54th BFI London Film Festival: 127 Hours (2010)

127 Hours, 2010.

Directed by Danny Boyle.
Starring James Franco, Kate Mara, Amber Tamblyn, Clémence Poésy and Lizzy Caplan.


SYNOPSIS:

The true story of mountain climber Aron Ralston, who found himself trapped by a boulder for five days in May 2003.


Slumdog Millionaire had phenomenal success, winning eight Oscars and seven BAFTA’s to name just a few awards it picked up. So how do the same filmmaking team follow up a movie that has literally won everything? Danny Boyle (director) and Simon Beaufoy (writer) give you... 127 Hours.

Based on Aron Ralston’s book Between a Rock and a Hard Place, the film details his horrific ordeal whilst climbing a canyon in Utah. He falls down a crevasse and his right arm gets trapped by a loose boulder that pins him down in the crack of an awesomely desolate valley. Aron, being a self-confessed ‘hard nut’, goes on his adventure without notifying anybody of his whereabouts, something that it quite humourously dealt with at the end of the film: “Aron now leaves a note letting people know where he is going”.

Boyle expertly takes the audience in to the ‘situation’ Aron (played very well by James Franco) finds himself in. In a few films that are quite claustrophobic audiences feel threatened by the scenarios, but as well as that in 127 Hours I found myself constantly thinking ‘what would I do in this situation?’ after every attempt Aron makes to try and free himself. His final option, which many already know, is still done in highly dramatic and real fashion. There have been reports that several people have fainted during the scene where he frees himself, and in an interview with TXT Movie Club Boyle says “The danger is that it becomes the be all and end all of seeing the movie. What follows is a moment of redemption where he enters into the sunlight. People should see it in that context. I hope it doesn’t put people off who feel that they might get too distressed by it. It’s not distressing in that sense, but it is intense.”

The film has a similar feel to the recent released Buried starring Ryan Reynolds. Both protagonists find themselves trapped in seemingly inescapable positions, the only difference is that Boyle mixes things up a bit. I’m not taking anything away from Buried, I thoroughly enjoyed that film, nor am I comparing it directly to 127 Hours. But Boyle uses flash backs, hallucinations and a range of creative camera angles to liven up what has the potential to be a boring sequence of events. Seeing someone trapped for a long while, there is only so much you can do with a brief like that to work from, but Boyle’s flair is tried and tested here - and it passes with flying colours.

Another interesting dimension added to the dilemma is Aron’s humour. He has with him a camcorder and a digital camera (which he uses to take a photo of an important possession he leaves behind when he escapes). He records videos for his family should he not make it back and makes funny remarks to help keep his spirits up. Either through humour or insanity he also mock interviews himself, even saying “you didn’t even tell anyone where you were going? Oops!” If these video recordings are indeed based on the Ralston’s actual messages then it really does show his inner strength.

Danny Boyle teams up with two cinematographers on this film, one of whom he has worked with before on Slumdog. Slumdog had a dazzling array of bright colours in a lot of scenes that were captured beautifully, and in 127 Hours there is one colour that is dominant - orange. Rich orange covers the terrain that Aron explores and although it is a dominant feature it is not over baring. The battle of man vs nature is portrayed excellently and the aerial shots of the canyon really emphasise its beauty, vastness and unpredictability.

Overall the film is gripping, more funny than I thought it would be, thought provoking and it has a powerful ending with shots of the real Aron and his young family. Boyle can again add another film to his consistently great filmography.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

Movie Review Archive

54th BFI London Film Festival: 2010 Award Winners

The 54th BFI London Film Festival drew to a close yesterday with the announcement of the festival's award winners at a star-studded ceremony in London's LSO St Luke's.

The festival jury - chaired by Patricia Clarkson and including Gabriel Byrne, Sandy Powell and Shekhar Kapur - presented Russian director Aleksei Popogrebsky with the Best Film award for his psychological drama How I Ended This Summer, while British filmmaker Danny Boyle was presented with the prestigious BFI Fellowship for his outstanding contribution to film.

