Sunday, August 28, 2011

Film Review: Horrible Bosses


Horrible Bosses. Rated MA 15+ (strong sexual references and coarse language). 97 minutes. Directed by Seth Gordon. Screenplay by Michael Markowitz, John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein.

Determinedly boisterous, take-no-prisoner comedies were given an undeniable lease on life courtesy of the break-away hit The Hangover (2009) – which stormed the global box-office on its way to becoming the highest-grossing R-rated comedy in the history of American cinema. Here was the antithesis of the celebrated ‘chick flick’ – a film about some perfectly likable blokes out to send their mate off into the realm of wedded bliss in style. And the rest, as they say, is history.

It’s not hard to see why everyone involved might have considered Horrible Bosses an each-way bet. Three hard-working guys (played by Jason Bateman, Jason Sudeikis and Charlie Day) are being terrorised by their maniacal bosses (played by Kevin Spacey, Colin Farrell and Jennifer Aniston respectively). When idle bar-room gossip about how miserable their working lives are turns into deciding to murder each other’s tormentor, Horrible Bosses hits a brick wall. Really hard.

It’s not so much the fault of the script – which is actually quite funny in places. Nor is it the extent to which our trio of jobbers are lead through the story by Mr Gordon’s sure grip on the crazy proceedings. It’s more to do with the fact that, in the acting stakes anyway, there’s just no contest; Spacey, Farrell and Aniston are fantastic. Ms Aniston in particular (playing against type in spectacular fashion), presents the film with its fatal flaw – which is that the very thought of our trio of outrageous control freaks vanishing from the screen is, well, more horrible than the thought of our work-a-day boys successfully pulling-off their murderous coup.

Bateman, Sudeikis and Day try very hard to ensure we are even remotely interested in their story, but it becomes increasingly difficult when all the real fun is at someone else’s party – and it’s a party that they are definitely not at. And nor are they ever likely to be.

Pictured: Jennifer Aniston and Charlie Day in Horrible Bosses.

This review was commissioned by the Geraldton Newspaper Group.

Monday, August 22, 2011

Film Review: Cowboys and Aliens


Cowboys and Aliens. Rated M (science fiction themes and violence). 118 minutes. Directed by Jon Favreau. Screenplay by Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, Damon Lindelof, Mark Fergus and Hawk Ostby. Based on the graphic novel by Scott Mitchell Rosenberg.

It is 1873. When Jake Lonergan (Daniel Craig) regains consciousness in the desert, he discovers that he has a rather nasty wound on his side and a ripper of a bracelet on his wrist. “That must have been some wild, Wild West-themed office party!” he says. No he doesn’t. Sadly. He and his killer jewellery (pictured) easily account for group of murderin’, thievin’ marauders before he sets off to the town of Absolution where he finds Harrison Ford’s Colonel Woodrow Dolarhyde. Colonel Dolarhyde and his cronies are holding the town to ransom due to the fact that, as the colonel’s spoilt little brat of a son Percy (Paul Dano) informs us, his Pa is responsible for all the money that is spent in the near-bankrupt little town. And almost before you can say “Was Star Wars really that long ago?”, the aliens arrive (shortly before the Indians), and everyone tries to kill everyone before they get killed. “Where did we park the car?”

Favreau (Iron Man, Iron Man 2) and cinematographer Matthew Libatique (Black Swan, the Iron Mans, Phone Booth) occasionally hit their marks, while Scott Chambliss’s (Salt, Star Trek) engaging production design delivers a particularly impressive upside down Showboat and a marvellous gold-mining spaceship. Mr Craig spends a good deal of time being Clint Eastwood to excellent effect, while Olivia Wilde (TRON: Legacy) is perfect as other-worldly Ella Swenson who might also have mistakenly stumbled onto the film set from a fashion shoot just over the hill. Mr Ford, when not looking extremely uncomfortable running about all over the place, gets a big rambling monologue moment that ends up being a compelling lesson in just how great an actor John Wayne was with this kind of material.

While it’s a vaguely better western than it is a science fiction adventure, Cowboys and Aliens is ultimately an utterly bizarre curiosity that manages to fail entirely by absolutely outstaying its welcome. And I can guarantee you won’t be the only one wondering “What on earth were they thinking?!”

This review was commissioned by the Geraldton Newspaper Group.

