Anyway, you can read more about the film over on that post because what I wanted to highlight here was the YouTube competition that was organised around its release.

The concept was simple but it was pretty cool. They wanted to find the UK’s spookiest ghost story. They invited people from all over the UK to sumbit videos of their original ghost stories to The Woman in Black YouTube channel. Stories had to be under 2 minutes but the videos could be as simple as someone just making a recording from their phone’s camera. It was open to all ages but as far as I can see there was a rather youthful bent to the entrants.

Just before the Christmas the 10 finalists were announced, chosen on the basis of their story’s creativity, originality and writing style. Those 10 went to a public vote… The prize? The winner of the competition would get a trip to the world premiere in London but better yet their story would be read out by Daniel Radcliffe himself for inclusion on the DVD release of the film. Not bad hey?

Well, the competition was quite the success and it was great example of a company doing something a bit more original with social media to promote a film. I don’t know how many entries they got in total but there are 175 on their playlist on the official YouTube channel – youtube.com/thewomaninblackmovie. You can see all the competition entries over there but I’ve got the top 10 here for your viewing pleasure.

The winner in the end was Nicola Torch, a 16 year old from Lancashire, with her story entitled “Fear of Hue”, which you can see below. Congrats Nicola, hope you enjoyed the premiere and looking forward to seeing your ghost story on the DVD!

RELEASE DETAILS

release date: 10 Feb 2012
director: James Watkins
writers: Susan Hill (novel), Jane Goldman (screenplay)
cast: Daniel Radcliffe, Ciarán Hinds, Janet McTeer
genre: thriller, ghost story
running time: 113 minutes

Official website: www.thewomaninblack-movie.co.uk
Official facebook page: facebook.com/TheWomanInBlackUK
Official Twitter feed: @WomanInBlackUK

The Woman in Black YouTube ghost story competition finalists

Candy Bones by Paul Bristow
The Woman of the Graveyard by Lukas DiSparrow
The Treehouse by Holly Knowles
The Fall by littlemonkeygun
HACK by mothergoose8619
Cassie’s Ghost by Cinzialix
The Calming Mist by Alice
A Ghost Story by Natiekins
The Dead House by Jasmine Thorburn
Fear of Hue by Nicola Torch (winning entry)

See the rest of the competition entries over here.

Candy Bones by Paul Bristow

back to top

The Woman of the Graveyard by Lukas DiSparrow


back to top

The Treehouse by Holly Knowles


back to top

The Fall by littlemonkeygun


back to top

HACK by mothergoose8619


back to top

Cassie’s Ghost by Cinzialix


back to top

The Calming Mist by Alice


back to top

A Ghost Story by Natiekins


back to top

The Dead House by Jasmine Thorburn


back to top

Fear of Hue by Nicola Torch


back to top


The Woman in Black is in Irish and UK cinemas from Friday 10th February 2012.

]]>

As usual, I’ll be doing an Oscar predictions post closer to the time but for now, as it seems to be becoming a tradition… I’ve done an Academy Awards 2012 A4 printable prediction ballot for you to fill out and do with what you wish. I’m not saying you should organise a pool amongst your friends or anything but like… you know, the form is handy for that type of thing…

This year I decided to redesign the Oscar prediction ballot form because I wanted to fit in more categories. It is still printable on 2 A4 sheets but I’ve kept the biggest categories on the first page so you can just not print the second if you want to keep it simple.

Feel free to send me your predictions as well, I am ever curious to know what other people think. You can e-mail your ballot form to nicola at averagefilmreviews dot com and if enough of you do I’ll announce the person who got most right on the blog on the 27th. I may even have a prize for the first entrant who gets all 21 right.

Anyway, to get the prediction ballot click the links below. I’ve done a pdf version this year as well. Oh, and I also put some tie breaker questions in for y’all.

DOWNLOAD THE WORD DOCUMENT HERE

DOWNLOAD THE PDF HERE

Actually, I didn’t know she had gone, I checked out of this franchise after the first film. Not that I’d hated it or anything. As far as I recall. I think it was just that I saw it around the same time as that disaster of a film, Van Helsing, and so I ended up staying away from vampire films for a while.

All I remember of the first Underworld was that Kate Beckinsale looked damn fine in the outfit and I wished I looked that good in skin-tight pants. So, as far as I can tell, little has changed in the intervening 9 years. She’s pushing 40 and still looking well. But that’s not being fair to the film at all, it has a lot more to offer than Beckinsale… There’s Michael Ealy and Theo James for the ladies as well. Ah no, I jest, there is more than that, I swear.