Also in attendance was Martin Scorsese, who delivered a special tribute to the work of the BFI National Archive for its 75th anniversary.


A full rundown of the award winners...

BFI Fellowship: Danny Boyle

Best Film: How I Ended This Summer (dir. Aleksei Popogrebsky)

"Tense, moving and universal in its scope, this is a cinematic tour de force." - Patricia Clarkson

Special commendation to Archipelago (dir. Joanna Hogg)

Best British Newcomer: Clio Barnard, director of The Arbor

"Clio Barnard’s genre-busting film The Arbor is innovative, eloquent and emotionally resonant... a stunning debut" - Tony Grisoni

Sutherland Award: Clio Barnard (The Arbor)

"This is a challenging, moving and utterly memorable film and a deserving winner of the Sutherland Award" - Sandra Hebron

Grierson Award for Best Documentary: Armadillo (dir. Janus Metz)

"Armadillo is a touchstone film that will be watched for years to come.” - Kevin Macdonald

We'll be finishing up our coverage of the London Film Festival here at Flickering Myth over the next few days, while highlights of the awards ceremony will be broadcast on Sky Arts 2 HD on November 7th.

54th BFI London Film Festival: West is West Q&A

Coverage of the West is West Q&A from the London Film Festival...

In attendance:

• Ayub Khan-Din (Writer)
• Lesley Nicol (Anne)
• Ila Arun (Basheera)
• Aquib Khan (Sajid)
• Emil Marwa (Maneer)
• Om Puri (George)

It’s been eleven years since the first film (East is East) which was very successful. It seems an extraordinary long time for a sequel when in general sequels tend to get rushed out. Explain a little why it’s taken so long.

Ayub: Before I was writing I was an actor and writing was just something I did as a hobby between jobs. I had written East is East in around ’82/’83 when I was at drama school and again much later, I think it was ’89/’90, I wrote a film called Riffle Was Here which was basically West is West. It was the follow on from East is East. After East is East came out I didn’t think about writing a sequel to it. Riffle Was Here was around. The “huge-ness” of the success of East is East was off putting. Also, having seen lots of other sequels that didn’t quite capture the original of that author was a stumbling block for me. But then a couple of years ago I stared looking a the script for Riffle Was Here and I just kind of thought what was important was to create a film that was a story in itself. You wouldn’t have to refer back to East is East, it had to be a stand alone story for me. And also for me, the worst thing about sequels is they do try to go back and do the same kind of gags and things that the earlier film did. So for me this film had to move forward, both emotionally and with the comic stance as well.

The film started off very light hearted and then developed well into a deeper area. When is the next part of the trilogy going to be?

Ayub: The thing about trilogies is that people always look at the first and second films. I don’t know probably this year or next year. I’m thinking about it now.


Three of our guests here are returning from the first film. Om, you return as the fearsome George. It must be strange coming back to a character after so long. How did it feel?

Om: It feels normal to me. The way George Khan gradually develops in East is East, I look at him at the end of the film as a mellowed person. When he’s about to hit his wife, Emil (Mandeer) grabs his hand and looks straight into his eyes and that’s where I tried to interpret that in George Khan’s eyes, the feeling is that his empire is over. He can’t take the children for granted any more and therefore he has to change his perspective and he has to behave himself. He spends the entire night in the chip shop. In the morning when Ella finds him sitting there on a chair and she asks him if he wants a cup of tea he says “I’ll have half a cup”. In this film he’s a much mellowed George Khan who’s matured, who’s full of guilt, embarrassment, awkwardness, especially when his British wife, without announcing it, lands in Pakistan and he’s totally dumbfounded. He doesn’t know how to react and how to handle this enourmous situation.

How much research did you have to put in for the script [for growing up in a mixed race household]?

