, which is the strong point in the film’s screenplay. He is not that stereotypical annoyingly immature guy that everyone somehow likes. This character is funny, sweet, insightful, friendly and it’s that minute when he takes a liking to Duncan that the film soars. His dialogue is quotable and even endearing. Here’s a character that’s incredibly funny and wonderful yet doesn’t sacrifice brain cells to be as such.

The only true downfall is one character [and without spoiling], who we want to believe has depth, when in fact they’re simply a story device. It’s a real waste of this person’s talent. That aside, The Way Way Back is immaculately directed by Jim Rash and Nat Faxton who are patient with every moment in the film. It has a screenplay that makes you just want to hug every character you encounter, as they’re for the most part intelligent, sweet and genuine. With a soundtrack that’s greater than any playlist you could create and a performance and character that’ll restore your faith in humanity, The Way Way Back earns its place among the best of the coming of age stories we know and identify with. Don’t be too surprised when you find yourself getting kicked out of your local cinema for attempting to hug the screen.

By Chris Elena

The Facts

Director: Jim Rash and Nat Faxton
Writer(s): Jim Rash and Nat Faxton
Starring: Sam Rockwell, Steve Carrell, Toni Collette, Maya Rudolph, Allison Janney
Runtime: 103 minutes
Release date: USA: July 5 2013; Australia: August 1 2013; New Zealand: August 8 2013.

Trailer: The Wolf of Wall Street

Sam — Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:26:42 +0000

The trailer for Martin Scorse’s The Wolf of Wall Street has dropped, and it’s a strange beast. Starring Leonardo Dicaprio, Matthew McConaughey, Jonah Hill, Kyle Chandler and more, the film is based on Jordan Belfort’s best-selling memoir, about his rise, and subsequent fall as a stockbroker on Wall Street. Dicaprio stars as Belfort, who refused to cooperate in a large securities fraud case involving corruption on Wall Street, the corporate banking world and mob infiltration.

The film has a November 15 release date in the US. There is no Australian release date at present.

Please share your thoughts! Is anyone else getting some [unfortunate] Gatsby vibes from this trailer, or is it just me..?

By Sam McCosh

SFF2013: Prince Avalanche

Sam — Sat, 15 Jun 2013 06:38:00 +0000

It’s surprising who you can become friends with when you are forced to spend time with someone. Prince Avalanche explores the unlikely friendship that forms between two oddball men while they’re installing road markings in an isolated area. Review after the jump.

Alvin (Paul Rudd) and the younger brother of Alvin’s girlfriend, Lance (Emile Hirsch) couldn’t be more different. Alvin is a perfectionist and stickler for the rules. He likes to think he’s a manly man, someone who can live off the land and get by on the smell of an oily rag. He’s having a tough time with his girlfriend, and isn’t sure where life is heading. Hard labour gives him time to be at peace. Lance on the other hand is a city slicker. He likes girls, he likes booze and he likes parties. But things are stale in the city and he needs to the money. The pair make up a two-man road crew, painting the yellow lines and putting in the posts in a remote area that has recently been devastated by wildfires. In the beautiful, broken landscape the two men are forced to interact, and despite their differences they slowly bond. Isolation gives a man time to think, and these men have things to think about.

Prince Avalanche is a quiet, reflective film. We watch the men deal with the isolation in different ways, and as time passes and trust develops, we see them confide in each other. Filmed on location in Bastrop State Park, which had been devastated by a fire in 2011, the landscape is both haunting and beautiful, and gives the film an almost spiritual feel – aspects of both life and death are evident. This is extremely fitting for two mean who are in a transitional stage in their respective lives – while loves, ideals and even youth may have been lost, there is life ahead. Director David Gordon Green actually found the setting before he had his story. The film is based on an Icelandic film called Either Way, which makes sense when you consider the gloomy, isolated locations such men in that part of the world might work in.

While the film is about two men understanding who they are and where they are going, it is also hilarious. Paul Rudd and Emile Hirsch have fantastic chemistry, and the pair deliver perfectly timed comedic performances. From insulting each other, to bonding over bad decisions and lost love, to the most energetic and entertaining drunk montage I think I’ve ever seen, these guys are funny. There is also an ineffable and surprisingly poignant supporting performance given by Lance LeGault (who died not long after the film wrapped), as a local trucker who seems to show up just when the men need someone else to talk to or offer wisdom.

