Showing posts with label Helena Bonham Carter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Helena Bonham Carter. Show all posts

Wednesday, 4 September 2013

150W: Mighty Aphrodite

Short reviews for clear and concise verdicts on a broad range of films...


Mighty Aphrodite (Dir. Woody Allen/1995)

There is a point in the Woody Allen filmography whereby his front-and-centre roles seem at odds with the story. 1995’s Mighty Aphrodite may be the moment he crosses the line. Interspersed with a Greek chorus, Mighty Aphrodite begins as sportswriter Lenny (Allen) becomes obsessed with finding the Mother of his genius, adopted child. Co-starring Helena Bonham-Carter as Lenny’s career-driven wife and Mira Sorvino (winning an Oscar for her role) as prostitute Linda, the aforementioned Mother, this should be amongst Woody’s best but it becomes a quiet horn compared to his orchestra of films. The symmetrical outcome of relationships does somehow ring a classical tune creating an inversed Greek tragedy of sorts. But Woody does seem out of place; jarring against the backdrop of younger actors that dominate the screen. His relationship with considerably-younger Linda combined with an adopted-child story seems strangely, unsettlingly poignant – but isn’t that why we love Woody?

Rating: 6/10
Large Association of Movie Blogs

Saturday, 1 December 2012

Great Expectations (Mike Newell, 2012)

"Do you wish to see Miss Havishman?"

Introduction

As the closing-night film of the London Film Festival, I believed Mike Newell’s Great Expectations was clearly re-imagining a classic story for modern audiences. Rather than following in the footsteps of Alfonso Cuaron, whereby his 1998 Great Expectations was set in modern-day New York starring Gwyneth Paltrow, Ethan Hawke and Robert De Niro, this interpretation harks back further to David Lean’s original rather than any contemporary piece. Written by David Nicholl’s (Writer and Director of One Day), this film clearly attempts to gain the interest of a younger audience, despite its period-setting. The trailer tells us “from the Director of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire” and ensures Helena Bonham Carter recalls her Tim-Burton-esque roles as the unsettling Miss Havisham. Lead-role ‘Pip’ is played by Jeremy Irvine, coming off his War Horse, and his rugged “old-fashioned-but-not-really” look seems to clearly target the Robert Pattinson fans. I fear that this Great Expectations will surely guarantee many school-trips and repeatable-viewings in English lessons – and may even con a few teenagers into paying for a ticket on a Friday night.

A Classic Story

The story presents us with Pip, a young-boy (Toby Irvine) who, upon visiting the grave of his Mother, is approached by an escaped-convict Magwitch (Ralph Fiennes). Pip manages to smuggle food to Magwitch, alongside stealing an axe to remove the chains. Soon after, Pip is sent for to ‘play’ in the house of Miss Havisham (Helena Bonham Carter) – a wide-eyed recluse – who has an adopted daughter in Estella (Helena Barlow). The class-divide is clear as Pip is the son of a blacksmith (Jason Flemyng) whilst Estella, living in the mansion with Miss Havisham, clearly has a high-opinion of herself - apparently raised to break the hearts of men. Through an unfortunate event, Pip stops visiting the mansion and continues to support his family as a blacksmith – until a lawyer, Jaggers (Robbie Coltrane), reveals that an anonymous bidder has ‘Great Expectations’ for Pip (now played by Jeremy Irvine) and will pay for him to live in London to become a ‘Gentleman’…

The story is renowned for its depiction of the social-divide and the attitudes people have to wealth and success. The definition of success in the family of Pip - happiness, marriage and love - opposed to the isolation and loneliness of Miss Havisham are all facets which, from the first act, you clearly appreciate. The type of criminal Magwitch is – opposed to the sins of other characters, are revealed through the story and again highlight an injustice between those of affluence, and those without. The setting between the country and landscape of Kent, opposed to the dirty hustle and bustle of London, again, portray the two differing attitudes to life – and the huge divide and difference between living an urban lifestyle rather than living in the rural outsider counties. These are timeless details which relate directly to the original literature by Charles Dickens.

Kent in all it’s Glory

Considering how important location is in Great Expectations, it is a god-send that the highlight of the film is in the depiction of Kent. The wide-shots portraying the vast landscapes manage to capture something mythic about the area - such beauty in the land is something that is core to the film. How would an alternate-version of the story look? Whereby the city-life was praised opposed to the muddy and dull country? At any rate, the stunning locale is highlighted by sunlight reflecting on the water whilst horses and carriages gently roll across the Isle of Sheppey.

