Showing posts with label Guy Pearce. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Guy Pearce. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Marvel Studios reveal: IRON MAN 3 conceptual art

Marvel Studios has debuted the first conceptual art from the highly anticipated film “Iron Man 3,” directed by Shane Black and starring Robert Downey Jr.

Rendered by artist Ryan Meinerding, the conceptual photo shows Tony Stark dressed casually except for his left arm and calf which are suited with Iron Man armor parts. Caption of the photo reads, "In Iron Man 3, Tony Stark suffers his most devastating attack, and must rely on his greatest assets, his ingenuity and instincts."

Based on the ever-popular Marvel comic book series, first published in 1963, “Iron Man 3” returns Downey as the iconic Super Hero character Tony Stark/Iron Man along with Gwyneth Paltrow as Pepper Potts, Don Cheadle as James “Rhodey” Rhodes and Jon Favreau as Happy Hogan.

Set for release in the U.S. and the Philippines on May 3, 2013, Marvel’s “Iron Man 3” marks the second feature to be fully owned, marketed and distributed by Disney, which acquired Marvel in 2009.

“Iron Man 3” continues the epic, big-screen adventures of the world’s favorite billionaire inventor/Super Hero, Tony Stark aka “Iron Man.” Marvel Studios’ President Kevin Feige is producing the film. Executive producers on the project include Jon Favreau, Louis D’Esposito, Alan Fine, Stan Lee, Charles Newirth, Victoria Alonso, Stephen Broussard and Dan Mintz.

Friday, June 15, 2012

Prometheus (Ridley Scott, 2012)

[Warning: contains spoilers]

The mythological and philosophical ideas co-writer Damon Lindelof shoehorns into Prometheus are intriguing ones, at least in theory. It also helps if you have never read the work of H.P. Lovecraft, seen Mission to Mars or understood 2001: A Space Odyssey. Prometheus is the cynical variant of the latter two works and a diluted take on the extreme nihilism of the former. In the bleakness of Prometheus' suppositions about humanity's origins is also a crushing limitation set by Lindelof's deficiencies of imagination. This film suggests a despairingly predestined meaning of human life, but also a grand plan more or less identical—in concept and messy, insane execution—as the Weyland-Yutani Corporation that hangs over the Alien franchise and, in pre-merger iteration, this prequel as a spectre of the all-too-human military industrial complex.

This could have been fodder for savage cosmic comedy, one that actually could play off the Promethean myth referenced, obviously, by the title. Prometheus' great crime was in giving man the power of a god, in giving mortals the chance at equaling, and perhaps bettering, immortals. The great thing about Greek mythology is how repulsive the gods are. They are belligerent, venal, venereal, and vain to the point of incest—for who else is worthy of a supreme being than something with that being's bloodline? They are deities unworthy of worship other than as a means of staving off death in their thoughtless rampages. If Lindelof ever went any deeper into his mythological fetish than merely connecting a web of references in dense but ultimately facile subtext, he might have truly reflected the nature of the gods Prometheus rebelled against and made something wonderfully deconstructive. That would require a willingness to treat the material with any kind of earnestness or thought, however, and Prometheus is instead one of the most tediously ponderous blockbusters in years even as it also routinely fails to invest its ideas with any severity.

Ridley Scott opens the film with helicopter shots of what one can assume is planet Earth in its infancy, volcanic eruptions cooling in torrents of sulphuric water. Straight-down shots of hardened magma give the impression of veins carrying the planet's lifeblood to its still-forming body. At a waterfall, an alien creature drinks a black fluid that dissolves him, depositing his DNA into the foaming waters as the credits roll. These moments represent the one time Scott's direction achieves any kind of visual grace, a humble beginning that is, though more explicit than the start of 2001, agreeably mysterious and captivating in a manner not unlike Kubrick's masterpiece.

