Review 2 – Moon

From one extreme to another – Harry Potter to Moon in one week. Have to say, Moon deserves its accolades entirely – for output from a sophomore writer/director, the film is incredibly good. It’s lovingly made and never really looks as low-budget as it undoubtedly was. It’s not a film you would watch to be entertained by spectacle. What it is is a well-made, homage to 70s sci-fi movies, where not everything is shiny spaceships or CGI-alien bashing. And it’s all the better for that.

Moon is what Almost Famous would calll ‘a think piece’: it unfolds relatively slowly and in a careful, considered manner. Sam Rockwell, who seems to choose his films very carefully and based on quality not scale (which bodes well for the upcoming Iron Man 2 – he and Downey Jr should bounce well off each other), portrays a character isolated in a lunar station with only a mobile computer voiced by Kevin Spacey for company. So far, so 2001… and yet while Moon is in the style of sci-fi films from the late 70s, it’s not in the slightest bit derivative.

While not the speediest and certainly not your average space-set action driven tale, Moon does make you think, while based very much in science theory of the now. Mining on the moon and *potential spoiler here but not really since all the reviews have already given it away already* cloning, in particular not-quite-perfected cloning, are already either underway (hello, Dolly) or already suggested by scientists. In a roundabout way, Moon begs viewers ot think of social and heirarchical issues to do with cloning, and the creation of second-class, disposable people who can do those jobs no-one else wants to, far away from the eyes of anyone who might be upset but such an idea. In this way, it reminds me very much of tales like Brave New World and even Never Let Me Go, as well as creating a largely faceless corporation responsible for overlooking human objections in the name of a quick buck, rather like the Alien series’ Weyland-Yutani Corporation.

Moon is also quite the showcase for Sam Rockwell, in one role which permits him two distinct – and evolving – characters. It also confirms Kevin Spacey – who I can occasionally find to be overrated and whose film choices of late have been patchy to say the least – as quite the vocal talent, conveying a lot of subtle subtext in just the voice of a computer in place on the moon station to take care of the inhabitant(s) By avoiding Alien/2001 style ‘evil’ and overly logical, computers, subservient to programming to the point of destroying human ‘masters’, Moon deftly nods to but undercuts sci-fi norms.

I would recommend Moon to anyone looking for something more cerebral to the typical summer blockbuster. And – to get the obvious gag out of the way at last – yes, the main character’s arse does appear on screen.

Also have to dish out kudos to a few people from my screening – first the man who got so into the Pearl & Dean theme tune he hand-jived, ending with a terrific and well-executed hand-roll; second, the gentleman in the seat behind who graced the trailer reel with a delightful and timely ad-hoc Brasseye quote; and third my viewing-partner, who clocked a certain Matt Berry, late of Garth Marenghi’s Darkplace, in a hard-to-focus-on almost-cameo in the movie, just from the sound of his voice. Well played, sirs. It’s people like you who make the cinema experience a joyous shared evening.

Review one – Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

I know everyone and their dog has had a go at this film by now, but here’s my take. Potential spoilers below – you have been warned.

I need to kick off by saying – yes, I enjoy the books. I was one of Those People who set aside the day of release to whip through the latest book. Yes, I have been known to have long conversations with people about them.

Given I know the story I was expecting this film to be largely lacking in real suspense. I wasn’t expecting it to surprise me – which in places, it did. And many of the reviews I had encountered suggested it was merely ‘OK’ – a decent fist of a difficult book.

Personally, I enjoyed it. It’s long, at over 2 1/2 hours – possibly too long for smaller kids. But then this part of the tale was never really the one smaller children were going to enjoy much, given its focus on developing teen relationships. Reviews had also lead me to believe that this was one of the failings of the film – far too much focus on romance.

I would rate it as better than alright – not the best film, but certainly not the worst (that award would have to go to one of the first two adaptations, possibly Chamber of Secrets). It does deviate from the book, but then given the source material is well over 600 pages of pretty richly detailed story, it would be very difficult for filmmakers not to. This is something the other films have also suffered from in comparison to the books, but really – I don’t see any way the films could have been made without jetissoning some of the content. In a way it’s unfortunate that the books have such a massive following, there will always be someone in the audience displeased that their favourite character or most cherished detail has been omitted.

