Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it's Michael Keaton in the finest performance of his career. "Birdman" is experimental filmmaking with a distinctive edge. Reviewed by Scott Gentry.

"Birdman (or the Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)" (15)
Directed by: Alejandro G. Iñárritu. 
Starring:  Michael Keaton, Zach Galifianakis, Edward Norton, Andrea Riseborough, Emma Stone, and Naomi Watts. 
Rated: '15' for containing strong language and sex references.
Running time: 119 minutes. 
Released in UK cinemas from the 1st of January, 2015.

It was a cold winter’s evening when I walked out from a suitably packed screening of “Birdman”, and as I passed through the ever-populated, and vibrantly-lit Leicester Square, I began to contemplate my feelings towards “Birdman”. On this particular evening, I felt a sense of emotion for this film that I had never felt before: overall bewilderment. What had I been viewing for the last two hours? I wasn’t sure. I knew in my heart however that my verdict was placed within the middle of being head-over-heels in love with the film and its sheer audacity to be different (trust me, it’s like none other), and detesting it for its relatively new and perplexing approach for me, as I had never before seen a film by Alejandro G. Iñárritu. The film itself challenged and moved me, but I was just completely baffled throughout. Now weeks after my viewing, I think I may finally have an opinion on this delicate and endearing piece.

 Mike Shiner (Edward Norton) attempts to steal the
spotlight from Thompson (Keaton), in a still from "Birdman".

Keaton stars as Riggan Thompson, a washed-up actor who, 20 years after quitting a highly successful string of career defining, superhero blockbusters (the Birdman series), moves his hand towards writing, starring and directing in a Broadway adaptation of Raymond Carver's short story, "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love". But as the play’s opening night grows ever closer, the tension behind Riggan’s elaborate project starts to mount, as he begins to worry about the deteriorating relationship with his girlfriend (Riseborough), the strenuous bond between his ex-drug addict daughter (Stone) and ex-wife (Amy Ryan), a seemingly incompetent cast, and an esteemed New York theatre critic (Lindsay Duncan), who is determined to rip apart his play. Despite the surrounding pandemonium, will Riggan be able to put aside his problems and reinvent his career? Well, if Birdman’s got anything to say about it, apparently no…

Perhaps the black humour of “Birdman” was occasionally lost upon me (I only managed a few belly-laughs), but the overall ambitiousness most certainly wasn’t. I can only imagine how difficult it must have been for Iñárritu and his team to persuade studio executives to pump money into their genre-jumping piece, in order to bring this bizarre and quirky script to the big screen. Just the idea of “Birdman” is a particular risk, and would the audiences themselves even appreciate it, let alone understand it? But, the 51-year-old Mexican director has produced a purely original piece with an awards-worthy cast, impeccable camera work, and Michael Keaton’s best performance in years. In fact, the entire cast shock with revelatory performances, but also add something delightful to the mix. Cast members such as Watts, Norton and Stone pour their true talent into the film, contributing energetic performances unlike anything we’ve seen before. The trio are all emotionally charged, and if at least one of them aren’t nominated come awards season, I’ll be pretty baffled as to why.

There's a shadow hanging over me... Thompson struggles
with his domineering alias, in a still from "Birdman".

Even with the exceptional support from Norton, Watts, Stone and Galifianakis, its Keaton who steals the entire film’s glory. I’ve never seen him perform like this before, and this film has finally paved the way for him to expand his acting style, and move away from blunders such as “RoboCop” (the remake, of course) and the equally abhorrent “Need for Speed”, with this, a virtuoso performance of great skill. Perhaps his next role in Thomas McCarthy’s drama “Spotlight”, may continue this exciting reinvention of his acting career. Perhaps a Keatononaissance? I certainly hope so. 

In league with the phenomenal performances from its cast, “Birdman” is a visual triumph. There’s no doubt in my mind when I say that Emmanuel Lubezki (the production’s cinematographer) is most likely to win awards for his stunning contributions.  Having provided his talents for many films (including “Children of Men”) and receiving praise for his wonderfully involved long-take sequences, Lubezki continues with his signature style, and places viewers deep into the heart of the acting world, as his camera moves in and out of the stage area and into the dressing rooms, carefully revealing the intricate relationships between our star-studded cast, and to also take advantage of shooting the film in real-time. It’s a skill not many have mastered, but this technique works so well within “Birdman” that it’s difficult not to mention.

Is this love? Sam and Mike embrace in a
touching moment, within a still from "Birdman".

Iñárritu and his team of writers are undoubtedly talented, and the prose of “Birdman” itself is dark with a distinctive and satirical bite, poking fun at the style of theatre and its variety of actors. It’s an inspired move, and all throughout the film, the quality of the interplay between each character increases, and eventually draws you into this shadowy world of lies and deception. The music doesn’t quite seem to fit the film’s style, and with the constant inclusion of drumming solos throughout, they occasionally wreck the atmosphere. However, credit is owed to Antonio Sánchez, as his inclusions of various composers for the most spellbinding of scenes (including Rachmaninoff, Mahler and Tchaikovsky) really complement the piece, and sets the mood particularly well. 

Verdict

“Birdman” may not appeal to wide audiences, but with its experimental style, captivating cinematography and a career-best performance from Michael Keaton, it’s undoubtedly the most spellbinding film of the decade.

8 Stars out of 10

Written by Scott Gentry.

Film/TV Rating Key

1-2 stars out of ten = Awful.

3-4 stars out of ten = Average.

5-6 stars out of ten = Good.

7-8 stars out of ten = Excellent.

9-10 stars out of ten = Amazing.

