Joan Rivers: A Piece of Work (2010) Review

Joan Rivers: A Piece of Work (2010), Ricki Stern
3/5
An interesting documentary about the strange and hilarious Joan Rivers. It focuses mainly on her career and ambition, with only some mentions to her more personal life. It includes some hilarious footage of her stand up comedy and is an interesting portrait of a unique person, that is both talented and utterly vain. The film did seem to lack a strong arc, but this is the more authentic form of documentary, rather than inserting an artificial story arc or journey.

Looper (2012) Review

Looper (2012), Rian Johnson 

 3/5

***Spoiler Alert***

From the writer and director of Brick (2005) (which also starred Joseph Gordon-Levitt) comes this unfortunately disappointing sci-fi action film. While the premise is somewhat interesting, utilising interesting notions of the dystopian future, it's fusion with gangster elements are underwhelming. The logic of time travel is not really addressed in the film, and is frankly nonsensical. It is disappointing that the film uses the concept of time travel as a jumping off point rather than truly exploring the issues involved in actual time travel. To the point where in a scene in the diner with young Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and old Joe (Bruce Willis), old Joe basically yells at his younger self's questions about how the time travel works, saying "I don't want to talk about time travel" which is basically sending a message clearly to the audience, that there is no point in trying to understand the underlying logic of the plot, which may come off as a joke when Willis' character states "I don't want to talk about time travel, 'cause if we start talking about it, we'll be here all day making diagrams with straws." This can be seen as a comedic nod to past scifi films attempting to explain time travel, but it comes off rather as a clear indication that disrespects the audience's intelligence. 

The choice to use digital affects to alter Joseph Gordon-Levitt's face to look supposedly more like Willis's in order to help convey that they are the same person, was an epic failure. The changes to Gordon-Levitt's face were constantly distracting and detracted from the focus of the plot. It would have been better to leave the actors as they were, as audiences are quite willing to suspend their disbelief. In general the look and style of the film was great, very much influenced by noir and neo noir cinema styles (which were heavily influences on Brick (2005) as well). 

The first act is great, but the story really starts to come apart at the seams during the second act. The pacing is quite slow and staccato with some action elements involved very early on in the first act, then leading in to a longer slower paced middle, which detracted from some of the tension. The performances were good, especially by the leads Willis and Gordon-Levitt, but due to plot and editing the characters lacked some empathic resonance, as allegiance was split as a viewer, and you didn't know who to side with. This might be conceived as a moral dilema, but as was clearly established early on due to the time travel element the story would end in a somewhat circular and predictable manner. This shows the underlying problem of time travel in films and literature. The choice must be made either that nothing can change, or that there are multiple strands of future and change is possible. Unfortunately Looper opted for the less logical, multiple futures "changing the future" is possible. Most of the characters weren't particularly likeable and the allusions made to dysfunctional families of the past, wasn't really explored. By the third act the strongest allegiance to any character was to Sara (Emily Blunt), but it was unfortunate that the story reverted to such strong stereotypes of the man/ woman/ child dynamic, and it felt clunky, especially the turn around between the relationship with young Joe and Sara. Where young Joe was selfish and ambitious and greedy and Sara was strong willed and independent, the film quickly reverted their characters to young Joe as the typical male protector father figure and Sara as the mother, comforter and sexual object. This was disappointing. 

The action lacked any real spontaneity or suspense and the supernatural elements were somewhat ridiculous. The ending was predictable, and therefore lacked any impact of the supposed "self sacrifice". This was also problematic due to the fact that while the two Joes were supposedly the same person, their break in psychological continuity (i.e. the link between conscious memories and narrative of self) was lacking and therefore, the vast distinctions between the two characters lacked any real impact that they were indeed the same person. 

Rather the thinly established plot of time travel was poorly adapted to try to convey a heavy handed message about nature/ nurture and a person's ability to change and defy their own patterns of the past. However the music and visual look of the film were good, as well as solid performances from great actors. What is most disappointing about this film is that it had such potential as a concept and unfortunately failed to meet the potential, failing to be a coherent science fiction film about time travel, failing to be a suspenseful thriller or a riveting action film. Therefore Looper (2012) is overall a muddled film, with many interesting ideas, good style and performances, but really lacking in substance, due to basic script issues. It is reminiscent of Inception (2010) in that is exploits "sci-fi" concepts in order to sell an action/ thriller, both lacking substance, and creating confusion to disguise poor story logic, all under the guise as a serious drama. I fear it is a growing trend of "action" films in the last few years, where it is not enough to sell straight action with dramatic violence and explosions, but now there is this new style of "high" action film which purports to be smart with serious overtones and dark themes, but instead mishandle these concepts merely in order to sell action sequences and CGI effects. 

Resident Evil: Retribution (2012) Review

Resident Evil: Retribution (2012), Paul W.S. Anderson
1/5
Don't worry if you haven't seen any of the previous Resident Evil films, there is an extended prologue recap sequence that will give you all the important relevant details to catch you up. Following the same basic plot as the previous films, and stealing heavily from Aliens (1986) there are some good action sequences, the CGI is bad at times. The nonsensical plot feels like a video game....wait IT WAS A VIDEO GAME! Ada Wong's character (played by Bingbing Li) is merely a plot device, spouting endless expositional dialogue, wearing a red dress with a large slit up the side, reminiscent of Alice in Resident Evil (2002). And we mustn't forget the recycling of intertextual references to Alice In Wonderland with the character of Alice and the computer program the "red queen".

