If your American you’ll probably know this film as The Ghost Writer. As I am not American and do not need everything to be spelt out for me I was able to deal with the slightly ambiguous title of The Ghost – I will freely admit a small part of me thought that I was about to watch a middle aged European version of The Sixth Sense.  However, to my disappointment and relief I was treated (this might be a strong word) to a political thriller with its references clearly grounded in the murky water of contemporary international politics.

Ewan McGregor plays the imaginatively named Ghost – that’s not his real name we just never get told what his disappointing name is – who is charged with completing the memoirs of former British Prime Minister Adam Lang (Pierce Brosnan).  The original Ghost writer has mysteriously been found washed up on the beach of the island that Lang is now inhabiting just outside New York.  While the Ghost is there Lang is indicted for war crimes.  This conveniently takes Lang out of the equation as he jets around America showing the world his innocence. This leaves the Ghost free to investigate Lang’s life as well as the death of his predecessor.  What follows is a dramatic web of secrets and half truths that builds up a fatal finish.

Now before I go any further I will give you an idea of how I spent the two hours twenty minutes that I was stuck in the cinema.  The first hour was so dull I felt like ripping out my eye balls and stuffing them in to my ears so I couldn’t see or hear how bad it was.  It was after this low that the film descended into a hole so deep that even someone like Roman Polanski – who is used to pulling out of small holes – looked as if he would struggle to turn this crime to celluloid around.  However, it is after this that the film became a completely different beast.  It actually became entertaining, with all of the mind numbingly dull build making sense.

In a sense the biggest problem with the film is Ewan McGregor.  Anyone who has watched Angels and Demons will struggle not to feel that Camerlengo Patrick Mckenna has been kidnapped from the Vatican and has been forced to put on an English accent that Dick Van Dyke would be proud of.  He is dreadful.  There is nothing positive to say about his performance other than the fact that finally Mary Poppins is no longer the film with the worst British accent in it.  The worst bit is undoubtedly the relationship that builds between “The Ghost” and Ruth Lang.  The build up to their brief affair is about as subtle as being stabbed by a 6ft 8 clown.  And to be honest it is from this moment that even the stupidest person in the audience works out the remaining 82 minutes of fun.

It is worth mentioning the one small highlight; Pierce Brosnan.  Although he’s hardly in the film he is the best thing in it by a country mile.  Although you get Tony Blair references – something that is clear throughout the rest of the film – he does a good job of not falling into the pitfalls of playing a parody of a well known politician.

Overall if there is a choice between drinking bleach or watching this film, I would be tempted to pour a glass of Domestos.  Although it is not the worst thing you’ll ever see, it is probably the most disappointing.  If you haven’t guessed the plot twist by 20 minutes in then I suggest you go to Tesco, get a plastic bag (preferably without holes), pull it over your head, tie a knot at the bottom and wait until you can no longer breath – you don’t deserve to live for your crimes to stupidity.

2/10 – Dick Van Dyke would be proud

]]> http://filmwipe365.wordpress.com/2010/05/24/the-ghost/feed/ 0 stuart78969 http://filmwipe365.wordpress.com/2009/12/09/le-diner-de-cons/ http://filmwipe365.wordpress.com/2009/12/09/le-diner-de-cons/#comments Wed, 09 Dec 2009 02:25:12 +0000 stuart78969 http://filmwipe365.wordpress.com/?p=160 ]]> Once again FilmWipe fans i am apologising.  I have been ill yet again.  I feel like Tiger Woods – I’ve denied the rumours on twitter that my illness is syphilis, however as time has gone it is looking increasingly likely that i’m lying.  All I need now is for my phone call to the syphilis sufferers of the Isle of Mann  to be released and then the game is over.  I would like to point out that I am not one of those people who is constantly ill or who has an allergy to everything (Secretly I’m Bubble Boy). Anyway, today I bring you a film that has been promised for your scrutiny for about a week Le Diner de Cons.

