Blog

By The_Reaper.

I was sent a reviewers copy of a short film recently screened in New York, named Therapeutic. It’s about this therapist that has quite a unique technique when it comes to treating her patients… You know that saying that goes “every psychiatrist has to have three psychiatrists”? Well that’s exactly what’s going on in this here short film. In short, the therapist is most probably an escaped patient from some or other high security insane asylum… The idea truly put a smile on my face.

Now, let’s get down to the nitty gritty part of my job, reviewing the film.

Therapeutic is unfortunately one of those movies that suffer from “indie flick budget” syndrome. If this film had a budget it would have been a hit, I’m quite certain of it. Sadly, because our independent horror films are being pushed aside for useless romantic comedies that for the most part stars either Jennifer Aniston or Katherine Heigl, we (the horror fans) get stuck with something that had so much potential, yet didn’t have the money to reach it. Lucky for indie flicks… I don’t subtract marks for a low budget.
I do however have to subtract some marks for the dialogue and the acting, not to mention the camera work (which unfortunately lacked in experience). These are all things that are easily fixed, were there a budget for it. On the other hand, I see a promising career for director Evelyn S. Oliver if some experience is gained in this particular field.

My biggest problem with the film, Therapeutic, was that it was too short. This is actually a bit stupid on my part, seeing that it is a short film, but I was left wanting more, I wanted to see the story behind the story and I wanted Evelyn S. Oliver to give me a reason for the therapist (Misty Easler) to do these heinous acts. I understand that budget will always be the main culprit in cases such as these, but as I have recently noticed, people want to help indie films and a fundraising would have benefited the film immensely. (As always, I want to see more blood! Keep in mind folks, a human bleeds excessively, especially when a main artery was hit!)

My verdict:

If you have a spare fifteen minutes on your hands and want to be entertained by a quick suspenseful movie, get your hands on Therapeutic and give it a watch. Help indie films reach their potential by wanting more (if we demand more gory films, and we demand better quality indie films, we need to support them. There’s no other way to get it.).

RATED: 7.5/10

By Sam Lunney.

Considering the effect that the economic climate has had on independent films, it is almost miraculous that this film has come to fruition at all. Initially slated as Mythic International Entertainment’s first production, a myriad of the smaller production companies have come to be credited with the financing of the project (totalling an alleged $25 million). As producer Andrew Curtis related to Variety magazine, the financial structure was ‘more complex than a London Underground map’. Indeed, the development of the film endured several hardships, with Megan Fox backing out in the early stages and at one point the entire supporting cast being replaced (save for Purefoy and Giamatti).

What then of the film itself? To explain it at a base, high-concept level would be a medieval Magnificent Seven, or perhaps an indie, British 300. Make no mistake, action is at the very forefront of this movie, as you will come to realize.

Ironclad tells the story of the siege of Rochester Castle in 1215 by the despotic King John, who has come to transgress the terms of the recently agreed Magna Carta (for those of you who didn’t pay attention in History class- a document forced upon the King limiting his powers by his subjects). Although it could be termed a historical film, the film opens with a narration that implies that the events presented are untold, allowing the excuse for the pre-requisite artistic interpretation, as well as the opportunity to portray a battle that the general public will probably not know much about.

This does not matter a great deal however (everybody does it!), as it is the bombastic thrills and spills, the spills being several gallons of blood, that are the main focus of the film. Body parts come detachable at regular occurrences and the grittiness that British cinema has come to be known for is not lacking in any area. The battle scenes, unapologetically lacking the scale of the major blockbuster set pieces that Hollywood audiences have come to be acquainted with, actually benefit from the dirty realist direction. English, who also co-wrote the movie, repeatedly downplays the glory of war as a noble thing, instead acknowledging it as a gory and nightmarish undertaking that should not define the individual taking part. There is no grand, Lord of the Rings type spectacle to be found here, yet this may not benefit audience members who dislike shaky and disorientating camera work at times. To be fair, if it stayed stationary, it would just be 3 blokes in dirty furs rolling in the mud.

This does not render the movie small time, as there is indeed an impressive cast on board. Along with the usual British actor gang (Dance, Cox), who lend a dependable sense of legitimacy as authority figures, there is the outstanding Paul Giamatti in the role of King John. Despite a long tradition of American actors stinking up screens with unconvincing English accents and corny gesticulations, Giamatti plays it just right as a fiery monarch bound to the Divine Right of Kings in conflict with the people he governs. He is an antagonist that is not so much painted as pointed in his motivations, and the actor deserves all of the praise that continues to come his way. James Purefoy also is a protagonist that fits the bill correctly as a meticulous, man-weapon Knight Templar. There is no need for extended dramatic monologues when a character’s main focus is hacking men to bits, so why should dialogue be more than a few gravelly-voiced polemics? Purefoy, on this showing, as well as an impressive TV portfolio, should soon be a probable fixture on screens to come.

