Film Review: IRON MAIDEN: FLIGHT 666 (2009)

Directors: Sam Dunn & Scot McFadyen
Running time: 112 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

USA release date 21st April 2009

Watched on Sky+ Saturday 29th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I was checking out what was on TV the other night and found this tucked away after midnight. As a bit of a fan of Iron Maiden, (I’ve seen them a couple of times over the years) I thought I’d give it a go. What I found really surprised me, a very professional bunch of guys that happen to play some great heavy metal music (IMO). But more of my thoughts later, here’s a very brief summary first (summary haters please load the plane while I write the next paragraph).

Iron Maiden hardly ever get their records played on mainstream radio and are seldom featured on mainstream Music TV. And yet their albums always sell well and they have a massive fan base all over the world. As part of their 2008 Somewhere Back in Time tour they provided their own transport in order to reach some of these fans in far-flung parts of the world. The transport took the form on a 757 jet, modified to accommodate the entire crew, the band and all of their equipment. Of course the plane was piloted (amongst others) by their lead singer and qualified pilot, Bruce Dickinson. We see the logistics of moving such a huge operation through India, Australia, Japan, Los Angeles, Mexico, Central and South America, before ending in Canada. Interviews with the band, the crew and many of the fans intersperse live performances of many of their classic songs. It gives a real insight into the lives of the band members and just what life is like on the road these days for this group of musicians who, let’s face it, aren’t too young any more. But that’s enough summary, here’s what I think of it.

As a fan of Iron Maiden, of course I like this documentary. As a fan of film, I think it’s very well edited and gives a coherent chronological account of the international leg of the tour. The balance between the live performances and the interviews and the narration is just about right for me. It may be a little long for those that aren’t fans of the band, but I guess if you’re not a fan then you wouldn’t choose to watch it. So, over all, a definite recommendation for fans of Iron Maiden, but maybe give it a miss if you’re not.

For those that are fans, what follows is a list of live tracks included in the film:

“Aces High”, “Transylvania”, “Wrathchild”, “Moonchild”, “2 Minutes to Midnight”, “Revelations”, “The Trooper”, “For the Greater Good of God”, “Number of the Beast", “Wasted Years”, “Can I Play with Madness”, “Powerslave”, “Run to the Hills”, “Heaven Can Wait”, “Fear of the Dark”, “Iron Maiden”, “Rime of the Ancient Mariener”, “Hallowed Be Thy Name”

My score: 8.3/10

LINKS:
(RT = Rotten Tomatoes)
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1361558/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/iron-maiden-flight-666/

Film Review: BLACK SWAN (2010)

Director: Darren Aronofsky
Running time: 108 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

UK Release date: 21st January 2011

Watched at the cinema Friday 28th November 2010.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

Having heard many good things about this film I thought it was about time I checked it out. At first I wasn’t too sure, but as the drama unfolded, I really got into the story and found myself transfixed by the end. But more of my thoughts later, here’s a brief summary first (summary haters please wait in the wings while I write the next paragraph).

Young ballerina Nina Sayers has been chosen to play the lead in Swan Lake. The production’s director, Thomas Leroy, has chosen her because she can play the white Swan perfectly, but he wants her to show more passion when she dances the part of the Black Swan. As she strives to achieve this level of performance we witness quite a dramatic change in her that totally alters her personality. She also has to contend with a rival dancer, Lily, who Thomas has put as her alternate (I guess the equivalent of an understudy in a play). Add to this the decline of Beth Macintyre, an experienced dancer that Nina admired and the attentions of her overbearing mother, Erica, and you can see she has a lot to contend with. Not wishing to give too much away, I’ll leave my brief summary there.

There is much to admire in this film, Darren Aronofsky certainly knows how to get a performance out of his cast. He also knows how to tell a story, I couldn’t fault the filmmaking; it’s great to look at, all topped off with a great performance from Natalie Portman as Nina Sayers. Also worthy of note are; Mila Kunis as Lily, Vincent Cassel as Thomas Leroy, Barbara Hershey as Erica Sayers and Winona Ryder as Beth Macintyre.

I very much like the use of music through this film; the themes from Swan Lake are throughout and only add to the enjoyment of the piece. I love the way the line is blurred between reality and the dark place Nina is trying to find inside herself. All this is brilliantly done, but I have just one problem, I find it very hard to find any likable characters in this film. Although I found myself rooting for Nina at the end, I never really found her character particularly likable. Having said that, it’s still a brilliant film with some great performances and one I highly recommend.

