Showing posts with label Quentin Tarantino. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Quentin Tarantino. Show all posts

Tuesday, 2 July 2013

Dumbo, Django and Despicable Me 2 - Reviews #167

Just six movies in the past 10 days, as I keep being interrupted by life and the world and stuff.


I can't handle this. At all.

*SOME SPOILERS*
Dumbo (Ben Sharpsteen, 1941)
- I didn't watch many films as a kid, but Dumbo was my favourite. It was also the third DVD I ever bought (if memory serves), after Once Upon a Time in China II and Three Colours Blue. But I hadn't seen it for perhaps seven or eight years before this evening. And I'd forgotten how desperately sad it is, drawing a lump to the throat around the 20-minute mark and holding it there until its climax. Only Capra has ever made you work as hard, or go through so much, for your happy ending, as Dumbo - a pure innocent, like Bresson's Bathazar - is tormented, patronised and brutalised, on his way to a climactic act of almighty catharsis.

It takes a little while to get going, with some extraneous, somewhat ill-conceived material about the circus and its sentient, breathing train, but every scene featuring the impossibly cute, stunningly expressive title character - a big-eyed little elephant with gargantuan ears - is pure magic, whether pairing him with his protective mother (wonderfully voiced by Disney regular Verna Felton), or the smart-talking Timothy Q. Mouse (veteran character comic Edward Brophy), a self-appointed guardian who takes her place after fate intervenes - and sets the life-changing finale in motion with an extraordinarily powerful plea for compassion.

After the failure of the matchlessly ambitious Pinocchio and Fantasia, Dumbo was intended by Disney as a back-to-basics affair along the lines of Snow White, on that smaller scale and with that slighter running time. The tremendous amount of love, care and attention to detail poured into it, though, remains staggering, from the incomparable opening with its formation of storks delivering newborn babies to be excitedly unwrapped by their parents, past the adorable sequence with Dumbo in the bath, through that terrifying set-piece that sits him atop a burning edifice, via the gobsmacking "pink elephants" set-piece and showstopping When I See an Elephant Fly number to a punch-the-air finale of uncommon brilliance (with a little tacked-on wish-fulfilment).

The film is simply conceived and unashamedly episodic, but hand-drawn with a rich and vivid flair, and capable of moving me more deeply than just about any movie I've ever seen. For all the surrealistic brilliance of those pink elephants - the most trippy, out-there and perhaps original thing Disney has ever done - my favourite passage (perhaps in all of cinema) is the breathtakingly beautiful, utterly sincere scene of Dumbo and his mum set to Baby Mine, which begins with them touching trunks through a cage window and ends with a wrenching farewell. It's the first thing that comes to mind whenever I think of the film: if the pink elephants wow me, then Baby Mine destroys me, and I think it's what makes this Disney's greatest - just pipping Bambi to the crown.

George Lucas once batted away criticisms of his movies' cold aloofness by saying that it's easy to make an audience feel something: you just choke a kitten in front of them. Dumbo's formula isn't complex, and you could argue that it follows that Lucas template - take an obviously adorable hero, make fully sure your audience is in love with him, then make him suffer - but its method of manipulation is so sublime and its story of redemption so timeless that it's very difficult to fault. Well, except for the train being alive - that's stupid. (4)

***



Django Unchained (Quentin Tarantino, 2012)

"Sold!"

I thought I was destined to dislike Django Unchained - or at least leave disappointed. I still remember the visceral thrill of seeing Kill Bill: Vol 1 on the opening night, being knocked sideways by this full-frontal assault on the senses, gazing up at the mammoth screen in rapt enthralment, perched on the edge of the only spare seat in the house, right on the end of the front row. I saw the film again a couple of weeks later, and thought: "Well, that didn't hold up particularly well", but the energy and invention of it all made one thing clear: a Tarantino movie is an event movie, more than any summer blockbuster is ever going to be. And whatever he does, for however long he does it, I'm going to watch it.

