Review: The Paperboy (2013)

The Paperboy (2013)  

Released: 15 March 2013

Director: Lee Daniels

Cast: Zac Efron, Matthew McConaughey, Nicole Kidman, John Cusack

Plot: Reporter Jack Jansen (Efron) returns to his hometown to investigate the murder of a local Sherriff, for which the convict (Cusack) is on death row.

ADAPTED from Pete Dexter’s novel of the same name, The Paperboy managed to snag itself a Cannes selection, probably due to a style and flair usually absent from Hollywood thrillers. But this combined with a solid, intriguing story and characters worth investing your attention in make it a distinguished piece of modern filmmaking. Shot on grainy widescreen 16mm and enlarged to 35, sometimes reflecting elements of Blaxploitation as well as sexploitation, the film appears as if literally plucked from the 70s, born of the era’s values and a product of its troubles.

It tells the story of Jack, of the Jansen family, which consists of his brother Ward (McConaughey), father and stepmother whom Jack and Ward are not particularly fond of. Rather, Jack finds friendship and maternal affections in his house help Anita (played brilliantly by Macy Gray, also narrating to the same degree), which result in some of the more memorable and adoring scenes, one even arguably the most humourous. The role of Jack marks Efron’s best work yet, batting the critics who associate his career with that Disney trilogy – an image by no means easy to shed, yet here is successfully so.

Kidman is barely recognisable as the white- trash object of Jack’s obsession Charlotte, looking and acting as if plucked from a Deep South edition of The Only Way Is Essex (The Only Way is Texas?) than the typically classy damsel Kidman audiences have familiarised themselves with. It could even be her standout performance, if not, a strong contender. Here, it is certainly the standout. It also provides a change of pace for McConaughey; whose performance grows on a script so easy on the ear it also feels as if the audience is witness to documented conversation. In an equally notable fashion, home grown actor David Oyelowo and John Cusack (his best work too) take on highly enjoyable and prevalent roles that are by no means peripheral.

The film’s strength is in its subtle storytelling, which is counterweighted simply by its content and subject matter. The graphic and just-the-right-side-of-gratuitous violence and sex just feel denotative of such a Southern lifestyle lived by its feral inhabitants. We see the more glamorous inner city settings, beaches and offices, which are contrasted with the bleak, dirty shabbiness of the swamps, where its dwellers are equally unappealing (and we’re not just talking about the crocs).

The real drama comes from Jack’s awkward and desperate desire to ‘jump on’ (as narrated) Charlotte, while trying to contemplate her desire for dangerous men – depicted in two prison visits, one of which is the film’s best, if most crude, scene. The audience is occasionally put behind the eyes of the youngster for daydream or half-conscious sequences, most if not all of which veer on at Kidman’s Charlotte longingly or lustfully. He’s a brash, often mouthy and emotive individual, and she, an overtly sexual, self- destructive mess – but something inside us wants to see it work out. Which, though, is something that the narrative playfully but consistently wraps a cloth of uncertainty around.

It is not without fault, though. At times the script leaves too much to wonder, and viewers could feel as though they are backtracking what’s previously happened in order to understand what’s happening before them, like flicking back through a lengthy novel. However, this is usually where The Paperboy once again grasps your attention in often a shocking way, and in a rare scenario by today’s structural standards, the third act not only maintains the pace of the prior two, but stands above them.

Pete Dexter (writer of both the original novel and screenplay) and Lee Daniels (writ/dir.) work together successfully to assert ownership over this engaging piece of cinema – it is most definitely a result of their respective skills – resulting in a finished product that is poignant, memorable and timeless in its content, sporting re-watching value (little things can be picked up on in hindsight) and dynamic characters that accompany a visually compound picture of high quality.

Verdict: Melodramatic and affecting yet strangely engrossing, The Paperboy tells a thrilling tale of mystery, troubled youth and societal decay with an effective vintage sheen. Have an accommodating mind and don’t be perturbed by the criticism. ★★★★

Review: Gangster Squad

Gangster Squad (2013)

The Fellowship of the Crime Ring 

Released: 10 January

Director: Ruben Fleischer

Cast: Josh Brolin, Ryan Gosling, Sean Penn, Emma Stone

Plot: Los Angeles, 1949. Mickey Cohen (Penn)’s reach stretches everywhere – even within the law. Realising that the only way to lock him up is operating outside it, Sgt. John O’Mara (Brolin) sets up the ‘Gangster Squad’, a team of men willing to play Cohen at his own game.

