Contagion (2011) Dir: Steven Soberbergh

Summary: A thriller centered on the threat posed by a deadly disease and an international team of doctors contracted by the CDC to deal with the outbreak. 

 

What Soderbergh does well is manage large casts of big name actors, he seems to be able to let them show case their best abilities and structure scenes where no one comes across as a bad actor. In Contagion Matt Damon is emotional strong, Laurence Fishburne is all CSI, Kate Winslett is all stressed but in control, Gwyneth Paltrow is weak and dislikeable, Jude Law is the nasty baddie and Marion Cotillard is beautiful and intriguing. The problem with Contagion is not the actors it is the multi-character story telling, the narrative in the film is provided by cutting from one character to another in a way similar to films such as Crash, Traffic and Babel, due to this the film loses much of its suspense and becomes a story of survival instead of the thriller we are advertised. 

Soderbergh focus on the individual characters does create a feel similar to the beginning of a horror film; Who is infected? When is the food going to run out? Is society as we know it going to collapse? But as the story unfolds you realise the film is meant to be about finding the root of the virus, finding a cure for the virus and managing the outbreak, non of these issues are really addressed but more stumbled upon and then not really followed through. All suspense is spoilt by the chopping and changing of the narrative and the investigation into the outbreak barely gets started before a cure is found. The whole film leaves you frustrated that the stories you want expanded are not and that any narrative that starts to get interesting is stopped in its tracks. I felt the most interesting characters where the scientist who first manages to grow the virus played by the charming Elliott Gould and John Hawkes (who should have won best supporting actor last year for his turn in Winters Bone) as the CDC janitor, both of which are underused, generally ignored and roles not really fully developed. 

 

Overall: I can't fault the acting but too many characters not enough investigating. 2.5/5.

Shame (2011) Dir: Steve McQueen

Summary: In New York City, Brandon's carefully cultivated private life -- which allows him to indulge his sexual addiction -- is disrupted when his sister Sissy arrives unannounced for an indefinite stay.

This is a film about control and disconnection but I could not tell you for the life of me if it was successful or not. Michael Fassbender commits fully to the role of Brandon, a sex addict living in New York, he is unable to form meaningful emotional relationships and manages his OCD and stress with his sex addiction and the wonderful Carey Mulligan plays Brandon's mentally unstable sister Sissy. The script leaves a lot unsaid leaving the blanks to be filled in my the viewer which reminded me a lot of French cinema such as Cache. It is beautifully shot, the pace was good and fundamentally it is a story of Brandon hitting bottom. 

My main issue with the film is that I didn't form a bond with either Brandon or Sissy. As the script withholds all of Brandon and Sissy's back story it is very hard to have any empathy for either one of them. I know this ploy is probably symbolic to their inability to form emotional relationships but for me really good films should make the viewer invest emotionally in them and with Shame I just didn't overly care what happened to either of the main characters. 

I'm sitting on the fence with this one, it is not a standard film about addiction or a life spiralling out of control and for that I give it credit but I just think it could have been pushed further by providing a back story and really pushing towards a devastating end. I felt throughout the film that I was waiting for the penny to drop, for the big twist or the dramatic finale but everything was played down and softly done. I think I just wanted something as powerful as Requiem for a Dream and instead got something which was holding back and maybe too clever for it's own good.

Overall: Not good but not really bad either 3/5. 

Drive (2011) Dir: Nicolas Winding Refn

Summary: A Hollywood stunt performer who moonlights as a wheelman discovers that a contract has been put on him after a heist gone wrong.