This is the first of the series to be directed by Swedish duo, Måns Magnus Mårlind (what a name!) and Björn Stein. The only other English language film the pair have directed was Shelter, starring Julianne Moore. I haven’t seen it, but with a whopping 0% on Rotten Tomatoes, I’m not exactly planning on picking it up.

With Shelter’s score in mind, I couldn’t help but wonder why Underworld: Awakening wasn’t screened for critics here. As we all know, this is rarely a good sign. Hence, I approached it with trepidation – and a 2 minute recap of the two films I’d missed from my cinema going partner. That trepidation was tempered by the fact that it’s an 18 cert film in Ireland and the UK. The Underworld franchise is hardly known for sex and nudity, so an 18 cert was bound to mean violence.

As it happened, I didn’t really need the recap. I remembered more of the first film than I thought and in any case there’s a short revisiting of the first three films at the start. With 3 years between films each time, I guess they’re used to having to bring the audience back up to speed quickly. The main thing you need to know is that in the last film, normal humans discovered the existence of the Lycans and Vampires. They were not happy about it.

So sets the stage for a “cleansing” of epic proportions.

I actually really enjoyed Underworld: Awakening. There’s always a lot to be said for having no expectations going into a film. I didn’t even know this film was out this week, that’s how in the dark I was. I wouldn’t go around saying it had the most amazing plot or performances… But, having already seen 4 out of the other 5 films out this week, I can say it’s probably the most entertaining of the week. Mind you, that’s still not saying much. I’ve only done the reviews of J. Edgar and Haywire so far, but you can take it from me that it’s a pretty poor week, Underworld 4 aside.

What’s most enjoyable about Underworld: Awakening is the action. With an 18 cert there’s no holding back. Selene kicks ass, and gets her ass kicked, from here to next Sunday with barely any let up. What let up there is is used to explain a perfectly serviceable plot. A rarity in a film like this these days. Recently action films seem to be struggling terribly hard with plots; unnecessary convolution is the order of the day. I can only assume they’re over-compensating out of a fear of being criticised for being too action oriented. I don’t know why they bother. People go to action films to see action. Right?

Anyway, with all the action on offer here, the target demographic should be satisfied. It’s worth mention as well that the 3D is pretty good. Ok, there are large parts of the film where you don’t need to wear your glasses, but it’s worth it for the parts where you do. Plus, it’s shot bright enough that you don’t have to worry about the type of murkiness that plagued The Darkest Hour. Of course… that’s not all that plagued The Darkest Hour, but that’s for a different review. You do still see that strange green hue you get with Real-D 3D glasses, but it actually suits the comic book stylings of the film so… it all works out really.

Some other reviews I’ve seen have criticised it as being a step away from the other 2 mythology-heavy sequels. Having never seen them, I have no idea if that’s true. Considering all 3 of the other Underworld films having come in for some fairly scathing reviews, I’m surprised they’ve decided to pick apart any changes.

As far as I’m concerned, if you’re looking for a glossy, 88 minute distraction with some good looking people being beaten every which way but loose… you could do much, much worse than Underworld: Awakening. This film is a bruised and bloodied hoot ‘n a half.

7/10

In preparation for this film then, I decided to read up a bit. He was actually a fascinating character… you know, if you find paranoid cross-dressing egomaniacs fascinating. Or at least that’s how some of those who write history have drawn him.

If you get past that, he was instrumental in the creation of the FBI, having been appointed Director of its predecessing bureau in 1924. At the tender age of 29. Hmm… Ever feel like you should be doing more with your life? Hoover served in the capacity of Director for 48 years, through 8 different Presidents. He was a man who, not only revolutionised criminal investigation, but was so far reaching in politics that he shaped US history. Of course, that doesn’t preclude him being a paranoid cross-dressing egomaniac but… it does put a different spin on it. So, even though biopics aren’t really my thing, I was kind of looking forward to this one.

Pity. Because as biopics go, this one really doesn’t measure up to it’s subject.

I guess I was expecting to learn a bit more about J. Edgar. I thought it might bring this complex, ambitious character to life. Instead what I got was a dull, bloated half baked selection of his greatest hits. In, what looked like, plasticine.

