Change Your Image
info-5342
Reviews
Rudderless (2014)
... a delicate tale about loss and the often very bumpy road to healing.
We've all experienced it... we see a good film but there are a couple of elements that seem out of place, or just kinda clunky in an otherwise very cogent effort... and there we are cheering it on... be great, we want you to be great... oh, don't do the obvious thing... don't go pedestrian on me! What could have been a four star movie we subconsciously demote. In the case of Rudderless, it teeters on the brink of a fall quite a few times, but in those moments when it finds its direction and steers straight, it shines brilliantly.
Actor William H. Macy - has been entertaining us for decades in films like - Fargo, Pleasantville, Mystery Men and the US copy of the British TV series Shameless, very often providing a lift to an otherwise under performing movie. Here his role is small but he takes on a bigger task - lending a hand in polishing the script and directing the film.
And there's a lot of responsibility on on his shoulders with this delicate tale about loss and the often very bumpy road to healing.
Billy Crudup plays Sam, an advertising suit who clearly makes a lot of money helping other people in suits sell things to people who probably can't afford suits.
He arranges to meet his amateur song writing College Student son to celebrate a big dollar deal but the son doesn't arrive.
Dad's a bit annoyed but then discovers why Junior was a no show. The reason? A mass shooting on a College Campus.
Cue Sam's not coping and "downward spiraling life montage" with too much drinking and kitchen sink full of dirty dishes... you get the idea... leads to Sam dropping out and living on a boat, not wearing suits and significantly lowering his personal grooming standards.
To this point the film has felt pretty ordinary, in fact a tad clichéd, but Sam's rudderless existence is lifted out of tele movie of the week territory and into a very respectable, thoughtful, mid-shelf indi space.
They say in classic story telling the hero has to reach his lowest point to be able to change... and the catalyst for Sam's change comes in the form of a box of demo recordings - songs made by his son.
Sam begins playing some songs at a local bar's "open mic night" where he is spotted by a quiet young man, Quentin, played by Anton Yelchin. Quentin suggests Sam expands his solo act to a duo... and then even a little more. Why? He sees great value in the songs Sam is performing.
I've read some comments that suggest Rudderless looses it's direction in the middle act but I disagree entirely - I find this middle act of the film the most engaging... And the most real... from the point Sam and Quentin meet I'm on a journey of discovery, totally in the moment, WITH these guys, transcending the earlier part of the film where I was just sort of passively observing and being fed the set-up.
The developing relationship between the emotionally scattered Sam and the introspective Quentin is beautifully played. Yelchin, in particular, is an delight and we begin to see Crudup come into his stride as a caring side of Sam emerges and Quentin becomes, at times, a sort of surrogate son to Sam.
The original songs are great (I had the soundtrack on my i-pod playing on loop for two weeks!). Tuneful with intelligent lyrics that cleverly relate to the developing character relationships... There are even a few hints about a big secret in the plot that you likely won't pick up on a first viewing, and that's fine, just go along for the ride, but a second time around you might spot the Easter eggs in the song lyrics.
Just to clarify, it's not a musical where the characters spontaneously burst into song to express their thoughts and feelings, the songs are what the band performs, but having this additional layer of comment and insight, via the lyrics, gives the music a real purpose, operating on two levels.
The fact that the band really are the guys you see on screen - that's them playing and singing - is a huge plus. I liked the music so much I wanted to find out where they were playing their next gig and get a prime spot in the mosh pit! Now, I did mention there were bumpy bits that, to me, diminished a potentially great film...
=== SPOILERS AHEAD ===
My main disappointment is the character played by Selena Gomez. She pops up providing an information dump then disappears until her next scheduled information dump. I wanted to see the character integrated into the film rather than just appearing like the Ghost of Christmas Past to be an annoyance to Sam.
The big "ooh ahh" reveal moment regarding the Son, is it all trick-or treat-a-bility and a little ingenuine? To be debated by those who have seen the film.
Laurence Fishburne's character, the music shop owner, feels like a clumsy convenience for some green guitar plot developments that feel often perfunctory and mechanical.
Then there's the ending, the, "Lets wrap it all up in a visual montage where everyone gets what they want"... I was thinking, "No, don't go there! This film is potentially much, much, better than a pat ending wrapped up in a cheesy bow!" but you know what? It works really, really well and it's not an avalanche of cheap sentiment at all.
