Author: Alton Williams

St Trinian’s 2: The Legend of Fritton’s Gold ****

The St Trinian’s films have been a staple of the British film industry for a long time with the five films being released across a 26 year span, ranging from 1954 to 1980. Some of these were regarded to be classics of British comedy cinema while others were considered charmless additions to a film series well past its sell by date. Its significant role in British film history was enough to warrant a revival, released in 2007, which was produced by British filmmaking institution Ealing Studios which has seen something of a comeback in recent years. While the practice of updating the series to keep up with the times wasn’t something that had proved wholly successful with previous instalments in this case it worked well, reflecting the less reserved times we now live in, and the film was a big hit, making a follow-up inevitable. With the release of St. Trinian’s: The Legend of Fritton’s Gold that follow-up is here. But is this sequel a film that will be remembered as a classic in the years to come or is it something that will be quickly forgotten? It’s hard to say really but for the time being at least it is a very funny film.

Life is as chaotic as ever for the goths, emos, trustafarians, geeks and ‘posh totty’ of St Trinian’s boarding school. When Celia (Juno Temple) is offered £20,000 by the nasty Lord Pomfrey (David Tennant) to obtain a ring that has been hidden in the school library for hundreds of years, the other girls Chelsea (Tamsin Egerton), Roxy (Sarah Harding), Bianca (Zawe Ashton), Beth (Jessica Bell), Zoe (Montserrat Lombard), Lucy (Ella Smith), Tania (Cloe Mackie), Tara (Holly Mackie), Daisy (Daisy Tonge), Bella (Clara Paget), Saffy (Gabriella Wilde), Jess (Jessica Agombar) and Harriet (Harriet Bamford) – now lead by new head girl Annabelle Fritton (Talulah Riley), decide to get in on the act and try to get more money out of Pomfrey. Their attempt backfires, however, and Pomfrey breaks into the school and steals the ring. Learning from headmistress Camilla Fritton (Rupert Everett) that the ring is one of two that when combined will lead to the location of a treasure buried long ago by her pirate ancestor, the girls are going to use all their guts, guile and girly charm to find the second ring, steal back the first one and find the treasure. But to do so they must stay ahead of Lord Pomfrey and his women hating secret society AD1 who are determined to stop the girls at any cost. Enlisting the help of former St Trinian’s head girl Kelly Jones (Gemma Arterton) and Miss Fritton’s love interest Geoffrey Thwaites (Colin Firth), the girls set about finding the treasure and putting an end to the plan’s of the bad guys. But with AD1 having people everywhere, can the feisty girl-gang outfox their fiendish rivals?

St Trinian’s 2: The Legend of Fritton’s Gold is a distinctly British film. The humour is aimed squarely at the British movie-going audience, being of the very silly variety that people in other countries likely wouldn’t be able to appreciate in the same way as does. It is silly but not so much in a way that seems lowest common denominator and while moviegoers with more sophisticated tastes in comedy probably won’t have much appreciation for this film, there is enough here to amuse quite a broad audience. The film could be criticised for having many of the characters as stereotypes – the girls are all in cliques and the bad guys are rich, posh politicians – but this is rather a charm of the film, something that works in its favour. The film doesn’t portray characters stereotypically in any kind of offensive manner but rather in an old fashioned kind of way, not taking itself seriously in any way. In fact, a degree of suspension of disbelief is required when watching this film really, as there is no way much of what happens could happen in real life. This is, of course, why the film offers such great escapism though. The reason the characters, and thus the humour, work so well can be heavily attributed to the cast. While no one is exactly going to win any awards for their acting, everyone is extremely game and they are all the more amusing for it. This is particularly the case with Rupert Everett who not only spends the entire film in drag, playing a female character, but actually, in one very funny and slightly cringe worthy scene, kisses Colin Firth. Firth too is extremely game as demonstrated by that particular scene, and David Tennant is also very amusing, clearly getting much enjoyment out of playing the bad guy for a change. As for the girls, they all shine, each bringing their own touches to their roles. They are all good so it is hard to pick out any particular ones who shine. The film isn’t as strong in all aspects, the story being pretty thin, but the film does what it sets out to do. It is extremely funny, very British and a great piece of entertainment. Only time will tell if the film is remembered fondly but for the time being St Trinian’s 2: The Legend of Fritton’s Gold is at least a hugely entertaining that is definitely worth checking out if you are in the mood for some good laughs, the kind of which only the British could provide.

