Film Brief: "House At The End Of The Street"

"HOUSE AT THE END OF THE STREET"

DIRECTOR: Mark Tonderai
WRITER: David Loucka
STORY: Jonathan Mostow

While suspenseful in places (there's at least one or two decent Jumps), it is essentially Psycho for Twilight fans that are too young to watch any of the Saw movies.  The handling of certain scenes may suggest that director Tonderai may be a safe hands for a Saw revival but if you want something better than this, I'd recommend his previous film (also his feature debut), Hush.  Written by David Loucka, who wrote the ill-reputed (i.e. I haven't watched it yet) Dream House.

Film Thoughts: "Ted" (2012)

Ted (2012)

*CONTAINS SPOILERS*

Director: Seth MacFarlane
Screenwriters: Seth MacFarlane, Alec Sulkin, Wellesley Wild
Story: Seth MacFarlane

You might have seen the trailer in which a young boy wishes that this teddy bear could come to life and it does, before cutting to years later in which they have both grown up.  That essentially sums up the premise of this live-action (with added CGI of course) feature film from the writers of animated sitcom Family Guy.  

Ted (2012) can be seen as a comedic answer to the question of "What if Christopher Robin and Winnie-the-Pooh grew up together?"  Of course, the idea of toys being alive (or coming to life) has been seen in Pinocchio (1940) and the Toy Story trilogy (1995, 1999, 2010).  Also the idea of living with a bear has been seen in the books and TV shows of Paddington Bear (and a feature film is in development).  To a lesser extent, there is a similarity with the opening scenes of The Muppets reboot (2011) in which the brother of Jason Segel's character is a Muppet.

The film opens in 1985 and thus welcomes comparisons with family fantasy films of that era - a photograph depicts Ted dressed as E.T. for example - and is narrated by Patrick Stewart, one of the handful of MacFarlane alumni to act in this film. In fact, the 80s has its culture plundered for most of the references in the modern day scenes, with particular focus on the 1980 version of Flash Gordon, which provides an extended cameo for Sam Jones (arguably his small role as a minister at the end would have sufficed).  There is also a Saturday Night Fever (1977) spoof which is so blatantly lifted from Airplane! (1980), that itself could only be an injoke.  Then again, there is I think a gag in which it's implied that John's ringtone for an incoming call from Lori is the Darth Vader theme from The Empire Strikes Back (1980) - a gag I believe was already coined by YouTube users.

As well as the MacFarlane alumni, there are other touches (besides flashbacks) such as the destruction of a motel room, which recalls Stewie beating up Brian and the Griffins' epic puking in the living room.

The film is not entirely without amusement though I cannot say I laughed particularly out loud.  It aspires to be offensive and there are at least two decent-ish gross out gags (the "teddy sex" being the superior one over the liquid soap cumshots, which is perhaps spoiled by Ted suggesting out loud that he may have gone to far in making lewd gestures at a female colleague; a similar moment is when MacFarlane actually references himself by drawing comparisons between Ted's voice and Peter Griffin's). 

There are some other redeeming features: it's also nice to hear Patrick Stewart speaking; Mila Kunis is in it (though Friends With Benefits is arguably a funnier film); Ted's "hooker" movie night-in looks genuinely fun; the Flash Gordon visual gags provide brief amusement but the joke as a whole is self-indulgent and lengthy; Ryan Reynold's wordless cameo.  Perhaps most importantly, the scene where John tries to repair a damaged relationship with Lori also resonated in how he didn't want it to end on a bad note and wanted to stay friends.  

My Top 5 Films of the Year So Far

Film critic Mark Kermode has listed his top 5 films of the year so far and here are mine (out of the few I've seen this year due to my financial state):

FAVOURITE: The Muppets

AND THE REST (A-Z):
The Descendants
Haywire
Prometheus
Shame

I'd also like to make an HONORABLE MENTION for BBC4's cinematic TV film, We'll Take Manhattan, written and directed by John McKay and starring Karen Gillan. Both are working on the upcoming Not Another Happy Ending.

