Nowhere Boy

Running time: 98 minutes

Genre: Biography/Drama

Release date: 25^th December 2009

Star rating: 4/5

Director: Sam Taylor-Wood

Writer: Matt Greenhalgh

Cast: Aaron Johnson, Kristen Scott-Thomas, Anne-Marie Duff

A chronicle of John Lennon’s childhood and teenage years, focused on his relationship with his Aunt Mimi and mother Julia, his first meeting with Paul McCartney and George Harrison, their friendship, their love for music and the formation of their first band The Quarrymen.

High anticipations are to be expected from a film that bills itself as the extraordinary untold story of one of the world’s greatest and most influential musicians: John Lennon. And this is before the respective reputations the films writer and director is considered. First time director Sam Taylor-Wood is famous for an art work titled ‘October 26 1993’ based on an image of John Lennon with Yoko Ono, whilst writer Matt Greenhalgh also wrote the acclaimed biopic Control which chronicled the life of ill-fated Joy Division frontman Ian Curtis.  When all of this is taken into account, it is fair to say that big things big things are expected of Nowhere Boy, and it certainly doesn’t disappoint.

Taylor-Wood avoids using any spectacular visuals in her debut film. Instead she simply provides a meticulously constructed backdrop where every set is packed with subtle references to Lennon’s life, for example a drawing on the wall in John's room - of a soccer player and two officials - appears on the cover of John Lennon's 1974 solo album ‘Walls and Bridges,’ that instantly transports us to 1960’s Liverpool. This allows the cast to freely showcase their considerably acting talents with ease and lets the story breathe.  

Greenhalgh’s writing avoids the obvious pitfall of many biopics by striking the right balance between factual relevance and telling an emotionally satisfying story. As such the film never dwells too long on one subject, where some writers may get bogged down in detailing Lennon and McCartney’s first band The Quarrymen, Greenhalgh switches between Lennon’s relationship with his aunt and mother, his rebellious social life as well as his musical awakening, which results in a script full of energy and vigour suiting its 1960’s backdrop.

The real focus of this film is not John’s musical beginnings but more about his rather tumultuous relationship with the two dominant women in his life at that time: his stern aunt Mimi and his wild mother Julia who re-enters his young life at a crucial moment.  Kristen Scott-Thomas is excellent as Julia, a woman so consumed with re-connecting with her son that she becomes more of a friend than a mother by secretly harbouring john after he is suspended from school and then introducing him to the music of Elvis.

But the stand-out performance has to be Anne-Marie Duff who brings firm aunt Mimi to life with a performance full of emotional restraint as Mimi struggles to hold things together following the death of her husband and the feeling that she is losing John as well after his behaviour becomes increasingly rebellious. In truth, Mimi is the real hero of this story and it is her that we are all rooting for in the end as we discover the real reason John ended up in her care.

This is not to say that Aaron Johnson’s turn as Lennon isn’t equally as impressive. Despite this being his first leading role in a feature film, his performance exudes confidence with just the right amount of arrogance that he is able to demand as soon as he is onscreen – so much like the real John Lennon. In addition to this, he is also able to provide the sudden turns of emotion from happiness to anger to utter misery of a confused young boy in a life buried in turmoil.    

The soundtrack to the film will absolutely keep fans of Lennon and the 1960’s music scene happy with a mix of early Beatles recording s and some of the biggest hits of the time, such as Screamin’ Jay Hawkins ‘I Put a Spell on You’. But this soundtrack is more than just a best of the sixties compilation. It’s the sound of everything this film stands for: energy, rebellion, friendship and ultimately love.

Verdict: an energetic and heartfelt biopic about a teenage boy’s desperate search for love from the two most important people in his life. Nowhere Boy makes big promises and delivers each and every one of them with a great soundtrack and some great acting to make a truly great film.  

The Debt

Running time: 113 minutes

Genre: Drama/Thriller

Release date: September 30^th 2011

Star rating: 3/5

Director: John Madden

Writers: Jane Goldman, Peter Straughan, Matthew Vaughn

Cast: Helen Mirren, Sam Worthington, Jessica Chastain, Ciaran Hinds, Tom Wilkinson, Marton Csokas.

Where time-line hopping espionage thrillers are concerned there is always the fear that the transitions between time periods will lead to a disjointed structure and a plot that is hard to follow. However, with The Debt director John Madden certainly delivers – for the first two acts at least- in making the leap between 1965 and 1997 seem effortless and maintaining the fast pace and high tension that is required for a high wire thriller such as The Debt.

