Thursday 29 September 2011

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

Very late to this one, but will tippity-tap my thoughts down anyway with all my characteristic exclusion of cinematic analysis and worthy point making very much intact. So, let's look at Tinker! Tailor! Soldier! Spy!: the 3D multi-million dollar musical currently taking the box office by storm.

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (2011)


Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (hereby referred to as TTSS for simplicity's sake) is one of those films you just know is going to be of a certain calibre. It's got an impressive cast list, boasting the some of the best thespians Britain has to offer and is based on the well-known and super respectable John Le CarrĂ© novel about grimy Cold War dealings, betrayal and intrigue. It's sort of like The Expendables for readers of The Daily Telegraph.

"We have a rotten apple, Jim."

The film is set in the middle of Cold War-era Britain. After a supposed covert mission goes awry, British intelligence head honcho Control (John Hurt) and his right-hand man, George Smiley (Gary Oldman) are sacked. However, when rumblings of a Soviet mole start becoming louder, the higher-ups bring back Smiley to track down the traitor in his old organisation where no-one can be trusted and everyone is a suspect. The plot demands full audience attention. This isn't one of those films you can nip out for a quick piss and come back having not missed anything important. Whilst it takes a while to get going, the film is tense and compelling for the most part. There are many twists and turns, but it all ultimately settles down to a satisfying conclusion. The cast are the main strength here, mixing seasoned veterans such as Oldman and Hurt with younger, almost household name actors such as Tom Hardy and Benedict Cumberbatch. The cast is superb without exception. Even the secondary players such as Kathy Burke and Roger "Trigger" Lloyd-Pack leave a lasting impression in their limited screen time. Oldman turns in a reserved performance, very rarely raising his voice and always seeming detached from his surroundings.

TTSS is initially a tough watch. Whilst everything from the era-accurate details to the aforementioned awesomeness of the acting is dead-on, I found myself not getting in to it for the first 20 minutes or so. The pace is purposefully slow and methodical, but I found myself focusing on the set dressing and cinematography more than I was on who the characters were. Now this could be the attention-reducing effects of all those mindless blockbusters and violent video games finally catching up with me, but I couldn't really grasp who was doing what and why. One could argue this was the point, but I'm not convinced. Once the film picks up the pace, certain character elements start to fall into place and I got a better sense of the characters. Once this happened, things understandably got more interesting and thankfully this self-styled "Cold War thriller" started to actually thrill.

There were a couple of plot highlights for me, but I'd rather not spoil them as the film's got that whole "web of intrigue" thing goin' on. I will say I especially enjoyed Tom Hardy's performance as Ricki Tarr and I thought Mark Strong was fantastic as Jim Prideaux. Cough, cough birdonfire cough.

"For twenty-five years we've been the only thing standing between Moscow and the Third World War!"

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is a strange one. I ended up really enjoying it, but I had one or two niggles with it that a lot of the gushing reviews (note to self: "gushing reviews" would make a great name for an adult movie review site) didn't mention. The film crams in a hell of a lot of plot into its 127 minutes and as such, the film can feel like a dense, impenetrable mass. Having no prior knowledge of the characters, I found it hard to follow in places, something which was not helped by the massive cast of recognisable faces and the multiple flashbacks for each character. Mood is something the film does extremely well, with director Tomas Alfredson giving us a bleak and grim take on '70s Britain. In summary, it's a fantastically well-made film, with some top drawer performances and some great moody cinematography. All the glowing reviews had me expecting this film to truly blow me away, but I walked away merely entertained. I get the feeling I'll need to see it again to really make up my mind about it. As a knee-jerk reaction though, it'll have to be this for now:


Friday 9 September 2011

Fright Night

This blog could (and has) been accused of many things. Extra-terrestrial bias is the latest in the worryingly long list of problems people have with my scrawlings. Looking back, my August output does read like the chapter headings in a filthy conspiracy theorist's equally filthy notebook, so here's some vampire shite instead. Also, it's The Popcorn Bucket's third anniversary. Hooray for that and indeed, me.


