Category: REVIEWS

Playmobil Movie Tie-In Toy Review

Reviewing toys is something a new experience to me. As a kid I had lots and lots of toys that I would play with all the time, and I’m sure I would have loved the opportunity to review them, but as an adult I don’t tend to really “make-believe” all that often… at least, not with toys, anyway.

So, when BRWC asked me to review some of the Playmobil tie-in toys, released ready for the upcoming Playmobil movie, I was somewhat reluctant to take on the job. However, I had an ace in the hole. My children, aged eight and four, would love to get their hands on some Playmobil sets… and I figured maybe they might like to review them instead.

So, that’s sort of what I did. After a couple of days playing with the sets, I sat down with them to have a chat about how they felt about them. Turns out, they were big successes. As I’m writing this my son is still sat on the floor playing with them both. Count that as a win, Playmobil… his attention span is practically non-existent.

Where to begin? Well, I’ll start with the unpacking and go from there. The two sets that arrived were Del’s Food Truck and Marla with the Flying Horse. My daughter took the Flying Horse, took it out of the box and had it assembled and ready to go before I’d even finished reading the instructions for the other. I asked her how she found putting it together and she said it was “easy”. She seemed to take great pleasure in the fact that she’d done it herself, which is always great to see, and was away and playing before I could get much more out of her.

Del’s Food Truck, on the other hand, was more difficult to assemble. Admittedly, it likely would have been easier if my son had ripped open all the individual plastic bags that contained the many smaller pieces and then strewn them across the floor, but several of the bits were fiddly and involved squeezing my hand uncomfortably through gaps none the less. Del’s Food Truck would most definitely require an adult present to set it all up. It took me around half and hour to forty minutes to get it all together (bearing in mind all the bits had been taken out and thrown around the place, mind you) and then there are the stickers.

Despite the difficulty of getting all the pieces in place, once it was ready to go, I couldn’t help but be impressed by the level of detail in the set. There’s everything from a coffee cup to a milkshake to mini-Playmobil-sized burgers there for kids to play with. Some of these pieces are pretty small, so could get lost or swallowed by younger kids, but the age range is clearly labelled on the box so… I guess that would sort of tell you what to expect.

The kids took the sets and started to craft a little game together. Del’s Food Truck also comes with a little table and stand that sits just out the front of the actual truck itself, and this meant that squabbling between the two was kept to a minimum.

Rather cleverly, as well, as my son pointed out when I was speaking to him about it, the front and the top of Del’s Food Truck lifts off but is easy to re-attach. This meant that he was able to get in and out of the actual truck without much difficulty, and he had a lot of fun using the little draws and cupboards that are inside to make the burgers and serve them to his sister. At one point I even overheard him telling his sister off for not washing her hands after eating, and he made her character, Marla – who comes with the Flying Horse, use the sink inside the truck to do so (like I said, there’s a LOT of detail in it… it’s super impressive).

The characters themselves, Del and Marla, and a third, who is unnamed as far as I could tell but acts as a customer for the food truck, are all pretty much what you’d expect from a Playmobil set. My kids found it hilarious that Del apparently looks like me, but other than that there’s not an awful lot I can really add to them.

The one real negative I got back was from the food truck. My son became increasingly more and more irritated (and by irritated I mean he loudly groaned, pushed the set away and then carried on playing after a moment) by the fact that when you move the food truck around – its wheels actually work, so you can sort of drive it about – the baskets, pots and pans that he’d put neatly away inside would all fall out. Perhaps it would have benefited from a more secure storage area, but it didn’t seem to bother him enough to stop him from playing, and in the end he pulled a strop when he had to put it away and it was time for bed.

The impressive detail in Del’s Food Truck, along with the many extra bits included inside (such as the burgers, table, pots, pans, baskets and cups) did mean that my daughter felt somewhat short changed by Marla and the Flying Horse, which doesn’t really include all that much. But then that is quite clearly determinable from the boxes, and so if you were purchasing them in a shop, I guess you’d probably purchase something more evenly.

Overall both sets were a success. I won’t bother summing them up myself, and instead I’ll give you the ratings my kids gave me.

MARLA AND THE FLYING HORSE – “It’s really cool. I love the wings and the fact that you can sit the person on the horse. I wish the horses legs moved, but that doesn’t bother me much. I love it!”

DEL’S FOOD TRUCK – “Leave me alone, Daddy! I’m playing with the food truck!”

