Skip to main content

Archive - M



FEATURING:

Man on Wire
The Matrix
A Matter of Life and Death
Max Payne
McCabe and Mrs Miller
Megamind
Mimic
Mission: Impossible
M:I-2
M:I-3
Modesty Blaise
Mr Brooks
Mr Magorium's Wonder Emporium
The Mummy: The Curse of the Dragon Emperor
Murder by Decree
The Mutant Chronicles

Man on Wire
(2008)

Reviews would have you believe this is the bestest documentary evah. It's not, and the theatricality of it is, in places, quite irritating. But the story can’t help but be fascinating and compelling (although I wanted more about these people, both in terms of who they were before and who they are since) while Michael Nyman's score does the piece enormous favours in terms of polish.

****

The Matrix
(1999)

Undiminished by the shortfall in quality of the sequels, what stands out here is how precise and of-a-piece everything is. The FX work, in particular, is stylised so as to make you more involved in the action, not remove you from it.

*****

A Matter of Life and Death
(1946)

Powell and Pressburger perfection. David Niven is the lead, but Roger Livesey and Marius Goring manage to steal the show. It's a while since I last saw this, but I'd forgotten how confidently it plays with the ambiguity of its premise (the is it/isn't it a fantasy).

*****

Max Payne
(2008)

Crappy computer game adaptation has somnambulant Mark Wahlberg investigating his wife's death, which seems to have drug connections. The cityscapes are like every other CGI-enhanced movie but nothing aside from a Matrix-style slow motion shoot-out in in a lobby sticks in the mind.


*

McCabe and Mrs Miller
(1971)

Altman's anti-Western. His indifference to plot is up there for all to see, but it's also what makes his genre dabblings the most interesting of his films. Beatty's McCabe ends up in hot water because he's isn't really that smart, and Vilmos Zsigmond's photography is stunning.

****

Megamind
(2010)

Not especially hilarious but decently plotted Dreamworks ‘toon. There's not a lot new for anyone familiar with Austin Powers and The Incredibles, but it's far superior to Despicable Me.

***

Mimic
(1997)

This looks great, and Rob Bottin's creatures are superb. But the storyline is very-run-of-the-mill, only enlivened by F Murray Abraham's cameo (an actor who should never have slipped from view) and a few surviving Guillermo Del Toro signatures, mainly because those Weinsteins screwed him over (as they inevitably do everyone, Tarantino aside).

**1/2


Mission: Impossible
(1996)

 De Palma the gives the first film some dazzling flourishes that at times make it an unlikely blockbuster. The script is appropriately convoluted and the whole only really falls down when Cruise does the Cruise charming cheese act.

****

M:I-2

The second is something of a train wreck (like most of John Woo's Hollywood sojourn); there are a couple of neat identity tricks but it's overblown and incoherent.

**

M:I-3

The third is the best of the trio. Abrams is no stylist but he knows how to put together something that's visually coherent and the script piles on the tension. And Philip Seymour Hoffman is wonderful. There should have been more Maggie Q, though.

****

Modesty Blaise
(1966)

Joseph Losey wasn't a very good fit for this, as he fumbles the requisite humour, breezy charm and quirkiness. The result is all rather heavy-handed and strained. 

Monica Vitti's okay but nothing special in the lead, while Terence Stamp and Dirk Bogarde play up their cockney and aristo roles respectively. The only person who completely seems to nail the tone is Clive Revill, who steals every scene he's in as McWhirter. He also dons a fake nose to play a Sheik, however.

**

Mr Brooks
(2007)

A pleasant surprise; okay, the premise is hokey, but William Hurt and Kevin Costner turn in such strong performances as the serial killer and his "conscience" you end up forgiving it a multitude of sins, not least Demi Moore's redundant sub-plot as a millionaire cop. Hurt seems to be in every other film of late, and that's fine by me; he's one of the most entertaining actors around.

***1/2


Mr Magorium's Wonder Emporium
(2007)

Extremely saccharine, and Hoffman's OTT affected performance is irritating rather than charming. But Natalie Portman is gorgeous, the kid manages to essay what should be a really annoying role adequately and Jason Bateman steals the film, somehow making the proceedings feel sincere and heartfelt - when so much else on display screams cynical manipulation.

**1/2

The Mummy: Curse of the Dragon Emperor
(2008)

It's not horrible the way the second one was, but it's utterly inert dramatically and a labour to get through. In it's favour, the cinematography and integration of effects is generally vastly superior to that of Indy 4.

*1/2


Murder By Decree
(1978)

Holmes and Watson chase Jack the Ripper Redux. This is far less Holmesian and far more Ripper conspiracy than A Study in Terror, and while it's always entertaining Bob Clark directs in a rather TV-movieish fashion. 

Great cast, especially Mason as Watson. Plummer's Holmes is very likeable, but he's hampered by a fancy dress party Holmes outfit, wearing his deerstalker everywhere and sporting a rather non-period coiffeur.

***1/2


The Mutant Chronicles
(2008)
Zero budget dreck with a great B/C-list cast including Ron Perlman, Thomas Jane and John Malkovich. Sean Pertwee features and goes the way Sean Pertwee goes in all features. I'd like to be charitable and say that the director has a certain flair, but I'd have to qualify it by saying that he must also be a moron to try something like this with no funds.


*

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

They'll think I've lost control again and put it all down to evolution.

Time Bandits (1981) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam had co-directed previously, and his solo debut had visual flourish on its side, but it was with Time Bandits that Gilliam the auteur was born. The first part of his Trilogy of Imagination, it remains a dazzling work – as well as being one of his most successful – rich in theme and overflowing with ideas while resolutely aimed at a wide (family, if you like) audience. Indeed, most impressive about Time Bandits is that there’s no evidence of self-censoring here, of attempting to make it fit a certain formula, format or palatable template.