But that brings me to the first problem: Kill Bill: Vol 1 is the only good film that Tarantino has made since Pulp Fiction, and it isn't even that good. Jackie Brown was a messy, "mature" movie that looked and sounded suspiciously like its writer was just flailing around, with nothing left to say after whacking out two instant classics in three years. Kill Bill: Vol 2 had its moments, but felt more like a collection of interesting deleted scenes than a film. InjUriOUWs Ba$turdz was just completely pedestrian, aside from Waltz's exceptional performance and that one nerve-shredding sequence in a bar. And then there is Death Proof. The reason I haven't seen Django until now is because I go to the cinema with Mrs Rick, and she has refused to watch any Tarantino films since we saw Death Proof. This seems entirely reasonable, since Death Proof is probably the worst movie of the last 10 years.

As if to further ensure my hostility, Tarantino then started laying into John Ford, my favourite movie director, and the inventor of the modern Western, in his idiotic publicity interviews for Django. "I hate John Ford", he said, before going on to imply that Ford and his films were racist. Sorry, Quentin, but I'm shutting your butt down. You made a film condemning racism. In 2012. For hipsters. Ford did it in 1960. At the peak of the Civil Rights struggle. For an audience half-comprised or rednecks and racists. His film took their prejudices, threw them up on screen and shot them to pieces. That movie was Sergeant Rutledge, and it's one of the bravest and most progressive movies ever made by a mainstream American filmmaker. Admittedly Ford cast the black star, Woody Strode, as a Chinaman five years later, but really we're nitpicking.

So I suppose I approached Django with my enthusiasm severely compromised: that long-held fantasy of a Tarantino film that would pick me up and sling me at the wall tempered by the reality of his last few, and a lingering resentment that his tiresome posturing now involves telling his legions of fans to ignore The Great American Director. The thing is, though, that Django’s good. Like, really good. Midnight in Paris good. It’s a film that sees an artist awakening, rising from a long creative slump. It’s a movie that stands on its own two feet, without the need for post-modern pastiche that colours his worst films. The insertion of that “mandingo” fight sequence (sadly not a man fighting a dingo, though there is something similar to that elsewhere) seems cribbed from Jules Dassin’s Night and the City, but otherwise this is (mostly) all his own work. And it all feels so effortless, just as Tarantino’s recent films seemed so mannered and forced.

As you’ll probably be aware, as you saw it ages ago, the story deals with Django Freeman (Jamie Foxx), a slave-turned-bounty-hunter who travels with his German mentor (Christoph Waltz) to a Southern plantation run by a flamboyant, eye-linered slave owner (Leonardo DiCaprio) - the only man who takes handshakes more seriously than Mark Hughes - in the hope of freeing his wife (Kerry Washington). Just as Inquisitive Batmen was a Jewish revenge movie, so this is an African-American one – made by a man who appears to be under the mistaken impression that he is actually black. It reminds me a little of that line about Life Is Beautiful: "Clowning does not merely seem an inappropriate response to the realities of a concentration camp, but the wrong response". Levity and gunplay may be the wrong response to the realities of slavery, but Django's a hell of a lot of fun.

Though the film isn’t explicitly split into chapters like the first Kill Bill, it still comprises three distinct sections. The first, dealing with Django’s transformation, is light-hearted, surprising and dizzyingly fun. The second, taking place in and around the rather wonderfully-named “Candyland”, is hysterically intense, a fusion of Tarantino and Tennessee Williams: incredibly and brilliantly talky, full of ingenious ideas and colourful dialogue, densely plotted, polemical and hideous, enveloping you in its sickening, seductive world. Its masterstroke is dipping into phrenology, the intriguing and appallingly offensive "medical" basis for racism. And the final passage – power-hosing the remnants of that moral swamp from your body, and lasting barely 35 minutes – is pure, cartoonish Blaxploitation, aside from containing a couple of those beautiful quiet moments that QT can do so well, when he’s so inclined. The clichéd shot of the slave smiling at the departing figure of Django is nevertheless rousing, while the last scene between Foxx and Waltz is the most affecting in a Tarantino movie since Mr Orange said he was sorry. The dynamic of the characters is also refreshing - yes Django needs an in with "civilised" society in the context of the times, but Tarantino avoids the old Cry Freedom trap by a mile; there's no way the hero of his film is going to be the white guy, or that the only way we'll be asked to empathise with the plight of black people is through the eyes of a Caucasian protagonist.

