The Wrestler movie review

The Wrestler is Mickey Rourke’s movie. A big time wrestler in the 80’s, Randy “The Ram” Robinson is now in his 50s and still wrestles, hoping for one more shot at the big time. Its the one thing he can do well and he lives for the roar and adulation of the crowd.
Yes, we all know that wrestling is “fake”, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t real or it doesn’t hurt. Each time you hit the canvas, or get hit with a fold-up chair, or any of the other creative ways the pros use to entertain you, the wrestler still has to take the blow, get up, and do it again. And the strains of this entertainment are starting to show. The Ram's body is scarred from ring mishaps of years past; the muscle tissue is starting to weaken and tear from years of abuse; and the drugs to repair the damage, build the muscle and eat the fat, are common place. Back stage, its not a glamorous lifestyle and the pay for his efforts is solely dependent on the gate – often not a lot of reward for his effort.
Rourke is such a physical actor. His body is as much a part of the role as any words he has to say. His big shoulders, square jaw and scarred brow all play the role. And you know too, or at least deeply suspect, that Rourke is doing all his own stunts. Each crunch is hurting.
The other notable performance, also a physical role, is stripper/friend Cassidy, played by Marisa Tomei. Striking to look at, 44 year old Tomei puts her body on the line. She is every bit as gutsy and compelling as Rourke, in a support role.
The director is Darren Aronofsky (Requiem for a Dream) who revels in the dark hallways or crowded change rooms that twist and turn before leading out onto the glittering pole-dancing stage or the brightly lit wrestling ring.
The story tracks The Ram through the final stage of his wrestling life as he tries to reconnect with his estranged daughter and make something of his relationship with Cassidy. It is straightforward enough. There is some humour, especially in the early wrestling scenes where each opposing pair works out their moves beforehand.
The power and appeal of this film however is in the dominating hulk that is Mickey Rourke and is worth every cent watching him strut his stuff. 4 out of 5.
The film is due out in Australia in January. Many thanks to Hopscotch Films for the preview.

James Bond Quantum of Solace movie review

I must confess to finding some of the detail of this latest Bond jaunt a little confusing. As such I won’t try and write a complete review. I will leave that for the more distinguished members of the Bond alumni such as old friend Veejay.
Some reflections then: Daniel Craig has ushered in a new Bond and with it none of the cool charm of previous incarnations. Gone are the scrapes but no bruises, the witty asides that cause the girl to go weak at the knees and the fawning of Miss Moneypenny and Q. This Bond faces a series of assaults that are anything but fun. He doesn’t sleep for days on end, is covered in welts from the various beatings, and manages to over compensate the level of force required by killing each possible lead, one after the other.
Apparently there is some international terrorist group called Quantum although we don’t get many insights into this throughout the movie. I assume they will rival Goldfinger when its all said and done but that must be for the next movie.
The Americans just want the oil and don’t care who they get it from. The Haitian coup leader is a nasty piece of work, and the French business man (Mathieu Amalric) will extort any or all. No wonder there’s trouble in the Home Office with M (Judi Dench) wanting to believe that Bond can sort it all out before the Minister outmanoeuvres her and closes their operation down.
I must say though, if nothing else, you must admire his “can do” attitude. Handcuffed in a lift surrounded by Secret Service goons? No worries. Just knock them out and away you go. Caught in a gas fired inferno with the roof crashing down around you? Don’t panic. Say a few quiet words to the girl your protecting, aim your gun at a cylinder and “Pow!” the wall explodes and out you jump. Apparently you don’t have to worry about the odd little thing like machine gun bullets too, either from a moving speedboat or motor vehicle. They can’t shoot straight anyway.
All the action sequences were filmed by “shaky hand Steve” with 2 second cuts. This made watching any of the chase or fight scenes very disorientating. My deeply held belief is that this kind of “kinetic”, “adrenaline charged” camera work is merely covering poorly choreographed action and they don’t want you to realise it! The rest of the film, you’ll be pleased to know, was shot perfectly normally.
It is also a great thrill with these modern action type films when they shoot on location, around the world. In Quantum, you have a little of Italy, Austria, Chile, Panama and Mexico.
Broadly I got what I expected out of a Bond film. Lots of big action and one superhero who can take them all down. The Bond franchise desperately needed a re-boot. Each Bond film was becoming a cliché of itself. This new series with Craig has given fans a gritty agent who really only wants to do it for “God, Queen and country.”

In the Garden, in the Rain

On the wettest day in Melbourne in the whole of 2008 and close to the wettest day in December, ever, young Curly and I weeded under the play equipment and moved one cubic metre of tan bark to cover the ground. Timing!
The remaining two cubic metres of mulch will go on the front garden beds tomorrow afternoon, after they have had a good soak.