The majority of the film takes place in the desolate post war city of East Berlin where Mossad agent Rachel Singer (Chastain) meets fellow agents David Perez (Worthington) and Stefan Gold (Csokas). Their mission is to capture the Nazi war criminal Deter Vogel – infamously named The Surgeon of Brikenau for his horrific pseudo-medical experiments on Jews during the Second World War. Rachel and David pose as an ethnic German married couple from Argentina – which later develops into real attraction that has fatal consequences – allowing Rachel to plant herself as a patient in Vogel’s obstetrics and gynaecology clinic. During one examination Rachel attacks Vogel and the trio kidnap him in an attempt to bring him back to Israel to face justice.

This is intercut with events during 1997 where, with the agents now venerated as national heroes, Rachel is attending a release party for her daughter Sarah’s book which chronicles the events of the 1965 mission. Here, she is reunited with Stefan and David and together they must deal with the consequences of their mission and the dark secret that torments them all.

With so much ground to cover over such an expansive time-frame, Madden is well served by actors capable of holding focus and carrying the characters through the years. Helen Mirren is on typically magnificent form playing the 1997 version of Rachel with the intensity of a woman still carrying both the physical and emotional scars of the events of 1965. Her 1965 counter-part Jessica Chastain is almost as brilliant bringing a nervous timidness to a younger naive Rachel on her first mission.

Unfortunately, the male characters do not receive the same treatment. Both David and Stefan are woefully underwritten and often underplayed so much so that I found myself asking which of the two men I was seeing when younger.

Whilst the first two acts are packed with tension and suspense –aided by an ear-piercing soundtrack where even the dripping of water can cut through you like a knife – the final act fails to live up to this early potential. By the final 20 minutes the film has rather lost momentum with its intensity and suspense going along with it, so much so the film has to drag its self over the finish line. Fortunately, such is the brilliance of Mirren’s acting ability, the pure emotion of her performance is able to keep you invested enough to carry you through to the very end.

The Debt is a sharp, intense espionage thriller that is carried by a superb performance by Helen Mirren but ultimately fails to live up to its early potential.

Do film critics still have the power to influence filmgoers?

It could once be said that film critics were one of the most powerful figures in the film industry. Their word alone could decide with a good review virtually guaranteeing box office success whilst a poor review resigned a film to obscurity and financial failure. Peeping Tom was universally panned upon its release in 1960 by critics who despised the use of violence, pornography and the sympathetic representation of the villain Mark Lewis.  While it is now considered a classic horror film with a large cult following, at the time of its release the critical exodus not only led to the distributors pulling the film from cinemas, but also destroyed the career of director Michael Powell, an indication of the level of power the critics held in the film industry.

However, things have changed since the 1960’s with marketing and promotion now reining supreme when it comes to persuading viewers to see a film. The voice of the critic has been quietened by the well financed and invasive advertising strategies, in a power shift that has left the impact of a film critic debatable.

In recent times films have been able to post huge financial gains despite receiving little praise from film critics. Alice and Wonderland released earlier this year was able to gross over $1 billion at the box office to become the 6^th highest grossing film of all time. This was all achieved despite the film receiving mixed reviews at best from the film critics who failed to warm to Tim Burton’s post-apocalyptic interpretation of the Lewis Carroll classic.

It is easy to see the impact marketing has on films when considering the ridiculous fan fares generated by blockbuster film series like Harry Potter and the Twilight Saga, and it seems the word of a film critic can no longer put a viewer off going to see a film. The most recent Twilight release managed to break the $600 million mark and the next instalment is sure to at least match that figure especially given to popularity of its male leads Robert Patterson and Taylor Lautner. Perhaps then, the only element needed for a successful film is an attractive lead to reel in viewers too busy fantasising to be engaged in the story and notice its obvious flaws.

And it is not only the successful films that forget the critic’s opinions; Superman Returns was praised as a superman for a modern audience by critics but did not provide sufficient box office returns (apparently $390 million isn’t a lot of money) and has been branded a failure by Warner Bros. proving that financial gain is now the only criteria for a successful film, artistic vision seems to have gone out the window.

But there is one shinning light that pulls film critics back from the depths of insignificance and reminds us of the power they once yielded: the independent film.  Whilst critics may no longer have the power to influence the tent-pole blockbusters that dominate our screens, they still have the ability to pick out the overlooked and shove them into the lime light. Take last year’s surprise sleeper hit The Hurt Locker which not only managed $40 million at box office, despite only being released in 4 US theatres and being up against heavy hitters like Harry Potter 6, but also beat Avatar to the best picture Oscar. This came only a year after Slumdog Millionaire rose from obscurity due largely to the universal praise of the film critic, showing they are not going down without a fight.

Despite this, the film critic is still in decline, and the reason for their ever diminishing power may simple boil down to a loss of prestige. In the past the a film critic was trained in the craft of writing but now the rise of reviewer websites like Rotten Tomatoes allows not just journalists to post reviews but also members of the public who are fans of the film. The fact is, with so many different opinions the real critics cannot be heard, their voice lost in the irrelevant views of part timers making it almost certain that the critics power will be forever forgotten.