Prince Avalanche is humorous and heart-felt, without being nasty or mean-spirited. This is how you make a comedy which has characters that the audience genuinely care about. We don’t want them to hurt each other for the sake of a laugh; we want them to bond, get drunk and realise that life ain’t that bad after all.

By Sam McCosh

The Facts

Director: David Gordon Green
Writer(s): Hafsteinn Gunnar Sigurðsson (original story), David Gordon Green (adaptation)
Starring: Paul Rudd, Emile Hirsch, Lance LeGault.
Runtime: 94 mintues
Release date(s): USA: August 9 2013

SFF2013: Monsoon Shootout

chris — Sat, 15 Jun 2013 05:47:07 +0000

One moment involving chance, timing and violence. A series of alternate resolutions. Anything goes with cops, crooks and endless betrayal in Monsoon Shootout, the new multi-narrative crime epic from Mumbai. My review after the jump.

Adi (Vijay Varma) is a fresh new face on the police force. His commanding officer Khan (Neeraj Kabi) is relentless and will do just about anything to take down the slum lord causing most of the drug and gang-related violence. Despite their very different approaches, Adi and Khan’s shared objective is to rid the streets of Mumbai of drugs, violence and illegal activity. One of their targets is Shiva (Nawazuddin Siddiqui) one of the slum lord’s many henchmen, who has an insatiable hunger for extreme violence and blood shed. Carrying around a gun and an axe, he doesn’t hide, but basks in his notoriety.

A series of events leads to Shiva being at the mercy of Adi during a drug bust. He has him corned but what does he do next? The moment may be singular, but the outcomes are endless. We from here on in are presented with a number of possible ends to this encounter, some with Shiva obtaining the upper hand while others have Adi climbing the ranks of the police force but of course not without serious repercussions. Every path is at the disadvantage of different players; but whose demise will the film settle on? Will our perceptions of the characters change greatly depending on the path?

The concept of endless conclusions to a single moment in a film and the rotating aesthetic of perception are exceptionally intriguing ideas. Any film that intends to alter the perception of anything is one worth seeing;so how does Monsoon Shootout squander such an intriguing idea? When any filmmaker attempts to extract the most out of characters with such a scenario and structure, they have to be characters with some form or complexity to begin with. In Monsoon Shootout, he only character with depth is that of Khan, the commanding officer. His disregard for abiding rules in an infrastructure that’s corrupt from the ground up proves compelling and interesting. Through the different paths we get a sense of who he is and we want to know more about this guy. However, Monsoon Shootout is only really interested in Shiva and Adi, two characters who hardly interact and aren’t nearly as intriguing as they should be on their own.

Nawazuddin Siddiqui who plays Shiva is a very good actor. His talent is exhibited throughout Monsoon Shootout, despite the fact his character’s evil nature as the film’s villain is forced and at times is downright ridiculous. We’re aware the character is poorly written, but Siddiqui makes it watchable. Neeraj Kabi should also be commended for his subdued and compelling performance as Khan. This multi-dimensional character is a huge saving grace for the film. Vijay Varma (who plays Adi) on the other hand, merely exists. He keeps the same expression and the same tone in every scenario, and it is tedious to watch. His performance and lack of character encapsulate the film’s greatest weakness.

The various scenarios that emerge as a result of the one incident are very interesting as a concept, but in reality they’re forced and contrived, and we don’t believe or care for what scenario will be next. Even the film’s love interest is just a floating head that says anything Adi wants her to say. She’s not a character or a person, she’s there…because every drama needs a love interest, right? Dull characters aside, nothing is given room to breathe. Scenes are rushed and quick cuts of extreme moments of violence prove that the film’s bark is much, much louder than its bite. Monsoon Shootout loves its ideas, but not its characters or execution

By Chris Elena

The Facts

Director: Amit Kumar
Writer(s): Amit Kumar
Starring: Nawazuddin Siddiqui, Tannishtha Chatterjee, Vijay Varma

SFF2013: The Bling Ring

Sam — Fri, 14 Jun 2013 01:26:18 +0000

The internet is a goldmine and the Bling Ring mined it to achieve the lifestyle they so lusted over. Why imitate a celebrity when you can simply break into their homes and take what is theirs? Their lifestyle is now your lifestyle. Review of Sofia Coppola’s The Bling Ring after the jump.