All of Tarantino’s films have the same three basic ingredients: talking, violence and suspense. Here, the "N-word"-heavy dialogue is largely sensational (a little mention for the rather lovely: "On the off chance there are any astronomy aficionados amongst you, the North Star is that one"), the bloodletting is superbly choreographed and much of the drama is so taut that is seems to be fraying before your eyes. Tarantino is helped by a superb ensemble: Foxx is a persuasive hero and DiCaprio is better and more intriguing than he has been in years – he never quite became the actor he seemed destined to in the mid-‘90s – though the standout is Waltz, one of the director’s greatest discoveries. As the charming, erudite and brilliant Dr Schultz, a former dentist now in the corpses-for-cash business, he’s laid-back and playful, but also enigmatic, until that sense of rage at the injustices of the world begins to broil beneath his avuncular façade. There’s something exalting, enthralling, even hypnotic about his performance – and indeed about the giant, quivering “tooth” he keeps on the top of his van.

As usual, Tarantino has assembled a bizarre supporting cast, which this time includes Samuel L. Jackson as a virulent “Uncle Tom” figure, Jonah Hill as a Klansman, Don Johnson as a racist, and the likes of James Russo, Russ Tamblyn and Bruce Dern! The director’s weak spot in terms of casting (and in terms of general filmmaking) is that he always feel compelled – perhaps through pity – to include roles for this hopeless Quentin Tarantino guy, who’s the worst actor I’ve ever seen. Here he pitches up looking like Randy Quaid and attempting an Australian accent. It isn’t pretty. Or good.

As ever, the film comes with the soundtrack to your next two months – the one thing Tarantino never gets wrong – and includes Jim Croce’s I Got a Name, a rather wonderful song which I first came across in the 2005 film Invincible, and which accompanies the unveiling of Django and Schultz’s two-man dream team. Their adventures out West actually get little screen-time, a fascinating decision that recalls the absent robbery in Reservoir Dogs, and reminded me of an interview with Tarantino from the early 1990s in which he explained that what you didn’t see was often crucial – a lesson he’d learned from The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp.

Tarantino’s direction has seemed to falter in recent years, being geared towards people with the world’s shortest attention span (Kill Bill: Vol 2), those with limitless patience who really like fire and blood (UpROARious P0th3ads), or sado-masochists (Death Proof). Here he’s absolutely on top form, delivering the requisite thrills through a fusion of pyrotechnics and restraint that he hasn’t had in check since Pulp Fiction. And this is, unquestionably, his best film since Pulp Fiction: a masterful, genre-bending movie that’s full of superb exchanges and exceptional individual scenes, but also works as a compelling and consummately confident whole. It loses half a star for some rare wrong moves (castration? Yawn, even if it leads to a fun Jackson monologue), Quentin's performance and the dancing horse. (3.5)

***



CINEMA: Despicable Me 2 3D (Pierre Coffin and Chris Renaud, 2013) - Retired supervillain Gru (voiced by Steve Carell) has settled down with his three adopted daughters and his legion of Minions, and is branching out into the exciting world of jams and jellies. Then, out of the blue, a secret organisation fighting the planet's greatest (and most ridiculous) criminals gets in touch - asking him to go deep undercover at a shopping mall, where he's joined by a feisty ginger agent (Kristen Wiig) who seems preferable to the women he's been trying not to date. This sequel to one of the best animated movies of the past few years - not in the same league as Up and Cloudy, but comfortably in that second tier - is one of those follow-ups that in dramatic terms has no real reason to exist, but in terms of entertainment is very welcome all the same. Perhaps as a result, the story is weaker and slighter - without the strong emotional hook we got last time around - the new characters are rather dull (well, except for that one absolute beauty of a scene in which the world's most macho villain rides a shark into a volcano) and there are a couple of fart gags that seem a little laboured. Thank goodness, then, that it's so uproariously, outrageously funny, thanks a little to Gru, but mostly to his Minions, whose exuberant silliness, blissful juvenility and endlessly inventive escapades - from magic shows to impressions of their mutant friends - lead to some of the funniest sight gags and sequences I've seen on screen in a long time. Despicable Me 2 doesn't compare to the first film, because its humour and action is serving a story that seems altogether more contrived within the boundaries of its preposterous universe, and the film does sag a little in the middle, but it made me laugh a lot - and that spirited comic imagination is something that shouldn't be underrated. (3)