Trailer

Clip

Don't you know Marmalade addictions are no laughing matter? "Paddington" packs family-friendly humour into a cheeky British concoction, mastered by Paul King. Written by Scott Gentry.

“Paddington” (PG)
Directed by: Paul King.
Starring: Ben Whishaw (voice), Julie Walters, Sally Hawkins, Hugh Bonneville, Peter Capaldi, Jim Broadbent and Nicole Kidman.
Rated: ‘PG’ for containing dangerous behaviour, mild threat, innuendo and infrequent mild bad language.
Running time: 95 minutes. 
Now showing in UK cinemas.

It was a relatively cold November morning when I had the pleasure of viewing “Paddington” (amongst a packed screen of critics and children alike), and prior to its scheduled start, I didn’t think anyone was expecting quite the film it turned out to be.  Throughout this Python-esque 95 minute extravaganza, I’d never heard so much raucous laughter in all of my life. The film was met with untold praise. Surprised? Not as much as I was. 

The latest update of this childhood phenomenon charters the very beginnings of Paddinton’s life, beginning with his early years  in the depths of deepest darkest Peru, in which he lives happily with his Aunt Lucy (Imelda Staunton) and Uncle Pastuzo (Michael Gambon). After a freak earthquake destroys his family home, Lucy decides that it’s time for Paddington to step out into the big wide world, in search of a new family who can take care of him properly. The sprightly and gentlemanly bear agrees, and stows away in a ship bound for London. 

When he eventually arrives at Paddington station, our small protagonist realises that life in the city is far more dangerous and intimidating than he imagined.  Just as all hope seems lost, Paddington makes the acquaintance of the Brown family, consisting of Mr. Brown (Bonneville), the happy-go-lucky Mrs. Brown (Hawkins), the adventurous Jonathan (Samuel Joslin of “The Impossible” fame), and Judy (Madeleine Harris), an emotion-concealing teenager. But when a villainous taxidermist (Kidman) from the Natural History Museum discovers that Paddington is an endangered bear, she sets out to catch him at any cost, threatening to destroy the growing friendship of Paddington and the Brown family. 

“Paddington” as I remember it, was never quite like this. But Paul King’s (“Bunny And The Bull”) renewal of the young bear’s story is welcomed due to his unbelievably witty script, inspired by the style and verve of a child-friendly “Mighty Boosh” episode. It all fits due to the writing, and King masterfully blends child and adult jokes together, to create a ludicrously imaginative piece which appeals to people of any age, featuring many quotable lines. Not only is it similar to the  Python’s British style, but it is also filled with meticulous detail, reminiscent of Wes Anderson’s large back-catalogue. 

The CGI is also something worth mentioning, as the British company Framestore (“Gravity”) have helped to create a believable and fun-loving character (despite not providing an actual presence on–set), who seems completely real throughout his scenes within the film. It’s no mean feat, but Framestore have outdone themselves, creating a perfect companion to the human characters. The entire cast is talented, especially Bonneville and Hawkins who provide hilarious comedic turns  throughout. Joslin and Harris are on fine form as the Brown children, working well with the more experienced of cast members, particularly a wonderfully devilish Kidman, who surprises in her comic abilities. Without the correct voice, Paddington wouldn’t have sounded right, and Colin Firth may have fit, but it was King’s ultimate decision to change from Firth to Ben Whishaw, who’s soft and tender British voice suits the polite bear perfectly. Along with a host of talented actors, “Paddington” is also graced with cameos from Britain’s best comedians, providing some laugh-out-loud scenes.  

Verdict

“Paddington” is one of Britain’s latest and greatest cinematic achievements; blending five star British humour with a lovely and fluffy plot, it’s hard not to fall under its family-friendly spell. 

8 stars out of 10

Written by Scott Gentry.

Film/TV Rating Key

1-2 stars out of ten = Awful.

3-4 stars out of ten = Average.

5-6 stars out of ten = Good.

7-8 stars out of ten = Excellent.

9-10 stars out of ten = Amazing.

Trailer

Clip

Did we need a sequel? No, but “Horrible Bosses 2” is a witty and infrequently well-played piece of Hollywood comedy, featuring a zany and effective performance from Chris Pine.

“Horrible Bosses 2” (15)

Directed by: Sean Anders.

Starring: Jason Bateman, Charlie Day, Jason Sudeikis, Chris Pine, Jennifer Aniston, Christoph Waltz and Kevin Spacey.

Rated: ‘15’ for containing strong language and sex references.

Running time: 108 minutes.

Released in UK cinemas from the 28^th of November, 2014.  

2001 was a slow year for comedy, and without the insertion of a little, first rate Rom-Com named “Crazy Stupid Love”, not much was on offer. But Warner Bros did manage to release “Horrible Bosses”, a fresh comedy which didn’t necessarily rely on previous instalments or relatable franchises to succeed. With a virtually unknown main cast, the film was indeed a gamble, but became a financial and (partly) critical hit.  For me, the film brought my mind to the point of exhaustion; the entire film was filled with overused gags and excessively crude sequences, prompting me to stop watching as soon as possible. Goodness only knows what held my interest. It definitely wasn’t Jennifer Anniston, that’s for sure. Now three years later after that huge misfire, I learned that Warner Bros were making a sequel. I wasn’t prepared for another instalment of mindless comedy, and was dreading its release. But I was pleasantly surprised, as this well casted film proved my expectations wrong, with me laughing all the way through.

