100W: The Fast and the Furious

As a writer, it is a regular expectation to keep to a strict word count. Every time you pick up a magazine, articles can be a small 100-word write-up or a 1000-word review. My own notes for the many films seen are always over 100 words - so this is a new feature that will focus on reviewing films in a concise 100 words.

The Fast and the Furious (Dir. Rob Cohen, 2001)

Dom Toretto (Vin Diesel) is top-dog in illegal street-racing LA, as Brian O’Conner (Paul Walker) tries to join in. An opening race establishes a simple world whereby the diverse cars match the diverse cultures that clash in this criminal world. But, an early reveal – that Brian is a cop – places this film in the clear-cut “good-guy-is-white” category – against the illegal criminals who seem to be anything but. Through brilliant stunts and a bass-pumping soundtrack you breathlessly see unbelievable races – and an unbelievable outcome as it portrays an America whereby crime’s allowed if (a white man decides) you’re a nice guy.

Further Reading: http://www.filmsnobs.com/www/shimes/fastfurious.htm

Fatal Attraction (Adrian Lyne, 1987)

"Well, what am I supposed to do? You won't answer my calls, you change your number. I mean, I'm not gonna be ignored, Dan!"

Introduction

According to Barry Norman, on BBC's Film '87, Fatal Attraction was "the most talked about movie of the year for all manner of reasons". Consequently, it sits within the 1001 Films to See Before You Die, usurping My Beautiful Laundrette and The Long Good Friday - two established films of the 1980's - as neither appear in the film-blogger bible. Indeed, whilst Fatal Attraction became a "talked about movie", it is clear that the set-up - of a man conducting a one-night stand (It's a weekend but ...) affair while his wife and child is out-of-town - will inevitably start tongues wagging. I would argue that the sexist-plot pretends to argue a feminist-opinion ... but upon closer inspection, it remains mysogynistic and ignorant and therein lies the discussion. Dialogue, written by James Dearden, spark up the highly-intelligent concept behind the story - but the narrative-by-numbers structure, ultimately stops the film from becoming anything more than a talking-point.

What A Woman...

As a viewer, we stick-close to Dan Gallagher (Michael Douglas). Dan is a happily married man with a child, comfortably moving up his lawyer-career ladder before he meets Alex (Glenn Close) and the two seem to be content in agreeing to a one-weekend fling - as Dan's family (Anne Archer playing his wife) are away at the parents. But Alex wants more from Dan - she calls him at the office; at 2am at his home; she confronts him at his office. Dan desperately wants out - but she continues to seek him by meeting his wife by pretending to be interested in his house; she kidnaps his daughter and kills her pet rabbit. Dan reveals all to his wife, but Alex pursues him further - climaxing in a flailing knife-in-the-bathroom shocker, harking back to Hitchcock's Psycho.

Considering the perspective we witness the film from, unfortunately Alex - though a top, humanised performance from Glenn Close (owing to arduous research to ensure that she was not a "one-note evil witch") - is clearly, and definitively, insane. You could assume that, because of her lost sanity, filmmakers could portray Dan as a philandering hsuband - but instead, he seems to attempt the opposite. Jonathan Rosenbaum highlights how prior to Dan's affair, after walking the dog he returns home to find his daughter comfortably asleep with her mother. She had a bad dream and will therefore spend the night in her parents bed. Poor Dan can't be intimate with his wife and, as if to pre-plan his affair, it is almost a justification for his actions.

Alex is the sexualised, contract-hired (and therefore temporary) fantasy to men - her madness later on becoming a "moral" to the story. Alex is the fearsome predator, waiting to trap the married man in her web, to women - her madness later on becomes the evidence to support the distrust in her initally. The intelligence in the film is how audiences became so wrapped into this clear good-guy/bad-girl dichotomy, they failed to appreciate the psychological depths the film tapped into. Mark Kermode wrote how "audiences screaming 'kill the bitch!' at test screenings of Fatal Attraction ... persuaded the film-makers to shoot a new ending in which Glenn Close's character became the victim of a shooting rather than a suicide, thus destroying whatever internal logic the film may have had.". Audiences were so-much sold on the good-guy/bad-girl set-up, they couldn't appreciate the suicide (rooted in reality) closure that should've befelled our crazy-in-love seductress.