Indeed I think the first mistake of this film was going down the flashback route. Or, more accurately, the “dictation of his memoirs” route. It’s a structure that serves to limit the scope of what is covered in the Hoover’s history. Arguably, this is the intent, we are seeing his version of the past. However it doesn’t necessarily make compelling viewing, it means that we can almost forgo any insight to be gained from these events…

No matter. This would be fine if it was interwoven with the story in the “present” day. History shapes the man as he shapes history… and all that. Unfortunately it’s not. The past events mostly peter out after the “Lindbergh Baby” case, the only event that significant time is spent on. This leaves almost 35 years that are barely touched. I’m pretty sure this wasn’t the most significant event in J. Edgar Hoover’s career. I understand the fact that they couldn’t cover every thing… fair enough. But they didn’t even focus on this as a way to parallel the stories. Plus, the constant skipping forward to the “present” day meant that the film never developed a coherent narrative to hang the character on.

It is, theoretically, a little more successful in building up a picture of the man through his relationship with his mother (played by Judi Dench) and his deputy, and supposed romantic life partner, Clyde Tolson. I say theoretically because there’s so much padding in the rest of the film that it’s hard to make out these core relationships clearly. However, yes, if you ignore large sections of the movie, these parts are almost worthwhile. The conclusions drawn are a little simplistic and obvious perhaps but, for the most part, interesting.

In my eyes though, the problems with the sagging structure and lifeless plot are insurmountable. This is a bad screenplay coupled with some lazy directorial choices. Yes, Dustin Lance Black and Clint Eastwood, this is your fault. This is not a good movie. Like Iron Lady last week, you wouldn’t know he was one of the most controversial figures in US history from this film… The scope of his influence is just not adequately dealt with at all.

It’s quite a shame because, aside from those massive issues, it’s decent. As unconvincing (read: horrendous) as the “later years” make up is, Leonardo DiCaprio and Armie Hammer (as Tolston) pull off reasonably strong, measured performances – except for in one scene where I laughed out loud, I blame the direction. Judi Dench as well is typically commanding in her role as Hoover’s mother. I like to assume she’s a lovely older lady when off camera, because there’s more than one film I’ve seen her in where she’s downright scary.

I also liked the colour palette. I take it as more a stylistic choice than a particular indicator of anything, but it looked good. The cinematography was otherwise unremarkable but I think it’s worth mentioning the things they didn’t f-k up in this film.

Speaking of things they f-d up… I would be remiss if I didn’t talk a little more about the make up. I know I’ve already said it was horrendous but I’m not sure that gives proper dues to exactly how awful it is. It’s bizarre. Seriously bizarre. Naomi Watts, as Helen Gandy, Hoover’s long standing secretary, comes away the best out of it. It helps, I suppose, that she’s that bit older than DiCaprio and Hammer, but she still looks… odd. DiCaprio’s only seems acceptable when you see Armie Hammer. Poor Armie Hammer. What did they do to you? There’s 46 years in the age difference between Hammer and the character they have him playing. They should have just got someone else, and spent a bit more money on DiCaprio’s latex face. And fat suit.

The one thing that rests a little uncomfortably with me is that… well… It’s the same problem I have with biopics in general. I can never reconcile with myself whether we’re supposed to believe them or not. After a biopic I always feel like I have to go out and find all the facts, read the true story. Which is, of course, often impossible when it comes to historical figures. Films have a power over people, when you see something you believe it’s true. The Usual Suspects is a prime example of this. I do wonder if that means that there should be a certain responsiblity on the part of the film-makers… There can’t be really, after all movies are for entertainment. But… I just hope that people don’t believe everything they see. Even though it’s up on a big screen.

Anyway, that is unimportant. What is important is that I can’t, in any good faith, recommend you see this. Even though I hated Haywire – also out this week – at least you’ll see some ass-kicking in it. There’s no such amusement to be had with J. Edgar. It’s 137 minutes long… and you feel every one of them.

5/10

I wish he hadn’t.

Haywire is a truly bizarre piece of film-making. It’s as though a rabid jazz fan decided to make an arthouse action flick. I don’t understand why this film happened. At all. I did not enjoy the experience of watching this experiment and I do not want to see one again.

Thing about the film is, it’s not that Soderbergh is a bad director. It’s like Contagion in that sense. It looks good, the acting is… acceptable. It’s just… not a good film. I have no doubt in my mind that Soderbergh has made the film he set out to make, I just don’t know why he made the choices that he made. At every turn there is, what I think is, a mistake.

