Film Review: MARGIN CALL (2011)

Writer/Director: J.C. Chandor
Running time: 103 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

Genre: Drama/Thriller
UK Release date: 13^th January 2012

Watched on Sky+ Sunday 3^rd March 2013.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE UNINTENTIONAL SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

This is a film I have wanted to see for some time now. Critically acclaimed on release, I decided early on it had to go on ‘The List’. It finally aired on TV this week and so ‘The List’ became one shorter (although there are still plenty on there). For a film that is very plot driven I found the performances really stood out, which, I guess, is testament to the acting talent on view. Here’s a very brief summary before I give you my thoughts.

Set around the time of the 2008 financial crash, this film documents the goings on in one investment bank in New York. When the head of risk management, Eric Dale (Stanley Tucci), is made redundant, he passes what he has been working on to his colleague, Peter Sullivan (Zachary Quinto). Dale looks worried as he hands it over and warns Sullivan to be careful. Sullivan looks at the information and fills in the gaps. What he finds will change the financial market forever. He call in his boss, Will Emerson (Paul Bettany), who is out drinking with another colleague, Seth Bergman (Penn Badgley) at the time. Emerson takes one look and calls in his boss, Sam Rogers (Kevin Spacey), and so it goes on… Rogers boss Jared Cohen (Simon Baker), Sarah Robertson (Demi Moore) and Ramesh Shah (Aasif Mandvi) are all called in and it’s decided they have to call in the head of the company, John Tuld (Jeremy Irons) and the executive board to make a decision. They even bring a reluctant Eric Dale back in to prevent him telling anyone about what he’s discovered. All this occurs in one night and what happens the following day sows the seeds of the financial crash.

On the face of it, this film does not appear to be the kind of thing to inspire an audience. I’m here to tell you that is far from the truth; I found it very compelling and a great eye-opener to the mechanics of the financial crash. Great performances all round with top honours going to Jeremy Irons and Kevin Spacey; both really excelled in this one. I think it’s a film I’d like to see again because the details of the reasons behind it all are quite complex and I’d like to get a better handle on that. It does lose a little momentum in the final quarter but it’s certainly worth investing the time to watch.

SteelMonster’s verdict: RECOMMENDED

My score: 8.1/10.

IMDb Score: 7.1/10 (based on 46,919 votes when this review was written).
http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1615147/

MetaScore: 76/100: (Based on 38 critic reviews provided by Metacritic.com at the time of going to press).

Rotten Tomatoes ‘Tomatometer’ Score: 88/100 (based on 150 reviews counted at the time of going to press).

Rotten Tomatoes ‘Audience’ Score: 74/100 (based on 14,990 user ratings counted at the time of going to press).
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/margin_call/

If you’re crazy enough… You can find me on Facebook at:
http://facebook.com/andy.steel3

FAVOURITE QUOTES:
John Tuld: There are three ways to make a living in this business: be first, be smarter, or cheat.

Eric Dale: I run risk management... it just doesn't seem like a natural place to start cutting.

Will Emerson: Jesus, Seth. Listen, if you really wanna do this with your life you have to believe you're necessary and you are. People wanna live like this in their cars and big fuckin' houses they can't even pay for, then you're necessary. The only reason that they all get to continue living like kings is cause we got our fingers on the scales in their favour. I take my hand off and then the whole world gets really fuckin' fair really fuckin' quickly and nobody actually wants that. They say they do but they don't. They want what we have to give them but they also wanna, you know, play innocent and pretend they have no idea where it came from. Well, that’s more hypocrisy than I'm willing to swallow, so fuck em. Fuck normal people. You know, the funny thing is, tomorrow if all of this goes tits up they're gonna crucify us for being too reckless but if we're wrong, and everything gets back on track? Well then, the same people are gonna laugh till they piss their pants cause we're gonna all look like the biggest pussies God ever let through the door.

Sam Rogers: You are panicking.
John Tuld: If you're first out the door, that's not called panicking.

John Tuld: Maybe you could tell me what is going on. And please, speak as you might to a young child. Or a golden retriever. It wasn't brains that brought me here; I assure you that.

Sarah Robertson: We were wrong.
Jared Cohen: You mean *you* were wrong.
Sam Rogers: I'm heading for the conference room.
Jared Cohen: I want you to hear this.
Sam Rogers: I don't want to hear this. How do you think I've stuck around this place so long?