This cheeky French farce comes straight from the imagination of the genius Francis Veber and in all honesty is a weaker version of his 2003 film Tai Tois. It follows Pierre Brochant a wealthy publisher who every week organises a dinner with his friends where they each have to bring an idiot with them.  They get their amusement from degrading the person without them realising it.  Unfortunately for Pierre he had not encountered on inviting the kind hearted but utter buffoon Francois Pignon.  Due to pulling a muscle in his back he can’t attend the dinner.  However, Pignon turns up at his house.  What unfolds is an unforgettable evening where Brochant the limits of human endurance and acceptability are pushed to its extremes

The character of Pignon is superb.  The balance between tragic idiot and kind hearted fool is struck brilliantly.  You can see why people would like him or loath him. A mixture of obsessive modelling (the Airfix kind not lingerie), mild supidity mixed with a face and body that only Rick Waller can dream of.   He plays as the perfect comedy foil for Brochant.  Pignon single handedly manages to destroy his life in one evening of good intentioned boffoonary.  Possibly the most cringe worthy moment is when Pignon invites his tax inspector friend round to the house in order to work out where Brochant’s wife has gone.  The scene lasts for what feels like an eternity, slowly building in tension and humour until a shocking revelation ends the film in an unforgettable crescendo.

The acting is superb throughout the film.  All of the cast put in a superb performance.  However, particular plaudits are deserved for Jacques Villeret.  His performance as Pignon is what set the film apart.  From start to finish you can’t help falling for his portrayal.  The mix of tragedy and comedy in the performance is quite extraordinary. Rarely has such a fine comedy performance been seen in comedic cinema.

Francis Veber is possibly the finest director of comedy I have seen. While this film is not his best work it is still entertaining from start to finish.  As with all of his comedy films he develops fantastic characters that play of each from start to finish.  The difference between this and in my opinion his best film Tai Tois is that Le Diner de Cons has not got the same level of character development.  The constraints of the film being set in one day severely limit the ability for the characters to reach their full potential.

Without questions this is an excellent film that should be viewed by anyone with even the hint of a sense of humour.  If not still watch as you might just discover it.

8/10 – Hilarious

The film is set in 1939.  War is about to break out.  The aristocracy believe that they can negotiate a deal to get Britain out of the war.  Unbeknownst to Anne (Ramola Garai) – the adoptive daughter of the high ranking Keyes family – her relatives are part of this plan and are knocking off anyone who stands in the way of their plot.  After one of her friends dies mysteriously, she stubbles across a recording that implicates the government and eventually her family in his murder.  What makes the plot even more “exciting” is that strange things start happening around her and more people die.  The whole plot is framed around the present day meeting between the grandson of Anne asking the last remaining relatives of the Keyes family about what happened to his Grandmther.

Almost everything is hateable in this film.  The direction is probably the worst bit.  I have seen genital crabs with more talent behind the camera than Poliakoff.  He has obviously been taking lessons in direction from a blind gereatric man with ADHD.  Every single scene has a camera zoom that lasts for an eternity on someone or something.  In particular the final shot on an elderly Anne.  Poliakoff has the longest possible zoom on to her wrinkled face followed by a dramatic pause which serves as an opportuniy to fade into Anne as she is in 1939.  It is horrible.  Leprosy colonies are more pleasant sights than the end of the film. 

What is even more infuriating is that he has managed to turn a cast of vaguely decent cast into a group more wooden than the amazon rain forest.  It is not a slight on them that they’re generally awful (apart from Bill Nighy). By trying to replicate the style of language used in films of the era, he has lost any semblence of plausabiliy and more importantly has failed to create the illusion of 1939. 

Bill Nighy deserves to have his equity taken away and then frog marched to a Sushi Bar in London where he can eat a piece of Sushi laced with radioactive thallium.  He was awful.  It was obvious from two minutes in what was really going on with his character.  He was so bad he made me want to scoop my eyes out with a rusty spoon.  I used to like him as an actor.  Now, I wouldn’t swerve to avoid him if he was crossing the road in front of me. Bad, Bad, Bad.

One tiny ray of sunshine was Ramola Garai.  She was quite good and gave a suitably convincing performance.  The film was clearly a vehicle for her to launch her career.  But, in all fairness she grabbed the opportunity with both hands.  Without her the film would have deserved being burnt in a return to the good old days when anything rubbish was vilified and led to national outrage. 