By the end has Sam found his salvation through truth and music? How many steps closer is he to finding his very personal Nirvana?
Frequently Asked Questions About Time Travel (2009)
One of the 10 best cinematic chronology crunchers ever made.
Yes, I understand a lot of people just can't go there - science fiction films... or SF (which can also stand for Speculative Fiction) and one step further - SF films about time travel - has many more people racing for the nearest exit, but here's one so ingenious I'm putting it up there on the top shelf as one of the 10 best cinematic chronology crunchers ever made.
When F-A-Q-A-T-T was released in its native UK it was promoted with a very Brit-centric proclamation, "It's Doctor Who meets Shaun of the Dead", and that's not invalid except I don't recall the good Doctor ever starting an adventure in a pub with three pints of stiff stout under his belt.
Chris O'Dowd as Ray, Dean Lennox-Kelly as Pete and Mark Wooton as Toby are the pragmatist, the cynic and the dreamer. We collect a few hints regarding their common aspirations - escape their dead end jobs, become famous, rich and get laid but let's face it in their rather sedate time stream none of the above is gonna be happening.
So how is it these larger lads end up in a rift that threatens the very fabric of time and space itself, in the process becoming so famous they have fans who hold look-alike parties in their honor! And no, I'm not trying to up sell - that really happens... in the future... and they don't even have to leave the pub to find out about it.
You're thinking, "Oh, that's a cheap way to do a movie, build just one set - a shabby pub interior - all stock standard bits and bobs and there's the art direction budget cut in half, right?" Well, yes, but the fact that the location of the story is so constrained, our heroes firmly rooted in one place, it becomes almost impossible for these imagineers to navigate away from the inevitable consequences when they ....
OK, OK no Spoilers! Not in this time stream.
Let's just say it's delightful to see how the long argued paradoxes of time travel theory become intrinsic to the action, and new complexities are built on the shoulders of other complexities... like Cassie, a time traveling plumber... of sorts... with self confidence issues delightfully played by Anna Faris. She arrives just at the right moment to repair a leak in time and there we are, 30 minutes into the film and everything is fixed and it looks like Ray might even get laid! As if! The boy's hopelessly under exercised hormones and a string of questionable choices result in even more temporal turmoils... and thanks to that we, the audience, have lots more fun! Now, most time travel, or time manipulation movies, generally suck at the timey-wimey bits... really... do not get me started on "Looper" or "Source Code" - movies that relegate the clock conundrums to second or third plot place behind lots of scenes involving good guy / bad guy chasing games... you can throw Terminator in there as well.
There are of course exceptions - The "Back to the Future" movies, especially the second film, where the impact of future on past IS the driver of the plot and the challenges for the lead characters come from the impact of alternate futures and pasts on each other.
F-A-Q-A-T-T truly man's up to the task and exuberantly throws itself into the mucky stuff of Grandfather and Chaos paradoxes and the really big issue, "Why you should absolutely not have sex with anyone while time traveling!" For once, an SF film created by people who clearly understand the finer points of genre with which they are working.
The script is a little fire cracker, a slow burner to start but then exploding into a life of its own. There's a great idea that starts playing with time before we're really even thrust into it and that's to have Ray tell of an experience in flash back, in the middle of what has, to that point, been a chronologically ordered plot - it works, it works very very well and is not at all confusing.
These playful story telling techniques makes for some internal treats relating to other time travel films... So, thank you writer Jamie Mathieson and director Gareth Carrivick for not treating your audience as if they are mentally defective or incapable of processing the paradoxes and thank you also for being creative enough to do this all with great wit and some really sharp dialogue.
High five to the three lead actors, especially Chris O'Dowd who's comic timing and recurring foot in mouth exchanges with Anna Faris prove he's one of the best.
And Dean Lennox Kelly's embracing of "Total Eclipse of the Heart" proves that even the manliest of men really do have a pop diva inside them wanting to get out! The way the joke is played once and then revisited just doubles the fun.
So why and how did F-A-Q-A-T-T fall between the cracks of public attention? Well, the reviews were a little mixed... OK they were unkind.... with observations like "mildly diverting" and "feels like a stretched out TV pilot..." wow, thanks for killing the British film industry there guys... like those comments are gonna make anyone line up at the nearest multiplex box office.