Ayub: East is East is pretty autobiographical. The parents were directly drawn from my own parents. In my family there were ten kids, but unfortunately with the play [East is East was originally a stage play], and also with the film, we couldn’t afford to have a bigger cast so it was all kind of condensed down. All the arguments, like the children arguing in East is East, I formed in my own head over a period of time. it’s not something you think about when you’re a kid, you just duck. With my Dad basically you just ducked down quick and let the next one get it! So you don’t really think in those kind of terms about the wider argument, it’s only later on when I started writing East is East that I tried to understand his perspective on life, who he was, how he thought our lives should be. It was only at that time, much later, that those arguments kind of formed, and I automatically started drawing on experiences and situations that happened to me. West is West again is based on my experience. I got sent to Pakistan when I was twelve years old. I was wagging school, doing a bit of shop lifting, just being a horrible teenager. My brother was already out there and my parents thought it might be a good idea to get rid of me for a year for me to look at a different life outside of Salford. I did go there and I ran riot for a year. My Dad’s first wife and family weren’t keen on me, I wasn’t keen on them and we were just kind of knocking heads all the time. But again much later when I came to start writing West is West, after East is East there were a lot of unanswered questions. People wanted to know more, people wanted to specifically know more about that woman in Pakistan and about the daughters and about the children. For me I thought I want to know more. All I knew was the antagonism that we had, but I really wanted to explore how that woman felt. After thirty five years suddenly he [George] sends two boys who turn up on her doorstep. It enabled me to try and get into her skin and to try and tell her story.

Emil: Well I was first part of the stage play and being mixed race myself I drew from my own experience. What was nice was reading West is West and actually seeing that my character had a nicer journey if you like, a more mature journey. He becomes a man, he is standing up to his father which he doesn’t have the opportunity to do in East is East. It was great for me as an actor to take that character on further and develop him in such a way. Ayub wrote it in such a way that it gives Maneer [his character] a chance to sort of develop out of this religious zone where he’s desperately trying to please his father. He goes to Pakistan in order to find a wife but at the same time he learns that things aren’t the way his father told him they were, and that’s what gives him the strength to stand up to him. And eventually, luckily enough, he finds himself a wife.


Aquib, this is your first acting experience and you’re taking over, if you like, a character [Sajid] that was rather well loved first time around. That must have been quite a challenge?

Aquib: Yeah, nearly everyone I know has seen East is East so I knew it would be pretty challenging but I thought I’d relate myself towards him because I am an annoying little teenager! So actually it was pretty easy!

So some experiences you have in the film, are they from real life too?

Aquib: Yeah there were some experiences from real life. I have lived in some areas around where I live, in Bradford, which were pretty racist and me being British Pakistani I could draw from those experiences and add it towards this film. He [Sajid] experiences racism from both sides not just from the white culture but the Pakistani culture as well. When he goes there they say “who’s this little English boy?”

What were the challenges, if any, when scripting this film to make it appear as a stand alone film?

Ayub: I think the major challenge for me, even before I started writing it, was thinking about Ella and the first wife in Pakistan. It was one of the most important issues in the film, that these two people have to communicate in some way. Every time I started thinking about it I was coming up against a brick wall because technically one spoke English and one spoke Punjabi so to have a third party in that scene that they have together in the film would have been taking away from it. And then it suddenly dawned on me that it didn’t matter that they didn’t speak the same language because they were talking about the one person they both loved, in a different way, but it was the one person they were both focusing on at that point. They communicate through the gestures they make. I wanted to be really clear when I was writing about that, about the way they both touched things and touched each other. Until I got that, that was the most difficult part of the project for me. Once that had happened so many different things started falling into place. I wanted to tell Basheera’s story well, without just being about this angry woman who had been abandoned thirty five years before. I wanted to make her a rounded character so you could understand exactly who she was and the decisions that she was going to make about this relationship and this man. A lot of the groundwork had gone in when I wrote Riffle Was Here so it wasn’t just jumping in to something that was completely new. I had a rough outline from the original script I started to write that I could follow. I was also trying to follow on from East is East so I had to decide to take only two of the boys. It was hard to discard those other characters because they were fantastic and needed to have a voice as well but I thought at this point the two most important were Sajid, the youngest boy, an Maneer the religious boy. Both those characters had to have a Road to Damascus moment.

