The Writers' Resource

Quite obviously, the visual effects budget was strained to the limit on this rollicking tale of a man who ages backwards and the love of his life. 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button' was originally penned as a short story by F. Scott Fitzgerald, and, given that man's inclination towards self-sabotage and destruction through his addiction to the demon drink, it seemed to me, in the original, as an attempt to find his own inner child and the impossibility to retain the wisdom with which we are born as infants.  Or something like that.  As Cher sang 'If I could turn back ti-ime'....

The problem is that the magic of the initial story hasn't lifted onto the screen well enough though Cate Blanchett is almost enough magic to make up for it.  Brad Pitt is somewhat too 'large' for the role and seems to have disappeared into the press persona that has been initially useful to his career, but now threatens it.  Undoubtedly, Mr. Pitt could act once.  But now, his tabloidedness gets in the way and he is just too darn well-groomed to convince.The waxed eyebrows are a dead giveaway!

 However, what really got me down was the droning monotone of the voice over throughout, whether from Cate Blanchett's old Daisy or from Pitt's Benjamin at his various stages of life. It had the effect of flattening the movie entirely a notch towards the lower third which is a darn shame as stories by Fitzgerald generally sparkle. David Fincher and Eric Roth confessed they dumped most of the story and made up their own and it really shows.  It has a Gumpish kind of tone overall, and though the craft of the film was there (production design was great, and makeup, obvioulsy rose to the challenge) the story just wasn't.  There were some areas of Benjamin's life that just copped out, such as the ending.  And that whole voice over cop-out thing.  Come on,Eric Roth!  you could have figured out some cunning way of making this into a film rather than  radio with pictures!  Surely.... It's too darn long, as well. And I had a slight set against this when I continually heard that 'the film was made in New Orleans to take advantage of the tax breaks.'  Ummmm, what the ....???? Surely that should be 'Brad and the entire cast and crew decided to make it in New Orleans in order to employ a shitload of locals and to do good deeds while they were there.'

Another problem is the shifting voice of the narrator.  His/her POV often changes so that they are armed with information they could not have had.

 There are many places to lop out at least thirty minutes of the film - plenty of passages are just in there for decoration, such as the whole car accident storyline.  

And what makes me mad is that it is sure to rake in the Oscars.   The double could just be 'Trouble the Water' (a really badly made doco about Hurricane Katrina) and this film (set in Hurricane-Katrina-land and time) which would reflect the fact that when those Oscar screeners are posted, most of the recipients don't even bother to watch but go with whoever had the biggest poster on the Strip.

Ahhh, Hollywood!  Remember when a good script and cast were the main ingredients?!

I've been trawling through as many of the Oscar hopefuls as possible and this film, Danny Boyle and Loveleen Tandan's wonderful 'Slumdog Millionaire' stands out from the pack.  The children, cast as the tiny, resourceful 'slumdogs' of Mumbai, light up the screen with their presence, not just becasue they are physically attractive, but because each acts with incredibly forceful conviction. There are so many layers to the story that it is hard to explain it without inserting that dreaded clause 'spoiler alert' into the text of any review.  I am sure the trailer makers will do their best, but it is an amazing expereince watching this film without any pre-conceived ideas.  I did just that, my only marker being that I love pretty much anything Danny Boyle works on and his ability to choose the right children for the roles and extract brilliant performances is legendary.  Who will ever forget those boys in 'Millions'?

Simon Beaufoy's script is similarly magnetic and one that all aspiring writers should watch with great attention.  It is very skilfully crafted.

Australian release  date is 18th December and I am sure youu will have no problem tracking down a theatre showing it.  Pre-knowledge of the workings of the TV Game 'Who Wants to Be a Millionaire' will add a layer of laughs, particularly when you relaise that no matter which international version, it is always hosted by the uber-cheesy presenter with an added coating of slime and grease.  The Indian one is no exception, though possibly he has never been an under-qualified CEO of a TV Station.

Get along and see it!