After ridding themselves of their previous bosses, Nick (Bateman), Dale (Day) and Kurt (Sudeikis) have decided to become their own bosses by creating their very own business. Based around the invention of their product “The Shower Buddy”, the trio decided to go into business with a slick investor (Waltz) and his son (Pine, proving to be a surprisingly hilarious and brilliant addition to the cast), in order to distribute the products. However, when the dastardly pair of investor’s double cross the dumbfounded group, they decide to hatch a mentally inept plan to kidnap the investor’s adult son and force the father to pay a ransom, in order to retake their company. Chaotic results ensue… 

Sequels rarely work, and I definitely didn’t envisage “Horrible Bosses 2” scoring points for originality, but it has attempted to try something different in relation to them becoming bosses themselves, which is interesting. This latest instalment succeeds in its ambitions by producing a self-aware script and perhaps the craziest performance of Pine’s career to date, involving a scene in which we see him “Fight Clubbing himself”. Trust me, you’ll understand soon enough. The previous film’s problem was that it held back far too much on the comedy which works such as the dark murderous aspects, but it seems as though “Horrible Bosses 2” has learned from its mistakes and returned with a hilarious script written by Sean Anders and John Morris (the pair have taken over from the previous writers), which surprises through its constant use of pop-culture references (the “Nine To Five” reference is ace) and manic performances from its cast. 

At this point everyone seems firmly seated within their roles, and both Dale and Sudeikis’s chemistry works extremely well with one another, providing the majority of laughs in certain scenes. The addition of Pine was a brilliant idea, as the usually dramatic actor turns in a wonderfully ecstatic performance which prompts the question, why can’t he act in more of these films? Waltz’s presence seems wasted however, as the celebrated star of “Django Unchained” provides a generic phone-in performance, and adds very little to the film’s already hectic style. Bateman’s character was the clear leader in the original film, yet it seems as though his part has been reduced to a mere supporting role, with him accompanying the other actors, but seeming uninterested throughout. The celebrity cameos also seem a little forced at times, with Aniston resorting to bellowing many crude jokes, and not developing her character whatsoever. Although, the return of Kevin Spacey is most definitely welcome. 

Verdict

Occasionally laugh-out-loud funny, but seemingly desperate to discover far more intriguing side-splitting gags, “Horrible Bosses 2” improves upon its predecessor by upping the idiocy of the original, and adding Chris Pine’s uproarious performance into the mix. A needless sequel it may be, but through the bizarre antics of our heroes, I was gleefully drawn into their stupidity.

6 Stars out of 10

Written by Scott Gentry.

Film/TV Rating Key

1-2 stars out of ten = Awful.

3-4 stars out of ten = Average.

5-6 stars out of ten = Good.

7-8 stars out of ten = Excellent.

9-10 stars out of ten = Amazing.

Trailer

Clip

In Wellington, New Zealand, no one can hear you scream... Jemaine Clement and Taika Waititi pay homage to the Vampire genre in bloodthirsty style.

“What We Do In The Shadows” (15)

Directed by: Taika Waititi and Jemaine Clement.

Starring: Jemaine Clement, Taika Waititi, Jonathan Brugh, Cori Gonzalez-Macuer, Stuart Rutherford, and Jackie van Beek.

Rated: ‘15’ for containing strong language and bloody violence.

Running time: 85 minutes.

Released in UK cinemas from the 21^st of November, 2014.

It’s been almost seven years since the unfortunate end of the award-winning sitcom, “Flight Of The Concords”, with very few shows being able to fill the hole of the most strangely compelling comic series to grace television in many years. Since then, Jemaine Clement has started collaborations with Taika Waititi (the odd, yet wonderful “Eagle V.S. Shark”), and starred in various small roles such as Boris The Animal, in the awful “Men In Black 3”. Unfortunately, nothing has ever filled the void of his award-winning TV show, until now.  Despite it’s particularly low budget, “What We Do In The Shadows” beats the very best of many high-end productions this year, proving to be the funniest and most inventive comedy horror in many, many years, topping the very best of comedy spoofs.

One sheet is plenty?
Taika Waititi stars as
Viago, in a still from
"What We Do In The Shadows". 

Mixing the odd and daft sensibilities of their original series with an off-kilter, bloody Edgar Wright style, Clement and C.O. portray four vampires: a suave playboy named Deacon (Brugh), Viago (Waititi) the charismatic pansy, their bumbling leader Vladislav (Clement) and a humble yet violent (when necessary) Nosferatu-esque vampire named Petyr (Ben Fransham). Having taken up residence in a flat with a desperate need for a lick of paint, in Wellington, New Zealand, the foolish group live comfortably together, until the day that Petyr decides to leave the confines of his cellar and bites into the neck of their dinner guest (he was meant to be the dinner for four, greedy so-and-so) Nick (Cori Gonzalez-Macuer), consuming his entire blood supply for himself. What’s worse is that Nick has now been turned into a new-age vampire, who threatens to upset the status quo, when he begins to show the group inventions such as the computer (cue hilarious results) and advertises his newfound powers a little too much…

Leading the audience through their extensive world of vampire mischief, “WWDITS” benefits from its purely original concept. Sure we’ve had fly-on-the-wall mockumentary’s before (check out “Dead Set” from the master of devious cyber-horror, Charlie Brooker), but nothing has ever hit the heights of comedy horror quite like this before. Clement and Waititi’s ambitious production rivals the very best in horror comedy, and it’s all down to their wonderfully bloodthirsty script. If you aren’t familiar with the pair’s previous writing style, it’s a vivid and overly strange approach, but it doesn’t matter. The entire script plays upon the tired Vampire format, and turns it completely upon its head, treating the audience to well-written characters which constantly surprise, jokes that aren’t notably predictable and the ability to make insanely funny jokes out of horror’s greatest memories.  

