Top Ten of 2012

What a totes cracking cinematic year it has been. I certainly haven’t seen as many films as I had hoped (I never do!), but I had no trouble coming up with enough stellar movies to easily populate the list. In fact, it was quite an effort to stick to ten. Disclaimer, as always: I take no responsibility for movies in this list technically being 2011 films – I see them as they arrive on Kiwi screens. In alphabetical order, my top ten of 2012 are:

The Dark Knight Rises – I agonised for quite some time about whether to include this film or Whedon’s brilliantly entertaining Avengers. In the end, TDKR simply moved me more.

The Hobbit – I risk being deported if I don’t include Sir Peter Jackson’s latest Middle Earth caper in this year’s list. And, furthermore, this is a film made by a cinematic pioneer, with an undying passion for the material. Nuff said.

Into the Abyss – My spiritual hero, Werner Herzog, at his best. A simply wonderful look at an awful subject, this film surprises and angers and saddens and challenges, but manages to do so without preaching.

Looper – A real surprise: compelling and thrilling and smart. I immediately wanted to watch it again. With a masterful performance by Joseph “He’s Everywhere All the Time” Gordon-Levitt.

Martha Marcy May Marlene – By no means an easy watch, this film is outstanding and has remained with me for months. Disturbing and unsettling, with a lead performance that is out of this world.

A Royal Affair – Wonderfully lush, this film was definitely a standout. I laughed, I cried and I learnt a great deal about Danish history.

Searching for Sugar Man – Two documentaries is maybe a hard sell for such a short list, but I simply couldn’t leave out this mysterious and uplifting story of an unknown superstar. I was an instant fan of the film and the music.

Skyfall – It hasn’t pleased everyone, especially those who like their Bond more misogynistic and wise-cracking. But it’s a Bond for the times – failure, emotional depth and all. And I loved it.

Tinker Tailor Solider Spy – It was film of the year ‘thus far’ when I saw it in January and remained a strong contender at the year’s end. Brilliant cast, brilliant story, brilliant atmosphere.

We Need to Talk About Kevin – And finally, my film of the year. An absolutely glorious film – stark, disturbing, beautiful and utterly unforgettable.

Very highly recommended (and so very nearly in the top ten):

The Artist, The Avengers, Chronicle, The Descendants, The Ides of March, Seven Psychopaths, The Way

Disappointment of the year:

Rock of Ages

Quote of the year:

Tony Stark (to Loki) in The Avengers - "There is no throne, there is no version of this where you come out on top. Maybe your army will come, maybe it’s too much for us, but it’s all on you. Because if we can’t protect the Earth, you can be damn sure we’ll avenge it!"

Seven Psychopaths

Colin Farrell, Sam Rockwell, Christopher Walken, Woody Harrelson, Long Nguyen, Tom Waits, Abbie Cornish, Linda Bright Clay

Dir & Scr. Martin McDonagh

Well, what a great film to get you right into the Christmas spirit! I’m kidding. But, you know what, I like to laugh at Christmas and I certainly laughed a lot during Seven Psychopaths … a little too much perhaps. It’s one of those black comedies in which you laugh, and then feel just a little bit of shame for doing so. I really liked this film. It’s not the best of its genre or even the best by McDonagh (of In Bruges fame). But it certainly ticked a lot of boxes. Highly recommend.

Seven Psychopaths is what you might call meta. A movie within a movie, and then some. Marty (Farrell) is a struggling screenwriter, possessed of a movie title – Seven Psychopaths – and not much else. His dog-napping friend, Billy (Rockwell), is desperate to help Marty write his movie and curb his drinking. Alongside this artistic struggle is the story of, well, quite a few others. Including Hans (Walken), Billy’s dog-napping accomplice; Charlie (Harrelson), a crazy gang lord who just wants his dog back; Kaya (Cornish), Marty’s long-suffering girlfriend. By the end of it all, Marty has his film.

McDonagh set his own bar extremely high with the brilliant In Bruges and this film has certainly suffered from constantly being compared to it. Sure, it’s not as good. It meanders in places, especially towards the end. Excuses itself from its shortcomings too easily and is, at times, a little too self-aware. Is perhaps a little too ridiculous in places. McDonagh has enough going on to pack several films. But for all its erratic-ness, there is much to like about Seven Psychopaths. Not least, it’s blooming funny. It’s also quite bloody, so be warned.

