Film Review: Killer Joe (18) (U.S.A. 2011) (Director: William Friedkin), Saturday 21.07.2012 20:45, Filmhouse Cinema Screen One, Edinburgh

I had reservations about going to see this, as in the past I have always been put off watching a film with Matthew McConaughey in it, as have found him a repellent presence. I suspect that I was turned by having seen William Friedkin the night before this premiered at the Edinburgh Film Festival doing a Q&A after a screening of The French Connection, in the very screening room where I was now sat watching the part-time naked bongo player. Now that McConaughey is playing a distinctly unpleasant character, Joe Cooper, one though which considering what he does, appears to have his own perverse moral code, I found him to be quite a watchable and engaging presence. Talking of moral codes, the central father (Thomas Haden Church), step-mom (Gina Gershon) and son (Emile Hirsh) don't appear to have one of these and clearly scrambling from one desperate situation to another.

The film speaks of the importance of honesty and a warning regarding who and what you may get involved in.

This is a visceral drama where the central father, step-mom and and son are deceitful and only serving their own self-interests. The father generally appears to be quite a passive and under the thumb character. The son is a proper bum, who appears to make no attempts to learn from the situations he gets himself into. The step-mom is the very definition of a slag.

The most interesting and intriguing character, and I would say most impressively performed in the whole film, is the daughter in the central family, called Dottie, played by the Brit, Juno Temple, daughter of the director Julian Temple. It is mostly assumed by the family that Dottie is a bit slow and needs protecting and often does not understand, and Joe assumes that Dottie is accepting of being pushed around by him. Yet by subtle inflections in the voice and rate of response along with how will change subject, along with micro expression in body language suggests that Dottie knows a lot more than is made clear. Dottie is by far the most ambiguous character and her motives are never made clear.

Having seen the film, I now agree with Mark Thomas when speaking on the BBC's Review Show (BBC2) on the night of the films general release, where he stated that the film should have been called Dottie. Although I agree, I also understand that a title like 'Killer Joe' is likely to gain greater interest and is more honestly reflective of the films tone. If it were called Dottie it may have got less attention and some may have gone to see the film expecting quite a different creature.

In regard to the infamous chicken scene, in the context of the depravity of the characters in the film, I don't see why this was seen as controversial, as seemed quite fitting in the overall tone. The Violence is in no way restrained and feels appropriately hard too take and will be appropriately too much for some. Thankfully there is also the balance of there being some genuinely laugh out load funny scenes.

The films ending is left with Dottie showing a strength, making it harder for her to be messed with (by those who are left), though also the ending is cut at a point where it is not clear as to how the character relations will pan out. Just the way I like it, no easy answers. A very enjoyable watch!

Rating: 08/10.

Film Review: A Royal Affair (15) (Denmark/Sweden/Czech Republic/Germany 2012) (Danish, English, German and French with English Subtitles) (Director: Nikolaj Arcel), Saturday 21.07.2012 17:45, Filmhouse Cinema Screen One, Edinburgh 

This film conveys historical events regarding the progressive implementation of the ideals of enlightenment into Danish society, at a time when they were still deeply mistrusted by those who were still unquestioning of the teachings of the bible and were reactionary to the changes being attempted. It also shows how tragically the one spearheading the change was killed by the 'old guard' who were still the holders of real power.

The one leading the change was the libertine who became the kings personal physician, and then much more than that. He used his influence to direct the king along the path of enlightened thinking and have the progressive changes enacted. The physician then had an affair with the kings wife (whose marriage had been arranged and done prior to their meeting), which produced her second child. When this became known the physician was executed and the kings wife sent into exile, where she died an early death due to ill health. With this the progressive laws became repealed. Then the queen's children when old enough, learnt what happened and her son (1st born) with the assistance of his father, who had been king, conducted a coup, this then lead to the progressive laws being reinstated  and being taken further than before.

