Author: BRWC

  • The Aggression Scale (2012)

    The Aggression Scale (2012)

    (ag.gres.sion.scale):noun: “A psychological test meaning the frequency of overt aggressive behaviours that may result in physical or psychological injury to others.”

    The film opens with shocking violence making you sit up and take notice this carries on throughout as there is no holding back in this action thriller. Mob boss Bellavance (Ray Wise) discovers that $500,000 of his money has been stolen so he sends out a gang of hitmen to send a message to the suspected thieves and also retrieve the stolen money. This of course could be harder than first anticipated. Having only recently and rather abruptly moved from the city into a house conveniently located in the middle of nowhere, aren’t they always and without even unpacking the moving boxes before Bellavance’s men turn up invading their home and killing Maggie and Ben in the process. Will they get more than they bargained for when they meet the children of the family rebellious Lauren (Fabianne Therese) and Owen (Ryan Hartwig) a very disturbed individual who has only recently been released from a facility.

    These are the two real standout characters of the film two fearless teenagers fighting against a gang of trained hitmen I know who my money’s on! Without knowing where the stolen money is Lauren and Owen are the key and last hope to finding it and they seem to have just escaped out the window. The only hope of finding Bellavances’s money is to find them. This should be easy shouldn’t it, trained hitmen against two teenagers? Owen is a deeply troubled and disturbed teen who has homicidal tendencies and rates rather high on the aggression scale himself. He does however know how to make lethal booby-traps and is about to teach some very painful lessons to the home invaders.

    There are comparisons to Home Alone and these cannot be ignored and are rather welcomed but we need to talk about Owen as he is much more Kevin Katchadourianhan than Kevin McCallister there won’t be any paint pots swinging at the bad guys this time but razor blades and guns as Owen has more deadly games in store for them and on a much more disturbing level. You always need to worry about the quiet ones and Owen is as silent and sadistic as they come.

    A thoroughly enjoyable film that asks the question how far would you go for money and is it worth dying for?

  • Petty Romance – DVD Review

    Petty Romance – DVD Review

    Petty Romance is a Korean rom-com following comic book artist Jeong-bae, who is capable of great artwork but less capable at coming up with an engaging and coherent story, who is told to hire a writer in order to help him attempt to win a $100,000 comic book prize. After a series of amusingly bizarre interviews he lands on Da-rim, an unsuccessful sex-columnist who is trying to make it as a creative writer who, it ironically transpires, is a completely sexually unexperienced virgin. This is a rom-com, so you can tell off the bat that the conclusion is inevitable, the two will end up together by the end, but what’s quite fun about Petty Romance is how it gets to that point.

    Opening to a rather comical, pun intended, sequence where Bae’s 4 year ‘labour of love’ graphic novel is laughed from the publishers office and he is forcibly removed when his reaction is a tad… emotional. Not long after, following the advice of his publisher friend, and his group of artist friends (of varying levels of success) he sets about having someone else write the story that he will visualise. The initial relationship between Bae and Da-rim is strained to say the least, there are some cultural idioms to do with who should be the elder in a conversation that are frankly lost in the translation for me, but a misunderstanding leads Da-rim to believe that Bea fancies her, when in fact he seems initially to despise her – the comedy aspect of ‘rom-com’. As they begin to create a story – in which a sexually provocative female assassin (that looks like Da-rim) battles with a nemisis/sexual partner (that curiously looks like her brother… a fact not really touched upon) – the pair build an oddball relationship, that is enhanced by their own eccentricities.

    As we learn more about both characters stories we see why they act as they do, Bea’s backstory involving a famous artist father and his need for money to retrieve a beloved painting and Da-rim’s family situation with her slightly uncaring, womanising brother along with her own sexual experience, help to give motivation to the otherwise slightly unstable characters.

    The movie occasionally dips into some surreal animated sequences, often highly sexualised, to parallel the narrative of the story with it’s comic book facsimile, and these sequences help to add a bit of fun and levity… oh and violence, some of the animated segue are fantastically violent and entertaining action sequences. There is quite a lot to find funny in Petty Romance, in the interactions between the two main cast and, later on, even some laughably cringy moments in what has to be one of the most embarrassing attempted ‘sex scenes’ I’ve watched this year, and a slightly slapstick toilet/shower sex scene fiasco. The story moves along at a satisfying enough pace and is never particularly boring during it’s (just shy of) 2 hour length, and this is helped by the fun frivolous acting and amusing dialogue.