My score: 8.3/10

LINKS:
(RT = Rotten Tomatoes)
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0947798/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/black_swan_2010/
Official Site: http://www.foxsearchlight.com/blackswan/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi3985807385/

Film Review: SOLOMON KANE (2010)

Director: Michael J. Bassett
Running time: 100 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

UK release date 19th February 2010

Watched on Sky+ Monday 24th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I saw this film last year at the cinema and quite enjoyed it. It has now made it to TV and I thought it was worth a second viewing… Here’s what I thought second time around. ‘Solomon Kane’ is based on a character created by Robert E. Howard, the writer who also created the, ‘Conan the Barbarian’ in the 1930’s. So as you can guess, I was quite keen to see what the filmmakers have done with him. It is the 1600’s, and Solomon Kane, who left his home at a young age having argued with his father and having thrown his brother from a cliff, is the captain of as ship in North Africa seeking treasure. What he finds is not what he bargained for; he finds the devil’s reaper who tells him that because of his evil ways, his soul was forfeit. Not wanting to go to hell, Kane denounces violence and vows never to kill again before escaping. That’s the set-up and here’s a brief summary before I give you my thoughts (summary haters please pray for redemption while I write the next paragraph).

Back in England, Solomon is staying at a monastery when Father Michael asks him to leave. He has had a vision and it’s time for Solomon to move on. With great reluctance Solomon leaves and heads west, towards his home. He is attacked on the road but is rescued by William Crowthorn and his family, wife Katherine, oldest son, Edward, younger son, Samuel and daughter, Meredith. They travel on together and Solomon begins to form a bond with them, particularly with Meredith and the young Samuel. Meanwhile, a band of warriors lead by a mysterious masked man is stalking the land, taking everyone they see as slaves or turning them, by evil magic, into soldiers. The family come across a place where some people had tried to burn a witch; everyone was dead with their eyes burnt out. They find a girl, the only survivor. Taking her with them, they continue on their journey, not realising that she is, in fact, the witch. Solomon discovers the deceit but the witch escapes, but not before marking Meredith. The family are then caught by the band of warriors and Meredith kidnapped. Enraged, Solomon now breaks his vow and kills as many of them as he can. Fatally wounded, William tells Solomon that he can redeem himself if he saves Meredith. This is now Solomon’s mission, but does he have the strength of will to carry it out? That’s enough summary for now.

Although quite slowly paced, I found this film very entertaining, the action sequences were very well done, the dialogue well paced and the special effects were excellent. I thought the mix of action and fantasy was very well judged, the balance was about right for me. Very good performances from James Purefoy as Solomon Kane, the late Pete Postlethwaite as William Crowthorn, Rachel Hurd-Wood as Meredith Crowthorn, Patrick Hurd-Wood as Samuel Crowthorn, Jason Flemyng as Malachi and Max von Sydow as Josiah Kane.

I suppose you can’t help but compare this film with the Conan the Barbarian films. I found it stood up well, set in a time that people can relate to and with much more dialogue, it’s very different, but I can see in the hand of Robert E. Howard there. Over all, it’s a very well made, even paced film with some very good performances, some great fight scenes and a great hero. I really enjoyed it… Recommended.

My score: 7.2/10

LINKS:
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0970452/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/solomon_kane/
Official Site: http://www.solomonkane.com/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi3791717401/

Film Review: CLEANER (2007)

Director: Renny Harlin
Running time: 88 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

USA release date: 27th May 2008 (DVD Premiere)

Watched on Sky+ Sunday 23rd January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I watched this on the recommendation of a friend and, to be honest, he owes me 88 minutes of my life back. It’s a crime drama set against the backdrop of the world of forensic clean-up. The guys that clean up what’s left after the body has been removed. I’ll give you my thoughts after this brief summary (summary haters please stay behind the tape while I clean up the next paragraph).

