In the Loop

If the recent elections left you a bit frayed at the edges with the non-stop barrage of attack ads, maybe it would help to sit down and enjoy a movie that reminds us that internal government politics are usually not much more mature than the election process. 

To paraphrase a review by Time Out London, In the Loop is the anti-West Wing. Instead of a movie depicting government officials as patriotic civil servants out to improve their nation, it shows them the way most of us probably think of them: as people in nice suits shouting at each other a lot. 

In the Loop is a documentary-style comedy about what goes on behind the scenes of the British and American governments. Simon Foster, a somewhat insignificant British minister, makes a comment on the radio that "war is unforeseeable," in an attempt to avoid commenting on the possibility of the UK going to war. After being chewed out for not following the Prime Minister's line by Malcolm Tucker, the communications chief, Foster goes back on air to try and amend his comment, but instead further increases speculation that the UK may be going to war. The comments are then picked up by the U.S. State Department, and the Brits must travel to America, as everybody tries to manipulate Foster's comments to swing both governments towards or against going to war. 

However, the political commentary sort of gets put on the back burner compared to the volume of foul language used in this film. It's quite possible that nearly every line of this movie is laden with some sort of obscenity. At a running time of 1 hour, 46 minutes, you'd think excessive use of the F-bomb would lose it's punch. It doesn't, and that's probably because it's mixed in with every other insult conceivable and ones you probably would never have thought up on your own. At one point, Love Actually is used as a derogatory term. 

There are a few actors in supporting roles who'd be familiar to most audiences, such as James Gandolfini and Steve Coogan, but Peter Capaldi definitely steals the show as Malcolm Tucker. (He's the one swearing everybody out in the scene above.) Capaldi plays Tucker as a completely unhinged, short-tempered individual, yet a highly quotable one. It's actually quite a shame that the TV series that In the Loop spun off of, The Thick of It, isn't currently available in the US, because Malcolm Tucker is a character you'd definitely want to see more of. Just make sure small children aren't around if you quote his lines. 

The Ghost Writer

Subtlety isn't  how you describe most political thrillers. Often they're high tension movies with lots of running, shouting and gunfire. While there is some of that in The Ghost Writer, it's on a somewhat less extravagant scale. It's a movie that plays it's premise so subtly it isn't even clear if there's any sort of political conspiracy afoot or if it is just a tale of a writer who finds himself in a paranoia inducing situation.



The story follows a ghost writer, played by Ewan McGregor who lands an assignment to write the memoirs of former UK Prime Minister, Adam Lang, after the previous ghost writer dies, but not before finishing a draft of the manuscript. The manuscript is kept under extreme security, with the current ghost writer only able to review a printed copy kept at a secured house on an island off the coast of New England. Shortly after the writer accepts the assignment, a major scandal erupts in which Adam Lang is accused of war crimes during his tenure as Prime Minister. As the scandal grows, the writer begins to uncover secrets his predecessor uncovered that are potentially more damaging than the war crimes accusations.

The pace of this movie is rather patient, revealing details slowly, building tension as the audience strives to make sense of them. For example, the movie opens with a shot of an SUV on a ferryboat, which doesn't move as all of the cars unload off of the boat, only after we see it towed away do we learn that it's former driver, the first ghost writer, apparently fell overboard. The audience is introduced to characters well before it's apparent what their role to play in the story will be.

The film shifts its focus equally among the various plot points so that the viewer isn't entirely sure what's a red herring and what is proof of a greater conspiracy at work. So, while you're focusing on the war crime scandal looming over the prime minister's head, a little nugget of information about the ghost writer's predecessor will pop up, leaving you unsure of which is more important. It all comes together nicely at the end, pulling enough twists to keep you guessing without resorting to cheap tricks.

I suppose I do have to mention that this is a film by Roman Polanski. While it may be hard for some viewers to put aside Polanski's personal controversies, the man definitely knows how to craft a good piece of cinema. He manages to make the story feel like it's moving along at a brisk pace even when it isn't clear to the audience what direction it's going in.

He also put together a great cast for the film. Ewan McGregor really lets you get inside his character's head, making you understand the motivations of a man who is trying to remain as objective as possible and just get a paycheck while caught in a situation where sides need to be taken. Pierce Brosnan plays the former Prime Minister. As easy as he was to like in the James Bond films, he creates a particularly loathsome character who is unapologetic for what he did during his term in office.

