The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014)

 

Year: 2014
Running Time: 100 minutes
Director: Wes Anderson
Writers: Stefan Zweig (based on the writings by), Hugo Guinness (story), Wes Anderson (story and screenplay)
Cast: Ralph Fiennes, F. Murray Abraham, Jude Law, Tony Revolori, Adrien Brody, Tilda Swinton, Jeff Goldblum, William H. Macy, Saoirse Ronan, Mathieu Amalric, Lea Seydoux, Harvey Keitel

The Grand Budapest Hotel will be released in Australia on the 10th April and is distributed by 20th Century Fox. Now showing in the United States and United Kingdom.

Wes Anderson's latest piece of cinema, The Grand Budapest Hotel is absolutely nothing short of grand itself. There is so much to marvel at during a viewing of this quirky but brilliant film. So much that you feel as though you need to watch it again just in case you missed something the first time around, and this is no bad thing. The whole film is a beautiful piece of art thanks to it's amazing visuals, extraordinary cinematography, interesting characters and wonderful screenplay.

While a young writer (Jude Law) is staying at the tired and rundown Grand Budapest Hotel, he meets the hotel's owner, Mr Mustafa (F. Murray Abraham) and enquires how he came to own the hotel. Mustafa tells the young writer of how he was a lobby boy (played by Tony Revolori) at the hotel between the wars and developed a close friendship with the concierge, M. Gustave (Ralph Fiennes). The intriguing tale of how these two became so close is one of theft, murder and adventure.

This is absolutely Wes Anderson's most visually beautiful film to date. There is not enough that can be said about the incredible production design employed in The Grand Budapest Hotel. Each shot is a unique piece of artwork carefully designed to create both awe and intrigue in the viewer.  From the very first scene in the cemetery, you are completely enthralled by how interesting the location is and the interest stirred in this opening continues throughout the film. The models of the hotel itself and of the structures among the mountains are just exquisite and somewhat playful at the same time. What does strike you watching the film is how neat and clean cut it is. Everything in the background of each shot is perfectly symmetrical from the pigeonholes at the hotel's front desk, to the prison beds to the formation of the soldiers on the train. While many of the shots employed are not uncommon in Anderson's body of work, this is the best use of his signature techniques thus far.

Before The Grand Budapest Hotel was released, there were several instructions sent out to the cinemas who would be showing this film. These instructions included using widescreen in panoramic shots and shortening the screen in others, a great technique as it draws the audience into the picture more. The musical score is also extraordinarily intriguing, particularly in the parts of high tension when the music would have you believe you are watching a horror or thriller film from the 1930's. The Grand Budapest Hotel is also extremely atmospheric and nostalgic of it's time and place in an unique fashion. You can smell the scent of the hotel in both it's glory days and it's harsh times, as well as feel the cold and harshness of the conditions in the European state of unrest.

The screenplay, based on the writings of  Stefan Zweig, is also very good. Through the film you know where it is heading, but you don't know how it is getting there and the way it gets there is not as interesting as the visuals, but still extremely entertaining. People familiar with other Wes Anderson films such as The Royal Tenenbaums and The Darjeeling Limited will know that Anderson's brand of humour is not the stereotypical Hollywood humour, and that this unconventional, quirky sense of humour may strike some members of the audience as weird and dull. However, the ones who do appreciate this quirkiness will be pleased. There are not many moments where you feel like rolling on the floor laughing, but are many amusing pieces of dialogue and comedic timing by the performers.

The Grand Budapest Hotel has an impressive stellar cast, many who have worked with Anderson before and again perform well under his guidance. Ralph Fiennes is wonderful as M. Gustave. He has a tremendous amount of character and although some of his practises are questionable to say the least, he is very likable. His entertaining dialogue is delivered exquisitely with perfect timing and emotion where called for.

An unrecognisable Tilda Swinton's role is somewhat brief, but her time on screen as Gustave's much older lover is definitely memorable.It is a pleasure to see F. Murray Abraham on screen, as his charisma gives off an air of respect and importance, although in the most subtle way. Adrien Brody and William H. Macy are the villains of the story and are really a lot of fun, particularly Macy.