Ila, you are new cast member is this potential saga. When you read the script how truthful did you feel it was from when you first saw it?

Ila: Like Ayub said, my character was genuinely a very well written role, and I can see thousands of such women who are forced to be silent. I could see their pain, so for me to get into that role it’s emotional, for any woman not just Pakistani. So for this fantastic role I can give what a woman can give, all the emotions. I [as the character] was told be silent for all those years, I don’t just want to speak for two minutes now.

Ila and Aquib, what was it like joining an already established cast, and also for everyone, what challenges did you face shooting in India?

Aquib: At first I found it pretty hard to blend in to the family, but I just thought ‘I am Sajid’, he is me now, and pretended the character hasn’t changed. Going to India was fantastic, it was the first time I’ve been there, I love the climate obviously, coming from rainy Britain! I stayed there for six or seven weeks. I’ve been to Pakistan before so it’s a lot like that, I could speak the language so it was great.

Ila: I always felt I was part of the family as Mrs Khan number one! So I’m shocked when [speaking in character] my husband comes back with these two sons who will take their own time to adjust. I felt absolutely at home. I think it was a difficult job for George (Om Puri) who ignored me, left and created his own world. I was waiting for them to come back and for me it wasn’t a problem.


Lesley you are another returning character [as Auntie Annie]. What were the challenges you faced in India?

Lesley: To be honest there weren’t really any challenges. It was one of those dream jobs. I’ve been a part of this whole East is East project, and West is West, for fourteen years. We did the stage play together, it’s been a family affair for a very long time. Weirdly Ayub [writer] and I had been working together in a television drama when he handed me the script and said ‘do you want to have a look at this?’ It’s been a project very close to our hearts, still is. India is beyond wonderful and I can’t wait to go back. All the crew their, the Indian crew, and to have Ila there was a great privilege and everyone was wonderful as always. It was a very very happy job and I feel lucky to have been there.

Ayub, were you conscious to portray a more positive image of Pakistan than we often see in the media over here , and were would you take the trilogy in the third part? Would we be following them once they [the Khan family] got back to the UK?

Ayub: So many things happened after East is East, like the bombings in London. No matter what I did people were going to refer back to that. I was writing about the Pakistan I saw in 1974 when I was there. You can’t make references to what’s going on today and what’s happening in Pakistan now. I didn’t attempt that, I just wanted to portray what I saw at the time and put my characters into that period. In terms of what’s going to happen next I can’t really say yet! George has got an understanding with his younger son and at the end of East is East there was a kind of ‘live and let live’ situation that was going on with the older sons. He hasn’t really come to turn with his older sons and his older sons haven’t really come to terms with him yet. There has to be a situation that brings those people together. Even being brought together by an emotional situation, whether or not they’ll walk away with any further understanding of each other I’ve yet to kind of develop.

Om, if you could chose what Ayub wrote about you [as George] for the third film what would you like him to do with your character?

Om: I want to live with both the women!

Aquib, this is your first film, and a major role, how did that feel? And on the subject of this being a trilogy is it going to be set in the 70’s/80’s again or are you going to bring it to 2010/2011?

Ayub: No it’s going to be around the time I left school so ’77, ’78, late seventies, early eighties.

Lesley: Well the clothes are fabulous!

And Aquib, how did this first major role feel and did anything go wrong at all?

Aquib: I wouldn’t say anything went wrong, it was all smooth. I just tried not to think about it because I knew if I thought about it there’d be pressure and I might break down! I just thought ‘this is my new family for six weeks’ and to just blend in. I just thought ‘I’m Sajid now’, it’s pretty easy to play, that’s it!