I love a film with beautiful silences, ones that stretch out for what seems like eternity but aren't awkward, they leave you time to breathe and take everything in; the gorgeous cinematography, the colours, the lighting, the wardrobe, the look on the character's faces, what has come before and what the script is building upto and Drive has them in spade. This was one of my 2 favourite films of last year (the other was Winters Bone) and if it doesn't get a nomination I will be furious.
Gosling is quiet, brooding, mysterious and scemeing, Mulligan is tender, soft and welcoming and even the woodeness of Pearlman cannot spoil this this masterpiece. The plot unfolds slowly rapped in the bold colours of day, the dark underbelly of night and the soundtrack of loneliness until the ultraviolent finale. Yes there are car chases that you would expect to see in a hollywood blockbuster, yes fundementally it is a heist movie but Winding Refn's indie astestic always keeps our focus on the lost soul that is the Driver. 
Winding Refn has come a long way since the Pusher Trillogy and Bronson and I really cannot wait to see what his next offering will be.

Overall: Simply gorgeous 5/5. 
P.S. Drive is release on DVD and snazzy Blueray on January 30th. I will be buying it.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011) Dir: David Fincher

Summary: Journalist Mikael Blomkvist is aided in his search for a woman who has been missing for forty years by Lisbeth Salander, a young computer hacker.

So why is the opening title sequence like being stuck in a Tool music video? It is so horrible I was jealous of the late comers who timed it perfectly to miss the cybergoth wet dream that I witnessed. This film only really left me with questions: Why does Lisbeth seem nervous and meek rather than angry and confident? Why is the 'background' music mixed as loud as the conversations? Why is the emotion implied by the music rather than the acting and why do Lisbeth's story seem to have been directed in a different style than Mikael's story? I know me and the Fincher have a rocky relationship (lets face it he hasn't done anything good since Zodiac), and I know I loved the book and the Swedish original but I really did try to go into this with an open mind. 

The music was the 1st thing that annoyed me, thumping beats to signify rising anger, off tune piano notes to symbolise tension and generally the way I was straining to hear the conversations. Next annoyance the pace seemed off, I felt I was thrown in with the characters rather than them being introduced, yet even though it felt like Fincher was rushing through it, it still went on forever................. I really thought it was ever going to end. Fincher also, even though he had 158 minutes, cut many of the more tender moments I loved in the original such as Mikael and Lisbeth's car journey. I didn't really engage with the film until Mikael and Lisbeth had united as until then I couldn't seem to find a coherency in the direction and then after the mystery of Harriet is reveled I felt frustration again Lisbeth begins to talk away too much and lose all her mystery. The only thing I really enjoyed was Daniel Craig who's use of his glasses was by far the best thing in this film.

Overall: What a waste, watch the original. 2 out of 5.

The Iron Lady (2011) Dir: Phyllida Lloyd

Summary: A look at the life of Margaret Thatcher, the former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, with a focus on the price she paid for power.

I did not want to see this, I especially did not want to pay money to see this and it was by far the bottom of my Oscars list but it's Meryl and Meryl Streep and the Oscar go together like marmalade and toast so there was no avoiding it. Balls.

It is scary how the Streep has completely been transformed into Thatcher Thatcher the milk snatcher, I can honestly say I got goose-pimples when she appeared on screen, even creepier was when Olivia Colman turned up as Carol Thatcher, the only thing that gave her away was her voice. The story is well crafted half love note to Denis Thatcher (played by the ever charming Jim Broadbent), half story of Thatcher's humble beginnings to pigheaded bully. Streep plays it all brilliantly and there is no faulting her, the script keeps you engaged and it is beautifully shot but there is no way to view this unbiased and therefore watching it is uncomfortable. You know the political events that are coming and you know the social unrest, you know the wrong decisions she made and the landscape of the country by the end of her 11 year reign, yet the film is very much as story about Thatcher's personal loss. The script focuses on Thatcher's loss of Denis due to his death, the loss of her children’s childhood due to her political ambition and the loss of her power.

The film very much reminded me of W. by Oliver Stone, you don't want to watch it, you don't like the character in it but it's still really interesting viewing and very well done.

Overall: With so many notable performances it is hard to hate this, definitely deserves a nomination for best make up at the very least. 4 out of 5.