Reel Review Roundup

West Of Memphis (MA)

Directed by: Amy Berg

Starring: Jason Baldwin, Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelley, Peter Jackson, Eddie Vedder

Four and a half stars

Review by: Julian Wright

Every time a new haunted house thriller, disaster film, romantic comedy or remake is released, we always wonder if there is anything fresh left to warrant another entry. The same old clichés are usually trotted out time and again and we cling to hope for a glimmer of originality, a nugget of new insight or a novel element. And sometimes we are rewarded. Often, we are not. Anyone who has been following the captivating story of the West Memphis 3 may hope for the same. Is there anything left to uncover in the shocking and horrifying 1993 West Memphis triple homicide case in which three kooky teenagers, accused of being bloodthirsty cultists, were locked up for the murder and mutilations of three young boys despite so little evidence of their supposed guilt?

Not only has the media been tracking the revelations of the case for almost 20 years, but documentary film makers Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky spent years filming hundreds of hours of trial and interview footage almost from the get go and edited it all into three lengthy documentaries, the Paradise Lost series (the third one was released as recently as last year). By this point, it would seem no stone has been left unturned. I must confess that I have not seen the series, but apparently West Of Memphis producer Peter Jackson (yeah, the Lord of the Rings guy) and director Amy Berg (Deliver Us From Evil) found a few hitherto unknown stones and took a peek underneath.

A quick Google search reveals that, unsurprisingly, West Of Memphis covers much of the same territory as Paradise Lost. It brings anyone unfamiliar with the saga up to speed with a truncated rehash of past facts (a coerced confession, satanic cult hysteria, botched investigations, false witness testimony, public and celebrity support for the convicted three) but delivered in a gripping fashion and up to present day. But for those that have endured the 400 minute long series, there are some surprises in store here, with some fascinating input from Jackson himself (who launched his own investigation), family history and past crimes revealed and fingers being pointed to a new suspect.

Being that this is mostly retrospective (Paradise Lost was filmed as the story unfolded), there is a lot of information to take in. With so many players by this point, despite title cards and constant reminders, it can often be hard to keep up with who is who, particularly when it comes to the countless people involved in the investigation and legal side of things. But extra care has been taken with this short hand introduction to the story to make it compelling as if it is being told for the first time. The facts are not rushed, graphic imagery is not shied away from and anecdotes not discounted. Given the number of years this has all been brewing and the running time the film makes have allowed themselves, it sometimes appears they have taken the “everything including the kitchen sink” approach. There is seemingly hard evidence, circumstantial evidence, trashy gossip, believable hearsay, disturbing domestics. And it simply sweeps you up into this world of mystery and intrigue, the plot of which get thicker and murkier.

Berg makes us mock jury members in a faux retrial (a retrial that she and producers Jackson and Fran Walsh are fighting for with this documentary and believe is deserved), a thrilling position to be in, as we are allowed to pore over the old facts and recently introduced ones and make up our own minds. We become part of the fight for justice. Hollywood superstar Jackson’s involvement could have been a case of a rich, pompous film maker using his riches to help save a trio of poor, white trash. It certainly sounds that way when it is described. But Jackson is just as frustrated with the wrongful imprisonment and rigid legal system and curious as anyone else familiar with the case that wants to see this twisty mystery solved and justice served. And his investigation offers the fresh information this documentary needs to set it apart from Lost Paradise.

Not to take anything away from the years of hard work Berlinger and Sinotsky did on their series, I can only judge West of Memphis as someone who has not seen their work, but Berg has delivered a fascinating, chilling, haunting and moving investigation into the lives of the affected and a questionable legal system that has as many real life surprise twists as the true events in The Imposter, culminating in a heartbreaking, tear inducing and shattering conclusion. West Of Memphis is a sensational documentary in its own right, but it has encouraged me to fill in the gaps with Paradise Lost.

West Of Memphis is in limited release in Australia from February 14.

Gangster Squad (MA)

Directed by: Ruben Fleischer

Starring: Josh Brolin, Ryan Gosling, Sean Penn, Emma Stone

Three stars

Review by: Julian Wright

Like it’s tommy gun-toting characters, Gangster Squad flirts with the fine line between good and bad, right and wrong. While it is a moral struggle that plagues the group of cops turned vigilantes, it is the confused tone that conflicts the film. After making his mark with the screwball-horror genre hybrid Zombieland (2009), director Ruben Fleischer attempts to mix flavours yet again – the light with the dark – but finds it a greater challenge when not dealing with flesh-eating ghouls. Trying to find a place for laughs in a 1940s “true crime” setting seems to be something that baffles him. His modern sense of humour struggles to exist in the noir context, coming off as an oppressed entity, battling to be relevant amidst the spray of bullets and blood and lush detail of the time recreated.