Overall this is poor. I love British cinema.  However, if this is the best it can curretly do I think the UK Film Council might as well give up.  It is so dire that I wouldn’t infict it on my worst enemy.

1/10 – Nicht Gut

The film follows Jake Teichberg.  He has gone back to his families loss making motel to help them try and survive.  With closure looming, Jake gets wind of the forced move of the Woodstock music festival.  As he has already got a license to host a music event he gets in touch with them, this results in him turning his small town in to the iconic music event.

Where do I begin?  The film is 1hr 50 minutes and you feel every single second of this, in particular the first half feels like you are pulling your teeth out with the most boring dentist in Beige Hospital.  Everything about it is dull.  I understand that Mr Lee was simply trying to set everything up for the second half.  However, he could have done this in a tenth of the time and still not have lost any of the quality of the film.

The second half is completely different.  The film springs to life.  The festival is on the verge of collapsing again.  The young people are destroying the family motel and Jake is on the brink.  The development from here to the end of the festival is actually quite good.  In particular the scenes involving the father rediscovering his happiness by spending time with a transvestite security guard and Jake’s journey into the world of drugs and music.

There are two exceptional performances in the film.  Imelda Staunton plays Jakes mother, a strict Russian woman who is obsessed with making money.  Staunton’s performance is spell bindingly and probably steals the show as she is so dislikeable that you end up enjoying every scene she is in.  The other great performance is Liev Schreiber, his portrayal of Vilma a transvestite security guard is priceless.  Frankly without him the film would have been devoid of any humour.  I put his small role down to the film being just about acceptable to watch.  and for achieving that he surely deserves a nod at this years Oscars.

The worst performance is sadly Jake, played by Henry Goodman.  He is wooden, uninteresting and is a disappointment to the acting profession. It is not because the character is like this, its because he cannot act.  At no point do you believe that he is Jake and throughout you’re fully aware that this is a young actor cutting his teeth.  He breaks the cinematic illusion and for that I not forgive him.  I also do not forgive him for having possibly the biggest nose I have ever seen in my life.  It is so large people in Austria ski down it in winter.  For half the film I spent my time trying to work out if there was a background, because his nose was in the way.  Get plastic surgery and acting lessons and then you might just be able too appear in something other than series 10 of I’m a celebrity, get me out of here.

Ang Lee.  I won’t rip you to pieces because you’re a great director but honestly this was poor.  Next time make sure you have actually got a plot line and vaguely decent script before you decide to make a film.

Overall it is alright but is not worth the money.  Wait until it is on itv2 in three years.

4/10 – Beige

The film follows Quentin (Gerard Depardieu), a kind hearted simpleton thief who inadvertently annoys every person he meets to the point that either consider killing him or themselves.  He finds himself in prison with Ruby (Jean Reno), a brooding outlaw.  Ruby attempts a solo escape but finds himself lumbered with Quentin.  What ensues is a race to find the other criminals that Ruby was involved with before he went to jail in order to find the person responsible for the murder of his lover.

The film is made by two of the best leading male performances in recent comedy history.  The pair play off each other wonderfully.  Reno is the straightest of straight men.  This contrasts superbly with Depardieu who creates one of the most lovably annoying and outlandish characters seen in film.  Earlier I mentioned Von Triers The Idiots, and frankly it is as if he stolen moments from that film but dramatically accentuated them.  The break out from the prison will leave your sides so split that you will be wandering if your liver is about to collapse on to the floor.

Conveniently writer/director Francis Veber also performed his acclaimed double act on tomorrow nights film.  He is clearly an ageing director of some talent.  Now in his early 70s (he is probably one of the few directors who gives Clint Eastwood a run for his money in the elderly stakes) Veber is still knocking out films like a girl from Essex fires out children in her attempt to overpopulate the world.    However, he is possibly one of the finest comedy directors still working.  His control over the film is remarkable.  His comic timing is exemplary.  This is the type of film that could quite easily have run out of control but he manages to stop it becoming silly and annoying.  The invention that he allows is second and his reminiscent of classic Hollywood comedy’s.

Overall I recommend this as one of the finest films that you can beg, borrow or steal from your local video store.  If you’re a Jean Reno fanatic (like me) then you will gobble this up like Richard Blackwood rediscovering food after his coffee enema.