Then, the movie abruptly cuts to the year 2089 as a group of scientists in Scotland discover a cave painting of a star pattern that matches exactly with ones they found in archaeological digs across ancient civilizations all over the world. The two in charge of the expedition, Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace) and her husband Charlie Holloway (Logan Marshall-Green), date the painting at 35,000 BCE. Later, Charlie says it is 35,000 years old, either because he likes nice round numbers or because he cannot add Common Era to Before Common Era. Elizabeth, for her part, is a Christian despite being a scientist in any capacity but especially a scientist who may have found the way back to humanity's decidedly non-spiritual maker. Her faith becomes a recurring issue only insofar as it allows the film to add yet more half-formed wisps of religious thought.

They track the primitive star maps to a distant moon capable of sustaining life, and the Weyland Corporation funds a covert expedition to meet God. The crew of the titular ship instantly sets in motion a series of problems that spiral ever further out of control as the film progresses. Not to harp on the many ways in which Prometheus suffers compared to Alien, but consider the casting of the two movies. Alien is nearly revolutionary this regard, populating the Nostromo with character actors who look like working class stiffs in space. Everyone on the Prometheus is a star, with the exception of some particularly red shirty fellows who might as well baste themselves in marinade for the benefit of whatever will inevitably consume them in 15 minutes. Everyone in Alien and its sequels tends to be referred to by their last names, stressing how work and assignment forces these people together. Everyone in Prometheus is, despite being strangers hired for a mission for which they are given scant information, on a first name basis.

Once the ship lands on the moon, everything falls apart. As is usual with Lindelof's writing, the supposed depth of his mythological and philosophical wonderings can only be facilitated by characters who do the stupidest thing at every turn. Charlie, upon learning the atmosphere inside a strange installation clearly erected by some sentient species is technically breathable, removes his helmet with no worries for bacteria or any other contaminants which his body would be wholly unprepared to fight. Our two redshirts inexplicably get lost on their way back to the ship, then play around with an actual lifeform they meet on an alien planet as if it were a stray dog. And though these two were always destined to die, they are helped along by the horniness of the ship captain (Idris Elba), who leaves his post monitoring two of his men out in the field to get some nookie from Vickers (Charlize Theron), the Weyland representative.

But hey, at least the film asks some big questions, right? True, compared to most blockbusters, Prometheus aims considerably high in what it wants to say, or what it thinks it's saying. Sadly, at no point does Prometheus follow through on any of its ideas, instead presenting a bunch of theories and leaving them to be argued over for years on Internet forum as false proof of depth. The opening images of the "engineer" sacrificing himself to give life become an endlessly referenced theme, with one character even saying, "Sometimes to create, one must first destroy." But it's not even correct to call this a theme, as it plays no part in the actual story of Prometheus. The nearest the movie comes to building on this notion are in the actions of David (Michael Fassbender), an android who seems to start his emotionally removed, superior outlook at Ash's "I admire its purity" speech in Alien and only goes madder from there. A dissatisfaction constantly lines Fassbender's otherwise impassive, eerily welcoming face as he follows his own agenda during the expedition, a sideplot potentially more complex than the philosophical reaching of the primary story. David brings up ideas worthy of the depth of Blade Runner, a creature essentially going to meet his grandparents and perhaps eager to carry out the mission implied in what they left behind to enjoy his own existence. Infuriatingly, though, these threads are the least explored of the film, David's behavior so ungrounded it is only justifiable as a manifestation of Oedipal impulses, which is too simple and human a box in which to place a robot.

After a time, an uncomfortable, pathetically self-serving subtext emerges in the crew's search for the great answers of our existence. Charlie, who shares surnames with the actor who played Sawyer on LOST, in blatantly a stand-in for LOST fans irritated by that show's own inconclusiveness and false promise. The crew of the Prometheus makes mankind's most significant discovery, and all Charlie can do is pout that they only found alien bodies, not their living selves capable of definitively answering all his queries. Lindelof sets Charlie up to look like a fool for this, and soon he punishes the character for his stubbornness. I'm not the only person to pick up on this, but there's something particularly infuriating about Lindelof dragging down another franchise to get out lingering feelings over his main gig.

