Anna Karenina Review

One of literature’s greatest novels adapted for the screen with nods to Baz Luhrmann, Bertold Brecht and Constantin Stanislavski? It sounds unnatural – the three are not natural bedfellows (especially not Brecht and Stanislavski, as any student of drama can attest to), but they come together to dazzling effect in Joe Wright and Sir Tom Stoppard’s absorbing and exciting version of Leo Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina, which succeeds in its quest to become so much more than just another costume drama.

The 800-900 page novel, depending on which version you have, tells the story of Anna (Keira Knightley), a socialite in her late twenties who is seemingly contentedly married to an intensely moral high-ranking government official, Karenin (Jude Law). Her life, and Russian society as a whole, however, is thrown into chaos when she meets and falls for a dashing young cavalry officer, Count Vronsky (Aaron Taylor-Johnson). Although the novel discusses everything from agricultural processes to balls and hunting parties and has several subplots involving Levin (Domhnall Gleeson), Kitty (Alicia Vikander), Kitty’s sister Dolly (Kelly Macdonald) and her husband Oblonsky (Matthew Macfayden) who ALSO happens to be Anna’s brother, Stoppard’s screenplay does a remarkable job of compressing their various attitudes, actions and relationships into a 130-minute running time.

 
Director Wright, who made his name with period adaptations Pride and Prejudice and Atonement, which both starred Knightley, was obviously wary of treading the same path again, and the decision he made to set almost the entire film in a run-down theatre is a bold, inspired and ironic one, considering that Tolstoy generally hated the theatre. It makes several appearances in the novel as a place where the upper-set gathers to socialise as much as watch the acting or operatic performances, and here it highlights the artificiality (much of the Russian nobility’s manners and conventions were learnt from the French) and disloyalty of their lives, notably in a ball scene where the women silently and audibly judge Anna behind her back for her carrying on with Vronsky – because she “broke the rules”, she must be cast out of her social circles. At other times throughout the film, backdrops rise, people scurry about in the wings and above the stage, extras on a dancefloor freeze in place as Anna and Vronsky whirl through and around them in one of Wright’s signature long takes and, indeed, his direction throughout the first third of the film as the scenes are set is filled with verve and style, tapering off as the plot progresses. However, although there is much to admire, the technique nevertheless has the effect of distancing the viewer and keeping them at arm’s length – perhaps it is its intention that we identify with Levin, the only character we see leaving the theatre to return home to his land and in search of a “real” life.

We focus, then, on the performances, which are as naturalistic as we have come to expect. At the risk of sounding unfair given that most of the character development and changes are described internally rather than externally in the novel, Knightley, tasked with conveying the variety of emotions and conflicts that Anna experiences over its course, does her best but just falls short. Taylor-Johnson, who was fantastic in his breakthrough, Nowhere Boy, as John Lennon, has been rather underwhelming since, and his Vronsky comes across as an arrogant, conceited schoolboy (which is more or less how he comes across in real life) rather than a charming, Rhett Butler-esque cad. When the two need you to be moved, they ultimately fail and, for a film presenting itself as a love story, this is fatal. Law, Macdonald, Vikander, Gleeson and Macfayden are far better, the first four providing levity (with Gleeson’s gradually-blossoming relationship with Vikander far more touching than that between Anna and Vronsky), while Macfayden performs well as the film’s comic relief.

Although Knightley and Taylor-Johnson make for an unconvincing central pair, the skill of the supporting cast coupled with Tom Stoppard’s almost flawless script as well as Joe Wright’s daring and innovative directorial decisions make this a whirlwind, intoxicating adaptation of Anna Karenina.

4/5

The Dark Knight Rises Review

It’s generally acknowledged that the problem with film trilogies is that, while one or two films within them might be classed as great, there’s always at least one part (usually the third: see the Terminator and Godfather series’) which lets the side down. Only the Toy Story, Lord of the Rings and Star Wars trilogies have managed it, so when Christopher Nolan decided to return to Gotham City one last time in The Dark Knight Rises, the challenge he faced to create a third Batman film which would stand up next to (and ideally surpass) Batman Begins, and particularly The Dark Knight, seemed insurmountable to everyone except him.

