REVIEW: Ides Of March

Clooney ... again .... With Gosling!!!


Ryan Gosling plays a young, idealistic campaigner for who he believes will be the next President and will actually make a difference to the world, Mr. George Clooney.

I had reservations about a Clooney political thriller, the man can be a little heavy handed and at points during this film, Clooney makes his own political stances quite clear as Govenor. However, it is quite a subtle introduction for modern mainstream audiences to embrace political thrillers that they might have thought would be too out of their depth, think All The President's Men and how it might be a bit old hat now for young cinemagoers. Though this doesn't have the appeal as that classic, it was surprisingly more entertaining than I thought it would be. The main reason for this is Gosling's ability to keep you interested in everything he is doing. His charisma knows no bounds. As he plays a young, rather naive, arrogant prodigy there is also a sense that as a person he is slightly corrupt, that his rather egotistical outlook on life is his own downfall and then, his own succession. He must, in fact, completely embrace that horrible, soiled side of him for him to succeed in what is dirty politics. It in fact shows that in a world of greys, in politics you either go all the way or you remain righteous and take the chance that you get left behind. Perhaps it is more black and white than it seems?

Gosling's character clearly looks up to Clooney and when his hero falls from grace in his eyes, in quite a dramatic turn of events, Gosling takes it upon himself to survive. However, it is in fact this sense of survival and character flaw of his that actually ends in a death. If he had been less selfish in the first place, things might have gone a little bit better.

Clooney's directing is somewhat lacking in anything substantial, it's average at best and has no excitement behind it. Just a man going through the paces. The performances are very good, but that's because of the heavyweights involved and Gosling's appeal rather than deserving directing. The plot is good, but not great, it's rather lacking in some areas and doesn't engross me like many political thrillers do, however it's definitely enjoyable and makes some good points.

Overall, Gosling's journey through the mudslinging and coming out at the end shows that no matter what ideals you have, in the world of politics, anything goes. Definitely worth a watch.

Rating: 6/10

REVIEW: The Descendants

Will Academy Golden Boy Clooney Do It Again?


A lot of people have asked me what I thought of this film and if you can't be bothered to read the below then I can sum it up in one word - "Alright".

For more greater detail on why, let's just say it's another Clooney vehicle. People might say how the focus should be on Payne and they are correct. However, I'm just not a huge fan of his. People writing reviews in magazines (the ones that get paid to write and get loads of time to do it and rarely know what they are talking about etc. - not bitter of course) have been writing love letters to Payne saying how they missed his work and it's been ages since his last film. You know why it's been ages? Because he's been spending that time working on Hung - a TV series I've neither seen or had the inclination to see.

Anyway, off the point, Sideways was a good movie - but I felt it was Giamatti who really made it. Payne's shtick of a 'journey' both literally and metaphorically is so cliched that it's tough to enjoy one film about it. Let alone three. I thought his true masterpiece was the largely undervalued Election and would gladly watch that again than watch this. However, time and time again he does seem to like the mid-life crisis of American males. It's just nothing new and Descendants is proof of this.

George Clooney plays a man whose wife is in critical condition. At the same time his large extended family have a huge deal in place with him at the centre of selling off some family plot. The painstakingly obvious idea of family is never buried within the story, it's clear as day - the land is a metaphor for his family. He won't 'give it up'. It's almost embarrassing to watch. As he delves a little deeper, he finds out his wife was cheating on him so makes it a task to find the people close to her, including the other man in her life. In a way, she has brought the family closer together than she perhaps ever could have done in life. It's a sad tale but one that is full of melancholy, a Payne favourite.

A lot of people describe this as a comedy, it's not. It's full of some weird funny awkward moments and Clooney's warmth shines through as he clearly understands the character, but Oscar worthy? Seriously? It's a completely forgettable film with some okay performances. The little girl is annoying, the teenager's boyfriend even more annoying (a male teenager from the Nineties it seems indicating Payne is quite out of touch) and the peripheral characters not really even worth mentioning. There are some touching, tender moments but with the amount of quality that was produced in the latter half of last year, this should be buried somewhat, not leading the pack.

The bit I really enjoyed the most was the end. A quiet, thoughtful, unassuming look at the family who are now sitting down and facing us, a role reversal to presume that it is now our turn to live our lives, tell our stories and get on with everything. It's simplicity is a touch of genius but something that can't save the entire film.

It's George Clooney being George Clooney (has he had work done?) in another slow, character led piece.

Good, but by no means great, or even fantastic.

