It's time to check out David Miliband again, as the Labour Party conference ends. He's just started a new blog at last - he kept one while he was Environment minister and there was a long hiatus after he became Foreign secretary. but at last a new one is up and running, complete with YouTube videos.
There's been pages of publicity in the press in the last week or so - profiles, transcripts of speeches etc etc. Something that stands out is his ackowledgement that military intervention isn't always the solution; that Iraq was divisive in the party and country. Good intentions weren't enough.
He's clearly distancing himself from the Blair regime, as I expected he would, plus he's reinventing himself as a serious, heavyweight politician. This has meant talking slowly and ponderously in an attempt to seem profound. Nevertheless, he hasn't quite been able to rid himself of the Fotherington-Thomas 'hello birds, hello, bees' impression he always manages to give. There's a feeling that emanates from him that if we were all a bit nicer to each other the world would be a better place. This is certainly true, but it's not politics, which is, and always has been , dirty in the extreme.
Friday 28 September 2007
Tuesday 25 September 2007
The Good Shepherd
I, unlike most critics, found The Good Shepherd an enthralling and engrossing film, throughout it's 2 hours 40 minutes. I usually get irritated by over-long films, but this was an exception. I've just had a look at some of the reviews, and not many liked it, and some were unnecessarily abusive, especially about Matt Damon. What is it about Damon that irritates so many? I think he's getting better and better, and maturing extremely satisfactorily. The Bourne films have shown that he can do action, but even in these he retains a riveting, buttoned-up intensity. Here he's frozen by his background, his sense of duty, his father's suicide and his failed, loveless marriage, and is utterly convincing throughout.
Most of the critics found the film impossibly long and tedious, though yet again, Philip French was one of the few exceptions and appreciated the film's strengths. Yes, there's a weighty ponderousness at times, but is that such a crime? It's far outweighed by intelligence and seriousness of purpose. French likens it to the masterly TV serialisations of John Le Carre's novels and he's absolutely right.
I need to see this film again, as I watched it at home on Saturday night, and I'm always fighting sleep at this time of the week. I didn't drift off but my concentration wavered at times. I watched it with my son who found it gripping as well. Critics - gaaaahhhhh!!!!!
Most of the critics found the film impossibly long and tedious, though yet again, Philip French was one of the few exceptions and appreciated the film's strengths. Yes, there's a weighty ponderousness at times, but is that such a crime? It's far outweighed by intelligence and seriousness of purpose. French likens it to the masterly TV serialisations of John Le Carre's novels and he's absolutely right.
I need to see this film again, as I watched it at home on Saturday night, and I'm always fighting sleep at this time of the week. I didn't drift off but my concentration wavered at times. I watched it with my son who found it gripping as well. Critics - gaaaahhhhh!!!!!
3.10 to Yuma
I went to see 3.10 to Yuma the other day at my local cinema. I remember seeing the original many years ago on television, so long ago I think it was in black and white. I had a quick look at the trusty IMDB which confirmed that it was released in 1957 and starred Van Heflin and Gleen Ford, in the parts played in the new version by Christian Bale and Russell Crowe.
I like these these two actors very much, though Crowe's career has been marred lately by poor career choices, while Bale, on the other hand, hasn't, as far as I'm aware, made a single bad decision, ever. I can't thinkof any off-hand anyway. He has the knack of submerging himself in whatever part he's playing, the definition of the character actor, whereas Crowe tends to be Crowe whoever he's playing. This wasn't always the case, however, as demonstrated by his performance in The Insider, and I think it's simply because he's become so famous that his personality has come to dominate.
Bale however, has no public persona whatever, so has retained an anonimity which means he becomes his character more effectively. I'm always impressed by the level of fierce commitment he always brings to his performances and this was no exception
Here, though, Crowe managed to let his larger-than-life star persona slide into the background and allowed the character of Wade, the outlaw to shine through. I've just been looking at some of the reviews of the film, and my favourite critic, Roger Ebert, perceptively observed that Crowe's portrayal suggested an intelligent man who has become bored with being an outlaw, bored by the expectations place on him by others, a man fascinated by the varieties of human nature.