Perhaps the movie’s biggest saving grace is its brilliant cast. Here, McDonagh is truly blessed. Farrell is, as ever, very watchable. And set quite against type, as a floundering, cowardly screenwriter. Harrelson is spot on type – violent, crazy and emotionally unstable; he’s a treat to watch. The women don’t have much to do here (something which is humorously noted in the movie itself), but Clay is sublime and Cornish a welcome addition. Waits is creepily wonderful as a former-serial killer just searching for his long lost love. But the real stars of the film are Rockwell and Walken. They simply steal every scene they are in. Rockwell is right in his comfort zone, as wacky and unbalanced Billy. And Walken is… well, he’s Walken. Speaking in that way he does and shining every time he’s on the screen. And he injects most of the heart into the film, which is certainly needed.

It’s not perfect. But its dialogue is razor-sharp and the performances are brilliant. Spending a couple of hours in the company of Walken and Rockwell and Farrell means I can forgive a lot.

P.S. Him Indoors pointed out that it should really be called Seven Sociopaths, for many reasons he outlined on the drive home from the cinema. I’ll let you make your own decision. Personally, I just think psychopath is funnier.

------------------

Hans: An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.

Billy: No, it doesn’t. There’ll be one guy left with one eye. How’s the last blind guy gonna take out the eye of the last guy left?

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen, Richard Armitage, Hugo Weaving, James Nesbitt, Aidan Turner, Dean O’Gorman, Graham McTavish, Andy Serkis, Sylvester McCoy, Cate Blanchett

Dir. Peter Jackson
Scr. Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens & Guillermo del Toro (based on the novel by JRR Tolkien)

This movie is like nothing you have ever seen before. And I’m not being hyperbolic, I promise. I can also say with near certainty that some movie-goers will hate it and complain that it’s not “cinematic” or that it looks “too real”. These people have small minds and need to get out more. Seriously though, this is something new and shiny, much like colour or sound or high definition. It’s innovation; it’s pushing the boat out. And kudos to Jackson for taking us to a new place, whether this new place is universally embraced or not. Let’s not forget also, this is a charming and enchanting story, with larger than life characters and a whole lot of heart. I highly recommend.

I am somewhat embarrassed to say I have never read The Hobbit (or anything by Tolkien for that matter). For those of you who have, you’ll know the story well. Bilbo Baggins (Freeman), a quiet-life-loving hobbit, gets swept along on an adventure with wizard Gandalf the Grey (McKellen) and thirteen displaced dwarves led by warrior Thorin Oakenshield (Armitage). Their kingdom, Erebor, has long been ruled by the evil dragon Smaug and they embark on a quest to reclaim their home. Along the way, friends and foes are encountered, including the strange creature Gollum (Serkis) who will change Bilbo’s life forever.

The book will spawn three movies, fleshed out by other writings and details by Tolkien. And indeed Jackson and his creative team. An Unexpected Journey feels very much like part one of a larger story. Jackson takes time in setting the scene and giving key characters depth and motivation – it’s a nice thing that he has the luxury to do so. The movie, because of this, does seem to take some time to get going. But when it hits its stride, it’s unrelenting, chaotic and cracking. This is also a much brighter and happier Middle Earth than the one we experienced in the Lord of the Rings (LOTR) trilogy. There is less lurking in dark corners and it lacks that constant sense of foreboding. Which I admit I missed a little.

The Hobbit is the first feature to be filmed and projected at 48 frames per second (fps). The standard is 24 fps. In addition, it’s in 3D. I guess if anyone is up to this task, it’s Jackson and his team. There is no question that this combination messes with your mind. How long it takes an audience member to adjust might directly correlate to how much the film is enjoyed and embraced. It’ll be a very personal journey. For me, the adjustment was swift but I was still repeatedly surprised and thrilled by the detail and smoothness and clarity. Although I could have done with a pause button to simply take it all in.

The cast on offer here, much like that in the LOTR trilogy, is stellar and clearly having the time of their lives. If some feel the look of the film is too clinical, they can be rest assured that this cast ably offer the emotional connection the audience needs and craves. First and foremost, Freeman is simply perfection. He was born to play Bilbo. Such enthusiasm and heart and humour and nuance, he is a delight. I connected with him so much more than Elijah Wood’s Frodo. McKellen is back as a younger Gandalf and is brilliant as ever, a little more vulnerable and unsure than his LOTR Gandalf. The gaggle of dwarves is very entertaining, though few are truly fleshed out. Armitage, as their driven and courageous leader Thorin, has the most to do and does it very well. The other standout for me is Serkis, reprising his role as Gollum. Without question, the best scene is the riddle battle between him and Bilbo – absolutely captivating and wonderfully funny. Some have compared McCoy’s wizard Radagast the Brown to Jar Jar Binks, which is awfully unfair.