***



*VERY MINOR SPOILERS*
Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai (Jim Jarmusch, 1999)
- All human life is here, in Jarmusch's existential hitman flick. At a prosaic level, this story of a lone, violent outsider (Forest Whitaker) turning the tables on his cartoonish mob bosses grew from Le Samourai and led to Drive. On a more timeless one, it's a movie about life itself, with a beautiful, humanistic hero who places common moral ground and an adherence to his rigid, rigorous samurai code over superficial ties like age, language and the constraints of late 20th century, inner-city America. Jarmusch's pet theme has always been the similarities that triumph over our differences - but has he ever done it more effectively or movingly than in the friendship between Whitaker and an ice-cream selling immigrant (Isaach De Bankole) who speaks only French? In a way, the movie seems almost unfinished - in need of one last script revision and a final cut - troubled as it is with a rough-and-ready visual and editing style, moments of disjointed storytelling, and some ironic villainy that at times just pushes too far (the Flavor Flav raps are weirdly broad and shallow by Jarmusch's standards). But it's also a startling and brilliant film: its belly laughs and bright, brief action sequences never serving to obscure an unforgettable undercurrent of wistful melancholia (those poor pigeons - I only just got over On the Waterfront), quiet humanism and tranquil nobility. And as the epitome of all three, the braided, sad-eyed Whitaker gives one of the finest performances of that or any other decade. (3.5)

***



Cube (Vincenzo Natali, 1998) - I don't watch many horror films, but Owen is a bit of a buff, so I asked him to recommend me four of the best - the only rule: no slasher movies. Cube was the first, and it's really good: a taut, tense fusion of horror, thriller and sci-fi that sees a cop, a doctor, a maths whizz, a cynic and a serial prison escapee trying to climb - and think - their way out of a series of cube-shaped rooms, many of them booby-trapped. The acting's pure B-movie standard, but that's part of its charm, while the originality of the concept, an atmosphere akin to Carpenter's Assault on Precinct 13 and a succession of stomach-churning, claustrophobic sequences - replete with nasty surprises - make it something of a minor classic. There's the odd lull, daft line or obvious revelation - and the maths whizz is pretty bad at maths - but also a heady combination of shifting sympathies, effective character drama and suspenseful action that makes it something of a spiritual successor to those chamber Westerns of the 1950s - just relocated from the sprawling outdoors to a series of dingy, dangerous cages, each 14ft by 14 by 14. (3)

***



Liar Liar (Tom Shadyac, 1997) - Well, it's not subtle... (2.5)

Tuesday, 10 May 2011

Bewitched, Beatrix and Woody remembering to include some jokes - Reviews #67



*SPOILERS AND ONE PRETTY MILD SWEAR WORD*
Whatever Works (Woody Allen, 2009)
– It takes a good 10 minutes to get going and the last half hour is a write-off, but there's 50 minutes of decent stuff here and in terms of Allen's recent work, that's not bad going. Larry David plays a misanthropic physics "genius” (his word) whose life takes a turn for the better when he meets down-and-out Southern beauty pageant regular Evan Rachel Wood - before some unwelcome visitors shove the lever on the old roundabout of infidelity. There are a few problems. Allen invests Wood with a great deal of likeability, but never warms to the idea that people who appear ignorant aren't necessarily unintelligent. And not only does he seem to think the funny thing about Born Yesterday is that Billie is a dumbass, he seems to think we're guffawing at Pygmalion because Eliza is a chav. They're not and we're not. The satisfying thing about those works is the idea that they challenge our initial perceptions and we wind up rooting for these transformed characters as they're given a chance in life and seize it with both rows of teeth. There's also an issue with Allen's portrait of evangelical Christians. Now I'm as sick as anyone of bigoted, gun-totin' idiot-holes giving the rest of us God-likin' folk a bad name, but I flat out refuse to believe that the reason they're big on fidelity and homophobia is because the women are nymphos and the men are all gay. That's true of 50 per cent of them, maximum. And, thirdly, while Allen has never really made a statement on film about the public arse-kicking he got following a certain relationship decision in 1992, this is the closest he's got, as David laments the crusading morality of America's "family values nuts", time and again. Nice, Woody. Very subtle.