Tom Cutler is a retired cop who is now making a career out of cleaning up crime scenes. His wife was killed some years ago and he lives with his teenage daughter, Rose. He turns up to the scene of a murder to find nobody at home but a key has been left for him. Having completed the job he returns home only to find he still has the key. Going back the next day he’s surprised to find the wife, Ann Norcut, at home holding a children’s birthday party. He asks if he can speak to her husband, but she says he is out. At this point he tries to cover his tracks, realising that it might be a set-up. He hides the evidence he collected but things are about to turn bad for the former cop. His ex-partner, Eddie Lorenzo, gets in touch and Tom takes the opportunity to ask him about the case. He denies all knowledge, but the investigating officer, another former colleague, Jim Vargas, is slightly more forthcoming. The press have, by now, got hold of the story that Ann Norcut’s husband is missing and Tom is between a rock and a hard place. Not everyone is telling the truth and this can only mean trouble.

A very complicated plot does not help this film. It strikes me the filmmakers are trying a little too hard to be clever and failing to hit the mark. The performances were OK, but nothing to write home about; Samuel L. Jackson wasn’t really stretched as Tom Cutler, Ed Harris had a stroll in the park as Eddie Lorenzo and Eva Mendes was nothing particularly special as Ann Norcut. Honourable mentions should go to Luis Guzmán as Det. Jim Vargas, Keke Palmer who I thought was actually pretty good as Rose Cutler and it was also nice to see Robert Forster as Arlo Grange.

It was almost like watching one of those old Philip Marlowe movies where Marlowe was a crime scene clean-up guy instead of a Private Eye. It certainly has that feel, but with nothing like the style it needed to carry it off. Over all I found this one pretty disappointing and I can see why it went straight to DVD… NOT recommended.

My score: 5.2/10

LINKS:
(RT = Rotten Tomatoes)
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0896798/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/cleaner/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/screenplay/vi3049128217/

Film Review: THE KING’S SPEECH (2010)

Director: Tom Hooper
Running time: 118 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

UK Release date: 7th January 2011

Watched at the cinema Saturday 22nd November 2010.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I always like a film based on true events, it seems that real life has just as many amazing stories as pure fiction. This is a case in point. A man who stammers has to rise above his affliction, with the help and support of those around him, to speak for a nation. It’s quite a remarkable film. Here’s a short summary first before I give you my thoughts (summary haters please wait outside while I get through the next speech… sorry, paragraph).

King George VI, known as Bertie to his friends and family, was not born to be king. That honour went to his older brother David, or King Edward VIII, after their father George V passed away. Unfortunately, David finds he cannot carry out his duties due to events in his private life (quite a scandal actually) and so Bertie has to step in. A long time before this he had started seeing an unorthodox speech therapist named Lionel Logue. He had always stammered and found it particularly hard to speak in public. With the help and support of Logue, his wife, Elizabeth and his daughters another Elizabeth (later to become Queen Elizabeth II) and Margaret; this film depicts how he overcame his problems to give a very important speech live on the radio to the entire British Empire (as it was then) just after the outbreak of World War II. It also gives an insight into the reasons for Edward’s abdication and the effect it has on the nation. But I think that’s enough summary for now.

I found this a totally engaging film from start to finish. As a Brit, I was taught about the abdication of Edward VII in school, but I never knew about George VI’s stammer or the work of Lionel Logue. Of course, the film is most noted for the performance of Colin Firth as King George VI (Bertie to his friends), which is totally justified, he is outstanding! Also worthy of note are both Geoffrey Rush as Lionel Logue and Helena Bonham Carter as Queen Elizabeth. Honourable mentions go to Derek Jacobi as Archbishop Cosmo Lang, Michael Gambon as King George V, Guy Pearce as King Edward VIII, Claire Bloom as Queen Mary and Timothy Spall as Winston Churchill.

Apart from the performances, I thought it was an excellent screenplay by David Seidler. Nicely directed by Tom Hooper, it depicts the period perfectly. This is a film with many laughs, more than a lot of modern ‘comedies’, IMO, which serve to lift the mood of what is, after all, rather serious events in world history. Over all, brilliant performances, a great story and a few laughs along the way… who could ask for more? Very highly recommended.

My score: 9.3/10

LINKS:
(RT = Rotten Tomatoes)
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1504320/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_kings_speech/
Official Site: http://www.kingsspeech.com/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi806197529/

Film Review: EVERYBODY’S FINE (2009)

Co-Writer/Director: Kirk Jones
Running time: 96 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 12A

USA release date: 4th July 2009

Watched on Sky+ Sunday 22nd January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

This is based on the 1990 Giuseppe Tornatore film “Stanno Tutti Bene” which I’ll admit I haven’t seen. It’s has a gentle pace that slowly unfolds the story of a man trying to make a connection with his children after his wife has sadly died. Here’s a very brief summary before I tell you my thoughts (summary haters please look after the garden while I’m away writing the next paragraph – thank you).