The Grand Budapest Hotel is an absolute cinematic treat. There is real fun to be had with this film and if you love Wes Anderson's unique film making style, this is nothing short of a masterpiece.

8.5/10

Hugo (2011)

Hugo

Year:  2011

Director: Martin Scorsese

Cast: Asa Butterfield, Chloe Grace Moretz, Ben Kingsley, Sacha Baron Cohen, Helen McCrory, Emily Mortimer, Christopher Lee, Jude Law

Before I begin my review….

                Hugo to me was like having that “Hallelujah” moment where you finally see the light.

                I smiled, I cried and I was devastated when it was over! This was very much a “me” movie in that it contained so many things which I love such as the city of Paris, history, film, books, originality and a director by the name of Martin Scorsese.

                I have to admit, until Hugo I didn’t know much about George Melies, besides that he was the creator of the early film, A Trip To The Moon. When Hugo first speaks of his father telling him about the film he saw where the rocket hit the moon right in the eye, I immediately saw that infamous image from the film in my mind.

                However, of course I had to wonder how much of Hugo is actually based on fact. Not that it really mattered because it made a great story anyway, but it was still intriguing. So I did my research and came up with the answer that everything we see in Hugo about Melies’ professional life is true, but his personal life not so much. I can’t really say too much on this topic without giving away too much about the film.

                I am really looking forward to reading The Invention of Hugo Cabret by Brian Selznick. Oh, there is another thing which makes this film complete for me, a Selznick involved! Brian Selznick’s grandfather was the first cousin of none other than David O. Selznick, the producer of many a film in the golden years of Hollywood and was most well known for producing the epic Gone With The Wind.

Review

                It is not often a film like Hugo is brought to our cinema screens.

                Martin Scorsese has taken a chance with this film which is completely different to any other film he has ever made, and has proved that he really can do anything. Hugo is a beautiful film with a fantasy feel to it, yet the characters are so real and real human emotions are dealt with.

                Hugo tells the story of recently orphaned Hugo Cabret (Asa Butterfield), who lives a quiet life in a train station in Paris in the 1930’s and looks after the clocks there. He feels like the only link he still has to his father (Jude Law) is the automaton which Hugo is trying to fix. His world starts to shift and he is taken on a great adventure when he starts to work for the train station’s unhappy toy maker, George Melies (Ben Kingsley) and meets his god-daughter, Isabelle (Chloe Grace Moretz). He and Isabelle set out to solve a mystery that will change all their lives forever.

                Hugo is beautiful from the very beginning. It is visually stunning from the opening scene, where the inside of a clock turns into a shot of 1930’s Paris. The visuals make you feel as though you are watching a pretty, fantasy film, but there is nothing to support the notion of this being a fantasy film. Every scene is beautiful in its own way and the recreation of Paris in the early 1900’s is spellbinding.

                The film is for people of all ages. On the surface, Hugo comes across as a children’s film with the protagonist being a child. Yet, there is so much in the film that will keep people of all ages entertained right up until the end.

                It is incredibly hard to fault this film. Scorsese has taken such a risk with bringing the novel The Invention of Hugo Cabret by Brian Selznick to the screen considering his past resume of films. Hugo is unlike anything he has ever done before and it is truly a triumph for him. The film is so tight and perfectly directed. Everything is done to perfection and every little piece of the film is a masterpiece.

                Asa Butterfield is absolutely superb as Hugo. He is heart-breaking as the orphan who clearly just wants to know where he is going and just misses his father. There is very little in the film of Jude Law, who plays Hugo’s father, and with such a small role, it is unusual to feel the connection between two characters when they appear on screen for so little time together. However, you actually feel more chemistry between Hugo and his father after his father dies. This is a credit to the young Butterfield. He is wonderful.

                Ben Kingsley is also perfect in the role of George Melies. He is the absolute perfect choice for the role, and not just because the resemblance is startling between the two. You really feel Melies’ pain of the past and he is, like Butterfield, heart-breaking. Helen McCrory is also wonderful as Melies’ wife, as she gives an emotionally charged performance and is so likable, even when she isn’t supposed to be.

                Sacha Baron Cohen is also very good in Hugo as the station’s inspector. He is very funny, but in a different way than we are used to. He is charmingly funny and at times you can really see the dramatic actor behind all the comedy. Chloe Grace Moretz is also very good, but her role isn’t as emotionally charged as her co-stars.

