Author: Alton Williams

Hereafter **

As a director, Clint Eastwood has made westerns, crime thrillers, character based dramas, war movies and true to life biographies but one thing he has never done is something more fantastical, until now that is. With a distinctly supernatural theme, fantasy drama Hereafter really is brand new territory for the director.
On paper it is a film that sounds like a recipe for success – it adopts a similar we-are-all-connected story formula to excellent films such as Crash and Babel, director Clint Eastwood has lately been churning out one great film after another – Mystic River, Million Dollar Baby, Flags of Our Fathers, Letters from Iwo Jima, Changeling, Gran Torino and Invictus – writer Peter Morgan has written such acclaimed films as The Last King of Scotland, The Queen, Frost/Nixon and The Damned United and star Matt Damon is perhaps one of the best actors working in Hollywood today, if not one of the more bankable ones. Yet, despite all these things, the film’s reception on its release in the states last year was lukewarm, both critically and commercially speaking. Why was this the case, you might be wondering? The obvious person to put the blame for the film’s failings on would be star Matt Damon who, as a result of choosing interesting but commercially unappealing films to star in recently, hasn’t been attracting the kind of audiences he did when he was starring in the Bourne movies. While this might account for the film’s underwhelming box office performance in the states (as well as that of Invictus which also failed to make much of an impression commercially even though it did receive a far more favourable response from critics), however, it certainly doesn’t account for why the response from critics in the states was merely average. Perhaps it could be that, given the fact that the supernatural nature of this film is new territory for Eastwood, his lack of experience in making this kind of film shows through – Hereafter is far from his best work.

In San Francisco, George Lonegan (Matt Damon) is a seemingly ordinary guy who is trying to escape from his past. He has a special gift that allows him to communicate with the dead but he views it more as a curse and is reluctant to exploit the ability despite pressure from his brother Billy (Jay Mohr) to do so. Yet the call of his ability is impossible to avoid and even after a potential relationship with Melanie (Bryce Dallas Howard) is ruined by it he still finds himself unable to escape. In Paris, French journalist Marie LeLay (Cécile De France) has recently returned home from Indonesia where she was a victim of the tsunami that hit in 2004. She has had a near death experience which as given her a glimpse of what lies after death and since then she has developed a completely new outlook on the world and has become obsessed with revealing what lies beyond death, an obsession that has cost her credibility and alienated her from her partner Didier (Thierry Neuvic). In London, Marcus and Jason (George and Frankie McLaren) are the identical twin children of drug addict mother Jackie (Lyndsey Marshal). When Jason is killed after being hit by a car, Marcus’ entire world begins to fall apart as he is taken away from his mother and placed in foster care where he begins to develop an obsession with contacting his dead brother. These three people from different parts of the world find themselves crossing paths with one another as their encounters with death shape and define their lives.

Coming off excellent efforts likes Gran Torino and Invictus, there was always a strong likelihood that Hereafter would turn out to be a bit of a letdown for director Clint Eastwood by comparison. But this film isn’t simply a letdown, it is a huge letdown, easily being Eastwood’s weakest film since 2002’s Blood Work and a film that is so underwhelming as to make it hard to believe that Eastwood (or indeed writer Peter Morgan) even had anything to do with it. This is not the fault of the film’s cast although largely the acting here is merely decent rather than sensational, Damon turning in his typical strong performance but failing to go the extra mile as a man struggling to cope with an overwhelming burden, Cécile De France being equally as proficient as a woman viewing the world in a different light following a glimpse of the other side and Bryce Dallas Howard also being decent in her rather small role while Frankie and George McLaren fail to impress with their blank and expressionless performances and a cameo appearance by Derek Jacobi doing a reading from Charles Dickens seems pointless (much like his recent desecration of Dickens’ A Christmas Carol in order to sell Sony products). The fault also cannot be placed on the core concept of the film. A study of death on the big screen is certainly something that has the potential to be very poignant and the film does deal with some very interesting themes but it fails to be nearly interesting enough in the way it deals with them, the story completely failing to compel us as viewers. Entire scenes feel dragged out far beyond what is necessary of them, lacking dramatic tension of any kind and being so painfully slow paced as to bore you to the point of tedium. The film also frequently proves extremely depressing, something that is not helped by the depiction of real life disasters and tragedies (incorporating real life events into the story despite the fact that the film is not based on or inspired by any real life events) such as the Asian Tsunami and the 7/7 Bombings. The inclusion of these events ultimately seems manipulative and frankly unnecessary given that the film is supposed to be fictional (fictional disasters could just as easily have taken the place of real ones) and the 7/7 Bombings, in particular, serve absolutely no purpose in the story whatsoever, making the inclusion of it completely pointless (whereas the Asian Tsunami scene at least establishes one of the film’s main characters). In many ways this is all symptomatic of weak writing and other such symptoms are present in the form of unmemorable dialogue, unengaging conversations between characters and very poor plotting. With multiple character arcs intersecting with one another, there really needs to be a strong link to bring all the threads together, even if it does only come into to play in the final act (case in point, Babel) but her when all the characters finally cross paths, events converging on London, the manner in which they do so is so flimsy and half baked as to virtually make a mockery of the whole film up to this point. The film is not without its redeeming features, however, boasting some decent cinematography and editing and a truly spectacular opening sequence detailing the events of the Asian Tsunami. Boasting some truly incredible visual effects – for which the film has received its one and only Oscar nomination – this sequence is executed superbly and really is quite harrowing to witness. Were this scene at the end of the film it might have at least ended it with a bang (as opposed to the whimper it actually goes out on) but at the start of the film it simply makes for an explosive start that really doesn’t make the rest of the film worth sitting through. Hereafter is so slow moving that you might actually find yourself wishing for quick death. There again, perhaps it’s somewhat appropriate that a film about death be so lifeless.

