Jamie passion and passionfruit!

French comedy which borders on farce about a gauche couple preparing to host the husband’s future boss for dinner with the help of an interfering neighbour cum PR consultant.  It is mildly amusing, rather short and very gallic.  It does have some sage points to make about job recruitment and trying to create impressions and despite the good will of the actors it seldom launches into flight.  Auteuil, Lemercier and L’hermitte are all great talents but even they cannot lift this material beyond the very average.

*  *  +

The latest film from Fatih Akin, German director of Gegen die Wand (Head On).  Another great offering from this talented director and screenwriter of Turkish descent.  The film moves back and forth between Bremen and Istanbul tracing the fortune of various interconnected characters who are either German, Turks or both!  It is a film that has an inventive but coherent storyline – even the coincidences that would seem far fetched under another director’s work, plenty to say and reflect on about our choices in life and the loyalty to both family and strangers, and some great acting.  The Turks led by Baki Davrak, Tunçel Kurtiz, the wonderful Nursel Köse as Yeter the prostitute, Nurgul Yesilçay, and the glorious Hanna Schygulla returning in a grand supporting role.  An attractive film with ups and downs it is intensely human and has a great ending.

*  *  *  * + +

A potted version of the famous Anne Boleyn story including the part played by older sister Mary, also a lover of Henry 8^th.  A fairly basic costume drama with a focus on the machinations of the court to place certain young ladies in accessible spots to the king. The film is spoilt by a very bizarre script and the not too convincing nature of Eric Bana and Natalie Portman in the leading roles. Scarlett Johansson does a reasonable job of Mary and the smaller parts bring us the talents of Kristin Scott Thomas and  Ana Torrent.  At the end of the day it is an entertaining flm for the subject matter but not so gripping as cinema art.  We have seen this kind of thing before and better.

*  * +

Once is a niceish film if rather different.  You have to like the music, which I generally did though found mournful in parts and accept that this is really an album put to film but as a new twist on screen musicals it has its moments.  It almost seems like a reality in parts but much less scripted and corny.  Despite all the raves, I liked it, rather than loved it.  Dublin is the other star in an understated way. 

* *  * +

The movie of the Saramago novel which opened Cannes last year.  Savaged by critics and I have to say not an altogether successful work.  As an allegorical work on society’s own blindness to each other, it does remind one of many of these ‘survivor’ style dramas and has its strong moments but also a lot of artifice and fallacy too.  I found the first half somewhat unattractive and while the latter part in the hospital gets more interesting it also gets more sordid too with rapes and the like.  Julianne Moore as the only sighted person holds it all together but even at the end as they get to freedom, the rather naff scenes of enjoying the rain smack too much of clichés.  Consequently, there are poignant moments and a lot of work and thought have gone into the movie but it just doesn’t come together.  The ‘blinding’ lighting of the film irritates, the script is flat and the best we can appreciate is the acting of Moore, Ruffalo and others.  A bit of a Europudding that sabotages the possibility of something really great.

* *

Here we go with the Oscar winner. No, definitely not the best film I’ve seen. Nothing that original and definitely artificial in parts.  The story and script is as convoluted as the game show that is at the centre of it.  Danny Boyle immerses it all in the whole Indian experience from the dirtiest slums to child slavery, ripping off tourists, the wealthy mafia, call centres, Mumbai real estate and Bollywood song and dance.  And yet, the film manages to rise above all of this somehow not to produce a classic film but to be a cinema phenomenon. It is entertaining and attractive to look at but its merits are more than that and can explain some of its overwhelming success and critical disdain.

1.     It is about the underdog winning against all odds and getting the girl.

2.     The actors, especially Dev Patel and Freida Pinto breathe meaning into their parts.

3.     The character of Jamal represents honesty in a world society sick from lies.

4.     The very clichéd nature of India and the game show also help people to identify with the film.

5.     The film is more important for its social comments than its artistic qualities, even though many of these are of a high quality.

6.     We can identify with the Everyman in Jamal.

I don’t know how I will stand on it by year end but as an entertaining story Slumdog scores on all points and as with all stories you suspend disbelief in order to accept it.

* * ** +

One of these films that apart from dramatizing a book, takes us on a life that mirrors the fortunes of a country.  In this case, Czechoslovakia – between and after the wars.  Well-known director Jiri Menzel does a sort of Forrest Gump with a hotelier who is unlikeable but gets into all sorts of scenes that mark local history.  Some great scenes but a lot of uncreative filler too – nude scenes, small episodes that don’t move the story along. The humour is also inconsistent, at least for us – both very funny and flat.  A curiosity more than anything.

* * +

The film starts slowly but builds to a crescendo with some creative plot twists and great chase scenes in the Belgian medieval city that definitely make it a welcome watch.  The script is one of the gems as it is unpredictable and treats the characters as real and three-dimensional.  Colin Farrell continues his upward revival as an actor, Brendan Gleeson creates a very real character in Ken and Ralph Fiennes as Harry, the boss of the ‘crims’ is excellent.  Even the smaller parts are great, notably the two main female leads.  And all with a background of this attractive city.

* * * *

Stylish if somewhat cold film based on an acclaimed novel about life in the stifling ‘burbs in the 1950’s.  Kate Winslet is excellent as the frustrated housewife and Leo Di Caprio surprises with the ability to show the pain and lack of understanding he has of his wife’s predicament. Kathy Bates and Michael Shannon support admirably.  All told, an absorbing film which perhaps does not quite set one alight with enthusiasm.

* * * *

Eliseo Subiela has discovered tantric sex!  And yes, he makes a film about it.  Much of it dissolves into ridicule with stream of consciousness comments in the script and a weird world of coincidences.  Terribly new age and likely to bring it into disrepute.  And yet, you have to hand it to him for having the guts to put this material on screen in a ‘serious’ film and for three or four really quite good scenes.  Not all is lost then but despite the noble efforts of Leandro Stivelman and Antonella Costa, it is hard to last through this.

* *