In our society it’s considered normal to lust after celebrities and their lifestyle. We admire their looks, their beautiful homes, the fashion and the seemingly endless nights of partying and just being seen. For some, watching from afar is not enough, they want to become like the people they admire. After all, why should just a few have all the fun?

When Marc (Israel Broussard) moves to a new school he meets Rebecca (Katie Chang). Rebecca likes to steal things. She enters cars, breaks into the homes of those she knows and gathers as much cash and designer goods as possible to support her thirst for fashion and status. For Rebecca this isn’t enough however – she wants more. She has the taste for the high life and she is addicted. When reading an online gossip column they discover that Paris Hilton is out of town. A quick internet search finds her address and within a matter of hours Marc and Rebecca have broken into Paris Hilton’s home. For Rebecca this is akin to a kid in a candy story. It’s all there, everything she’s always dreamed of. What a turn on.

Rebecca shares their adventure with friends Nicki (Emma Watson), Sam (Taissa Farmiga) and Chloe (Claire Julien), who think it’s hilarious. They want it. It’s kind of Peter Pan like after all, taking from the very rich (who won’t even notice it’s gone), and spreading the wealth around those poorer. If these celebrities are stupid enough to leave their homes unsecured, then the stuff must not be that important to them anyway. As the group feeds their addiction, their behavior becomes more and more erratic. House after house, coke hit after coke hit, hundred-dollar bills and Facebook posts which gloat about it all.

The Bling Ring is based on a Vanity Fair article by Nancy Jo Sales about the life Hollywood Hill robberies which occurred in 2008 and 2009. The thieves used Google, social network sites and gossip columns to find the houses of the celebrities they crushed on and when those celebrities were out of town. When watching the film you shake your head thinking, “there’s no way it could be that easy”; but it was. These kids came from reasonable backgrounds, but they wanted more. They wanted the life they saw in the magazines, and it was easier to take it than to earn it.

It is this desire for status which fuels the film, and the motivations of the teenagers. To them, there was nothing more desirable than being the objects of desire themselves. They wanted to be the ones lusted over, admired and talked about. In Hollywood status is power, and power is intoxicating. The pursuit of an empty dream is a reality in a society that celebrities notoriety, and Coppola has successfully portrayed that sad part of our culture with this film.

Emma Watson is easily the stand out performer in a film filled with characters which are impossible to like or admire. Watson nails the Valley Girl emptiness with her vacant expressions, oddly worded “profound” statements about life and almost sexual desire for all things celebrity. She is easily becoming one of my favourite young actresses, as she brings something different to every role. I also really enjoyed Leslie Mann’s performance as Nicki’s mother, who home schooled her girls based on the philosophy of The Secret. It was great fun to watch her on screen; and I enjoyed this performance far more than the usual neurotic housewife/mother she often plays.

Pulsating electronic music, fast edits and crystal clear photography help create a glossy world which feels little more than surface deep. Sure it looks good, but when the music stops and the lights go up, what’s left is ugly. While the film is quite funny at times (you have to laugh at the ridiculousness of these people) it also is very repetitive. There are only so many burglaries and drug-fueled parties you can watch before it all gets rather bland. Coppola grew up in Hollywood, so we can only assume this is an accurate portrayal of the scene there. However, just because it’s accurate, doesn’t make it interesting to watch.

The Bling Ring is as vapid as the culture and people who it portrays. Does this mean Coppola has really nailed the Hollywood hollowness and shown a genuine snapshot of this lifestyle? Or is the film, by portraying these teenager’s acts, merely feeding into their desires and giving them something else to get off on? After all, what they want more than anything is status and notoriety. I’m not so sure that the film is anything more than part of the cycle of a culture which celebrates material wealth and fame more than anything else.

By Sam McCosh

The Facts

Director: Sofia Coppola
Screenplay: Sofia Coppola
Starring: Katie Chang, Israel Broussard, Emma Watson, Leslie Mann
Runtime: 90mins
Release date(s): USA: June 21 2013; Australia: August 8 2013

SFF2013: For Those In Peril

Sam — Wed, 12 Jun 2013 03:55:19 +0000

The sole survivor of a fishing accident which took the life of five young men (including the survivor’s only brother) struggles to deal with both the grief and finality of death and the attitude of the village-folk who don’t understand why he walks among them, while others are dead. Review of Scottish director Paul Wright’s début feature film, For Those in Peril after the jump.