Rating: 6/10

Uncharted Movie News

It's official - Sony have cast Mark Wahlberg as Nathan Drake in a movie adaptation of the incredible PS3 Uncharted series.

As anyone knows, Wahlberg's perpetual worried look will make a lot of fans displeased. Look at his Max Payne game remake for instance. Nathan Fillion had expressed an interest in playing the role, which would have been a million times better but instead we're left to see an amazing game franchise get completely raped by a crap actor. Yes crap. Does anyone else agree? "Oh what about The Departed?" umm.. wasn't he just an angry the whole time? Isn't he just supposed to look angry all the time? I think it can be safely said that whatever films he does, he's not a bankable star by any means.

So what about the director? David O Russell will take the helm which is a surprise because he's done some very strange films and is known for well... not getting on with his cast. George Clooney smacked him about in Three Kings and there's that fight on YouTube he has with Lily Tomlin in I Heart Huckabees, and he's got The Fighter coming out with Wahlberg and Bale which might be a good impression of how much he can get out of Wahlberg's limited acting. Pesci and De Niro have even been rumoured to play Wahlberg's father and uncle - which will be strange. I'm just hoping it won't be another National Treasure ... I'd rather kill myself.

The American

Dutch music video director Anton Corbijn returns from the success of his first full length feature 'Control' with a take on the novel 'A Very Private Gentleman' starring George Clooney as a gunmaker hiding out in an Italian village. Is this 'thoughtful thriller', as Corbijn puts it, another Jason Bourne? Definitely not ...

Let's start by saying that this film isn't the action blockbuster that Focus have made it out to be. Instead it's a slow, reflective piece that works almost like a serious Lost In Translation, which can only be a good thing right? Well, not really.

Clooney plays Jack, a man who right from the first shot of him sipping on a drink while his girlfriend puts her arms around him from behind, while he stares emotionless into the middle distance, looks dead inside. He's completely detached from the world and after getting found by his enemies (why they are after him in the first place we never find out) he has to leave to set up shop again in a small Italian village. Whilst he is there he makes friends with the local priest and falls in love with a local prostitute and soon wants out of the game. That's the whole film, apart from the opening action, a small chase scene halfway through and the end, that's all the action you're going to get. Boring? Well, yes and no.

What Corbijn has done here is taken Clooney's paranoia and brought us into it. Through the score, the shots, the look and the general silence (it feels like hardly a word is uttered throughout the film), we start questioning what's around the corner, if anyone can ever be trusted and a mere shadow makes us just as tense as Jack. The way this feeling of suspense effortlessly glides from character to the audience is a masterful stroke in itself, but with all the suspense in the world even the master himself Hitchcock knew you have to give the audience a pay off, and The American just doesn't do it enough. It might build things up, but the audience's confidence in Jack means that there's no situation we feel he cannot control and so the tension can only work to a certain degree. However, the constant turning of one's head and lack of trust is an important concept that you can imagine all these spy thriller heroes would have to go through. It looks lonely and exhausting and, as we know from the off, Jack is no hero either.

It's also interesting how it's called The American. His lack of trust and paranoia is something that could be said of the country's social mentality post 9/11, but also how he feels isolated outside of his natural habitat - as if America feels cut off from the rest of the world and how, in some ways, it is. I don't think it's just by chance that he deals arms and is ex-military either. I'd also argue that the whole world he's living in is his own Hell, which is even suggested by the priest at one point. There's a lot of talk of religion, of cleansing sins, of hope and despair and the ultimate trial of opening up to someone and falling in love. All the while he's making deals with the devil for monetary gain and has, in theory, sold his soul.

It's a film that is more about what's not being said than by what is. Little looks, turns of heads and the use of light indicate a director who knows exactly what he wants and the framing and cinematography in general is beautiful. Every shot is like a perfect picture and cannot be faulted, you can see why this man is one of the best photographers out there. However, I can't help but feel that this should have been an art-house film with perhaps an unknown in the lead. Not that there's anything wrong with Clooney, in fact all the acting in this is superb, but the expectation of this being a Clooney spy thriller means that it becomes a disappointment for a lot of people. It's a slow-paced, suggestive tale of one man trying to reach out to others and would have been better off without being touched by Hollywood. Had this have been advertised as a slow, emotive, indie art-house foreign flick (whatever that means anymore) I would have liked it more. As it is, it feels like a pretentious, yet beautiful, sequence of images that is more about scoring credibility for all involved rather than entertaining the audience. If people say they loved it, it's more likely because they feel they have to. It's a good, quiet, sombre film that jogs along and keeps you guessing, but essentially it was a bit boring.

Rating: 6/10