    The conclusion is perhaps slightly drawn out with some overly dramatic acting choices from the pair, as they confront each other at the comic book awards ceremony, but it ends how you would expect and is no less satisfying for the slightly manic mannerisms and outbursts. Definitely worth a look if you’re a fan of Korean or Asian comedy, especially if you enjoyed My Sassy Girl, but equally enjoyable for anyone just looking for a decent laugh.

    Petty Romance is released on October 8.

     

  • Review – [REC] 3 Genesis (2012)

    Review – [REC] 3 Genesis (2012)

    Your wedding day is supposed to be an occasion you won’t forget your happily ever after not the zombie apocalypse!

    Koldo and Clara are about to celebrate their wedding day with family and friends and all appears to be running smoothly for the bride and groom as the audience is lulled into a false sense of security in the build up to the worst wedding crashers ever.

    It soon becomes apparent that till death do us part may come sooner than the newly weds expected as the guests start to show signs of a strange illness. All hell breaks lose and guests along with the newly weds are running for their lives. We see Koldo at the beginning of the film but we have no idea if Clara is even still alive. We later hear her on a radio/intercom telling Koldo she is also pregnant this almost brings out her maternal instinct straight away the fight or flight response to protect her own. They both set out in the hellish destruction in the hope of finding each other with Koldo bringing a whole new meaning to knight in shinning armour in the most literal sense.

    The film mainly focuses on them trying to find each other and start their lives together while all around is pain and suffering. Using a chainsaw that just so happens to be laying around Clara cuts her wedding dress up on one side to make it less constricting she is ready, fighting off the undead and kicking some serious butt with the chainsaw her once pristine dress is now covered in blood, even with makeup smudged and running down her face she is still fearless in her search for Koldo. When given the chance to leave and have a chance to be safe she refuses as she won’t leave without him. Does love really conquer all?

    The film is visually appealing with the special effects and bucket loads of blood. Chainsaw check, kitchen utensils check, electric whisk check, sword check, not the weapons that first spring to mind when fighting the undead but they do make make for interesting screen time and they are nothing if not resourceful.

    An enjoyable bloodfest and you know what they say you never forget your wedding day!

  • Accounts From The Video Store Front Lines (No. 2)

    Accounts From The Video Store Front Lines (No. 2)

    “I remembered throwing punches around

    And preachin’ from my chair”

    Accounts from the Video Store Frontlines (no. 2)

    by Pablo D’Stair

    Any video clerk worthy of the title learned the ins-and-outs of navigating the often precarious harrows of customer recommendations, fairly quickly.  Those who embraced the position and did not merely decide to tow the line by halfheartedly pointing to the pre-selected Recommendations on the New Release wall or to relate stories of how perhaps-only-make-believe relatives/acquaintances had “really liked” whatever movie a customer might hold up to ask for encouragement in renting had to face the hard reality of what it meant to actually be endowed with a sense of personal aesthetic, let alone a faith that such a thing could mean something to anyone else, was something that might be in even the most meager way transmittable.

    Such clerks knew that insisting a customer leave with Bottle Rocket meant either a new best friend had just been made or that eye contact would be forever avoided with some specific human being, by mutual tacit consent; giving someone Sid and Nancy, Naked, Fitzcaraldo or Cache meant either the store would literally no longer be receiving a certain individual’s business or else from that time forward this customer would insist on calling ahead to ask the recommending-clerk to pick something and have it waiting, didn’t matter what.

    There was a lot at stake for the clerk who was in it for the long haul, who would be confined to the store and to contact with the same few dozen persons on a daily or at least bi-weekly basis. And never was the pressure more than when a well vetted, multiple-success customer (one who had shown discernment, good breeding, and openness to Art) happened to come in when the film JCVD was in stock, waiting right there on the shelf, the customer giving big wide smile and head nod from down the length of an aisle, eyes hungry while mouth said “There you are, give me something good, for tonight.”

    ***

    I understood, of course, any initial skepticism to the film. When I had first encountered JCVD I was prepared to enjoy it, but had it in mind—in part due to packaging and preview—that it would be a kind of self-deprecating, tongue-in-cheek romp, a bit of Meta-cinema lite, maybe a tepid and watchable cross between The Last Action Hero and Being John Malkovich (such a crossbreed I honestly would still be very interested in seeing, let me add). That is to say, I was not prepared for it as it actually is, not prepared for a new addition to my without-a-moment’s-hesitation recommendation pile, had not expected a new entry to my list of “films that are so much my favorite there is no point in calling them favorites”—had not anticipated that the motion picture would reveal itself to be, simply put, sublime.