Now to the good stuff. Whatever Works has effective performances from David and Wood, a strong first act where their relationship flowers and as many good one-liners – scattered liberally throughout the film – as any Allen film in recent memory. My favourite is a sitcom-ish pay-off, when Ed Begley, Jr. comes looking for his estranged wife, now shacked up with two lovers. "She's got a new man? What's he like?” Begley asks. "He has four arms and two noses,” smirks David. It's a shame, really, that the excessive smugness and disastrous plotting takes it off target, because there's some fine writing here and the potential for a great film, about a talented old grump finding happiness – and hopefully some shred of decency – in the love of a pretty young girl. But then I suppose that's Sweet and Lowdown. And about five million other movies. And perhaps, Woody would say, his own life. (2.5)

See also: To read about how little Woody forgot how to make good films again, read our annoyed review of You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger here.

***



*ONE RUDE WORD*
Sherlock Holmes (Guy Ritchie, 2009)
– Maybe we've been spoiled by Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss' spectacular update of the Holmes legend, but this doesn't quite cut it. Whereas that BBC series provided a fascinating, contemporary, utterly convincing spin on the character: dark, apparently autistic and obsessed with crime beyond all reason, Ritchie's film thinks the way you inject danger into Sherlock is to make him a bare-knuckle boxer. It also lacks the knowledge of, and reverence for, Conan Doyle's stories – there's precious little of Holmes' distinctiveness here. And, while the movie exploits the Victorian London setting to some degree, it does so no more than, say, From Hell. Or Shanghai Knights. Added to which: why are the stakes in these action blockbusters always so high? And so stupid? In this case it would appear the answer is at least partly down to marketing. Villain Mark Strong is very keen to mention clearly – and twice – that he intends to take over Britain (yeah, whatever, who gives a shit?) and then AMERICA (oh no, not the Land of the Free!). Having said that, Robert Downey, Jr. (as Holmes) and Jude Law (as Watson) are both quite good, and spark off each other impressively, and the possibly supernatural story – which at times appears ludicrous – does tie up reasonably well at the end. If the sequel can get hold of a smarter script, it might turn out alright. But I'm rather more excited about the return of Sherlock to the small screen in the autumn. (2.5)

***



While You Were Sleeping (Jon Turteltaub, 1995) – This excellent romantic comedy eschews formula and works so well for just that reason, with a real story about characters you genuinely care about, feeling emotions that humans actually feel. Sandra Bullock is a lonely train station ticket attendant who falls in love with suave commuter Peter Gallagher without having ever spoken to him. When he's mugged at the station, she rescues him from the tracks and, while he's in a coma, is taken to the bosom of his family. The only thing is, they think she's his fiancée. Then his suspicious, quietly charming brother (Bill Pullman) turns up. It's an extremely well-plotted film, never feeling forced or unrealistic, and the performances from Bullock and Pullman are absolutely lovely. It's funny too, with Michael Rispoli offering a hysterical characterisation as Bullock's unwaveringly horny neighbour. (3.5)

***



*SOME SPOILERS*
From Dusk Till Dawn (Robert Rodriguez, 1996)
is about as good as a crime-thriller-turned-vampire-bloodbath is ever going to be. Tarantino’s script is excellent, the performances from George Clooney, Harvey Keitel and then flavour-of-the-month Juliette Lewis are spot on, and the super-stylised weapons make fighting the undead look like a valid and desirable career option. At least until that massive rat thing turns up. I could certainly have done without a sensationalist subplot about rape, and Tarantino is a flatly terrible actor, but everything else about this Alamo re-imagining hits the bullseye. There's also a bit where the not-entirely-hideous Salma Hayek dances around in her bra and pants, if that's your sort of thing, which it probably is. (3.5)