When it seems the law can no longer touch violent and powerful mob king Mickey Cohen (Sean Penn), who has many politicians and most of the LAPD on his payroll, Sgt John O’Mara (Josh Brolin) forms a secret unit of clean cops to cause a rift in the crime lord’s plans to corrupt the entire country. With his concerned and pregnant wife Connie (Mireille Enos), O’Mara hand picks a collection of character cliches: ladies man Sgt Jerry Wooters (Ryan Gosling), brainiac Det. Conway Keeler (Giovanni Ribisi), sharp shooter Det. Max Kennard (Robert Patrick), the token minority group representatives who are given the least amount of screen time and development (Michael Pena and Anthony Mackie). You get the idea. Added drama is attempted with Wooters falling head over heals for Cohen’s girl Grace Faraday (Emma Stone), a delicate, one-time Hollywood hopeful that became trapped in her boyfriend’s lifestyle. Oh, and the brief, fleeting moment in which Keeler questions the group’s actions and methods when the line between the good guys and bad guys becomes blurred.

Gangster Squad sets a tone with some deliciously delightful era inspired puns, indicating a breezy recreation of those old Hollywood gangster films but then takes a swerve with graphic violence and melodramatic delivery of some very average dialogue. The glaring inconsistencies become a distraction. Does this want to grab us by the throat with the detailed attacks or make us laugh with Three Stooges-like botched attempts to bring justice? This is the kind of confused film that tries to get our pulses racing with a shoot out sequence only to halt it midway for a gag. It wants to have its cake and eat it too, but does not have the knowledge or expertise of when to serve it.

If the cast had anything to work with, they might have looked like they were enjoying themselves a little more. Gosling appears most at ease; his gentlemanly mannerism will melt hearts (every time he enters a room or chats to a woman, he puts his hat over his heart. Swoon.) Brolin is supposed to be carrying the story but fails to impress and Penn hams it up in the most over-the-top, cartoonish performance in the film. But Stone, who usually pops with her effervescent screen presence, is positively dull in her underwritten, after-thought role. Fleischer must have had the easiest time directing her: “Stand there. Look pretty.”

Seemingly stifled with the task of recreating the historical look, Fleischer offers little personality to the project. Everything looks great, inauthentic but passable to anyone who is not up on 1940s fashion and design and the action is acceptable. But there is little else to put this above the pack. Gangster Squad is slick but hollow entertainment, that will likely encourage you to dig around to uncover some of cinema’s more golden entries in the genre.

Starbuck (M)

Directed by: Ken Scott

Starring: Patrick Huard, Julie LeBreton

Four and a half stars

Review by: Julian Wright

This year was all about trying to explore alternatives to the nuclear family. Challenging the traditional way of having a family (two people meet, fall in love, get married and raise children in a nice home behind picket fences, which Hollywood still thinks is the be all and end all way), Not Suitable for Children and Friends With Kids showed us that children can be brought into a loving family with a little help from the medical profession or without the customary mum-and-dad-happily-married set up.

While not the best examples to hold up – they both ended up on my worst films of 2012 list with their obnoxious characters and flippant decision-making  – they do shine a light on modern family values and child rearing. Times, they are changing. But Starbucks, about a man who fathers 533 children through sperm donation, gets it right, showing us that there is no “normal” when it comes to family. But also that alternate ways of parenting can be just as acceptable.

Constant screw up 40-something David Wozniak (Patrick Huard) does anything he can for a quick buck, which included in his early 20s, donating sperm on a regular basis. This routine comes to bite him in the backside several years later at the worst possible time. His police officer girlfriend announces she is pregnant, some dodgy dealings has left him in a huge amount of debt with some local heavies and he has a pile of unpaid parking tickets. On top of all this, 142 of the 533 children he fathered from his sperm donating phase have banded together with a lawsuit to force the fertility clinic to reveal his true identity. They only know him as his alias Starbuck. And the story is spread by the media.

