How To Lose Friends & Alienate People

From small town, small budget comedies to a big city, big budget comedy in a matter of days. Good God, is there anything I can't do?

How To Lose Friends & Alienate People (2008)

When I first saw the Photoshopped-to-shit poster for this film, I let out a deep sigh. "Simon Pegg has sold out." I thought as I balled up my fists in cinematic rage. I then vowed not to see the film in the cinema and avoid it for as long as possible. Well, curiosity got the better of me and I rented it the other day. I am a weak, flawed human being.

"I've got cock on my hand"

Loosely based on writer Toby Young's memoir of the same name, How To Lose Friends & Alienate People follows Sidney Young (Simon Pegg) as he leaves his humble British magazine Post Modern Review to work for glossy New York mag Sharps, headed by Clayton Harding (Jeff Bridges). Young also meets co-worker Alison (Kirsten Dunst) who is very frosty towards him. The plot didn't really do anything new. It's the same old "fish out of water" plot dragged out every now and again and dressed up as something new. So much so that you can predict the sort of gags that will come up- misunderstandings, clashes of culture- things like that. However, How To Lose Friends... does eventually start doing something interesting with the plot about halfway through, providing you are still paying attention. Pegg was pretty funny (although he's funnier when he's spouting lines he's actually written) and Kirsten Dunst was just Kirsten Dunst- however you may feel about that. The funniest character for me was Jeff Bridges' Clayton Harding who was just a joy to watch.

From what I gather, Toby Young's source memoir is more a damning piece of writing, criticising not only the fashion/celebrity world but himself for being part of it than the traditional romcom formula we are given here. However, I haven't read it so I can only judge on what the film brought to the table. And, whilst it does bring a lot to the table that we've seen time and time again- it does some interesting stuff too. Pegg is just likeable as Young, which is probably what rubbed the readers of the book up the wrong way. Yes, he does some shallow and selfish things, but you can't help but like him. I swear, the man could set my dog on fire and repeatedly punch my mother in the face and I would still smile and tell him how great Shaun of the Dead was. I really liked Megan Fox's Sophie Maes too- and not just for the obvious reason. Fox actually seems to be acting in this film, which is a change from certain other films starring massive lumps of computer wizardry.

How To Lose Friends... is a mish-mash of different genres. Whilst this could be a good thing, I don't think it is in this case. For every witty line (and there are several) there's some slapstick which lets the film down somewhat. There's nothing wrong with slapstick, it's just I preferred the dialogue to Pegg falling off things and getting slapped.

"(To his father) You thought Brad Pitt was a cave in Yorkshire."

I was surprised how much I liked How To Lose Friends & Alienate People. I liked Simon Pegg in it, Gillian Anderson was great and Jeff Bridges was simply fun to watch. I get the feeling that if it had stuck to its witty guns, rather than bringing out the broad comedy slapsticks it would have been a fantastic film instead of simply a great one.

In Bruges

Time for something a little more off-beat now with a look at In Bruges, an easily missable 2008 film that definitely needs more press.

In Bruges (2008)

I didn't know what to expect going into In Bruges. From the poster I figured it might be a kind of Hot Fuzz retread- doing the "big action, small town" type juxtaposition with Colin Farrell attached just to sell tickets. I was wrong and I'm very glad I was. It's much better than that.

"Two manky hookers and a racist dwarf. I think I'm heading home."

After a job gone awry, foul mouthed Irish hitmen Ray (Colin Farrell) and Ken (Brendan Gleeson) are told to lie low in medieval Belgian town Bruges and await further instructions from their furious boss Harry (Ralph Fiennes). The story was great, providing a really strong character driven narrative that kept me hooked. Both Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson were fantastic, giving us the best hitman duo since Jules and Vincent in Pulp Fiction. Honestly. The relationship between the two was brilliant, going from Odd Couple one minute to believable friends the next. Ralph Fiennes was hilarious as Harry, proving he has more strings to his bow than straight-up character actor. The dialogue is also fantastic, with genuinely funny exchanges and endlessly quotable one-liners.

So In Bruges is funny. Let me qualify that and say that In Bruges is darkly funny. Some of the humour present is about as dark as you can get and it's safe to say it won't be to everyone's taste. It has a really strange charm to it all that bypasses all the jokes about racist midgets, drug abuse and more violence and swearing than you can shake a fucking baseball bat at. For most of it, Ken is the eye-rolling straight man to Ray's sulky teenager, but some of the more affecting stuff is allowed to come through later which is a masterclass in character development.

There are some great scenes too, including a memorable lads' night out scene with "dwarf" (we are told that the vertically challenged prefer the d-word over the m-word) some Class A drugs and some prostitutes. There's also a fantastic bit where Ray does his bit for international relations between our country and the rootin' tootin' U.S. of A.

"(On the subject of Belgian jokes) Is Belgium with all those child abuse murders lately? I do know a Belgium joke. What's Belgium famous for? Chocolates and child abuse, and they only invented the chocolates to get to the kids."

What surprised me most with In Bruges was how moving some of it was. I was caught up in it all and actually got a bit choked up by proceedings- something which really caught me unaware. I would definitely recommend a viewing. Not only will you be getting a great, darkly comic film, you may even learn something about the historic town of Bruges too.

Déjà Vu

Christ, I've been lazy of late. I've watched quite a few films and haven't even be bothered to drag my arse a few metres to my computer to type about them. Since I have 5 or 6 films to catch up on, I'd better get started...