RUBEN Fleischer’s last outing, 30 Minutes or Less, was widely ignored having been overshadowed by its funnier older brother, the highly marketable spin on a popular and successful genre, Zombieland. Melting violence and humour together delicately yet enjoyably, It was the closest the US had ever come to replicating the refreshing thread of comedy famously portrayed by Edgar Wright’s Shaun of the Dead.

Gangster Squad almost nails this. It builds upon the basis of The Untouchables, but never quite rises to the same heights – no Oscars for best supporting role here. That said, the ensemble here – the Gangster Squad – bounce off one another nicely.

The main strengths here though, are Brolin and Penn. The former is the strong headed, brave, equally-as-moral-as-tough Costner- stand in, while Sean Penn is more stand out than stand in. Boasting far more character than screen time (sadly), he drives the film as a viciously ambitious Mickey Cohen, who locks his associates in lift shafts then burns the building to the ground, chains a man to two separate cars (wild-west style, minus the horses) and orders them to drive apart, or makes literal use of the phrase ‘you know the drill’. Never has Cohen been portrayed with such attention to detail and a fearsome on screen presence.

Elsewhere, the supporting cast carry the drama at a favourable pace, never slowing, but also never faltering. There is a good story to be told, and it wraps up without leaving the audience feel short-changed. Fleischer knows how to pay cast members the attention they are due, especially considering the sheer size of it here, and saddles each character with a selling point. That considered though, the running time doesn’t allow for deep enough character exploration beyond Brolin, Penn and Gosling, but, frankly, most will be content with this.

Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone are given a chance to replicate their romantic chemistry seen before – one or two of their moments feel like Crazy, Stupid, Love’s deleted scenes – though both are good performances standing firmly on their own merits, albeit their status as tokens for a more general market. A very trebly Gosling is ideal as smart, ladies man (though fictional) Jerry Wooters, who goes to show, in a shooting outside a restaurant, that he is willing to punish a bad guy accordingly:

“You won’t shoot me, you’re a cop!”

To which he replies, “Not any more.”

Other characters are purely a product of their casting, for example Nick Nolte must have been first call as the Police Chief determined to prise LA from Cohen’s grasp, or Giovanni Ribisi as the nervy but good- willed eyes and ears of the operation. They are all of course, simply good guys willing to do some bad to pull a city through a corrupt epoch.

In terms of directing, narrative and performance, Gangster Squad is a decent movie. It may not be as consistently rich in character as The Untouchables or as sophisticated as LA Confidential, but it certainly throws enough punches and covers enough ground to warrant recognition as a great gangster flick.

Verdict: Gangster Squad is the ideal weekend movie, championing brawn over brain whilst being gutsy and unafraid to expose post- WWII LA with unsubtle honesty. It pulls a Tommy gun trigger and doesn’t let go until the drum empties. ★★★★

Review: Skyfall (2012)

Skyfall

The Bond we’ve been expecting 

Released: 26 October 2012

Director: Sam Mendes

Cast: Daniel Craig, Judi Dench, Javier Bardem, Ben Whishaw, Naomie Harris, Ralph Fiennes, Bérénice Marlohe

Plot: After a mission goes south in Istanbul and 007 is presumed dead, MI6 is attacked and M is targeted by someone from her past. Agent James Bond must track down the person responsible, which leads him down roads he never intended to revisit.

2010. Metro Goldwyn Mayer is in trouble. With a debt surpassing $3.7 billion, the then simply titled ‘Bond 23’ was strung up in development purgatory. The impact of the economic recession on MGM was becoming more and more apparent as output decreased and speculations over the lack of Bond- related news festered. 2008’s Quantum of Solace had already disappointed fans, and an eagerness for a strong follow up put pressure on MGM to deliver. Whatever the outcome, it was obvious that the studio was heavily reliant on Bond 23.