Consider that a win, Playmobil. Well done.

Empathy Inc. – Review

A struggling venture capitalist, Joel (Zack Robidas) invests all of his family’s savings in an extreme virtual reality company. The concept is to give the wealthy an experience inside the shoes of those less fortunate. However, Joel’s struggle to regain his financial status through this ground breaking technology becomes a fight for more than he is willing to lose.

Tightly wound sci-fi thrillers are a difficult thing to master. There has to be some semblance of a grounded reality for the audience to grab on to, and the human element must be potent enough that the plight of the protagonist resonates. The technology touched upon in director Yedidya Gorsetman’s film don’t initially seem like much of a leap from the modern VR and Augmented Reality.

Part of the hook to Empathy Inc. is the “science eventually” concept and the initial pitch from honey tongued Nicolous (Eric Berryman). The extreme VR in question is a near-tangible McGuffin. A means to an end for Joel who is desperate to pick himself up from losing his job, his finances and his pride. On the surface it seems that he’s investing in this new start-up for the right reasons but that slight whiff of avarice clings to the character.

Tonally, Empathy Inc. has elements reminiscent of Darren Aronofski’s debut, Pi (1998) and Shane Carruth’s excellent time-travel movie, Primer (2004). The black and white photography is gorgeous with the use of greyscale perhaps a comment on the intricacies of Joel’s choices and his reasons for his actions.

His relationships aren’t black and white. He lies to his loved ones and manipulates emotions for what he perceives to be a better future for them all. He has the best of intentions as he seduces and bullshits, which is what makes his journey so enticing.

We spend the majority of the film with Zack Robidas, who is excellent as Joel, but robust supporting turns from Berryman, Kathy Searle (as his wife, Jessica) and Jay Klaiz (as antisocial tech-wizard, Lester) are what make this movie work. Their interconnectivity within this tangled web of lies and the true nature of Empathy Inc. lead to a truly remarkable final act that assuredly sprints with its science fiction.

Not only is it thrilling, it’s exhilarating, with tension mounting as the stakes get higher and the concept, weirder.

Empathy Inc. is a cautionary tale for those willing to re-align their moral centre to keep a white-knuckle grasp on their middle-class trappings. The brisk 97 minutes are well-paced, the narrative is lean, and the conclusion is unexpectedly emotional.

Mystify: Michael Hutchence Review.

The untimely and tragic death of INXS lead singer Michael Hutchence in 1997 scarred Australia and the world. Here was a man, who only a decade earlier, had been the frontman of one of the biggest bands in the world, all over the news for taking his own life.

That very year his existence had become dark thanks to the backdrop of a vile custody dispute with Bob Geldof who was aiming to take his daughter away from him. Richard Lowenstein’s “Mystify: Michael Hutchence” deals with this devastation and so much more in its retelling of the life of Australia’s engrossing enigma. 

The most important aspect of this documentary is that it is very much about Hutchence and not totally about INXS, which is the inverse of Australian mini-series “Never Tear Us Apart”. Mainly from the perspective of the women who surrounded him, we follow Hutchence through the critical phases of his life.

From his rise to being the charismatic artist he was known for to the traumatic brain injury he sustained in 1992, all the way to his death, Mystify paints a heartfelt and affectionate portrait of Hutchence that will likely never be topped. 

Throughout all the right voices are heard. Every serious girlfriend he had tells of his kindness and love. Hutchence was a good man, yet the film still knows precisely when to condemn him. For his foolishness and his anger, the film admonishes him, not in any harsh manner, more through the personalities speaking pointing out, in their own words, that he usually didn’t and shouldn’t have behaved that way.

His breaking of Kylie Minogue’s heart in 1991 and his violent refusal to not go to the doctors after being assaulted in 1992 stand out as some of his lowest moments before the events of 1997. He also had a tumultuous relationship with his brother Rhett who fell into heroin addiction, a decline that began when Michael knowingly fled with his mother to America in 1976 during their parents’ divorce. Presenting both sides of Hutchence’s chaotic life was imperative, and since Michael isn’t here to tell it himself, the film does the best it can and exceeds even that.

All these moments are mere dots on the vast expanse that was Michael’s 37 years of life. The amount of emotion the film has as a whole is so intense that I was tearing up within minutes of the beginning. There was no escaping the harrowing ending everyone knew was coming, but the in-depth look at the path there inspires empathy, frustration, joy and a sense of deep sadness. There are moments where it feels as if Hutchence is stirring us with his vocals on stage as if still with us.