Déjà Vu (2006)

I've made no secret of the fact that I'm a big fan of action films. It's very easy to point to action films in general and accuse them of being hackneyed and devoid of intelligence. I don't think of them like that. I think of them as perfect vessels to pass the time- with enough gunfire, death and tits to sate my raging inner pleb. Truth be told, I couldn't watch a Michael Mann film every day, much in the same way that I prefer not to view The Godfather films on a regular basis. Why? Because they stimulate my brain and normally when I slump in front of my T.V. I'm looking for the opposite of that. Hence why I actively seek out brainless action blockbusters-to shrink the danger of my using my brain too much.

"Brace yourselves, I think you're about to witness a murder."

Nothing has "brainless action blockbuster" written over it more blantantly than Déjà Vu. We open on a nice New Orleans day where 500 Johnny Americana sailors are on a ferry to a Mardi Gras party with their smiling, flag-waving little children and doting wives. Suddenly, this tranquil, American-as-apple-pie scene is rocked by a fuckingmegahuge explosion big enough to give Michael Bay a raging hard-on. After several ssslllooow mmmmoooottiooonnn, sad music scored shots of people being stretchered out of the port, we have ATF Agent Doug Carlin (Denzel Washington) pull up and survey the damage- they just done pissed off the wrong motherfucker. Carlin is then recruited by FBI Agent Paul Pryzwarra (Val Kilmer) who has access to a very special machine called Snow White that allows you to see three days into the past- from any angle. The plot was OK, but at least it was a slight twist on the usual action bollocks. Denzel Washington was good, but wasn't exactly stretching himself. Same goes for Val Kilmer. I did like Paula Patton's turn as Claire though. She didn't irritate at all in a pretty much thankless role.

Déjà Vu is a strange film. There is a good central idea in it, but it's not entirely sure what to do with it, so it tries everything. It's a clue-finder, suspect viewer and finally a deus ex machina. This isn't really a bad thing, it's just a bit wishy-washy. Need a clue? Snow White. Where did the suspect go? Snow White. It's just a bit lazy. I would have preferred if they used the unique capabilities of the machine to track down evidence and stuff like that.

"We've got some unique time constraints."

Still, Déjà Vu definitely delivers in the action department, including one genuinely inventive sequence which involves Carlin chasing a car from the past in splitscreen. Doesn't make sense? Watch the film and it will. Déjà Vu is also very well shot, with director Tony Scott bringing his experienced eye to every frame on screen. Trouble is, Déjà Vu is a bit style over substance, even for an action film. I found myself getting a bit bored during the third act and wishing it would stop explaining stuff and actually do something. All in all, Déjà Vu isn't a bad film- but it's not exactly that good either.

The Departed

I've been indulging my criminal side lately with films like Public Enemies, so I figured I'd review Martin Scorsese's 2006 Oscar-winning flick. Because I'm badass like that.

The Departed (2006)

I know what you're thinking- "Martin Scorsese doing a mob movie? How daring (!) Let me just put on my shocked face..." Well, actually The Departed is probably his most daring film in recent years, taking more chances than you'd expect him to. It's just a shame some of them don't pay off.

"When you decide to be something, you can be it. That's what they don't tell you in the church. When I was your age they would say we can become cops, or criminals. Today, what I'm saying to you is this: when you're facing a loaded gun, what's the difference?"

The Departed is a remake of 2002 Chinese film Infernal Affairs, which I haven't actually seen, so I'm basing my review solely on what The Departed brings to the table. The story goes thusly: the Boston Police Department manages to place young cadet Billy Costigan (Leonardo DiCaprio) deep undercover in the city’s Irish-American gangland, run by the violent Frank Costello (Jack Nicholson). However, gangster Colin Sullivan (Matt Damon) has also signed on to join the Police force, planning to leak information back to Costello. The plot is very good, using a parallel between the lives of Costigan and Sullivan to drive events forward. Leonardo DiCaprio is great, but I was pleasantly surprised by Matt Damon. I know the guy can act, it's just that I'm not used to seeing him as the bad guy. I suppose that's what happens when you play someone like Jason Bourne.

So, with the two leads talked about, let's focus on the "villain" of the piece. Jack Nicholson wasn't even trying, I swear to God. If we're honest, he hasn't been really good since One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest back in 1975. Yeah he was okay in As Good As It Gets, but that's about it (first person to mention his turn as the Joker in Batman gets to die) He just does the same schtick over and over again and I'm getting sick of it. Nearly all of Costello's lines could have been taken from Nicholson's life, with the line: "I haven't "needed the money" since I took Archie's milk money in the third grade. Tell you the truth, I don't need pussy any more either...but I like it. " just needing the words "took Archie's milk money" replaced with "did Batman in '89" to be a bona-fide fact. Trouble is, even with all I've said above, he's so damn charismatic almost none of that matters. I just wish he'd stretch himself again, because he's such a brilliant actor.

Despite my personal beef with Nicholson, the rest of the film is pretty damn good. Scorsese makes an artform out of the tense scenes on display here and it's good to see. The elevator shootout scene had me jumping at the slightest little noise, which is always a good sign that the director is doing something right. Some of the dialogue is truly stellar too, with most of it spewing from the foul-mouthed Dignam (Mark Wahlberg). Turns out Marky Mark can act. Who knew?

"What Freud said about the Irish is: We're the only people who are impervious to psychoanalysis."

The one thing that really let The Departed down was the ending. Not the ending of the story or bad acting or anything like that, but the final shot. I won't go into it here, because it will spoil some of the twists and turns that should be enjoyed spoiler-free, but it bugged the fuck out of me. It was so smack-in-the-face obvious. It seemed like Scorsese nipped out to the loo and some other director, fresh from some bullshit film school, snuck into the edit suite and decided to add this shot on the end "to add poetic meaning". It undermines the whole damn film and pissed me off to boot.