Rounding out the cast are Kim Katrall as the Prime Minister's personal assistant and Olivia Williams as his wife. I especially liked Olivia Williams's performance, as her character is both trying to watch out for Ewan McGregor while also being fed up with the situation she's been put into. This is the first major role I've seen her in, and hopefully she'll start appearing in more leading roles after this.

Overall, this is a movie for somebody looking for a story that straddles the line between political thriller and film noir, especially one that is less about explosions and bullets and more about telling an engaging story.

Millions

I've been meaning to review a lot of movies by director Danny Boyle on this blog. He's been making movies since 1994, and pretty much all of them have been good. The exception is his film The Beach, starring Leonardo DiCaprio, which tried to hard to be flashy. He's most well known for his films Trainspotting, 28 Days Later and Slumdog Millionaire. If you've seen those movies, you'd know they're pretty adult fare, which is why many of his fans were surprised in 2004 when he made the family friendly Christmas movie, Millions.

I suppose technically speaking, this isn't so much a Christmas movie as it is a movie set at Christmastime. The distributors clearly thought so, since in America this movie was released in the middle of the summer, but the story just feels a bit more relevant in the holiday season.

Millions is set in the UK in the month leading up to it's changeover from the pound to the euro as its currency. Two kids, Damian and Anthony come across a duffle bag full hundreds of thousands of pounds in their backyard, which they realize they have to do something about soon as it will be worthless when the UK switches to the euro. Anthony, the older brother, wants to spend it and invest it and Damian, the younger brother, wants to give it to the poor.

I should also mention that Damian is frequently visited by visions of saints who explain their personal histories to him.

Millions doesn't resort to the obvious cliche where everybody realizes it's better to give to others than to spend on yourself. It actually becomes a rather complex morality tale, but you should have guessed that it was going to be complex when I told you that it was a family movie that involved changing foreign monetary systems as it's central premise.

Both brothers agree to keep the money secret, though Anthony doesn't waste any time buying fun gadgets and bribing his friends. On the other hand Damian has a bit of difficulty giving away his share, since a grade school kid can't really go about handing out money without raising suspicion. It's not long before things get out of hand for him and everybody feels entitled to some portion of the wealth.

If you've seen any of Danny Boyle's other movies, you'll definitely recognize his directorial style in this one. There's plenty of slick editing and music choices all along the way. One of the most energetic scenes is when the boys learn where the money actually came from, which is set to Muse's song "Hysteria."

The movie is family friendly, but it's complexity may mean that parents watching it with their kids will find they have a lot of questions to answer afterward, probably the largest one being whether or not you'd keep the money for yourself or give it away.

Another heads up: this movie will probably put you in a philanthropic mood afterward. The movie never outright preaches that giving is good. Instead it makes an argument about what one really can do by using money wisely. Keep it to yourself and it's useless. Give it away thoughtlessly and people start expecting it. Somewhere in between, it argues, you can afford to help somebody out while enjoying yourself.

In keeping with that theme, the DVD contained an insert suggested making a donation to Heifer International if you felt inspired by the movie to do some giving. Even if the movie doesn't seem like your cup of tea, at least look into the charity.

RocknRolla

Dear Guy Ritchie,

Welcome back.

Signed,

An Avid Film Buff

When Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels first came out, director Guy Ritchie was hailed as the next big filmmaker. His follow up, Snatch, proved he was deserving of that acclaim. He knew how put together a film so that everything; the acting, the editing, the music and the dialogue, all had the same aggressively cheeky tone to it. It's no wonder that of all the short films made for BMW's 2001 web series, The Hire, Guy Ritchie's entry is probably the only one still being talked about. I've included it in its entirety below.

Then, he got serious with Madonna, and together they released the romantic comedy Swept Away, which I haven't seen, but I understand is considerably less awesome than the film above. Things got worse with his follow up film, Revolver, a Kabbalah allegory that drowns in so much symbolism and has so many twists and turns, I don't even know what plane of existence it's supposed to be set in.

But then he made RocknRolla, and everything was alright. He went back to the formula that made him big in the first place: Crime + comedy + twisting plots + big ensemble cast. (Revolver lacked the comedy portion.)

Still, despite the critics recognizing that the Guy Ritchie we used to know and love was back, and a fair amount of TV spots being run for it, RocknRolla was given a limited release, making it more of an art house movie. The film went in and out of theaters without a lot of people noticing.