The complicated position we are in. We are angry with the protaganist as he has risked his entire marriage for satisfying his lustful urges - but we ignore the abuse and disposable-attitude Dan has towards this one-night-stand victim. Indeed, Alex is a human too - and such a disregard for another person cannot be ignored. How fascinating it is as Alex explains how she wishes he wasn't married - how brutally true she is as she reminds him that his actions were selfish and ignorant of her. Despite this - we cheer on Michael Douglas and support his reactions.

What a Man ...

Michael Douglas himself took the role as it was "closer to myself than any part I've played before" , and director Adrian Lyne support this "truth" as the film represents "every married man's nightmare - every married womans nightmare". Of course, the role does manage to portray a damning portrayal of men and the lust we all fall victim to - but, I would argue, that this is the tone (and perspective) of the entire film.

The wife, Beth, is a good wife who stays at home and prepares dinner for her man as he returns home. He is a lawyer (a respectable well-paid job) in an incredible apartment opposed to the low-rent apartment Alex lives within, whereby sex in the elevator is always on the cards.This framing of a man who is, not only happily married within a nuclear family (the family we see framed in the final shot...), but also financially successful within a close-nit friendship group, also dictates that we look up to him. He truly has it all.

A film containing a popular talking-point is always going to be a success at the box-office - but let's not kid ourselves. This is a man in a exist world of power and wealth - whereby his attitudes towards women are disposable (in terms of sex) and family-focussed (in terms of the health of his child). Fatal Attraction is a thoroughly enjoyable watch due to a strong concept and a high calibre of actors on show. The conflict of interests is clear in the decision to change the ending. A problematic compromise between intelligent-storytelling and mass-appeal lowest-common-denominator filmmaking is always a tough balance. But then, maybe the only reason the film became so successful 25 years later may be because of that compromise. If the film did not include the shock-ending, it may never have earnt such a large audience - and if it catered to such a broad audience throughout, it would simply sit alongside the erotic-thriller films of the 1980's. Instead, it remains an interesting snapshot of the time's attitude towards sex and marriage.

Originally written/published on Man, I Love Films on 9 May 2013

My Beautiful Laundrette (Stephen Frears, 1985)

"You need to know how to squeeze the tits of the system."

Introduction

Following from last weeks The Long Good Friday, we continue a streak in British 80's drama with My Beautiful Laundrette. Unlike The Long Good Friday, in Stephen Frears controversial film we are now firmly embedded into the Thatcherite era. The Iron Lady has been in power for over 5-years and, dealing with issues as polemic as racism, sexuality and immigration, it begs the question as to the type of commentary the film has on the time-period. Hanif Kureishi, son of a Pakistani Father, but born-and-raised in South London, clearly has a first-hand perspective on many of the issues within the film, but you would be hard pressed to  pin down the political issues being raised. The film was nominated for an Academy Award for Best screenplay, but lost out to Woody Allen's Hannah and Her Sisters. It is most notable for its appearance of Daniel Day-Lewis in an early role, but clearly establishing how demanding and dominating his screen-prescence is - even when he was starting out.

An Eighties Business

Omar (Gordan Warnecke) is taken under his Uncle Nasser's (Saaid Jaffrey) wing to run a beaten-up Laundrette - and, within a Pakistani community, he is subjected to racist intimidation by the local neofascist gangs while within his own community he is expected to move up and become a successful businessman. IN addition to this he (it is implied) resumes his relationship with Anglo-Saxon Johnny (Daniel Day-Lewis), who assists him in establishing the Laundrette business.

