Rating: MMMM

Review of Richard Linklater’s 1930s set period piece about the great Orson Welles’ theatrical triumph – his version of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar.

Director: Richard Linklater
Starring: Zac Efron, Claire Danes, Christian McKay
Running time: 114 mins

Richard Linklater’s latest film sees Orson Welles (having already taken the airwaves by storm on radio) perched on the brink of conquering the stage, starting with his production of Shakespeare’s classic history play Julius Caesar, set to be performed at the Mercury Theatre on Broadway. The ‘me’ of the title is teenager Richard (Zac Efron), the audience’s window onto the theatrical world of Welles and his company.

The casting of Efron in this particular role (a serious part and one lacking the squeaky, shiny happiness of the High School Musical franchise from which Efron made his name) may surprise a few, but Efron delivers a solid and utterly convincing performance as Richard, the young man who falls under Welles’ beguiling charms and finds himself part of the cast, playing Lucius, Brutus’ (played by Welles himself) servant boy and resident ukulele player. Efron, as previously mentioned, demonstrates that he is clearly a young actor blessed with multiple talents, being able to perform like an old Hollywood star with skill in singing, dancing and acting – the former and latter of which are on display here. Efron’s credible performance will with any luck silence harsher critics often out for his blood.

Claire Danes is as good as ever, in a role that pleasingly sees her in a bitchier role than usual with a character more reminiscent of Sookie in Igby Goes Down than the pure Juliet (William Shakespeare’s Romeo + Juliet). However, as good as Efron and Danes’ performances are, the film belongs to relative newcomer Christian McKay in a role he was seemingly born to play. It is no wonder by playing someone as egocentric, selfish and charismatic as Welles that he steals the show – he has a bewitching way of drawing the audience to him – but his performance is of such tremendous excellence, vivacity and believability that any scene without him is left wanting and rendered almost flat, lacking the energy his performance brings to the piece – something which becomes almost detrimental to the film as a whole. However, come awards season, McKay presents himself as a dead cert for acting nominations.

The story is an interesting one, avoiding the now saturated genre of biopics and concentrating on the character of Orson Welles in one specific time period. Linklater’s 1930s setting is convincing and well produced, with exquisite art direction that passes the Isle of Man for New York city. Linklater has produced an entertaining and enjoyable film in Me & Orson Welles, however a problem is posed by a rather languorous third act, an almost plodding final section which could perhaps have been avoided by better editing. The last few minutes really do slow down proceedings, a great shame in a film that is otherwise funny, intelligent, entertaining and engaging.

Rating: MMMM

As soon as I did so, my vegetative state took on a new guise as one rapt, transfixed by what I saw: glossy visuals, beautiful shots and clever mise-en-scene, stellar acting and a script on a level with Aaron Sorkin’s best work.

Set in early 60’s America amongst an elite community of advertising executives, the show explores politics, socioeconomic issues, sexism and ethnicity with apparent aplomb and proves what a hellish world the office workplace could be for women at the time, unprotected by the sexual harassment laws of today.

Admittedly this is all based on the first episode alone, but this is the first intelligent, high-quality series since ‘The Wire’ that I’ve got really excited about.

Co-created by an ex-Police reporter David Simon, HBO’s crime series ‘The Wire’ (set on the streets of Baltimore, Maryland) boasts a multi-layered narrative framework and an excellent ensemble cast, including British actors Dominic West as Det. Jimmy McNulty and soon-to-be-huge-star Idris Elba as the charismatic Stringer Bell (who in fact was tipped to be a future choice for James Bond in the G2 section of The Guardian a few months back). Not only does the show feature standout realist performances from each and every actor, but the show is brimming with a richness and depth not seen on the small screen in a long time. This may be due to the fact that the show is based on the real-life experiences of both of the show’s co-creators, Ed Burns (a former homicide detective) and the aforementioned David Simon – however, I feel the show’s potency is more than somewhat linked with what it expects from its audience. In comparison with other high-profile television drama such as ‘ER’ which presents the audience with a short recap of footage from previous episodes (“previously on <insert drama series here>…”), not once in its 5 seasons does ‘The Wire’ offer its audience a chance to refresh their memories.

