Hitchcock - Review

Hitchcock

Dir - Sacha Gervasi

98 mins, 12A

It's awards season, a time when a  plethora of movies are released with the sole intention of picking up kudos from the Academy. Some succeed (as Argo and Lincoln will attest) some don't (as Skyfall's cruel snub from major awards demonstrates). Some, on the other hand, drop the ball so much that you wonder if they ever had a ball in their hands to begin with. 'Hitchcock' sadly falls into the latter camp. 

     The irony behind it all is that Hitchcock was a cinematic master, even his less respected works had a certain craft that many films of the era failed to match. He spoke fluent cinema. The story behind 'Hitchcock' lies in the making of Psycho, the alleged tale of what 'really happened' during the production. It's safe to say that Hitchcock wasn't a schizophrenic plotter of horrific murders and nor was Alma a cougar on the brink of infidelity, so on the 'true story' front the film fails. It's also safe to assume that Hitch didn't sound like a slightly older, sedated Alan Rickman. 

     Yes, you heard it here, Anthony Hopkins underwhelmed as Hitchcock, portraying him more akin to a caricature of Winston Churchill than a accurate channeling of the master of suspense; his make-up not baring any resemblance, sometimes fluctuating between a chubbier, bald Peter Kay and a caucasian Jabba the Hut.   The usually reliable Helen Mirren also disappointed with her by-the-numbers super woman stereotype of Alma. The movie would've been more aptly titled 'Reville' as it centres more on her plight against her senile husband and her bogus affair. The supporting cast also fail to engage, with the exception of Scarlett Johansson who seems uncannily Leigh-esque.  

      This could've been so much better, but it isn't. The ever inspired, thrilling and creative director has been 'honoured' with a picture so pedestrian, flaccid and vacuous that he'd be turning in his grave. However, it did remind me what a good director Hitch was. Then again, I could get that same conclusion by watching Psycho. 

Flight - Review

Flight
Dir - Robert Zemeckis
15, 138 mins

After almost 10 years of fannying about with motion capture technology, Robert Zemeckis returns to live action with Flight, a tale about a plane crash and the subsequent investigation into the pilot of the ill-fated crash. Said pilot is an alcoholic, which as you can imagine is where the majority of the drama spins from.
     If anyone knows how to make great blockbuster entertainment, it's Zemeckis. The man is responsible for Back to the Future and Who Framed Roger Rabbit but also some fine Oscar-bait in the form of Forrest Gump and Cast Away. Flight somewhat melds both sensibilities, being in some instances a terrific adrenaline-fuelled spectacle whilst also being unashamedly dramatic. Much like his previous work, special effects are fully exercised to their potential but more importantly grounded firmly within the structure of the story, the air crash never quite being the centre of the movie. 

      The centre of the film comes in the form of Denzel Washington, an alcoholic, cocaine-snorting womaniser, who is found at the scene of the crash with alcohol in his blood. What follows the initial roller-coster of the disaster is a more low-key depiction of his troubled psyche. His fragmented family life, his alcoholism and his uncommunicative nature are all portrayed with a delicately which makes this a cut above the rest in terms of blockbusters. On the other hand, Kelly Reilly's character verges on the 'pointless sub-plot' category, her caricature of a heroin addict contradicting the otherwise convincing dramatisation of addiction. Thankfully, the remainder of the supporting cast make up for it; Don Cheadle and Bruce Greenwood playing their roles with enough understatement to let Washington shine through, and John Goodman popping up every once in a while to provide laughs and take the lime-light off Denzel.
     Flight can best be summed up as an above-average blockbuster with a terrific performance at its heart. It surprised me with how serious it too itself whilst still lacking pretention. Highly recommended.  

Zero Dark Thirty - Review

Zero Dark Thirty 

Dir - Kathryn Bigelow

15, 157 mins

A sign of a good film is if it can put you on the edge of your seat, nervously awaiting what happens next. A sign of a great film is when it can do all of those things even though you know the outcome. Unless you've been living in a cave (or a small country mansion in Pakistan) you're probably aware that Osama Bin Laden, the effective 'poster boy' of international terrorism and the al-Qaeda, was found and killed by a group of US Navy SEALs almost two years ago. Zero Dark Thirty documents the hunt over a 10 year period, beginning with a sound collage of phone calls during the 9/11 terrorist attack. This opening pretty much sets you up for the kind of film this is; dark, menacing and uncomfortable. 

     I was a little sceptical going into this film, fairly certain that it would patriotically wave the flag for the USA and shove down our throats how 'great' they are as a nation. However, it's surprising how unpatriotic the movie is. Maya, portrayed astoundingly by Jessica Chastain, is almost a CIA-prodigy who becomes obsessive about the capture of OBL. She starts out as a fresh-faced new recruit in the US Embassy in Pakistan, initially overwhelmed by the brutality of torture, and gradually morphs into a reclusive and obsessive key-player in the manhunt. Chastain is incredible, being both cold and unlikeable while at the same time being human enough for the audience to still invest in her character. It is a remarkable performance matched by the stellar supporting cast. However, this is very much Maya's show, sometimes feeling more like a study of a workaholic than a docu-drama.

     Conversely, when the big guns come out, they certainly come out. For the majority of its two and a half hour running time, most of the action comes from the offices and workspaces of the US Embassy or the CIA, that is not to say that there aren't isolated scenes of explosive action, but they are certainly secondary to the drama. However, this being a picture about a manhunt, the final 30-40 minutes is some of the most gripping and exciting cinema that I've seen in a while. Again, it's a credit to the filmmakers for taking a story we know well and making it into something that still takes us by surprise. 

     Perhaps the biggest snub of the Academy Awards this year was the lack of a nomination for Kathryn Bigelow, which probably has something to do with the difficult politics and subsequent controversy surrounding the picture. Her nomination would have been one of the most deserving, as the film's power and effect is almost single-handedly down to her direction. 

     In turns thoughtful, exciting and shocking, Zero Dark Thirty is the best film I've seen so far this year. Phenomenal.