Showing posts with label Daniel Radcliffe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Daniel Radcliffe. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Capsules: the ghost, the bear, the MMA champ



James Watkins’s The Woman in Black is an old fashioned ghost story unconcerned with the post-adolescent thirst for bloody carnage, putting atmosphere above gore and playing with tragedy rather than troublesome suburban poltergeists. Daniel Radcliffe carries most of the film alone as a young lawyer, Arthur, recently widowed, who treks to a remote part of the English country to settle the affairs of an estate. But he’s not alone in the old deserted mansion where no-one else is willing to set foot, and how is it that so many children have died in the nearby village? This is a horror for audiences who understand horror to be about tragedy coated with the supernatural, not drowned in blood. As a remake of a Hammer studios classic, Watkins succeeds in evoking a sense of dread and grave inevitability as the young lawyer, ably performed by post-Potter Radcliffe, comes to fear for his own safety. It’s an atmospheric, quiet, satisfying horror.

Here we have another film that seems more concerned with other films than with telling a story itself. Instead of telling an involving and funny story, Ted steadies itself upon other movies, propped up on pop references and cues to make things funny when there’s very little happening on screen. I’d rather watch Flash Gordon again than watch Ted again. Between the Saturday Night Fever reference (or rather an Airplane! reference) and many other winks at better films, the film plods along with an odd and misguided stalking subplot thrown in featuring Giovanni Ribisi. I’ve seen Ted described as transgressive and subversive, but the film is the same-old-same-old story about friendship that we’ve seen a hundred times, even if the titular character is a marijuana smoking foul mouthed teddy bear. Indeed, contemporary American cinema’s celebration of the persistence of adolescence has become quite tedious, and despite a few genuine laughs – including an inspired jab at a Twilight cast member – and excellent visual effects, Ted is neither refreshing not intelligent comedy entertainment. Creator Seth McFarlane’s television work, mainly Family Guy, provide better material.


Haywire, Steven Soderbergh’s first foray into mainstream action (accepting that his Oceans movies are lightweight capers, not action films) is a sombre, yellow-hued affair with MMA star Gina Carano starring as Mallory Kane, an employee of a company contracted by the United States government to address sensitive international situations by way of assassination. While Carano is clearly not a strong actor, her physicality more than makes up for often clunky line delivery. Haywire is a female driven Bourne but stripped of spectacle and with Soderbergh’s trademark restrained editing. As a result, the combat scenes are exciting without being exaggerated or indulgent. Haywire tells a simple story but in Soderbergh’s hands it becomes (momentarily) cerebral. The film features Ewan MacGregor, Michael Fassbender, Channing Tatum, Antonio Banderas, Michael Douglas and Bill Paxton. Fans of The Expendables 2 need not apply.

Monday, April 25, 2011

Boy wizard faces first part of final challenge

Harry and Hermione contemplate the future in "Deathly Hallows, Part I"
(Image: Cinenthusiast)
I cannot emphasise enough my relief that the latest and penultimate "Harry Potter" installment, "Deathly Hallows, Part I", is a resounding success. Instead of chopping the book up and discarding key scenes and events, director David Yates and company opted to rather tell as much of the full story as possible and to split the final film into two parts. I concede that the economic imperative at play was a certain factor in this decision, but at least it's a decision to the benefit of the franchise's fans, among whom I count myself.

As an avowed fan who suffered disappointment with the abbreviated "Order of the Phoenix" and felt only marginal improvement with "Half Blood Prince", I am relieved that "Deathly Hallows, Part I" is the best boy wizard adventure since Cuaron's near definitive "Prisoner of Azkaban" years ago. It's as if Yates had taken the best storytelling techniques of the previous titles and added it all to "Deathly Hallows". Consider the breathtaking sequence where Hermione reads a classic story from "The Tales of Beedle the Bard", and, in a possible nod to Del Toro, the whole story comes to life in vividly stylised animation.  

It's become a bit of a cliche to call serious-minded adventure and fantasy movies "dark", but it's an ideal and accurate adjective for this film on all levels. The characters have matured a lot, which provides their trials with greater emotional depth, and as the events in the story took a turn for the serious, the film became visually darker and scarier. "Deathly Hallows, Part I" is the darkest Potter yet, and not a bit of it feels forced. If you've read this far, you don't really need me to tell you what happens in this seventh film. Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), assisted by his longtime friends Hermione (Emma Watson) and Ron (Rupert Grint) are up against Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes), who is gradually taking control of the wizarding world. They face numerous challenges, not least the dangers to loved ones.

The film's tagline is "Nowhere is Safe", and indeed, there is but a single throwaway reference to Hogwarts. Gone are the hallways and corridors, the shifting stairways and vocal paintings; the absence of the comforts of the familiar are felt by the characters and the viewers. The air of innocence and excitement established by Chris Columbus in the first two films has made way for tangible threat and danger. To amplify the general feeling of distress that pervades the film, "Deathly Hallows, Part I" is book-ended by notions of death and demise.

"Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part I" feels much shorter than its 140 minutes, and I'd love to eventually watch it back to back with "Part II". The boy may have lived, but triumph will not follow without sacrifice.