                Hugo is the type of film that does not come around very often and is a complete joy to behold. An absolute masterpiece.

9.5/10

Sources
Imdb.com
Welcome to The Invention of Hugo Cabret

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows

Year: 2011

Director: Guy Ritchie

Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law, Noomi Rapace, Rachel McAdams, Jared Harris, Stephen Fry

Before I begin my review….

                Personally, I have so much respect for Robert Downey Jr.

My husband will tell you it is because of his looks that I say this. Don’t get me wrong, he is a very good looking man, but this isn’t the main reason I am such a fan. I think he is an amazing actor who brings his quirky streak to his performances and when you go to see a Downey Jr. movie, you know you are never in for a dull and lifeless performance.

                I also have tremendous respect for his marriage to Susan Downey. I love these two as a couple. Any footage of these two tells you that these two are the perfect type of couple, they are best friends who are clearly in love and infatuated with each other. Robert is always complimenting Susan and Susan is continuously glowing every time she looks at her husband.

                As we know, Downey Jr. has not always been the golden boy of Hollywood with several visits to jail and drug addiction in the late 1990’s. Yet, life just seemed to get better and better for him once he met producer, Susan Levin on the set of Gothika in 2003. The couple married in 2005 and Downey Jr.’s career started to take and upward turn not long after. I am not saying that Susan is the sole reason why his career has been so successful in the past few years, but it does no harm being in a happy and supportive relationship, especially when she is also the producer in the majority of his films.

                The happy couple are expecting their first child together this February and we wish them all the best!

Anyway, onto my review of Downey Jr.’s latest film, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows,

Review

                A sequel is a sequel, you can’t expect too much more than what you know a typical sequel is.

                This doesn’t mean that Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows is a bad movie, it just puts the words into your mouth that you often hear after most sequels, “It wasn’t as good as the first”. Yet, do we expect it to be? If you normally think like this with a sequel, you are setting yourself up for disappointment. If you go in not expecting it to be as good as the first film and just appreciate it for what it is, you avoid disappointment and just enjoy what has been given to you.

                However, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows is better than your typical sequel. Director, Guy Ritchie has bought across to the new film what made the first film work such as amazing cinematography and a killer score by Hans Zimmer, but has enhanced the comedic value of the film.

                In the second of the latest Sherlock Holmes films, Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) and his ever trusted companion, John Watson (Jude Law) are in pursuit of Professor Moriarty (Jared Harris), who Holmes believes is behind a series of disasters across Europe. Moriarty makes Watson and his new wife, Mary (Kelly Reilly) his target in response thus forcing Holmes to retaliate and set out to overthrow his plans to unleash havoc on all of Europe.

                There is no doubt that Ritchie knows how to direct a film. He proved the perfect choice for the first Sherlock Holmes and he has carried on into the second instalment what works. The film is very entertaining and is visually fantastic to watch. There are several “wow” scenes such as the chase through the woods. The editing and cinematography in such scenes as this are breathtaking.

                However, the story and script are nowhere near as strong as they were in the first film. This Sherlock Holmes doesn’t have the same air of mystery that a Sherlock Holmes story traditionally has, it is more an action film than a mystery. The story isn’t very strong and feels a bit jumpy at times.

                It also feels as though the script by Michele and Kieran Mulroney is trying to be a little too funny. What made the first Sherlock Holmes work was the subtle humour involved and the witty script. A Game of Shadows tries a little too hard and works too much on the comedy side rather than on a tight script and story. Granted, it is funny so it does work in that way and it does make it entertaining, but it would have been nice to have seen the focus shifted to a cleverly written script.

                However, the film’s story does strengthen towards the end and it is actually an ending most people will not see coming.

                Robert Downey Jr. is still perfect as the lead role in this film. He has the right amount of quirkiness, strength and belief in his character to bring Holmes to life and make him likable. Downey Jr. and Jude Law’s best friend/ partner in crime relationship peaks at the right time in the story and in the right ways. They feel distanced and without chemistry at the beginning when Watson is preparing for mystery retirement and marriage, but they work as one again by the end of the film.