Viago (Waititi) takes IT lessons from the group's only human friend
Stu (Stuart Rutherford), in a still from "What We Do In The Shadows". 

But despite their inventive script, Clement and Waititi seem to have hesitated in creating a narrative that we as an audience are expected to follow. Maybe they didn’t feel confident enough to create a real story, but what makes this series of vast sketches work so well, is the film’s fast and furious delivery of sight-gags and quips, which establishes it as a piece that may benefit from repeat screenings in the future, allowing viewers to discover fresh jokes upon each viewing (much like “Shaun Of The Dead” and the rest of the “Cornetto Trilogy”). It’s writing like this that deserves the attention of comedy fans, instead of films such as “Horrible Bosses 2” and “Tammy”. They’re completely different brands of comedy sure, but with “WWDITS” it seems as though the film has actual heart and energy throughout, with a goal to entertain and not to dominate the UK box-office.

Playing hide and seek with Petyr was a dangerous affair...
 Ben Fransham stars in a still from "What We Do In The Shadows".

Without a comical cast, “WWDITS” wouldn’t have worked to its full potential. It’s the comic stamina of Clement, Waititi, Brugh and Gonzalez-Macuer which keeps this piece alive throughout its (unfortunately short) 85 minute running time, and although they’re on camera 95% of the time, the group provide commendable wise-cracking performances, mastering comic timing from their expertly crafted script. Along with the main cast, the film is also complemented by the additions of Jackie van Beek (as Jackie, a house-maid who just wishes to become a vampire) and Rhys Darby (a swear-word hating werewolf named Anton), carrying my favourite line from the entire film: “What are we? Werewolves, not swear-wolves!”

Verdict

Ignore everything else currently showing in your local multiplex (yes, even “Interstellar”) and watch "WWDITS". Put everything else on hold, and if “WWDITS” isn’t showing locally, unearth a cinema which is showing it. It’s the breakout indie-comedy of the last five years, and to miss it would be criminal. Quite simply, it’s comedy gold.

8.5 Stars out of 10

Written by Scott Gentry.

Film/TV Rating Key
1-2 stars out of ten = Awful.
3-4 stars out of ten = Average.
5-6 stars out of ten = Good.
7-8 stars out of ten = Excellent.
9-10 stars out of ten = Amazing.

Trailer

Clip

Turing Complete: The Imitation Game with Benedict Cumberbatch

by Jon Petre

This film was sure to sell, if only for Benedict's Cumberbitches (people, as he prefers they're known). It had a garunteed target audience who would go and see it, if only to satisfy their lust for everyone's favourite (debatable) Sherlock. Now, that could've gone one of two ways; either Cumberbatch could've been a shallow, flabby on-screen performance and made his money regardless--because hey, garunteed watchers--or, as he did, he realized that he has a reputation to uphold. And uphold it he did.

Would I be forgiven in saying that that's quite "cryptic"?
I'll see myself out.

For those of you who don't know, Alan Turing was a genius British mathematician, who cracked the Enigma code at Bletchley Park during WW2 and then went on to create the first digital computers, which were then known as "Turing Machines". He was also gay, and in 1954 he was tried and found guilty of homosexuality. He was kind of a hero, and his story is long overdue to be told. Last year the Queen pardoned him, and there's even a petition to get him on the £10 note. Alan Turing's story deserves to be told, and I'm glad it was told masterfully.

Flashing between codebreaking in 1940, a childhood in 1923 and an interrogation in 1951, The Imitation Game plays around as much with plot and order as much as it doesn't with much else. There's nothing groundbreaking about this film, no grandiose new schemes or devices or allegory; it's quite stereotypical, but that doesn't take from it. The Imitation Game charts Turing's difficult life, explaining the problems of codebreaking and the magnanimous task of defeating Enigma. It's well written, well acted, and well filmed. If not for a few hiccups, this might be a five star review. But.

While Cumberbatch and Knightly were both skillful, we didn't expect any less from them. There were several good performances from secondary characters, including Charles Dance and Rory Kinnear, but many more were...forgettable. But there are many worse films out right now, and to have so many good major characters isn't necessarily something to be scoffed at, though the others were somewhat lacklustre. And I'd be lying if I said I didn't enjoy it. It was a bit...watered-down, feeling like an episode of Downton Abbey, and earlier this year the film garnered controversy for supposedly down-playing Turing's homosexuality, and over-emphasizing his friendship and sham engagement with Joan Clark.

Oooh...look at those dials.

And that's something we have to draw attention to, though; why? Why downplay that? It was how Turing was--it's how many people choose to live their lives--and there's nothing wrong with that. But, I suppose, if more people aren't turned off by the "gayness" (I know some of my more...conservative friends were hesitant to watch because of that. Idiots.) then that means that more people will see the film, and more people will know the truth about Turing. But still. Rather than censorship, I like to think that this was done because, like Turing said, it really didn't matter--who cares what we do and don't like. The man invented the computer.

Overall, it was a good film, and I was able to geek-out sufficiently with my useless(?) trivia on Turing and cryptography, because that's the sort of exciting person I am. But it was genuinely moving, and made for both a good historical thriller, a good mystery and a good drama. My only qualms came in the form of forgettable secondary characters, and a downplaying of who Turing really was.

4/5

Dennis Lehane's screenwriting debut features adequate performances from Tom Hardy and Noomi Rapace, yet James Gandolfini's last role is disheartening.