Gotham has had eight crime-free years and, with the police and the Harvey Dent Act ensuring that things stay that way, there appears to be no need for Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) to don his cape and cowl again. That, and the fact that Batman’s still wanted for Dent’s murder while Bruce Wayne is still mourning the death of Rachel Dawes has turned the billionaire into a Howard Hughes-esque recluse. However, Bane (Tom Hardy), a terrorist trained by the League of Shadows (an organisation whose leader, Ra’s Al Ghul, was Batman’s main nemesis in Batman Begins) whose imposing physique suggests that he could probably give Marvel rival the Hulk a good run for his money, sets his sights on shattering the idyllic peace that the city finds itself in, bringing Batman out of his cave and back onto the streets.

That’s about as much as can be revealed without giving away major spoilers, but it will have to suffice. Thinking about it later, it’s staggering how much Nolan, his brother Jonathan and David Goyer have managed to pack into 165 minutes of film – there are themes that take in everything from personal betrayal to the very real economic crisis, knowing nods to and full representations of elements and plotlines from the comics, inevitable blockbuster action (including a jaw-dropping escape from a plane in mid-air by Bane in the first ten minutes), a good amount of screen-time for everyone involved (and with a cast that includes Anne Hathaway, Michael Caine, Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Marion Cotillard, that takes some doing) and above all a re-examination of plotlines and events from the previous films, bringing things full circle from the trilogy’s first film while suggesting that the story will carry on after its end (although Nolan won’t be aboard – this is definitely it as far as he and probably all of the cast and crew, including director of photography Wally Pfister, are concerned). 

Much of the attention before the film’s release focussed on Bane – as the film’s main villain, Tom Hardy faced the unenviable task of measuring up to Heath Ledger’s chilling, Oscar-winning performance as The Joker in The Dark Knight. It seems unfair to compare them, such was the power and demented energy of The Joker, but Bane is a very different kind of enemy – one capable of physically breaking Batman in half rather than trying to outsmart him. Bane presents himself as a liberator of Gotham, breaking the people free from the shackles they are placed under by the rich and powerful, but in his own way, he causes just as much mayhem and chaos as his predecessor. It’s also worth noting that, bar two or three lines, his voice (which is muffled and distorted due to an anaesthetic-feeding mask that he wears at all times) is perfectly understandable.

While the old stalwarts are as reliable as they have been in the previous two films, two other new characters stand out. Anne Hathaway is something of a revelation as Selina Kyle, a very modern burglar whose night-vision goggles flip up on top of her head to look like the ears of a cat. Playing a character with about six different layers that she can put on display at the flick of her tail, Hathaway ensures that we see every one of those layers, and her dubious morality gives the film much of its intrigue. Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays an entirely new character, one who doesn’t feature in the comics – police officer John Blake. He gives the film a much needed dose of morality and honesty as a foil to Gary Oldman’s jaded Commissioner Gordon, never wavering in his determination to rescue Gotham from the clutches of Bane and the gang of mercenaries he commands.

The Dark Knight Rises is by no means a perfect film. There are a few minor plot-holes, a relatively old-hat “ticking bomb” scenario which doesn’t add a huge amount in the way of tension and the effect Bane has as Gotham’s reckoning and as a match for Batman is severely diminished by the end. However, despite these small gripes, the film is a satisfyingly intellectual, highly emotional and always thrilling trilogy-ender on the most epic of scales. Good luck to the director that Warner Bros hires to resurrect cinema’s most famous cape and cowl – they’re going to need it.

5/5

Prometheus Review

Ridley, Ridley, Ridley. There are some people that reckon you haven’t made a good film since Matchstick Men, but we all watched you struggle through the likes of Kingdom of Heaven, A Good Year and Robin Hood, desperately hoping that you’d rediscover your form and make a film to match up to Blade Runner or, dare I say it, Alien. When news came through that you were directing what was being described as an Alien prequel, many of us whooped for joy. In hindsight, perhaps polite applause mixed with apprehension would have been more appropriate.

The film that was eventually entitled Prometheus is compelling in parts, but far from perfect, and a lot of the blame for this can probably be laid at the doors of writers Jon Spaights (whose only previous screenwriting credit was the space-flop The Darkest Hour) and Damon Lindelof. Together, they managed to riddle an awful script with holes more in number and larger in size than the one the xenomorph made in John Hurt’s chest in 1979 – without giving away any spoilers, anyone that sat through all six ambitious-but-ultimately-pointless seasons of Lost, for which Lindelof was a co-showrunner and writer, will know the kind of thing I mean.