    And there is no way to get this across to someone, no way at all before they have seen it, no way to make them understand that they are wrong about everything they are, being fair, kind of right to be thinking by way of hesitation—much in the same way that recommending someone the termite/driver ant documentary Besieged Fortress on the strength that it would “change their views of their own humanity” could not be understood as anything but a cipher or a tipsy rambling before that film is taken in.

    And while I would like to have had confidence that a customer who had loved You Can Count On Me, We Don’t Live Here Anymore and Man on the Train would, without fail, devour the beauty of JCVD and track me down at home, sneak into my house at night and cuddle up beside me for having made them acquainted with the film, what I knew more was that, through some vicious trick of mother nature, those customers were actually the sort of people who would most venomously discard the film into the ashcan on principle unviewed or be hardwired to praise it only as the anomaly it might, surface level, appear to be on a biased watch. Yes, sadly there is just something in the borderline prickishness it takes to be an astute lover of Cinema that would kick in at a Darwinian level. It was, after all, a ‘Van Damme movie’ and without asserting that they are “sort-of-kidding, of course” even the hepest of film buff or the hippest or hipster cinephile could not be expected to breathe “Art” and “that guy” in the same sentence.

    ***

    But Art is what it is, unquestionably, unabashedly—art of the highest echelon of cinema, jolting, beautiful and vibrantly alive with brazen and cathartic honesty. And it being so, I and clerks like me were put in the firing line, no choice but to hold it up in the light it deserved as often as possible, to laud it and do our best to keep it from being something with no higher hope than in twenty-years time popping up on a list here or there as an ‘overlooked gem.’

    Usually, I’d begin talking the film up in a general way (leaving out key details like who the star was) as I casually strolled a customer in the direction of where it would be found, then as I neared the spot itself, reached for the box, I’d explain that they were to brace themselves for a bit of a jolt at what I was about to hand them, making it flat that I was assuring them I was not dicking them about by earnestly describing it as “pretty much a blend between Dog Day Afternoon and oh take your pick between  A Bout De Souffle, Tirez sur le Pianiste or Bande a part.” The customer would, I could tell, be coiling tight with giddy anticipation, visions of…well, anything but Jean Claude Van Damme in a breathtaking and understated performance delineating the line between Realization and Idealization, between Self-loathing and Self-actualization dancing in their mind.

    This would fall out in one of two ways: either they would notice the cover of the film before I had finished the introduction, laugh big like I’d been winding them up the whole time and quickly say “But really which movie?” or they would just take the box, silently look at it (Van Damme staring at them disaffectedly), turn it over (unfortunately greeted with Van Damme flexing his arm as though to say “look how strong and awesome I am” while the image is actually pulled from a portion of the film where he is saying anything, anything, anything but that) turn it back over and look at me while saying they didn’t like “that kind of movie.”

    “You’ve never seen this kind of movie,” I’d say (in either of these circumstances) and I would, like a doctor recommending leeches or something, say how I understood the hesitation, but unlike a doctor recommending leeches I would be able to honestly assert to them it would be something they would thank me for, profusely.

    If the discussion went any further, it would only be for the customer to more politely turn down the suggestion, saying they “like smart action flicks, I guess,” but were “in the mood for something else” or some close cousin of that statement.

    ***

    Sometimes I’d just address the elephant in the room before the trunk had appeared by beginning my recommendation on the merits of Van Damme’s performance, straight out (expressions like “captivating,” “mesmerizing,” “utterly perfect” often coming up when I did) and explaining that after watching this film the one thing I could say with sincerity was that Van Damme should have been working with Bresson or at least with Lumet (I always tried to invoke Dog Day Afternoon, as much as possible, JCVD so very much an out-and-out homage to that masterpiece) and that it is lamentable that this is the first time in his film history, as I was familiar with it, that Jean Claude was allowed to do anything substantive—often only saying “substantive” so I could more properly up-sell it to “artistic” or even “imperative.”

    “It’s a bank heist film?” I’d sometimes be asked (and fairly enough) to which I’d have to say “No no, well, there’s kind of heist in it, of sorts, but that’s not what it’s…about…at all.”

    And meanwhile the customer would slowly be putting it back and picking up Juno or Julie and Julia or something while I got a bit disappointed that they probably considered Dog Day Afternoon a “bank heist movie” and, following this logic, probably didn’t even know who Bresson was and that, sadly, they’d never know who Jean Claude Van Damme is, which is something, really, they ought to.

    ***

    Pablo D’Stair is a novelist, essayist, and interviewer.  Co-founder of the art house press KUBOA, he is also a regular contributor to the Montage: Cultural Paradigm (Sri Lanka). His book Four Self-Interviews About Cinema: the short films of director Norman Reedus will be re-releasing October, 2012 through Serenity House Publishing, International.