To David, he was just providing his seed for a quick buck, without considering consequences or responsibilities. But with pangs of guilt, he accepts the profiles of each child involved in the lawsuit from his best friend and lawyer and begins to track them down. In some of the most moving and revealing moments, David anonymously helps each one in a conflict they are experiencing, from a struggling actor to a drug addict trying to get her life on track. If these scenes don’t have you reaching for the tissues, then the final 20 minutes will.

The key to this film’s success is the flawed but likeable lead (which is a tricky balance to strike), something that Not Suitable For Children or Friends With Kids did not have. Those two films had immature, selfish lead characters, who never showed any interest in wanting children, one day turn to their best friend and saying “Hey, let’s have a kid” like they were possessions. Starbuck is about a man who is a deadbeat but not cold-hearted or uncaring, who learns about morality and responsibility. This is the kind of drop kick you want raising an unconventional family. Patrick Huard is a pure delight, offering comedy with pathos and unafraid to look weathered with his greying scruffy hair. He lights up the screen with his presence.

The film stumbles ever so slightly when the dialogue unsubtly discusses David’s role as guardian angel for these children who he has missed out on seeing grow up (anyone paying attention would have picked up on the gorgeous sentiment). Thoughtful, thought-provoking, funny, moving and a pure joy to watch, Starbucks is the film that makes you want to rush home to hug your family, whatever kind of family it is.

Starbuck is screening as part of the Perth International Arts Festival from December 31 – January 13.

Reel Review Roundup’s Worst Films of 2012

Some people think posting a worst of list puts out too many negative vibes. I think that if one is to post a best of list, then there is no harm in a little balance with a worst of list. While the films listed here are what I believe to be some of the most mind numbing, incompetent films made, somewhere in the pile may be someone’s masterpiece number one. If this leads to some enlightening film discussion then that can only be a good thing. Noticeably absent from this list are more obvious choices Taken 2, Bait 3D and The Expendables 2 – while all poorly scripted and wretchedly executed, they were so bad they left me in tears of laughter. How could I banish films that made me laugh so hard to a worst of list? They turned out to have more entertainment value than the laugh-less comedies One For The Money, Project X and Fun Size.

Top 10:

10) A Little Bit of Heaven – How does a director go from the daring, heartbreaking, challenging The Woodsman to a flaccid rom com? Barely released, this story about a young free spirit Marley (Kate Hudson) diagnosed with cancer who falls for her doctor doesn’t even use the disease to give this lightweight story an edge. She is like “Cancer, meh.” If she doesn’t care, why should we?

9) Underworld: Awakening – Why is it always the bad franchises that never die? A tortuous 88 minutes of running, jumping, diving and shooting with the occasional pause for expositional dialogue. If it wasn’t for the overly loud soundtrack, this would put you to sleep.

8) Street Dance 2 – The kind of film where the lead character cries poor then plane, train and automobiles his way around Europe (and not even in the most cost-effective way) to recruit dancers to form a new group. A feature-length film with barely enough story for a 20-minute short where the “actors” are wooden and even the dance sequences become a bore.

7) Fun Size – Who was this film even aimed at? A raunchless Superbad/The Hangover for pre-teens (except for the huge chicken statue humping the rear of a car), without any jokes that would even appeal to the Nickelodeon crowd, then giving extra attention to a Mum going through a mid-life crisis. Confused and without a grasp on comedy or what audiences enjoy.

6) Alex Cross – Mistake number 1: Replacing Morgan Freeman in the popular role with the charmless Tyler Perry. Mistakes 2 through to 5: the horrible script, pedestrian direction, laughable dialogue and lame acting. Matthew Fox, surprisingly creepy as the villain, is the only positive in this poorly made “thriller’ where every cliché in the book is ticked off the list. Trying to surprise us by having Cross’ loved ones be targets? Try harder.

5) Mental – P.J. Hogan’s misconceived attempt to recapture the dramedy tone and zaniness of Muriel’s Wedding. The performances are sensational, but the characters are horrible. Instead of coming up with new plot ideas, Hogan’s script just repeats the theme while splashing in some off colour humour and filthy dialogue. The most offensive part is when Hogan tries to get laughs from a date rape story. It’s almost as offensive as the menstruation blood on the white couch. Yuck.