It expects us to keep up with the complex and multi-layered plot strands and character arcs, and if we can’t, well tough. As odd and demanding as this sounds (and even damn right incongruous to the way we approach serialised television), this apparent expectation is certainly to the show’s credit. ‘The Wire’ knows it is an intelligent piece of drama, and therefore expects a certain intelligence and amount of concentration from those who choose to watch it.

Another area that the show excels in is the depth of its characters. Initial viewings may prove difficult, in that the sheer number of characters is slightly overwhelming, but after a couple of episodes it becomes easier to identify character from character and to understand the complex plot. But not only are the plots and narrative strands rich and multifaceted, the character development seen in ‘The Wire’ is next to none. In comparison with various other crime television franchises employing a black-and-white moral environment where the police are the upstanding heroes and the criminals are the ruthless villains, ‘The Wire’ refuses to subscribe to this outdated and essentially preposterous view. Instead, the show deploys a striking vision of moral ambiguity in the presentation of the citizens of Baltimore. In place of valiant and noble police we have a rag-tag group of officers, each with their own approach to their work (which often seems to serve only themselves) – leading to corruption and egotism throughout the force. On the street, the drug dealers and gang members are not the evil blackguards that other media has led us to expect; they often display more integrity and decency than the cops pursuing them. It must be said however, that the show is primarily male focused, which is a definite problem. Arguably the show features Sonja Sohn as Det. Kima Greggs as a key member of the police team, but really this does not make up for a distinct lack of female characters.

As acting goes, performances featured in ‘The Wire’ are second to none. British actor Dominic West (seen recently in ‘Breaking the Mould’ for BBC4 and ‘The Devil’s Whore’ on Channel 4) is excellent as Det. Jimmy McNulty, as are Clarke Peters and Wendell Pierce as Lester Freamon and Bunk Moreland respectively. The only major detraction in terms of the actors’ performances is that the language used by those portraying characters from the ‘street’ tends to be esoteric real slang and dialect specific to the Baltimore area – as a result it is sometimes difficult to understand just what it is they are saying. Therefore it is sometimes useful to watch the show with subtitles on so you can catch every word and keep up with what is undoubtedly one of the best, most sophisticated and engaging television dramas ever made.

Rating: MMMM

Review of Michael Mann’s ‘biopic’ of the notorious American criminal, John Dillinger.

Director: Michael Mann
Starring: Johnny Depp, Christian Bale, Marion Cotillard, David Wenham, Stephen Dorff
Running time: 140 mins

In the 1930s, America was swept by a crime wave, with the notorious criminal John Dillinger (Johnny Depp) at the centre. Michael Mann’s new film follows Dillinger, his associates and a special team of Federal Agents – led by Melvin Pervis (Christian Bale) – in their attempt to take down Dillinger and his gang.

As with Collateral and Miami Vice, 2009’s Public Enemies is photographed digitally, a technique which tends to add a slight blur to the frames. In Mann’s two previous films this worked well, adding an aesthetic quality (especially the slick urban environment of Miami Vice) that when coupled with the predominant use of steadicams, gave a documentary feel. Sadly, Mann’s penchant for shooting in this way does not work well here. Public Enemies being shot with steadicams and on digital detracts from the overall style. The period setting causes the inevitable blurring to seem very out of place – as the film cannot possibly be a documentary the action therefore seems contrived and false. Mann can also be faulted for his direction, in that his actors sometimes deliver lines of dialogue that are barely comprehensible through being spoken too quickly, quietly or lost under heavy accents. The action sequences in the film whilst being very well executed are at times too lengthy and poorly lit to be engaging – one scene has two of Dillinger’s gang members running through a dark forest, pursued by the feds, all of which is very difficult to distinguish in the dark (although this near-blackness does allow for the gunfire to illuminate the characters’ faces which is a nice touch). However, these are minor setbacks in an otherwise excellent film.