LINKS:
(Note: All were working at the time of going to press)
Official Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/margincallmovie
Official Twitter: https://twitter.com/margincallmovie
Official Site: http://www.margincallmovie.com/
Trailer:

Film Review: THE HUNGER GAMES (2012)

Director: Gary Ross
Writers: Suzanne Collins (screenplay/novel), Gary Ross (screenplay), Billy Ray (screenplay)
Running time: 142 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 12A

Genre: Action/Drama/Sci-Fi
UK Release date: 23^rd March 2012

Watched at the cinema Saturday 31^st March 2012.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I first have to admit I’ve never read the books and so this franchise is all shiny and new to me. Knowing that it is aimed at a teenage audience, I took a risk and decided to go and see a Saturday afternoon screening. The (young) audience were quite well behaved over all, although the staff did seem to take a very long time in getting something up on the screen (they was getting a bit rebellious). But when they did eventually start the film they soon settled down (after a little coaxing… from me). But back to the film, very well made with some good performances and, despite the level of violence being toned down (a lot), quite entertaining. I will give you full skinny after this brief summary.

In a future North America, now called Panem, (the rest of the world doesn’t exist for some reason) and after a civil war, a way is found to keep the defeated ‘Districts’ in tow. The Hunger Games are invented; a boy and a girl for each of the twelve districts must fight it out, to the death, until there is only one winner. The whole event is televised and broadcast across the nation with host, Caesar Flickerman, giving a blow-by-blow account. The games organiser, Seneca Crane, has the ear of the President Snow and uses his influence to make the games bigger and better each year. Now, the District we’re interested is District 12, and its contestants, Katniss Everdeen and Peeta Mellark. We see the selection process and their training, with which they are aided by former champion, Haymitch Abernathy and style guru, Cinna, amongst others. See, it’s not just about training to fight, it’s all about winning the hearts and minds of the viewers (sponsors), who might send you some help during the games. And so we come to the games themselves, and this is where I’ll leave you hanging or the Spoiler Police (Futuristic Movies Division) will be entering me for the next event (even though I’m far too old!).

This is a very well made film with some nice CGI in places, although I did feel it was a little over-used in a couple of scenes. I wasn’t very impressed with the quality of the sound, although that might have been down to the equipment at my local cinema (not a multiplex). As far as performances go, well, the stand-out has to be Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss Everdeen. She was ably supported by; Josh Hutcherson as Peeta Mellark, Stanley Tucci as Caesar Flickerman, Wes Bentley as Seneca Crane (with some extraordinary beard sculpturing), Liam Hemsworth as Gale Hawthorne, Lenny Kravitz as Cinna, Donald Sutherland as President Snow and finally, although he didn’t have a lot to say, Toby Jones as Claudius Templesmith.

There are so many similarities (in part) to other films it’s hard to know where to start. I guess ‘Battle Royalle’ is a pretty good start, although I could see influences from; ‘The Truman Show’, ‘Rollerball’ (the original one) and ‘The Running Man’ in there too. I did get the impression that there is a lot more explained in the book than there was time for on the screen because I did feel I had missed out on a few plot points here and there. These particularly surrounded the relationship between Katniss and Peeta; I won’t discuss it here as I don’t want to go putting down spoilers. Over all though, the 142 minute running time seemed to pass quite quickly (always a good sign) and so I’m happy to deem this one… Recommended.

My score: 8.2/10.

IMDb Score: 7.8/10 (based on 56,220 votes when this review was written).
http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1392170/

Rotten Tomatoes ‘Tomatometer’ Score: 85/100 (based on 239 reviews counted at the time of going to press).

Rotten Tomatoes ‘Audience’ Score: 87/100 (based on 84,278 user ratings counted at the time of going to press).
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_hunger_games/

If you’re crazy enough… You can find me on Facebook at:
http://facebook.com/andy.steel3

FAVOURITE QUOTES:
President Snow: And it was decreed that each year, the 12 districts of Panem should offer up a tribute of one young man and woman between the ages of 12 and 18 to be trained in the art of survival and to be prepared to fight to the death.

Katniss Everdeen: May the odds be ever in your favour.