  • A Night In The Woods – DVD Review

    A Night In The Woods – DVD Review

    November 2010. Three people disappeared on Dartmoor. What you are about to see is found footage. That’s the gist of the opening titles so yes we’re watching a “found footage” film about people in a the woods. You could be forgiven for thinking “Blair Witch was thirteen years ago do directors really think it a good idea to keep scraping that barrel”. In this case director Richard Parry (director of South West 9 and the interesting Dale Farm: The Big Eviction).

    Couple Brody and Kerry are taking a weekend trip to the moors of Dartmoor. On the way there they pick up Kerry’s cousin Leo. Tension builds between Brody and Leo as they attempt to assert their superiority. As night falls the group disintegrates and the darkness brings untold horrors on the group.

    Reading the synopsis before watching A Night in the Woods I hoped that it may have been a pastiche of the recent slurry of found footage horror films. It’s not a bad genre and when done just write can be some of the creepiest cinema out there today. The flip side is that all you need is a cheap camera, some actor friends with a free weekend and a location, say a field, that you don’t have to pay for. Then anyone can make anything. Cliches are already easy to spot, especially in films involving unseen ghouls, the fact that this is so derivative of The Blair Witch Project it couldn’t be anything but a parody.

    Unfortunately it’s not. Starting off in a domestic setting reminiscent of Kill List we find Brody (Scott McNairy) and Kerry (Anna Skellern) very much in love. For a reason that is never fully explained Brody feels the need to record every little thing. This may lead you to think “why would you record this?” several times. Shots range from looking overly stylised and set up to being so off-kilter it’s hard to see anything. Often with found footage films though you have to put these worries aside. Things aren’t so rosy with the arrival of Leo (Andrew Hawley). Despite being Kerry’s cousin Brody takes an instant dislike for their new companion. Is he really her cousin or is there something more to Kerry and Leo’s relationship? This plot thread is swept aside for a moment as the trio visit a local pub where for no real reason every one in the pub talk about devils being up on the moors. The film suddenly turns into a talking head documentary as colourful types talk about occult happenings. At one point in what has to be the comedy highlight of the year a native actually says the line “you don’t believe me? You come in here in your shiny car, with your green wellies. What do you know?” I couldn’t believe that line has actually been included in a “serious” horror in 2012.

    Apparently there was no script and the actors improvised through scene set ups much in the same way that Curb Your Enthusiasm is made. Once the threesome are out on the moor there are plenty of scenes of them fooling around with the camera which looks terribly arty. Everyone also uses time to treat the camera as a confessional booth telling it and us their little secrets. It’s a lazy well of feeding the audience information. Brody on several occasions decides to sit down with the camera and provide an almost Shakespearean monologue. All three leads are very good and in their respect roles they all manage to convince. McNairy and Hawley play the dual personas of the nice guy/arsehole well and Skellern does angry and terrified convincingly. But with the dialogue left largely to them scenes become stuttering matches. The characters repeating questions at each other which may seem naturalistic but on film comes off as annoying. The horror aspect of the film – which comes in the form of shaky tents, odd noises and nooses hanging from trees – feels like an afterthought. Whilst it is a nice touch that it is never explained whether the terrors facing the group are supernatural or mind games perpetrated by Leo or Brody it still feels like an odd tangent for what has essentially been a drama till this point. There are a few effective shock scares as Kerry runs screaming through the woods after the homicidal looking Leo and Brody have run of themselves. Overall the horror is practically non-existent, good night sleeps are guaranteed.

    The whole time watching A Night in the Woods I could not get one question out of my mind. Why is Leo there at all? As we discover; he is Kerry’s ex who she seems to be having some kind of affair with. Brody suspects this. Why in her right mind would Kerry decide to go out into the middle of the moors with her boyfriend and her affair. What possible reason could she have to do that? Even lying that Leo is her “cousin”, she really couldn’t be away from him for a few days. It is one almighty plot hole which I just could not get my head around. It’s as if the three characters made up this character arc whilst out filming in the moors with out much thought as to whether it made sense plot wise.

    Despite the spirited performances by the three leads the script is far too weak dramatically or horrifically to make a compelling watch. Even at 76minutes A Night in the Woods feels long. Adding nothing to the genre of found footage horror it’s one that will pass with out much notice. Had it gone the route of parody it may have been far more successful. The making-of accompanying the DVD release is a far more interesting watch than the film itself.

    Can we please stay out of the woods now?