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

Review by Robert Mann BA (Hons)

Sherlock Holmes ****½

Since the early days of cinema filmmakers have looked to classic literary works for inspirations for their films, the novel adaptation having just as big a place in cinema history as more original cinematic works. The same is still quite true today but perhaps in a different way. While literal adaptations of classic novels do still show up from time to time – a la the recent A Christmas Carol – many classic novels have been adapted so many times for both the big and small screen that there is little left to get out of truly faithful adaptations so a new approach has come into being, one that can be described in once simple word – re-imagining. The updating of a classic literary work to make it more modern is something that most of us will have seen in way or another but never before has there been one that has come with such controversy as Guy Ritchie’s 21st century take on Sherlock Holmes. Essentially taking a character that we all know thanks to numerous portrayals in many adaptations and turning him into some kind of Victorian action hero, there has been some criticism that the original intention of author Arthur Conan Doyle has been lost, despite claims by Ritchie that they have actually stuck quite faithfully to Doyle’s original writing and suggestions that this depiction of Holmes may actually be closer to Doyle’s original intention, the version of the character we are used to seeing in fact being the unfaithful interpretation. Whether or not the film is a truly faithful interpretation isn’t really of much significance, though, as long as people actually like the interpretation and judging by the extremely positive response thus far it is fair to assume that this 21st century repackaging of a well worn out literary character is winning big with audiences. And quite deservedly so I might add.

After finally catching serial killer and occult ‘sorcerer’ Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong), legendary sleuth Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) and his assistant Dr. John Watson (Jude Law) can close yet another successful case. But when Blackwood mysteriously returns from the grave and resumes his killing spree, Holmes must take up the hunt once again. Contending with his partner’s new fiancée Mary (Kelly Reilly) and Inspector Lestrade (Eddie Marsan), the dimwitted head of Scotland Yard, the dauntless detective must unravel the clues that will lead him into a twisted web of murder, deceit, and black magic – and the deadly embrace of temptress Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) who has an agenda of her own. However, as Blackwood’s devilish plans unfold and his seemingly supernatural abilities reveal themselves, Holmes finds himself facing not only his biggest and toughest case yet, but also a plot that could change the face of the whole world.

Despite what many literary purists will inevitably say, Guy Ritchie’s Sherlock Holmes is not an adaptation that will make Arthur Conan Doyle roll in his grave (or rise from it to enact revenge) – quite the opposite in fact. This interpretation may be sold as a modern take on the source material but in many ways it is actually pretty old fashioned. There is a distinct sense of authenticity to proceedings, with the look, sound and feel of 1890s London being convincingly captured in everything from production design to costumes and performances to dialogue. While the film has been represented as a ‘modern’ take on the Holmes character none of the essence of the period has been compromised. So, no 21st century dialogue has been slipped in to bring in the 21st century audience. Just the action has been amped up, making this interpretation of Holmes much faster paced than past ones. And for anyone worried about the action compromising the integrity of Doyle’s signature creation, there is no need to fear, as the action sequences merely fill in details implied in the original stories. Doyle would say that Holmes apprehends or arrests the bad guy. Here we see HOW he does so. After all, the bad guys wouldn’t go down without a fight would they? So, in short, this is a grittier and more down to earth Holmes than we are used to, but still Holmes nonetheless. And the action sequences are just as period authentic as everything else in the film, not to mention being extremely thrilling and quite smartly executed. This is particularly the case with the fight sequences which we are shown first in slow motion, accompanied by Holmes’ musings (presented as voiceover narration) on how best to fight his opponent, then at normal speed as he implements his attack. This approach is smart and original, giving us an insight into Holmes’ distinctive reasoning process, and means that the fights actually serve a purpose in the development of the Holmes character, rather than existing just of the sake of action sequences. Authenticity is present in every facet of the film, particularly the performances, with everyone doing a great job. Robert Downey Jr. is superbly entertaining as Holmes, delivering a fresh and unique take on the character, here presented as brash and rough around the edges, completely unlike past portrayals of the character. He doesn’t just entertain but convinces as well, particularly thanks to a very convincing British accent. His Holmes is one that we can both enjoy watching and genuinely give a damn about, something that is crucial to the success of the film. He isn’t alone, though, with the supporting cast also of a high standard. Jude Law’s Watson is also different to the character we know well, here a mind to rival Holmes and also a tough individual who comes to Holmes’ rescue more than a couple of times (without ever diminishing Holmes’ presence though). Law too is both hugely entertaining and convincing. Rachel McAdams is also very good, being excellently seductive and sly as the only adversary who has ever outsmarted Holmes, while Mark Strong makes for a superbly sinister villain, even if his character is out-shadowed slightly by mystery villain who is present in the background. This is not the fault of Strong though. The success of the performances can also be attributed to the script as well as the actors. As well as sounding very period authentic, the dialogue is also very sharp and smart and sometimes wittily humorous. The writing for Holmes is particularly effective, making us believe that Holmes really is a genius detective. The writing is also very good with regard to plot. The story is very strong and should appeal to both Doyle purists and mainstream moviegoers alike, being very respectful of its source material whilst mixing things up so as to ensure that things never seen in any way tired or predictable. So, overall, Sherlock Holmes is a re-imagining that works. Both smart and fun, it is an adaptation that brings enough new to the fold to attract a new generation of super sleuth fans while also showing respect for its inspirations so as not to alienate those who appreciate Arthur Conan Doyle’s original writings. And with the ending setting things up for a sequel you are sure to leave the cinema eagerly anticipating the follow-up. It is elementary my dear film fan.