If you are a Tolkien and LOTR fan, you will not be disappointed by this visit to Middle Earth. The technology on display here may divide audiences and I’m sure the likes of James Cameron are looking on with great interest – if it goes well, who knows how many frames per second Avatar II might be filmed in. Jackson clearly believes in his vision. This particular movie-goer was simply delighted by it all.

------------------------

Gandalf: You’ll have a tale or two to tell when you come back.
Bilbo: You can promise that I will come back?
Gandalf: …. No. And if you do, you will not be the same.

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 2

Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Billy Burke, Peter Facinelli, Ashley Green, Jackson Rathbone, Michael Sheen

Dir. Bill Condon
Scr. Melissa Rosenberg

I have a love/hate relationship with the Twilight movies. Well, maybe ‘love’ is too strong a word. But I was happily entertained by the first instalment, Twilight, and by Eclipse. Both New Moon and Breaking Dawn – Part 1 (BDP1) however, drove me near insane with rage. Which is, in itself, rather entertaining (I like nothing more than yelling at fictional characters). So could Breaking Dawn – Part 2 (BDP2) bring balance to the universe? In short, yes. BDP2 is wonderfully ridiculous and gloriously naff and I had a great time watching it. It also has, without question, the best and biggest fight scene you’re likely to see all year. To those who like to dismiss these films out of hand, you’re missing out on a real treat.

At the end of BDP1, our gloomy protagonist Bella (Stewart) gave birth to her miracle child, died while doing so and was “saved” by her vampire hubby Edward Cullen (Pattinson). So, finally, hurrah, everyone is a vampire. Except, of course, for werewolf Jacob (Lautner) who is nonetheless stuck with the Cullens because he “imprints” on Bella and Edward’s daughter, Renesmee. It’s not all happy families however, and once again the Volturi – the most powerful clan who enforce the laws of all things vampiric – are after the Cullens and their new strange half-breed child.

I haven’t read the books on which this series of films is based, but I’m told that this last instalment posed the most problems for filmmakers and fans alike. In other words, nothing much happens in the book. A lot of standing around and talking and coming to sensible agreements about thorny issues. Yawn. I think without really annoying the fans too much, Condon and Rosenberg have managed to let us have our cake and eat it too. In a glorious, ripping-heads-off sort of way.

The special effects are, as always, a tad awful. And I’ve learned to live with that. But nothing quite prepared me for the horror that is baby Renesmee. I understand they had to make her do things they couldn’t possibly get a real baby to do, but did she have to be so utterly unsettling? It was the frightening element of the movie.

The performances in BDP2 are largely more of the same. Although, I have to admit, this is the first time I actually didn’t mind Bella. Stewart is finally able to portray a strong and formidable leading lady, rather than one who largely mopes about. Pattinson was also a bit more animated and engaging in this instalment. Lautner continues to be the weakest link. Along with every non-Cullen/non-Volturi vampire on offer (and there were quite a number to choose from), who were all utterly ridiculous stereotypes. It’s great to see Bella’s dad Charlie (Burke) back and Burke gives a lovely performance, as always. The real highlight though, without any doubt, is the return of Michael Sheen as Aro, the Volturi leader. He captivates every time he appears on screen. And that very special laugh was the best bit of the whole movie and worth the price of admission alone.

Critics love to hate all things Twilight. If you don’t mind me plagiarising for a moment, I completely agree with the oracle Mark Kermode, who said recently: "the sight of stuffy, bespectacled greying men berating films aimed primarily at teenage girls is as farcical as it is depressing." I like to laugh at Twilight as much as the next person, but I can’t deny that I have a soft spot for the whole weird and wonderful and ever-so-slightly-camp Twilight universe. And if you take it for what it is, BDP2 is an entertaining film.

------------------------

Jacob: Lot of red eyes around here …

Skyfall

Daniel Craig, Judi Dench, Javier Bardem, Ralph Fiennes, Naomie Harris, Albert Finney, Ben Whishaw

Dir. Sam Mendes
Scr. Neal Purvis, Robert Wade & John Logan

After the disappointing Quantum of Solace, fans have been holding their collective breath, hoping that Bond can be restored to the wonderful grittiness that was Casino Royale. Well, everyone can finally exhale – Mendes has delivered not only the best Daniel Craig Bond, but the best Bond outing …. (wait for it) …. ever. Well, maybe that’s overstating it, but not by much. Skyfall is not just a great Bond film, but a great action film, period – more than a sum of its Bond-ish parts, Skyfall walks a fine line and walks it well.