Frank Goode is waiting for his children to come and visit. It is the first time the family has all been together since his wife passed away eight months ago. Giving one excuse or another, the children all cancel, but Frank is determined to see them. He doesn’t like flying, and has a lung condition that prevents it anyhow, and so he gets on a train and a bus and goes to see all four of them. They are all in different parts of the United States and so it is quite a trip for a man of his age. The four children are; David, an artist in New York, Amy, an advertising executive, Robert, a musician on tour with an orchestra and Rosie, an actress in Las Vegas. I won’t go into details here, but none of them are telling Frank the entire truth and he soon realises that it’s going to be tougher than he thought to connect with them all.

Although it has quite a slow pace, I don’t mind because it gives the viewer a chance to become invested in the characters, particularly Frank. I love the way that he always sees them as little children rather than the grown-ups that are before him. Great performances all round, particularly from Robert De Niro as Frank; he reminded me what a fine actor he really is. Drew Barrymore did a fine job as Rosie, as did Kate Beckinsale as Amy and Sam Rockwell as Robert. You may think I’ve forgotten the other son, David, well, that’s a mystery I’ll leave for you.

The gentle pace may not be for everyone, I think you have to be in the mood to watch this one, but if you are, it’s worth it. There is a really good pay-off at the end which I found both satisfying and heart-warming. I like the cinematography and it has a very appropriate soundtrack, including a song by Paul McCartney that I haven’t heard before. It’s not perfect and it won’t be to everyone’s taste, but I quite enjoyed it… Recommended.

My score: 7.1/10

LINKS:
(RT = Rotten Tomatoes)
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0780511/
RT Page: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1211197-everybodys_fine/
Official Site: http://www.everybodysfinemovie.com/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi2944533529/

Film Review: MY COUSIN VINNY (1992)

Director: Jonathan Lynn
Running time: 115 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

UK release date: 17th July 1992

Watched on Sky+ Monday 17th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

There are very few comedies I find funny, if you read enough of my reviews you’ll eventually find out which ones I like. This is very much one of them! For me is has everything, great acting, an excellent script and, most importantly, it’s funny. But more of my thoughts later, here’s a brief summary first (summary haters please consider yourselves in contempt while I write the next paragraph).

Two college students, Bill Gambini and Stan Rothenstein, from Brooklyn are on their way to LA via the South when they stop off in a small town in Alabama. They are mistakenly identified as the murderers of a clerk in a small store they had visited. Unable to afford a lawyer, they turn to Bill’s cousin, Vinny Gambini, who has only been practicing law for six weeks. Vinny has brought his fiancée, Mona Lisa Vito, with him but he is determined to win the case on his own. Judge Chamberlain Haller is suspicious of Vinny’s credentials but allows him to defend the two boys. Vinny immediately falls fowl of the accepted procedure in court and finds himself in contempt (more than once). The prosecution seem to have a strong case but Vinny is determined to find as many holes in it as he can. Will Vinny prove the boys innocence? Will the judge discover he is only a novice? Will Vinny ever get a decent night's sleep? All these questions and many more will be answered… but not here.

First of all, hats off to Jonathan Lynn, I love the way he just lets the story unfold and the way he allows the characters to develop. Yes, there are one or two clunky bits, but for the most part I also very much liked the dialogue. Finally, great casting, I couldn’t imagine anyone else apart from Joe Pesci playing the part of Vinny. Also, I thought Marisa Tomei was excellent as Mona Lisa Vito, a role for which she won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar, and it was great to see Fred Gwynne (yes Herman Munster) as Judge Chamberlain Haller. Honourable mentions should also go to; Ralph Macchio as Bill, Mitchell Whitfield as Stan and Lane Smith as Jim Trotter III, the prosecutor.

I may be biased, but I saw this film many years ago and fell in love with it then. It’s one of those I always get great pleasure from watching. If anything, it is a little long, but I can forgive that, I think when you’re invested in the story the time factor becomes less important. Over all, a very well scripted film with some really great comic performances and one which I highly recommend.