Like Lock, Stock... and Snatch, RocknRolla has a lot of overlapping stories about criminals screwing each other over. There's Lenny Cole (played by Tom Wilkinson) a real estate baron who manipulates the system so he's in control of any deal that goes down in London, his son Johnny Quid, a junkie rocker, and the Wild Bunch (lead by Gerard Butler) a group of criminals for hire.

A Russian developer does a deal with Cole, and as a sign of good faith he lends Cole his lucky painting, which is promptly stolen by Johnny Quid. While Cole is having his men look for his son, the Wild Bunch are stealing money from the Russian to pay off money they owe Cole, using tips from the Russian's accountant (played by Thandie Newton). Artful swearing and occasional gun battles ensue.

For fans of Guy Ritchie's other movies, in terms of tone this one falls somewhere between Lock, Stock... and Snatch. It's lighter in tone than Lock Stock... but compared to Snatch it feels a bit scaled back. Aside from Jeremy Piven's and Chris "Ludacris" Bridges, this one mainly avoids American actors. The low level criminals have dumb moments but they don't match the total stupidity of Vinny, Tyrone and Sol, (the trio of thugs from Snatch tasked with kidnapping Franky Four Fingers.) It's definitely a funny movie, but there are notably fewer laugh out loud moments, possibly due to the subplot involving Johnny Quid being a drug addict.

All of the performances in this movie are good, but special attention should be called to Toby Kebbel who plays Johnny Quid, and Mark Strong, who plays Archy, Lenny Cole's right hand man.

Strong has been around the film industry for a while, but aside from his role as Septimus in the film adaptation of Neil Gaiman's Stardust, he hasn't had any previous major film roles yet. Here, Strong stands out like he's been a top billed actor for ages. He plays his role the way the way you'd expect somebody like Willem DaFoe or Michael Gambon to play it, commanding complete control over the scene. It's no surprise that for his next movie, Sherlock Holmes, he gets billed alongside Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law in the trailers.

As for Kebbel, he's new to the game, but he's going to go far. Somehow, his portrayal of a junkie rockstar bounces back and forth between a tragic figure and a slapstick cartoon character. In the scenes he shares with Mark Strong, it's like watching two legendary actors at work.

If you missed this one when it came out, you should definitely bump it to the top of your viewing list, especially if you're into crime movies and definitely if you're among those people excited by the prospect of a sequel to Boondock Saints.

Wallace & Gromit: Curse of the Were-Rabbit

For ages, Disney pretty much had a stranglehold on the animated family film market. No matter how good or bad something another studio put out was, it could never hope to get the level of public recognition as a Disney movie. Dreamworks finally broke through that barrier with its computer animated hit, Shrek, and has enjoyed success ever since... mostly. While its CGI efforts have have been rolling in money, Dreamworks' non-CGI cartoons have largely gone unseen by mass audiences. It's a shame because some of those movies represent the studio's best work, such as the Academy award winner for Best Animated Feature of 2005, Wallace & Gromit: Curse of the Were Rabbit.

Wallace, an absent minded British inventor, and Gromit, his considerably more level headed pet dog, were previously the stars of a trio of award winning short films. It seemed logical that they were deserving of their own feature length film. The movie features them as a pair of humane exterminators, helping their neighbors protect their crops from rabbit infestations. Wallace gets the idea to use mind control on the local rabbit population to stop them from eating crops, but the invention he designs for the task doesn't work right and instead creates a giant were-rabbit that terrorizes the village (in a completely harmless family friendly way.)

There's a steady stream of humor, but unlike a lot of Dreamworks' other animated films, it's not centered around pop culture references or songs that were tearing up the European dance scene five years ago. Instead the filmmakers opted for a more vaudevillian/Looney Tunes style of humor. So, expect a fair amount of food being thrown in faces, muskets being fired and one instance of cross-species cross-dressing. (Hey, it worked for Bugs Bunny).

The great thing about that is it gives the movie a timeless feel. You could show this to somebody 50 years in the past or the future and they'd enjoy it on the same level as somebody today.

Granted the characters are all British, but the filmmakers were fully aware that this movie's largest audience would be stateside, so the accents aren't too thick. Of course with British characters, one can expect British humour. In addition to the slapstick, there's a fair amount of subtle jokes in the way of visual gags and word play.

If I had to guess why this movie didn't end up getting lots of public recognition, (though clearly it got the critics' attention) I'd say it was probably due to its release date and the marketing behind it. For one thing, it came out in October. This makes sense, seeing as how the whole giant monster rabbit lends itself to the Halloween market, but that's also a traditional dumping ground for movies the studio didn't think were good enough for the summer or holiday movie season.