Aaron (George Mackay) should feel like the luckiest man alive. A freak accident took five young men away, including his older brother (Michael, played by Jordan Young), but he survived. However, he is plagued by guilt, by sadness and by a lingering hope, or belief that his brother is still alive. Unable to let go of this, he hears Michael’s voice calling for him from the sea, from the places they hid as children, from the dark depths of death. Aaron is obsessed with finding his brother and bringing him back.

We learn that even before the accident, Aaron was an outcast. However, Michael, his popular, spirited older brother protected him, and made sure he was included. Without Michael around to take his side, Aaron is ostracised by the community. They believe that he shouldn’t have come back from the sea, and that he is bad luck. It is implied that they suspect that his inexperience had something to do with the tragedy. No one knows what happened out there, and Aaron claims he can’t remember. At a time when Aaron is suffering perhaps more than anyone else, he is almost without support. Only his mother (played by Kate Dickie) and his brother’s girlfriend (played by Nichola Burley) give him the time of day, but even they refuse to support his search for his brother. He’s gone they claim, let him go and move on.

Grief is a complicated process, unique to each person and each loss. Writer-director Paul Wright has done a fantastic job at portraying the multiple layers of one very complicated young man’s grief. Aaron’s mind is a maze of confused feelings and thoughts. What is real and what is not is not clear to Aaron, and therefore also to the audience. George Mackay gives an extraordinary performance as the troubled young man. He deftly navigates the line between fantasy and reality, sadness and madness, and absolute pain. The nightmares and flashbacks are mixed in with the present day, creating a visceral story with immense depth. Through the use of different visual techniques, Wright has woven a rich tapestry of fears, dreams and death. His experiment layering different audio and visual styles reminded me of the late Chris Marker’s films – a sensory experience as well as an emotional one.

The rugged location of the sea-side village lends itself way to the story and the haunting myths of the ocean that are woven throughout. Writer-director Paul Wright stated that the myths in the film were based on similar myths told in similar villages, where life revolves around the ocean, and the ocean isn’t always kind. For Those in Peril is an incredibly accomplished feature film début. Paul Wright is certainly a filmmaker to keep an eye on.

By Sam McCosh

The Facts

Director: Paul Wright
Writer(s): Paul Wright
Starring: George MacKay, Kate Dickie, Nichola Burley, Michael Smiley

SFF2013: Wadjda

chris — Mon, 10 Jun 2013 06:15:32 +0000

A 10 year-old girl living in Saudi Arabia abides by her strict culture yet never stops observing and questions the more unfair notions of a society that operate in the favour of men. All she wants however, is a bike, but she’s told that it’s not appropriate for a young girl’s virtue. She just wants to be an individual with the freedom to experience pure joy, much like any child does. Does it resonate? Do we come to care about a girl and her bike in the first place? My review of Wadjda after the jump.

Wadjda is a 10 year-old girl living in Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia. Her mother serves her husband hand and foot, however this is not enough. His mother wants him to remarry another woman and have more children,..preferably sons. Wadjda is continuously reminded to keep herself covered and away from the sight and sound of men, particularly at school, with the impending threat of one day being married off, much like her friends have recently been. She is restricted, in every sense of the word, even her best friend, Abdullah, isn’t allowed to be seen with her in public unless she refers to her as his sister. Amidst it all, she is still exceptionally energetic, inquisitive, ambitious and entrepreneurial, and all she wants more in the world is a bike so she can race Abdullah and win. Only a few days after deciding this, an immaculate green push bike goes on sale, but costs more than she could ever afford. Of course, being as determined as Wadjda is, she won’t let that stop her and enters a competition at school which requires one to recite verses from the Quran perfectly. The prize? enough cash to buy the bike. Can she win? Will her home life be restored in any way?Will ever be able to live as free Wadjda as her spirit is?

