Tag: Jeff Bridges

True Grit / Drive Angry

I just spotted there were going to be eight films in the cinema this weekend that interested me. This called for an emergency trip to the Edinburgh Cineworld to offset this load slightly.

True Grit

“If you would like to sleep in a coffin, it would be all right.”

Plot-in-a-nutshell: hard drinkin’, straight shootin’, man huntin’… erm… rootin’ tootin’ cowboy flick.

According to the blurb, this isn’t  remake of the 1969 John Wayne movie, but instead a new adaptation of the original source novel by Charles Portis. I heard an interview with one of the Coen Brothers recently, and he stated that they’d stayed close to the book including around 90% of the dialogue being lifted straight from it. The dialogue certainly is fantastic and one of the highlights of a great movie.

Now, I’m not a Coen disciple. In my opinion they’ve done some pretty good stuff (The Hudsucker Proxy) and some completely over-rated claptrap (I’ll be crucified for this, but I think Fargo is ****). I picked True Grit as it had had good reviews and because it started at a convenient time. I’m glad I did as I really enjoyed it.

As I said, the dialogue is a delight. If the Brothers tell the truth then the credit deserves to go to Portis for writing it so well. Of course, the delivery by the likes of Jeff Bridges (“Rooster” Cogburn), Matt Damon (Texas trooper LaBoeuf) and narrator Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) should also be credited in much the way that Aaron Sorkin‘s genius wouldn’t be as effective without the gifted casts of The West Wing or The Social Network.

I am not a fan of westerns, either, but the setting makes no odds for this as the story is good. A simple tale of revenge as Mattie hires Cogburn to track down Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin) for killing her father. The two don’t like each other, or Damon’s LaBoeuf who joins them, and the three play well off each other.

It’s a well-spun tale with a good ending (not the same as the Wayne version, and apparently that of the book) which doesn’t over-stretch itself or become maudlin.

Better than I expected and well worth a watch.

Drive Angry 3D

“Wouldn’t wanna be you when Satan finds out!”

Plot-in-a-nutshell: Things explode and people get killed and there’s some devil worship in there somewhere… and maybe a plot.

I really can’t be arsed with 3D films. This one claims to be shot in “state of the art”3D. How this is different from the 3D used in other films these days, I have no idea. Yes, I’m aware there are those filmed in 3D and those ruined by mucking about with the print in post-production to fake it, but they’re all just gimmickery.

The first thing you should do upon buying your ticket for Drive Angry is to place your brain into neutral and allow any sense of reality to ooze from your ears before the trailers end (and that ******* Orange advert comes on. Again.). You should now enjoy it immensely. Especially if you’re male and around 18 years of age. It’s that kind of film.

Nicolas Cage is a man on a mission, to rescue his grand-daughter from the clutches of an evil devil worshipper. He’s aided by a ridiculously hot waitress (Piper played by Amber Heard) and a couple of other buddies along the way. To tell you more would only give away as much as is in the trailer but as ever I’ll try to stay as spoiler free as always.

As a bonus for your money, there are two bad guys. The aforementioned evil devil-worshipping cult leader Jonah King (Billy Burke) and The Accountant played by a  magnificent William Fichtner. I’ve seen this man in a few things, including TV’s Prison Break and he is, frankly, the natural replacement for Christopher Walken. Cool, unruffled, slightly unusual-looking and capable of scaring the **** out of you. In fact, he’s so good in this film, that he runs the risk of doing what Alan Rickman did in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves and stealing the show.

This is not a sensible film. There are no heart-wrenching performances. It won’t have you rolling in the aisles with laughter. What it will do – if you enjoy films like Death Race – is thoroughly entertain. It does get a little bit repetitive at points, and some of the action scenes drag a little too long. Or maybe that’s me having seen too many daft films.

Either way, it’s worth your cash. Although I still reckon it would have been every bit as stupid and enjoyable without forcing me to wear those bloody glasses for 100 minutes.

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta

Lovely Bones, Crazies and Crazy Heart

Cover of "The Crazies"
The Crazies - 1973 version

Bringing me up to seven films for the weekend (it’s a wonder I get any coursework done), I added The Lovely Bones, The Crazies and Crazy Heart to the “watched” list today.

The Lovely Bones

“As usual, Grandma Lynn was wrong.”

Plot-in-a-nutshell: A young girl is murdered but tries to help her friends and family find her killer.

The reviews I’ve seen of this to date seem to be “it’s rubbish” from those who’ve read the book and “it’s good” from those who haven’t. I’ve not and it’s OK. Don’t expect me to be able to compare against something I’ve not read.

There are some good performances, but top of the list has to be Stanley Tucci as the child killer. He’s suitably creepy without being over the top. Mark Wahlberg as the father puts on a good show and Saoirse Ronan is impressive as Susie Salmon, the central character. Nods to Susan Sarandon as the drunken chain-smoking grandmother.

Once Susie is killed an enters into a fantasy purgatory, it doesn’t take long for Peter Jackson‘s influence to show. Anyone who’s seen his superb (and frankly, superior) Heavenly Creatures will recognise the way fantasy elements have been mixed in with real life.

The problem is that the story doesn’t need all of this and especially towards the end, everything starts to seem so drawn out. It’s art for art’s sake in places and the running length could be fifteen minutes less if the waffle was cut out.