4) Cosmopolis – Aren’t limo rides supposed to be fun? Robert Pattinson sheds the sparkle and glitter from the Twilight series to take on one of his more serious roles as a monotone, mega rich jerk who spends the day trekking around town in his super fancy limo for a hair cut. “Yawn” doesn’t even do it justice as he indulges in pretentious philosophical conversations, while getting a prostate examination. Director David Cronenberg clearly has a lot to say about society but did he have to make it so clinical? This tops his A Dangerous Method in the “all talk, no action” category.

3) Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close – More like Extremely Bratty & Incredibly Annoying. A highly strung New York kid, traumatised by the death of his father on 9/11, tries to find the lock a found key opens. A sort of The Goonies search for treasure, with dramatic overtones, but carried by a bratty, mercilessly annoying character and child actor (who sounds like he is reading cue cards). While a tiny nugget of what is trying to be achieved here (alternate 9/11 point of view and how people dealt with the tragedy) is barely recognisable, this is torture to sit through.

2) Project X – Another found  footage travesty. This teen flick is as offensive as V/H/S. The arc of the story had so much potential – house party turns a quiet street into a war zone – but that is where the creativity ends, or more where it is objectified and vomited on. The cameras leers on underage girls, creeping up their bare legs and zooming in their crotch and cleavage. Then all the abhorrent behaviour is condoned when the party host’s dad high fives him. A projectile vomit of clichés and disgusting, adolescent behaviour. Blerg.

1) V/H/S – An attempt to revive the horror anthology genre and breathe life into the found footage genre by meshing the two came out a big old mess. A horrific and heartfelt first segment is a distant memory after the barrage of poorly scripted segments that follow that are populated with deeply unappealing characters. Apparently, every guy with a video camera wants to film himself or others have sex and every female that has a camera shoved in her face wants to take her clothes off for it. Then there’s the segment where a woman lures her friends into the woods as bait to trap a killer. Wouldn’t you love to be her BFF? Repugnant.

Dishonourable mentions:

The Devil Inside

The Lucky One

Act of Valor

The Vow

Not Suitable for Children

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows

The Watch

The Darkest Hour

On The Road

Man On A Ledge

One For The Money

Friends With Kids

Safe

The Rum Diary

Lawless

Dark Shadows

Swerve

Snow White And The Huntsman

Total Recall

The Hobbit

Reel Review Roundup’s Best of 2012

I had not realised how many films I had seen this year and how many were terrific until I tasked myself with creating a best of list. Guys, this list was hard. I had so many great films to choose from (two film festivals in one year grants access to so many gems) that I agonised over this list and briefly considered blowing it out to a top 20 list. Also, this list was dominated by enough documentaries that I could conceivably have made a separate top 10 documentaries list. But that would mean extra work and I am on holidays here. I had to make several tough decisions to make cuts to this list, these are the ones that survived the carnage.

Top 10:

10) The Words – Not popular with critics, or audiences, this tale of a struggling writer who finds an old manuscript, publishes it as his own and becomes a worldwide sensation drew me in with its take on the lead character’s moral dilemma. Finally, a film that takes its time making the characters’ initial decision as real and believable as possible. Three storylines from different times were seamlessly edited together, all equally gripping. Bradley Cooper at his (so far) best.

9) The Grey – The year’s most white-knuckle thriller that tackled faith and fate. A bunch of men who survive a plane crash but must battle the elements of the Alaskan wilderness and a pack of territorial wolves struggle with the question of why they are being put to this ultimate test of survival. While the dialogue isn’t the most subtle when exploring  the themes (no need to spell it out, we do get it), this is more substance than one usually is faced with when watching a thriller.

8) Prometheus – While others loathed the characters’ supposed dumb decisions, clunky dialogue and barely-there links to the Alien franchise, I was drawn to its astounding ideas and themes of creation and the relationship between creators and their creations. Sure, that final third is a doozy – what we learnt from Prometheus is that you cannot have your heroine running around post-surgery with a severed head. It just does not work. Audience members also bemoaned the lack of answers to so many questions asked. My favourite part was using my brain to try and come up with my own interpretations.

7) The Avengers – After not enjoying the slew of films that were leading up to this point in which a collection of superheroes join together to fight evil, imagine my pleasant surprise when this witty and thrilling action film blew its predecessors out of the water. Others have tried and failed to give pathos to action films, juggle several characters and have each one just as important and fleshed out as the others and also pander to fanboys but also appeal to new audiences. Joss Whedon actually did it.