It’s been eleven years now, and I remember when East is East came out and it felt like a landmark, a chance to see Asians in a great British film. There have been more representations since so I wondered what the panel thought of the intervening years, whether we’ve [Asians] been represented more on screen.

Om: I’m not really familiar because I don’t live here.

Emil: I’m thinking off the top of my head, Slumdog Millionaire. Well actually that’s set in India isn’t it. We’re talking Bend It Like Beckham, It’s A Wonderful Afterlife, Gurinder [Chadha]’s films. Basically I can only think of Gurinder’s films, so in answer to that I would have to say not really.

Ayub let me just come to you with this. I remember talking to you a few years ago and you saying that there had been a very limited representation, an almost patronising wave of Asian characters. I think you yourself were in something like London Bridge, a television series, then things perked up a bit. What’s your observation?

Ayub: It changes. When I came out of drama school, the only representation we [Asians] had in the media was we either played shopkeepers or were beaten up by skinheads, or we were just being allowed to be doctors. But it gets better. Without My Beautiful Laundrette [a British film from 1985] there wouldn’t have been Brothers in Trouble [another British Asian film from 1995, also starring Om Puri], without those two there wouldn’t have been East is East. Every generation moves it on a little step more. It’s hard enough getting films made whether you’re Asian or not, the money isn’t there. There’s even less money there now because of the cut to the UK Film Council, which was a major mistake. They kind of supported young black filmmakers, and I include everyone in that [Asian, Indian, Pakistani filmmakers]. It was a place where young black filmmakers were helped, were encouraged. We’ve still got Channel 4, Film 4 and the BBC but it much smaller ways. But it helps every time a film like East is East or Bend It like Beckham comes out, it just pushed to the fore that black stories are mainstream, it doesn’t just have to be specifically about black problems. Emotions are universal. Every film that comes along helps that.

Read our review of West is West here.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

54th BFI London Film Festival: The Kids Are All Right (2010)

The Kids Are All Right, 2010.

Directed by Lisa Cholodenko.
Starring Annette Bening, Julianne Moore, Mark Ruffalo, Mia Wasikowska and Josh Hutcherson.


SYNOPSIS:

Two children conceived by artificial insemination bring their birth father into their family life.


A family drama with a bit of a shake up, The Kids Are All Right stars Annette Bening and Julianne Moore as a lesbian couple with two kids, each conceived by the same sperm donor. They live as a happy family and the two kids (Mia Wasikowska and Josh Hutcherson) seem content. That is until they decide to trace their biological father when daughter Joni (Wasikowska) turns eighteen. They track down their sperm donor parent Paul (Mark Ruffalo) and gradually bring him into not only theirs but the whole family’s lives.

I couldn’t help but feel that the lesbian relationship between Nic (Bening) and Jules (Moore) felt forced and unnatural. As good as both actresses are there was very little chemistry between their characters and they made up for lacking in that area by over doing the touching of each other. I don’t mean that in a sexual way but if we were to see a straight couple touching and stroking each other that much it would make us think “why are they treating each other as pets?” But maybe that’s just me...

There also appears to be an underlying tension between Nic and Jules. At first I wasn’t sure if it was because I didn’t believe in their relationship but when Paul arrives on the scene the family unit implodes slowly but surely from within.

Paul, well played by the laid back Ruffalo, receives a call out of the blue at work one day from the sperm donor company asking him for his permission to be contacted by someone that was a result of his donation. He agrees, although he seems to be unfazed by quite a major event. Throughout the film Ruffalo interacts with others like a stoned teenager, but this is not a bad thing. His easy going nature and environmentally friendly lifestyle go hand in hand with his demeanor.