The film is well paced and performed by all the cast. The central characters don't appear particularly likable. Though then it is clear that the king (Mikkel Boe Folsgaard) is prevented from holding real power and is viewed as mad, which could be seen as contributing to his character becoming eccentric and self-centred. The queen (Alicia Vikander) finds herself in an unhappy & loveless marriage where she has nothing in common with her husband and in an alien community and culture, so it is hardly surprising that she is unhappy for much of the time, except when alone with her lover and fellow libertine; though this also causes her to be betraying her husband. The physician (Mads Mikkelsen) always appears to have had trying to influence the enacting of progressive change as his central focus, though he can hardly be blamed for that. The films true villains are the 'old guard' and their duplicitous means of trying to prevent change that they do not like.

The film is engaging and tells a historically important tale, which I had not been aware of previously. In retrospect though I find it hard to feel excited about it as a film and don't feel an urge to rush to see again. I feel as though I should like the film more and don't feel able to agree with Mark Kermode on this one (he saw it as his film of the year, so far), As mentioned in the last posted review, there are only three new films I've seen so far this year, that I would class as flawless and this film although  good, would not even make it into a top five of the year so far.

Rating: 07/10.

Film Review: The Dark Knight Rises (12A) (U.S.A./U.K. 2012) (Director: Christopher Nolan), Friday 20.07.2012 06:00, The Cameo Cinema Screen One, Edinburgh (Preceded by Double Bill of Batman Begins + The Dark Knight (Both 12A) (U.S.A./U.K. 2005 + 2008) (Director: Christopher Nolan), Thursday 19.07.2012 23:30, The Cameo Cinema Screen One, Edinburgh, The Dark Knight Rises (12A) (U.S.A./U.K. 2012) (Director: Christopher Nolan), Sunday 22.07.2012 16:00, Cineworld Screen One (IMAX), Edinburgh

-----------------

Batman Begins/The Dark Knight Double Bill:

This was treated as an event by me, and it appeared to be the case also for many present. I arrived shortly before 23:00 and the cue was already out of the front door of the cinema. I'm sure that most would have seen the first two films several times previously, though both of them were received with applause; all part of the build up to the main event. There was an hour break between the first two and the final film and The Cameo Cinema kindly put on free breakfast for those who were staying for the third film, which appeared to be almost everyone; the seats were almost full for all three films, though I managed to get my preferred seat, A8, for all three.  

I'm not going to write full reviews of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, though will say the following:

Begins was a good origins story, though that was what it was and it did not feel to be in full stride. It also feels to me to not have enough of a sense of menace to it. It did not feel to drag, and with it lasting 2H 20Min, that is quite impressive.  

Knight had more menace with an overall tone that is quite ominous and felt to be in full stride. It also benefited from Heath Ledger's definitive performance as The Joker (which made Jack Nicholson's efforts in 1989 appear fairly pedestrian). I feel the fact that he died prior to the films release is irrelevant as to how the performance is viewed. The one problem with the performance is that it was so good that it blinded at the time to the fact that the film is flawed. The film is just over 2 & 1/2 Hours, and after The Joker is and Two-Face still to be dealt with, it does drag at that point. It felt as though it overreached itself. Two-Face, although visually very well handled, felt to be an afterthought of a villain, certainly in contrast to The Joker, he appeared slight.

Begins: 07/10.
Knight: 08/10.
-----------------

The Dark Knight Rises: 

The anticipation by the time the new film arrived felt to be quite feverish. 
I'm going to try to write this without any (or minimal) reference to the actual plot.
The film is just over 2 & 3/4 Hours, and from the start to the end, I felt there was no drag at all. From the start to the end it is was masterclass in terms off large-scale, intelligent action based blockbusting. The tension of the plot escalates throughout to a satisfying finale. With this being the final part of Nolan/Bale's trilogy, there were then some scenes to wrap up. This presented an emotional payoff which I felt to be satisfying though predictable. There was then a twist of there being further scenes and the real end I found to be more emotional and satisfying. I felt the ending was handled very well. After the final scene there was rapturous sustained applause.    

There has been reaction to the film saying that about half of what Bane says, through the device he needs on his face to prevent being in crippling pain, is unintelligible; I disagree, I would say that there is the occasional word that is difficult. beyond that I had no difficulty with it, and it certainly had no impact on enjoying the film. The sort of criticism that has been expressed in regard to this, I feel could only come from someone not paying proper attention.