Open House

Running time: 88 minutes

Genre: Horror/Thriller

Release date: January 31^st 2011

Star rating: 1/5

Director/writer: Andrew Paquin

Cast: Rachel Blanchard, Tricia Helfer, Brain Geraghty, Anna Paquin, Stephen Moyer

On the verge of a nasty divorce, Alice (Rachel Blanchard) looks to sell the luxury home she shared with her husband, and start life a fresh. Of course, it’s not that simple, and things begin to go horribly wrong when David (Brian Geraghty) sneaks in during an open house and takes Alice hostage; meanwhile, Lila (Tricia Helfer) moves in and begins to act out her psycho-sexual fantasies.

The promotion for this film claimed starring roles for True Blood couple Anna Paquin and Stephen Moyer, but this is reduced to nothing more than a brief cameo as their combined screen time is probably less than ten minutes before they are quickly killed off. And this is perhaps the most surprising aspect of a film that disappoints at every opportunity. Despite a running time of less than 90 minutes, the plot idles on offering little in terms of tension and suspense, leaving the audience with nothing to grab hold of. This is director/ writer Andrew Paquin’s first film, and it shows by the amateurish way the film has been put together as he loses control of the quickly fading plot.

The characters are one dimensional and instantly forgettable. Tricia Helfer (Lila) may be able to play an intimidating seductress, but she is only able to use this talent twice in the film, the rest of the time she is inexplicably absent making it impossible to impose any sense of threat. This shifts the focus onto Brain Geraghty (David) playing a shy, socially awkward character whose sense of weakness in front of Lila is supposed to create shock by his random bursts of rage, but actually becomes predictable and ultimately boring.

The main failing of this film is that it simply doesn’t build up to any sense of climax. The plot is frustratingly repetitive, reverting to predictably killing off a cast member every time the plot desperately needs a boost. At no point is there a sense that the killers may be caught or that Alice will escape her captors. Instead the plot is simply allowed to slowly fade away with barley a whimper as it reaches its unsurprising conclusion.

Verdict: Open House struggles due to a half-cooked script that fails to deliver the basic tension and suspense required of the horror genre, while the characterisation is less that of threatening psychopaths, and more frustrating psycho-sexual clichés. All of which leads to a lacklustre ending that is ultimately forgettable.

Peeping Tom

Original release: 16^th may 1960 (re-released November 19^th 2010)

Genre: Horror/Thriller

Run time: 101 minutes

Star rating: 5/5

Director: Michael Powell

Writer: Leo Marks (original story and screenplay)

Cast: Carl Boehm, Moira Shearer, Anna Massey and Maxine Audley

Up until the 1960’s the horror genre focused on adaptations of classic tale, such as Dracula and Frankenstein. In these films the villains were monsters, inhuman; they received very little sympathy from the viewer. However, the release of Peeping Tom in 1960, shortly before Hitchcock’s classic Psycho, would revitalise this stale genre.

Peeping Tom follows Mark Lewis a quiet, reserved and lonely young man who keeps his camera close by at all times claiming he is making a documentary. By day, Lewis works as a focus puller in a film studio and as a photographer of pornography, but by night carries out his gruesome obsession- he films women as he murders them to capture the fear on their faces and later watches them in his den. 

Since its release the film has become regarded as one of the greatest British horror films at a time when fantastical monsters ruled the genre Powell introduced a new type of villain, the human psyche where the evil lay in the modern world.  However, upon its initial release the film critics were disgusted and the severe backlash left Powell excoriated from the industry and his career never fully recovered. The film was not just controversial for its use of graphic violence (in fact very little violence actually occurs on screen) but also for its presentation of taboo subjects, in particular pornography which, although part of society, had never been represented in mainstream cinema before Peeping Tom’s release. 

One of the most unique aspects of this film is the central theme of voyeurism. Lewis’ obsession is driven by the voyeuristic pleasure gained by watching the fear on his victims face as he dies. Lewis always has his camera rolling during the film and clever camerawork by Powell allows the audience to watch through the lens of his camera, we become voyeurs, watching as innocent people are brutally murdered.  These techniques allowed the audience to see the world through Lewis’ eyes and are able to gain an insight into his psyche. A career defining performance by Carl Boehm makes this character feel human with the torment of his obsession reflected in his eyes. .  The essential aspect that derives from the sordid theme is that the character is redeemable Lewis recognises his sickness and obsession but feels compelled to finish his documentary of fear. It is his crushing loneliness and the after effect of his father’s experiments in fear conducted on him during his childhood that has left Lewis in this psychologically damaged state which makes it difficult for the viewer to feel anything but sympathy for him even as the film comes to its shocking but inevitable finale.