6) The Intouchables – Another film about the disabled, The Intouchables has a more standard, conventional plot – grumpy, middle-aged paraplegic befriends rough, former criminal from the wrong side of the tracks. But there is more realism to this story than the seemingly Hollywood cookie cutter plot suggests. The emotions are genuine, the actors are sensational together and the script is hilarious. The ultimate feel-good film.

5) Starbuck – This is how you make a film about alternate, modern families. Not Suitable For Children and Friends With Kids (both on my worst list) tried and failed by taking obnoxious, selfish characters who never wanted children, turn to their best friend of the opposite sex and go “Hey let’s make a baby.” Starbuck looks at family values in a new, refreshing, charming and heartfelt light. Again the character is selfish (it is necessary for him to grow), but not irredeemably so (an important key). If you are not sitting in a puddle of your own tears by the end you are made of stone.

4) Looper – A science fiction that makes you think but doesn’t leave you confused, that borrows ideas from other films but reinterprets them and makes them its own, and doesn’t forget one of the most important parts – the characters. Looper manages to be thoughtful, tender, thrilling but most importantly complex and challenging, without being alienating – what more could you ask for?

3) The Sessions – a surprisingly candid and frank look at the taboo topic of how disabled people have sex and how they deal with their sexuality. Heavy on laughs – this isn’t an out and out depressing look at the struggles of the disabled – and humanity, this is about people discovering each other, and is not just aimed at those that are wheel chair bound. Hawkes gives a warm and mostly horizontal performance but his trepidation about hiring a sex therapist makes the character real.

2) Margaret – long, messy (due to infamous post production issues) and challenging but most of all, gripping. From the astounding opening scene in which Alison Janney is hit by a bus that kicks this epic story of a bratty teenager’s journey into action, to the final moments, this story has you. The teenager in question, Lisa, is obnoxious, self righteous and lost. Her story and the actions she does is often confusing, nonsensical and also right on the money. And Anna Paquin balances all facets of this complex, multi layered character with aplomb. This 150 minute version was the hacked one the studio wanted released. I haven’t seen the 186 minute version yet, but i cannot wait.

1) The Imposter – Excuse me while I pick my jaw up off the floor. An absolute stunner. The kind of documentary that the saying “truth is stranger than fiction” is made for. A teenage Texan goes missing then seemingly resurfaces three years later in Spain. But that’s not the end of this jaw droppingly fascinating story that has more twists and “no freaking way!” moments than a season of a daytime soap opera. And just remember – this actually happened.

Honourable mentions:

Hugo

Once Upon A Time In Anatolia

Marina Abramovic: The Artist Is Present

Carnage

Martha Marcy May Marlene

Undefeated

The Interruptors

The Dark Knight Rises

Your Sister’s Sister

The Color Wheel

Shame

Arbitrage

Killing them Softly

Argo

Skyfall

The Raid

Killer Joe

Beauty Is Embarrassing

Weekend

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (M)

Directed by: Peter Jackson

Starring: Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen, Hugo Weaving, Cate Blanchett

Two and a half stars

Review by: Julian Wright

Having not read J. R. R. Tolkien’s books but feeling an immense appreciation for Jackson’s thrillingly epic and moving Lord Of The Rings trilogy, you could say I was one of those that jumped on the bandwagon late in the game. But don’t hold that against me because, let’s face it, those impressive cinematic achievements are a decent lot to jump on board with. Despite enjoying the trilogy I was not too keen to revisit Middle Earth. I know there are more stories set there and the die-hard fans would love it but I was concerned that going back there after 10 years would not be worth the wait. This is not to suggest that I went in with a closed mind – if director Peter Jackson could recapture the magic of the first films then I was ready to swept up all over again.

Jackson has taken a not so long book and made three films to chart the journey of Bilbo Baggins, Gandalf and a bunch of homeless dwarves and assumes a simple revisit to the fantasy location will be enough to pull audiences back. But not this bandwagon jumper. I craved a more compelling story, something that would up the ante. I was not delivered what I hoped for.

Long, drawn out re-introductions to The Shire and the cast of 13 dwarves (which includes a musical number), who were driven from their castle many years ago by a dragon, make for a dull opening to this padded section of the prequel. Taking about an hour to get going, eventually a hesitant Bilbo (Martin Freeman), Gandalf (Ian McKellen) and the dwarves begin their trek to reclaim their castle. Along the way they encounter a variety of Middle Earth beasts that put a few hurdles in their unexpected journey. See? A film that  takes one or two sentences to describe does not need to push the 2.5 hour mark, let alone be stretched to three films.