Tuesday, August 16, 2011

Departures: Facebook and other random acts of cultural narcissism


In everyday speech, "narcissism" often means inflated self-importance, egotism, vanity, conceit, or simple selfishness. Applied to a social group, it is sometimes used to denote elitism or an indifference to the plight of others. In psychology, the term is used to describe both normal self-love and unhealthy self-absorption due to a disturbance in the sense of self. (Wikipedia)

I consider myself a Facebook Pioneer. I signed up to the social networking site in 2009. I spent hours, sometimes days and often entire nights at a time enthusiastically plugged in to the interface and discovered it to be the perfect vehicle for me to make contact with long-lost friends and maintain friendships with people who had influenced my life in meaningful ways. Ways I had become too time-, resource- or genuine interest-poor to maintain in real time. This newfound connectedness had given muscle to a previously dormant characteristic: laziness.

In a world of excuses, resentment and anger, Facebook was titillating, invigorating and entertaining. It was occasionally informative and always distracting. It allowed me, with a click of my mouse, to let someone know I liked what they were thinking and doing. With warrior-like fortitude, I defended it against the naysayers with alarming levels of blindness and alacrity – which is not unusual given that they are two aspects of my character I have always used in my approach to everything I have achieved in my life.

As I mined deeper into the world of Facebook, I ‘liked’ what I saw less and less and I ‘liked’ what I was becoming even less. The big surprise though, was I ‘liked’ my Friends even less. My judgement of them became harsh, erratic, conditional and immediate. My impatient disdain for every detail of their very ordinary lives was like fire. Or gastro. I began to revel in my vastly illuminated life, my cultural superiority, my spelling ability, my grammatical fastidiousness. I became instantly dismissive and equally as hungry for blatant and salacious gossipy detail. Starving. Smug. Superior. Words that would once have been difficult, if not impossible, to use to describe me.

Was my dedication to spending time on Facebook changing me physically, spiritually and emotionally? Or was this version of me simply being given – even by the loosest definition – a life? I have been known to rail against my sea of troubles, and by blaming everyone else, end them. The fascinating details involved in apportioning blame have, eventually, formed the blueprint for the way in which I have resolved personal and professional conflicts in my life. Was my habitual overdosing on Facebook changing me almost physiologically? Why was I suddenly feeling less independent and impossibly lonely?

At the risk of sounding naïve: who decided, and when, that the sharing of fears, anxieties, personal truths – regardless of the extent of their (un)popularity – should be denied us as fundamentals of an honest human exchange?

My frustration with the dishonesty of a Facebook Newsfeed began, subconsciously at least, to disturb me deeply. And given that the internet is an irony-free zone – it’s retarded cousin, sarcasm, became my weapon of choice. Like most passive aggressive bullies, I have a sizable armoury. I have a vicious tongue, an irrational Celtic temper and the purest ability to disable my foe with a well-formed sentence which has formed in my mind hours before it is hurled, precisely, from my mouth. Like a harpoon.

My penultimate Facebook Status Update drunkenly screamed the fact that my life was full of losers. The sad irony, to use another contemporary reference, was that I was the biggest loser. The weakest link in a previously ambitious chain of laughter, creativity and strength.

I had OD’d on Facebook exposure – and like a junkie hooked on any other substance – my substance of choice was a frightening creative inertia. Such is loneliness. And disillusionment. And the fear of being misunderstood. And judged. All of those things that the relative anonymity of a Facebook Profile Page provides for us. Why else is it possible to hide people? You are either interested by human interaction or you’re not. It is too easy to have an enviable number of Facebook Friends, but to also care less about what any number of them are doing, let alone feeling.

It is another irony – and one that belongs intrinsically to social media – that the very fact of how easily we can edit another "friend's" very existence without editing ourselves escorts us to a default position of unhealthy narcissistic indulgence. The denial through censorship (invisibility) of another because, just as in life, it is no longer important that we genuinely care. About anything or anyone. Except ourselves.

*****

I value the act of caring very, very deeply.

People in real time have fuelled my existence. My capacity to help, house, comfort and dissect the complex issues at hand are attributes of my character I am most proud of. They are the characteristics I share with those who I am grateful to count as my inner circle – those people who have fed my soul, my heart and my sense of identity and purpose.