But then, Prometheus bombastically displays all of LOST's worst traits. The self-satisfied, meaningless appropriation of religious and mythological symbolism. The characters who serve at the pleasure of the plot, rewritten on a whim to facilitate some new development.* The assumption of emotional investment in a story that openly prioritizes deep, arching mysteries over character growth. In addition, Scott ports over the worst of his own tendencies. He's clearly happy to be back in science fiction, but he has CGI mounted on such a ludicrous scale that the film falls flat, most egregiously in a storm of dust and static electricity that is shot with unforgivable incompetence in spatial relations. (I wish Scott's brother Tony had handled this scene; he would have turned the flying shards of metallic dirt into a Pollock painting.) And while everyone wanted to avoid regurgitating all the franchise's iconic imagery, this results in a lot of roaming around nondescript tunnels and too-shiny ship cabins (what happened to that incredibly tactile, lived-in quality of the Nostromo?). The only time the film looks interesting or has any sense of shot rhythm, in fact, is when it actually does reuse some of the old imagery and symbolism, especially on a set that will be instantly familiar to fans.

I didn't want to drag Alien into this too much, but that film illustrates everything Prometheus gets wrong. Though this new film aims at profound questions about the nature of humanity and a dark truth that could be behind it all, Alien manages to address the same ideas fluidly through its plot-driven story. It crystallizes the vicious nihilism this film cannot bring itself to fully endorse: on the one hand, the Nostromo had to contend with a perfectly evolved killing machine that existed only to kill and reproduce. On the other was the heartless corporate power that came to govern humans, a capitalistic juggernaut willing to destroy its own species for the sake of profit and expanded power. Alien is a film so bleak that the only two moral acts of selfless concern—bringing the infected Kane back on-board the ship and Ripley going back for that damn cat—are so out of place as to seem insane. The only victory in Alien is survival at whatever cost, and they respond organically to this trauma. In forsaking profundity, Alien achieves it; in desperately pursuing it, Prometheus falls laughably short. As with LOST, Prometheus will be defended for posing complex questions, but the explanations, hidden as they are in the promise of a sequel, are so easily gleaned from this lame collection of heady sci-fi tropes that, taken with its two-dimensional plotting and banal direction, Prometheus emerges a failure not for its obscurity but its simplicity.


*This is especially true of David, whose intriguing, sinister arc is dumped in the last few minutes in favor of inexplicable acquiescence, even pleasurable, willing cooperation.

Friday, June 8, 2012

Marvel begins production on “IRON MAN 3” | In preparation for May 3, 2013 film release

BURBANK, Calif. – Following in the footsteps of the record-breaking Marvel Studios’ release “Marvel’s The Avengers,” production on the highly anticipated film “Iron Man 3,” directed by Shane Black, has commenced production in Wilmington, North Carolina. The production schedule will also include locations in Raleigh/Durham, North Carolina, Miami, Florida and China.

Based on the ever-popular Marvel comic book series, first published in 1963, “Iron Man 3” returns Robert Downey Jr. as the iconic Super Hero character Tony Stark/Iron Man along with Gwyneth Paltrow as Pepper Potts, Don Cheadle as James “Rhodey” Rhodes and Jon Favreau as Happy Hogan.

Set for release in the U.S. and the Philippines on May 3, 2013, Marvel’s “Iron Man 3” marks the second feature to be fully owned, marketed and distributed by Disney, which acquired Marvel in 2009.


“Iron Man 3” continues the epic, big-screen adventures of the world’s favorite billionaire inventor/Super Hero, Tony Stark aka “Iron Man.” Marvel Studios’ President Kevin Feige is producing the film. Executive producers on the project include Jon Favreau, Louis D’Esposito, Alan Fine, Stan Lee, Charles Newirth, Victoria Alonso, Stephen Broussard and Dan Mintz.