“The Drop” (15)

Directed by: Michaël R. Roskam.

Starring: Tom Hardy, Noomi Rapace, Elizabeth Rodriguez and James Gandolfini.

Rated: ‘15’ for containing strong language and violence.

Running time: 106 minutes.

Released in UK cinemas from the 14th of November, 2014. 

Undoubtedly an outstanding novelist, Dennis Lehane has the ability to craft complex characters and even more elaborate plots within his stories, attracting the attention of many Hollywood greats, including Martin Scorsesse (he directed an adaptation of “Shutter Island”, starring Leonardo DiCaprio) and Ben Affleck (who directed an adaptation of “Gone, Baby Gone”). Based upon his very own 2009 short-story, "Animal Rescue", Lehane has attempted to construct a thriller which ultimately becomes a B-Movie with blockbuster performances. It’s a disappointing send off for Tony Soprano. 

Bob Saginowski (Hardy, with a poor American accent) is a hardworking bartender who works within his cousin Marv’s (Gandolfini) coveted establishment, which not only serves alcoholic beverages, but also acts as a bank for local gangsters who use the business as a “money drop”, for their illegal takings. It’s a difficult life for Bob, especially when he finds himself at the centre of a robbery, which places him and Marv under scrutiny from the mob, when they lose close to $5000 in the hold-up. The Chechen mafioso’s want their money back, and Bob is committed to retrieving it, but when he befriends Nadia (Rapace) and a pit-bull named Rocco, he is pursued by a mysterious and dangerous man named Eric Deeds, who threatens to turn his life, and the lives of those he loves, upside down. 

To arrive at the cinema expecting a taught and tense film like many of Lehane’s earlier adaptations, you may be thoroughly disappointed. Written by Lehane himself, “The Drop” doesn’t exactly pack the powerful punch which many of his other works achieved, and therefore descends into an often melodramatic piece, with an uninspiring plot, especially due to the amount of intriguing sub-plots which aren’t all tied up towards the end of its running time. Despite all the possible danger incurred by crossing paths with gangsters and convicted killers, the film remains bloodless (except for two short scenes) and fails to engage through it’s often slow sequences shared between Rapace and Hardy, in a will they/won’t they? relationship which ultimately boils down to prosaic drama. 

However, the film is well crafted in regards to its performances from two leads; Hardy (we’ll ignore the accent for a moment) and Rapace manage to create characters which may not always be engaged in the most intelligible of conversations, but their chemistry is what holds it all together. Although Gandolfini should feel right at home within the seedy world of crooks and murderers due to his experience from “The Sopranos”, his performance is ultimately hollow, and remains dreary throughout, proving to be a disappointing end to his extensive and award-nominated filmography.

Verdict

Apart from two adequate performances and some commendable camerawork from Roskam and his DOP Nicolas Karakatsanis, “The Drop” is an unconvincing drama which would work perfectly along with less characters and well developed plot strands, than it already contains. A missed opportunity. 

5 Stars out of 10

Written by Scott Gentry.

Film/TV Rating Key

1-2 stars out of ten = Awful.

3-4 stars out of ten = Average.

5-6 stars out of ten = Good.

7-8 stars out of ten = Excellent.

9-10 stars out of ten = Amazing.

Trailer

Clip

Ciphers, typography and the ultimate good of Google: Mr Penumbra's 24 hour bookstore by Robin Sloan

by Jon Petre

A narrow bookstore next to a strip club in San Francisco. Tall shelves "like a Transylvanian forest". An open book with two hands resting on it. A wizened old Bookman who asks, "What do you seek in these shelves?"

It was hard for me not be excited when I read that, bibliophile that I am. Penumbra is a book about books and the internet, with old school codes and resourceful buddies. One of last year's most promising standalones, Mr Penumbra's 24 hour bookstore was engaging, funny and light, very modern but very interesting like a city break to Bruges.

Clay Jannon is a techie left unemployed by the recession. He gets a night job at a small, strange and dusty bookstore (bookshop) with no clients and no profit, save for the select number of old scholars who browse the aisles at the back, which operates as a tiny library. But the books are encoded, unreadable. Something is afoot.

I'm a book-lover; it'd be hard for me not be at least somewhat one-sided here, unless the writing was truly atrocious. But this was a delight. I usually read two or three books at a time, but for this I  put the rest of my messenger bag library on hold and gave Jannon my full attention, because he deserved it. It wasn't the sort of novel where you can just put it down, oh no; you're missing that bus stop, you're leaving that coffee, because that last page is more important to you. Because the novel is so modern, so contemporary I think it's the sort of thing that anyone could pick up--not to belittle any of you fine folks, but something like Ulysses or The Lord of the Rings can be a bit of a chore for anyone to pick up--and I'm pleased to be reviewing something that's not from the SFF shelf. Penumbra is fresh and original, blending mystery with techie fiction in the same way that it blends the old world of books with the new, open-plan (cough, cough, Google) world of books.

The characters, while not being outstandingly original or particularly deep, were interesting and unique, at least from each other. While there's obviously differences between the book people and the internet people, each group seemed to me a little stereotypical. Sloan's broken no new ground here, but that doesn't mean that what he's got isn't any good. Not by a long shot; just don't expect Tess here. Special mentions go to the characters of Kat and Penumbra himself, who were by far the deepest of the bunch. Everyone in the novel seemed to come with a veneer of shiny optimism, and that got on my nerves a little, if I'm honest. There was no tension between the characters, not really, and it sounds so pessimistic of me but...everyone worked together, and no one got sick of each other. That doesn't happen in real life.