***



Bewitched (Nora Ephron, 2005) isn’t a straight update of the enduringly popular ‘60s sitcom, but a film about an update of the series, which features a real-life witch (Nicole Kidman) as Samantha, opposite obnoxious movie star Will Ferrell. I'm not being unpleasant; those are the roles they play. It feels more like a cop-out than a meta-textual triumph, as if comedy veteran Ephron won the right to adapt the series, sat down and promptly thought: ‘Oh no, what the bloody hell have I done?’ It’s perhaps fitting, then, that the film has little obvious fondness for its source – beyond its pop cultural significance – as the remake-within-the-remake scenes are purposefully unfunny. I don’t think the film deserves the comprehensive kicking it received. The story’s nothing new, essentially paraphrasing Bell, Book and Candle, with Steve Carell overacting in the Lemmon stylee as if his life depended on it. And a strong veteran supporting cast, featuring Michael Caine and Shirley MacLaine, is largely wasted (though Caine does turn himself into the Jolly Green Giant at one stage). But it’s entertaining – particularly in the first half – with Ferrell doing his usual shouty improv schtick and Kidman drawing laughs and pathos from a wide-eyed, deadpan naivete, only falling down when she diverts from it. The best moments are in Ferrell’s opening scene, where he enthuses about the merits of the original Bewitched, before a bit of prompting from his agent (Jason Schwartzman) encourages him to embark on an increasingly ludicrous set of demands. It's not magical, then, but not too bad. (I wish they hadn't glibly soundtracked one inane sequence with R.E.M.'s Everybody Hurts, though - that song is too great and too important for such tiresome indignities. The rest of the music is really well-chosen, in the American Werewolf in London manner.) (2.5)

See also: For a write-up of Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy, also starring Will Ferrell, go here.

***



Miss Potter (Chris Noonan, 2006) is a pleasant but unremarkable biopic of Beatrix Potter, lit by its minimal use of animated inserts (which interact with their creator) and some good performances. Zellweger is an almost instinctively irritating performer – all ill-judged grins and cloying sentiment – but she’s far better than usual here, bringing both steeliness and an attractive vulnerability to the character. The script’s mostly quite well done too, though it's a little one-note and does turn into a dry study of land reform in its final minutes, which is generally a no-no. Ewan McGregor is ideal as Miss Potter’s publisher and prospective beau. Emily Watson, who apparently wanted the lead and would doubtless have been wonderful in it, is also fine as her confidante. Nice music too. (2.5)

***



Sexy Beast (Jonathan Glazer, 2000) – Heeeeeeeeere’s Gandhi! Yes, Sir Ben Kingsley (I called you “Sir Ben” like you asked, please don’t glass me) is the goateed psychopath trying to talk ex-crim Ray Winstone out of retirement in sunny Spain, with the aid of repetition, deviation and his fists. This is really just another variation on the classic ‘70s/’80s Lahndahn gangster model, with echoes of both The Long Good Friday and Get Carter, but the dialogue and characterisations are extremely strong, the heavyhanded symbolism in the opening scenes works a treat and the pay-off is particularly sweet. I’m not sure about the jokey twist at the death, though. (3.5)

***




Mean Girls (Mark Waters, 2004)
isn’t necessarily a very enjoyable film, as Lindsay Lohan’s school newcomer loses her identity, her perspective and her sense of decency as she battles – and ingratiates herself with – reigning queen of mean Rachel McAdams. But there’s no questioning the quality of either the acerbic dialogue or the performances, which are spot on. The plotting does borrow too liberally from the wonderful Heathers, and Tina Fey loses her grip on the realism of the piece in the final third, but this is still an incisive and intelligent teen movie. (3)

***



Shrek (Andrew Adamson and Vicky Jenson, 2001) - Well, it's not as funny or clever as it thinks it is, but the central story is strong, John Lithgow's tiny villain is good and Eddie Murphy made me laugh a few times. (2.5)