Familiar characters are slotted in for nostalgia’s sake (Elijah Wood has the most thankless cameo of them all with his almighty two minutes of screen time as Frodo), extending the running time even further. But the most welcome return is Gollum (Andy Serkis) in another unnecessarily long sequence but it is the highlight of this patience testing installment. The appearance of the one ring to rule them all is a nice tie-in to the other stories, also.

Where The Hobbit soars is in the action sequences that kick in about halfway through. When it comes to scale, Jackson is the master. The action is epic and looks fantastic. But good-looking action scenes are not worth much if you are not invested in the fate of the characters in them. There is plenty of peril, (seemingly endless peril) but the camaraderie between these characters is not a patch on that between those in the Lord Of The Rings trilogy. There are close calls but you never believe anyone is going to be injured or die. A little side note about acceptance towards the end (Bilbo has been a bit of an outcast throughout the story) feels tacked on.

Maybe Jackson is just teasing us with this first story. Maybe he is just getting warmed up. Maybe he will let rip in the next film. Whatever his tactic, this introduction to a new trilogy is a major disappointment. He will be lucky if anyone jumps onto this bandwagon.

Hitchcock (M)

Directed by: Sacha Gervasi

Starring: Anthony Hopkins, Helen Mirren, Scarlett Johansson, Jessica Biel

Three and a half stars

Review by: Julian Wright

Films are hard to make. Funding can fall through, stars can pull out, productions can go undistributed, scripts can be re-written, endings can be changed last-minute, sets can be destroyed by natural disasters. The collapse of Terry Gilliam’s ambitious but luckless The Man Who Killed Don Quixote was captured in the documentary Lost in La Mancha (2002). Ditto the disasters that plagued Apocalypse Now in Hearts of Darkness (1991). Those that are fortunate enough to be completed and see the light of day are released to audiences who are none the wiser to the blood, sweat and tears that went into making it.

Perhaps one of the lesser known behind the scenes dramas happened during the making of a genre and film making defining classic – Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho. Well, unless you are a Hitchcock fan boy who has read all about the famous auteur’s career. For those that haven’t may be interested to know that it was not Hitch’s easiest film to make. What we learn in this dramatised story is that he not only put his career on the line by making the bold choice to bring this horror film to life, but that he also risked his relationship with his doting wife Alma.

After North by Northwest was met with a lukewarm reaction in 1959 (who would have thought), the media began suggesting that director Alfred Hitchcock (Anthony Hopkins) hang up his directors hat. Fueled by this, the master of suspense began a search for a smashing comeback. He options a book titled Psycho, loosley based on the killings of infamous serial killer Ed Gein – much to his wife Alma, (Helen Mirren) staff and colleague’s chagrin. Paramount Studios won’t fund such a ghastly story so Hitch pays for it out of his own pocket, putting himself and Alma in a dangerous position. If the film loses money, they lose their house.

Tension hangs over the entire production as Hitch’s attention is focused exclusively on the film and his blonde leading lady Janet Leigh (Scarlett Johansson) and production immediately falls behind schedule. Meanwhile Alma, who always helps out with script rewrites, yearns for a creative outlet of her own which pushes her into the arms of writer and Hitchcock collaborator Whitefield Cook (Danny Huston).

Directors complaining about studio interference and actors moaning about long working hours can often come off a little “first world problems” – many of these people in this elite industry rake in mega bucks – but Hitchcock reminds us of the sacrifices people make for their art. Hitchcock the man is portrayed as a risk taker and genius (he was) but also with plenty of inner turmoil, grappling with his choices, not always confident. Such a reminder of sacrifices for art and how ambition can sometimes make people batty offers much-needed depth to a story that sometimes slips into melodrama and struggles to elevate itself above TV movie grade.