The creative production team on the film includes two-time Oscar®-winning director of photography John Toll, ASC (“Braveheart,” “Legends of the Fall”), production designer Bill Brzeski (“The Hangover,” “Due Date”), editors Jeffrey Ford, A.C.E. (“Marvel’s The Avengers,” “Captain America: The First Avenger”) and Peter S. Elliot (“Fantastic 4: Rise of the Silver Surfer”), and costume designer Louise Frogley (“Quantum of Solace,” “Contagion”).

Marvel Studios most recently produced the critically acclaimed “Marvel’s The Avengers,” which set the all-time, domestic 3-day weekend box office record at $207.4 million. The film, which is currently in release, continues to shatter box office records and is The Walt Disney Studios’ highest-grossing global and domestic release of all time and marks the studios’ fifth film to gross more than $1 billion worldwide.

Saturday, May 19, 2012

Shia LaBeouf and cast | "LAWLESS" character posters!

Shia LaBeouf poses with pistols in this character poster for Lawless.

Also featured: Tom Hardy, Mia Wasikowska, Guy Pearce, Jessica Chastain, Gary Oldman, and Jason Clarke.

Here’s the film’s synopsis: Lawless is the true story of the infamous Bondurant Brothers: bootlegging siblings who made a run for the American Dream in Prohibition-era Virginia. In this epic gangster tale, inspired by true-life tales of author Matt Bondurant‘s family in his novel “The Wettest County in the World”, the loyalty of three brothers is put to the test against the backdrop of the nation’s most notorious crime wave.

The drama is slated to hit theaters August 31. Check out the trailer in case you missed it!





Source: Just Jared

Saturday, April 21, 2012

IRON MAN 3 | GUY PEARCE is ‘Extremis’ geneticist Aldrich Killian

The casting of Guy Pearce in Iron Man 3 (2013) answers the question of who will play Aldrich Killian in the Shane Black directed film. Filming next month, Guy Pearce’s geneticist Aldrich Killian is intergal to Iron Man 3‘s plotline, which will be loosely based on Extremis. Warren Ellis’ six-issue Extremis introduced nanotechnology to Stark’s technologies.

On the Extremis plot line from the comic book:
Through trial and error, the brilliant Maya Hansen constructed Extremis, a bio-electronics package fitted into a few billion graphic nanotubes and suspended in a carrier fluid. The package, when injected into the human genome, was meant to hack the body’s repair center and rewrite the normal human blueprint with a better one. When the human brain is convinced that the Extremis blueprint is the correct one, it shuts the human down, leaving the human needing nutrients intravenously injected during the following days while the body rebuilds. Under the premise that she would use her new creation for military efforts, Maya obtained military funding for her operation.

Maya learned that the military was pulling her funding before she could try Extremis on a live subject. She and her partner at Futurepharm, Aldrich Killian, decided that they should put Extremis into the hands of criminals, then involve Tony Stark’s creation, Iron Man, against the Extremis-enhanced criminal. She figured that if they could thus prove the value of Extremis, it would help her save countless human lives after her funding was restored. She and Aldrich stole Extremis and put it into the hands of terrorists.

Robert Downey Jr., Scarlett Johansson, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Don Cheadle are all reprising their previous roles for the previous Iron Man films.

Production on Marvel Studios’ Iron Man 3 is set to start in May 2012. Iron Man 3 will be released in US theaters through Walt Disney Pictures on May 3, 2013.

Source: Film Book

Sunday, April 8, 2012

PROMETHEUS | 13 Minutes of Haunting Slow Motion - Movie Trailer HD

In the late 21st century, a star map is discovered within the imagery of Aztec, Mesopotamian and Magdalenian cultures. The crew of the spaceship Prometheus is sent on a scientific expedition to follow the map as part of a mission to find the origins of mankind. Exploring the advanced civilization of an extraterrestrial race, they soon face a threat to humanity's very existence.

Prometheus is an upcoming science fiction film directed by Ridley Scott and written by Jon Spaihts and Damon Lindelof. The film stars Noomi Rapace, Michael Fassbender, Guy Pearce, Idris Elba, Logan Marshall-Green and Charlize Theron. The plot follows the crew of the spaceship Prometheus in the year 2085, as they explore an advanced alien civilization in search of the origins of humanity.