Several of the reviews have expressed dissatisfaction with the ending, and I have to agree. It lacked clarity and consistency and, by killing off Evans (Bale), its moral compass came askew, and it's an unsatisfactory mess. Obviously complexity, post-Unforgiven, is essential in westerns nowadays, but we were left with confusion rather than ambiguity. My response was 'What just happened....???'
Philip French in the Observer points to the huge influence of Deadwood, the western series set in a frontier town just at the point at which the West was beginning to be colonised by white settlers. Deadwood is far too black and scabrous to be shown on terrestrial TV, unfortunately, but, with its baroque language and lack of moral absolutes, astonishing period detail, it's an extraordinary evocation of the West that is surely much closer to its reality. I don't have Sky One any more since Virgin Media ditched it but I intend to catch up and rent the DVDs, switching on the subtitles to experience the dialogue in all its glory.
I have to confess that I didn't recognise Peter Fonda as the bounty-hunter McElroy, and that's maybe a tribute to him. Anyway, his presence was another major plus, as was Ben Foster's as Wade's brutal sidekick, a closet gay clearly in love with his leader. Philp French descibes his performance as 'terrifying' and I have to agree - truly demented.
So, a handsome production, enjoyable, entertaining and compelling. I'd like to see it again, though - that ending! Bleahhhhhh
I like these these two actors very much, though Crowe's career has been marred lately by poor career choices, while Bale, on the other hand, hasn't, as far as I'm aware, made a single bad decision, ever. I can't thinkof any off-hand anyway. He has the knack of submerging himself in whatever part he's playing, the definition of the character actor, whereas Crowe tends to be Crowe whoever he's playing. This wasn't always the case, however, as demonstrated by his performance in The Insider, and I think it's simply because he's become so famous that his personality has come to dominate.
Bale however, has no public persona whatever, so has retained an anonimity which means he becomes his character more effectively. I'm always impressed by the level of fierce commitment he always brings to his performances and this was no exception
Here, though, Crowe managed to let his larger-than-life star persona slide into the background and allowed the character of Wade, the outlaw to shine through. I've just been looking at some of the reviews of the film, and my favourite critic, Roger Ebert, perceptively observed that Crowe's portrayal suggested an intelligent man who has become bored with being an outlaw, bored by the expectations place on him by others, a man fascinated by the varieties of human nature.
Several of the reviews have expressed dissatisfaction with the ending, and I have to agree. It lacked clarity and consistency and, by killing off Evans (Bale), its moral compass came askew, and it's an unsatisfactory mess. Obviously complexity, post-Unforgiven, is essential in westerns nowadays, but we were left with confusion rather than ambiguity. My response was 'What just happened....???'
Philip French in the Observer points to the huge influence of Deadwood, the western series set in a frontier town just at the point at which the West was beginning to be colonised by white settlers. Deadwood is far too black and scabrous to be shown on terrestrial TV, unfortunately, but, with its baroque language and lack of moral absolutes, astonishing period detail, it's an extraordinary evocation of the West that is surely much closer to its reality. I don't have Sky One any more since Virgin Media ditched it but I intend to catch up and rent the DVDs, switching on the subtitles to experience the dialogue in all its glory.
I have to confess that I didn't recognise Peter Fonda as the bounty-hunter McElroy, and that's maybe a tribute to him. Anyway, his presence was another major plus, as was Ben Foster's as Wade's brutal sidekick, a closet gay clearly in love with his leader. Philp French descibes his performance as 'terrifying' and I have to agree - truly demented.
So, a handsome production, enjoyable, entertaining and compelling. I'd like to see it again, though - that ending! Bleahhhhhh
Monday 10 September 2007
Atonement
I saw Atonement this weekend - it's just come out, and I do like to see films when they've just been released. There's a real buzz surrounding this film; I suppose because it's British, but also because of the Ian McEwan factor; he's just been put on the Booker prize shortlist for On Chesil Beach, and he's probably the most high-profile British author around at the moment. Also, keira Knightley; she's definitely the British actress of the moment. I saw the first 2 Pirates of the Caribbean films, against my better judgement, and couldn't be bothered to see the third (too long and cumbersome, not very funny, not exciting, not interesting on any level), so had zero expectations of KK in Pride and Prejudice. I was pleasantly surprised by her performance; she acquitted herself very well, though I did think she's a little young for Lizzie Bennet. The film as a whole had much to recommend it, and Brenda Blethyn as Mrs Bennet, was, I thought, a huge improvement on Alison Steadman in the BBC's famous production, though Matthew McFadyen was a pale, forlorn Mr Darcy after Colin Firth, who, I think, is a super-hard act to follow.