Fright Night (2011)


Straight off the bat, let me just say a couple of things that may or may not change your opinion on the rest of my review. Firstly, I haven't seen the original 1985 film. From what I can gather with minimal Internet research, it's a fairly schlocky light horror/comedy film with the exact premise this one has. Personally, I only know it from the fact that the VHS cover used to scare me when I was a kid. Secondly, if you're a newcomer to this hateful little slice of the 'Net, you should know that horror and I don't exactly get on. With most "scary" films, I find my eyes are rolling too much to focus on the fact that Nubile Teen #3 just got her throat ripped out by a bloody fog monster or other somesuch nonsense. Therefore, I tend to approach a film that proudly wears its "'80s horror remake" badge alongside its neon "I'm in 3D Muthafuckers!" one with the same enthusiasm as I would a proffered toenail and pre-cum panini.

"He's not brooding, or lovesick, he's the fucking shark from Jaws."

Teenaged Charley Brewster (Anton Yelchin) has had a recent reversal of fortune. He's dumped his geek friends, including bespectacled dork Ed (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) and is now going out with a hot, popular girl Amy (Imogen Poots) and enjoying all the perks that come with it. All of this starts to change when Jerry (Colin Farrell) moves into the neighbourhood and Brewster's suspicions start to grow that not only are vampires real, he may be living next door to one. Out of desperation, Charley turns to Vegas occult showman Peter Vincent (David Tennant) to help with this unusual, but frightening turn of events. The film plays the whole "vampire living next door" thing with the tongue-in-cheek irreverence one would expect from such a daft premise. Overall, the story was alright but it had a slightly parodic edge to it which I liked. The cast are fine. Yelchin proves to be a likeable, if not relatable, lead. Poots isn't given much more to do than look pretty and Mintz-Plasse is doing his McLovin routine, which he has down to a fine art. The main talking points though will be Farrell and Tennant. I thought Farrell was great, clearly having fun as the predatory Jerry. I liked Tennant, but just wished he was given better jokes and had done something more than giving a Russell Brand-esque performance where there are no real punchlines outside of swearing.

There are a couple of things that caught me off-guard in this film. Maybe it's because we've all become used to pussy sparkling vampires, but this incarnation has significantly more bite (excuse the pun, I can't think of a better way to describe it). Jerry is a fucking vicious creature and is responsible for most of the unsettling moments. I also liked the fact that the film didn't waste time setting up its own take on the vampire tropes. It assumes you know all the classic preventions and ways of dispatching the bloodsuckers and just gets on with it. I can respect that. The way the film is shot is surprisingly decent too. Way better than one would expect for a horror remake. There's a claustrophobic 360 degree shot in a car that stood out to me, although it loses some points considering it was augmented with CGI. The one in Children of Men was all practical and was much more effective. The film manages to be visually interesting and not hindered by being in 3D, which is an achievement.

So, the million-dollar question: it is scary? Well, not really. There are a few jump scares and the the film makes use of the completely unnecessary "third dimension" by having blood spatter occasionally. This isn't a hardcore pants-shitter, but I was slightly disappointed by the distinct lack of "fright". I was also really put off by the first 15 mins of the film. The dialogue was so fucking contrived and unnatural I felt like getting up from my seat and storming out, slapping any people who seemed to be enjoying it as I passed. Luckily for me and my currently unsullied police record, the film got better. Whilst I wasn't scared by it, I still enjoyed it. Tennant and Farrell certainly make proceedings more entertaining and I felt the film lift when one or both of them were on-screen. The ending is a bit poor and has a perfect example of a Deus ex machina if ever I saw one. Without giving too much away, I liked the grim direction certain things were heading and to have it all magically resolve itself was a let-down.

"Don't do anything I wouldn't do, and... that doesn't leave much. Well... basically, Sushi and mini golf."

So yeah, despite being a horror, a horror remake and being in fuckmothering 3D, Fright Night won me over. It's not bad at all and way better than I was expecting it to be. Most of the issues I had with dialogue and plot were balanced out by the lead performances. It's fun enough, but is hardly going to feature on my list of "Favouritest Films Evaarrrr".