                Noomi Rapace still looks a tad lost in the film and there really is no strength in her performance, even in moments where there should be.

                A great holiday movie and an above average sequel.

6.5/10

Sources
The Internet Movie Database
RadarOnline.com

Contagion (2011)

Contagion

Year: 2011

Director: Steven Soderbergh

Cast: Gwyneth Paltrow, Matt Damon, Kate Winslet, Laurence Fishburne, Jude Law, Marion Cotillard

Before I begin my review………

Contagion is not a movie for hypochondriacs or those who are obsessive compulsive.

If you think you are sick all the time and are constantly worried that you are going to catch something somehow, Contagion will only fuel the fire.

I don’t consider myself a hypochondriac or obsessive compulsive, but this movie had the ability to make me paranoid. When Kate Winslet’s character, Dr Erin Mears said “The average person touches their face 3000 times a day”, I immediately became aware of how many times I touched my face or whenever someone around me did.

One of the first signs of the virus in the film is the presence of a cough. There were some coughers in the cinema, and my heart skipped a beat every time I heard one of them.

I suppose these reactions I had to the film are just an indication of how realistic Contagion is. It is now a few hours since I saw the film and the more time elapses, the more disturbing I find it. The dislodging of your emotions in a film is always a sign of a good film. You may enjoy the film or not, but the fact is that if a film makes you feel a way you weren’t feeling when you walked in the cinema, then it is doing something right.

Review……..

Contagion is Steven Soderbergh back to his best.

Soderbergh rejuvenates his ability to unsettle his audience while they are completely unaware as they are completely taken by his brilliant film-making skills.

Beth Emhoff (Gwyneth Paltrow) returns from a business trip to Hong Kong with what she thinks is a bad case of the flu combined with jet lag. It is clearly not, as Beth and her young son both collapse into seizures and die within a few days. Her husband, Mitch (Matt Damon) is determined to find out what happened to his wife. The virus spreads rapidly around the globe and with millions affected and scientists cannot find a cure quick enough.

Although Contagion can be considered a suspense film, the film goes deeper than just being a race against the disease. Contagion is a scary dose of the mortality of humans and how society acts when faced with their mortality.  The realism in the film is incredible. Soderbergh’s direction makes you feel like you are right there when everything happens.

However, Contagion does lack something which a suspense film normally excels at, pace.  The first half of the film is the perfect pace, while the second half completely slows down and makes it feel longer than its 106 minutes. Yet this is Soderbergh taking time to show the stages society goes through and what the virus does to each of the characters emotionally.  This period of the film does come across as a time where not much is really happening, but look deeper to see what Contagion is really trying to tell you.

The musical score is fantastic and completely suits the atmosphere of the film. The beginning sequence of the film is the perfect way to begin the film and heightens your curiousity and interest straight away.

There is not one actor who puts in a bad performance in Contagion. Kate Winslet, Marion Cotillard and Laurence Fishburne are perfect in their roles, but these three actors seem to be a rare breed of actor who can clearly just not give a bad performance.

Jude Law is also a real stand out with a role which is very different to his usual role. His character of Alan Krumwiede is very interesting. He plays the part well of the “journalist” who completely takes advantage of the situation, or so it seems.

Matt Damon is probably the only lead actor who you feel could have given more in his role. He isn’t quite as grief stricken as he should be considering his wife and stepson have just died. The relationship with his daughter, Jory played by newcomer, Anna Jacoby-Heron, doesn’t seem at all realistic. However, Jacoby-Heron is one to watch out for.

Contagion may not be a film for those who are worried about their mortality and health and will unsettle you, but there is no denying that it is very well made and a piece of art.

8/10

Sherlock Holmes

Sherlock Holmes
Year: 2009
Director: Guy Ritchie
Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law, Rachel McAdams

In My Own Words
Everyone knows the basics of “Sherlock Holmes”. He is a British detective who has an offsider named Watson. That’s pretty much my extent of my knowledge of Sherlock Holmes. I love reading, but have never read a Sherlock Holmes book. Upon seeing this film, I was expecting a bit of a background about Holmes, or maybe even a beginning point where Holmes becomes a detective. This is not what the film is about. It throws you in the deep end of a Holmes story and expects you to understand everything and everyone in it. This is not always a bad thing, as a little mystery in a film is a good thing. However, too much mystery can be messy.