Wadjda is the feature film début for writer/director Haifaa Al-Mansour and is the first feature film to be shot in Saudi Arabia. The fact that it was a female director to do so is the cause for controversy and celebration. Wadjda does something many films released as of late ignore, multiplex fodder and arthouse cinema alike; It utilises a female protagonist that has no interest or exposure to sex and does so to acknowledge a culture we’re exposed, to yet essentially know very little about. Films with a political agenda always have the aim to “raise questions” by showing you the flaws of a particular discourse. Wadjda is that anomaly of a film, it answers the questions it’s asking and gives an opinion to the perception we’re presented with. It’s the opinion of someone who is intelligent, fair, kind yet upset, frustrated and perplexed. Am I talking about the central character or the film’s director?

Films in the last ten years have gone backwards with their ideals and perceptions. This also includes arthouse films. The role of the female is to seduce, inform and or to support. But for them to breathe, exist and revolutionize is unheard of. Why? Since when? This isn’t the voice of a feminist, it’s one of a straight male who’s sick of seeing the same damn film day in and out and the cardinal element of each repeated formula is the sidelined female character. Because it’s easy? I’m still unable to answer despite continuously noticing it. Haifaa Al-Mansour inadvertently attempts the to answer such a question with her devised narrative in regards to films of now. She does so by asking the same questions of a culture, a culture women are raised in yet hidden. The questions aren’t simply mentioned, anyone at a dinner with friends can do so. It’s the attempted answer that resonates.

Everything from screenplay to direction to performances are of the highest calibre. The social context is the narrative yet a kind and inquisitive approach in the form of the protagonist (played to perfection by Waad Mohammed) elevates the commentary. Once again, like recent cinema and side lining female characters, it’s easy to have an innocent yet thin narrative with social commentary infused in the character’s dialogue, but to integrate the two so importance is placed on all fronts, it’s unheard of, it’s also refreshing and more importantly effective. Why do we care about a young girl wanting to buy a bike? The aggravating injustices of a culture presented before us give weight and meaning to such a simple tale.

You will care, you will think, you will understand. All that’s left now is to question why every other film you see struggles to make you do so, amongst other things. Aggression is easy, listening and perceiving with thoughtful consideration is something else.

By Chris Elena

The Facts

Director: Haifaa Al-Mansour
Writer(s): Haifaa Al-Mansour
Starring: Waad Mohammed, Reem Abdullah, Abdulrahman Al Gohani
Runtime: 97 minutes

SFF2013: Ginger & Rosa

Sam — Sun, 09 Jun 2013 12:12:47 +0000

In the early 1960s much of the world are on edge. The threat of nuclear war hangs heavy in the air, and nothing feels certain. What a time to grow up and mould your identity as an adult. Two friends, both young and naïve, but with very different ideals forge their way through 1962 in Ginger & Rosa. Review after the jump.

Ginger (Elle Fanning) is both afraid and carefree. She fears “the bomb” and the threat of nuclear war is almost suffocating her; but she also loves life, laughter, freedom and her best friend since birth, Rosa (Alice Englet). The two girls are inseparable and make the same mistakes as teenagers have for all of time – the smoke, drink, hitch-hike, and generally put fun ahead of safety. Ginger worries greatly about the impending end of the world, and convinces Rosa to attend some protest meetings – she really wants to try to make an actual difference. Rosa takes a more relaxed approach and feels it is up to God. Prayer is the best hope they have.

At home things aren’t so rosy. Ginger’s pacifist father (Roland, played by Alessandro Nivola) is barely home, and her mother (Natalie, played by Christina Hendricks) suspects he is cheating. After one too many extended periods away from home the two separate, and Ginger decides to live with her seemingly laid back and hip father. Her mother loves her but she is so uptight and Ginger is tired of being bound by her rules. Moving in with her father opens Ginger’s eyes to a number of things she probably wished she could have ignored. With freedom comes possibilities, but also consequences.

Elle Fanning delivers a mature and controlled performance as Ginger. Despite being only 13 years-old at the time of filming, Fanning is utterly convincing as the 17 year-old English school girl. Fanning’s performance and Ginger’s story arch are definitely the highlight in a film which otherwise becomes bogged down in manufactured melodrama and one-dimensional characters. Setting the film during such a time of unease in the world, allowed us to meet a character who was coming of age during a particularly confusing time. Ginger is a sensitive soul, and takes the nuclear threat to heart more than most. Her journey to try to make sense of living during this time, and trying to find a way to make a difference is both interesting and enduring.