There are more twists in plot & reveals + development to characters, than there had been in either of the first two films. In this way, the film felt to have more depth and satisfaction. There is no villain to compare to The Joker, though the ominous tone to the whole film is darker than the last, and that was one of the notable characteristics of that film. 

Catwoman I felt to be a particularly well portrayed character. She felt to be capable of looking after herself, sexy and quite ambiguous - which I always like. Anne Hathaway as Catwoman is quite a scene-stealer. There was a vulnerability to the portrayal by Michelle Pfeiffer in Tim Burton's Batman Returns, which reduced her sense off threat and made her fairly comical. The new portrayal does not have that same vulnerability and therefore is more investable. 

Alfred the Butler. Michael Cane is an actor I have found hard to warm to in the past, though I did feel he was good in the last two batman films. In this one he rivals Hathaway for quality of presence. The emotion within his performance, allows for the sneaking in of classy twists. There is much to admire of his performance within the film.  

I feel the term comic-book film in terms of these films is now redundant and particularly unhelpful. They may be based upon comics, though that is where the comic element ends. I also feel it is unfair to actual comic-book films for these films to be lumped in under the same heading, as actual comic-book films can only look meek in comparison.The current batman trilogy are proper adult dramas. I do also wonder, as do others, as to the appropriateness of these films being given a 12A certificate, they do though also retain a fantastical element which may assist younger viewers to retain that is entertainment and not to be taken as real. 

There is a quality and complexity to the plot weaving of this film, which could only be termed as drama of the highest caliber (with Shakespearean elements). This is easily the best of the current batman trilogy, and that is not being disparaging of the others, mealy a reflection of the quality of this one, how often can that be said of the third part of a trilogy. I would view this as an instant classic, and the only new flawless English language film I have seen so far this year (there are only two other flawless feature films so far, one French 'Goodbye First Love' (10/10), and one Turkish 'Once Upon A Time In Anatolia' (10/10)).     

Rating (without hesitation): 10/10. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Dark Knight Rises (IMAX)

I subsequently went to see The Dark Knight Rises in the IMAX format. I was curious about IMAX as had not seen any films in this format previously. 

After seeing Prometheus in 3D and then 2D, I had reached the decision that I really do not like 3D and did not wish to waste any of my further viewing on this format.

It also caused me to think that I really only wanted to see films, for the first viewing at least, in a conventional presentation, and if possible at either The Cameo Cinema, or Filmhouse Cinema, hence why I first saw the new batman film at The Cameo (my favorite cinema).

I had thought about seeing a film I was not bothered about in IMAX for the sake of experiencing that format, though then also realised that this made no sense. I therefore decided to book to see The Dark Knight Rises in IMAX format, and this decision was supported by my awareness that Nolan views IMAX cameras as being the most advanced for gaining images of the highest quality. I am also aware that about 30 minutes of The Dark Knight was shot uses IMAX cameras, and a bit over an hour of The Dark Knight Rises has been shot using these cameras.

Although it was enjoyable in a way that 3D is not (the gloom + the restricted viewing range of the frames = detracting from enjoyment), I did not feel that it added anything compared to seeing it on a conventional sized screen. It did not feel any more immersive, and the increased quality of the IMAX shot footage is clearly visible on a normal size cinema screen, or even for that matter when projected on an H.D. T.V. Screen from a BLU RAY Disk. As it also costs more to go to an IMAX Screening, as with 3D (those cheeky monkis), and did not add anything, I don't feel any need to return, and as I suspected and has been the case for many decades, conventional screens will do just fine.

In terms of the film, I don't feel it lost anything in enjoyment on 2nd viewing. To consider I knew what was going to happen and therefore there were no surprises; a sign of a great film. There were even some nice little details, at the time of Batman's first battle with Bane and towards the end that I had not picked up upon on first viewing, which added further depth.   

A film that I was already very impressed with, appeared even better on the 2nd viewing, and to think this is a commercial blockbuster. Even more strongly than before, I feel this film cannot be viewed as popcorn fluff (as is the case with pretty much all blockbusters), though has to be respected as the layered classic that it is.
--
 Nolan is developing a habit of commercially successful intelligent films, which demand the attention of the viewer. The Dark Knight, Inception and The Dark Knight Rises makes three in a row. Although not all of his films are flawless and he has not reached a point yet of me being able to consider him as one of my favorite directors (i.e. Almodovar, Kubrick, Lynch), commercial cinema is certainly a lot better off for being the benefactors of his attention.    