Ironclad is an unashamed man-movie (there is a minimal romance thread and the wenches are indeed comely) which is well worth your time. A couple of minutes could have been shed and a bit of focus reinforced, but these are minor criticisms. Give it a go, and be glad that British independent cinema is capable of movies like this.

***

By Robert Mann.

Diary of a Wimpy Kid 2: Rodrick Rules ***½

Considering that, as the title suggests, they revolve around a rather wimpy lead character, the Diary of a Wimpy Kid films have to date proven surprisingly mighty, their opening weekends at the US box office, where the first film beat up romantic action comedy The Bounty Hunter on its opening weekend and the second one – which was released there in March but is only now getting its UK release – well, sucker punched Sucker Punch on its first weekend, exemplifying this – how often is it that you get to say that two major Hollywood movies have been completely pulverised and totally embarrassed by a little film that, for all intensive purposes, should never have posed any kind of threat to them?

Admittedly, the UK box office performance for the first film was poor at best but Diary of a Wimpy Kid nonetheless received a warm reception from many of those who did see it upon its release over here and interest in sequel Diary of a Wimpy Kid 2: Rodrick Rules seems to be considerably greater as a result – even though in America interest seems to have dropped off somewhat since the first film, this sequel proving less successful there. Based on the book of the same name, the second in the Diary of a Wimpy Kid series by American author and cartoonist Jeff Kinney which currently consists of five volumes, with a sixth scheduled for release in November of this year – other volumes that may get adapted for the screen at some point in the future including The Last Straw, Dog Days and The Ugly Truth – the commercial success of the film was practically a given considering the significant built in audience that exists in the form of fans of the books but, following the lower box office numbers, is a critical reception that also falls somewhat short of that of the first film, the reaction from critics generally being that this is a follow up that is not as good as its predecessor.

This is despite that fact that most of the original characters are returning with the same actors once again playing the roles and original screenwriters Gabe Sachs and Jeff Judah have returned along with them. That said, though, original director Thor Freudenthal (Hotel for Dogs) has been replaced by director David Bowers, who previously helmed the CG animated features Flushed Away and Astro Boy and who is making his live action directorial debut on this film, and the transition from animation to live action directing is not always a smooth one. So, how does Diary of a Wimpy Kid 2: Rodrick Rules compare to the original film and more importantly how does it stand up on its own terms? Does it follow the example of its box office performance in being a mighty sequel that really stands out from the crowd or rather does it disappoint as an effort that proves, well shall I say, wimpy?

He may only just be starting his second year at middle school but tweenie Greg Heffley (Zachary Gordon) is already finding the embarrassment and misery that he endured in his first year catching up with him. Caught right in the middle between his nasty older brother Rodrick (Devon Bostick) and his mischievous baby brother Manny (Connor and Owen Fielding) and with even his parents Susan (Rachael Harris) and Frank (Steve Zahn) being as embarrassing as ever, it doesn’t seem like Greg’s life can possibly get any worse but as his rivalry with Rodrick reaches whole new heights he finds himself facing his biggest life challenge to date – being nice to his big brother. Susan has decided to deal with Greg and Rodrick’s constant arguments by offering them cash to get along and to help them bond she and Frank go away for the weekend, leaving Rodrick in charge. Naturally, he throws a huge house party and locks Greg in the basement. Upon the return of their parents, however, they realise that, if either of them comes clean about the fact that they had a party, they will both be in big trouble – that and Rodrick really wants to keep getting mom bucks for good behaviour.

Hence, a truce of sorts is formed between them and for the first time ever they find themselves being nice to one another. As Rodrick’s band Loded Diper prepares to perform at an upcoming talent show along with their new member Bill (Fran Kranz), Greg and best friend Rowley Jefferson (Robert Capron) also set out to achieve stardom, Greg’s idea being to become internet sensations by putting a video on YouTube while Rowley is more interested in preparing his magic act for the talent show. Meanwhile, Greg has taken a liking to new girl Holly Hills (Peyton List) and tries to win her over but finds his attempts to win her over failing, even with the advice being given to him by newly non nasty brother, and it certainly doesn’t help that she thinks he is the disgusting and gross Fregley (Grayson Russell)! If that wasn’t bad enough Greg also has to face the wrath of bad girl Patty Farrell (Laine MacNeil) and finds himself with a new nemesis in the form of Chirag Gupta (Karan Brar). Can Greg overcome all the obstacles that his second year of middle school is throwing at him to win the heart of Holly? And can he and Rodrick maintain their truce long enough to make it to the talent show?