But ironically, outside of Kent, the setting seems to feel quite small-in-scale. For a different website, I wrote an analysis of David Lean’s Great Expectations, discussing how it managed to capture the fascination with old-traditions represented by the decaying-house – in 1946, Lean's version followed Xanadu in Citizen Kane and Manderlay in Hitchcock’s Rebecca. In the current climate, it seems that this new-version follows on from The Woman in Black, and the gothic house which ‘the woman’ resided within. The Georgian context, though the accurate time period, is also difficult to truly grasp with regards to London itself. The streets of London often feel false whilst many rooms and locations are imitations of the sets within Lean’s film - for example the stuffy and disorganised offices of Jaggers. The sheer scale of the film is only effective when we are within the countryside – whereas within London, it feels smaller and tight.

Success within Schools

Last year, when The Woman in Black was released, students in schools were all whisked away to the cinema at different points. Many were directed to attend a screening over the half-term as Susan Black’s short-book was used as a text in the English GCSE. Everything about Mike Newell’s Great Expectations seems to reek of the same thing. Harry-Potter cast members in Helena Bonham Carter, Ralph Fiennes and Robbie Coltrane – alongside the direction of Mike Newell target the teenagers of today. The Robert-Pattinson look of Jeremy Irvine with a love-triangle between Pip, Estella (Holliday Grainger channelling the femininity of Christina Hendricks in Mad Men) and “Bentley Drummle” (Ben Lloyd Hughes) seems to echo the Twilight series. Even Holliday Grainger has starred alongside Robert Pattinson in Bel-Ami and The Bad Mother’s Handbook – is she the ‘go-to’ girl for R-Patz’s love-interest?

It is 200 years since the birth of ‘Charles Dickens’, creating buzz and purpose to produce a version of the story before the year is out. Indeed, the BBC had a version recently starring Gillian Anderson, David Suchet and Ray Winstone. The production has ticked all the relevant boxes to ensure that the film garners success – free advertising through the Dickens relevance; a film which Grandparents and Parents alike will want to take their families – as teachers and schools will flock to maximise the use of a current trend in classic literature… and, who knows, some Twilight and Harry Potter fans may see the poster and go in on the actors credentials alone! But as a film, Jeremy Irvine is weak and wooden as Pip; Helena Bonham Carter – though effective – feels like she is simply phoning-in a character she has played before whilst Ralph Fiennes is criminally under-used. Everyone else, director included, seems to look to David Lean for some type of credible reference point. So why not simply watch the original? I doubt this will go in the history books – but I’m sure it will be in English exercise books for the next five years. At least until The Great Gatsby comes out...

Wednesday, 13 June 2012

Planet of the Apes (Tim Burton, 2001)

"I think it's fair to call this hostile territory"

Introduction

It is strange how, in a week whereby I watch Batman (I was not happy about that film) and Batman Returns for the first time, I then write about another previously-owned property, Tim-Burton-ised for a new audience. He claimed it was a 're-imagining' of the original Planet of the Apes film. Since the end of the original saga, the film was in development in different stages from 1988. Over many years with a wide range of directors (Peter Jackson, Chris Columbus, James Cameron, Sam Raimi, Oliver Stone) and a diverse possibility of actors (Tom Cruise, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Charlie Sheen), it seems the reboot of Planet of the Apes could've been anything. Arnie, the 'scientist' travelling back in time? A half-humn, half-ape creature within the Ape version of the Renaissance? A "sword and sandal spectacular" set within an Ape version of the Roman civilisation? These were all considered ... but it eventually fell to Gothic Tim Burton signing on to direct and Richard D. Zanuck producing.

The Scale Roddy McDowell Dreamed Of...

The problem with the earlier saga was how small in scale it was. The idea of Apes taking over the world simply didn't have the same effect when you only see the apes fighting within car parks and in spaces which are clearly stage-sets. From the opening scene we see what we had never seen before - lots of space. Bar Taylor's (Charlton Heston) brief introduction at the start of Planet of the Apes, we never truly see the wide, expansive galaxy that earth hovers within. Even in Escape from the Planet of the Apes, whereby Zira and Cornelius crash-land on earth and tell us how earth was destroyed, we don't see their journey.