Film Review: Alien (18) (U.K./U.S.A. 1979) (Director: Ridley Scott) Sunday 15.07.2012 17:30, Filmhouse Screen One, Edinburgh

I already gave this a 10/10 rating in my Prometheus Review, and that has not changed. What I was struck by seeing this in the cinema again, is how economical the story is. Along with there being very subtle elements to the body language of characters such as Ian Holm's android, and the limited use of violence; there is no use of guns and when that is compared to the sequel the differences between the two films become very stark.

Alien is subtle parred back beauty, Aliens is violence 'porn'.

Having seen Prometheus recently, it does cause some of what occurs in Alien to be seen in a slightly different light, and causes Prometheus increased positivity.

A Definite Classic.

SOULSAVERS: THE LIGHT THE DEAD SEE 02.07.2012

Album Review: Soulsavers (England), The Light The Dead See, Released: 02.07.2012, Label: V2, Available on Vinyl (Comes with 'free' C.D. Version), C.D. & MP3 Download. 

I had purchased this as had read that Dave Gahan of Depeche Mode had done the vocals and contributed to the writing of the songs. Dave is a singer I enjoy and whose singer I feel to have got stronger over the years. Soulsavers are noted as a production and remix team consisting of Rich Machin & Ian Glover.

It was only after purchasing the album, that I read that Soulsavers were support on the European leg of Depeche Mode's tour in 2009. It is likely then that it is them that I saw live in Glasgow on Sat 12.12.2009, and was not impressed with what I saw.

Having said this the album is enjoyable.

There are 12 songs.
The first (La Ribera) is not really a song, more a musical intro to the album, though still pleasant.
The singing is strong throughout, though songs that I am particularly impressed by are:
Longest Day (Track 3); soulful though punchy,
Just Try (Track 5); soporifically quiet number,
Take Me Back Home (Track 8); properly soulful with a lovely acapella section at the end of the song,
Take (Track 11); engrossingly somber piano lead.

This is not an album to make you want to jump up and down or dance a la Depeche Mode, though it is very good.

Rating: 08/10. (Purchased on Vinyl).

Film Review: The Fly (18) (U.S.A. 1986) (Director: David Cronenberg) Friday 13.07.2012 23:00, The Cameo Cinema Screen One, Edinburgh

It has been many years since I have seen this film.
I had remembered it as being quite funny. I had forgotten how cute Geena Davis was then.

On viewing again, for the first time in a cinema, I found the transformation into brundlefly to be more difficult viewing than I remember from before. That is until he starts to use digestive acids to melt parts of limbs of the person he sees as being there to attack him, then it became quite funny again.

The film appears to speak of desperation to reach goals that have been striven for, despite the warning signs. How this can be particularly concerning when it comes to scientific discoveries, and the particular need for caution in this particular field.

Geena and Jeff work well together, their interaction being very enjoyable, to consider they were 'an item' in real life makes sense.

The whole story clearly involves complete suspension of disbelief, though even with doing this, Jeff Goldblum going into a bar and arm wrestling the tough guys and then taking home a bar pick up still feels difficult to take.

John Getz who plays Geena's boss and ex-boyfriend is an appropriately self-centered sleazy creep and makes a considerable contribution towards caring about what happens with Geena and Jeff's characters.

The emotional depth of the film is something I had not anticipated, though very much appreciated. The film has lot more quality to it than just being a gore-fest. The film was enjoyable if gruesome.

Rating: 08/10.  

Film Review: Total Recall (15) (USA 2012) (Director: Paul Verhoeven) Tuesday 10.07.2012 21:00, The Cameo Cinema Screen One, Edinburgh (Originally Released 1990 (18))

I saw a lot of Arnold Schwarzenegger's films when I was younger, though am aware that this is the only one, where he is playing a human and I don't look back upon it with derision. I had not seen it since my school days and was curious to go and see it, to see what I would make of it now.

I am also aware that there is a remake on its way, and I felt I would rather see the original again.