Conceived as a prequel to Scott's 1979 science fiction horror film Alien, rewrites of Spaihts's script by Lindelof developed a separate story that precedes the events of Alien, but which is not directly connected to the films in the Alien franchise. According to Scott, though the film shares "strands of Alien's DNA, so to speak", and takes place in the same universe, Prometheus will explore its own mythology and ideas. Principal photography began in March 2011, with filming taking place in Canada, England, Scotland, Iceland, and Spain. Prometheus is scheduled for release between May 30 and June 8, 2012 in various territories through 20th Century Fox.

Saturday, March 17, 2012

PROMETHEUS Trailer 2 Preview | Cast led by Michael Fassbender, Charlize Theron & Guy Pearce


Ridley Scott, director of "Alien" and "Blade Runner," returns to the genre he helped define. With PROMETHEUS, he creates a groundbreaking mythology, in which a team of explorers discover a clue to the origins of mankind on Earth, leading them on a thrilling journey to the darkest corners of the universe. There, they must fight a terrifying battle to save the future of the human race.


Stay tuned for a longer HD trailer tomorrow! 

 

Thursday, December 30, 2010

The King's Speech

Though it features the sort of rousing, uplifting score one expects for a movie about an underdog overcoming an obstacle, the dominant sonic motif in Tom Hooper's The King's Speech is a light, choked gargle, the sound of the base of the tongue splashing around the back of the throat in tremulous preparation for a performance it would like nothing more than to not give. The tongue in question belongs to Albert Frederick Arthur George, the Duke of York and second in line of succession to the king of England, a man whose stammer might never had been an issue were he blessed with the good fortune to have been born before the popularization of radio.

The film opens in 1925, at the closing of the Empire Exhibition at Wembley. Albert's father, King George V (Michael Gambon), charges him with delivering the closing speech on radio, himself and the primary heir to the throne, Prince Edward, having already made their wireless debuts. As he arrives, his wife and their confidants reassure Albert that he will do wonderfully, but the look of fear in his eyes creates a tense mood before he even says a word. At last, aides send him in front of the microphone at the head of the stands, and all in the audience turn reverently to hear him. The pause is deafening, and when Albert finally speaks, the crackled stutters that escape his lips echo through the sound system, mocking him as the crowd maintains their respectful silence but look around uncomfortably in that way people need to make eye contact to share pain but must also avoid it at all costs to prevent an errant titter.

It's an excruciating moment, and as someone who does not stammer but has often felt the hot sting of apprehension -- no, pure, unrelenting terror -- at the simple notion of public speaking, the seemingly contradictory combination of agoraphobia and claustrophobia that creeps into the mise-en-scène rang painfully true. Of course, the damned thing about a stammer or any other display of anxiety is that, once aware that others have picked up on the trait, the sufferer can never right, spiraling further into a pit of self-revulsion and embarrassment that magnifies the first slip into a cascade of tics and halting pronunciation. The first scared pause, the dreaded "ums" and "likes," never come in one aberration. They only ever lead to more mistakes.

Humiliated by the experience, Albert tries a series of speech therapists, all of whom display a knowledge of medicine so arcane one expects them to break out leeches and suggest a blood-letting. As ashamed by the experiences of failing with countless doctors as the public performances themselves, Albert swears off speech therapy and banks on a public life held largely out of view as his father and elder brother can handle the speeches. But the king knows better. He realizes that an occasional appearance in procession with a regal wave will no longer do; with every household turning to radio for news, entertainment, and general social guidance, it is imperative that the royal family take advantage of the airwaves lest they become an inanimate relic alongside the other trinkets in their castles for fat American tourists to come marvel at year after year. "We've been reduced to the most vile and loathsome profession of all: actors," sighs the king with grim irony.