Verdict: Peeping Tom can be best described as a misunderstood masterpiece that has now become one of the greatest and most influential British horror films. It creates a climate of terror built from laying bare the intimate aspects of human relationships showing us the side of life we don’t wish to see.   

Death Note: The Last Name

Runtime: 141 minutes

Genre: Psychological/Supernatural Thriller

Release date: July 4^th 2008

Star Rating: 2/5

Director: Shusuke Kaneko

Writers:  Tsugumi Ohba and Takeshi Obata (comic) Tetsuya Oishi (screenplay)

Cast: Ken’ichi Matsuyama as L, Tatsuya Fujiwara as Light, Erika Toda as Misa Amane, Shidou Nakamura voice of Ryuk and Shinnosuke Ikehata voice of Rem.

Death Note: The Last Name is the second film based on the Manga comic series of the same name and picks up where the first film left off with Light in possession of the death note, the world’s deadliest weapon, with the power to kill anyone in the world simply by writing their name in this book. The film follows Light’s crusade against evil as he uses the book to kill all the criminals in the world whilst the ICPO, led by the mysterious L, attempt to catch him and bring an end to the series of murders he has committed.  

The portrayal of L by Ken’ichi Matsuyama is the stand out performance of the film creating an almost Sherlock Holmes-esque character whose weird eccentricities, such as wearing a Halloween mask to hide his face in public, provide much needed comic relief in this rather dark film.

However, the central plot of this film is the psychological chess match between L and Light leading to a dialogue heavy narrative with very little to visually interest the audience. The director seems intent of sticking religiously to the source material which gives the film an exasperating run-time of 141 minutes and the narrative feels sluggish as it struggles to pick up pace- the first 90 minutes are just plain boring.

Verdict: Death Note may well please the fans of the original Manga comics but for those of us unaware of the source material will find the narrative slow and tedious with very little to visually spark the imagination. The one redeeming feature of this film is that the conclusion is both shocking and inspiring and will captivate your attention for the first time in the film providing twists and turns whilst dealing with the key moral issue, is it right for humans to play god?

The Lonely Guy

Running time: 90 minutes

Genre: Romance/Comedy

Release date: January 27^th 1984

Star rating: 4/5

Director: Arthur Hiller

Writers: Neil Simon (screenplay) based on the book The Lonely Guy’s Book of Life by Bruce Jay Friedman

Cast: Steve Martin, Charles Grodin, Judith Ivey and Robyn Douglass

‘You’re not going to be lonely forever, are you? I’m not’ so says the hopeful greeting cards writer Larry Hubbard (Martin). After finding his girlfriend in bed with another man, Larry is forced to begin a new life as a single man. At the pit of his despair, he writes a book titled The Lonely Guy’s Guide to Life which becomes an instant bestseller and hurls him into an entirely different experience of life.

Set in New York and based on the book ‘The Lonely Guy’s Book of Life’ by Bruce Jay Friedman, The Lonely Guy is a charming, quirky romantic comedy that perfectly portrays the trials and tribulations of the single man. As such it could be seen as a male version of Sex and the City, but this would be doing the film a disservice as, although there are comparison to be drawn from the two – both follow the lives of singles living in New York City and are told from the point of view of a narrator – Lonely Guy is a much more witty and heartfelt effort that is able to pick out the insecurities that lurk inside all of us and presents them for our own amusement.

There is no better example of this then when Larry enters a restaurant and announces he is dining alone at which point he is placed in a spotlight as all the other diners stare at him in un-merciful silence.

Steve Martin is an excellent casting as the eternal optimist Larry Hubbard as he pursues his aloof love interest Iris (Ivey). By effortlessly exuding boyish charm, Martin makes the pitiful lonely guy even more engaging and w e are with him every step of the way in his un-ceasing campaign to attract Iris – even when he goes as far as spraying fake sweat on himself in an unsuccessful attempt to impress her.    

However, the stand out performance has to be Charles Grodin as principal lonely guy Warren Evans. Acting as Larry’s downcast friend and mentor in the art of being a lonely guy, Grodin is the perfect counter-point to Martins eternal optimist playing his role in pure dead pan style. Weather he is introducing us to his fern plants (which he calls his guys) or throwing a party where the only guests are cardboard cut-outs of celebrities, Grodin provides instant comic relief at times when the film is in danger of becoming too dramatic and downbeat.

If there is one weak point to this film, it would be the plot which does not live up to its early promise. Larry and Iris get together too early leaving them with nowhere to go and thus the plot quickly becomes repetitive as the two break up several times as the writer struggles to find ideas to expand the plot.

Never-the-less, this does not prevent the story from building to a classic rom-com ending that will leave the audiences knowing that, no matter how lonely they feel, they’re not the only ones.