There is nothing as angry as a film reviewer who feels that the 90 minutes they have spent watching a movie has been a total waste.  Thus it was last night - only in bulk as all the critics stormed down the stairs to go home, having hung in there, out of politeness and that sort of obsessive thing that prevents us from leaving till the credits have rolled, all complaining about the waste of time 'Quarantine' turned out to be.  of course, we should have realised, as there are not many good US remakes of Euro films EVER.  But this was quite the worst.  The cast and crew deserve to be taken out and given a good talking to.  The story is thin at best and inspired by the Blair Witch shaky cam film, it is the remnants, on tape, of a disaster unfolding.  The odd things included the incompetence of the 'expereinced' cameraman who couldn't hold the camera steady for an instant.  no news camera chap worth his salt would let this happen.  Another was the fact that while the electrics were out in the building, the elevator and tape recorder worked.  Ditto the length of the camera battery - one battery for the whole shoot, wow!!  And how come the battery wasn't back in the truck?  It always is on my shoots!  

Predictable rubbish badly told, and it would be of use to aspiring writers to go and see this one.  Take a critical eye, analyse it and try to work out how far off the logical beats they were in EVERY case.  There is no suspense, just tedium.

In theatres now, sadly on general release.

I have been looking forward to this film for quite a while being somewhat impressed by that young Craig chappie and also enjoying the occasional rolling out of that part of the brain that cheats at push-ups.  After all the hype (and isn't finding the correct level of 'hype' turning out to be a tricky thing these days!) it took some effort to watch 'Quantum of Solace' without pre-judging it from its numerous trailer cuts.  Actually, even having been through that forgiving exercise, I was really disappointed.  It started well enough with a great action chase.  But too long, chaps, before plunging into what could have been an intriguing story.  This episode sacrifices story for icky-thump and some excellent CG but, having seen the recent Dutch Dominoes record breaking story on the news, I needed more to impress me.  I wanted to give a stuff about Bondie when he was been the victim of workplace bullying.  I wanted to care about Camille (Olga Kurylenko) and her burnt back, but sadly, she continually walked and posed like a runway model, feet in third position, and I was more intrigued by how she maintained her elegant posture while on the speedboat.  (She is not unlike Megan Gale in her tanned earthiness, and isn't it amazing how Megan's ocker accent has turned her once lovely face into a roughie!! Olga's Euro speak keeps her facial muscles so much more taut.)

Three areas that were way too sparse on story  were:

Fields.

The Q group

The trigger for the explosion in the hotel which, I believe, defied logic and science.

I've read a Fleming book or two in my time.  One thing he got right was the procedure and the believability of those books was A+.  The other thing that impressed me was the vulnerability of Bond but his rakishness.  Missing in 'Q of S' totally.  Daniel Craig is a bit of a cold fish compared with the twinkly-eyed Roger Moore and Sean Connery, even David Niven.  It was nice to see Jeffrey Wright in something like this - he can really brighten up a screen with interest.

In production terms - the film was  extremely well made, though I believe that the old Bond may have gone forever.  'M' (Judi Dench) is way over glamorised now and her apartment was somewhat out of character and unmotivated.  She is a public servant after all!  Did she have a rich husband?  Some kickbacks?  Nice bathrobe though and her skin is still beautiful.   Not so Gemma Arterton who had trouble in closeups and I am wondering how things were on set coping with her cold-sores? 

Now that may seem a mean thing to say, but sometimes things like that on a massive screen can distract from the action!  OK, so now that we have assumed that James Bond has caught herpes, a condition that may explain his lassitude in this adventure (well, it would be a miracle if he weren't a walking TVC for every kind of STD under the sun now wouldn't it?.  The laconic lines he delivers are rather so-so and the film lacks the campy fun one-liners of past episodes.  

Honestly, the overall film plot appeared to have been  an overshoot with drastic cuts to the story, happening insenstively and beyond the shorthand story arc popular now.  There are so many leaps that it is impossible to feel empathy for any of the characters and even in a Bond flick this is important.

However, the scenery is magnifico whether in Chile, Mexico or Italy  or Bregenz Festival House in Austria where 'Tosca' is performed in modern dress. 

In fact, the opera scene bothered me a lot as it was such a great setup, I wouldn't like to have seen more of it.  Those groovy little transmitters were excellent and I hope that I find one in a trade show sample bag one day!

It is a dazzler but sit in the back third of the cinema - otherwise you will miss detail.

General Release - fun for the holidays and I wil probably also buy the DVD when it is released but on the big screen there are some terrific 'wow' moments.

OUT NOW!