THE MUPPETS (2011)

DIRECTOR: James Bobin
SCREENWRITERS: Jason Segel, Nicholas Stoller, Jim Henson (Characters)

First, a confession: I have seen more episodes of "Muppets Tonight" than "The Muppet Show" (in the latter, namely the "best-ofs", and the "Star Wars" and "Elton John" episodes). A childhood favourite movie of mine was "Muppet Treasure Island" (1996) and it may still be my "favourite" of the Muppet films though in a more critical mindset, my vote for "best" might be "The Great Muppet Caper" (1981) though the original "The Muppet Movie" (1979) - the one I got round to watching last (during my first year at university) - is arguably the most cinematic. It is difficult to rank them in order, particularly when it comes to picking the (whisper it) *weakest*. "The Muppets Take Manhattan" (1984) is the one that takes itself most seriously although the wedding finale manages to bring a lump to the throat; "Muppets from Space" has less songs but still has some amusement and there is the moment where it's possible that Gonzo might be leaving.

Recently re-viewing of the previous films, I figured that the better ones are those in which it is clear that the Muppets are putting on a production (in which case "Muppets from Space" is probably the "weakest" in that there is no context for the Muppets all living together - Kermit is on vacation: what was his job? - though I believe the house in question is briefly alluded to in "The Muppets"). The first three make up a kind of trilogy which began with a kind-of retelling of the Muppet's origins (a more literal interpretation would see them travelling by map to London), then a fun jaunt to Great Britain to solve a jewel robbery, before portraying a group of students wanting to take to Broadway before having to disband and eventually reuniting for Kermit and Piggy's possibly real wedding (if the suggestions on IMDB forums are true).

Years later, the series was "rebooted" of sorts with literary adaptations of "The Christmas Carol" and "Treasure Island" in the cinema, and "The Wizard of Oz" on television. "The Muppet Christmas Carol" remains a favourite for Christmas viewing besides "It's A Wonderful Life" (and apparently "Elf").

"Muppets From Space" seemed a more literal film though Piggy has a job as a coffee pig despite being in a second-rate variety show (or third-rate, if you're Luke Skywalker) but there was still room for jokes that showed the characters were aware that they were in a film (there was probably room for more songs but the tone was perhaps too serious for breaks into jolly numbers and the music mainly consisted of backing tracks and the actual Muppets singing is saved for last and even then it wasn't the main cast performing it).

I've generally tried to avoid reviews of this film but one I briefly scanned seemed to indicate it was a return to the original movie. I agree in that it's a much simpler, light-hearted bright family film, which takes a similar plot involving the Muppets being rounded up one my one, which is also similar to the final act of "The Muppets Take Manhattan" as here the Muppets have disbanded and our protagonist Walter - who maybe a Muppet himself - starts a campaign that will lead to a telephon revival of the original show, having grown to love it after watched rented videos with his brother, Gary (the adult version played by Jason Segel - incidentally, fans of two paricular contemporary American sitcoms will finally seem them cross over). Walter has discovered that a rich tycoon aims to tear down the Muppet studios for oil (a plot as familiar as last year's live-action "Yogi Bear" movie) and seeks out his hero - and eventual friend - Kermit and is assisted by Gary and his girlfriend Mary ("Enchanted"'s Amy Adams).

While this is a more literal Muppet movie (although there are plenty of knowing injokes), it defintely works, specifically because: I laughed several times; I forgot it was a "Disney" film; I was sort-of won over to Walter; when they started playing the finale song, I tried to figure out where I heard it from and realised they were replaying the OPENING song. And while I might not have had warm fuzzy feelings of nostalgia, I am sure this film will grow on me. It is almost certainly the best family film I have seen in the cinema since "Toy Story 3" (2010) and stands as a beacon of hope in a multiplex filled with Michael Bay's Transformers, Jim Carrey's penguins, and Kevin James' zookeepers.

It is appropriate that it should open in the UK on the same day as the 3D reissue of "Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace". Responsible parents would have a choice between a fun, feelgood family film featuring REAL Muppets or go next door and watch a retro-fitted 3D film in which a Muppet has been replaced by a CGI substitute.

Some may be disappointed that their favourite Muppet might not get enough screentime (Gonzo is far less featured than in previous entries and Rizzo appears at least twice). My slight, minor problem with the film is the possible negative portrayal of rap (music that isn't necessarily to my taste but still...) - the tycoon gets his own(ly) number in the form of a rap song while in Fozzie's tribute band, his earless substitute wears a gold chain.