Second, the characters don't exactly lend themselves to the marketing blitz usually associated with animated movies. This isn't an "event" movie that easily lends itself to action figures, children's bedspread sets and the usual merchandising gimmicks. (I hear Disney actually had a lot of the same problems when it came to promoting Up and Ratatouille.) It's a pretty small scale story that spoofs more epic movies without trying to be epic in scope itself.

Personally I'd recommend this movie for lots of people, and not just people with kids. It's great for anybody really just looking for an hour and a half of good clean slapstick fun. I mean, I like my comedy to be edgy and over the top too, but it's nice to see a comedy on occasion that isn't mean spirited.

If you do like this movie, you should also check out the other Wallace and Gromit shorts, A Grand Day Out, The Wrong Trousers and A Close Shave, all of which are available in a single collection on DVD.

Image Courtesy of Dreamworks SKG and EW.com

Layer Cake

The Movie that Turned Daniel Craig into James Bond

So, you've seen The Departed inside and out, you know every line from Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and you're trying to find a crime movie a little less over-referenced than Scarface. (Over-referenced. Overrated. Same thing.) Fortunately, if there's one thing that British filmmakers are good at, it's putting together a crime movie that doesn't feel like it's just a rehash of everything that came before.

(On a side note, I just want to mention that I opted for the UK version of the trailer because it was far more creatively made than the US version, revealed less of the plot and just to point out what they can get away with in advertising over there.)

Layer Cake is just that sort breath of fresh air the crime genre can use. It's got all the stuff I wish American filmmakers would put in gangster movies more often. There's the snappy one liners, the characters constantly trying to out do each other, and the fact that anybody who's naive enough to think he's a big shot usually gets cut down... brutally.

The film stars Daniel Craig as a drug dealer named... um... Okay, so apparently I'm not smart enough to figure that out. Anyway, he rigidly abides by a set of rules that ensures that he stays out of trouble with the law. He keeps a low profile, doesn't try to make a name for himself, and has every intention of getting out of the job early.

His plan seems to be working well, until his boss calls him up and says he wants Daniel Craig to find one of his associate's daughter who's gone missing. On top of this, a group of idiot wannabes heisted a large supply of ecstasy pills from an Eastern European war criminal, claiming to be Daniel Craig's associates, so he's got to sort things out to keep his good name alive.

The film is directed by Matthew Vaughn, who previously produced Guy Ritchie's hits Lock, Stock... and Snatch, and who would also go on to write and direct Stardust (another movie I expect to cover later). Unlike Ritchie's films, which are essentially comedies where everybody has a gun, Layer Cake is a bit more serious in tone.

That's not to say this is some sort of gravely serious, gritty crime drama. There's plenty of humor, it just tends to be a bit quirkier. For example, one scene has Daniel Craig's character engaging in a romantic tryst with a woman played by Sienna Miller. She gets him riled up then makes him wait while she changes into something a bit more enticing. Just before she's ready to make her grand entrance, he is quietly abducted by thugs.

Then of course there's what one of my friends described as the best directed scene involving a man getting beaten senseless, scored to Duran Duran's "Ordinary World." You really have to see that for yourself.

The film does suffer a few drawbacks. Everybody speaks with pretty heavy British accents, making the dialogue a bit hard to follow on occasion. This wouldn't be so problematic if everybody in the movie weren't constantly trying to outwit each other. There are a few instances where it was clear that somebody just pulled an impressive con over somebody else, but I couldn't tell exactly what had just happened. The accents and plot twists only result in mild confusion, and with the overall cleverness of the movie, you're not likely to care too much.

It's also worth noting that this is pretty much the movie that secured Daniel Craig's role as the new James Bond, and it's easy to see why. He portrays his character in this movie with the sort of aggressive coldness he would later use to save the Bond franchise from the travesty that was Die Another Day, though in Layer Cake, he does considerably less ass kicking. In fact, the first time he picks up a gun, he kind of makes a fool of himself.

If you do decide to check it out (which you should), I should also mention that this movie seems to be one of those ones that Best Buy periodically puts on sale for $5 or less, meaning that it's just as cheap to own it as it is to rent it. In that case, buy it right away. Odds are, this movie is going to find its way into the rotation of movies you watch over and over again anyway.