Katniss Everdeen: So you're here to make me look pretty.
Cinna: I'm here to help you make an impression.

Caesar Flickerman: What did you say to your sister when you volunteered at the reaping?
Katniss Everdeen: I told her that I would try to win for her.
Caesar Flickerman: And try you will.

Rue: You have to win.

LINKS:
(Note: All were working at the time of going to press)
Official Site: http://www.thehungergamesmovie.com/
Official Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thehungergamesmovie
Trailer:

Film Review: EASY A (2010)

Directors: Will Gluck
Running time: 89 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 15

Genre: Comedy/Teen
UK Release date: 22^nd October 2010

Watched on Sky+ Saturday 22^nd October 2011.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

As some of you may know, I’m not big on comedies. It may be because I have a peculiar sense of humour, but, for the most part, what Hollywood thinks is funny is usually antipodean to my opinion (bet you’re looking up what ‘antipodean’ means now). I’ll still keep trying them out form time to time though… you never know, there just might be someone out there in ‘La La land’ on the same wavelength as me! And so we come to ‘Easy A’; a teen comedy (not encouraging so far), all about a girl of (alleged) easy virtue (still not encouraging, but hey, I’ve come this far…). Well, despite many misgivings, I must say it wasn’t half as bad as I thought it might be (& that’s high praise from me!… for a comedy). Now, since I’ve been accused of giving too much away in my plot summaries, I will just give you the very briefest outline of what it’s about (you’ll probably get more from the trailer than I usually give away… but, (sigh), if I’m getting complaints I guess I’d better pare it down a tad or 12).

Olive Penderghast is at high school and she lies to her friend, Rhiannon, about sleeping with a boy (for reasons I won’t go into). As they do, rumours spread like wildfire, and before she knows it, Olive finds herself with an unwanted reputation. The question is… what is she going to do about it?... So there you go, the new and improved ‘outline’… Hope you liked it and I didn’t spoil the entire movie for you… If I did then you have my profound apologies.

I said earlier that I didn’t find this film too bad, well, I might even go so far as to say I actually enjoyed parts of it quite a bit! I thought Patricia Clarkson as Rosemary (Olive’s mother) and Stanley Tucci as Dill (her dad) provided a great comic foil for her character. Her favourite teacher, Mr Griffith, played by Thomas Haden Church, and his wife, played by Lisa Kudrow, also added another dimension to the piece. Of course, it was Emma Stone, as Olive, that held the whole thing together, and I thought she put in an excellent performance. Honourable mentions go to; Malcolm McDowell as Principal Gibbons, Penn Badgley as Woodchuck Todd, Amanda Bynes as Marianne, Dan Byrd as Brandon and Aly Michalka as Rhiannon.

A witty script with some great dialogue made a welcome change from many recent (so called) comedy efforts I’ve seen spewed out of ‘tinsel town’ in recent years. It also has a pretty good soundtrack with some tunes even I recognised! There is a minor problem with it though… The way Olive chooses to deal with her problem is dragged on a bit too long and after a while it gets a bit monotonous. Fortunately it picks up though and it got saved from a lower score by a rather cool ending (sorry… no clues). Over all, although not perfect, I found this a witty, pretty well written and entertaining comedy… Recommended.

My Score: 7.1/10.

IMDb Score: 7.1/10 (based on 61,651 votes at the time of going to press).
http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1282140/

Rotten Tomatoes Score: 86/100 (based on 174 reviews counted at the time of going to press).
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/easy-a/

If you’re crazy enough… You can find me on Facebook at:
http://facebook.com/andy.steel3

FAVOURITE QUOTES:
[first lines]
Olive Penderghast: The rumours of my promiscuity have been greatly exaggerated.

Woodchuck Todd: Screw all these people, Olive!
Olive Penderghast: Haven't you heard? I already did.

Rosemary: Not to mention how have you been dressing this past few day. No judgement, but you kind of look like striper
Olive Penderghast: Mom!
Dill: [to Olive] A high-end stripper, for governors or athletes.