Oh, you got me right in the pantaloons, partner.

The Party (1968) (SPOILERS) Blake Edwards’ semi-improvisational reunion with Peter Sellers is now probably best known for – I was going to use an elephant-in-the-room gag, but at least one person already went there – Sellers’ “brown face”. And it isn’t a decision one can really defend, even by citing The Party ’s influence on Bollywood. Satyajit Ray had also reportedly been considering working with Sellers… and then he saw the film. One can only assume he’d missed similar performances in The Millionairess and The Road to Hong Kong ; in the latter case, entirely understandable, if not advisable. Nevertheless, for all the flagrant stereotyping, Sellers’ bungling Hrundi V Bakshi is a very likeable character, and indeed, it’s the piece’s good-natured, soft centre – his fledgling romance with Claudine Longet’s Michele – that sees The Party through in spite of its patchy, hit-and-miss quality.

You must have hopes, wishes, dreams.

Brazil (1985) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam didn’t consider Brazil the embodiment of a totalitarian nightmare it is often labelled as. His 1984½ (one of the film’s Fellini-riffing working titles) was “ the Nineteen Eighty-Four for 1984 ”, in contrast to Michael Anderson’s Nineteen Eighty-Four from 1948. This despite Gilliam famously boasting never to have read the Orwell’s novel: “ The thing that intrigues me about certain books is that you know them even though you’ve never read them. I guess the images are archetypal ”. Or as Pauline Kael observed, Brazil is to Nineteen Eighty-Four as “ if you’d just heard about it over the years and it had seeped into your visual imagination ”. Gilliam’s suffocating system isn’t unflinchingly cruel and malevolently intolerant of individuality; it is, in his vision of a nightmare “future”, one of evils spawned by the mechanisms of an out-of-control behemoth: a self-perpetuating bureaucracy. And yet, that is not really, despite how indulgently and glee

I never strangled a chicken in my life!

Rope (1948) (SPOILERS) Rope doesn’t initially appear to have been one of the most venerated of Hitchcocks, but it has gone through something of a rehabilitation over the years, certainly since it came back into circulation during the 80s. I’ve always rated it highly; yes, the seams of it being, essentially, a formal experiment on the director’s part, are evident, but it’s also an expert piece of writing that uses our immediate knowledge of the crime to create tension throughout; what we/the killers know is juxtaposed with the polite dinner party they’ve thrown in order to wallow in their superiority.

Miss Livingstone, I presume.

Stage Fright (1950) (SPOILERS) This one has traditionally taken a bit of a bruising, for committing a cardinal crime – lying to the audience. More specifically, lying via a flashback, through which it is implicitly assumed the truth is always relayed. As Richard Schickel commented, though, the egregiousness of the action depends largely on whether you see it as a flaw or a brilliant act of daring: an innovation. I don’t think it’s quite that – not in Stage Fright ’s case anyway; the plot is too ordinary – but I do think it’s a picture that rewards revisiting knowing the twist, since there’s much else to enjoy it for besides.

Never lose any sleep over accusations. Unless they can be proved, of course.

Strangers on a Train (1951) (SPOILERS) Watching a run of lesser Hitchcock films is apt to mislead one into thinking he was merely a highly competent, supremely professional stylist. It takes a picture where, to use a not inappropriate gourmand analogy, his juices were really flowing to remind oneself just how peerless he was when inspired. Strangers on a Train is one of his very, very best works, one he may have a few issues with but really deserves nary a word said against it, even in “compromised” form.

I'm an old ruin, but she certainly brings my pulse up a beat or two.

The Paradine Case (1947) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock wasn’t very positive about The Paradine Case , his second collaboration with Gregory Peck, but I think he’s a little harsh on a picture that, if it doesn’t quite come together dramatically, nevertheless maintains interest on the basis of its skewed take on the courtroom drama. Peck’s defence counsel falls for his client, Alida Valli’s accused (of murder), while wife Ann Todd wilts dependably and masochistically on the side-lines.

A herbal enema should fix you up.

Never Say Never Again (1983) (SPOILERS) There are plenty of sub-par Bond s in the official (Eon) franchise, several of them even weaker than this opportunistic remake of Thunderball , but they do still feel like Bond movies. Never Say Never Again , despite – or possibly because he’s part of it – featuring the much-vaunted, title-referencing return of the Sean Connery to the lead role, only ever feels like a cheap imitation. And yet, reputedly, it cost more than the same year’s Rog outing Octopussy .

I don’t like fighting at all. I try not to do too much of it.

Cuba (1979) (SPOILERS) Cuba -based movies don’t have a great track record at the box office, unless Bad Boys II counts. I guess The Godfather Part II does qualify. Steven Soderbergh , who could later speak to box office bombs revolving around Castro’s revolution, called Richard Lester’s Cuba fascinating but flawed. Which is generous of him.

You’re easily the best policeman in Moscow.

Gorky Park (1983) (SPOILERS) Michael Apted and workmanlike go hand in hand when it comes to thriller fare (his Bond outing barely registered a pulse). This adaptation of Martin Cruz Smith’s 1981 novel – by Dennis Potter, no less – is duly serviceable but resolutely unremarkable. William Hurt’s militsiya officer Renko investigates three faceless bodies found in the titular park. It was that grisly element that gave Gorky Park a certain cachet when I first saw it as an impressionable youngster. Which was actually not unfair, as it’s by far its most memorable aspect.