In the essence of its everyday machinations, Facebook has eliminated romance, intimacy and trust – the pillars that define great interpersonal relationships – by trading on the one thing that we value more than anything else: privacy. Consider for a moment the last time you dared to update your Facebook Status with your inner-most thoughts and feelings? Some of us might remember what we used to call “deep and meaningfuls” … D&Ms … those often vast and rewarding conversations between friends over a pizza, a bottle of wine, a meal or that most old-fashioned of past-times – a weekend away with friends by the sea. Or in the country.

Great moments of interpersonal exchange have never happened while everyone was sitting alone in their room in front of their laptop – staring into the over-illuminated void until their eyes start to water from fatigue. Our eyes used to water with tears of hilarity or sadness. Do they still? Mine don’t. And sometimes I doubt that they ever will again.

Which is why I decided to deactivate my Facebook Account, and return – optimistically and determinedly open-hearted – to the real world. And the people that really matter in my life will find other ways of communicating with me. Or maybe they won’t.

I suspect that Facebook will eventually collapse as the whipped whore to commerce and cultural narcissism it is rapidly becoming. There will, I predict, come a time when interpersonal relationships, with all their flaws, become something that we wish to cultivate, share and experience above all else. That sense of liberation that is defined by acts of interpersonal exchange and development that ensures our culture and our spirituality resonates loudly and clearly into the future. My fear is that, as the pioneers of old, we may be in the process of sacrificing a great deal more of our humanity than might currently appear to be the case.

Sunday, August 14, 2011

Film Review: Rise of the Planet of the Apes


Rise of the Planet of the Apes. Rated M (violence). 105 minutes. Directed by Rupert Wyatt. Screenplay by Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver. Based on the novel by Pierre Boulle.

Depending on how you prefer to organise your filing system, someone in Hollywood has opened the ‘R’, the ‘P’ or the ‘A’ drawer in the great, big filing cabinet that is marked ‘Great Films We Could Make Again’. In the case of this ‘reboot’ of the legendary Planet of the Apes series – five films beginning with Planet of the Apes (1968) and ending with Battle for the Planet of the Apes (1973) – it’s nothing more than origins of the species nostalgia with lashings of 21st century techno-dazzle.

Tim Burton’s much-maligned 2001 angry, intense and visually impressive remake of the original (starring Mark Wahlberg) has been curiously side-stepped here as we launch back into the series with a film that shouldn’t work. It eventually does – but it’s a long, mostly unsatisfactory wait. And it’s only Andy Serkis engaging performance as Caesar that ensures our interest is maintained.

Mr Serkis is Hollywood’s go-to guy for motion (or performance) capture – a state-of-the-art technological process whereby the intricacies of a human actor’s physical performance are mapped by computer software and translated onto the screen in digitally-enhanced imagery. The process was used to bring Mr Serkis’s ‘Gollum’ and ‘Kong’ to life in Peter Jackson’s The Lord of The Rings and King Kong respectively – and it’s only Mr Jackson’s Weta Digital apes that hold this peculiarly old-fashioned flick together.

James Franco (127 Hours) is occasionally engaging as Will Rodman, a genetic scientist who is developing a cure for Alzheimer's by testing his genetically engineered retrovirus on primates. When it all goes horribly wrong (as these kinds of things inevitably do), a deadly virus is released into the world that delivers extraordinary levels of intelligence and strength to the ape population – while threatening to wipe out (in a mid-credits sequence) the human race. And unlike the famously confronting final scene of the 1968 original (pictured), this time it’s impossible to know why we should care.

This review was commissioned by the Geraldton Newspaper Group.

Sunday, August 7, 2011

Film Review: Red Dog


Red Dog. Rated PG (mild themes, coarse language and sexual references). 92 minutes. Directed by Kriv Stenders. Screenplay by Daniel Taplitz. Based on the novel by Louis de Bernières.

The feelings upon leaving the cinema after seeing this fantastic Australian film are countless. You’ll probably be feverishly wiping away the tears and forcing out uncontrollable laughter. That will be when you are not wondering why on earth it took someone so long to bring this story to the screen – before, at some point, breathing in deeply and remarking how they just don’t make films like this anymore. Because – put simply – they don’t.

Almost drowned in the film distribution cycle of slap-down, international blockbusters, Red Dog is a quintessentially Australian film. The Pilbara-based locations – Dampier, Karratha, Mount Tom Price and beyond – all star in this great yarn about a lovable red kelpie (played to heart-melting perfection by Koko) whose particular brand of loyalty to his one true master brings the disparate, hard-working folk of a remote mining community together.