As is tradition, from the very opening scene, Skyfall drops us right in the middle of the action. Bond (Craig) is hot on the heels of a stolen list of undercover British agents, when he is shot and presumed dead. Of course, he isn’t dead and resurfaces when M (Dench) needs him most – MI6 is under attack, from an unknown enemy and from inside the corridors of political power. Bond is tasked with finding the list and restoring order to the universe.

It’s a pretty simple story, which is somewhat of a relief. The rule of thumb seems to be the more convoluted a Bond plot, the more awful the film. In Skyfall, the actions of a madman (Bardem) are driven by that most wonderful and visceral of motivations: revenge. And for Bond and M, this is a story of redemption and resurrection. This allows Mendes and his cast to delve, to reach down deep, and bring to the screen the most emotionally honest Bond to date. Sure, you don’t necessarily want every Bond film to be Skyfall, but this is a real emotional injection in the arm of a franchise which has certainly suffered from its fair share of two-dimensional characterisation.

Mendes also manages to navigate the fine line between a good film and a good Bond film. Without the knowing, and sometimes humorous, nods to the past, Mendes was in danger of making a film that simply wasn’t Bond. Without making fun, Mendes manages to homage the past and bring it right into the present.

The action on offer here is spot-on. Not too frantic or detached. But retaining a style and finesse that is all Bond. The whizz and bang of the London underground scene made my teeth rattle. I could have lived without all the product placement, and loudly scoffed at one particular moment when the camera lingered a little too long on Bond’s Omega wristwatch. But what’s a little mid-action advertising between friends?

For my money, Skyfall offers some of the best acting in a Bond film ever. Craig has already shown us he is more than cut out for this role and his performance here doesn’t disappoint. Dench is her usual wonderful and slightly cantankerous self. Bardem completes the oddly-Shakespearean trio, with a performance that possibly tops them all. Darkly camp, if there is such a thing, he is perfect. Fiennes is a welcome addition to the cast, giving a restrained and understated performance. Whishaw, as the new Q, is a delight. And Finney, well, I thought he was dead. Turns out, not so much.

I hugely enjoyed this film. I slapped my knee and whooped at one point, quite against my will. And the opening credits were simply the best (but being an Adele fan, I would say that). I highly recommend Skyfall, and not just to Bond fans. This is a fine action film with surprising emotional depth.

--------------------------

M: Dignity! To hell with dignity! I'll retire when my goddamn job is finally done.

Argo

Ben Affleck, Bryan Cranston, John Goodman, Alan Arkin, Victor Garber, Tate Donovan

Dir. Ben Affleck
Scr. Chris Terrio

Critics have piled praise on Argo, heaped it on, up to its eyeballs. I have to admit I was underwhelmed. The film does one thing very well – tension. I felt nearly physically sick from the opening scenes until near the end of the film. It’s uncomfortably tense, which is good. But aside from that … It just was. Not terrible. Just not particularly memorable either. If you have an interest in the era and the events, I imagine you’ll enjoy it, so by all means see it. And if you’re Canadian, see it – it’ll give you warm fuzzies.

Argo is based on true events. In 1979, angry revolutionaries stormed the US Embassy in Tehran and took more than 50 Americans hostage. A group of six escaped and took refuge in the Canadian Ambassador’s residence, holed up for weeks while awaiting some sort of rescue. Enter the CIA and a plan so crazy that it just has to be true. CIA specialist Tony Mendez (Affleck), posing as a movie producer scouting exotic locations for a sci-fi movie called “Argo”, attempts to retrieve his fellow Americans and leave Iran right under the noses of their wannabe captors.

Argo is a ‘film within a film’ film, a classic caper flick. And while there is certainly humour – some of it quite dark, some of it in-jokey – this is a pretty grim film. It’s sobering and, as I said, tense. Interestingly this doesn’t jar against the Hollywood satire elements of the story, although it certainly (on paper) had potential to. And all credit to Terrio and Affleck for this. While it doesn’t jar, it doesn’t always mesh either. It tends to jump around a bit too much not to be distracting.

My biggest problem, however, was that I just didn’t care enough. The onslaught and maintenance of tension didn’t necessarily equate to actually being concerned about whether the diplomats lived or died, were rescued or not. It’s a cold film, which is hardly surprising. But a certain something is lacking that meant not only didn’t I care, but I had also largely forgot about the film hours after seeing it. I accept that I seem to have taken up residence in an extremely lonely minority on this, but it is what it is.