As ever, Johnny Depp excels in a charismatic role – the real life John Dillinger was reported to be an engaging and captivating personality, one that Depp masters and delivers very well. Certain scenes present Dillinger’s charisma shining through a tough-guy persona, including a moment where Dillinger offers a woman a warm winter coat when he and the gang have just taken her hostage. It is in the scenes with love-interest Billie Frechette (played to sultry, sassy perfection by La Vie en Rose’s Marion Cotillard) however, that Dillinger is at his most charming. One scene in particular has a coquettish Billie in the bath, leaning her leg in an overtly erotic way, to which Dillinger responds superbly. This playful rogue behaviour is also in abundance in what is arguably one of the film’s best scenes, where Dillinger takes a visit to the Police department building and blithely walks around the special ‘John Dillinger Unit’, a whole detail of police assigned to tracking and apprehending him. Surprisingly enough, Depp outshines his co-star, super-ego Christian Bale as the latter portrays Agent Purvis with a lack of intensity or depth. This said, Bale’s performance may seem underwhelming in contrast to Depp’s maximised screen time and much of the plot given over to the romance between Dillinger and Billie Frechette (which may anger some audiences, eager to see the number of tommy gun battles so promised in the film’s trailer).

Public Enemies is yet another sterling addition to the already stellar Michael Mann canon, providing an interesting narrative trajectory, good performances, wonderful period details and costumes and the best insight into crimefighting in 1930s America since The Untouchables.

Rating: MMMM

Review of Doubt first published in a February 2009 issue Spark*, the newspaper of Reading University Students’ Union.

Director: John Patrick Shanley
Starring: Meryl Streep, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Amy Adams
Running time: 104 mins

For those who have only seen Meryl Streep in recent summer romp Mamma Mia or the fashion-themed fun of The Devil Wears Prada, John Patrick Shanley’s Doubt is a great window onto some of her more serious performances. This is for the primary reason that Doubt is well and truly Streep’s film, despite what the film’s Oscar nominations might suggest (an acting nomination for Streep, Hoffman and Adams). But this is also one of the main detractions from the film: Streep’s powerful performance (which undoubtedly – pun intended – is excellent) is left to dominate and overshadow the film itself. Adams’ performance is very good, although she seems to maintain a look of anxious trepidation throughout the entire film. Hoffman’s performance follows his usual excellent standards, simultaneously conveying an uncomfortable creepiness and kind benevolence.

The film features some clever subtle moments, one where Sister Aloysius (Streep) forces Sister James (Adams) to eat a piece of gristle that she previously spit out and put on her plate with one piercing look from her beady eyes – conveying the silent power and domination that Sister Aloysius holds over Saint Nicholas School and the rest of the nuns.  The nun who is suffering from sight deterioration placing the figures in the nativity crib at Christmas is also deftly handled. So is the cinematography, with some interesting off-balance and low-angle shots.

However, aside from three very good performances, Doubt fails to deliver on pretty much any other level. The film’s premise is basically all that happens in the film: nun/principal of Catholic school suspects and accuses priest of having a questionable relationship with a student. Doubt tries but never succeeds in escaping from this problem – nothing happens in the film that you haven’t already seen in the trailer. As for the ending: on one hand, the film’s climax which breaks with conventional explorations of mystery (by giving no answer one way or the other whether Sister Aloysius’s suspicions were correct or not) is an interesting one, leaving the audience to work out their own conclusions and judgements. On the other hand however, the film’s ending leaves the audience with a lack of real resolution and ‘closure’, forcing further questions to be asked than any to be answered. For some this would be to the film’s credit, but sadly not for this critic. There is an overriding sense of heavy-handedness in the film’s dialogue and smaller lead-up scenes which begins to grate and eventually becomes very irritating: “it takes a cat to catch a mouse” and “the wind has changed” are both lines that smack of poor writing that scream of try-hard symbolism.

All in all, Doubt marks another great performance from the ever-excellent Streep and Hoffman, and further establishes Adams’ reputation from being a star on the rise. But the overwhelming lack of dynamism and pace makes what could otherwise be a tense and intriguing drama into a tedious and dull 100 minutes. Perhaps Doubt works better on the stage (the film is a celluloid version of Shanley’s own play), but to be frank, I’ve seen enough.

