Blog

By Robert Mann.

The legendary Howard Marks – drug trafficker, spy and world-class charmer. Born in South Wales in 1945, his beginnings were as unremarkable as anyone else, yet he went to live a life that has included careers as a teacher, a drug smuggler, an author, an actor, a campaigner for the legalisation of cannabis and even an (unsuccessful) politician.

Through supposed connections with groups such as the IRA and the Mafia and high profile court cases he achieved notoriety as an international hashish (a particular preparation of cannabis – Marks refused to deal with hard drugs) smuggler and at the height of his career it was said that he controlled 10% of the world’s hashish trade. He was eventually caught by the American Drug Enforcement Association and served seven years in a prison in Indiana. And while Marks’ life may sound like a work of complete fiction, it is quite remarkably true, and his imprisonment isn’t where his story comes to an end as, following his release, he went on to publish the best-selling 1996 autobiography Mr Nice – which is the inspiration for this very film – as well as several follow up works and has had several small acting roles/cameo appearances in films like Human Traffic and Killer Bitch, not to mention his campaigning work and his standing for election to Parliament in 1997 with the single issue of the legalisation of cannabis, something which prompted the creation of the Legalise Cannabis Alliance in 1999. And now, following all of these things that have happened in his remarkable life, not to mention him touring the world with his own one-man show and being the subject of Sky 1 documentary Stoned in Suburbia, Howard Marks is receiving his very own big screen biopic (and he even collaborates with British artist Kav Sandhu on the track Mr Nice for the film) in the form of Mr Nice, with the title role of Marks himself going to fellow Welshman and acclaimed actor Rhys Ifans and the job of both writing and directing going to the somewhat unobvious choice of Bernard Rose, who is perhaps best known for 1992 horror film Candyman. But there is nothing horrific about his latest movie except for perhaps the fact that it is nowhere near as good as you may have been told it is.

From humble beginnings in South Wales the intelligent Howard Marks (Rhys Ifans) wins a place at Oxford University in the 1960s. Howard is initiated into the world of drugs by his girlfriend, Ilze (Elsa Pataky), but the death of a friend from a heroin overdose forces him to straighten out. He gets his degree and returns to Wales to be a teacher, as does Ilze. Boredom sets in after he and Ilze are married and, at a party in London, Howard encounters the temptation of drugs and a lithe young lady named Judy (Chloe Sevigny). When an old friend asks Howard to bring a carload of hash back from Germany, the near-calamitous journey ends with Howard winning both the respect of established traffickers and the love of Judy. The game is well and truly on as an unbelievable adventure begins for Howard and Judy, one that sees him doing business with the likes of Kabul drug supplier Saleem Makik (Omid Djalili), IRA member Jim McCann (David Thewlis), American drug dealer Ernie Combs (Crispin Glover) and crooked accountant Patrick Lane (Jamie Harris), recruited into MI6 by old friend Hamilton McMillan (Christian McKay) and pursued by DEA agent Lovato (Luis Tosar).

It could be said that Howard Marks has lived a very exciting life and you would certainly expect any film based on it to be exciting as well. Exciting, however, is not a word that can be used to describe Mr Nice. It isn’t that the film isn’t interesting because Howard Marks’ life story is an interesting one no matter it is presented, him having lived more in his life than most people, but the presentation here is that of a dull biopic rather than a truly engaging drama, the kind of thing that might pass in a television documentary but as a movie just doesn’t cut it. What we actually see of Marks’ drug smuggling operation is generic, the kind of thing that we have seen before many times in other movies and, while his cleverness occasionally shows through, most of what we see is just dull. It’s certainly in keeping with a key theme that is present in the film – the life of a drug dealer is NOT a glamorous one – but it doesn’t make for anything truly enthralling from the perspective of the moviegoer. In portraying the man behind the legend the film is considerably more successful with a fair amount of time put into showing Marks’ personal life and the characters mostly being very well developed, Marks in particular coming across as a very well rounded character for whom the title of Mr NICE is really quite accurate as he is presented not as some evil criminal mastermind but rather as a human being who doesn’t believe he is doing anything wrong and who never resorts to violence or the pushing of hard drugs. Consequently, he is a character who we can feel empathy for even and actually care about as he flouts the laws of different nations. Even the character based stuff, however, fails to be particularly gripping. The blame for this likely goes to Bernard Rose for his writing, despite offering up some good dialogue and employing the smart approach of presenting Marks’ story as it is being told to a live audience at his one man show (voiceover being used very effectively here), is very lacking in the plot department and as the film progresses it begins to feel rather repetitive, even longwinded. In terms of the direction, however, Rose fares much better with a number of stylistic touches ensuring that this is, at the very least, a film that looks good.

