Cinephile At Large

Director: Bruce Campbell
Writer: Mark Verheiden
2007

Bruce Campbell stars as a satirical version of himself in this offbeat comedy about an ancient demon unleashed on a small town, so the town decides to call on Bruce Campbell to save them. Only trouble is, they have blurred the line between reality and fantasy, thinking Bruce is capable of doing everything he’s done in his films and has actually experienced all those horrors first hand. If that were the case, who’s better qualified to fight off an evil demon then someone who fought off the evil dead with a chainsaw for a hand? But it’s Bruce Campbell the actor that shows up, and even though he’s playing himself it’s still a character-version – it’s Bruce Campbell the actor to the max – highly satirized, dramatized and the kind of guy you would definitely not pin all your hopes on. Naturally, hilarity ensues and although I’m not a fan of Bruce Campbell films, I really enjoyed this one because it’s Campbell at his funniest, most vulnerable and most dejected. My Name Is Bruce is pure entertainment! See for yourself.

Director: Guy Ritchie
Writer: Guy Ritchie
2008

What is a RocknRolla? After seeing this film I can honestly say I still don’t know. This is the latest film from Guy Ritchie, and although it is not as good as Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels or Snatch but it’s evident that Ritchie is back on track, and I have high hopes for his next project. RocknRolla has all the great elements involved in a Guy Ritchie film: heists, comedy, action, violence, dim-witted street tuffs who happen into sticky situations, smart aleck dialogue and his signature editing techniques (including the slow motion to fast motion technique). The plot is a little hard to follow and a wee bit jumbled but if you watch and listen carefully, you will catch on. RocknRolla is well worth your time to watch.

Director: John Erick Dowdle
Writer: John Erick Dowdle and Drew Dowdle
(Adapted from film “Rec” written by Juame Balagueró, Luis Berdejo and Paco Plaza)
2008

I’m going to start off by saying that this film really freaked me out. Not only was the story plausible, but added to that was the handheld first person camera technique used throughout. The story revolves around a nightly news team consisting of a reporter and her cameraman, who are sent to document a night in the life of the firemen in the city. The chemistry between the actors works wonderfully and with the audience experiencing everything from the camera’s point of view we can really connect with what’s going on in the story, ultimately, this choice of camera style makes the horrors seem more real than if it had been filmed any other way. Quarantine is frantic and suspenseful with really great horror acting throughout and I encourage you to pick this one up, it is seriously enjoyable. And if you can, pick up the original Spanish film Rec, which is just as enjoyable if not a little more.

Director: Ridley Scott
Writer: William Monahan (screenplay); David Ignatius (novel)
2008

Other reviews for this film say the plot is jumbled, hard to follow and Ridley Scott is losing his touch. I for one, completely disagree. Body of Lies had the easiest plot to follow, and I really can’t see how you would be confused. Even if you fell asleep and woke up half way through the film you would still catch on. Body of Lies has a straightforward story about a CIA operative  Roger Ferris (Leonardo DiCaprio) who is a field agent in the mid-east, tracking down terrorists. Ferris constantly clashes with his boss Ed Hoffman (Russell Crowe) because Hoffman is on the outside looking in, and Ferris thinks that he cannot possibly understand what’s really going on down on the ground. Overall, it’s a pretty good film. It is less “rah rah America” and doesn’t try to show American ideals post 9/11 so overtly as Syriana for example. The film is more subtle than that, allowing the viewer to formulate their own opinions rather than being told what to think as if it were a piece of propaganda. Though not the best from the caliber of Ridley Scott, DiCaprio or Crowe, however it is still watchable. If you liked Spy Game, you’ll like this one. If you haven’t seen Spy Game, you should.

Director: Gavin O’Connor
Writer: Joe Carnahan and Gavin O’Connor (screenplay); Gavin O’Connor, Greg O’Connor and Robert Hopes (story)
2008

All in all, Pride and Glory is a generalized story of police corruption and its implications on family life. Granted, it is not as great as The Departed (what can be, really?) but that’s mostly because of the story and how the plot moves forward. The faults lie in the script because it holds back – the film has so much potential to jump off the screen and really grab the audience but it’s overly cautious. There are so many characters that not enough time is taken to really delve deep into their development, and they become one dimensional. We are shown the facts about how all of their lives intertwine and the consequences of one person’s actions on the whole family structure, but we cannot connect with any auxiliary characters because they are constantly on the sidelines, taking a backseat to the main plot line with Ray Tierney (Edward Norton). If there were less characters, or more time taken for their development then this film would have been better. Edward Norton did carry the film but there wasn’t even any insight into Colin Farrell’s character that would have explained his reasoning for doing any of the things that he did – all that was given was he’s simply a bad cop, abusing his authority and only through his final act of self sacrifice he really shows any kind of human emotion and we can see a character beginning to evolve, but by then it’s too late.  Edward Norton certainly stole the show as he does in most of his films, but for this one it would have been nice if he were to share the screen with some of the other characters. Everything in Pride and Glory should be taken at surface value, because just like the cinema screen on which it’s projected, there is no depth beyond.