So, track down a copy and take note - it's one of those films that has more clues after all the thank yous to dolly grips, best boys and honey wagon drivers have rolled up the screen...
Yes, there's more movie after the movie!
Three Blind Mice (2008)
...a brave little film. Its rawness and honesty show a real freshness and spirit.
There's a certain sub genre of film drama that sits somewhere between the conventional scripted narrative and an observational documentary. A sort of flirtatious experiment with layers of realism, hand held cameras and a very loose approach to what feels like a lot of semi improvised dialogue.
The question inevitably, on everyone's mind, "does it work or does it collapse under its own alternative cleverness?"
Scenes play out in almost teal time and dialogue flows, stops, does a few twists and turns as it tends to in real conversations between people, not in the short hand of movie dialogue.
The question inevitably, on everyone's mind, "does it work or does it collapse under its own alternative cleverness?"
We meet three young seaman on the town for a spree without a single sighting of Gene Kelly - it's the classic set up of one last night of innocence and shenanigans before being shipped off to a war zone in the cold light of day.
Director / Writer / Actor, Matthew Newton in a trifecta of effort plays high spirited and repeatedly reckless Harry; Toby Schmitz as the contemplative and responsible Dean; and Ewen Leslie as the somewhat lost lamb Sam.
In the confines of a rather bland hotel room, in semi whispers, Dean and Harry are treading on egg shells concerning something that has happened to Sam... and the teasing out of what it is and why it has happened is beautifully infused into the developing story line.
Now, the extent of naturalistic, real time conversation isn't everyone's cup of tea... a five minute exchange between two characters takes five minutes to play out... and by TV soap opera standards, with their 90 second scenes, this will feel as slow as molasses in January, but it has a function - the protracted time scale allows the actors to really inhabit their character and for us, as an audience, to absorb nuances that otherwise would slip by unnoticed when playing a scene in some contrived short hand.
That said, there are some scenes that might have fared better with some heavy handed pruning at the film editing stage. In particular a card game featuring Newton, Schmitz, Alex Dimitrades, Marcus Graham and Clayton Watson.
While the actors I'm sure were having a wonderful time reaching to the very core of their "he man" bravado, it goes on so long that it starts to feel like an acting improvisation class rather than an integral part of the developing problems for our heroes. I'm not saying it has NO function, but in terms of screen time compared to the payload it delivers, it feels rather disproportionate...
In another sequence, Barry Otto and Heather Mitchell as Dean's prospective in-laws, play out a painful bickering, drunken aversion of all the reality about them -- Again, fascinating character stuff but ultimately, like the card game, is it helping to drive the plot and impact our main characters?
So filming is over. It's eight weeks later, here we are in the editing room and it's time to look at what's in front of us, objectively, and ask that very important question, repeatedly... "Would the audience miss that moment or that moment, if the scene was half the length? Would cutting it down that much actually make the intent of the scene more concentrated and effective in communicating it's intention? More isn't always more... discuss.
While there are those somewhat bloated legatos scenes, there are also tighter, leaner and more focused moments that really demand our attention.
Sam's visit to his Mother and Grandfather is a multi layered glimpse into not just Sam's background but the expectations of Grandad - Bud Tingwell in his last film appearance - and Jacki Weaver in a fascinating and multidimensional characterisation.
Her conflicting disappointment, fear, criticism and love for her son are barely fleeting hints of a very rich and detailed back story. And Tina Bursill, just perfect, as a tired prostitute who, in just a few lines of dialogue, sums up an entire life.
In an Interview with Stuart O'Connor of The Guardian, Newton has said of the film, "I guess I also wanted to show what young men should be doing with their evenings as opposed to going and getting killed or having to kill someone else - making mistakes, getting in trouble, meeting girls, playing cards, trying to figure out what it is to be a man."
The themes of loyalty, commitment, honesty and the abuse of power are all knocked squarely and firmly into their respective pockets... with a surprise twist in the final moments surrounding Sam and Harry's personal decisions. This is no gimmicky twist - not at all - it that feels absolutely right given what they have been through over the course of the evening.
Despite some significant film festival wins, the release of the film in its native Australia, and beyond, was very limited and it was difficult to track it down on DVD six years later.
Three Blind Mice deserved better. It's a brave little film - its rawness and honesty show a real freshness and spirit - Newton and his cast, they really do deliver.