That said, I still enjoyed the novel and I still enjoyed the characters, somewhat lacklustre though they are. It was the plot and Sloan's excellent writing that saved it for me; he can make anything sound beautiful, even cold, heartless machinery and veiny old men/women. It was a pleasure to read if only for the text, and though the novel wasn't revolutionary and it certainly wasn't my favorite thing I've read this year it was still very good.

I had fun reading this, and I hope you will too. Check out Sloan's follow-up prequel, a short novel by the equally-as-intriguing title of Ajax Penumbra 1969, which promises to be much more succinct and just as well written as its 2013 big brother.

Lynn Shelton's latest directorial feature may be clichéd, yet it benefits from the endless charm and energy provided by Keira Knightley and Sam Rockwell.

“Say When” (15)
Directed by: Lynn Shelton.
Starring: Keira Knightley, Chloë Grace Moretz and Sam Rockwell.
Rated: ‘15’ for containing strong language and sex references.
Running time: 99 minutes.
Released in UK cinemas from the 7th of November, 2014. 

Growing up can be particularly tough for some adolescents, just take Charlize Theron’s character from Jason Reitman’s “Young Adult” as an example. But let’s face it, in the future we’ll all want to relive those glorious years, filled with the typical aspects of a teenager’s life. Partying, drinking, gaming, they’ll all most probably appear on that long list. Here, “Say When” (named “Laggies” in the US) attempts to tell a story of facing up to the responsibilities of adulthood, yet whilst not being able to escape the crushing similarities to various other films of this context, it remains engaging due to its cast, led by an appealing performance from Knightley, despite her abhorrent attempt at an American accent. 

At the age of 28, Megan (Knightley) chooses to remain a jobless, happy-go-lucky character who apart from working part-time for her father (Jeff Garlin), doesn’t actually have a financially viable career. Instead Megan just wants to have fun, despite her friends decisions to marry, and a proposal from her long-term boyfriend Anthony (Mark Webber). Deciding to escape the events of a quarter-life crisis, Megan befriends a 16-year old teenager named Annika (Moretz), and decides to stay with her for a week, unbeknown to her father, Craig (Rockwell). But as the week goes by, the secret is uncovered, as Craig discovers Megan sleeping within the house. Despite her intrusion, Megan befriends Craig, and their relationship grows, prompting her to make the biggest decision of her adult life so far: Anthony or Craig? 

To argue that “Say When” is an original piece of comical entertainment would be inaccurate, as it is in fact a comedy we may have seen in other forms many times, but it has been made  surprisingly well, as the film benefits from the pleasing performances of its main leads, especially Knightley and Rockwell who have acquired a palatable chemistry, which bounces off of each other exceptionally well.  After playing Hit Girl (from “Kick Ass”) and a young prostitute from “The Equalizer”, “Say When” offers Moretz the chance to portray a ‘normal’ character for once, and produces a charming performance, which is enjoyable. 

The performances may carry the film throughout, yet without the allure of the cast, “Say When” would prove to be an arduous affair, along with a partly clichéd script and plot. Written by Andrea Seigel, the script is occasionally whimsical and dramatic, fitting the tone of Rockwell’s acting especially well, but Knightley isn’t American, so why cast a British actress? Well, the film reveals her likeable talent throughout, but there are many opportunities to create funnier sequences for the cast, yet Seigel focuses upon the dramatic elements perhaps a little too much. 

Verdict

“Say When” is an easy-going film with a balance of comedy and drama which doesn't always hit the mark, yet the performances of Knightley, Rockwell and Moretz are praiseworthy, managing to salvage this piece from becoming tedious. 

6 Stars out of 10

Written by Scott Gentry

Film/TV Rating Key

1-2 stars out of ten = Awful.

3-4 stars out of ten = Average.

5-6 stars out of ten = Good.

7-8 stars out of ten = Excellent.
9-10 stars out of ten = Amazing.

Trailer

Hilarious and heartfelt, "The Skeleton Twins" is an exceptional indie-flick with astonishing performances from Kristen Wiig and Bill Hader.

“The Skeleton Twins” (15)
Directed by: Craig Johnson.
Starring: Kristen Wiig, Bill Hader, Luke Wilson and Ty Burrell.
Rated: ‘15’ for containing strong language, sex and sex references.
Running time: 93 minutes. 
Released in UK cinemas from the 7th of November, 2014. 

Award-winning, yet perhaps marketed wrongly in relation to the film’s tone, “The Skeleton Twins” opens with one of our main protagonists, Milo (Hader), stripping off, and placing himself within a bathtub of hot water. With his stereo playing at full blast, he proceeds to slit his wrists. Meanwhile, Milo's sister Maggie (Wiig) is about to swallow a handful of pills. They’re both at their wits end. 

What a depressing opening to what I believed to be a charming comedy. In fact, the beginning of “The Skeleton Twins” may be bleak in its nature, yet it’s tone rises, and flourishes into perhaps one of this year’s greatest cinematic achievements. A comedy/drama about what happens when we lose sight of our life. 

So, after both coincidentally attempting to commit suicide on the same day, Milo (Hader) winds up in hospital, and Maggie (Wiig) arrives to visit him. The pair haven’t seen each other in over 10 years, and after various conversations reminiscing their past, the pair realise they’ve never been so far apart than now. Deciding to rekindle their relationship, Maggie invites Milo to stay with her and her overly cheery husband Lance (a hilarious Wilson), back in their hometown, hoping to reengage Milo within his life. But as life so often does, it decides to throw various situations into their daily endeavours, including marital problems and re-visiting a forbidden relationship between Milo and an older man/previous teacher Rich (Burrell), causing the siblings to face their personal problems (there’s a fair few), in order to fix their relationship. 