I’ll start with the score. There are large swathes of the movie with no music at all, we’re just left with silence and the occasional burst of ambient noise. Which is fine. Except all at once this random, jazzy, elevator type music will start up. I don’t know how I’m supposed to feel about this. The music neither takes it’s cue or gives a cue as to what’s happening on screen at any time. There is a long action sequence near the start where you hear nothing at all but this weird tinkling jazzy music – all kinds of, quite frankly, mad stuff, is going on on-screen and all we hear is… music. No shouting, no conversing, no effects at all. Why?

The cinematography was similarly strange. Vast parts of the movie look like they were shot in ambient light. To the extent that it’s hard to make people out from time to time, and I don’t mean because they were hiding in shadows. As a result there’s quite a dull palette on offer here – browns, greys, blacks and the occasional hint of blue. That’s pretty much it. It doesn’t make for an exciting watch.

Not quite the same but similar was the camera work itself. It’s not that it’s particularly shaky, a pet hate of mine. It’s that, at times – especially when Carano is running around – the camera is all over the place. Swooping over her head, swinging around a corner, poking her in the eye. Sometimes there’s a long shot, just for the craic it would seem. I don’t know what effect they were trying to achieve… It’s as though they’d heard somewhere that your camera should get involved in the action but they weren’t sure what it meant. It was just confusing.

And while we’re on the subject of confusing… the plot. I don’t want to give anything away but there really seemed to be a lot of convolution for convolutions sake. I’m actually still not entirely sure where we finished up on everyone. It doesn’t matter though. I don’t care and I don’t think they did either. This picture was about ass kicking. Which brings me on to…

… The script. I’d almost forgot the script. Easy thing to do since there wasn’t much of one. Most of the dialogue was functional. Generally it seemed to just serve to get Ms. Carano from one reason to kick someone’s ass to the next.

It was as though the whole thing was a pastiche of a ’70s action film, or worse still, a pastiche of a Quentin Tarantino pastiche of a ’70s film. Except for a scene where a camouflage faced Carano stares into a fire in the darkness, the light flickering on her face. That’s when I thought, maybe he’s going for the early ’80s?

It’s hard to find anything to like about this movie but I will say this one thing. Gina Carano sure can kick ass. Of course, being a professional MMA fighter, you’d hope she could. That element of the film was relatively satisfying. Compared to what you’d usually see in films, these fights looked very realistic. They weren’t a blur of fists and quick cut camera work, so that was nice. They also sounded realistic. I’m not sure if that was a good thing though, we’re used to the more snappy side of foley artistry for fist fighting so it sounded a bit deadened to my ears.

The rest of the surprisingly stellar cast were also good, Michael Douglas played his role with remarkable aplomb, considering he was only in it sparingly. Antonio Banderas, Ewan McGregor, Michael Fassbender and even Channing Tatum got on board when they were needed. I also wanted to single out Bill Paxton as well, as her father. Nice to see him around, albeit briefly.

Oh, there’s also some amusement to be had from the fact that it’s filmed in Dublin. It’s kinda cool to see the streets you walk every day in a movie. Even if I throughly disliked the movie.

The fact is, friends, this isn’t the film that it could or should have been. I don’t know why Soderbergh decided to make it in this fasion, but I think that Carano actually has a chance at being an action hero. Unfortunately films like this aren’t going to do her massive favours. It’s not the worst film I’ve ever seen (which one friend of mine exclaimed after the screening) but it certainly looks like an early contender for one of the spots near the bottom… She gonna need something with a little more pizzazz to get the audience to notice her.

Around the time of Contagion, Soderbergh announced that he was planning to take some time out from film-making to work on his painting… Here’s hoping. Maybe he’ll come back fresh and reinvigored rather than churning out sad facsimiles of genre films.

3.5/10

New operators, Element Pictures, say they plan to screen the best of international art house and Irish cinema, as well as re-runs of classics and special events. They are, hopefully, starting as they mean to go on, with the programme for this (re)opening weekend includes The Artist and Shame. Other films include Madonna’s W.E. and Clint Eastwood’s latest, J. Edgar.