Hopkins, front and centre and inches deep in prosthetics, looks the part the way he walks and holds himself, but his speech pattern feels forced. When the script calls on him to emote, he does as usual, nail it. Strangely, it is Johansson in a supporting role as Psycho star Leigh that stands out, projecting a presence and spirit of the charming beauty over delivering an imitation. There are some unusual touches (Hitch’s conversations with a ghostly Ed Gein (Michael Wincott) and the presumably fictional game of jealousy tug of war between Hitch and Alma) that add an edge to the Hollywood ins and outs that feature such delicious moments as Hitch’s fight with censors over showing a flushing toilet for the first time in film history. Hitchcock almost flushed his career down the toilet making Psycho, but fortunately for him, his wife and audiences, it paid off.

Hitchcock is released in Australian cinemas on January 10, 2013.

Love Is All You Need (M)

Directed by: Susanne Bier

Starring: Trine Dyrholm, Pierce Brosnan, Kim bodnia

Two and a half stars

Review by: Julian Wright

Ageing female actors have often noted the lack of strong, meaty roles for them to sink their teeth into. Once they have hit their 40s and beyond, they are usually restricted to playing “the mother” or “the grandmother”, banished to the sidelines and the characters stripped of dimensions. Any decent roles are promptly snatched up by Meryl Streep, Helen Mirren or Frances McDormand, leaving little left for capable performers such as Michelle Pfeiffer, Sigourney Weaver and Susan Sarandon.

It is refreshing to have a romantic comedy – a genre usually dominated with pretty young things, poster boys and girl next door types –  powered by a female character in her 40s, struggling with real problems. None of this adolescent “will the most popular boy in school ever notice me?” rubbish. Not so refreshing is that this rare occurrence offers us one of the most backwards written roles that sets women’s liberation back a good 30 years. Perhaps writer Anders Thomas Jensen was aiming for “flawed” when developing struggling wife and mother Ida on the page, but on the screen she just comes off weak, barely able to stand on her own two feet and constantly at the mercy of men.

When cancer fighter Ida (Trine Dyrholm) returns home to find her husband Leif (Kim Bodnia) having sex with an attractive employee half his age on their couch, she doesn’t yell, scream or throw things. Sure she is devastated, but she is composed. But when low life hubby starts to blame her sickness for his unhappiness, she still hardly reacts. Her only solution to this problem is for them to fly separately to their daughter Astrid (Molly Blixt Egelind) and her fiance Patrick’s (Sebastian Jessen) wedding in Italy.

Ida puts on a brave face and a wig of flowing blonde locks (the chemo therapy has made her bald) when she arrives at the gorgeous site for the wedding, a sea-side property owned by Patrick’s family as she watches her daughter prepare for the biggest day of her life as her own life crumbles. But sparks begin to fly between her and Patrick’s father, Philip (Pierce Brosnan), a brash, no-nonsense businessman who has been widowed for years but has never tried to find another love. Despite the icky set up (no-one seems to be aware of the implications of Ida and Patrick hooking up the same weekend their children are getting married), their courtship is sweet and is bolstered by the hijinks and dramas of the weekend. Philip’s inappropriate, attention seeking sister-in-law Benedikte (Paprika Steen) steals every moment she is in.

Dyrholm is gorgeous, charming and bold and makes Ida sympathetic and there are some powerful moments – including the reveal of her bald head – not often found in such light weight entertainment, but it is hard to champion a character that is so unwilling to stand up for herself. Ida lets herself be treated like a doormat by those around her while she waits for a charming Englishman to sweep her off her feet. But more troubling is the course her relationship with Phillip takes – after a few time-consuming and needless on-again-off-again moments, it is only solidified in the final moments when Ida’s hair has grown back and sporting a spunky cropped hairstyle. If this was a film about unconditional love and falling in love with someone despite their flaws, it would have made a much more powerful statement for this moment to occur much earlier, when she had no hair.

The strengths, however, lay in the quirks of the crazy family members that have gathered for the occasion. Steen is a hoot, providing many of the laughs that nicely balance the feather-heavy plot and beautiful scenery. Love Is All You Need tries hard to leave you with warm fuzzies, but forgets that you can have romantic sentiment and still create a ballsy female heroine.

Paris-Manhattan (M)

Directed by: Sophie Lellouche

Starring: Alice Taglioni, Patrick Bruel, Marine Delterme

Three stars

Review by: Julian Wright

Ask any film buff who their favourite director is and they will usually be able to tell you in a split second. They may even rattle off a series of names. We tend to identify with certain directors, whether due to a common theme explored in their work that appeals to us or stylistic touches that we become intrigued or fascinated with. We would love to sit down with our directorial idols and have a one on one chat with them and picks their brains, alas it rarely happens. Except for Paris-Manhattan‘s unlucky in love Alice (Alice Taglioni), who has a lifelong relationship with hers and regular discussions.