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

Review by Robert Mann BA (Hons)

Alvin and the Chipmunks 2: The Squeakquel ***

When Alvin and the Chipmunks was released two years ago no one expected much from it, many self respecting film fans in fact dreading it. However, the film proved to be a huge surprise hit at the box office so a sequel received the immediate green light. And parents, you only have yourselves to blame now that you are being subjected to Alvin and the Chipmunks 2: The Squeakquel – just the word Squeakquel will probably be enough to fill film fans with dread once again. Seriously though, the first film, whilst being rather irritating to accompanying adults wasn’t THAT bad really. It kept the kids entertained, possibly took some parents on a nostalgia trip and was far from being one of the most unbearable kids films that parents have ever had to endure. But does the sequel manage to repeat this feat, a feat which was quite impressive considering the film’s stars were singing chipmunks whose voices are enough to irritate even the most hardened of moviegoers? Not quite, but it still manages to avoid being too irritating, so that’s something.

When their adopted father Dave Seville (Jason Lee) is hospitalised, loveable singing rodents Alvin (voiced by Justin Long), Simon (voiced by Matthew Gray Gubler) and Theodore (voiced by Jesse McCartney) find themselves with a new human minder in the form of Dave’s twenty-something nephew Toby (Zachary Levi) and heading back to the high school classroom like regular kids. There they must save the school’s music programme by winning the $25,000 top prize in a battle of the bands. But first they have to tackle a host of new challenges such as peer pressure, school sports and girls – namely Brittany (voiced by Christina Applegate), Eleanor (voiced by Amy Poehler) and Jeanette (voiced by Anna Faris), aka rival musical trio ‘The Chipettes’. Sneaky manager Ian Hawke (David Cross) is determined to wreak revenge on his former clients The Chipmunks by making the girls the Next Big Thing. Can the two groups overcome their personal and music differences?

As you would expect after the first Alvin and the Chipmunks film The Squeakquel just delivers more of the same. So, from a technical stand point, this film, just like its predecessor, has very little to offer. The plot, or what passes for plot, is wafer thin, existing only to provide a link between the film’s events and the scriptwriting is never more than passable. The performances from the film’s human cast are equally as unimpressive. Jason Lee is relegated to the sidelines this time around, only appearing in a few scenes and then given hardly anything to actually do. In his place is Zachary Levi, from TV’s Chuck, who is an amusing addition to the cast but too is completely wasted in a role that makes no use of his talents. Also wasted are Wendie Malick as school principal Dr Rubin and David Cross who again fails to make an impression as the villain of the piece. Much of this is not the fault of the cast though but rather the writers who give the cast nothing of note to do, not that the target audience will care, as the real stars are The Chipmunks and The Chipettes, who are better than their human counterparts thanks to some good voice work from a (rather unnecessarily) starry voice cast. With such criticisms for the film you would probably wonder why give it three stars? Well, for all its faults this is, at least, a film that will keep the kids happy. The Chipmunks and The Chipettes are totally adorable computer creations and the numerous song performances by each of the groups are lively and fun. This time around, however, none of the songs are the original Chipmunks tunes from the 1950s but rather quite fun cover versions of popular songs from the last year, including ‘Hot N Cold’ and ‘You Spin Me Round’ among others. As for the humour, the film largely delivers on the same level as the first film. The gags are all clean and harmless and kids will probably find it quite hilarious, although parents less so. There are, however, a few movie in-jokes that, while not being particularly smart or inventive, some older viewers may get some appreciation out of. So, overall Alvin and the Chipmunks 2: The Squeakquel is a film that kids will love and parents should be able to be endure. And given the lack of choice for films to take the kids too at the moment parents should be grateful that this film offers simple, harmless fun that the kids will love.

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

Review by Robert Mann BA (Hons)