Simply put, an enjoyable film but very self-involved.

The Crazies

“We’re in trouble.”

Plot-in-a-nutshell: Plane crash releases a chemical weapon that sends people kill-crazy. Cue gore.

This is a remake of the 1973 original with the same title. That one was directed by George A. Romero who has stepped back to production duties on this effort. I didn’t realise either of these facts until after I’d seen the film but it is very similar to his zombie movies so it doesn’t surprise me to find out he’s involved.

I’ve not heard of any of the cast before which does help in that I had less of an idea of who was going to get killed. Of course, given the roles they play it doesn’t take long until you narrow it down and know who’s going to make it through to the end.

The gore is fairly plentiful and the corpses pile up quickly. There’s a whiff of government/army intrigue making the film some kind of cross between Dawn of the Dead and 1995’s Outbreak. It is rather by-the-numbers, but the jumps and “eeeeew” moments are plentiful which is what you pay for when you go and see a film like this.

Don’t expect too much and you won’t be disappointed. And I did like the ending!

Crazy Heart

“Ain’t rememberin’ wonderful?”

Plot-in-a-nutshell: A couple of years in the life of a downtrodden, drunk, chain-smoking, divorced (of course) country & western singer.

Jeff Bridges has been winning plaudits for his performance of Bad Blake, the central character in this run-of-the-mill drama. He deserves them, playing the part well, but doesn’t raise the film up above the average.

My main problem with Crazy Heart was that there weren’t any real surprises. “Bad” is a stereotype. The events that occur come as little or no surprise. The ending is as predictable as it comes.

Still, it’s a nice enough ride to get there and the dialogue is sharp in places. There are also some lovely lines in there. It’s a shame that such good wordplay and impressive performances are hanging off a story that twists and turns like the edge of a ruler.

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Film Saturday

Just for a change, a Saturday visit to the picture house and what a change it made crowd-wise. While I much prefer an empty theater (as people are generally selfish, noisy buggers in this country) it is good to see that the cinema is still a popular place to go. The queue was pretty big at 1pm, and by the time I walked past at 3pm I was glad I’d picked up the ticket for my second film in advance – the queue was out the door and up the street!

The Men Who Stare At Goats

Weird title, weird film. Apparently based on a weird book – which I actually remember seeing in the Popular Science section of Waterstone’s many years ago.

Plot-in-a-nutshell: a journalist with a failed marriage heads for Iraq to write a war story. On the way he encounters a retired soldier who claims to have been part of an elite psychic soldier outfit. And this is apparently based on a true story…

The main cast is astounding: George Clooney, Jeff Bridges, Ewan McGregor, Kevin Spacey… Robert Patrick is headlined, but he’s only in it for five minutes. They’re all damn good as well. McGregor managed to pull off a decent American accent without sounding stupid while Clooney pulls off stupid without looking… well, stupid.

This is a film about complete mentalists. It’s hard to tell where the line is drawn between docu-drama and complete fiction. I’d guess that the book is the same, partly as it just seems to far-fetched. Yet how unlikely is it that armies were throwing cash a potential psychic “weapons”?

There are laughs a-plenty, most of them quite dark. The fact that McGregor’s character ends up in a quest to become what the psi-ops regiment called a “Jedi” is not lost on the viewing public either.

Overall a good film that doesn’t outstay it’s modest running length.

Jennifer’s Body

The last decent female-based teen horror film was Ginger Snaps and that was released ages ago. Jennifer’s Body goes more down the “monster” than “werewolf” route but does it well with some great black humour. And two hot girls snogging.

Plot-in-a-nutshell: Town bike Jennifer turns from slut to blood-hungry psycho, requiring the blood of scared teens to survive. Her best friend is the only one to know her secret and she doesn’t like it.

When I saw the trailers I thought “rubbish – move on”. Then I saw some reviews, and not just from the likes of Baz Bamigboy and Jonathan Ross‘s far less talented sibling who will say anything is the “Best film of 2009” if it gets them a free bag of popcorn. The schedule fitted in with my free time so I took a chance.

The film opens after the end of the main plotline with one of the characters putting us into the scene. The story then jumps to the beginning and is more or less linear from there except for a brief jump back to explain exactly what happened to Jennifer (Megan Fox). Fox, incidentally, is hot. Scorchy hot. I-would-give-a-limb hot. But credit must also go to co-star Amanda Seyfried who plays the frumpy best friend, Needy – “frumpy” in the sense that as soon as she takes off her glasses and shakes out her hair she’s also typically sexy.

Everything happens at a good pace with the characters not being too stereotypical. The gore isn’t over-the-top and the effects are good. What I liked most, other than the humour, is the way the two main characters act opposite each other and how Needy develops.

You can pretty much guess what happens, it’s the ending that’s fairly original. Although not a huge twist, it’s definitely well written.

Don’t avoid this film just because it has obvious eye candy in. Don’t get me wrong. Fox isn’t that great an actress, but her hotness is actually useful in this film. And you get to see her with her tongue down another hot chick’s throat. Admittedly this scene was made somewhat less erotic by one numpty in the cinema crying “YAY” in a dull monotone, resulting in a huge outburst of laughter and a smattering of applause.

Still, that’s a throwaway moment in the film in my opinion. The main reason to see it is Seyfried’s performance. And the poor jokes.

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]