I can only image what a fantastic film it would have been if it had been simply called Ginger, and had followed her character’s journey. Unfortunately director-writer Sally Porter chose a different path for the film, one of family fall-outs, scandalous affairs and god-awful parenting. When we first meet the girls, they are inseparable, and their energetic youth is infectious. However they have a serious falling out and the character of Rosa is transformed into a plot device for drama. Her actions devastate Ginger, and are used to create drama that really doesn’t need to be there. Ginger’s story is interesting enough, and this family drama only serves to drown out the real heart of the film. It certainly doesn’t help that the characters are neither likeable, nor particular interesting. Ginger’s godfathers (player by Oliver Platt and Timothy Spall) provide some interesting perspective, but they have far too little screen time to make an impact on the story.

Sally Porter has succeeded in creating a visually appealing film which showcases the barren, beautiful English countryside. Photography is excellent, with the use of light in particular helping to create a warm, youthful glow in earlier scenes between the two girls. One tense scene at a protest was also a highlight, with the fear and confusion of the occasion expressed wonderfully though both the camera work and Fanning’s raw performance. Ginger & Rosa had a fantastic story and character with Ginger, it’s such a shame that the Rosa side of things was allowed to dominate and weigh down what could have been a moving film.

By Sam McCosh

The Facts

Director: Sally Potter
Writer(s): Sally Potter
Starring: Elle Fanning, Alice Englert, Oliver Platt, Christina Hendricks
Runtime: 90 minutes

SFF2013: Cheap Thrills

chris — Sat, 08 Jun 2013 22:57:16 +0000

What would you do for money? What excruciating and indescribable lengths would someone to go for money? A lot of money? Whether it be to support their family, to live comfortable, to avoid debt, anything. Director E.L Katz is curious of the answer with his feature début, Cheap Thrills. It’s depraved, it’s revolting, but is it any good as a film? Do we have anyone to cling onto amidst the madness? My review after the jump.

Craig (Pat Healy) is a quiet and humble family man living with his wife and 10 month old son. They’re in debt. Their apartment is up for foreclosure and he just lost his job changing oil in a mechanics garage. Things just aren’t looking good. However if things aren’t about to get worse, they’re certainly going to get strange. Enter Vince (Ethan Embry), an old buddy from high school. They haven’t seen each other in 5 years and thought it was about time to have a drink and catch up. Both are in debt, one more considerably so than the other but it’s made clear, both are in real financial trouble. If fate were to have it, at this very same bar is Colin (David Koechner) and his young bride Violet (Sara Paxton). They’re crazy, drugged up and richer than anything. Their paths cross, money is spent and drinks are had. Then things get creative in the most unpleasant ways. They’re each offered large sums of money by Colin to complete a series of dares. Before anything else can be said, let’s just agree that these dares get worse…and I mean much worse. Exactly what lengths will these two friends go to? Will Craig Have enough to protect his family from foreclosure and debt and just how depraved are this couple?

Before ANYTHING about Cheap Thrills can be critiqued, it must be said, the film’s greatest strength are the performances – everyone across the board is exceptionally brilliant. For a film of this calibre to even be considered convincing throughout its 90 minute running time is an incredible attribute, and the performances are a staple of that. Koechner and Embry (both known for their roles in comedies) really resurrect their characters from a script that could’ve easily given them a dimension or two. Oh yeah, the screenplay, well..

Written by David Chirchirillo and Trent Haaga the story and plot progress well, giving scenes and moments room to breathe so the audience has a minute to familiarize themselves with the next challenge and story turn. It makes for very easy viewing, despite content. The downfall, are its characters, well, one, really. The female character is unfortunately wasted, the signature mark of a black comedy-horror film, when the only woman in the room says very little and wears just as much but is supposed to be “mysterious”. If not that, then the female would be a protagonist yet only due to her vulnerability (Evil Dead being an example). Cheap Thrills uses Violet as the former and sadly, brings the film down considerably.

Some won’t agree with this and simply say it comes down to a limited number of characters in the space to begin with. But when you’re surrounded by coked up men making poor decisions, you do wonder what the observational female in the room has to say. This is a shame considering there’s a real intelligence to the story’s progression and the multi-dimensional friendship had by the film’s two male protagonists. It’s called Cheap Thrills, yet only really proves cheap towards the film’s end when the activities the character’s are partaking in go beyond vulgarity and depravity.