Don’t allow the gloomy subject of suicide to put you off this ingenious indie-flick, “The Skeleton Twins” is a prime example of how to balance drama and hilarity. For instance, nearing the end of the film Maggie and Milo begin to argue, but Milo’s there to lighten the mood once again, as Hader uses his expert charm and energy to entice her into lip-syncing along to Starship’s power-house hit, “ Nothing's Gonna Stop Us Now” (the soundtrack itself is wonderful) . Expect laughter, in heavy doses. Even after their nifty little number, the pair bounce back into a dramatic mode with such ease, it seems as though they’re naturals. 

Naturals they are, as the cast of this Sundance hit (the film walked away from Sundance 2014 with a screenwriting award) have provided outstanding performances, especially from Wiig and Hader. When the duo aren’t gallivanting around the stage over on “SNL”, the pair allow themselves to develop their acting (and writing, in relation to Wiig) abilities through various feature films, and this piece is no exception, as “The Skeleton Twins” feels particularly realistic and relatable, due to their ability to master the major shifts in tone and because the situations in which the characters find themselves actually take place in many people’s lives. 

Not only is the film anchored by the main performances, but it’s also the supporting cast who not only score some of the most intense and hilarious scenes, but act in ways we haven’t seen before. Burrell and Wilson are the prime candidates here, as Burrell’s troubled character provides him with a small, yet meaty role in which he gladly sinks his teeth into, reflecting the same comical selfishness of his character Steve from “Dawn Of The Dead” (2004). Wilson meanwhile happily portrays the bumbling fool of a husband, who is unsuspecting of his wife in relation to just about everything, but his scenes with Hader often prove to be comic gold. 

Along with the powerful performances from its cast, “The Skeleton Twins” benefits from the well written script by Johnson (“True Adolescents”) and Mark Heyman (“Black Swan”), which revisits the family drama and attempts to steer away from clichéd material, but fails towards the end of the film’s running time, and falls into unfortunate clichéd territory, but the performances manage to salvage a poor ending to such an endearing piece. 

Verdict

Featuring eloquent performances from its prodigious cast, “The Skeleton Twins” is a frequently hysterical drama, which is sure to inspirit it’s audiences throughout its strikingly sincere story.

8.5 Stars out of 10

Written by Scott Gentry.

Film/TV Rating Key

1-2 stars out of ten = Awful.

3-4 stars out of ten = Average.

5-6 stars out of ten = Good.

7-8 stars out of ten = Excellent.
9-10 stars out of ten = Amazing.

Trailer

Clip

Timothy Spall's finest hour; "Mr. Turner" is a fantastic British treat from auteur Mike Leigh.

“Mr. Turner” (12A) 
Directed by: Mike Leigh.
Starring: Timothy Spall, Paul Jesson, Dorothy Atkinson, Marion Bailey, Karl Johnson and Ruth Sheen.
Rated: ‘12A’ for containing moderate sex and sex references.
Running time: 150 minutes.
Released in UK cinemas from the 31st of October, 2014. 

Perhaps best known for his televised exploits, Mike Leigh has a unique talent for directing, and has continued to showcase his British talent throughout his career of film directing, including such films as “Another Year” (2010) and “Happy-Go-Lucky” (2008), two of his most well-received pieces. Now, Leigh has turned his gaze towards the silver screen once again, in “Mr. Turner”, a biopic of one of Britain’s greatest painters, who despite his own personal problems, had a unique gift to share with the world. 

Focussing upon the last quarter-century of Turner’s life, this revealing drama explores the events during his life which affected him most deeply, including the death of his beloved father, the mistreatment of his housekeeper,  and the close relationship which is formed between himself and a landlady who lives by the sea, in Chelsea. But despite his universal acclaim and travels throughout the country, Turner wasn’t exactly an ideal role model, as we are also guided through his sexual exploits, but shown his profound talent, through his membership of the Royal Academy of Arts. 

It may not shy away from the most upsetting of scenes between the people he loved the most, but Leigh’s undeniably ambitious film shows the talent of perhaps Britain’s most revered artist, but also dares to influence or change the public’s perception of him, by  shedding information upon his long bouts of depression and the side of Turner which is ultimately shocking. But it’s here in which the drama all comes together, as the real hero of this certain award-winning piece is Spall, providing the performance of his career.

This is undoubtedly Spall’s finest hour, performing through a wide range of snorts, grunts and occasionally indescribable dialogue, but he carries this entire production firmly upon his shoulders, dealing with the most demanding of scenes perfectly, and ultimately triumphing above many of the best lead performances from cinema this year.

Without the supporting cast however, “Mr. Turner” would have been a spectacular one-man show, but the inclusion of many cast members as Turner’s nearest and dearest, present tender, well paced performances from many of Leigh’s regular contributors to the art of cinema. Specifically the performances of Atkinson, Bailey and Savage, who are all delightfully equipped with the style and accents of Great Britain within the 1800’s. The supporting cast often prove to be the most enticing of characters, specifically the character of  Benjamin Haydon, a financially troubled artist who was eventually brought to the depths of suicide, but is ultimately one of the most humorous characters, yet essentially tragic. 