————————————————————————————————————————————

Review by Robert Mann BA (Hons)

Tangled 3D ****½
Tangled 2D ****

Walt Disney Pictures has a very long tradition of producing movie fairytales about princesses and has produced many classic movies in this particular subgenre, among them such beloved animated features as Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast.
Until last year, however, and with the exception of 2007’s animation/live action blend Enchanted, this tradition looked to be one that was completely relegated to the past in terms of Disney’s big screen releases (although Disney Princess has continued to be a strong brand on DVD), their efforts being invested in making other kinds of family films far removed from their past works, and only with the release of last year’s The Princess and the Frog did it appear that Disney were making a move back to the kind of films that they became known for in the first place. The Princess and the Frog demonstrated a step backwards on behalf of the studio in more than just one way, not simply being a return to their classic princess film mould but also a return to traditional hand-drawn animation techniques. When I reviewed that film I stated that Tangled – then titled Rapunzel, before they gave the film a makeover to make it a bit more 21st century, the final film being a touch more comedy adventure than straight out fairytale with the male “hero” playing as a big a role as the princess herself – would continue in the fashion established by The Princess and the Frog by being both another princess movie and another one made in the form of hand drawn animation. It has since transpired that, while I was correct on the first count, I was actually wrong on the second, as Tangled may embrace more traditional Disney family film values but it is also a film done in the more modern animation form of computer animation – the first Disney fairytale movie to be made in this way – and is also the latest animated feature to be released in 3D. This isn’t to say that the traditional animation style has been ditched altogether, however, as much effort has been made to give the film a traditional look. According to animation supervisor/directing animator Glen Keane – who, from the beginning, intended the film to look and feel like a traditional hand-drawn film but in 3D and who hosted a seminar called ‘The Best of Both Worlds’ where he brought in 50 (an apt number given that this film, as stated at the beginning, is Walt Disney Animation Studios’ 50th animated feature) Disney animators, working in both CGI and traditional animation, to discuss the techniques used in each style and how to, in his words, “bring the warmth and intuitive feel of the hand-drawn to CGI” – a technique known as non-photorealistic rendering was extensively used in the making of this film to make the CGI surface look like it is painted whilst still containing depth and dimension and the movie’s visual style (essentially that of a three dimensional painting) was greatly inspired by the romantic painting The Swing, by the French rococo artist Jean-Honoré Fragonard, Keane saying that “a fairy tale world has to feel romantic and lush, very painterly”, Keane crediting animator Kyle Strawitz for achieving the painterly style that is on display in this film. Clearly, a lot of effort – and money, the film’s production budget being a huge $260 million – has gone into making Tangled but is this is a film that’s worthy of the same positive reaction awarded to last year’s The Princess and the Frog, or even Disney’s classic princess movies, or does it owe more to Disney’s earlier forays into the world of computer animation which proved simply decent rather than remarkable?