The first Diary of a Wimpy Kid was one of those films that I went to see with very low expectations but was subsequently very pleasantly surprised by how good it actually turned out to be. So, my expectations for the sequel were understandably higher, something that makes Diary of a Wimpy Kid 2: Rodrick Rules a bit of a disappointment by comparison, if only slightly so. Much of the blame for this seems to belong to director David Bowers whose direction is considerably less effective than Thor Freudenthal’s was in the first film. As a sequel, this is a film that fails to fully recapture the charm of its predecessor and also feels somehow less smart than that film. It might be easy to blame the writers but generally the writing in this film, which is by the same people as the first film, seems to be on pretty much the same level as it was in that film – even if, perhaps, the book it is based on doesn’t necessarily offer such rich material to work with as the first book did.

Sure, there isn’t a lot of plot to speak of but there wasn’t that much in the first film either. Generally speaking, the storyline here is perfectly sufficient for the needs of the film, the dialogue is good also and the character development also proves sufficient, even though the characters do often come across a bit like caricatures. Where the film succeeds the most is in the way it embraces its innate childishness, this in fact being where most of the charm and humour come from. The embarrassing situations that many children might find themselves in from time to time and that Greg Heffley finds himself in a lot provide much of the focus and these embarrassing situations are ones that you will probably feel like you shouldn’t laugh at but likely will. Such things as Rowley lip syncing to Ke$ha’s TiK ToK for a YouTube video, Greg and Rowley watching the lamest horror movie ever in the form of ‘The Foot’, a hilarious magic performance at the talent show and Greg’s mom embarrassing him with her dancing provide plenty to laugh at and fans of the first film might also be inspired to giggle slightly by a little in-joke in the form of the spot where “the cheese” used to be.

Unfortunately, while the humour is often pretty funny but it is also often rather cringe worthy and it never seems as witty as that in the first film. The result is something that is funny but creates a sense that it could be so much funnier. Despite the film not living up to its full potential in the humour department, however, it still proves very successful in the manner in which it offers a child’s outlook on life in middle school and the world in general. Everything we see here is from Greg’s perspective, us being given insights into the way he think through the portrayal of his fantasies about ways in which his life might be better and, just like in the first film, animated segments being interspersed throughout, representing the illustrations in Greg’s diary and helping to ground the film in his perspective. The caricature style cartoons once again have a very appropriate look and style and the incorporation of the drawings into some of the live action segments here is seamless and effective – for instance, in the film’s opening scene, the Heffley family car pulls up with cartoon versions of the characters inside before they get out and transform into their live action selves, something which is very well executed and is a good visual flourish.

With a variety of colourful and entertaining characters to play, the actors here do a pretty good job. Zachary Gordon is a believably wimpy lead, making Greg a likable character but also one who is not particularly strong willed, making the way he constantly falls victim to Rodrick, portrayed with an appropriate level of nastiness by Devon Bostick, and Manny, portrayed perfectly mischievously by Connor and Owen Fielding, and is repeatedly embarrassed by his parents, very embarrassingly portrayed by Rachael Harris and Steve Zahn, all the more believable – you’ve really got to feel for Greg as his life is being made miserable by his brothers and even his parents at times. Playing a character who holds an understanding of Greg’s situation with his brothers, having experienced the same thing herself with her two sisters, Peyton List is a real cutie and a very good object of affection for Greg. It’s a shame though that she and Greg are not explored as a couple – but maybe that’s something a later chapter from the diary. As Greg’s friends and classmates, Robert Capron perfectly makes uncool not seem so uncool, Karan Brar delivers a very confident performance as a character who is very over confident, Grayson Russell is as childishly gross as ever and Laine MacNeil once again convinces as the tough girl but also gets a chance to show a believable other side to her character.

Sadly, the absence of Chloë Grace Moretz who stole the show in the first film is greatly felt here, her loss being another reason why this sequel is lagging behind the first film. All in all, Diary of a Wimpy Kid 2: Rodrick Rules is funny and heart-warming with a sweetness that wins out in the end but it never recaptures the magic of the first film and really is a tad too cringe worthy at times, so much so that it might be slightly embarrassing just to be seen watching it. So, a decent film in its own right then but, as a follow up, it is a slightly wimpy one.

By ameliaforsbrook.

Thought you knew all about punk? Think again. This film not only unearths a new punk subculture, but teaches us a lot about how and why we use rebellion.

Bobby Naderi is excellent as Yusef, a naïve and likeable young man who enters the house of outsiders and Noureen DeWulf’s riot grrl portrayal of Rabeya is seasoned with just the right amount of anger and protest.