LINKS:
Official Site: http://www.sonypictures.com/homevideo/easya/
Trailer:

Film Review: THE LOVELY BONES (2009) - Revisited

Director: Peter Jackson
Running time: 135 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 12A

UK Release date: 19th February 2010

Watched on DVD Wednesday 24th November 2010.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I have now read the book by Alice Sebold, with the same title, on which this film is based, and so I thought I’d give it a second viewing. In my first review I looked at the film as a stand-alone piece of work, now, having read the book, will I see it differently? Here’s a brief summary first before I give you my thoughts (summary haters please wait in the ‘in-between’ while I write the next paragraph… you can re-join the group afterwards).

NOTE: This is as depicted in the film:
Susie Salmon was fourteen when she was murdered on December 6th 1973; she has never been kissed and will never grow up. Her body is never found, but her consciousness goes to a place known as ‘the in-between’, where she watches as her family try to come to terms with her loss and also try to discover what happened to her. Her father, Jack, becomes so obsessed with finding out what happened to his daughter that he ends up in hospital having stalked a man into a field only to be beaten up for his trouble. Her mother, Abigail, cannot face it all and has to take some time away from the family. Abigail’s alcoholic mother, Grandma Lynn, comes to stay while she’s away. Her sister, Lindsey, frustrated with the whole situation, focuses her attention on a neighbour, George Harvey, who she is convinced has something to do with Susie’s disappearance. Through it all, Susie watches and tries to steer them in the right direction so that they can move on, and so can she. It’s very difficult to summarise the plot without giving too much away, so I’ll leave it there, I think I told you enough to know what the film is about.

It’s a beautiful film to look at, very clear images and some wonderful production. The time period the film was set was, for me, brought across perfectly, I’m only a few years younger than Susie would have been, and I remember the early 1970’s quite well. I thought the performance from Saoirse Ronan as Susie Salmon was quite brilliant, she won several nominations and a few awards for the part. I also thought that Stanley Tucci as the creepy neighbour, George Harvey, was also excellent. Decent performances from Mark Wahlberg as Jack Salmon, Rachel Weisz as Abigail Salmon, Susan Sarandon was woefully underused (IMO) as Grandma Lynn and Rose McIver as Lindsey Salmon.

There has been a lot of discussion about the depiction of ‘the in-between’. Personally, I didn’t have a problem with it; I guess whenever you adapt a book the picture in the reader’s head will seldom match the vision of the director. Now, having read the book I find there are a lot of differences between the book and the film. Some of the changes make the film more coherent, but the book was already out there as a body of work a long time before the film. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a very good effort by Peter Jackson et al, but I think I’m always going to prefer the book.

But going back to the film, I found it a little too long, but for the first hour it was totally engrossing. The visuals are stunning and there are a couple of great performances. I guess if you haven’t read the book that I can recommend it to you, it’s worth seeing. Now the tough one, if you have read, and loved, the book then maybe don’t see this adaptation… but if you’re feeling brave... Oh, and in case you’re interested, last time I scored it 7.1/10.

My score: 6.4/10

LINKS:
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0380510/
Official Site: http://www.lovelybones.com/#home
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi2521171225/

Film Review: JULIE & JULIA (2009)

Director: Nora Ephron
Running time: 119 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 12

UK release date: 11th September 2009

Watched on Sky+ Sunday 14th November 2010.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I wasn’t quite sure I would like this film, for a start I have never heard of Julia Child, but I guess few people outside the USA that are not all that into food have. Don’t get me wrong, I like to cook, it’s one of those survival skills you pick up. I guess what I’m trying to say is I’m not what you might call a foodie. So I’ll begin with a very brief summary (summary haters please look away while I type the next paragraph… you can rejoin the group after).

Two stories are told in parallel. First the story of how famous food writer Julia Child got her love of cooking, and how she came to write the well known book “Mastering the Art of French Cooking”. Julia’s husband, Paul, is a diplomat who is stationed in Paris in the late 40’s early 50’s, and this is where Julia, needing something to do, decides to learn to cook. She meets two French ladies, Louisette Bertholle and Madame Brassart who are writing a French cook book for Americans. After their publishing deal falls through they ask Julia to help out, which she does and, after many years they finally get it published. The second story is that of Julie Powell who needs a focus in her life. At the suggestion of her husband, Eric, she decides to cook every recipe in Julia Child’s book in one year. Not only that, but she will write a blog about her experiences. There are many highs and lows, but she eventually achieves her aim, which brings other, greater rewards.