Upon researching a bit more once I got home, it turns out that Sherlock Holmes’ creator, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle actually does not disclose much about Holmes’ world outside his detective work. He does not write much about his family, his past education or his love life. So this film can be forgiven for its lack of character development. Yet, I still believe that a director such as Guy Ritchie could find a way of including some type of subtle character development, whether or not it be through words. Perhaps he was just trying to stay true to the books, as many directors who are adapting novels into movies do. One thing is certain, there must be a sequel to this film, as too many questions are unanswered here for there not to be. We can only hope so anyway, or it will be one of those films I will be thinking about for years to come, still trying to figure out why certain things were there in the movie. Such as, does Watson’s betrothed, Mary, really look a bit suspicious, or is it just me? Or was Irene Adler constructed so basically because she is to have an unravelling or character in the future? These are the things I am wondering about anyway.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
The highly anticipated “Sherlock Holmes” will delight many, but disappoint many others. The film ultimately does what it sets out to do, which is entertain the audience. It is nothing short of entertaining with its special effects and action sequences, but it does certainly lack substance in certain areas, in particular, that of character. “Sherlock Holmes” opens with the legendary Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) and his partner, Dr John Watson (Jude Law) stopping the evil Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong) from taking the life of a sixth young woman by using his black magic. Lord Blackwood is sentenced to death and hung, but somehow comes back to life. Holmes is once again called upon to stop Blackwood, who also has a keen interest in Holmes.

First and foremost, this film is thoroughly entertaining. The special effects and the story will keep audiences entertained and capture their attention for the whole time. There are some stunning visuals of London in the 1800’s and the period is perfectly captured by director, Guy Ritchie. It is obvious that this film has been made by Ritchie, as it contains dark humour and has a rough edge to it. It also contains a few fighting scenes which are reminiscent of his earlier films. He does do a good job, but there are quite a few criticisms of this film. Firstly, there is not much character development and many things that do not seem to make sense. As a stand alone film, it does not work quite so well. Ritchie assumes that the audience knows who Holmes, Watson and Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams) are, and does not attempt to give the audience a helping hand as to find out where these characters have come from and why they are the way they are, and why they have these relationships with each other. Apparently, the Sherlock Holmes creator, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, was not a fan of the retelling of each of the characters and their personal stories in his novels, so Ritchie may be forgiven for making this choice in his film, as he stayed true to the novels. However, many audience members will be sure to feel lost, as they would not have heard much about these characters before seeing this movie. The film does also leave room for a sequel, as there are unanswered questions both during the film and at the end of the film.

Robert Downey Jr. does definitely shine as Sherlock Holmes. He is quirky and puts a new spin on the traditional Sherlock Holmes, making him more rugged and comical. He is also extremely likable. Jude Law is also perfectly cast as Watson. The two actors compliment each other on screen and play off each other. The characters are both witty and quick, making their relationship interesting and humorous. The screenwriters must be complimented for the way they have written the relationship between Holmes and Watson. However, Rachel McAdams does not shine. She does not seem suited to the role of Irene Adler. One would expect, as she is said to be a criminal, for her to be far more devious in nature and bordering on the femme fatale role, rather than just plain. There does not seem to be much depth to her character and can in fact be quite boring at times. There are moments throughout the film where it is unclear why she is even there. Adler and Holmes were supposedly madly in love with one another once up a time (or, we suspect this, but there is not spark or on screen chemistry between her and Holmes. There is suggestion towards the end of the film that if there is a follow up, she may have a bigger role then, but her role is almost useless in this film. It would seem that Kelly Reilly, who plays Watson’s fiancé Mary, would have been more suited to the role of Irene Adler than McAdams.