The film starts out in black and white as we are introduced to the completely sober Howard Marks before he is introduced to the world of drugs and only when he takes his first drag of cannabis does the colour start to drain in, this touch not being especially original but proving very effective. Colour in general is used effectively here with a strong contrast between duller colours when Marks is sober and vibrant, brighter ones when is stoned, something that effectively distinguishes the two different worlds between which Marks steps foot. The cinematography in general is excellent and the way in which the film has been shot often gives it a trippy, psychedelic look, something that is very appropriate given the themes that the film explores. The film has also been shot in such a way that is actually looks like a film that was made during the 60s, 70s or 80s with the picture quality being very much like what you would have seen in a film from any of these decades (the same decades over which the film’s events take place) and there is also effective integration of real life archive and news footage, something that gives the film a look and feel that is authentic to the periods. The performances on display are also excellent with Rhys Ifans, in particular, standing out and once again demonstrating why he is one of the finest actors of his generation. His performance is note perfect and whether he is playing Marks completely sober or stoned out of his mind he never fails to convince or bring on the charm. His co-stars are also superb but the real scene stealers come from the likes of David Thewlis, Christian McKay and an almost unrecognisable Crispin Glover. Unfortunately, neither the strength of these performances or the quality of the visuals is enough to overcome the fact that the film as a whole really is quite tedious viewing. The story never really engages, making it hard to really get into what is happening and the overall film is a real drag (pardon the pun). So, Mr Nice is a not a film without its strengths, being very technically proficient and boasting great acting but its failure to really enthral us with a truly engrossing storyline makes for a film that you won’t love, rather just consider to be nice.

I have to be honest I’ve never cared for Kevin Bishop’s comedy show when it was on British TV. It consisted of broad impersonations of celebrities that most school boys could (with the subtle humour to match). Although it is heartening to note that he played Jim Hawkins in Muppet Treasure Island. That aside seeing his name above the title did little to excite me about this film. Luckily Bishop doesn’t get to break out his arsenal of stupid impressions.

He plays Officer Baz who whilst cycling away from a community meeting is assault by a local crim. Sustaining a bad concussion he starts to experience blinding migraines which also gives him the urge/brainwave to kill people who witnesses breaking the law. You may have guessed from the titles use of the letter “U” that the films plot heavily relies on all the mod cons; texting, YouTube, i-Pad apps all feature heavily in the story. This is just a straight forward Death Wish rehash, our anti-hero likes to record his killings and put them up online as some sort of deterrent to the residence of East London. Worried about licensing laws or even being charged with murder he asks each victim “may I kill you?” befor clubbing, strangling or electrocuting people to death. I’m not entirely sure it works as a defence in court – not sure Boston Legal covered that.

There are some slick moments where text bubbles appear on screen when characters receive them. It’s a trick that seems to associated with TV’s Sherlock but it should become a standard way to deliver these message. Assuming texts will be around for a couple more years at least, it makes a change to them being read out or having to cut to a phone for 10 seconds in order for the audience to read them. May I Kill U? also is one of the first films I can think of that utilises phone and desktop apps. Most of us use them now. Again it’s a plot device which will probably start be used more often in films.

But technological inventiveness aside May I Kill U? doesn’t have a whole lot else to recommend. It seems to be aiming for some sort of biting social satire. But it’s not funny when it tries to be or horrific enough when it needs to be. You could read the tone of the film as being judgemental toward viewers appetite for murder and death on the web. The overall tone though feels more like a wish fulfilment for anyone who’s been annoyed by thugs in the street or thought “castrations too good for them” when they see stories about sex traffickers. In this world you can murder folk, tweet about it, build up an online celebrity status, get an attractive girlfriend and have people applaud you for it. This is fantastical realism in it’s extreme. Director Stuart Urban has a slick visual eye and knows how to use his locations well. Sometimes the acting needs reigning in but for the most part the cast are solid. Stuart Urban the writer though needs to find the right balance in his story – is this thriller? Comedy? Horror? Throw in some almost random Oedipus subplot and the story seems a little all over the place. Overall May I Kill U? is a film once seen and quickly forgotten.

By DeeDee Spears.