We watch with baited breath as to whether the couple will be "found out". Though a tense element - highlighted in a moment of interrupted love-making as Omar's Uncle dances with his mistress in the Laundrette prior to its grand opening - it is clear that this is not a film about the acceptability or unacceptability of homosexuality. It appears to highlight the changes in attitude to class, and social-change, rather than an attempt at changing attitudes towards sexuality. Uncle Nasser, though succesful in his transition to London-life, he loses touch with his cultural roots - leading to a fractured relationship with his daughter and a sham-marriage. Indeed, Omar himself becomes increasingly money-obsessed as the film progresses - leading to a shocking confrontation with Johnny. The film purposefully begins as Daniel Day Lewis's Johnny squats in flats - before we change to see the difficult family-life Omar copes with as his Father is an alcoholic and so, consequently, his Uncle takes him away to work in his car dealership - in turn, leading to the laundrette. How many have become increasingly successful through a political-power that valued building privatised buisness over destroying the poverty that plagued the streets of London in the 1980's. 

Racist Attitudes

Indeed, the 1980's was a difficult time as the country was divided. The racism that is tackled with My Beautiful Laundrette is the same racism that we see in 80's-set The Is England in 2007 (The picture on the right must've been a reference for Shane Meadows). There is a sens eof community that appears to be lost due to the attitudes towards immigration - and Kureishi manages to show boths sides of the coin as, in an almost throwaway moment we see a cousin of Omar throw money to the ground to mock the white-businessmen who they work alongside. Salim (Derrick Branche) has clearly seen and experienced so much abuse, he is anti-White and clearly despises the culture that he is now a part of.

It is clear that My Beautiful Laundrette is not trying to play a moral-tale as, in many instances, he portrays an opposing opinion. When you see the success of the Laundrette, it is not long before we are reminded that illegal drug-trafficking is what has partially-funded the enterprise. Johnny - though we could argue is a tragic figure who is constantly reminded of his outsider status to Omar's Pakistani family, we also know little about. We know that he ran with the skin-heads and squatted in flats ... but he doesn't follow the law.

Great Britain's Mistress

Even Uncle Nasser has a mistress,but her pride in her status and the clear benefits she achieves from conducting this relationship (shown when confronted about her immorality by Nasser's daughter) hints at a possible representational-role she is portraying. Rachel (Shirley Anne Field) is a figure to Nasser who fulfills his urges - and his dreams. Indeed, like Margaret Thatcher, she may be what he wants; he may take advantage of her change in laws and funding of private enterprise ... but ultimately, she is a character of sin who is corrupting his values and comprimsing the future he wants. Inevitably, this affair will rip his family apart ... and in many ways, Thatcher seemed to be responsible for the "ripping apart" of society. I'll bet Nasser's mistress believes "there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women...", because she - like many entrepreneurs in the 1980's - was only looking out for herself.

Originally written/published for Man, I Love Films on 2 May 2013

I'm So Excited (Pedro Almodóvar, 2013)

"I need a booster to face those savages"

Introduction

Pedro Almodóvar is a force to be reckoned with. A director who doesn't appear to make any compromises, making a film almost annually in the eighties and becoming accepted in the mainstream market since 2000. He has a back-catalogue as diverse as Bad Education, Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down! and Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown, and a close-knit group of actors to turn to - including Antonio Banderas and Penelope Cruz  who owe their careers to him. It is clear that although themes of sexuality, identity and gender appear often in his work, Almodóvar can equally raise these issues in cine-literate moments such as the silent-film within Talk to Her or within the context of a crazed-surgeon and his kidnapped-victim in The Skin I Live In. Pedro Almodóvar is part of the roster of filmmakers who owe their own style of film-making to the film-makers that preceded them and  upcoming directors who surround them in cinema today. His previous exploits are as cinematically aware as Tarantino and Scorsese, with references to Hitchcock, Fellini and Bergman rather than exploitation and Powell & Pressberger. Does I'm So Excited build on Almodóvar's work so far? or is it merely a footnote in his ever-growing canon?