Overall, “Sherlock Holmes” does what it sets out to do, entertain. It is witty and clever, and people will be excited to learn of all of Holmes detective methods, but the connection to the characters may not be there as much as one would hope.
6.5/10

The Imaginarium Of Doctor Panassus

The Imaginarium Of Doctor Panassus
Year: 2009
Director: Terry Gilliam
Cast: Heath Ledger, Christopher Plummer, Lily Cole, Tom Waits, Johnny Depp, Jude Law, Colin Farrell

In My Own Words
Another movie I had the pleasure of seeing for free as I also won tickets to this! I did not know much about this movie when I walked into the cinema. All I really knew about it was that it was a fantasy and that it was Heath Ledger’s last movie. This fact in itself will draw crowds to see it. The movie itself, I found interesting. It was one of those movies that I go home and look up information about, particularly about how the film managed to be finished without one of the main characters. From doing this, it was easy to see how the films opening was a great deal delayed. The script had to be rewritten and Johnny Depp, Jude Law and Colin Farrell had to be brought in. I won’t go into the reasons why these actors were brought in, as it would definitely contain spoilers for those who plan to see the movie. However, it is admirable that this movie was finally released, as many movies become unfinished projects when one of the leads dies in the middle of filming. For example, 1962 movie “Something’s Got To Give” remains unfinished due to the death of Marilyn Monroe.

I’m glad I saw this movie, as it is not often a movie comes out like “The Imaginarium Of Doctor Panassus”. It was something different and although not a movie I would go out and buy on DVD, was a pleasant watch. However, it is slightly odd, or very odd, depending on what you are into.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
“The Imaginarium Of Doctor Panassus” is a clever, visually stunning fantasy movie, that some will adore, but it will also seem a little too far fetched for others. If you enjoy films that combine the modern world with fantasy without crossing over into the sci-fi genre, this movie may well be for you. While fantasy fans will flock to see this film, so will many others just to watch Heath Ledger in his last performance on the big screen. “The Imaginarium Of Doctor Panassus” is all of these things... a Heath Ledger tribute, stunningly beautiful and completely and utterly bizarre.

Thousand year old story-teller and imagination guider Doctor Panassus (Christopher Plummer) is the leader of a travelling sideshow in modern times, which is extremely unsuccessful. As a result of a wager he made with the devil, Mr Nick( Tom Waits), sixteen years ago, he is in danger of losing his beautiful daughter, Valentina (Lily Cole). A new wager is set up to see who gets to keep Valentina, both Mr Nick and Doctor Panassus vie to be the first to collect five souls in the Imaginarium. With the appearance of a mysterious stranger, Tony (Heath Ledger) the competition turns out to be more than what everyone involved has bargained for. “The Imaginarium Of Doctor Panassus” is very slow to begin with, but speeds up in the second half to the point that it is almost going too fast. The story gains momentum and becomes intriguing in the second half, thanks to the entrance of the Imaginarium in the film. The visuals created for the Imaginarium are amazing, and are likened to a cross between the visuals in “Lord Of The Rings” and “Corpse Bride’, beautiful yet dark. Even the stage for the Imaginarium is beautiful and vintage, as are the costumes used for Doctor Panassus and his troop.

The first image of Ledger in the movie is almost spooky, like seeing an image from beyond the grave. It is an extremely different role to the ones in which Ledger was known for, although it isn’t too far removed from the Joker in “The Dark Knight” in some sequences. It is a fitting farewell to the Australian actor, and a fun and pleasant last role for fans to remember him by. The role of Doctor Panassus, as played by Plummer, is supposed to be of a role in which people feel sorry for and connect with. However, he just comes across as a drunk who doesn’t show much feeling until the very end. Perhaps the best performance in the movie is by model turned actress Lily Cole. Her portrayal of the young and naïve Valentina show both the strong and weak sides of her character. Valentina is both a temptress and a child and Cole is perfect in the role. She shows how she has made the successful transition from model to actor and has a promising acting career ahead of her. Johnny Depp, Jude Law and Colin Farrell’s roles are more like cameos, there in place of Ledger. Their roles are, however, not clearly defined, and are more like talking points for the audience to decode and come to their own conclusion about what they mean after the movie.

As mentioned, it is a great story and very clever. The writers did a great job of reassembling the script after the shock of having one of the major stars die. One would have to imagine what their Imaginarium would be like. However, much of the film is not thoroughly explained and can be confusing. It is not a realistic movie at all, which is inevitable of it being a fantasy film, but it can come across as extremely bizarre. This degree of strangeness will be a reason why people both love and hate the film.

7/10