Behind Albert's back, his wife, Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter), finds a middle-class therapist, one Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush). Whatever danger this movie was in of being a stuffy period drama is obliterated by Rush's entrance, heralded by a toilet flush before that magnificent mass of a head enters the frame and, unaware of who Elizabeth really is, makes plain, frank chat with her. His puckish grin, mischievous bow tie (and since when has a bow tie been mischievous?) and quick wit disarm the somber proceedings instantly, though it's just as amusing to see his boyish looks blanch when his upfront candor is returned in kind and Elizabeth reveals her identity and that of her husband.

The scenes between Lionel and Albert -- or Bertie, as his family (and Lionel, to his extreme annoyance) call him -- play as a tug-of-war between stale, Academy-pleasing montage of uplift and determination and something fresher, more spontaneous. Lionel insists on a first-name basis to make his therapy work, and his direct manner so stuns the royal member used to even his closest advisers speaking to him with reverence and cowed expression that he starts answering back in spite of himself. Rush's humor is infectious; Bertie tells him about the other doctors who prescribed cigarettes to relax the lungs, to which Lionel replies, "They're idiots." "They're all knighted," replies Bertie smugly. "That makes it official, then," says Lionel with a wide grin.

Rush and Firth attain an instant chemistry that shows off each individually but also creates a certain hollowness when they're apart. Rush, with his giant, triangular face, is at once boyish and refined, his elocution and perfect diction clashing with his more laid-back attitude. He plays off Firth, who once again gives a fantastic performance. Like Tilda Swinton, Firth is seemingly incapable of giving anything less than a mesmerizing performance, and he's the sort of person who can oscillate between homely and strikingly beautiful depending on they compose themselves. Firth spends most of the film contorted in mental agony, squashing his throat into a makeshift double chin as if compressing a bellow, hoping to stoke the words out of his lungs. He looks uncomfortable with the very thought of existence, his eyes darting nervously even when secluded from the public eye.

Had Hooper the confidence to stay entirely with their interplay, The King's Speech might have deserved the fevered hype that has greeted its release. But he gets mired in the cliché of the genre. His edits border on the sporadic at times, eliding over the more intimate and affecting moments to get to necessary stopgaps in plot. Bound to tell the historical narrative, Hooper must devote time to Prince Edward, a feckless, irresolute cad governed by his emotions, all of which are petulant and self-centered. Casting Guy Pearce in the role makes all the Australian jokes lobbed at Lionel throughout the film that much more amusing, but not even Pearce can work with the weakling. Nothing exposes the ludicrous nature of the monarchy like Edward's ascension and ultimate abdication of the throne: he falls in love with an American woman working on her second divorce, and his passions lead him to propose marriage. As the head of the Church of England, the king could not marry a divorcée, and what's more, neither the characters nor the people behind the camera suggest his rashness comes from true love. And so, Edward drains the film's middle section, simply occupying time until he can at last drop out and let his younger brother assume the throne.

Furthermore, Hooper and writer David Seidler get stuck with the proposition of successfully building dramatic tension to the titular speech, delivered when Britain declared war on Germany. Though Lionel features prominently and the camera spends some time in his modest domicile, this is a film that essentially roots itself in the hermetically sealed world of the monarchy, a faded, anachronistic relic that effectually ended long before the Russian tsars and German emperors mentioned nervously as Albert and others ponder the fate of the dynasty. But this creates the issues of building social tension through the group of people most oblivious to popular malaise and the nuances of international relations. After all, this monarchy sent its subjects to die en masse in the previous Great War even though they, being of inbred "pure" stock, were related to the German nobility they were meant to be opposing. The film wouldn't work if it suddenly sprang WWII on the audience without tying Albert's story to the mounting international turbulence, but it also seems clumsy for the characters to mention him only in the most terse and suggestive way possible, as they do throughout the 30s before Albert becomes George VI. Only when war is at England's doorsteps do the references to "Herr Hitler" becomes anything less than thudding moments of forced relevance in an otherwise sharp script.