8/10 – Enjoy

The film follows Jenny (Carey Muligan) a school girl growing up in suburban 60s London, aiming to go to Oxford.  She is repressed by her father, Jack (Alfred Molina) who makes her work obsessively in order to fulfil the ambition.  One day she is caught waiting for a lift in the rain.  After waiting for a long time for a bus on a rainy day, she is offered a lift home by David (Peter Sarsgaard).  He chases after her for several weeks impressing her normally hard line parents enough to letting her go on trips with him.  He shows her a life she could only imagine.  However, things turn sour when he proposes.  This leaves Jenny in the position of trying to decide whether she stays at school and goes to Oxford or leaves and gets married.

The acting in the film is generally very good.  Carey Muligan is superb as is Alfred Molina.  The father daughter relationship between the pair is both gritty and yet touching and has certain element of truth in relation to the era.  However, I did not understand the rationale behind Peter Sarsgaard and Dominic Cooper’s (Danny) casting.  The pair are both excellent actors, but should have been playing each others role.  Cooper is young and charming.  His obvious chemistry with Muligan (exhibited only for a brief second) was so intense it made the remainder of the relationship between Jenny and David seem flimsy at best.  Similarly Peter Sarsgaard would have suited the role of Danny much better.  Also it would have made the characters relationship with Helen (Rosamund Pike) seem plausible.  As it was Rosamund Pike looked as if she was doing an impersonation of Gary Glitter by dating someone dramatically younger than herself.  It looked appalling on screen and detracted from the film as a whole.

The script was excellent.  Nick Hornby (Writer of High Fidelity and About a Boy) wrote an excellent script with some absolutely brilliant lines.   However, the overall plot was dismal.  The idea of the fallen school girl seduced from her path of academic excellence, drawn instead to a sordid life of fun that almost costs her the dream but instead through hard work and determination achieves anyway, has been done so many times it might as well have been a plot line written by Plato (It probably was).  It would have been more interesting to see Jenny lose her future as a result of this relationship.  Instead the disappointing attempt to play everything safe was both weak and expected.

The worst bit of the film had to be its ending.  After rushing through the reclamation of Jenny’s life  the film flips to Oxford where she is a student.  Here Jenny gives the most patronising sentence  about the last hour and half which is comparable to the ending of the new crossroads “it was all a dream”.  Rubbish.

Overall this is ok.  It is worth watching, but is more of a present for someone you don’t like.  Treat them to this and they will get the message.

1/10 – Tiresome

The film follows the brothers nicknamed Rudo (Diego Luna) and Cursi (Gael Garcia Bernal) on their journey from the bannana plantations in rural Mexico to super stardom playing football for two of the nations biggest teams.  It all kicks off for them when Batuta (a soccer scout) breaks down near their town.  After helping to fix his car the brothers compete against one another to get him to represent them.  Cursi wins and leaves their provincial home for Mexico City.  He is a big success and finishes as top scorer in his first season, which gives him the opportunity to follow his real passion, music.   Rudo has it a bit tougher.  Several months after Cursi, Batuta gives Rudo an opportunity with a rubbish team.  He leaves his wife and children to follow his dream.  After stuggling to get a place in the team in his first season he fortunately finds himself in the top flight. The second season in football contrasts hugely for the pair.  Cursi has lost form due to his relationship with a tv star and is on the verge of being sent to a lower division club.  Rudo, is close to becoming the best goal keeper in the history of the league.  However, his gambling addiction has left him owing money to some dangerous criminals and in the game against Cursi’s team he is asked to throw the game.  He is left with the dilema of following his dream or doing what he is told.

Well after what is possibly the longest description of a film in review history, I will get down to business (I can hear the sense of relief).  Until Cursi leaves for Mexico the film is desperately dull. The film offers very little about the depressing poverty that the pair grow up in. In some ways this is good, however there is hardly anything interesting.  And when you do get a flash of something interesting you’re so bored that you struggle to notice it (such as the abuse by her boyfriend of the pairs mother).  Cursi on his own in Mexico city is abut as exciting as staring at a beie wll for 15 hours.  It is so difficult to stay awake only repeated attempts at self harm will stop you from seeing most of the film with your eyes closed. 