Along with the film’s wonderful performances, Leigh contributes masterful direction and writing to a film which not only entertains through its rich script, but also its style of guidance in relation to the film’s beautiful shots of wide landscapes which Turner is seen to be painting. The film’s cinematography by Dick Pope is perhaps a  worthy rival to the expert cinematography of Roger Deakins (a fellow Brit), and helps to bring alive the most important paintings and scenes from within Turner’s life with seamless ease. Along with the talented individuals from behind the camera, the score by Gary Yershon helps to reveal the emotions felt by many of the characters, and accompanies various silent scenes perfectly, exacting a melancholic feel to Turner, in his more acceptable state. 

Verdict

One of the year’s true greats, Leigh has directed a character driven masterpiece, featuring captivating performances from Spall and his fellow cast members. It’s a stroke of genius.

8 Stars out of 10

Written by Scott Gentry.

Film/TV Rating Key

1-2 stars out of ten = Awful.

3-4 stars out of ten = Average.

5-6 stars out of ten = Good.

7-8 stars out of ten = Excellent.

9-10 stars out of ten = Amazing.

Trailer

Not relying on generic jump scares, director Jennifer Kent provides real fear, driven by exemplary performances and a horrifying villain. Scott Gentry reviews "The Babadook".

The Babadook (15)
Directed by: Jennifer Kent.
Starring: Essie Davis, Daniel Henshall and Noah Wiseman.
Rated: 15 for containing strong supernatural threat and bloody images.
Running time: 94 minutes.
Released in UK cinemas from the 24th of October, 2014. 

In most cases, Hollywood tempts us all in with the promise of ambitious and arresting horror, yet they often seem to be wrongly luring us into a thieving trap. And, for a year filled with laughable contributions to the horror genre such as "Devil's Due" and "Deliver Us from Evil", I honestly believed that there was little hope for the worn out category. But along came "The Babadook", a low-key horror that creates the crucial themes of tension and psychological fear effortlessly, once again installing the very fear I felt when I first heard the story of "The Boogeyman". 

Seven years on from a car crash which killed her husband, Amelia (Essie Davis) is struggling to cope. Her six-year-old son Samuel (Noah Wieseman) grows restless as the days go by, insisting on his ability to create harmless (they're actually harmful!) weapons out of scrap wood, eventually causing mass mayhem.  On top of a troublesome son, Amelia’s best friend is beginning to worry about her, she is constantly showered in seemingly unwanted affection by her co-worker Robbie (Daniel Henshall), and her job in the local care home proves to be a fairly monotonous career. Just when things couldn't get any worse, a mysterious red book appears on Samuel's bookshelf. Its name is "Mister Babadook". After a frightening bedtime story, Amelia is convinced that there is nothing to fear, but her son isn't. He's seen the Babadook himself, and if the book's frightening words of warning are anything to go by, the pair may be in serious peril. 

Bedtime stories just became a whole lot creepier...
Essie Davis and Noah Wieseman
appear in a still from "The Babadook".

After many years of exposure to the horror genre, audiences now demand jump-scare driven films which contain half the care and attention that was implemented into certain horror classics. But, director Jennifer Kent has managed to direct a tense-filled classic, which sets the scene through the simple idea of less is more. This doesn’t necessarily mean that the film doesn't deliver in its ability to shock or scare, but what it does achieve, is genuine and thought provoking fear. 

One of the film’s strongest features is the choice of not explaining the villain’s intentions, and why it wants to commit these atrocities, until at least the very end of the film. In fact, the audience never discover who Mister Babadook really is, which creates a vivid and cruel sense of the unknown. After all, when we don't understand something, aren't we more afraid of it? 

Co-star Noah Wieseman provides a note-worthy
 performance in "The Babadook".

Apart from the choice of the film’s villain and style, Kent directs this piece masterfully, as if she had directed hundreds of films. As a matter of fact, this is her first feature-length production. Previously, Kent had directed a shorter version of this piece ("Monster", 2006), but reached out to the people of Kickstarter (Zach Braff’s first choice for crowd-funded films), and received enough money to create a feature-length version. Due to the good-will of horror hungry fans, Kent managed to bring her vision to the screen, and her skills behind the camera are perfect. Each shot is arranged wonderfully, presenting the viewer with strange atmospheric sections of film, which contribute to the tight-as-a-drum atmosphere. Constantly angled so the audience aren't particularly sure of the character's safety, the fright is made all the more real when Kent fiendishly decides that the audience should be treated to some eerie shots of the home in darkness, or the book itself.

But it's not just through the filmmaker's desire to deliver harrowing, yet subtle shocks that sells this piece, it's the performance of a relatively unknown actress, Essie Davis. Davis puts across the role of a desperate mother perfectly, mixing dashes of comedy and strong threat splendidly which prove her acting calibre. 

Behind you! Or not...? Essie Davis stars
in a still from "The Babadook".

Throughout various horror's we are always subjected to the male's view of the paranormal, but through the use of a female character with a particularly tragic back-story, the audience is treated to a situation that is relatable, and a welcoming story that may be a supernatural horror, but at least it has a mean bite up its sleeve. Co-star Noah Wieseman is also notably talented, as a troubled child who is multi-layered in his ability to juggle not only emotionally disturbing scenes, but pitch-black comedy, much like her co-star Davis. A natural perhaps? 

Verdict

Smart, tense and unbelievably effective due to the inclusion of horror’s latest and most imaginative ghoul to date, “The Babadook” is a low-key horror that will remain with the most desensitised of viewers for a long, long while. 

8 stars out of 10 

Written by Scott Gentry.

Film/TV Rating Key

1-2 stars out of ten = Awful.

3-4 stars out of ten = Average.

5-6 stars out of ten = Good.

7-8 stars out of ten = Excellent.

9-10 stars out of ten = Amazing.

Trailer