I understand it to be based upon a Phillip K. Dick story, though it has been embellished a lot. I understand that in the original story they never get to Mars, and there is no lady with three breasts.  

I found it to be like a live action cartoon, it is not possible to take any of it seriously; making the change from 18 to 15 certificate understandable. I also suspect this is why I did not look back on it with derision. When the rest of the film is as much of a joke as Arnie, it is hard to view him harshly within this context. The only other films where he does not appear stilted are the terminator films, where appropriately he plays a robot (okay, android, for anyone wishing to take issue).

It also struck me that the central characters complete amnesia about what he knew of the way in which the people living on Mars are held to ransom regarding their air supply. And his then being able to understand how to activate a livable atmosphere via a system created by 'aliens', removing the people from the clutches of the ruler of the colony, was handled without explanation. - Though then I remind myself that this is a romping chase of a film and to consider when this was originally made, I think I should not expect too much.

It was also amusing to see Sharon Stone having a practice run for what she would go on to do in Basic Instinct, which I had forgotten was by the same director.

As a bit of fluff, it still felt oddly enjoyable.

Rating: 06/10.

Film Review: The Dead Zone (15) (U.S.A. 1983) (Director: David Cronenberg) Friday 06.07.2012 23:00, The Cameo Cinema Screen One, Edinburgh 

I had hopes for this one, as understood it to be a particularly odd film, with one of Christopher Walken's better performances. When I first saw the Cronenberg season advertised, this is the one that held most interest for me. Although I enjoyed the film, I was disappointed.

The story is based upon the writing of Steven King.

The central character has an accident which leads to their developing telepathic powers, which are triggered in regard to being able to see people's pasts and futures upon touching them. This leads to his helping people and a level of community interest he finds hard to bear. Then upon shaking the hand of a politician while they are electioneering causes him to see the damage the person will go on to cause, so he takes action to curtail the politician's life. Although this is interesting, I felt it was also dealt with in a simplistic manner.

My reasoning to say that it is simplistic is this. To hypothetically suggest, upon what is known of someone today, it is possible to project forward and see that they will commit a damaging crime in say a years time. This ignores the fact that it cannot be known what may occur in their life between now and then and something may occur that alters the persons actions and prevents the crime from happening, without having to take any action to prevent it.

Having said this it is good to see films tackle the matter of life's self control balanced against/with chaos (actions from within the environment around). How there is no such thing as fate, just an ever changing trajectory, who's changes depend upon the influence of chaos upon control and control upon chaos.

Rating: 06/10.

Live Concert Review: The Stone Roses, Heaton Park, Manchester, 30.06.2012 (Supports: Beady Eye, Wailers, Professor Green, Hollie Cook). 

In July 2011, I met up with three mates, two of which I had not seen for 11 years. These where mates where one of the commonest things we used to talk about back in the day, was music. At that meeting last year, one of them asked a question along the lines of 'If you could have any band reform to be able to see live, who would it be?'. Without hesitation I said the original line up of The Stone Roses, and I was laughed at. This was obviously not out of any sense of derision, though was due to how unlikely this prospect was seen to be. Needless to say when, when just a matter of months later (October 2011), there reformation, and the live dates at Heaton Park were announced, I felt quite emotional. I took the day of work on the day of tickets being sold, to try to ensure I got my ticket. In case you are reading this and don't know, initially there were two dates (29th & 30th June) and a third (1st July) added quickly due to demand. 220,000 Tickets were sold in little over an hour for the three dates (that's a bit more than 73,000 each day), which I understand to be the fastest selling concert dates ever in the U.K.. One other from the discussion mentioned above, who lives in Middlesbourgh, had managed to get a ticket for the 1st of July.
--------------------
I traveled from Edinburgh by train on the morning of the day before the gig I had a ticket for - the middle of three dates being played. On the eve before travel all rail travel between Scotland and England was disrupted due to landslides and floods. I was relieved that the train travel on the way to Manchester was not disrupted and did not care that the train was as overcrowded as I've ever seen, as I was on my way.

It felt to be well organised in terms of shuttle buses from the city centre making getting to and from a stress free experience.

