The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1

Shut up. My reviews of Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi are incoming. I'd finished my Empire one and booted it up to find I'd lost about half of it. Instead of trying vainly to recreate my genius, I thought I'd better type down my thoughts on the newest Twilight and then fill in my Empire review with all-new genius.

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1 (2011)

 

I would say that I've been quite fair to the Twilight films. Critics have been sharpening their claws since the first one came out and savaging it gives them a big ol' smug grin on their faces and a small ol' bulge in their corduroy trousers. That's not to say the films haven't been deserving of a critical mauling, I just don't like the notion that someone is actually proud of coming up with shit puns like "Breaking Yawn".

 "No measure of time with you will be long enough. But we'll start with forever."

Breaking Dawn starts with what most Twihards have been waiting for- the long-hyped marriage of Bella (Kristen Stewart) and Edward (Robert Pattinson). After the wedding and inevitable wedding night, Bella discovers she's pregnant. Trouble is, no-one knows what with as a human/vampire hybrid has not been encountered before. Things get worse when the unborn whatever starts physically hurting Bella and pretty soon, becoming a real threat on her life. Also Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner) is in this film. Breaking Dawn's story is actually batshit insane, but at least it does more than the treading water that Eclipse did. All three leads are the best they've ever been, but still fall short of, y'know, acting. The dialogue is better too, but they are still guffaws to be had at some of the straight-faced mentalism on display. This is encapsulated when Bella, who has been walking around her own wedding barely cracking a smile, says to Edward: "Why can't you see how perfectly happy I am?". Cue big giggles from the audience.

It's odd then, that a film series known for awful dialogue, unintentional campness, wooden performances and enthusiasm for naked male torsos is tackling such a prickly issue such as abortion. There are entire sites dedicated to author Stephenie Meyer's hidden Mormon agenda and the general lack of feminism in the books and films, but personally Breaking Dawn has been the only film that I feel was trying to make a serious point. It doesn't succeed and as a result, shows how fucking shallow the films are, but I felt this film was actively trying to well, brainwash, for lack of a better word, its captive teen female audience. It left me with a rather nasty taste in my mouth. I don't think I'm reading too much into this either. The film ain't subtle at the best of times. Also, for a film supposedly all about romance, I've never encountered something so loveless. The Bella/Edward love story has never convinced, but by Christ is this frigid. Our power couple finally consummate their "love", but it's not the passionate roll in the hay that has been built up for three films. We don't see anything. Just lots of kissing. I wasn't expecting full penetrative vampire sex in a 12A, but considering what they got away with later in the film, it is surprising. Instead we cut to a scene that wouldn't look out of place in an Austin Powers film- their four poster bed destroyed and feathers fluttering down. Vamp boy got some skills, apparently. However, after seeing some bruises on Bella, Edward doesn't want to touch his new bride again and the couple instead have sweaty, passionate games of chess instead. It's all very disquieting. Also explain to me how a guy with no blood can get it up.

But fear not, those unintentional guffaws are still present. Not a minute in we have Jacob receiving his wedding invitation, ripping off his shirt and flouncing off into the forest. There's also what will soon be referred to as the "talking wolves" scene which is downright terrible. The special effects are still shite, with the wolves still crappily done and Edward's whooshing about not being any more convincing that the low-fi effects in the first film. These films are massive now and the budget for this one was $110 million. Why the fuck can't they afford decent effects? Sure, special effects do not a good film make, but when the characters, story and dialogue makes you want to shit yourself in protest, the effects seem all the more important. Some of this is damn embarrassing.

Breaking Dawn does manage to do a couple of things right. These are spoilers for anyone silly enough to ignore my warnings, so just skip to the end if you don't want to find out what happens. The pregnancy is well handled. It's creepy as shit watching Bella get more and more emaciated and her belly gets gradually more swollen and bruised. The birth scene is surprisingly disturbing too, especially for a "tween" film. As usual I thought Jacob was the only likeable character and my dislike for Bella grows with each film as she treats him so poorly. The "imprint" scene is nice though. The film is well shot too, with some really nice cinematography. However, these fleeting positives don't make up for the shitty film. It's like giving your dead grandmother a makeover. You can slap as much lipstick and blusher as you like on the poor cow, it's never going to disguise the rotten core.

"It's crushing you, from the inside out."