Rating: MMM

Review of Frost/Nixon first published in a January 2009 issue of Spark*, the newspaper of Reading University Students’ Union.

Director: Ron Howard
Starring: Michael Sheen, Frank Langella, Kevin Bacon, Sam Rockwell
Running time: 122 mins

Admittedly I haven’t seen Peter Morgan’s original play, but it really is hard to imagine any medium other than celluloid for which to present the drama played out between Richard Nixon and David Frost in their 1977 televised interviews. The film opens with newsreel footage of the social and political conditions of 1974 and the resignation of President Richard Nixon, then in disgrace following the discovery of the Watergate scandal. For those not familiar with this period in American political history and the events that preceded and followed it, there is helpful narration from characters which form the support teams of both Frost and Nixon. Three years later, Frost embarks on an ambitious project to interview the hated former President.

Before the interviews take place, there are some excellent moments of comedy and drollery, surprisingly more often than not in the form of witty one-liners from Nixon (Frank Langella), delivered with perfect deadpan humour. Sam Rockwell is refreshingly cast against type as James Reston, Jr. researcher keen to uphold the ideals of democracy and freedom, to ultimately procure a confession and apology from the man who he sees has shamed and degraded the presidency. Michael Sheen is very good, mimicking David Frost’s voice and mannerisms exactly. It is Frank Langella’s film though, putting every last ounce of energy into arguably what will be one of the best performances of the year.

Director Ron Howard, it seems, has lost much of the self-indulgent tone displayed in earlier work such as Apollo 13 and A Beautiful Mind, subsequently rendering Frost/Nixon all the more potent and tense as a result. And tension is the unmistakeable motif here, seen from start to finish. Sexual tension seen early-on between ‘playboy’ Frost and new flame Caroline Cushing (Rebecca Hall), economic tension for the financing of the interviews (Frost practically financed the interviews out of his own pocket), and the most important tension of all: that between a disgraced and crooked President and the misled American public that he deceived. At the climax of the fourth interview, we see the broken image of a man, bitterly depressed with self-loathing finally and desperately apologise to the country he lied to – and what a mesmerising moment that is.

Rating: MMMM

Director: Edward Zwick
Starring: Leonardo Di Caprio, Djimon Hounsou, Jennifer Connelly
Running time: 143 mins

Only two years on from its original release, it may be hard for some to regard Blood Diamond as a ‘classic’, but classic it is. With its powerful mix of shocking ultra-violence, poignant scenes, liberal political message and standout performances, the film delivers on every level.

Blood Diamond begins with the dramatic and shocking assault on the village of Shenge by the Revolutionary United Front (the rebel side of the civil war), machine-gunning all in their path, murdering and maiming at will – these opening five minutes are hard to stomach, as the violence is almost too realistic. Women are raped and tortured. Children are abducted and torn from their families. Villagers are not killed have their hands cut off to prevent them voting in the Sierra Leone elections. Those with a nervous disposition or an aversion to blood, look away now. Along with seminal war films such as Saving Private Ryan, the bloodshed and gunfire in Blood Diamond is unsettling due to the fact that it really happened. What makes it even harder to watch is that we know that needless conflicts and atrocities like those witnessed in Sierra Leone are still going on.

Another element of near-the-knuckle realism is the film’s depiction of children being forcibly taken from their homes, brainwashed and indoctrinated (with shouts of “shed their blood! Shed their blood!”) and handed an AK-47. These are children, being taught to kill their parents and to relish the acts of murder they commit: making it all to easy to understand what Oxfam and Amnesty are fighting for when they say “children are born with these arms (hands), not these arms (guns)”.

The eponymous ‘blood diamond’ in question is a pink golf ball sized rock, which although on the face of it might sound impressive and beautiful, it becomes no more than an object of revulsion and disgust when we learn the lengths people go to obtain it and just how many lives pay for it. The diamond’s journey through the film forces the audience (this critic at least) to question why the hell we desire lumps of rock with which to adorn our fingers, necks and hands when people have to die in order for us to buy them.