The film has its other flaws. For the note-perfect work from the main cast, some of the supporting parts, though played by heavyweights border on the laughable. Timothy Spall, my dear Timothy, puts in such a bad Churchill impersonation I kept waiting for, Monty Python-style, someone to walk in from behind the camera and say, "No, stop, this has gotten far too silly." Derek Jacobi plays the Archbishop of Canterbury, one of the more morally superior to hold the position, as an unctuous but snippy sycophant, wanting to be villainous without being able to twist the real man that far without snapping him from his base in reality. Long after Hooper's direction settles into its refined grace and settles the aesthetic issues near the start, these two drag down all of their scenes. Taken with some of the more obvious lines, these nagging issues too often distract from the keen, hilarious and moving double act shared by Rush and Firth and expertly moderated by Carter.

Yet if The King's Speech is ultimately unable to transcend the restrictive boundaries of its awards-baiting genre, it overcomes any disappointment by being so full of verve and energy that it at least stretches those confines to the breaking point. This is the kind of film made to show off its actors, but the main players are all so excellent that they would all deserve awards, were they given based on merit instead of marketing ability. Fortunately for the cast and crew, The King's Speech has enjoyed plenty of that as well. I do not think the term "Oscar-bait" necessarily connotes a bad film, but it does speak to the increasingly stale formula guaranteed to please the artistically conservative members of the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences. What typically makes an Oscar-bait film unbearable is when it was clearly made to reap platitudes.

The King's Speech works because it cares for its characters and understands the symbolic but vital importance of George VI. A whole other movie could be made about the courage he and his wife displayed during the war, never leaving London even when a bomb went off at Buckingham Palace. The pauses he put into his speeches as he ensured each word came out clearly gave his voice a solemn gravity, and though his inspiration gets overlooked in favor of Churchill, George too played a key role in the war effort. Rush's Lionel looks compassionately but sternly upon his subject, aware that Albert could be a great man if he could only get over his fears. It is a testament to how well Rush goads Albert and how well Firth responds that, when the speech came at last, though I knew the ending, a tiny knot had formed in my stomach. Whatever else holds back the film, that effect was earned, and this break from the usual, priggish nature of period drama made The King's Speech an unexpected pleasure to watch.

Thursday, December 23, 2010

Animal Kingdom

If the emotional range of crime family films stretches from the operatic types of The Godfather to the viscerally felt human beings of GoodFellas, Animal Kingdom strives to find the middle ground between the two. That's not an entirely fair assessment, I grant you, as David Michôd's film cares less for the crime than the characters, but then the same was true of those landmark entries in the genre as well. Unfortunately, if a medium between the conflicting styles exists -- unlikely, considering the mutually annihilating contradictions -- Michôd doesn't find it, and Animal Kingdom slogs along for two hours unable to find a clear direction.

It opens strikingly enough, as a zoned-out teenager, Joshua or "J" (James Frecheville) sits watching TV next to a passed-out woman. Only when paramedics arrive do we realize that she has overdosed on heroin, and subsequent detail reveals the woman was the lad's mother. It is a perfectly paced procession, culminating in the dead-eyed teen's transferal to the family his mother tried to protect him from for years. That a heroin addict would find her relatives too horrible for her child suggests something about what kind of people they are, but what choice does J have?

In retrospect, I can see the immediate downturn in the film from this measured opening in its credits sequence, filled with somber, dull sweeps over an engraved plate and still from bank surveillance footage as robbers hold them up. The Codys are a family of robbers and dealers, but Michôd never actually shows that side of the action. It's a perfectly valid artistic decision, of course, but when I reflected on the film, I found it amusing that the director teased the audience with a heist movie even as he honestly conveyed what the film would give the audience: organized crime filmed tediously.