I agree with bequiffed critic Mark Kermode, who stated that critics in general are softer on movies (like the Star Wars films) embraced by fanboys than they are with movies embraced by fangirls. Despite being a massive fanboy, I'm not afraid to like the Twilight films. I enjoyed New Moon and wouldn't have to be held at gunpoint to see it again. I can't shake the feeling that the films have stopped trying. They pointlessly split the last book into two films because Summit Entertainment decided they liked money a hell of a lot more than brevity. It's been an interesting experiment, but thank God it's almost over.

Contagion

A dose of the fairly new before I metaphorically slap you back to the '80s with my review of ONE OF THE GREATEST FILMS EVER MADE. Here's my review of a film that will undoubtedly be at the forefront of my mind next time I feel a bit under the weather.

Contagion (2011)

With all the scaremongering that modern news networks do, it's a safe bet that there's going to be another health scare pretty soon. Health scares invoke that special kind of fear because they are an invisible, inhuman threat. That serial killer on the loose? Scary, but you can attribute human qualities to him, he's got a name and a human face (plus several more in his rucksack). It's the same when you look at other types of monsters, like the greedy bankers that plunged the world into a spiral of debt and despair. They've got faces, if only to frame their smug, unapologetic, shit-eating grins. What I'm getting at is that personally, I find the threat of a global pandemic to be terrifying and way more frightening that bloody ghosts (hello, Paranormal Activity), killers (erm, Scream 4, I guess) or any other such shite. Real life is scarier than fiction and a lot of effort has gone into making this film as realistic as possible.

"It's a bad day to be a Rhesus monkey."

So, the story of Contagion is a simple one. There's a killer virus, called MEV-1, affecting the entire world and people are dropping like flies. We see how different countries, organisations and people deal with the global crisis, including everyone from the eye of the storm in the Center (sic) for Disease Control aka the CDC, run by Dr. Cheever (Laurence Fishburne) down to suburban family man Mitch Emhoff (Matt Damon) who's just trying to protect his daughter. Any plot summary of Contagion makes it sound a bit schlocky and not dissimilar to the rubbish 1995 film Outbreak, which starred Dustin Hoffman and Marcel, Ross' monkey in Friends. It's much better than that claptrap, however. I really liked how it presented a (probably) realistic version of how society would fall apart in the wake of massive fatality rates and widespread panic. There are a lot of famous names in this and all do a good job with the possible exception of Jude Law, who seems to be doing an awful (apparently Aussie) accent and wearing a comedy set of crooked teeth. Jude Law's usually the worst thing in anything he's in anyway, so no worries.

It's tough to discuss Contagion without spoiling some things. I'll do my best to dance around what I consider to be the worst spoilers, but if you want to go into Contagion without any prior knowledge whatsoever, close this review and go and do your taxes or something. For the rest of you dangerous, sexy people, I will say Contagion can be pretty damn disturbing. There's one scene where a character is being autopsied, which will stick with me for a while. Again, without specific spoilers, let's just say it's nice to see a film where the names on the poster don't necessarily dictate who will be left standing at the end. Despite not liking the fact that Jude Law is in it, I thought his character, Alan Krumwiede, was a interesting one. He's a freelance blogger who picks up on the story before the major news networks do and as a result gets a lot of people visiting his site and hanging on his every word. His lack of journalistic morality coupled with his massive audience really confuse the public and make things ten times worse.  The only substory I felt fell a little flat was Dr. Orantes' (Marion Cotilliard). It was okay, but I felt it didn't really add anything to the story as a whole. It was almost like they couldn't believe they managed to snag Cotilliard, realised the part was a little too skimpy for an Oscar winner and so went back to the script and hastily added some "emotional" things to react to.

Right, I'm going to talk about the ending, so if you haven't seen the film yet, skip on down to the awesome concluding paragraph. The ending has been a pretty controversial one. Many critics felt it was a misstep after a very slick and well put-together film. I thought it was great. It's clever, thought-provoking and outlined the terrifyingly random sequence of events that could produce the next bubonic plague. Whilst a bit saccharine, I also liked the conclusion to Emhoff's ordeal and found myself with a lump in my throat.

"Blogging is not writing. It's just graffiti with punctuation."

So yeah. Contagion isn't a fun watch. It's a slow, meticulous, bleak film containing some famous faces doing what they do best. It's certainly one of the most interesting films I've seen for a while. I'd also like to take this opportunity to say what a clever title Contagion is, as both senses are on display here. It's an intelligent take on the Outbreak formula and that very fact alone makes it worth seeing. It's grim, but also fuckin' sick (in all senses of the word).

Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope

With this review, I'm two thirds of the way home. It occurred to me that I (and probably many others like me) have not seen the original cut of any of the original trilogy. Lucas and his team of spineless, submissive boffins have been tinkering with the films practically since they were released. So, I'm reviewing the versions on the recently released Blu-ray boxset. As with nearly all of these changes, they stick out like a housebrick in your morning cornflakes, so I'll set aside a paragraph to comment on any changes that improve, or more likely, denigrate the film. Anyway, a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away...

Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope (1977)

It has been scientifically proven that one cannot say anything new about Star Wars. It's got to the point where even commenting on the fact that you can't say anything new about Star Wars is passé. It had a huge impact on science fiction, blockbusters and special effects, the tremors of which can still be felt today. It's very difficult to review Star Wars with fresh eyes. This trilogy was an intrinsic part of my childhood, probably the first films I loved and re-watched over and over again. Fret not though. This shall not be a chin-stroking retrospective nor an awkward, indulgent fanwank. This is just what I think.

"Your father's lightsaber. This is the weapon of a Jedi Knight. Not as clumsy or random as a blaster; an elegant weapon for a more civilized age."

Simple farmboy Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) is trapped working for his aunt and uncle on the desert planet of Tatooine. However, this changes when he comes into possession of two robots, named R2-D2 (Kenny Baker) and C3PO (Anthony Daniels), who lead him to a mysterious old man named Obi-Wan Kenobi (Alec Guinness). Along the way, Luke and Obi-Wan encounter roguish smuggler Han Solo (Harrison Ford) and his right-hand Wookiee, Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew). The group end up going on an adventure to save a princess (Carrie Fisher) from the clutches of the evil Empire and their intimidating employee, Darth Vader. The story is as classic as they come. Typing that synopsis made me realise that it actually sounds a bit lame, but in practice it's cinematic gold. The actors are all fine, but Harrison Ford is the standout. This is a star-making turn and you can see why the guy is still working in Hollywood today. The dialogue at times is shoddy as fuck, with Lucas famously being told by Ford: "George, you can type this shit,  but you sure as hell can't say it!"

A New Hope blends so many elements together it's a wonder it works at all. The film shares DNA with a vast array of things, from old samurai movies and World War II dogfights to Saturday morning serials like Flash Gordon. To me, the backbone that holds all these elements together is the strong characterisation. You actually care for these characters. You empathise with Luke, being stuck on his rock of a home planet when his friends have moved on. The film is brave enough to have you dislike certain characters initially. Hell, I don't particularly like Luke in this film, at least for the first half. He's a bit of a whiny ponce with a silly haircut. Luckily, he does become likeable. Even fan-favourite Han Solo comes across as a bit of a douche the first time we meet him. We see he's got a dark side to him when he shoots the bounty hunter Greedo in the Cantina.

Speaking of which, those changes. I don't know why Lucas is doing this. Some of the computer tinkering is to fix stuff you wouldn't even notice was there. For instance, some time ago, Lucas actually paid someone or a team of someones to CGI the Death Star crews badges onto the correct side of their uniforms. Some of the most out of place stuff though is in Mos Eisley, where added CGI creatures are pasted into the frame. There's even an awkward non-comedy bit with two robots that is so fucking unnecessary, it hurts my brain. There's even added nonsense in the Blu-ray release where some rocks have been CGI'd in front of R2 when he's hiding in the canyon. Check out the original here, and the new version here. Who is that bothered by rocks? It doesn't make any sense. I can understand updating certain effects (sort of) but this needless altering is incomprehensible. Especially considering the fact that all this stuff drags me out of the film.

The funny thing about Star Wars is that its so ingrained in our collective memories, we have sort of forgotten it is a slightly hokey '70s sci-fi that has had its formula imitated, expanded upon and bettered by films since. After a lengthy discussion with one of my friends about Star Wars, we concluded if we ever had kids (not together, that'd be weird) we'd make sure they saw the original Star Wars trilogy first, before something like the Lord of the Rings films. Kids just wouldn't be as blown away with lightsabers and the Death Star exploding if they'd seen the epic battle of Helm's Deep or a fully-fledged CGI character like Gollum. However, there are some things about Star Wars that will always have an impact like the classic story, the characters and the amazing John Williams score. I still get chills during the final Death Star assault when Luke hears Obi-Wan's voice, the Force theme swells and he switches off his targeting computer.

"Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi; you're my only hope."

Practically every frame of A New Hope is iconic. It's unfortunate that practically every comedy TV show or film still feels the need to reference it to this day. However, all the shite Big Bang Theory jokes in the world cannot dull the original brilliance of the first Star Wars film. It's the rarest of things to me- a childhood favourite that still holds up now. It's a fantastic film, I just hope that in a decades' time when we all have on demand films projected onto the inside of our eyelids, Lucas won't have replaced Han Solo with a Gungan or decided that the Cantina scene needed another musical number.