Paul is eventually introduced to the “moms” and they appear to take to him. So much so that Jules agrees to help him landscape his garden. But this is when emotions go crazy and things take a turn for the worst - well, in Nic’s case anyway.

Nic gets to a point where the arrival of Paul has disorientated the family dynamic too much for her liking - “I feel like he’s taking over my family.” Her displeasure is portrayed perfectly in a shot where Nic is sitting on the sofa by herself whilst Jules, Paul and the two kids prepare dinner in the kitchen behind her in a more traditional family set up.

I often judge the level of a films entertainment by how long it takes for me to look at my watch for the first time (I didn’t glance at the time once during Avatar, that movie simply flew by). Whilst watching The Kids Are All Right I didn’t check my watch until an hour and twenty minutes in, which is pretty impressive since I wasn’t really aware that I was that engaged with the film. Maybe the subtle way the family dilemma draws the audience in will become one of the charms of the movie.

One aspect that did let it down though was the ending. Obviously how a film ends has the final impact on the audience: think Fight Club, Se7en, The Usual Suspects, The Sixth Sense (the list really is endless). All these films have great endings, and even the Bruce Willis film Surrogates, which I thought was pretty awful throughout, had an ending that was good enough to make me re-evaluate my opinion of the film as a whole. The conclusion of The Kids Are All Right left one major question unanswered for me, one that I don’t want to go in to too much detail about at the risk of revealing too much, but I’m sure I am not the only one who will feel this way after watching this film.

Although it tries to mix up the family drama element with an interesting premise, it ultimately tries too hard and unfortunately that takes the edge of what is otherwise a fairly decent film from writer/director Lisa Cholodenko.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

Movie Review Archive

54th BFI London Film Festival: Black Swan (2010)

Black Swan, 2010.

Directed by Darren Aronofsky.
Starring Natalie Portman, Vincent Cassel, Mila Kunis, Barbara Hershey and Winona Ryder.


SYNOPSIS:

A sophisticated psychological thriller set in the milieu of the New York Ballet.


Darren Aronofsky has carved out a career as an inventive and interesting director making films such as Pi, Requiem for a Dream, The Fountain and The Wrestler. His fifth feature, Black Swan, is a film that keeps with the trend of his impressive filmography.

The film centres on Nina (a very impressive Natalie Portman), a perfectionist ballet dancer who is going for the lead role in Swan Lake. Nina is a very sweet and pure girl. Dedicated to her art, she steers clear of the bitching sessions the other dancers regularly participate in. She also has a controlling mother (Barbara Hershey) who even assists her when she is getting dressed. Nina’s pink bedroom is akin to that of a boy band loving teenager - without the posters.

The lead role in Swan Lake requires the dancer to be both the White and Black Swans. Nina’s near perfect technical ability and grace make her an ideal candidate to represent the White Swan, but her inability to let go and embrace the darker Black Swan makes the artistic director Thomas Leroy (Vincent Cassel) have his doubts. And then a rival presents her own case - Lily (played by Mila Kunis). The battle Nina faces with Lily, and also with herself, stirs intrigue and in typical Aronofsky fashion the psychological drama has you hanging on to every frame that is on the screen in front of you.

At first Lily doesn’t show her threat. She invites Nina on a night out, which she isn’t keen on but reluctantly goes out to get away from her over protective mother. Nina uncharacteristically goes overboard whilst the girls are clubbing and wakes up hungover the next day. When she arrives late at rehearsals having already been given the lead role in the production she finds Lily has taken her place, leading Thomas to reconsider his choice.

Throughout the film mysterious cuts appear on Nina’s back and hands, perhaps signaling that in order to fully embrace the role of the Black Swan she will have to alter her natural dancing personality. As the competition between Nina and Lily heats up the psychological tension is masterfully cranked up by the daring director, scenes that make the audience jerk in shock yet applaud the craft in equal measure.