I found this film a little hard to watch, the constant jumping from one story to another got a little distracting at times. However, the scenes when Julia was in Paris really took me back. At one time I had a French girlfriend and we had some good times in Paris… but I digress (again). I hear that Meryl Streep’s performance as Julia Child is spot on. I’ll have to take that on trust never having seen the original to compare. There were also good performances from; Amy Adams as Julie Powell, Stanley Tucci always good value as Paul Child and Chris Messina as Eric Powell.

At the end of the day, yes, I did enjoy this film. Despite the slightly distracting jumping from story to story, I found it quite engaging. Although it’s not the best film ever made, it is still pretty entertaining, and you can’t ask for more than that. Over all a quite endearing film with some good performances. I find films based on fact are often quite interesting and this one is no exception… recommended.

My score: 7.1/10

LINKS:
IMDb Page: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt1135503/
Official Site: http://www.sonypictures.com/homevideo/julieandjulia/
Official Blog: http://blogs.salon.com/0001399/2002/08/25.html
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi77595161/

Film Review: THE LOVELY BONES (2009)

Director: Peter Jackson
Running time: 135 mins (approx)
Certification (UK): 12A

UK Release date: 19th February 2010

Watched at the cinema Saturday 27th February 2010.

PLEASE NOTE: THERE MAY BE SPOILERS IN THIS REVIEW.

I have heard and read some very mixed reviews about this film and so I was interested to see it. I guess Peter Jackson is always going to have his work compared to ‘The Lord of the Rings’ trilogy, and because of that it’s going to be hard for them to get the recognition that they might if directed by someone else. For the record, I am a fan of his work but I’ll try to be objective in this review.

I have not read the book by Alice Sebold, with the same title, on which this film is based, but I will at some point in the near future. Susie Salmon was fourteen when she was murdered on December 6th 1973; she has never been kissed and will never grow up. Her body is never found, but her consciousness goes to a place known as ‘the in-between’, where she watches as her family try to come to terms with her loss and also try to discover what happened to her. Her father, Jack, becomes so obsessed with finding out what happened to his daughter that he ends up in hospital having stalked a man into a field and got beaten up for his trouble. Her mother, Abigail, cannot face it all and has to take some time away from the family. Abigail’s alcoholic mother, Grandma Lynn, comes to stay while she’s away. Her sister, Lindsey, frustrated with the whole situation, focuses her attention on a neighbour, George Harvey, who she is convinced has something to do with Susie’s disappearance. Through it all, Susie watches and tries to steer them in the right direction so that they can move on, and so can she. It’s very difficult to summarise the plot without giving too much away, so I’ll leave it there, I think I told you enough to know what the film is about.

It’s a beautiful film to look at, very clear images and some wonderful production. The time period the film was set was, for me, brought across perfectly, I’m only a few years younger than Susie would have been, and I remember the early 1970’s quite well. I thought the performance from Saoirse Ronan as Susie Salmon was quite brilliant, how she wasn’t nominated for any awards is beyond me. I also thought that Stanley Tucci as the creepy neighbour, George Harvey, was also very good. Decent performances from Mark Wahlberg as Jack Salmon, Rachel Weisz as Abigail Salmon, Susan Sarandon as Grandma Lynn and Rose McIver as Lindsey Salmon, although none of them were really stretched.

There has been a lot of discussion about the depiction of ‘the in-between’. Personally, I didn’t have a problem with it; I guess whenever you adapt a book the picture in the reader’s head will seldom match the vision of the director. I have also heard that the casting of Mark Wahlberg and Rachel Weisz as Susie’s parents was wrong because they are too young. I’ve looked up their ages and I don’t have a problem with it, they maybe look a bit too young by today’s standards, but people started families a lot younger in the 50’s and 60’s. So what can I say in conclusion? I found it a little too long, but for the first hour it was totally engrossing. The visuals are stunning and there are a couple of great performances. I guess if you haven’t read the book that I can recommend it to you, it’s worth seeing. I you have read the book, then I’ll leave it up to you (it’s a cop-out I know, but I haven’t read the book… yet.)

My score: 7.1/10

LINKS:
IMDb Site: http://uk.imdb.com/title/tt0380510/
Official Site: http://www.lovelybones.com/#home
Trailer: http://uk.imdb.com/rg/VIDEO_PLAY/LINK/video/imdb/vi2521171225/