Die-hard Woody Allen fan Alice has always had an affinity for the neurotic Jewish man’s films and has a poster of the off-beat looking but genius film maker hanging on her wall. Whenever she finds herself in a spot of bother, she will have a conversation with the poster and he gives her advice. An unusual set-up for a comedy, yes, but once you get over the initial hurdle by suspending disbelief, it can be a bit of fun. In her adult years, she inherits her father’s pharmacy and as well as handing out prescription medication, she also doles out copies of her favourite director’s movies to brighten up the sick and depressed.

But once this quirky set up is established, it is quickly forgotten and we are left to experience the courtship between Alice and the charming Victor (Patrick Bruel). Alice is initially prickly, scorned by failed relationships and incompatible partners, (particularly the one who ended up marrying her sister, but like any romantic comedy, we know where this is heading. The only thing that really matters in these films is the journey, not the destination.

But the journey here takes a detour that is almost as strange as the talking poster. Alice and Victor suspect her brother-in-law is cheating on her sister so they break into the house to find clues – on the same night her parents do the same. It’s all very French farce, but this section seems out of place in the context of what has been established. This shift in focus highlights just how little can be done with the film’s unusual set up. The story is capped off with a great cameo that plays nicely into the final “will they or won’t they get together” cliché, giving it shot of much-needed freshness. Unfortunately, it is too little too late for an otherwise standard romantic comedy with a hook that is not fully fleshed out.

The Perks Of Being A Wallflower

Directed by: Stephen Chbosky

Starring: Logan Lerman, Ezra Miller, Emma Watson

Three and a half stars

Review by: Julian Wright

Imagine the struggle of being a shy teenage outsider with no friends, never been kissed and having to start your first day at high school where you are the target of ridicule from the “cool” kids. Now imagine you have a mental illness on top of all that teen angst. Mental illness is not an untouched topic in feature films but it is usually limited to the struggles that adults have with it. Not since Donnie Darko has there been a potent expose on how teenagers deal with it. This refreshing twist, which doesn’t come into full play until the shattering final moments, is the driving force behind what is otherwise a painfully self-consciously hip look at high school life.

Charlie (Logan Lerman) is an awkward and quiet teenager that shows up to high school on his first day with no friends. He soon befriends kooky, free-spirited step siblings and high school seniors Patrick (Ezra Miller) and Sam (Emma Watson) and is welcomed into their group of friends with their own individual flair. Throughout the school year, the trio become inseparable and they and their friends deal with a plethora of coming of age issues.

Charlie deals with his first love (he falls for Sam, who doesn’t seem to return the same feelings), his first relationship with vegan Buddhist Mary Elizabeth (Mae Whitman), Patrick must keep his relationship with jock Brad (Johnny Simmons) a secret and Sam has a promiscuous past and worries that she won’t be accepted into her preferred college. Meanwhile bits of Charlies past are constantly haunting him and he tries to keep up  a facade of “normal.” And all of this plays out to the soundtrack of a few mix tapes.

There is a lot to like here. The performances are spot on; Watson provides the charm in a role that doesn’t really let her stretch beyond her Harry Potter films character and Miller provides the laughs – something he was not able to do as the evil, psychopathic child in We Need To Talk About Kevin. But Lerman knocks it out of the park, balancing an appearance of awkwardness and genuine distress at his own creeping thoughts.

Audiences may get a kick out of the cassettes, mix-tapes, records and typewriters that feature heavily in this early 1990s-set story, but its over-reliance on them to connect with audiences is distracting and grows tiresome. Trying even harder to secure a hipster audience, the film (which is based on the book of the same name) has its characters work in a theatre that screens The Rocky Horror Picture Show sing-a-longs, which, for me, incited more eye rolling than giddy nostalgia.

This is a super sweet film that wears its heart on its sleeve while hinting at a much darker undertone. The issues dealt with make this more than just a John Hughes teen movie knock off. But the dramatic moments, while packing an emotional punch, feel more like punctuation points throughout the film, creating an unevenness in the storytelling. An often achingly relatable look at high school life with a few surprises up its sleeve should be see but taken with a grain of salt. Like its lead characters – it has problems.