Tim Burton, and his $100m budget ensures that we see all of space. Our hero is Leo Davidson (Mark Wahlberg), an astronaut on board a mothership which trains apes to explore areas which are unsafe. Davidson's favourite chimpanzee is sent into an electro-magnetic storm and, without question, Davidson decides to save him when it is clear that he has been 'lost. A time-warp takes Davidson onto a different planet whereby Apes are the dominant species and, in the same manner as Schaffner's original, Davidsons - amongst primative humans - is chased by apes, and caught.

Already a change in the characterisation of our lead role - he is now not neccessarily a morally-ambiguous lead, he is very-much a hero. In the opening sequence, Davidson is a hero - he saves apes. To make matters worse, not only does a stunning female-slave Daena (Estella Warren) fall for him, but it seems that Ari (Helena Bonham-Carter), a liberal ape who doesn't agree with slave humans, also falls for him. The apes and humans all speak, and the subtext about communication is lost. The film knows what it is - a heroic journey whereby our hero has to 'win' by defeating the enemy.

Enemies

General Thade (Tim Roth) and General Attar (Michael Clarke Duncan) provide our hero with his enemies. Chalton Heston even cameo's as the aging Father of Thade, upping the ante, by showing Thade that 'guns' exist. This is all alongside the religious subtext regarding a holy site named CA-LI-MA and a Messianic figure in Semos - who the apes are descendants of.

Interestingly, pre-9/11, the story is very much about extremists as General Thade is overtly 'religious', even uttering the lines:
"Extremism in defense of apes is no vice"
The film is highliy critical of faith, but equally undermines it by implying that Wahlberg himself is a Messianic figure. Ari tells him how he is "sent from the stars" and his actions inspire the humans, leading the way to their salvation - and to war.

An Epic War

As previously noted, this is epic in scale. At the time, films including The Mummy, Gladiator and Armageddon were the buzz around Hollywood. The ancient civilisations in the former-two seen as a major draw at the box-office. Egyptian and Roman Empire's celebrated on the silver-screen - could the Ape Empire be celebrated on such a scale too? Throw into the mix a space-station, science-fiction element that - in the third act - is found again, having crashed to planet earth and it seems that you have a combination of all three. The latter is a bit of a stretch, but it is fair to say that both Armageddon and Deep Impact were huge-draws in 1998, and both of which spent a considerable amount of time on-board a spaceship.

But the war-finale pre-dates The Lord of the Rings trilogy, and combined with the religious overtones and historic civilisation, it caught the imagination of an audience keen to watch action sequences on such a large scale. We see explosions and a battlefield pitting humans against apes - a far cry from Battle for the Planet of the Apes. Mid-fight, a spaceship lands, and the ape Davidson originally seeked, arrives on the planet.

Lets Do The Time Warp Again

The time-warp element is important to the apes film and Burton doesn't leave it out. IT is integral to the plot. Davidson managed to survive blasting through a time-storm, the chimpanzee seems to do the same - whilst the spaceship Davidson was on fails to jump the time-warp and instead crashes down on the planet, beginning new life and new conflicts. But that is not all. God-like Mark Wahlberg sets off, leaving the planet (this time, in-keeping with Pierre Boulles novel) and returning to Earth before finding that time has been altered and General Thade has replaced Abraham Lincoln. It makes no sense. Don't even start to think it through - it is ridiculous.

This finale sharply pulls everything sharply into focus- the film is merely a light-hearted joke. This is an Apes film without depth, without personality and without meaning. Prior to Burton's Planet of the Apes, every film raised a social-issue that you could discuss afterwards. The film brings nothing new to the argument. It hints at ideas about equality, faith and 'truth', but it doesn't resolve the issues. In 1968, Planet of the Apes conclusively stated how earth will destroy itself if it continues in the same manner. Beneath The Planet of the Apes tackled nuclear power - and our obsession with weapons and power. Escape from the Planet of the Apes tackles the fear of exploration, and fear of acceptance. This film doesn't directly conclude any of the issues raised and, within all the fighting and fire, you know that it simplifies everything. Taylor wasn't neccessarily 'good', Ceasar was complex - frustrated by the injustice and angry about human greed. Leo Davidson is 'Good'. Ari and all the humans are 'Good'. Thade, Attar and Limbo are 'bad'. They need to all get along ... and by the end of the film, they do get along. Praise be to Semos. 
Large Association of Movie Blogs