This is another one of those films that I saw a few years ago but at the time I never fully appreciated how brilliant it really was. When it comes to the works of the Coen brothers there are so many bloody good films to chose from. Whether its oddball comedy or thought provoking drama, chances are the Coen brothers have had a “go” at the Genre. Im usually not an avid fan of “Period Piece” films as I have seen a few of them done terribly but in watching this film I was amazed at how much attention to detail there was going into the film which was a pleasant surprise compared to some of the terrible period pieces I have seen in the past. “Millers Crossing” features 2 Actors whom I believe never really got the credit they deserved in Hollywood and 1 Actor whom I believe should of been Giant among the more mature Actors of today.

I’m referring to Steve Buscemi and Marcia Gay Harden. Steve Buscemi is usually used as the punchy bit part Actor who makes a huge Impact in the short amount of screen time he is given (Desperado, Con Air, The Big Lebowski) the man has this down to an Art Form. To be able to do this requires a “Hell” of a lot of skill and charm. In his scenes in most films people find themselves drawn to his characters and in this film he is no different. Than we have Marcia Gay Harden. I first noticed her in Frank Darabont’s “The Mist” which her portrayal of Crazed Religious fanatic “Rose Barlow” honestly “creeped the shit outta me”.

She was that convincing to a fault. Than I got to see her work again in Clint Eastwoods powerful “Mystic River” in which I felt she stood out amongst the “Stacked” ensemble cast which she worked with in that film which is by any means no small feat. Than we go onto the Actor whom I feel was the Power behind “Millers Crossing” and I believe should be up amongst the Deniro’s and Pacino’s of our time. Albert Finney (you thought I was gonna say Gabriel Byrne dind’t you) I believe is an Actor who IS being under utilized by Hollywood and. Albert Finney and Brian Cox (I know but I couldn’t help myself I’m a huge Brian Cox fan) are 2 Actors whom I believe should have greater status in Hollywood. Both are renown Powerful performers who flawlessly portray any emotion they are given. Albert Finney pretty much sets the tone for “Millers Crossing” with the brilliant finishing touches provided by Gabriel Byrne, John Turturro and the rest of this brilliant cast.

Stanley Kubrick has dismissed Fear And Desire, his 1953 feature debut, as  a “lousy picture, roughly and poorly and ineffectively made”. Its hard to argue with the late great auteurs’ own assessment, at times the film feels amateurish in its execution particularly in the technical aspects of filmmaking, poorly dubbed dialogue and rough sound editing often detract from the narrative. However there are moments within the film which stand out as pure Kubrick both in their execution and the way they deal with certain themes that the director would later explore in his later, more well known, work.

Fear And Desire is an existential war story which, as a narrator informs us at the outset is ‘outside history, only the unchanging shapes of fear and doubt and death are from our world’. As such there is no clear setting or cultural context for the film to operate in, leaving us with only the characters to navigate some unknown world. The narrative follows four soldiers trapped behind enemy lines as they struggle to survive. The characters themselves are archetypes, the standard soldiers we have seen in countless war films since — the by the book leader, the gruff second in command, the nervous young recruit. The fact that these men can often seem robotic or inhuman could be considered a major flaw in the film, not allowing the audience to connect to the protagonists. Alternatively this could be the exact point that Kubrick and his screenwriter Howard Sackler are trying to make. The dehumanising effect of war would later go on to become a key theme in Kubrick’s seminal Full Metal Jacket (1987) and it’s not hard to see the themes, and techniques the director uses to convey them, begin to take shape here. In a standout sequence the soldiers brutally slaughter a group of enemy combatants and proceed to calmly finish their dinner, the scene is expertly cut with extreme close ups of faces and hands, more than a little reminiscent of the shower scene of Hitchcock’s Psycho.

Parallels can also be drawn between the characters of Pvt. Sidney (Paul Mazursky) and Pvt. ‘Pyle’ (Vincent D’Onofrio) in Full Metal Jacket, as the two men similarly descend into madness. However it is the former that remains the more chilling and effective as a combination of over acting from Mazursky and a somewhat rushed transition from innocence to outright lunacy takes place within the Fear And Desire‘s admittedly short running time (at just over an hour, it barely qualifies as a ‘feature’)

Unfortunately the filmmaking of Kubrick’s debut struggles to effectively put across a clear message. Whether this is due to Sackler’s at times overly simple, at times overly philosophical, script or the wooden performances is hard to tell but as Kubrick himself suggested “the ideas which we wanted to put across were good. But we didn’t have the experience to embody them dramatically”.

For die hard Kubrick fans and cinephiles, Fear And Desire will no doubt provide new material to study and analyse, for general audiences however it is a perplexing and often sterile exercise, a rough sketch from a director who would go on to become one of cinema’s greatest artists.

Fear and Desire is out on Blu Ray and DVD on 28th January