Film Review: The Robber (15) (Germany/Austria 2010) (Director: Benjamin Heisenberg) (German with English Subtitles),  The Filmhouse Cinema Screen One, Edinburgh, Sunday 23.03.2014, 15:55

This is the third film the Filmhouse have become the U.K. distributor for, and the first of these I had wanted to see. This is based on events from the 1980's concerning a criminal who was nicknamed 'Pump-Gun Ronnie' after his weapon of choice and use of a Ronald Reagan mask. The main elements to the criminal was that he would hold up banks and was also an athlete who ran marathons. Due to his athleticism he was able to evade capture for some time. When people around him began to twig-on he was able to explain he was not doing it for the money, though could not explain why. 

There is no understanding of his actions reached within the film, though that is often the way in life. The film is well constructed, paced and edited. The story is conveyed in an engaging manner and all of the acting serves the story well. It is quite a visceral visual experience, though I would still struggle to recommend. 

Rating: 06/10.       

Film Review: Salvo (12A) (Italy/France 2013) (Directors: Fabio Grassadonia & Antonio Piazza) (Italian with English Subtitles),  The Filmhouse Cinema Screen One, Edinburgh, Saturday 22.03.2014, 13:30

This is a film that starts with the attempted assassination of a Mafia hit-man. It then goes on to show his developing revenge and the unexplained assistance he gives to what appears to be the 'disabled' sister of the man who tried to assassinate the hit-man.

At 1 hour and 44 minutes the film felt to drag and overall it felt to be a bit on the slow side. The actress who played the part of the person who hit hit-man assists was impressive, though I would not recommend the film for this element.

Nothing of note...

Rating: 03/10.     

Film Review: Under The Skin (15) (U.K. 2013) (Director: Johnathan Glazer), The Cameo Cinema Screen Two, Edinburgh, Wednesday 19.03.2014, 25:30

This is the film where Scarlett Johansson plays an unnamed alien interacting with locals in Glasgow & exploring the West Coast of Scotland. 

The film has passages that are striking in terms of its sound and visuals. It is a subtle film which benefits from concentration. I would say there are sections which are quite interpretive, other sections which appear quite clear, and further sections which feel beyond understanding and which work solely in an aesthetic way. I would say that the film concerns themes of consumption, assimilation, development of emotion and compassion. 

I feel it adds nothing to know that some of the interactions with locals were 'for real', with their consent being got afterwards to enable use in the film. I found myself recognizing parts of the setting as have lived in Glasgow for periods, and I don't know if this took me 'out of' being able to see the environment as alien, and how the environment it is set in would have added to such a sense for those who don't know Glasgow as well as I do.      

There have been reviews claiming this to be a masterpiece and other reviews have been damming. I don't sit at either extreme. I feel the films pacing is a bit slow in parts and none of the film feels to be a revelation. I feel this was an intriguing film which may well reward further viewings, though I don't feel it would be fair to think of this as flawless. 

Rating: 07/10. 

Film Review: Nymph()maniac (18) (Denmark/Germany/France/Belgium/U.K. 2014) (Director: Lars Von Trier), The Cameo Cinema Screen Two, Edinburgh, Vol. I Friday 28.02.2014 21:10 Vol. II Saturday 01.03.2014, 20:45

This film revolves around a character called Joe (Charlotte Gainsbourg) who at the beginning of the film is lying bloodied and bruised in an alleyway where she is found by the kindly Selligman (Stellan Skarsgard). Selligman takes Joe home to allow her to rest and recuperate, and Joe begins to regale him with her life story. Joe's story is a graphic recounting of her nymphomania (refusing to term herself as sex addict) and it soon becomes apparent that Selligman is a virgin who can only equate what she is talking about with the likes of fly-fishing and the laws of geometry and numeracy.       

The film work of Lars Von Trier I think to be very hit-and-miss. There are only two of his previous films that I rate: 'The Idiots' (1998) & 'Antichrist' (2009). Sadly this does not add to the pluses. I found Vol. I boring and extremely tedious, and Vol. II little better. I found the character of Joe's recounting of her sexual life to thankfully not be titillating, though regrettably I also found this to be indulgent, insensitive to who she was speaking with and really dull. None of the recounting I found to be presented in an interesting way. It never tries to give any sense as to why Joe felt compelled to behave in the way she did. There are also scenes that are recounted and shown such as Joe's father shitting the bed while in the process of dying, where I was left thinking that Lars was solely pushing buttons by this, as this certainly appeared to add nothing to understanding Joe. 

Vol. II felt to be marginally better than Vol. I, though this was probably due to my by this point expecting tedium. At the end of Vol. II Joe is about to go to sleep having found a friend in Selligman, and Selligman going to his room to do similar, when the film suddenly enters lazy and angering stereotype. Sadly not even this felt interesting. It felt as though Lars had lost interest in stimulating by this this point and had fallen back upon the sort-of shear predictability that you would get from an ignorant 'hollywood' director. Lars, Shame on you. 

Even to consider how the title is advertised using the empty brackets in place of the 'o', as this is suggestive of the female genitalia, strikes me as quite juvenile and not the sort of thing I would expect of an artist. The poster is also childishly misleading, showing a myriad of actors with 'cum-faces' on, when the majority of these characters never engage in intimate acts within the film. 

I cannot recommend this to anyone. Don't waste your hard-earned pennies. 

In terms of rating, I did think should I at least give it one out of ten. Though then I had to consider, 'what for?'. If I were to give any points it would be a reflection upon previous work by Lars and that is not acceptable, so sadly Lars get's the first 00/00 of the year. Tut Tut. Not even Uma Thurman's single scene (the best thing in the film) could save this one from the ignominy of the double zero. 

Rating: 00/00.