Generally though (while "Muppet Treasure Island" may be embedded as a favourite), I am wondering on the cusp of tabloid territory as I am tempted to describe this film as "Perfect".

Brief Review: "The Human Centipede (First Sequence)" (2009)

Written and directed by Tom Six

An updated twist on "Frankenstein" in which a German scientist stitches three living humans (rather than dead body parts) together to create a new creature based on the premise. Thrilling and gripping and though ultimately cruel, there is a surprising spark of humanity with one or two tender moments (namely the two female leads hold hands as they endure their predicament). After an uncertain start (who really cares about the quality of acting in a horror movie about eating poo?), Ashley C. Williams and Ashlynn Yennie prove themselves once they are in Dr. Heiter's house and out of the rain and Dieter Laser is very good. The concumption of fecal matter is far less overt than Pasolini's "Salo (Or 120 Days of Sodom"), in which it is served up as a meal. There are a couple of hints at ideas besides the central high-concept, with the idea of the scientist as God (c.f. "Frankenstein", 1931) and the Katsuro, Japanese tourist victim (Akihiro Kitamura) says how what a crazy world we live in, before making a terrible choice.

Short Film Review: Breaking Dawn Part 1

Breaking Dawn Part 1 (aka The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 1)

DIRECTOR: Bill Condon

SCREENWRITER: Melissa Rosenberg (based on the novel by Stephanie Meyer)

While I've previously had something of an interest in Twilight (thanks to some positive reviews from two film critics I like and I ended up thinking the first installment was 'alright'), I had since been doing some catching up with TV's Buffy the Vampire Slayer (I've started on Season 3) and recent re-viewings of the Twilight films on television (thus diminishing the cinematic experience), I found myself getting more critical of them as being dull and sometimes stupid but with some moments of interest. The one problem though with comparing both though (although I am Team Buffy) is that one is a series of 45 minute episodes while the other is a series of 2 hour feature-length cinematic experiences.

However I saw Breaking Dawn Part 1 today and it's quite possibly the most respectable of the series despite some moments of silliness. If Eclipse was the first that resembled a horror film, this goes into steely Rosemary's Baby territory with it's 12A certificate pushed to the limit and the "conclusion" had me thinking there was almost no need for Part 2. Though I have not read all the books I would suggest it is the least "reverent" to the franchise and fanbase (particularly the darkly funny sequence in the end credits), and all the better for it.

As a matter of interest, not only do Twilight vampires not melt in the sunlight (and why does Edward not sparkle in he and Bella's Tracy Island honeymoon, unless it's because he's indoors?), they can also be reflected in a mirror.

POSSIBLE SPOILER

May I also be the first to suggest the next item of Twilight merchandise being an inflatable Bella?

Film Review: Machine Gun Preacher (2011)

MACHINE GUN PREACHER (2011)
Director: Marc Forster
Writer: Jason Keller (Based on the life of Sam Childers)

WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD

Some films I have seen this year that I don’t like have been boring (“The Smurfs Movie”) and often to the point of not caring what was going on (“Anonymous”, “Fast Five”). While “Shark Night 3D” was disappointing and “Bridesmaids”, “Your Highness” and “The Hangover Part II” failed to elicit a laugh most of the time, “Machine Gun Preacher” is a kind of film that while perhaps well made – mostly of the time – it goes down a path that I find troubling.

An opening prologue set in the Sudan in 2003, where a young boy is forced to beat his mother to death.

We then go to Pennsylvania, “a few years earlier” (?) where Sam Childers (Gerard Butler, “300”, “Gamer”, “Law Abiding Citizen”) is released from prison and returns home (after having car sex with his wife Lynn, played by Michelle Monaghan). It turns out Lynn has quit her job as a stripper – much to Sam’s anger – and “found Jesus”. Sam goes on a raid to get some drugs with his junkie buddy Donnie (Michael Shannon) and here we find out how bad a person Sam is: he swears, does drugs, uses a gun, and uses racist language when threatening a black man. When Lynn finds Sam trying to wash some blood off his hands, he asks her to help him. Next thing we know, he’s going to Church (as opposed to Lynn calling the police over his apparent murder or manslaughter) and Sam soon accepts an alter call and is baptised. So far, so “conversion story”.