Personally the most excruciating aspect of the film is Rudo’s gambling addiction.  From about 2 minutes into him arriving in Mexico city you quickly guess where the story is going.  It takes about 40 minutes to get to the point that you had magically predicted.  It is so painful to watch that cutting off my penis, cooking it on an open fire and then sharing it with a small Mongolian family as I slowly bleed to death seems a tempting alternative.  There is nothing I  loath more than being able to predict what is going to happen.

If I had my way Radovan Karadžićy would not be the only one in the Hague waiting to serve trial for crimes against humanity.  Director Carlos Cauron deserves to be sentenced to a life punishment for what he has done to cinema.  Technically the film is ok.  However, as the boy genius who wrote and directed this horror show he takes full credit for the misery he has brought on the world.  The script is terrible.  Even his mum would struggle to tell him that this was any good.  The dialogue between characters is so turgid it makes watching paint dry genuinely seem quite exiting.  His direction does little to excite the senses.  Worst of all he manages to make two excellent actors seem like David Arquette.  This is quite a skill as David Arquette is so bad that even genital crabs seem like Oscar nominated actors in comparison to him.

Overall this should be avoided at all costs.  Even football thugs will be bored as you only see about 1 minute of football.  Save money and do something else.

1/10 – If I couldgive minus figures Iwould but I don’t want to give it the infamy.

Anyway back to the film.  The film is about Bob Wilton (Ewan Mcgregor) a small town reporter who thinks he has the perfect life.  However, after a chance interview with a man who claims to have been trained to by the army to use his brain so that he has psychic abilities. Shortly after this Bob’s life falls apart. His wife leaves him which sparks his journey to Kuwait in order to gain an exclusive on the Iraq War.   Here he meets Lyn Cassady who reveals himself to be one of the key figures in this psychic army.  Together they go on an adventure across Iraq to complete an undefined mission in a hostile country.

The film is derived from a story written by the wonderfully bazaar mind of Jon Ronson.  He has gone for a strange but highly entertaining take on the Iraq war and manages to make a number of criticisms of the failings of the British and American invasions without turning it into a pandering demeaning festival of unintelligible drivel like Lions for Lambs.

The film itself is a treat.  The acting is absolutely superb.  George Clooney steals the show from start to finish.  Rarely has an actor clearly relished a role as much as Mr Clooney has done with this.  His portrayal of Lyn Cassady is undoubtedly one of the cinematic highlights of 2009.  He manages to mix the strange, disillusional, psychotic and authoritative with an effortless charm that carries the film from start to finish.  He also manages to drag Ewan McGregor kicking and screaming into giving a performance worthy of an actor of his unquestionable talent.

I will freely admit that I can easily lose interest in Jeff Bridges and Kevin Spacey.  This may partiallly be caused by their strange double act in K-Pax or (and this is purely for Bridges) his performance in Arlington Road made me want him to be involved in a fatal accident.  However, Bridges certainly redeemed himself in my eyes with his performance.  He is actually enjoyable to watch.  You forget the wilderness years where highlights included the lukewarm Seabiscuit and the equally unenjoyable The Moguls. Spacey on the other hand is someone I have always revered and thought a great deal of even if I have loathed many of his performances (Superman Returns and The Life of David Gale). It is difficult to see if he has managed to put his acting back into first gear or if he still stuck in reverse (Current highlights include adverts for airlines, seriously they are better than his film acting).  However, he is enjoyable to watch and should be celebrated as the creepy American who controls so much of British theatre.

Plaudits really need to be given to director Grant Heslov.  He successfully managed to keep a film which has the potential to be strange and annoying to be sharp witty and highly poignant (As well as being slightly strange).

Overall I recommend this to anyone, apart from goats.  Although if you are watching a film with a goat I think it is time to attach a pipe to the exhaust of your car, put the other end of the pipe in through the passenger window, close all other doors and windows, and sit back and relax as you speed away to a painless suicide.