"It's my gayest film ever!"

Giles Tremlett for The Guardian, interviewed Almodóvar for him to "joyously" state that I'm So Excited is his "gayest film ever!". Though incredibly camp and a complete move aware from the seriousness of Almodóvar's films in the last decade, this is not unheard of. Indeed, Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown is a film that is comedic, camp and playful in the same manner as I'm So Excited. 

A plane is forced to stay in the air as all the Spanish airports cannot accept the faulty plane to land. On the plane itself, we are forced to be amongst the business-class "savages" and their respective cabin-crew; three camp air stewards until the situation resolves itself. The pilots equally have a role to play as both are unsure, sexually, where they stand. It is clear from this basic overview that the film is full of subtext an allegory as it alludes to the financial issues in Spain. A plane that cannot land; those leading the people - the pilots - are indecisive about their sexuality and truly don't know who they are and where they should go; the passengers all have their own goals and motives to pursue - without looking out for each other. We are forced to stay in the small-space of the elite upper-class - whilst the rest of society/the plane is fast asleep in economy.

Small-Scale

Generally speaking, this film remains within the plane - often taking place in ever-decreasing smaller-spaces as the air stewards argue and joke within the preparatory-area at the front of the cabin - to only move into the cock-pit, whereby we remain squeezed in amongst all the dials and gadgets that litter the front of an airplane.

But this film is about capturing the mood of a nation. Pedro Almodóvar is famous for creating an image of Spain to the rest of the world. The cultural attitudes towards death in Volver; the almost-iconic look of the pastel-coloured rooms that he regularly uses. Almodóvar believes we are in a "bleak place" right now - and I'm So Excited is about filling that void with a playful, comedic and upbeat attitude towards our own defencelessness in the face of the recent banking crisis. I'm So Excited is an "unrealistic, metaphorical comedy", and so you seek out the political and personal issues raised amongst the sex, alcohol and drug-taking on board Flight PE 2549.

Crash-Landing

This is Almodóvar for the fans. This is Almodóvar for the hard-core film-completest. Since 1999's All About My Mother, Pedro Almodóvar has been a film-maker who has not only challenged viewers but he has also become a film-maker who weaves profound and deeply-poetic themes and ideas within accessible international cinema. I'm So Excited features a cast and cameos from many actors who have featured in many of his previous films - Javier Cámara (Talk To Her), Lola Dueñas (Volver) and Cecilia Roth (All About My Mother) to name a few - and so we have a film that almost feels like a Best Of... Almodóvar. Using this idea as a jumping-off point, it is more a Best Of... The Early Years of Almodóvar. That's not a bad thing of course, but personally I preferred his later records and despite a huge success in his native country, I don't think the film is as accessible as his later films. Enjoyable, quirky and metaphorical - yes. But not as profound as I expect.

Originally written/published on Flickering Myth on 1 May 2013

100W: The Last Airbender

As a writer, it is a regular expectation to keep to a strict word count. Every time you pick up a magazine, articles can be a small 100-word write-up or a 1000-word review. My own notes for the many films seen are always over 100 words - so this is a new feature that will focus on reviewing films in a concise 100 words.

The Last Airbender (Dir. M. Night Shyamalan, 2010)

The infamous comparison to Spielberg stops as Shyamalan takes on multi-million pound blockbuster The Last Airbender. Adapting the Nickelodeon TV-series may have appeared an easy hit, but alas, script simplicity plagues the film despite top-notch special effects. The story revolves around Aang (Noah Ringer) – the only one who can “bend” all four elements of Fire, Water, Air and Earth – who, in a messianic manner, will bring balance to the planet. Katar (Nicola Peltz) and Sokka (Jackson Rathbone), two flat-characters join Aang on the journey as they challenge Fire-Nation exile - Zuko (Dev Patel). Good effort – but complete misfire – from Shyamalan.