The merchandise also appeared to be reasonable in price.
--------------------

The Supports:
Hollie Cook:
Fine to listen to in a filed for a while to pass some time, not great by any means, not offensive, would not by her stuff (she is the daughter of Sex Pistols drummer Paul Cook). Rating 03/10.

Professor Green:
He may have had a difficult childhood, though even taking this into account, he struck me as a petulant and stroppy young man with one almighty chip on his shoulder, who was doing agresive and poorly mixed hippity-hop. The only redeeming part of his set, was when Lilly Allan joined him on stage to provide vocals to a track. Sometimes with this sort of Hippity-Hop I wonder whether I just don't get it, as it appears somehow to be popular - certainly troubles the chart,though the crowd did not appear to be that into it. Rating 02/10.

Wailers:  
Provided the crown with a dance and sing-along. I only like a couple of the songs they played, though cannot deny the stuff is popular and at least appears to be jollier than 'pro green'. Rating: 04/10.

Beady Eye:
Not as good as Oasis; who themselves were not great when I saw them in Edinburgh in 2009. Though it was good to see Liam Gallagher appear humble as he truly appeared to be honored to take part and was very clear in his admiration of the roses. For the crowd it was also good to have them perform 3 or 4 Oasis songs. Rating: 04/10.

--------------------
There was intermittent quite heavy showers during the supports, though by the time The Stone Roses came on, the weather was fine. The crowd appeared friendly throughout and did not see any agro. The overall enjoyment of the gig was also certainly helped by the fact that all in the crowd appeared determined to enjoy themselves. Did see one person collapse before The Stone Roses came on stage. During The Stone Roses in the enclosure at the front (which apparently held 15,000), where I was stood there was about six or seven flairs set of, though they appeared to handled fairly carefully, as carefully as you can with flairs).   
--------------------

The Stone Roses:
It was truely wonderful, one of the best rock gigs I have ever seen. The whole performance and the crowds reaction to it felt like a mass celebratory euphoric experience - quasi religious; though in a good way.

I had a sore cheeks and difficulty speaking afterwards from grinning at the briliance, and singing along - being Manchester, the whole show was a mass sing along. The bass and guitar were great (The synchronicity between the bass, drums and guitar was remarkable.), though Reni's drumming - which is why i'm such a fan - is quite probably the best I've ever seen in terms of rock drumming - with added jazz flourishes. I had the heirs on my arms standing up and was on the verge of tears. I had thought for a long time that I would never get to see him perform, it felt to be a privilege to witness. Reni still has the ability to make what he does appear effortless, yet it is clear from the sound he creates that it is anything but; a truly remarkable drummer. 

The only footage I've previously seen of the Roses performing from their first time out, is the recording of the concert at Blackpool's Empress Ballroom. The level of playing across the bass, drums and guitar has definitely improved and the overall sound was faultless, and Ian's singing I would happily say to be adequate.  

There was not a single weak song, they began with 'I Wanna Be Adored' and ended with 'I Am The Resurrection'. They played the entire first album throughout the set, as well as other early tracks such as 'Sally Cinnamon' & 'Mersey Paradise', they played a couple from 'The Second Coming' and words would not be able to do justice to their performance of 'Fools Gold'. For me the only notable ommisions were 'One Love' and 'Elephant Stone', though this is quibbling. 

(The Full Set List Was: I Wanna Br Adored/Mersey Paradise/Sugar Spun Sister/Sally Cinnamon/Where Angels Play/Shoot You Down/Bye Bye Badman/Ten Storey Love Song/Standing Here/Fools Gold/Somethings Burning/Waterfall/Don't Stop/Love Spreads/Made Of Stone/This Is The One/She Bangs The Drums/Elizabeth My Dear/I Am The Resurrection.)

The Roses played for approx 1 Hour & 50 Minutes and from start to finish the quality did not dip once. The overall enjoyment of the gig was also certainly helped by the fact that all in the crowd appeared determined to enjoy themselves.  

To top it all of they had a fantastic firework display when they went off stage - which the night before you could hear from the city centre.

As you can tell, I found it to be quite the experience, I doubt I will ever forget how great I found it to be.

Rating: 10/10 (I did consider giving 11/10, though that would just be a daft thing to do with any review).