I have to give it my rarely seen rating of the yellow five stars i.e. a personal favourite to which giving the normal red five stars seemed like an insult.

In Time

I know. A New Hope is next. Just need a bit more time to type down some points about it that aren't utterly trite. Anyway, I've actually managed to see a brand spanking new film, rather than a two-week old, everyone-who-was-going-to-see-it-already-has one.

In Time (2011)

 

I hate to say it, but In Time actually does seem rather timely. For a film about holding up a mirror to the gulf between rich and poor to be released whilst the #OccupyWallStreet movement is still going on is a stroke of luck that the filmmakers couldn't have possibly have planned for. Having said that if they did plan it and all this 99% stuff turns out to be an elaborate viral marketing stunt for In Time, my faith in humanity will sink to an all-time low.

"You can't hide 100 years in the ghetto."

It's sometime in the future and everyone stops ageing at 25. However, people are born with digital timers in their forearms that counts down their lives. Time really is money, so people like blue collar workin' man Will Salas (Justin Timberlake) have to graft hard to get another few days on the clock and have the privilege of living for that little bit longer. When Will is gifted over a century by a suicidal man, he endeavours not to waste the man's time and change his destiny. The concept here is awesome. Not only is it a fantastically easy and effective way to create tension, but it also make a valid, if heavy-handed, point about the class divides. I've read a lot of criticism about Justin Timberlake, but I thought he was solid as the lead. I don't have a problem with the guy. I think he was good in The Social Network and he's decent here. I can't help but feel it might be his N*Sync roots that people may be objecting to. Amanda Seyfried was okay, but didn't impress me nearly as much as she did in Chloe. I thought Cillian Murphy was wasted as Timekeeper Raymond Leon. The guy's a fantastic presence, but was rather ineffectual here, the problems just coming down to lazy characterisation. Alex Pettyfer makes a surprise appearance as a scumbag thief, but doesn't really do anything more than add some variety to his acting C.V.

So yeah, that concept. It's a terrifying thought to have to run down to your last hour or two just to pay the gas bill. It's chilling that "timing out" is so common that people are just used to seeing corpses lying in the street. There's one genuinely affecting scene where Will and Sylvia talk about feeling the timer start when they turned 25. It's really interesting to see that fast pace that people in the ghetto move compared to the lax, luxurious pace the rich and powerful do. It's certainly effective in making you wish for some kind of fiery retribution on the 1% who have centuries to play with. The time as currency idea does lead to infrequent confusing lines of dialogue however, such as when a prostitute propositions Leon: "I'll give you ten minutes for an hour."

The film is written and directed by Andrew Niccol, who some of you may know as the writer (and occasional director) of films like Gattaca, The Truman Show and Lord of War. Now, apart from the Niccol connection, what else do these films have in common? Yep, they're as subtle as a tiger in a hen house. They all have DAMN SERIOUS MESSAGES to convey, but are always in-your-face and border on the preachy. That's not to say that the messages aren't important- in fact I wish more films would talk about overpopulation and the like, I'm just saying that sometimes I feel he'd be happier doing angry PowerPoint presentations instead of making populist entertainment.

The film is good 'n angry for the first half,  but then slowly starts to unravel before coming to a shuddering, uninspired end (much like my style of lovemaking*). It goes for a rather overdone Bonnie and Clyde/Robin Hood strand that doesn't particularly work. I actually felt my heart sink a bit when they first decided to rob a "time bank". I'd been really enjoying it up until that point and to go for the "rob from the rich" angle seemed a real step down. Also, the fact that you can steal someone's time just by gripping their wrist is ridiculous. They have the technology to implant accurate LED timers into someone's arm, but there's no safeguard? Not even something as high-tech as a fucking bracelet? Weird. Apparently, you can rob a bank simply by driving a massive truck into it. Good to know.

"You put enough time in the wrong hands, you upset the system."

In Time is pretty good. The concept is great and the points the film is so eager to hammer home couldn't be more relevant if it tried. It's a shame that the film's wheels start to fall off once the pair decide to embark on a life of crime. Handled well, this could have been the perfect, angsty, cinematic time capsule for the right now. As it stands, it's a slightly better than average movie with some great ideas and wasted potential.

*I know I've made this hee-larious joke before, but I couldn't resist making it again. If it helps, think of it as an homage to my now fuckin' classic Drive review.