Film round-up #2: racism, childishness and incredible acting

I know that I give high ratings for things. That’s because I am rating my enjoyment, not how good a film it is. Personal preference. This week was a mix:

Nothing much to say about this, other than it was mildly funny if not confusingly racist. Confusingly because sometimes it was just impossible to tell whether what I was watching was a clever look at people’s perceptions of those from other races, or just plain, shocking racism. Anyway, nice to see Eddie Murphy in a role where he’s not playing all 7 main roles, and being generally over-boisterous the whole time.

Oh maaaan. How to describe my disappointment with this film. It begs to be accepted as a kid’s film, but simultaneously as an adult film (being Scorcese), and as such achieves neither to an acceptable level. This is my opinion, but apparently I am alone in this, as it has racked up the most Oscar nominations this year. Unbelievable. Essentially, I found Hugo to be an overly-sentimental tribute to the cinema, like Cinema Paradiso was, but without the tact or the heart. Whereas Paradiso gave us characters we learned to love, Hugo gave 2D characters on a 3D screen. Whether this was the fault of the young male lead (who was able to stir not a single emotion in me), or just the scriptwriting/story in general, it is uncertain. The tributes to the old-style making of film were the best bet, which only highlighted how rubbish THIS actual film was. It was patronising for children: shoving in action sequences designed to excite children at random points in a way that was utterly at odds with the tone of the film, and the two hour running time seems ridiculously young for the target audience of this kind of silliness, and as such failed to work for me on any level. If this wins best screenplay/motion picture I will be outraged.

Whilst on the subject of Oscar outrage, this deserves a mention, as the acting in this was just off the scale, both for Carey Mulligan and Michael Fassbender (whose size in the trouser department was also pretty off the scale…). Whether this means I enjoyed the film, I’m not sure. It was a difficult film to watch, being quite emotionless and occasionally brutal, but its main problem was that it had no plot. Although it worked as a fantastic double-character portrait, as a film it was lacking, as there was no tension to keep me on the edge of my seat the whole way through.

What an enjoyable piece of meaningless fun! It seems to have got pretty rubbish reviews, but I thought this was a genuinely offbeat, not-always-predictable comedy, which is the best you can ask for these days in Hollywood to be honest, and it was good to see Danny McBride not being the Comedian Who Isn’t Funny for once. Oh yeah, and an Indian Sidekick providing the role that Black Sidekick normally fills. I appreciate the change, though still question how acceptable it is in racism terms.

Ah, what a delightful film. A 1941 spy film set in the war, this had some adorable humour, mixed with a heartwarming romance as well as a genuine thriller with plenty of twists. Kept me entertained the whole way through, with a nice slow pace, and well-realised, rounded characters.

Oh wow. This film just blew me away. We finally get to see Ryan Reynolds acting, and boy can he act. He was able to carry this one and a half hour film that by all logic should be boring-as-shit. Set in a coffin, with Ryan Reynolds being the only person on screen the entire way through, this is the most intrusive film I have ever seen, and never have I felt so suffocated watching a film as I did with this. With the greatest of restrictions, the film manages to create a plot with genuine emotion, twists and turns, and the fantastic cinematography keeps the box, and Reynolds, looking fresh. Cannot recommend this enough.

And with Buried in mind, a treat here and here. Laters.