As J gets used to living with his grandmother, he introduces us to the family (via a voiceover narration that is subsequently dropped from the film, which would be cause for snarky complaint were it not such a relief not to hear Frecheville's droning voice overlapping the soundtrack). The oldest son, Andrew a.k.a. Pope (Ben Mendelsohn), stays out of the picture at the beginning, busy planning his various crimes and hiding out from the police. At the Cody home are the middle child, Craig (Sullivan Stapleton), a unstable man who is willing to spend hours tailing a driver who flips him off just to terrify him; Darren (Luke Ford), the youngest son with only a few years on J; and Barry, a family friend who assists Pope in robberies and seems a fourth son at times. And presiding over them all is Janine (Jacki Weaver), a kindly matriarch whose loving attitude toward her children borders on incestuous. She does not say much for most of the film, but Weaver projects a cold authority behind her warmth. Where the matriarch in crime films is always aware of the actions of the men in her life but is ultimately removed from the action, she all but coordinates her children without outwardly doing so.

The first half hour moves swiftly, but apart from the initial introductions, Animal Kingdom makes no headway with its characters. Frecheville has clearly been instructed to play J as an emotionally stunted, blank teenager, but he makes for a poor cipher, and the story bounces off him like radar waves on a stealth bomber. We know to be horrified by his living conditions because the things that happen around him are despicable, but Frecheville is trapped by the role and cannot react to anything.

Every time this film starts to turn around and become something engaging -- particularly when police corruption factors into the hunt for the Cody family -- it stops just as quickly as it started. The cops close in at the half-hour mark and show a disturbing willingness to circumvent the right to a fair trial (to say the least), but the briefest of reprisals appears to back them off for another hour of screen time. Michôd seems to be trying to avoid falling into the unintentional romanticizing and cliché of the crime film, maintaining focus solely on the family and not their exploits or, unless one of the Codys is present, the police procedural work and corruption in the justice system. But no one fills the gaps left by these omissions, and I found myself wishing for a cliché just so I'd have something to hold onto. The mere absence of the usual does not automatically equate to insight, and for most of the film I felt as if I were looking at the molted shells of creatures who'd grown and moved on to some other film.

In fairness, the performances are uniformly excellent. Stapleton is a live wire, yet he may be the least unsettling person in the Cody household. Both Ford and Mendelsohn are quieter and more reserved on-screen, but they hide an intensity that could obliterate Darren, the middle child who has to act out to get noticed against the elder and the youngest sons. Mendelsohn, with his weak chin and unassuming physique, may not look like a dealer and a robber, but one shot of his eyes tells you all you need to know about the killer inside. Even Frecheville, stunted as he is in the restrictive part of J, holds his own with the other actors; later in the film, he manages to hold his own against Guy Pearce, who plays a detective who wants to save J from his life but also exploit him to bring down the family.

Pearce's involvement and the tug-of-war between his detective and J, who would just like to go back to the surrogate family he makes with his girlfriend, livens the film. With J poised to sell out his family to be rid of them, Michôd finally unleashes Weaver in all her power, and the results are transcendent. Already the focal point of attention with her subdued presence, Weaver's Janine morphs into a grandmotherly version of Lady Macbeth as police pressure constricts her sons. Her ability to mix open scheming, matronly charm and a veneer of false helplessness makes her the most terrifying character in the film, and her grim, spectral smile is beastly, as if a lioness baring her teeth when an outside force threatens her cubs.

But the turn comes too late, and Animal Kingdom switches into second gear long after it should have been in fifth. Too many elements never come together, from its cold, detached direction to the equally pedestrian electronic score that serves primarily to demonstrate to the skeptics how great and varied and textured other like scores have been recently (compare the nuance and perfectly timed fluctuations of, say, Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross' Social Network score to the unimaginative hum of Anthony Partos'). Some scenes verge on the embarrassing, as the lazily ironic use of Air Supply's "I'm All Out of Love" following a tragedy or a sort-of gangster version of the "You know how I know you're gay?" segment of Knocked Up that haphazardly occurs right after the audience gets introduced to Pope so we lack the investment in the character to get any laughs out of him. I've heard some say that the film is one of the most honest crime movies in years, but I found it too sterile, more realistic in aesthetic than a movie like GoodFellas but not nearly as real. Animal Kingdom fancies itself a character study, but it never studies its characters, and the individual elements of the film, some of which are exemplary, never coalesce, leaving an awkward, plodding mess.