Such brilliant casting is supported by a focus on how clothing comes to represent our identities. There is a brilliant moment where the house-mates throw down their varied shoes outside the mosque, balancing two subcultures most would assume are incompatible. Similarly, Rabeya’s burka, embellished with patches and a button badge bearing the word ‘dyke’, allows numerous associations to violently collide, revealing the wearer as a woman who is refreshingly more than capable of expressing herself.

Unfortunately, this movie’s biggest shortcoming is its unfulfilled ambition. Unlike the throwaway calls for ‘ANARCHY’ that punk has become defined by, many lines in The Taqwacores are delivered with an expectant weight. Aware that its content is thought-provoking and controversial, the film’s success seems to rely on us bringing our own analysis to excavate deeper meanings from its shallow portrayals.

Yes, this gritty, low-budget insight into the subculture of Punk Islam is bound to have a few critics, but I’m sure it will have a middle finger or two to answer that with.

Best line: I’m too wrapped up in my mismatching of disenfranchised culture.

By bADVERTISING.

Once again here’s another fashionably late straight to DVD double-bill. Maybe ‘Belated Reviews’ could become a regular feature. No? Ok, fair enough…

Franco-Belgian horror The Pack starts promisingly enough, clearly taking inspiration from recent continental horror efforts like Haute Tension and Martyrs. Charlotte (Emilie Dequenne) drives through the grey French countryside, puffing cigarettes and listening to French punk music. Clearly designed to be an intelligent, take-no-shit modern kind of girl, she nevertheless breaks horror movie survival rule #15 – ‘don’t pick up the the hitchhiker’ – and travels on to a rural truck-stop known locally as La Spack, named after it’s sinister looking landlady (Yolande Moreau). Naturally, things start to go wrong…

The Pack’s opening gambit is more effective if you’re familiar with the tropes of modern French horror. These new ultraviolet and nihilistic films often feature strong female leads and washed-out, queasy colour-ranges, and so the first 20 minutes or so crackle with a sense of foreboding. The expectation is that the film will devolve into something nasty and grimy. And to an extent, it does – Charlotte is kidnapped and caged, and her blood is drawn from an elaborate and unsanitary looking home-made contraption. However, the film starts to stutter when the reasons for Charlotte’s incarceration are revealed.

It turns out that the frumpy La Spack is the mother of a pack of ground-dwelling zombie-cannibals, and they need feeding. While the creatures are well designed and certainly look terrifying enough, it feels like they are revealed too early, undermining the good work done at the start of the film and dissipating the sense of dread. Moving from suspenseful horror-mystery to creature-feature just isn’t quite handled all that well and the picture continues on its wayward trajectory until the end, culminating in a twisty ending that feels tacked on, as though the film-makers felt obliged to do it. Ultimately, The Pack feels somewhat like a missed opportunity, especially given its strong start.

At least Risen can’t be charged with the same offence as The Pack, because it doesn’t even start well. It tells the tale of real life championship boxer and ‘Welsh Wizard’ Howard Winestone (Stuart Brennan), who rose to prominence in the 1960’s and became something of a Welsh sporting hero. Risen follows Howard from an industrial accident in his home town of Merthyr Tydfil, through to his fights for the World Championship title that became his obsession.

The story is packed with potential, but unfortunately the film is hamstrung at almost every turn by a low budget, almost non-existent production values and some atrocious acting. It almost feels mean to have a go at the film, but given that someone, somewhere spent their hard earned cash on making it, it should be able to justify its existence. Leading man Brennan is passable, if not entirely engaging, but his supporting cast range from ‘okay’ to truly awful. Recognisable face John Noble (LOTR’s King Denethor) as Howard’s trainer Eddie Thomas spectacularly fails at accents; his Welsh lilt flitting somewhere between a bad Richard Burton impression and Mel Gibson’s Braveheart.

A lot of the time you can’t really hear Noble’s accent however (a mixed blessing), as the sound design is truly terrible. Characters mutter their lines or shout over the top of each other, with one particular scene where Howard finds out he’s due to fight for the British Championship belt rendered completely unintelligible as three men talk over each other.

But this is a boxing film – the fights are most important, right? Well, in Risen’s defence, the hits look real, and hard. Cinematically though, they are un-stylish. One fight with reigning Champion Vicente Saldivar (Erik Morales) is shot almost entirely in slow motion and set, of all things, to Moonlight Sonata, just serves to magnify the uninspiring choreography. Howard’s home life was clearly somewhat troubled in real life, but here it feels soap opera-esque – this fact magnified by cheap sets and bad lighting.

Parallels drawn on the DVD’s cover to Raging Bull are certainly not to be trusted. Unfortunately Risen lets down the legacy of a real Welsh hero.