 

It’s all the more agonising because there are hints of the film that Prometheus could have been. The general premise involves Dr Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace), and a clichéd ragtag team of astronauts/scientists comprised of sarky oddballs played by the likes of Idris Elba, Rafe Spall and Sean Harris, visiting a far-off moon which they believe holds some of the answers regarding who created us and where we came from. Charlize Theron is along for the ride as a representative of the Weyland Corporation, which is funding the mission, while the film’s ace in the hole is Michael Fassbender playing android David. With the exception of Rapace and Fassbender, who plays David in an unnervingly calm and serene way (and if there’s a better actor working regularly today, I’d like to see him), every character’s dialogue and general underdevelopment practically scream “tentacle fodder” – there’s one guy who picks up a gun, is told to put it down by Shaw and then we never see him again. What was the point of creating him for that one line? Things, as they often do in space, quickly go wrong and the whole “why are we here/who created us” question is thrown screaming out of the airlock as the film devolves into B-movie ridiculousness, albeit stunningly well-made.

 

That’s one of the things that Prometheus and Ridley Scott can’t be criticised for – it looks amazing, with no expense spared on huge soundstages and CGI effects. H.R. Giger’s original designs are expanded to great effect here by production designer Arthur Max – you can feel the ambition, but the script cannot match it. Although it’s asking far too much for Prometheus to actually answer the questions that humanity has been struggling with since the dawn of time, touches like David questioning his own creation by humans as they struggle with the idea that their own creators might not have been all that they thought they were indicate that the seeds of good ideas were there, but were lost in the mire of explosions and effects that obscured the last third of the film.

 

Ambitious but ultimately hugely flawed, Prometheus is a difficult film to assess. Although it had flashes of brilliance, its plot holes, weak characters and the fact that it didn’t seem to know what film it was trying to be detracted from it – it’ll nevertheless be interesting to see what the inevitable sequel does with the questions left open at its conclusion.

3/5

The Hunger Games Review

On its opening weekend in the United States, The Hunger Games made $155 million. It became the third-best debut of all time (after The Dark Knight and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2) and earned the most that any non-sequel has earned in its first weekend, with hopes that the Lionsgate film could earn up to $400 million domestically, and that’s not counting overseas sales. The terrifying thing is that this film is only the first of four installations in The Hunger Games series.

What makes this feat all the more impressive is that this is a film that hardly breaks new ground. While certain quarters will grumble that this is just a watered-down version of Battle Royale or The Running Man, the fans of those films are by no means the target audience of The Hunger Games. Based on the series of young-adult novels by Suzanne Collins, the film sees America broken up into twelve districts and ruled over by President Snow (Donald Sutherland) who, along with the rich and privileged, is based in the Capitol. Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) volunteers to compete in the Hunger Games, an annual event that sees a male and female between the ages of 12 and 18 chosen from each District as Tributes to battle to the death, when her younger sister Prim is chosen to represent District 12. Along the way she forms relationships with her mentor, a former Games winner (Woody Harrelson), her stylist (Lenny Kravitz) and, most importantly, her fellow District 12 Tribute, Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson). 

This film, the first of the series, looks as though it is going to more than fill the void left by the recent ending of major franchises. The fact that vampires, werewolves, witches, wizards and love triangles (though apparently this last gains greater precedence as the series progresses) are initially replaced with dystopia, brutality, satire and sci-fi means that it appeals to men as well as women. As a standalone film, however, it’s relatively hit-and-miss, though still a good evening’s worth of entertainment. While the central performances and direction are strong, with Lawrence channelling her Oscar-nominated role in Winter’s Bone, the film doesn’t seem able to strike a consistent balance on the subjects of morality and satire, by turns overly heavy-handed and frustratingly light, so many of the deep questions sci-fi often attempts to answer are skimmed over. For instance, the Tributes never really stop to consider their predicaments – with 18-year-old men being told to kill 12-year-old girls, how has civilisation dissolved so quickly? Do they not feel anything any more? In addition, the film’s final moments seem weak and rushed, as though director Gary Ross knows that, now the battle is over, his teenage audience’s attention has already begun to slip.

I have no doubt that The Hunger Games will clean up at various teen choice awards and probably make everyone involved a great deal of money, but it could have been so much more than it ultimately is. Whether the following films get better or worse clearly remains to be seen, but it has a lot more potential than anyone saw in the likes of Twilight, which became a parody of itself within three or four months of it first being released. The challenge for Ross is to find the balance between sci-fi satire and burgeoning romantic storylines – another four-film love triangle melodrama is the last thing anyone needs.

3.5/5