In Defence of Luhrmann's Australia and Nicole

There is an abundance of negative publicity surrounding Baz Luhrmann’s latest film, ‘Australia’.
Tall Poppies
Criticism of ‘Australia’ seems to be strongest from the high brow movie watcher who appear guilty of a local cringe factor. It puts me in mind of the national consciousness in the lead up to the Sydney Olympics opening ceremony where a similar negativity was leapt upon by a waiting media, always happy to push any measure of bad news. And with headlines that scream “Australia disappoints at box office”, who can resist a knowing nod?
With a reported cost of $130m to make and promote the film, there is no doubt that this one film has cost more than any other Australian film. Coupled with a calculated business drive to promote the film heavily, which is unusual for Australian films, the nation’s “tall poppy syndrome” has been quick to set in.
Luhrmann’s use of Australian actors is welcome and his portrayal of outback landscapes is appealing. It is no wonder that Tourism Australia were keen to align themselves to his vision.
Despite the high price tag and popular nature of this film it has been far from a failure. In its first week alone its box office takings were in the order of $10m in Australia alone. It will run for a few weeks yet into the summer holidays and that figure doesn’t take into account any overseas takings either.
Contrast this with the Australian films nominated in the Best Film category at last weekend’s Australian Film Institute awards : The Black Balloon, The Jammed, The Square and Unfinished Sky. Have you heard of any of these films? Let alone actually watched any of them? Perhaps you have heard of The Black Balloon (which won best picture) or Joel & Nash Edgerton’s The Square, and that because they were advertised in some way more than the others. Their combined box office takings however are $3.9m. Total.
Furthermore their themes are broadly consistent with many Australian films of recent times, darker in tone and more serious in nature. By all accounts they are very fine films but do I, as a potential audience member, get excited about the prospect of seeing something dour and downbeat? To be sure, I will be watching these films as they hit our DVD shelves, if for no other reason than because they are Australian films, but don’t tell me that somehow they are success stories (other than the actual success of getting them made which is no small feat in and of itself) while ‘Australia’ is a failure. In every way ‘Australia’ outpoints these other films: in its profile, its popular sensibility and its takings.
The Nicole factor
The other reaction against ‘Australia’ is that of Nicole Kidman. For some reason she is ‘on the nose’ of Australian audiences and that is counting against the film.
As you all know, I am a fan of Nicole and have been for a long time and I don’t back away from that now.
I think the reasons for this anti-Nicole sentiment is two fold. The first is her tabloid profile and regular folks are heartily sick of seeing her mug on the cover of every women’s magazine. Being married to Tom Cruise placed her in the echelon of uber-celebrity and she has been a target ever since.
As an adjunct to that, facial surgery in early 2000s, initially (I believe) to reshape her nose and since then, who knows what else, has resulted in a face with no blemish or wrinkle. Certainly the absence of any “laughter lines” or the like give opportunity for people to complain of an expressionless, “plastic” face. Ironically she has the appearance of a Stepford Wife, a role she played in 2004.
Secondly, the movies in which she has played a part in recent years have not been either critically or popularly acclaimed.
Kidman’s great film roles occurred around the time of her break up with Cruise and which garnered a Best Actress Oscar : The Hours, Dogville, The Human Stain, Cold Mountain and Birth. The dark subject matter was more than met with the dark moods of her personal life. They were powerful and serious storylines.
Since then, lighter tones and more popular offerings that sadly have been less impressive: The Stepford Wives, The Interpreter, Bewitched, Fur, The Invasion and Margot at the Wedding.
All I will say in defence of Kidman and her choice of roles is that she takes risks. I can only imagine that an actress with her profile would be offered countless roles in blockbuster, ‘James Bond’ type movies. The fact that she has done very few of those types of films, and none recently, should be marked as a credit but it is not recognised.
For example, with Fur, she took the opportunity to work with director Steven Shainberg whose previous success was with the controversial and independent film Secretary. Fur turned about to be a bit too quirky for its own good.
Margot, to work with Noah Baumbach whose previous success was with The Squid and the Whale. Margot was a hard script to work through and would have sunk irrespective of the cast.
I believe that the opportunity to work on an Australian film and support the local industry was behind her motivation to work on ‘Australia’ and before that ‘Happy Feet.’
I tend to judge the success of an actor very simply. If, at the end of a movie, I am satisfied that I believed what I was seeing, then it’s a ‘pass’. It is my opinion that Kidman remains a fine actress although not every film she has appeared in, has worked.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I comfortably rate ‘Australia’ as a 3 out of 4 star movie. The fact that it is an Australian film that highlights our history and addresses some of our current day issues is to be celebrated and enjoyed.