Watching the film in 3D was a big mistake, not being a fan of 3D films in general this is a particularly bad example and use of it. The action becomes cartoonish and cut out like, detracting from the experience, making the film seem even more cheap and videogame like. Particularly bad was the shot where blood spattered on the"camera" or "your face" which broke the fourth wall and was less scary or shocking, than just annoying.

Mila Jovovich (Alice) was great as always, giving a good performance and looking great as always in a new outfit. The film borrowed heavily from Aliens (1986) using the elements of the daughter of Alice like the Ripley and Newt scenario, even down to the girl being taken by a monster/ alien and having to be rescued by the mother Alice/ Ripley. Also the man who would help the heroine is critically injured just beforehand, so she must go alone to save the girl, just as in Aliens (1986). Detailed pilfering of Aliens even goes down to the egg-like sacks that the girl Becky is trapped in and Alice, like Ripley must rip her out of it. The name Becky is even a homage or throw back to Aliens as Newt's real name in the film was Rebecca!

Resident Evil: Retribution (2012) Alice & Becky

Aliens (1986) Ripley & Newt aka Rebecca

Even the alien/ zombie creatures are reminiscent of Alien face-huggers and also the "vampires" in the Blade films. There are some funny moments and some good fight sequences to be sure. And don't forget the inevitable set up for the sequel. Can you say "Resident Evil: The Last Stand"? But this film is most successful at is making me feel like playing the video game, so in that, I guess the film is a success, as marketing for more video games.

Resident Evil: Retribution (2012)

Blade Trinity (2004)

Alien (1979)

Mission to Mars (2000) Review

Mission to Mars (2000), Brian De Palma
05./5
This terrible science fiction film, directed by Brian De Palma continues his trend as a bad film maker, making use of nonsensical plot, gratuitous action, melodramatic performances, lack of any actual character development, unrealistic "scientific" jargon instead of actual logic, heavy handed music and shovel loads of expositional dialogue are what make Hollywood science fiction film so bland and unintelligent. Totally unrealistic, boring with bad graphics and overly melodramatic idealistic notions.

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) Review

***SPOILER ALERT***

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974), Tobe Hooper
2/5
Highly controversial and shocking at the time of it's release, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974). It is less explicitly violent, on screen, separating it from the gore horror genre, instead focusing on the horror and suffering of the characters. The pacing is relatively good, with a good 40 minutes before the main action. The acting feels amateurish and more like drama school performances. The film is still very grainy to watch, shot on 16mm, despite being 'restored' to HD format. Obviously it was a highly influential film on the horror genre, with the jagged camera work style, the use of chainsaws and household items as weapons. What I think is more interesting is the themes developed early in the film, where the hitch hiker talks to the young people about slaughtering cows. The cannibalistic themes and the ensuing horror and especially the imagery of the 'meat hook' of the first girl and being placed in the freezer all allude to notions of animal slaughter and cruelty to animals.

The film is not particularly scary, and is instead rather absurd, especially watching them endlessly chase the girl around and never quite catching her, makes little to no sense. It lacks real horror due to the predictability both built in to the film and also because it helped create many of the genre expectations that now underly the contemporary horror film. It sort of really started the idea of "based on a true story" text at the start of the film, despite this actually being totally fictional. Wolf Creek (2005) feels remarkably similar both in style and plot to Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974). It continued mythic horror themes of the beautiful country house facade, cannibalism, grave robbing etc.

The film relies heavily on audience expectation and imagination to create a sense of 'horror' although the maniacal and inaudible rantings of the 'cannibals' and the screams of the girl are particularly disturbing. Highly influential of the 'slasher' and 'torture porn' genres, even influencing Ridley Scott's Alien (1979) and other horror films like Halloween (1978, John Carpenter) and more. The genre stereotypes that were established continue to be remade and influence films since. Especially the role of gender and the torture of women, or the "final girl" phenomenon which can be seen in the Alien (1979, 1986, 1992, 1997) franchise, Halloween (1978) and more recently parodied in Cabin in the Woods (2011) written by Joss Whedon. Such as the use of masked assailants that are mostly gormless and personality less, seen in Halloween (1978) etc, instead focusing on family dynamics and also the major thing in the true "Horror" genre of playing on anticipatory dread and fear of violence using the unseen to create fear, and the unknown, rather than what is shown. Something that is deviated from in the sequels/ remakes and more recent "slasher" films which focus on the explicit violence and gore, as "gross-out films" rather than true "horror" films.

The film can be seen as a prime example of the expression of violence in film as a substitute for sexual violence, instead portraying the hysterical girl. There were some amazing moments including a couple of amazing shots where the "final girl" jumps through glass windows.

Strangely the final moments of the film showing her covered in blood laughing hysterically as she escapes in the back of a pick up truck are almost just as disturbing. The film is highly unrealistic and both disturbing, funny and ultimately absurd. It is worth a watch just to see some of the influence and origins of the genre.