2012, and we now know 23 as a far better name – Skyfall. Sitting in the cinema and watching the endless plethora of Bond- related merchandise and loosely- associated brands is nostalgic by now. But then, Skyfall’s opening shot explodes onto screen – brass note accompaniment and all – and in a deliberately blurred shot in which Daniel Craig’s bright blue eyes become framed in a dash of sunlight, Bond is back.

And never better. Skyfall is one hell of a return for the most famous spy in the world. It is well aware of Quantum’s failings and makes up for them brilliantly. Most importantly though, it is unapologetically Bond- esque, trading

Quantum’s gritty realism for a taste of convention – because after all, it’s what we’ve come to expect from MI6’s greatest agent. In essence, Skyfall’s winning ticket is its ability to perfectly blend Casino Royale’s overhaul of the franchise whilst retaining, put simply, what makes Bond Bond.

Skyfall’s other strength lies in its narrative. Whereas James Bond’s past has been very much buried for 22 films, Skyfall allows the enigma to surface without leaving the audience hungering for anything more definitive – gladly, the film doesn’t do an X-Men Origins: Wolverine or Hannibal Rising on our nation’s most beloved movie hero – the result is more akin to a Nolan- era Bruce Wayne. Craig’s performance is consistently strong, too. Nobody can handle the Brosnan style cuff- correction or the sarcy dialogue with maximum admiration and minimum corniness like he can. It’s no wonder then, that Roger Moore, the longest running Bond so far has hailed Daniel Craig as his favourite. Craig remains solid into the final act, which is a challenge for any Bond actor in its context alone. As Skyfall guides us deeper into Bond’s past, a geographical shift, a descent in glamour and a stripping away of style leave Skyfall at the mercy of the main three – Craig, Dench and Bardem. It’s a risky move, but the three make use of a great script and input from Mendes sees Skyfall to a triumphant end.

Bardem is easily one of the most memorable and dynamic Bond villains, partly due to a wise development decision to follow the Bond baddie handbook – dodgy hair, foreign accent, and a deformity that tops the chart (hint: it’s no Scaramanga third nipple). Once he is introduced (it does take some time) Bardem very much carries the film. The return of Q is also warmly welcome, and Whishaw does a fantastic job of it too – this time on a par with 007’s snide remarks. The bond girls Eve and Sévérine (Miles and Marlohe) also energize the narrative, the former adopting a more hands-on – easy now – rough and tough role and the latter encompassing the traits we have come to expect from one of 007’s squeezes. And of course, credits go out to Dench’s M, who plays a pivotal role this time.

Skyfall doesn’t ease us into the action either – it stars at full throttle, featuring a car and bike chase, a train sequence and plenty of fisticuffs action to keep the audience engaged throughout. Throw into the mix an exotic location (which Skyfall has no shortage of) and you have your perfect bond movie. Thankfully, it is saturated with classic bond moments and nods to previous instalments – the shark pool is traded in for a pit crawling with Komodo dragons, Q remarks that if Bond expected exploding pens, they “don’t really go in for that anymore”, but most glaringly (and brilliantly) of all is the return of James Bond’s most famous car – arguably Skyfall’s most memorable moment.

 Sam Mendes breathes new life into what Quantum of Solace seemed to lose control of, and a director with remarkable experience in character- led drama is an obvious pick for Skyfall’s heavily demanding modus operandi. The film’s visual potential is this time not in establishing shots of beautiful locations that ludicrous budgets have achieved, but instead in a Shanghai high-rise fight sequence which pits 007 and an assassin’s silhouettes against one another whilst vibrant ads run up the glass building’s exterior. It makes for a colourful display of well-choreographed hand-to-hand combat, which Bond has latterly become proficient in. Cinematographically, Skyfall is the most ambitious Bond yet. All things considered, Skyfall feels like the true successor to Casino Royale, and believe the hype – it could well be the best Bond since the Connery epoch. Sherioushly.

Verdict: 007 delivers his finest film in a long time, thanks to a gracious cast and inventive, yet loyal, directing. The future is looking bright for the world’s longest running franchise – for fans, James Bond won’t return soon enough. ★★★★★