My score: 8.2/10

LINKS:
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0104952/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/screenplay/vi2744844569/

Film Review: SEX & DRUGS & ROCK & ROLL (2010)

Directors: Mat Whitecross
Running time: 101 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

UK release date: 8th January 2010

Watched on Sky+ Sunday 16th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

Back in 1977 while punk was just getting going, a band called Ian Dury and the Blockheads released an album called ‘New Boots and Panties’. A few years later, feeling a bit nostalgic, I bought said album really cheap. I still have it today; in fact I’m listening to it as I type this review. Now, onto the film, it’s a biopic all about Ian Dury, his fight against disability and his rise to fame. Here’s a brief summary before I tell you my thoughts (summary haters please mingle with the audience while I write the next paragraph).

Ian Dury was an entertainer, or that’s what he always said he was interviewed. He had been struck down with polio when he was young and this left him withered down his left side. When we first see him, he is with another band who are rehearsing downstairs while his wife, Betty, gives birth upstairs. Later, after their last gig, he meets Denise Roudette, with whom he has an affair. They move in together and a while later, his son, Baxter, comes to stay with them. As Ian puts a new band together, including musician and songwriter Chaz Jankel, Baxter struggles to come to terms with the chaotic lifestyle he has been thrown into. The film plots his rise to fame and the effect it has on Ian and those around him. It also tells of his early life in flashback, his relationship with his father, Bill, and his unhappy childhood in an institution. I won’t say any more as I don’t want to give too much away.

Made in a very theatrical style, this film cuts from live action to animation, to live musical performances and back again. It all sounds a bit chaotic, but, for me at least, it works. At the centre is a really great performance from Andy Serkis as Ian Dury, although he doesn’t particularly look like him, he has all his mannerisms down to a tee. I also thought Bill Milner played the part of Baxter Dury very well, it can’t have been an easy part for a young actor and I thought he coped with it pretty well. Similarly, Wesley Nelson played the part of Young Ian Dury very well. I should also give honourable mentions to Olivia Williams as Ian’s wife, Naomie Harris as Denise Roudette, Tom Hughes as Chaz Jankel, and nice cameos from both Ray Winstone as Bill Dury (Ian’s dad) and Noel Clarke as Desmond.

Although Ian Dury wasn’t the easiest person to get along with (for those that don't know, he passed away in 2000) and consequently not the nicest man in the world, I found this quite an enjoyable film to watch. I can’t say I’m a huge fan of Ian Dury and the Blockheads, but I do recognise that Ian was a very talented chap and I always respected him as an artiste. Later in his career he appeared in quite a few films, not a bad actor. Over all, it’s quite an interesting film, very touching at times but also quite bold in its approach. I know it won’t be everyone’s cup of tea, but still… recommended.

My score: 7.1/10

LINKS:
IMDb Site: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1393020/
Official Site: http://www.sex-drugs-rock-roll-thefilm.com/news/16/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi1506083865/

Film Review: THE BOOK OF ELI (2010)

Directors: Albert Hughes & Allen Hughes
Running time: 107 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

UK release date: 15th January 2010

Watched on Sky+ Saturday 15th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I saw this when it came out in the cinema and quite liked it. Now it has come round on TV I thought it might be worth a second viewing. This film is about the quest of one man to get a book to the place it’s supposed to be, to use his words. Now, I’m not a religious man but I can see the value this book might have in a world torn apart by war. It is a post-apocalyptic world, thirty years after it was destroyed. Those that were not killed scratch a living out of what’s left, and many have turned to cannibalism. Many were blinded by the flashes in the sky but survived. As stated in the film, after the war people destroyed the bible blaming it for what happened, but Eli has the last remaining copy. Now you know the set-up, here’s a brief summary before I give you my thoughts (summary haters please don’t touch Eli… not if you want to keep your hands that is… and wait here while I write the next paragraph).

Always moving west, Eli is a loner on the road. Like everyone out there he knows it’s a very dangerous place. He kills animals for food and gets clean water where he can. When set upon by hijackers but Eli is a ferocious fighter and thus far has come out on top. One day he wanders into a small town run by Carnegie, a determined man who has been sending out men in search of a particular book, the very one Eli has in his possession. Carnegie has a mother and daughter, Claudia and Solara in his entourage, Claudia was blind from birth, but Solara is sighted. In trying to persuade Eli to stay, as he can see the value of a man who can fight like him, he sends Solara to his room and she discovers the book. Carnegie finds out about the book and sends his henchman, Redridge to get it but Eli has already gone. Eli starts heading west again only to find Solara following him. Redridge wants Solara and makes a deal with Carnegie to get the book in exchange for her. And now the chase is on, will Eli and Solara escape or will they be caught? I think that’s enough for now.