Anyway, back to Atonement. A great deal of effort has gone into establishing its period authenticity; clothes, accents, hairstyles, even the way everyone walked. So when something isn't quite it really stands out. For example, KK's eyebrows, while right once the 1940s arrived, were far too thick for 1935. Maybe it doesn't matter, but I always find myself spotting this kind of thing. There weren't too many occasions like this, though, and she, and James McAvoy, made a pretty good attempt at Celia Johnson/Trevor Howard-style received pronunciation, something many actors today find extremely difficult. I always notice immediately when Estuary English is spoken in wartime and pre-war films, and I hate it; it's just wrong. Even non-posh people spoke with clipped accents in those days, so I was pleased to see a serious attempt made at getting this right.
James McEvoy has been pretty good in everything I've seen him so far, and he did exceptionally well in this. He's one of those actors who becomes the character, shedding all traces of himself; Knightley, being more high-profile can't quite do this, remaining KK however hard she tries.
Romola Gary, on the other hand, inhabits her character completely, and both my daughter (who came with me) and I felt her performance as the sister (the WWII incarnation) was the highlight of the film. because the sister, who misinterprets the relationship between Knightley and McEvoy, is played by 3 actresses, Gary's part is necessarily smaller and less high-profile, but all the portrayals were exceptional, finishing with Vanessa Redgrave as the elderly version. A charming device, I thought, to link them, was to give them all similar hairstyles - this worked well, giving the film an extra coherence.
Much has been made of the bravura sequence depicting the beach at Dunkirk, quite rightly, I think. It encapsulates the madness and chaos that must surely have engulfed the evacuation of the BEF. So, well done all round. Whether it'll win any Oscars remains to be seen, but it's a worthy first shot across the bows of the industry. And, thank goodness, a decent film with which to kick-start the autumn season.
Anyway, back to Atonement. A great deal of effort has gone into establishing its period authenticity; clothes, accents, hairstyles, even the way everyone walked. So when something isn't quite it really stands out. For example, KK's eyebrows, while right once the 1940s arrived, were far too thick for 1935. Maybe it doesn't matter, but I always find myself spotting this kind of thing. There weren't too many occasions like this, though, and she, and James McAvoy, made a pretty good attempt at Celia Johnson/Trevor Howard-style received pronunciation, something many actors today find extremely difficult. I always notice immediately when Estuary English is spoken in wartime and pre-war films, and I hate it; it's just wrong. Even non-posh people spoke with clipped accents in those days, so I was pleased to see a serious attempt made at getting this right.
James McEvoy has been pretty good in everything I've seen him so far, and he did exceptionally well in this. He's one of those actors who becomes the character, shedding all traces of himself; Knightley, being more high-profile can't quite do this, remaining KK however hard she tries.
Romola Gary, on the other hand, inhabits her character completely, and both my daughter (who came with me) and I felt her performance as the sister (the WWII incarnation) was the highlight of the film. because the sister, who misinterprets the relationship between Knightley and McEvoy, is played by 3 actresses, Gary's part is necessarily smaller and less high-profile, but all the portrayals were exceptional, finishing with Vanessa Redgrave as the elderly version. A charming device, I thought, to link them, was to give them all similar hairstyles - this worked well, giving the film an extra coherence.
Much has been made of the bravura sequence depicting the beach at Dunkirk, quite rightly, I think. It encapsulates the madness and chaos that must surely have engulfed the evacuation of the BEF. So, well done all round. Whether it'll win any Oscars remains to be seen, but it's a worthy first shot across the bows of the industry. And, thank goodness, a decent film with which to kick-start the autumn season.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)