Given such a brilliant cast of the older British actors (Gambon, Smith, Rickman and Broadbent were all predictably excellent), the main trio have always been one of the weaker parts of the Potter movies for me. This time, I thought Daniel Radcliffe had come a long way, even displaying quite the talent for humour (or was it mimickery, I couldn’t put my finger on it) in one scene. I also thougth Rupert Grint did a good job of – once again – the comedy sidekick role (in fact in this story, he really had no other real job to do, sadly. I’m looking forward to seeing what he can do int he next two films). Emma Watson I found to be wooden again – it’s very difficult for me to watch her and not get the impression she is simply voicing the lines, rather than attempting to imbue them with any real emotion or power. However I didn’t find her too jarring overall. (I’m sure she’d be just thrilled to know that).

The film did add in some scenes – some structural really, to aid the flow with parts of the story which had been cut. I wasn’t entirely taken with the newly added-in attack on the Weasleys’ house. Given the filmmakers purposefully took out a fight scene which occurs in Hogwarts at the end of the book, due to it seeming ‘too similar’ to one which happens at the end of book seven (like we poor viewers would get confused as to which film we were watching?), to have an attack added in which is very similar to something that – shock horror – happens in the seventh book, seems a strange decision. Unless this scene too has been omitted. It’s entirely possible. Either way – it didn’t sit quite right. For those who know the story it doesn’t serve to add any pace; we all know how the book ends so nothing can really happen to the teens-in-peril. Equally, when a wrecked house earlier in the film is repared with the wave of a wand, surely a house engulfed in flame shouldn’t pose too much problem either?

In terms of the romance – given it’s a significant part of the book, I didn’t find this dragged. I thought Harry and Ginny’s attraction – perhaps a little rushed and sudden? – was well handled. Given most viewers have seen both of these kids grow up on screen, to see them entangled as frequently as they are in the book might have been a bit jarring, not to mention a little voyeuristic. I can’t speak for the younger viewers in the audience, but I would assume they are there because they have read or been read the books – so the romance couldn’t come as a surprise. Ron’s entanglements with his obsessive girlfriend were funny to watch (I would assume, even for the under-tens) and lightened the tone of an increasingly dark -not just in terms of story, but in terms of cinematography – tale.

I will take issue with the lack of real menace in this film. The key villain does not appear. Aside from attacking a London bridge in the opening minutes of the film, his minions seem to be more occupied with unneccessarily breaking things or playing a grown up version of knock down ginger than proving dark credentials. Also the cave scene, where Harry and Dumbledore are set upon by reanimated corpes was so badly animated you couldn’t make out any real detail. This may have been to avoid upsetting any younger viewers, but still, after the wonders Peter Jackson managed with Gollum just a few years ago, bad CGI in a film with this budget is pretty unforgivable.

On balance – yes I liked it. Yes, I will be going to see it again (not only because my first experience was in a cinema so bad it had no air conditioning and it smelt. Also due to my own fault I got there too late to get a central seat and ended up right next to a wall, which marred the whole experience for me). It’s flawed, and it does omit some fairly sizable facts from the overall story arc, but then the filmmakers have another two movies to play with to make sure everything keeps on track. I was always entertained, never bored, and occasionally laughed out loud. 3.5-4 out of five from me.

Kicking off

Wow. A blog all my own.
I should probably start by what this is intended to be all about.
My whole life, I’ve been fascinated by the cinema. Ever since I was a young kid. I have some very clear memories of going to see films with my family and friends, down to the films themselves but also the cinemas I saw them in. And yet its tricky for me to put a finger on what it is exactly that I find so appealing – the way it can inspire, or relax you; the chance to maybe see through someone else’s eyes (or close to it) for once; the way that watching a good (or even a no-so-good) film can lift your spirits or crush your heart or change your outlook on something. It’s a medium which can do so much, essentially through the play of light on a blank background. You take out what you put in as well, like with a good book – you can be swept away by the story, or look deeper to see the underlying films and technical aspects that make something great.
I’m prepared to accept that I might be a little obsessed with film – I tend to view it as a healthy interest rather than something all-consuming – but I do go to the cinema regularly and I have a healthy crop of trivia stacking up inside my head. I’m frequently astounded, for example, when people haven’t heard of IMDB. But more on that later (I have a little rant brewing in my head, it’s been going around for a few days now, about certain types of newspaper film reviewer).

A while back I noticed that people tended to ask my advice on releases or start conversations with me about films they’d seen, or wanted to see. They seemed to value my opinion, which was nice… I like how film is pretty much a universal conversation starter, everyone has their own preferences, and frequently it’s very hard to guess correctly what these might be.

I don’t intend this to be a big-headed download of my opinions, but I would like to use it to share my thoughts and overall experiences about film and the cinema with anyone who’d be interested in reading.

Chances are, if you know me, you’ll know sooner or later I’d do it in real life anyway…