This film was shot in a similar way to 300 (2006) with a kind of washed out comic book feel to it and, for me, it looked a bit too artificial in places. A lot of the landscapes were CGI which didn’t come over too well on TV. Great performances from all of the leading cast, Denzel Washington as Eli, Gary Oldman as Carnegie, Mila Kunis as Solara, Ray Stevenson as Redridge and Jennifer Beals as Claudia. Honourable mentions also go to Frances de la Tour and Michael Gambon as Martha and George, a mad old couple who Eli and Solara find on their travels.

Although it’s a fairly straightforward story I found it a very entertaining and compelling film to watch, the 107 minutes went by pretty quickly, which is always a good sign. It did get a bit bogged down in the middle, but redeemed itself with a totally unexpected twist at the end. Don’t worry; I’m not going give that away here. Also a haunting soundtrack backs up the visuals to great effect. Over all, although it’s not been well received everywhere and although not perfect, it’s a good effort… Recommended.

My score: 7.3/10

LINKS:
IMDb Site: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1037705/
Official Site: http://www.sonypictures.net/movies/bookofeli/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi862650905/

Film Review: CRAZY HEART (2009)

Director: Scott Cooper
Running time: 107 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

UK release date: 5th March 2010

Watched on Sky+ Saturday 15th January 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I wasn’t too sure about this one at first. I’m not a great fan of country music for a start, but I do know a good tune when I hear one and those guys at the Academy can’t always be wrong, so I thought I’d give it a shot. I’m really glad I did! It’s a really great film with some cracking songs and some truly great performances. But more of my praise later, here’s a very brief summary first (summary haters please help unload the gear while I write the next paragraph - thanks).

Bad Blake is a country singer whose best days are behind him. He plays small bars, bowling alleys; anywhere he can get a gig really. Like many on hard times he has turned to alcohol to ease the pain, but it is clearly doing him no good. While playing in Santa Fe he meets journalist, Jean Craddock, who he begins a relationship with. She has a young son, Buddy, who takes to Bad and it seems things a looking up for the Country star. His agent calls him and tells him he has a gig in Phoenix, opening for his former protégé, and a very successful star, Tommy Sweet. At first he’s hesitant, but finally agrees to do the show. He talks to Tommy and Tommy offers to help him out by paying for any new songs Bad has written. The trouble is Bad hasn’t written any new material in quite a long time. On his way back to see Jean, Bad has an accident and is laid up for several weeks. During this time he begins to write again, but his alcoholism is about to rear its ugly head. Is Jean his salvation? Well, I guess that would be giving the game away, so I won’t tell you here.

First of all the music, as I said at the beginning, I’m not a fan of Country music, but I do know a good tune when I hear one, and there are several on show here. The original songs by both Stephen Bruton and T-Bone Burnett are spot on. So good in fact that I bought the soundtrack album. One thing I did note was that there is no incidental music which I found made the film a little sparse. Lots of dialogue can get a bit tedious without anything to break it up. Having said that, I guess it makes the viewer appreciate the performances of the actors more.

I am not surprised that Jeff Bridges won the Oscar for Best Actor for his part as Bad Blake; he is truly excellent in this. I must also give praise to Maggie Gyllenhaal as Jean Craddock; I thought she was really good as well. I will also give honourable mentions to; Colin Farrell as Tommy Sweet and Robert Duvall as Bad’s friend Wayne (he was also one of the Producers by the way). Both Jeff Bridges and Colin Farrell performed the songs themselves which, I think was, first of all, brave, and secondly, excellently done! Both could have a second career some day.

Over all, a really well made film with some great cinematography, the use of the landscape of New Mexico really stood out. Of course, the performances all round were excellent and only added to my enjoyment. It did fall a little flat in the third quarter where the story concentrates on the relationship between Bad and Jean, but I guess that’s because there are no songs in that part. Having said that, this is still a film I would still recommend to anyone! If you haven’t seen it, please do, it’s well worth a look.

My score: 8.4/10

LINKS:
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1263670/
Official Site: http://www.foxsearchlight.com/crazyheart/
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi1217594393/