Sam’s lifestyle changes include working as a construction worker, wearing nicer shirts than his biker get-up (the mullet goes too) and saving Donnie from drugs in a scene showing his withdrawal that recalls the similarly “gritty Christian-themed” film “The Cross and the Switchblade”.

Sam is inspired by a guest speaker to do work in Uganda. When voluntarily visiting a “war zone”, Sam finds children gathering outside to sleep in safety (“night commuters”) and invites them in doors. Back at home, Sam stays up all night and claims to have had a vision from the Lord to build a Church across the street that will “not turn away prostitutes or junkies” – the problem being that there was no evidence that that’s what the Church he attended was doing. They seemed a nice bunch, wearing suits etc. and saying “Amen” to everything. Sam wants to build an orphanage for the children in Uganda and returns there. However during its construction, an attack leaves it destroyed and when he calls Lynn, she tells him to rebuild it.

Sam’s work builds him a reputation as a “white preacher” (never, as the title suggests, a “machine gun preacher”) and his dedication to helping the kids leads him on a path towards obsession (maybe the first clue was building them a play park). It begins to draw him away from his family (his first trip means he has to miss his daughter Paige’s (Madeline Carroll) play, which he has recorded on a camcorder.

On one trip, Sam and the men he’s working with find a large group of children and there are too many to take all of them in their truck so they would have to return for them. But when they do, they find the remaining kids dead and on his return home, Sam seeks out money for a new truck, taking his wife and daughter away from a party when discreetly given only $150 of the $5000 he wants. He given goes down the “dark” path again when he swears at his daughter, who asks him about hiring a limo and he goes berserk when told “You love them black babies more than me!” Leaping to her defence, Donnie is told that he is a “stray dog”. Next thing we know, he’s back on drugs while Sam is (*gasp!*) drinking. It does not end that as he sells his business and looks for money in a safe – Lynn has to tell him their daughter’s date of birth in order to get the combination – in order to pay for the truck.

A possible issue here is whether Sam is doing the “right” thing or whether the film thinks he is. Is he following Jesus, who said that a “man’s enemies will be the members of his own household” or the disciples, who complained that the money bought from the perfume used to anoint Jesus’ feet could have been given to the poor? Or perhaps in particular, Judas – Sam appears to doubt God, perhaps to the point of turning his back. However, Sam seems to find redemption of sorts in the form of a boy he rescued from being a child soldier.

The film ends with a similar situation in which they lack the transport to rescue all the kids and he says they are staying until it comes. We are then told via on-screen texts about the reality of Joseph Koney and the Lord’s Resistance Army and that Sam and Lynn are still together. The credits rolls while documentary footage shows us the real Sam Childers, his family and the kids.

One thing of note is that the real Sam Childers is very much unlike the much more “action movie”- friendly Gerard Butler (who even then seems puppyish compared to, say, Jason Statham. His best role that I have seen him in was probably “300”). Perhaps a documentary on the real Childers would have been more interesting. The last word on the film goes to the real Sam who, defending his use of a gun, asks if your child was kidnapped and help was sent, did it matter HOW they were brought back? And there lies my problem.

It starts off with Childers wanting to help the kids but soon he takes up weaponry in order to do so. There is a scene in which a woman who appears to work in humanitarian aid is confronted by a road block and when offering her hands up, is struck down by the butt of a gun. Promptly Gerard Butler appears with a rocket launcher and gets rid of the bad guys. It is also not entirely clear where Childers stands in his faith by the end. Earlier, during what could be his downward spiral, we hear him preach that God wants wolves, not sheep. One question could be whether Childers’ use of violence is any different from fighting in World Wars, or the Israelites acting under orders from God.

The title “Machine Gun Preacher” suggests a silly religious-themed B-movie (it can be an amusing title, certainly) but with perhaps (from the trailer) what appear to be honourable intentions. Thought-provoking as it is, I am unsure whether I can like or approve of the path Childers takes.

And when the title is onscreen, great emphasis is played on the word “GUN”.