Stenders elicits fine performances from his cast (which includes John Batchelor, Noah Taylor, Rachael Taylor, the late Bill Hunter, Josh Lucas and Luke Ford), while Taplitz’s flashback-based screenplay neatly incorporates the ambitions and aspirations of the people who work for Hamersley Iron as they recall how Red Dog came into their lives. Rohan Nichol is particularly impressive as the grieving ‘Jocko’ – and it is impossible to deny the impact of his Great Australian Dream speech in the local pub.

Cinematographer Geoffrey Hall (Dirty Deeds, Chopper) and editor Jill Bilcock (Strictly Ballroom, Muriel's Wedding) are obviously right at home in this territory – although my only minor disappointment was that we didn’t get to linger a little longer in some of the mighty locations. Ian Gracie’s (Art Director for X-Men Origins: Wolverine, Australia, Moulin Rouge!) production design showcases the 1970s to perfection – providing the film with a memorable and distinctive Australian charm that is difficult to resist.

But dog-lovers be warned. No feats of ordinary human resistance will be possible.

This review was commissioned by the Geraldton Newspaper Group.

Friday, August 5, 2011

Departures: Israeli orchestra wows Wagner's Bayreuth


AAP: An Israeli orchestra has made history by performing a concert in Bayreuth, the spiritual home of Hitler's favourite composer Richard Wagner, and received a standing ovation.

"It was a joy for us to play Wagner here," Roberto Paternostro, the conductor of the Israel Chamber Orchestra, said after the first-ever performance by an ensemble from the country in this southern German town on July 26.

The concert was not on the official program the 100th Bayreuth Festival dedicated to Wagner's works that opened with great pomp on Monday in the concert hall built by the composer in the 1870s on the famed Green Hill. However, the taboo-breaking event of around two hours, dominated by music by Jewish composers like Gustav Mahler and Felix Mendelssohn but finishing with Wagner's Siegfried Idyll, has been a major talking point.

Hitler was greatly impressed by the music of Wagner, who died in 1883, with its use of epic Germanic and Norse mythology, becoming a frequent guest of the family and the festival. Wolfgang Wagner, the composer's grandson who died in March 2010 aged 90 after running the Bayreuth festival for 57 years, and his siblings used to call the visiting Nazi dictator "Uncle Wolf". The music and the composer have since been widely associated with the Holocaust, and Wagner's work has been off-limits in Israel.

When Israeli-Argentine conductor Daniel Barenboim led the Berlin Staatskapelle in a performance of an excerpt from Wagner's Tristan und Isolde in Jerusalem in 2001, dozens of audience members stormed out.

Wolfgang Wagner worked during his almost six decades in charge to exorcise the festival's Nazi ghosts, turning it into a major event on the cultural calendar and attracting some of world's best singers and conductors. His daughter Katharina Wagner, who since 2009 has run the festival with her half-sister Eva Wagner-Pasquier, has vowed to take this process further, promising to open up the family archives to historians. Katharina Wagner sat in the front row for Tuesday's concert, and Paternostro said he had given the bouquet that he received after the concert to her. "I just thanked her for her immense help," the Austrian told AFP.

"I have been coming to Bayreuth every year since 1951 and we have just seen a historic moment," Mechtild Habiger, 80, a member of the audience in Bayreuth on Tuesday, told AFP. "The standing ovation was well deserved."

The concert has still set some tempers flaring, however. The American Gathering of Holocaust Survivors and their Descendants said the orchestra was "tone deaf to the anguish of victims who lived through the instrumentalisation of Wagner's music in the service of spreading hate". Felix Gothart, a leader of the Bayreuth Jewish community, which now has about 500 members, twice the number when Hitler came to power, was also critical of the decision to invite the Israeli musicians. "As soon as a single person was offended by the fact that Wagner is being played by Jews in Germany it would have been better to keep a lower profile," he told AFP. However, the president of Israel's fledgling Wagner society, Jonathan Livni, said he was delighted, saying he hoped Wagner will soon by performed freely in our country,"

Bambi Zucker, 29, who played oboe in the concert, admitted to being sceptical the project would get off the ground and said she had been nervous that hecklers would interrupt the performance. "The music is so divine, and so great. And it is also a very important part of music history," a relieved Zucker told AFP. Turning your back on Wagner "is like ignoring Shakespeare", she said.