It is a testament to both the filmmakers and the man himself how captivating Michael still is. The most significant achievement of this magnificent documentary is that it gives us these magical moments with him once again, as fleeting as they are. 

Mystify pays homage to its title with how it manages to mystify you with its brilliance. By the end, Michael has come and gone again without missing a beat and as charismatic as ever. All the answers provided don’t make him any less of an endearing personality; they only serve to immortalise him further. This documentary exists because the world misses Michael Hutchence, and it’s as simple as that. Knowing that the many people who still grieve him will have this to watch for a few more moments of his magic is heart-warming and makes this one of my most recommended films of the year.  

Opus Zero: Review.

Discussing the worlds big questions of life and death in film is no easy feat. It is so easy to ramble your answers into an echo chamber, only to realise you didn’t have anything to say. Daniel Graham’s “Opus Zero” falls victim to this, yet it remains an undeniably beautiful film. What little story there is revolves around Paul (Willem Defoe), a composer seemingly looking for a meaning in life that is impossible to find.

He arrives at a remote Mexican village after his father’s death but has missed the funeral and does not seem too focused on grieving. Instead, he searches for a girl in a photo his father gave him for reasons not known to him. Paul refuses to accept that anyone can completely disappear from history, so he feels he has to find this girl. However, when all proves fruitless, he is simply a lost soul in the streets of a Mexican town.

Paul is a frustrating protagonist; his methods of self-expression, particularly his speech, are almost entirely archaic. He is not the only character guilty of this. Most of the cast like to speak in a sort of free verse poetry, but they very rarely have anything profound to say. The film masquerades as philosophy and only manages to come across as strange. There are one or two moments where Defoe manages to pull it off, and a vibrant mystique fills the screen begging for any line to be brave enough to delve into it further and yet nothing comes of it.

Following the narrative is a struggle, it is hard to tell what the message is, and considering all Opus Zero has to offer is insight, this is a destructive issue. Saying that this movie is inaccessible to most audiences would be an understatement, and I’m not saying every film needs to pander to the masses, but when making a film, a potential audience should be in mind and in this case it appears that didn’t happen. 

Opus Zero (Trailer) from Matías Penachino on Vimeo.

Utilising cinematography to isolate your characters in their own worlds is always enjoyable to watch when done well. This is what Opus Zero does spectacularly well. Every slightly hammed-up philosophy lesson has a wondrous view to go along with it. Cinematographer Matias Penachino has managed to capture a real sense of beauty in the bleak environments around this Mexican town. There are plenty of shots that linger for far too long, but it is hard to be too upset when what they show us is so unflinchingly stunning. It’s a shame that the script couldn’t back up the work done here, had it done the message could have transcended boundaries, which is what I think Graham was going for, but the film never manages to achieve this. 

Opus Zero’s major downfall is its lack of any discernible story. It is a husk of a film, with a beautiful and robust foundation that is entirely void of anything else. The concept wasn’t the issue, it has been pulled off many times before, but each of those times there has been a clear narrative path to follow. Take Terrence Malick’s “The Tree Of Life” for instance, the entire narration of that film is actual philosophical poetry, but it is used to flow the story along and to emphasise a clear yet conceptually significant message.

Opus Zero’s dialogue opts not to have a story and fails to make clear what it is trying to say. I think for his debut feature Graham has aimed too high and fell flat, regardless the talent is still clearly there; the issue is in the expression not the thinking behind it. 

Willem Defoe is making a habit of popping up where no one expects him, and it is excellent for the film industry that he is. He has buoyed the low budget films he’s been appearing in to no end, and this one is no exception. Opus Zero is far from his best work in recent times, but it is still a strong outing for the veteran actor. The script often proves too much for him to overcome, but the effort is still clear to see.

Defoe tries just as hard as every other aspect of this film to say something worth saying, and that is admirable. There is an interview scene in the second half of the film, and I think it is the best scene in the entire film. Here Defoe encompassed Paul perfectly and had the rest of the film dug so deeply as this scene does, I think it would have been a far more enjoyable experience. 

Opus Zero doesn’t lack beauty, but its absence of a story is unforgivable. There is little to be gained by its constant philosophical teachings despite the apparent effort to speak to whoever sees it. All the right elements are there to suggest that Daniel Graham is a more than capable filmmaker who could very well make a movie that achieves transcendence, but this one isn’t it.