You can read my review of 'Australia' here.

Movie Reviews : A-K

My Top 12 movies of the 2000s
$9.99
All The President's Men
An Andalusian Dog (La chien Andalou)
Aussie Rules

Australia

Bad Boy Bubby
The Ballad of Narayama
Bangkok Hilton
Birth
The Black Balloon
Blame
Blessed
The Book of Revelation
Borat
The Bourne Ultimatum
Bran Nue Dae
Capote
Changeling
The Class
Cold Mountain
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Defiance
Doubt
The Duchess
Duplicity
Flags of Our Fathers / Letters from Iwo Jima
Flushed Away
Frost/Nixon
Frozen River
Ghost Dog : The Way of the Samurai
Gosford Park
Gran Torino
Happy Feet
El Heist Grande
Howls Moving Castle
The Hurt Locker
Inglourious Basterds
In The Loop
The Jammed
JFK
Jim Jarmusch retrospective
Kill Bill Vol. 1

Movie Reviews : L - Z

Movie Reviews : L-Z

Lady Vengeance

The Last Station
Letters from Iwo Jima / Flags of Our Fathers
Little Sparrows
The Loved Ones
Man On Wire
Marie Antoinette
The Matilda Candidate
Milk
The Natural
Paranormal Activity
The Passion of the Christ
The Princess and the Frog
Punch Drunk Love
James Bond Quantum of Solace
The Queen
Rachel Getting Married
The Reader
Requiem for a Dream
Revolutionary Road
Romper Stomper
Hitchcock's Sabotage
Slumdog Millionaire
Somewhere
The Square
Superman Returns
Team America
Thirst
Tideland
Time
The Tree
Tristan + Isolde
Troy
Twilight
Unfinished Sky
Van Dieman's Land
Vicky Cristina Barcelona
The Visitor
Volver
Waltz With Bashir
The White Ribbon
Winter's Bone
The Wrestler
Zidane : a 21st Century Portrait

Movie Reviews : A - K

Bad Boy Bubby movie review

Rolf De Heer is one of Australia’s most talented and diverse filmmakers. From the race conscious Tracker, to the silent-era homage Dr Plonk, De Heer utilises local talent to make Australian films crossing genre and style. Ten Canoes is set exclusively in the Northern Territory and tells a coming of age story about passion and respect amongst a tribe of indigenous Australians; Alexandra’s Project is a revenge thriller set in the suburbs.
And then there’s Bad Boy Bubby.
I am not so easily horrified by films. Indeed, only last weekend I watched an Asian horror film about evil spirits that barely flickered above the ho-hum. The first half hour of Bubby however made me repulsed by the squalor and abuse and I questioned whether or not I would make it to the end of the film. I could sense however that in a perverse way, De Heer was having some fun with us. It is as though he said to himself, “Now, just how putrid and disturbing can we make this scene?”
Bubby, played by Nicholas Hope, is an idiot savant who has been locked in a one bedroom cell for 35 years by his mother who shares the room, her bath and bed with him. Her psychological abuse is unrelenting and her slaps and punches leave him cowering. She prevents him from leaving by wearing a gas mask and telling him the air outside will kill him. The cell is dirty and sweaty and bare save for a few pieces of furniture.
With nothing to do and no one to talk to, Bubby keeps a ‘pet’ cat locked in a cage which he antagonises with a stick.
His brain slowly rationalises how the cat could survive outside if it didn’t wear a gas mask.
His mother answers, “it survives by holding its breath.”
“What’s holding your breath?” he asks
She grabs him from behind, blocking his airway.
Now he knows. He experiments on the cat only to find the cat doesn’t care for having its airways closed. He wraps its body in cling wrap. It still finds a way to breathe. Breathing is a little harder through the plastic and he is somewhat surprised that the cat dies.
When his father turns up, this proves the last straw for Bubby who eventually cling-wraps his parents. He stumbles into the outside world for the first time and sadly this is where the film loses some of its impact. As gross as the first Act was, the claustrophobia and tension was becoming compelling.
Bubby stumbles from one group of welcoming strangers to the next. They all take care of him in some way which I didn’t find wholly believable. He gets by with a few phrases he has learnt from his mother or picked up along the way. This alternately gets him into trouble or endears him to the next audience.
Eventually he meets Angel, a nurse at a disabled person’s home, who has breasts like his mothers. He demonstrates affection toward her and she welcomes him. Angel has experienced abuse at the words and attitudes of her judgemental and self-righteous parents. In a moment of dark humour, the cling wrap killer dispenses some movie justice.
Nicholas Hope when left alone on the set, ably plays the simpleton who discovers and reacts to the world around him. He does not pre-empt the consequences of his actions and appears bewildered but nonplussed when things do occur. When he interacts with others however we sense a spark in the actor that belies the reality of the character.
It is easy to see why Bad Boy Bubby has become a cult favourite since its release in 1994 and is an important stepping stone in the life of an intriguing and talented Australian filmmaker.