The acting is mixed, though I don’t think it’s fatal to the film. Affleck is just fine as Mendez. He’s never going to set the world alight with his acting prowess, but he’s not awful here. And he has pleasing and era-appropriate facial hair. The actors playing the hidden Americans are largely forgettable, which is unfortunate and certainly problematic. There are some shining lights. Cranston, playing Mendez’s supervisor O’Donnell, is his usual excellent, watchable self. And Arkin and Goodman – the Hollywood connection – are funny and engaging.

Argo seems to be a little confused about what it’s trying to be. Is it a caper? Is it a docudrama? Should it have been funnier? Or less funny? For me, it didn’t gel and it certainly didn’t shine. And that’s seems quite unforgivable for a film with so much crazy plot potential. See it, by all means, I don’t care. I don’t recommend or not recommend. Which is an odd place for me to occupy.

--------------------------

John Chambers: You need somebody who's a somebody to put their name on it. Somebody respectable. With credits. Who you can trust with classified information. Who will produce a fake movie. For free.

Looper

Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Bruce Willis, Emily Blunt, Jeff Daniels, Paul Dano, Noah Segan

Dir & Scr. Rian Johnson

I’m a complete and utter sucker for time travel movies. Often, though, they get so bogged down in explaining themselves, the joy of the whole idea is whittled away. Looper is certainly not without its faults. It’s hugely derivative, full of holes (pretty glaring holes, if you want to see them) and is, at times, unintentionally funny. But, you know what, I had a ball watching this film. Not your run-of-the-mill time travel tale, Looper has humour and thrills and horror and a pleasing amount of heart. The performances are all well above average and, in the case of the two leads (which are, errr, the same lead), stellar. A truly entertaining night out.

In the not-too-distant future, 2074, time travel has been invented and instantly outlawed. Offing people in this particular future is not an easy task, so the mob uses time travel to covertly send people back in time to be killed and disposed of by “loopers”. Joe (Gordon-Levitt) is a young looper, in a grim 2044, living the high life with the blood money he gets paid. The only way out of the business is to “close your loop” – when the loopers’ older self gets sent back for the younger self to kill and collect a massive pay check. When Joe fails to close his loop, letting Old Joe (Willis) escape, all hell breaks loose – both men are on the run, each trying to protect their own future.

This is a creative, surprising, thrilling film. Without offering up plot spoilers, it takes the audience in unexpected directions – it’s science fiction, sure, but it also has a healthy dose of horror thrown in. This isn’t jarring though – writer/director Johnson handles the action with ease and the story moves along at a pleasing pace. For a movie of just under two hours, it sure felt like he managed to get a lot in. Although we do get some Looper Universe 101 at the beginning, Johnson (to his credit) doesn’t get bogged down in explanation or revelation.

Sure, there are holes. I won’t go into detail, but let’s just say, time travel mythology isn’t easy. One glaring scene in the middle of the film hangs by a tenuous thread of explanation. And the whole second half of the film – where the two Joes exist in the same time, with largely their own memories – defies belief. This will frustrate some viewers, those of the pedantic persuasion. I suspect most will just let it ride. For me, there is an emotional weight to the film (lacking in so many of this genre) which makes its flaws much easier to forgive.

Much of that weight comes from some very fine performances. Gordon-Levitt transformed himself for this role. His appearance is only one part of this – he has Willis’s mannerisms and speech patterns down to a fine art. And it’s a credit to him and a boost to the film. Willis himself is somewhat against type. A not-so-nice man driven by pure selfishness to protect his future. We’re so used to rooting for Willis in movies; it’s refreshing to be conflicted. Willis also brings a lot of the emotional highlights. When he first does the particular thing that he thinks he has to do (sorry, vague I know, but it’s for your own good), his reaction is gut-wrenching and almost had me in tears. The conversation in the diner between the two Joes is a particular highlight for both actors. Blunt is, as always, wonderful. Tortured but utterly strong. Dano’s appearance is brilliant but all too brief as Joe’s fellow looper, Seth. And Daniels, as mob kingpin Abe, is delightful, with some of the best dialogue at his disposal.

This highly-stylised science fiction/horror/action film manages both depth and heart. Quite a feat. It’s compelling, entertaining and exciting. Highly recommended for anyone who likes the genre and recommend even for those who don’t.

---------------------

Abe: This time travel crap just fries your brain like an egg …