With what be one of the best final shots of any film I’ve seen so far this year and a menagerie of great performances amidst a cesspool of grotesque debauchery, Cheap Thrills blurs that fine line of what is cheap and what is of true substance when it comes to violent entertainment.

By Chris Elena

The Facts

Director: E.L Katz
Writer(s): David Chirchirillo, Trent Haaga
Starring: Pat Healy, Ethan Embry, Sara Paxton, David Koechner, Amanda Fuller
Runtime: 91 minutes

SFF2013: Stoker

Sam — Sat, 08 Jun 2013 03:40:16 +0000

When India Stoker’s father dies in a car accident, an uncle she didn’t know existed comes into her life. Who is this man and why has he shown up now? Review of Park Chan-wook’s Stoker after the jump.

On India Stoker’s (Mia Wasikowska) 18th birthday, her much beloved father (Richard Stoker, played by Dermot Mulroney) is killed in a car accident. India is devastated. To say that she was close to her father would be an understatement. India doesn’t care much for her cool mother (Evelyn Stoker, played by Nicole Kidman), who has never really “got” her. India views the world a little differently than most. She observes things, details, that most would overlook, and she has the ability to hear the very quietest of sounds. She is brilliant but reserved, preferring the company of her father and herself to those of friends or other family.

On the day of her father’s funeral Charlie Stoker (Matthew Goode) presents himself to Evelyn and India. He is Richard’s younger brother, and he has decided to finally returned to his family in order to support Evelyn and India through this tough time. Evelyn knew of Charlie, but to India his existence is a surprise. She is both intrigued and wary of this man who says he has spent the last two decades travelling the world. Charlie decides to stay for a while, both to support, and to get to know his family; or at least that’s why he says he is staying. India isn’t so certain. There’s something about Charlie which both fascinates and scares her. His eyes seem to pierce through her tough exterior into her soul. There’s something there, but what?

From the very first shot, you know you’re seeing something special with Stoker. This film is a visual masterpiece. Every single frame of this film looks stunning. From the composition, to the colours, and the lighting, it has all been executed immaculately. In the Q&A after the film, director Park Chan-wook (Joint Security Area, Old Boy) said that it was he wanted to tell a story through visual and audio means first; the dialogue was secondary. He has succeeded. Those familiar with his work will recognise his visual flair in Stoker; the attention to detail is incredible. Everything has a purpose. Nothing is in this film just because.

Complimenting the fantastic photography and composition is the editing. At times I was aghast at the seamless transition between scenes. From the flowing locks of Kidman’s hair, to long grass blowing in the fields, all in one beautiful motion. It really is such a fluid film; themes, style, editing, visual cues, character’s behavioral patterns – all of these things repeat throughout the film, but never at the expense of the story. It is not distracting, it is immersive and rewards those who have an eye for detail. The use of music and the original score by Clint Mansell serve to heighten the Gothic nature of the film. When characters are uneasy, the subtle score ensures that we’re feeling unsettled too.

Mia Wasikowska once again proves she is a young actress with immense talent. India is a complicated character, and much credit should be given to Wasikowska for enabling the audience to connect with her. Kidman is well suited for the icy, slightly crazy matriarch role; while Goode gives a fantastic and unsettling performance as the mysterious uncle. While Jackie Weaver is a minor character, she certainly makes an impact during her time on screen. She is the audience, and we feel her unease.

Stoker is a gothic family horror. It has all the elements of a good horror, with the look and feel of something decidedly more like Bram Stoker’s Dracula, something which screenwriter Wentworth Miller admits being inspired by. While it is a horror, it’s ultimately a film about a young woman discovering who she is. India has always been different, but it takes the appearance of her uncle for her to understand what that really means.

The film has an amazing first act – the screenplay is tight and we learn so much about the characters, without it feeling exposition-heavy. However in the later stages of the film things go a little wayward. It’s hard to say much without talking about specific plot details, but I felt that some of India’s character development was a little unearned. It didn’t feel that there was as much depth to her character in the latter stages of the otherwise almost faultless film.

By Sam McCosh

The Facts

Director: Chan-wook Park
Screenplay: Wentworth Miller & Erin Cressida Wilson (contributing writer)
Starring: Mia Wasikowska, Nicole Kidman, Matthew Goode
Runtime: 99 minutes
Release date(s): Australia & New Zealand: August 29 2013