Source: AP/AFP

Thursday, August 4, 2011

Departures: Equality


"If a married lesbian couple saves 40 teens from the Norway massacre and no-one writes about it, did it really happen?" Talk About Equality asked on 1 August. And rightly so. The almost rhetorical questions illuminated by Talk About Equality's article are poised on the tip of the tongue: why has this story of incredibly fearless and selfless heroism gone largely unreported? And what does that suggest about our mainstream media's position on informing the public debate about equality?

"By this point, most of you have heard about the tragedy in Norway a few weeks ago when a Christian Fundamentalist murdered 77 people and injured another 96. The story has been well-covered by international media and the mainstream press.

What you probably have not heard about is the married lesbian couple who rescued 40 teenagers during and after the bloody event. Several blogs and gay and lesbian publications are now picking up the story, but the heavy hitters who usually kill for hero stories like this, have remained silent.

The Finnish capital city’s largest daily newspaper, Helsingin Sanomat, published this account (translated from Finnish):

Hege Dalen and her spouse, Toril Hansen were near Utöyan having dinner on the opposite shore across from the ill-fated campsite, when they began to hear gunfire and screaming on the island. “We were eating. Then shooting and then the awful screaming. We saw how the young people ran in panic into the lake,” says Dale to HS in an interview.

The couple immediately took action and pushed the boat into Lake Tyrifjorden. Dalen and Hansen drove the boat to the island, picked up from the water victims in shock in, the young and wounded, and transported them to the opposite shore to the mainland. Between runs they saw that the bullets had hit the right side of the boat. Since there were so many and not all fit at once aboard, they returned to the island four times. They were able to rescue 40 young people from the clutches of the killer.

“We did not sleep last night at all. Today, we have been together and talked about the events,” Dalen said.


There is also an interesting follow-up article.

Pictured: Hege Dalen and Toril Hansen. Photo: Maija Tammi. Image courtesy Talk About Equality.

Monday, August 1, 2011

Film Review: Captain America: The First Avenger


Captain America: The First Avenger. Rated M (action violence). 124 minutes. Directed by Joe Johnston. Screenplay by Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely. Based on the comic books by Joe Simon and Jack Kirby.

Don’t let the title confuse you. While Captain America might be ‘the first avenger’ (he first appeared in comic form in 1941), it’s actually the fifth instalment in the Marvel Comics’ ‘cinematic universe’ which will culminate in next year’s eagerly-anticipated The Avengers in which each of the Marvel superheroes will finally appear together. (Fans should note that there’s a sneak peak at what’s in store in a snappy post-credits sequence.)

The set-up has been intense, with Robert Downey Jnr blitzing the field in Iron Man and Iron Man 2 (with Iron Man 3 underway), several attempts at getting The Incredible Hulk right (Mark Ruffalo gets the big green guernsey in The Avengers), Chris Hemsworth’s formidable Thor, and now Captain America.

It is 1942, and evil villain Johann Schmidt (Hugo Weaving) is in possession of a super-powerful energy source which he has refined into a weapon of mass destruction. To avert cataclysmic disaster when Schmidt unleashes his plan for world domination, the Americans have been refining their own creation of a “super-soldier” – hand-picking the skinny young try-hard Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) to become their Captain America prototype.

Johnston (The Wolfman, Jurassic Park III, and Art Director on the Star Wars films) does a solid enough job, even though Captain America suffers from a feeling of being over-edited – with the surprisingly clunky, jumpy action sequences, in particular, never realised with the same flair as those in either of the Iron Mans or Thor. The overriding sense is one of nervous anxiety that the whole thing is ultimately going to collapse into an unforgivable shambles.

What holds it together is Evans’ (Fantastic 4, Sunshine) star turn in the title role and an equally committed supporting cast including Weaving (whose metamorphosis into The Red Skull is a highlight), Hayley Atwell (a sublime Peggy Carter), Tommy Lee Jones (romping through as leader of the American Armed Forces, Colonel Phillips) and Dominic Cooper (perfect as Howard Stark). The digital trickery that reduces Evans’ to his pre-serum geek is brilliantly achieved – and one of the many occasions littered throughout Captain America when it is hard to believe your eyes. And this film has just enough of those moments to ensure it takes its rightful place in the Marvel superhero-dominated world.

This review was commissioned by the Geraldton Newspaper Group.