Their (likely) re-vamped website is not up and running just yet, but you can contact them on twitter @LightHouseD7 or on their Facebook page. They have been up and answering queries, so if you have a question get over there and start following them! If you’re wondering if they’re going to have a loyalty scheme, from their responses this morning it looks like one might possibly be on the cards…

The Light House Cinema has had a slightly chequered history. This particular Light House Cinema first opened in Smithfield in May 2008 under the ownership of Neil Connelly and Maretta Dillion. Dillion and Connelly had run the original Light House Cinema on Middle Abbey Street. That cinema enjoyed a run of 8 years in it’s Abbey Street premises, the art-deco style facade of which can still be made out, till it’s lease ran out in 1996.

The site in Smithfield was then custom-built with 614 seats across 4 screens and areas which could be used for events and exhibitions. The arthouse cinema was heralded as a centre to invigorate the cultural cinema landscape and deliver a greater choice and diversity of films in Dublin. Indeed, the site was designated as a cultural space under the planning permission given for Smithfield Market and some €1.75 million was granted by the state for its development.

Unfortunately the cinema, and Smithfield in general, became a victim of the property crash and in April 2011, The Light House had to close it’s doors again in the wake of a rental dispute with the landlord, Mr. John Flynn of Fusano Properties. Fusano’s properties had been taken over by the National Assets Management Agency (NAMA).

Under NAMA and Fusano Properties a new tenant was sought for the site and happily one has been found in Element Pictures.

Element Pictures is a Irish film and television production company, founded in 2001 by Ed Guiney and Andrew Lowe. They have produced such successful Irish films as The Wind That Shakes The Barley and last year’s massive hit, The Guard, starring Brendan Gleeson. The company also operates Element Pictures Distribution, who are responsible for the distribution of StudioCanal (formerly Optimum Releasing) films in Ireland.

From the press release for the official launch today, 17th January 2012:

Welcoming the reopening of the Light House, Minister for The Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Jimmy Deenihan said “The Programme for the Government committed us to seek to capture some public good from NAMA buildings for arts and culture facilities. The reopening of the Light House is a tangible expression of that commitment. I believe that this outcome is hugely positive for the arthouse cinema sector, for the Smithfield area and for employment and economic regeneration locally“.

Directors of Element Pictures Andrew Lowe and Ed Guiney are “delighted that the Light House Cinema will be screening films again. We are opening the cinema at the earliest possible opportunity and have lots of ideas, which we will implement over the coming months . We really appreciate the warm support and goodwill we have received following the news and look forward to ensuring that a visit to the Light House is a unique and wonderful experience. We would also like to extend our thanks to the Minister Jimmy Deenihan, the Arts Council and Bord Scannán na hÉireann / Irish Film Board for their support in getting the Light House up and running again”.

Commenting on the news, James Hickey, Chief Executive, Bord Scannán na hÉireann / Irish Film Board said “The reopening of the Light House brings an important renewal of the Irish exhibition landscape. It will once again provide Dublin audiences with reinvigorated access to the wide range of independently produced films than are currently available. It is our ambition that the Light House will contribute to the growing appetite for independent cinema amongst Irish audiences, in a cinematic environment with the availability of the latest digital equipment.“

Orlaith McBride, Director of the Arts Council, said, “The Arts Council wishes Element Pictures every success in the operation of the Light House cinema. Element Pictures will build on the programming foundations laid by the Light House since its opening and will continue to bring a diverse range of cinema to audiences in Dublin to this fine cinema setting“.

Co-directors Ed Guiney and Andrew Lowe at the re-launch of the Light House Cinema in Smithfield today, 17th Jan 2012.

The first I had heard of The Artist was a few months back, maybe about 4 months ago. I was in the cinema (surprise!), either Cineworld or the IFI, when this completely captivating trailer came on.

I don’t usually put trailers in my review but I thought this one warranted it. Probably best viewed on a 40 ft screen. Or failing that, full screen.

I just remember thinking, I have never seen anything like that before.

… Bear in mind that the only silent movie I’ve ever watched was Mel Brooks’s Silent Movie. Oh, and Nosferatu. So, yes… nothing like it before.

I didn’t know anything about it and the trailer didn’t really tell me all that much. At that stage it wasn’t out in the US, there wasn’t a UK or Irish release date and there was so little info on it that I didn’t even know that it was a silent movie… so there was every chance it was going to be just a one week run in the IFI or something. I didn’t matter though, I knew I had to see it.

Flash-forward to today and The Artist is everywhere. Some are even calling it the film of the year. It’s only 16th January for Pete’s sake!