Pearls - my favourite comic strip

Pearls Before Swine

Baz Luhrmann's Australia movie review

Baz Luhrmann, writer, director and producer of Australia, promised an ‘epic’ and epic is what he delivers. Starting pre-war in 1939 with the arrival of Lady Sarah Ashley (Nicole) on a Qantas flight from England, it finishes with the Japanese bombing of Darwin in 1941. In between time we drove 1,500 head of cattle from Faraway Downs station onto the ship in Darwin harbour with The Drover (Hugh Jackman), have the boy, Nullah (Brandon Walters) taken to Mission Island, as was the experience of many coloured and native children, have The Drover and Lady Sarah fall in love, be separated and then reunited, all the while compete with the voracious and avaricious King Carney (Bryan Brown) and his son in law Neil Fletcher (David Wenham), rival cattle barons and acquisitive land owners.
The thread of the story however belongs to Nullah, his ties to the land and his people. When his mother dies, he is left in the care of Lady Sarah who adopts him as her son.
The opening Act, that of Lady Sarah coming to Australia and to her property at Faraway Downs, is filled with vaudeville as Luhrmann plays up much of the Australian larrikin sense of humour. The Drover (whom we first meet looking up from under his hat a la Clint Eastwood) is centre stage for a brawling fist fight outside the hotel; Lady Sarah’s English ‘tourist’ is excited by her first sighting of a kangaroo; Jack Thompson’s inarticulate entrance.
The film really represents two distinct story arcs : the drove, and war-time. The Drover, clearly a white man, is a friend of the blacks and is seen as “black” by white society, and therefore shunned. Nullah, born of a white father and black mother, is seen as neither one nor the other by each race. The film goes to some pains to incorporate themes of the stolen generation, black dreaming and segregation but it is a testament to how well the story is told without it ever feeling like a ‘message’ movie. There is even an acknowledgement that the most sympathetic of white fellas, The Drover (and even, by inference, the filmmaker) doesn’t always fully understand. Take for example the confrontation between The Drover and his best mate, Magarri, after Nullah is taken by the Police. Even with the best of understanding, a child remains a child and should be protected and cared for by loving parents, not left to their own devices where they can unwittingly get themselves into trouble.
Nicole is fine as an English lady staring down a strange and remote environment. That English resolve is demonstrated here which founded a whole Empire. Hugh Jackman is a little too ocker (one too many “crikey’s”) but otherwise entirely believable as a hairy, sweaty, manly cattle drover who believes in mateship but is fearful of expressing his emotions. There is chemistry between these two and thankfully Luhrmann doesn’t throw in a gratuitous love scene just to please the formula writer. What is shown on screen is quite appropriate.
Brandon Walters is the real find of this film. He is such a handsome boy who is able to look into the camera with such innocence and openness. His manner, and the character he is playing, is so assured however he does not lose that vulnerable and childlike manner.
David Wenham does menacing better than most and the rest of the support performances are great : David Ngoombujarra (as Magarri), Jack Thompson (as Kipling Flynn, Lady Ashley’s accountant), plus old favourites, Barry Otto, Ben Mendelsohn, Bruce Spence and David Gulpilil.
While Australia is not a complex story, it is entertaining, takes us on a fun and dramatic journey and is most assuredly recommended.

Blog Re-design

I have been fiddling with the design and functionality of my blogsite over the past few days. I have changed some of the link features on the sidebar, down the right hand side, including a scrolling photo board. In honour of the new film release Australia, I have started with a Nicole Retrospective. Can you name each of the movies she appears in? I expect I will change the content of the slide show every now and again as time and ideas allow.
I have also added a counter down the very bottom of the page. I know every website has them, and clever programmer people add them in with ease, but I was very excited to find this bit of code, linking back to WebTracker.
Finally, I have changed the look of the site. I haven't totally settled on the final colour combination but I think a black background is an improvement over the white. I am far from happy with the header, so expect changes there.
Let me know what you think. Are the colour combinations working for you? Do you use, or are you likely to use, the links?