Rapunzel (voiced by Mandy Moore) is a teenager who has been imprisoned for years in a tower after being kidnapped from her real parents, the king and queen of the kingdom, by her evil ‘mother’ Gothel (voiced by Donna Murphy) when she was just a baby. She is no ordinary teenager, though, but one who possesses 70 feet of enchanted blonde hair, hair which has the power to heal and revitalise, a gift that Gothel wants all for herself. Unaware that she is a lost princess, Rapunzel desperately wants to leave the confines of her tower home and explore the world and it seems that she may have the chance to do just that when charming thief Flynn Rider (voiced by Zachary Levi) takes refuge in the tower. At first, it is simply a trade off, whereby if Flynn takes her to see the releasing of some lanterns into the sky, something which Rapunzel has witnessed from a distance every year on her birthday, she will return the crown that he has stolen to him. But, as they get to know each other, Rapunzel and Flynn develop a connection and discover something far greater than either could have imagined. But Flynn is a wanted man, wanted not only by the forces of the palace guard but also the Stabbington Brothers (voiced by Ron Perlman), the two accomplices he swindled, and Gothel is not prepared to let Rapunzel escape with her magic hair and soon the two find themselves tangled up in a spectacular action-packed escapade. With her pet chameleon Pascal and police-horse Maximus by her side, Rapunzel sets for her true home, having the time of her life along the way.

I will start off by saying that Tangled is a stunningly beautiful film. Showing off a fresh and innovative approach to CG animation, the animation here is truly wondrous and the design of the animation really captures the essence of hand-drawn animation, perfectly transposing it to CG animation, the look, feel and texture of a hand-drawn animation film being superbly applied to 3D computer animation, there being times when you will swear that you actually are watching a hand-drawn animation film rather than a CG one. It really does look like a painting that is being presented and brought to life in three dimensions and the extra dimension itself is used to terrific and magical effect. It’s great to see a true 3D movie for a change (i.e. one that isn’t a 2D to 3D conversion) and particularly one that makes as good use of 3D as this film does. The 3D here isn’t the most obvious you will see, being neither in your face or gimmicky, but it is creative and inventive, the extra dimension being used to enhance the storybook feel of the film and in a superb way. A classic Disney fairytale with a slight 21st century twist, the film retains the musical aspect that is such a key part of classic Disney movies and just as with The Princess and the Frog does it really well, delivering good upbeat song lyrics and musical scoring and pitch perfect vocals provided by the cast, in particular Mandy Moore whose singing voice is pretty much perfect. While this film may be a (slightly) more modern take on the classic Disney princess movie, this doesn’t mean that the humour falls back on pop culture references or resorts to cruder styles of humour as is sometimes the case in today’s animated features – the humour here is good, clean and simple, and most importantly, pretty funny. Combining some amusing physical style comedy with entertaining supporting characters and fun musical numbers, the film delivers plenty of laughs. Not only that but the film manages to appeal to more than just the core audience for whom these films are normally targeted. A full on princess movie might only appeal to young girls but this film has plenty to appease young boys as well, the comedy adventure style making this more than just a classic princess movie (though that element never fails to come through as well), being a film that delivers as much in the action adventure department as it does in the romance aspect and the musical numbers. As well as being a technically proficient film in terms of visuals and music, the film also boasts good voices, Zachary Levi’s vocals perfectly capturing Flynn’s ego and sense of self importance as well as his charisma and later his more touchy feely side while Mandy Moore generally proves decent in bringing to life her character. The other vocal performances are also good and mention must be given to appearances by such stars as Jeffrey Tambor, Brad Garrett and Richard Kiel as thugs who turn out to be quite soft on the inside. In general, the characterisation is also very good – thus giving the voice actors plenty to work with – Flynn not being your typical prince type character, rather far more of a rogue, while Rapunzel is a traditional Disney princess, only with a very slight modern twist, being far from a helpless damsel in distress and quite capable of holding her own. The story is hardly complicated and certainly won’t get your brain in a tangle, offering few surprises and generally being very predictable but the writing is pretty decent and you really won’t care that you probably know how everything will work out. Very sweet, extremely lively and upbeat, lots of fun and with good values, this film is just too delightful for you to be let down by a slight case of predictability. Combining action, adventure, laughs and romance, Tangled is a film that the whole family can enjoy. A stunning work of animation, this is a truly magical and enchanting 3D moviegoing experience. Don’t be fooled by the fact that the film is CG – in spirit, this is a classic Disney princess movie.

———————————————————————————————————————————-
Review by Robert Mann BA (Hons)