I wouldn’t go that far, not just yet, but I will say that it is an absolutely delightful affair. Jean Dujardin plays George Valentin, a star in the world of silent movies, whose career is threatened by the advent of the age of the Talkies. As his star is falling, another is rising, in the form of Peppy Miller (Bérénice Bejo). Miller is a talented bright young thing, who Valentin had helped with her first break.

Despite how charming the film is, and how charming it looked in the trailer… it is, oddly enough, not the film I thought it was going to be. I suppose I thought it was going to be some kind of epic, in the old style of film-making, and it wasn’t. It is, pretty much, the story of George Valentin. And Uggy. Not that this was disappointing, but I’m just surprised that people seem to be so swept away by a film which is, fairly simple to be honest.

What sets it apart from the usual is that it’s quite clever, since there’s no dialogue writer/director Michel Hazanavicius has (obviously) had to call upon his actors to EMOTE. And for EMOTING to look sensible, you’ve gotta have sharp actors. Everyone here is up to the task, John Goodman and James Cromwell in particular, shine in their respective roles. The Artist works very well in this way. I never thought the gimmick wore thin…

… what wore a little thin for me was Valentin’s trials and tribulations. And, when things got a bit heavy, I’m not sure that the tone matched the story we were being told. But, I’m not going to go into the plot. Suffice to say that I thought the runtime was slightly long, even though it was only 100 mins. Aside from that, there isn’t a lot to complain about. It’s a perfectly lovely slice of throwback cinema, a cute and entertaining look at a bygone era.

In any case, they saved it all at the end. I loved the ending.

So, go out and watch this film. While you might not think it’s the film of the year, you’re bound to enjoy it. Unless you don’t like music. If you don’t like music you might have a problem.

8/10

Well, Thursday was a happy day for me because it saw the debut of the trailer for Moonrise Kingdom, Wes Anderson’s latest offering. It’s written by Anderson and Roman Coppola, who last collaborated on The Darjeeling Limited so I’m taking this as a good sign.

There’s not loads of information out there at the moment so here’s the official synopsis:

Set on an island off the coast of New England in the summer of 1965, Moonrise Kingdom tells the story of two twelve-year-olds who fall in love, make a secret pact, and run away together into the wilderness. As various authorities try to hunt them down, a violent storm is brewing off-shore — and the peaceful island community is turned upside down in more ways than anyone can handle.

Anderson has assembled some big names for this one; the cast is led by the two young newcomers, Jared Gilman and Kara Hayward, but Bruce Willis, Frances McDormand, Tilda Swinton, Ed Norton and Harvey Keitel all feature in various fun looking roles.

Fans fear not though, he also has a couple of his usual suspects in Bill Murray and Jason Schwartzman as well as his regular cinematographer Robert Yeoman.

Watching the trailer it looks like absolute classic Anderson so I, for one, can’t wait to see it. To forewarn you though, I did tune out a little toward the middle because it was starting to look a little spoilery.

Undoubtedly there will those out there who would rather hear nails on a blackboard than watch a new Wes Anderson film. To ye I say… fair enough. Just don’t go see it.

Sadly there is no Irish / UK release date yet announced but you can rest assured I will let you know as soon as I hear.

RELEASE DETAILS

release date: 23 May 12 (US), UK & IRL TBC
director: Wes Anderson
writers: Wes Anderson, Roman Coppola (writers)
cast: Jared Gilman, Kara Hayward, Bill Murray, Jason Schwartzman, Bruce Willis, Frances McDormand, Tilda Swinton, Ed Norton, Harvey Keitel
genre: drama, comedy
running time: TBC

Official website: TBC
Official facebook page: TBC

Video clips available
Official trailer #1

Official trailer #1

back to top

Moonrise Kingdom does not yet have a set release date for Ireland and the UK

]]>

In more ways than one.

Man of the moment, Michael Fassbender, plays Brandon Sullivan, an Irish-American business suit type with an addiction to porn and sex with anonymous strangers. His life is going… relatively well really. His job hasn’t yet cottoned on to his problem – or at the least he must be making them enough money for it to not be a problem – and the ladies seem to fall at his feet. That is until his hot mess of a sister (Carey Mulligan) turns up.

That’s pretty much it. Ah no, it’s not really but it may as well be.

To be honest, I was sorely disappointed by Shame. There was so much buzz, so much hype around it and I just don’t think it’s worthy.