8/10 Goatastic

If you do not know who Charles Bronson is, he is Britain’s most expensive criminal (this is due to all the damage he has caused while in prison).  The film follows  Michael Peterson – a slightly deranged youth –  who commits a robbery on a post office and is sentenced to seven years in prison.  However, after realising his limitations he seizes his time in prison as an opportunity to become infamous.  This leads to him develop an alter ego as Charles Bronson committing a number of violent crimes while inside that draw him to the public’s attention and result in him serving over 30 years in solitary confinement at her Majesty’s pleasure.

Refn takes the character of Bronson on a fascinating journey.  He decides to create these surreal scenes where Bronson is performing for a public on a stage.  He regularly is dressed as magician or as a mime artist/clown.  It is a delightful visual metaphor for Bronson’s repressed desires of how he would like to be and what he actually is.  What is brilliant about these scenes is the fact that you see the disintegration of any form of mental stability to the point that he loses any semblance of sense or reason.  By the end of the film you feel as if he has lost all control but has some how managed to find a balance between his artistic and violent sides.

It is very difficult to give an opinion of Tom Hardy’s performance.  There is no question that he creates a disturbingly wonderful character.  However, by trying to make him as real as possible (What I mean by this is the characters simpler side) at times you feel as if there is the odd moment of nonchalant acting.  This may be slightly unfair as it is a great performance and he does create what is arguably the ultimate cinematic anti hero.  It is quite an experience to watch a character who is so easily dislikeable for an hour and a half and yet actually care about what happens in the end.

Readers of my thrilling review of Refn’s Bleeder will know that I am a massive fan of his work even if it doesn’t quite hit the spot.  This is probably the best biopic (if you can call it that) I have seen since The Diving Bell and the Butterfly and is on a par with this wonderful French gem.  I will freely admit that his film doesn’t quite hit the highs of the Pusher series, although in all honesty very little does.  But it is still a development of such and is a man who is close to perfecting his style.  I would hazard a guess that within the next couple of  films he will probably become Europe’s most sort after directors.

Overall this is a good film that marks a landmark in the development of one of Europe’s brightest talents.

7/10 – Good but not brilliant

Mr Fox is a bird thief.  However, on discovering his wife is pregnant he agrees to retire from this profession.  Jump forward 12 years and Mr Fox is a newspaper journalist.  His home is dysfunctional and his relationships with his wife and son are strained.  He decides to move above ground to a tree on top of a hill (luxury accommodation for local animals).  This places him in direct view of the local farmers and landowners Boggis, Bunce and Bean.  Mr Fox decides to carry out one last job and carries out a mega raid on all 3.  This angers them and leads to weeks of revenge which threatens to put the animal community at risk.

This film is fantastic from start to finish.  The animation is absolutely fantastic.  It is such a treat to see a film made with such an attention to detail.  Every second is a moment of joy on the eyes.  The sets have been beautifully made.  The characters wonderfully sculpted.  Even the recreation of the Little Theatre in Bath is further sign of the passion and dedication that was paid to the film.

The vocal performances in the film are something to cherish.  I am not normally someone who raves about actors performances in an animation but it is particularly worthwhile in this instance.  George Clooney is fantastic.  There a suaveness that is as easy to hate as it is to love.  Meryl Streep is also absolutley excellent.  Although in my opinion the scenes are often stolen by Willem Defoe as the rat.  His vocal performance is captivating.  It is also a pleasure to hear Owen Wilson tune with a brief role as a gymnastics coach.

What is enjoyable about the film is the way that Anderson puts his own mark on the classic story.  Everything is reminiscent of his other work.  The clipped use of language, a pastiche for classic objects and the slightly surreal dated world he creates.  Everything is very precise.  But it is theme of dysfunctional family life that has drawn the most attention.  Ash – Mr Foxes son is always constantly in the shadow of his dad and he developed a resentment towards him.  This feeling is made worst by the arrival of Kristofferson his cousin who is hugely talented and instantly courts the affection that he desires from his father.  Anyone who has seen The Royal Tenenbaums or The Darjeeling Limited will instantly pick up on the themes.  The film is a natural evolution from his other work and does as previously mentioned easily fits in with his work.  It is interesting to see how a director of this talent can spread his skills across different disciplines.

Overall – This is the best film of the year.  I say this a lot but I mean it.  You won’t find better! Like Paul McKena I will try and hypnotise you and make you go. Go! Go Now!! NOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWW!!

9/10