The action sequences are gripping, terrifying, but more importantly ugly (the race out of Freetown in particular is adrenaline-charged) making a stark contrast with the majestic African landscape – the violence and hatred of the human conflict takes on a new devilry when set against the natural beauty of the continent.

Acting wise, the performances are spot-on. Leonardo DiCaprio as Danny Archer is excellent, with a fantastic accent to match. Jennifer Connelly (Maddy Bowen) is also very good, although she isn’t given much reign as either of her co-stars. However, Djimon Hounsou steals the show with a reprise of the noble humanity and power he found in Gladiator to shape a truly moving performance. Supporting roles from Michael Sheen and David Harewood (as the psychotic Captain Poison) are also very solid.

The only thing detracting from the movie is the predictable Hollywood-shoehorning of a romantic subplot between DiCaprio and Connelly, which feels gratuitous and out of place. This aside however, Blood Diamond is an intense and thought-provoking thriller that is both profound and wildly entertaining. If you take away anything from the film, let it be the conviction to boycott conflict diamonds. Make sure they are ethically sourced, and not from African war zones. If you’re not careful, you might just have blood on your hands.

Review of the first season of hit US television show ‘The West Wing’, article first published in October 2008 issue of Spark*, the newspaper of Reading University Students’ Union.

If you thought ‘political drama’ was the veiled attempt at a Labour party leadership bid, or the exhaustive BBC coverage of the Labour party conference, think again. Despite it being almost straight-jacketed into the aforementioned genre label, The West Wing is far removed from those dull notions. Poignant, thought provoking, thoroughly engaging and often hilarious, this is drama at its best. It just happens to be political.

The show’s pilot episode, ‘Premiere’ sets the tone, atmosphere and verbal pace for the rest of the series – and it is this, the verbal exchange that is the jewel in the crown of The West Wing. Aaron Sorkin’s whipcrack dialogue and clever verbal sparring fires from the mouths of his exceptional characters, making for witty repartee rarely seen on primetime television: “the President, while riding a bicycle on vacation in Jacksonhall came to a sudden arboreal stop” – how White House Chief of Staff Leo McGarry (the superb late John Spencer, who in fact sadly died during filming of season 7) describes how the President rode his bike into a tree. Although at times the lines are hard to keep pace with and the policy acronyms too copious (‘POTUS’, ‘DEA’, ‘DNC’, ‘ATWA’ etc), these are minor drawbacks in the face of such compelling viewing.

The primary reason for the show being so compelling (razor sharp dialogue aside)?  The characters. Each one, from aide Charlie Young (Dulé Hill), through to Deputy Chief of Staff Josh Lyman (Bradley Whitford) is exceedingly well cast, bringing humour, pathos and genuine humanity to the screen. Richard Schiff as Communications Director Toby Ziegler shines particularly in the episode ‘In Excelsis Deo’ where a winter coat he gave to charity leads him to organising a funeral for a homeless Korean War veteran. Even the supporting roles (Mrs Landingham, Admiral Fitzwallace) are played to perfection. And with the ‘Leader of the Free World’ himself, President Josiah Bartlet being so well portrayed, US citizens could indeed be forgiven for exclaiming “don’t blame me, I voted for Martin Sheen!”

Unafraid to tackle controversial issues (and matters which still hold sway in Presidential election campaigns), The West Wing pulls no punches. Early in the series, members of the religious right meet with staffers in an attempt to procure an apology for an on-air insult (“Lady, the God you pray to is too busy getting indicted for tax fraud”), and consequently enter into a bargain exchange for a crackdown on pornography, condoms in schools (they say it like it’s a bad thing!) and the implementation of school prayer. Unluckily for the representatives of ‘The Lambs of God’, they don’t get too far:

Reverend: “If children can buy pornography on any street corner for $5, isn’t that too high a price to pay for free speech?”

President Bartlet: “No. On the other hand, I do think that $5 is too high a price to pay for pornography”.

Pure genius. Accused by some for being too liberal (causing the show to be dubbed “The Left Wing”) and criticised for glorifying all things American, you can see how the tone might grate after a while. But with drama this good, you’re too engaged to care!

Rating: MMMMM