Which is not to say that you shouldn’t see it, Michael Fassbender puts on an excellent performance, one that may even warrant the honour of an Oscar nomination, but – in my opinion of course – there isn’t much more reason to see it. I’m just not sure why it’s a film at all. It is an intimate and granular portrait of a man consumed by his demons, no doubt, but as a film it just didn’t make for compelling viewing, for me.

Maybe I shouldn’t have been surprised. Looking back over my review of director Steve McQueen’s last film, Hunger, I had similar issues. Not quite the same but similar. In Hunger we weren’t shown any of the motivations for the characters. That wasn’t a problem for it though, there was a delicate balance to be struck in telling the story of Bobby Sands’ last days on earth and McQueen managed it. Shame is an entirely different kind of story though and I think McQueen needed to take a chance here and bring us a more critical eye, or perhaps a more benign one, I’m not fussy. Any kind of commentary would have been welcome.

Like in Hunger, Fassbender’s nymphomaniac exists without any context or motivation. He is an empty vessel, waiting to be (ful)filled. We never get a sense of who he is beyond his addiction and we never… get beyond his addiction. There are some excellent and moving scenes with Mulligan but there’s a tendency to stifle the emotion. Which is, ostensibly, the perogative of the character but as a viewer it merely leads to frustration.

It’s also, probably, worth mention that this is an 18 rated movie and, as you would expect, is rife with relatively explicit scenes of a sexual nature. His hypersexuality is depicted time and time again, to the point that it gets quite boring. I imagine perhaps this is the point… however, it still means you’re boring your audience.

It is, therefore, a shame. Shame, because I think that there’s a lot more in the story that could have been explored. Shame, that Fassbender’s fantastically nuanced performance lies flat in a film that seems content to pinwheel around random meaningless encounters. And lastly, Shame, because I had to sit through another movie where Carey Mulligan seems intent on maintaining her 70:30, crying to not-crying, ratio of screen time.

I feel like I’m being unecessarily harsh. There were things I liked about it… I liked how it looked. There were some nice shots, I particularly liked the running scene. I liked the music… I didn’t actually hate the film. Fassbender gives us a perfect, outsider sense of who Sullivan is at this point in his life. As a portrait of a man, it is crystalline. You feel his torment in his eyes, in the lines of his face… But there’s just nothing there at the core. I don’t know what this film was trying to say to me… All I can say is… Why?

And don’t get me started on the ending. I was truly riled by the ending. I’m not going to give it away but I could probably write another few paragraphs on what was wrong with the 5 mins or so of the film…

… Sorry, I just had to get that in there.

5.5/10

All the trailers I could find from official sources are below. I’ve put them in broadly chronological order. That is, in the order they were released, as far as I can tell. There were too many to keep track of at the time!

As a bonus too, I’ve throw in the trailer for the 2nd Toy Story Toons short film from Pixar. This one’s called Small Fry and it’s showing before cinema screenings of The Muppets. I think it’ll be fun, the Hawaiian Vacation one before Cars 2 was and I do love Toy Story…

RELEASE DETAILS

release date: 10 Feb 2012
director: James Bobin
writers: Jason Segel, Nicholas Stoller (writers), Jim Henson (characters)
cast: Jason Segel, Amy Adams, Chris Cooper, Rashida Jones
genre: comedy, adventure
running time: 103 mins

Official website: Disney – The Muppets
Official facebook page: facebook.com/TheMuppetsUK

Video clips available
trailer #1: Green with Envy
trailer #2: Being Green (Green Lantern parody trailer)
trailer #3: 1st official trailer
trailer #4: The Pig with the Froggy Tattoo (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo parody trailer)
trailer #5: The Final Parody trailer (feat. Paranormal Activity 3, Puss in Boots and Twilight: Breaking Dawn)
trailer #6: 2nd official trailer
trailer: Toy Story Toons – “Small Fry” sneak peek (Toy Story Toons short before The Muppets)

trailer #1: Green with Envy


back to top

trailer #2: Being Green (Green Lantern parody trailer)


back to top

trailer #3: 1st official trailer


back to top

trailer #4: The Pig With The Froggy Tattoo (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo parody trailer)


back to top

trailer #5: The Final Parody trailer (feat. Paranormal Activity 3, Puss in Boots and The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – part 1)


back to top

trailer #6: 2nd official trailer


back to top

trailer: Toy Story Toons – “Small Fry” sneak peek


back to top

The Muppets is in UK and Irish cinemas from Friday 10th February 2012

]]>