The mental downfall of Nina is excruciating to watch at times such is the delivery of Portman’s performance, but at the same time it is unmissable. This is summed up perfectly when her mother asks Nina “what happened to my sweet girl?” and she defiantly replies “she’s gone.”

Although the main focus of the story is on the tension Nina suffers, the ballet is in no means left out in the cold. Dancing sequences, both performances and rehearsals, are beautifully shot. The culture and passion that surrounds the art is portrayed in a stylish manner, and although the film looks fantastic it is Natalie Portman’s staggering performance as Nina that will no doubt draw many plaudits. Perhaps this year Aronofsky will have got an Oscar-winning performance from one of his actors.

Portman convinces with her portrayal of both sides of Nina. First she is utterly believable as the innocent dedicated dancer who steers clear of trouble and works hard to achieve her goals. Then when she has to shine as the darker swan she gradually sheds her incorruptibility and a new passion and determination becomes the centre point of her character’s personality. Of course one performance doesn’t make a film, and there are equally strong performances from Vincent Cassel and Mila Kunis as the other two key figures in the story.

Unblemished performances from the cast and an intriguing narrative are clear positives from Black Swan. But not only that, Aronofsky has proved yet again that he has the ability to create beautiful and passionate films without fault. His career keeps going from strength to strength and it is no surprise he has been linked with several high profile film projects of late. I don’t think it will be long before Portman is given regular leading roles and this film could may well win several Oscars come February 2011.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

Movie Review Archive

54th BFI London Film Festival: The King's Speech (2010)

The King's Speech, 2010.

Directed by Tom Hooper.
Starring Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush, Helena Bonham Carter, Jennifer Ehle, Michael Gambon, Derek Jacobi, Guy Pearce and Timothy Spall.


SYNOPSIS:

The story of the relationship between King George VI and an unconventional Australian speech therapist.


The first thing I’d like to say about The King’s Speech is I’m not usually a fan of historical dramas (the occasional war epic aside) but there is a lot of buzz surrounding this film. Even on my way to the screening I couldn’t escape it: I was reading Shortlist magazine on the tube and on the fifth page is an article touting Colin Firth for Oscar glory for his performance. Having now seen the film I can see what the fuss is all about.

Firth plays Prince Albert, Duke of York (known as Bertie to his relatives and who later becomes King George VI). Albert suffers from a debilitating stutter that often cripples him when he is required to take part in any form of public speaking. Having tried several remedies his wife Queen Elizabeth (that’s the Queen Mother, played by Helena Bonham Carter) has a doctor recommended to her - Lionel Logue (brilliantly played by Geoffrey Rush). Logue has some very unorthodox methods to combat Albert’s speech problem, something that causes him to lose faith in the doctor and end their consultations. But when he is asked to read Shakespeare whilst listening to music so as not to focus on his speaking his stammer is gone and Logue is required once more.

The consultations between the future king and his speech therapist gradually transform into meetings between friends, but not without the two characters having their differences. The first time they meet for example gives us one of the funniest scenes in the film, a scene that sums up the characters perfectly. Firth’s Albert is pessimistic whilst Rush’s Logue does not seem to care for Royal formalities. When Logue asks Albert what he likes to be called he responds “Your majesty is fine”, to which Logue nonchalantly replies “I prefer Bertie.”

But it’s not all laughs. The seriousness of Albert’s speech impediment is displayed delicately and gracefully throughout to highlight the problem. There is a scene with his brother David (who becomes King but later abdicates to marry Wallis Simpson) where he mocks him which causes his confidence to plummet and takes him back to square one with his progress. Lionel Logue is unfamiliar with defeat and continues to help his royal patient. One technique he employs is to get Albert to swear and sing between words so that he doesn’t hesitate. Although a lot of the scenes including this technique provide humour, it was a genuine tool used by the writer of the film, David Seidler, when he too suffered from speech problems in his younger days.

As the film progresses Logue and Albert become closer, their friendship being confirmed in an emotional scene where Albert confesses to his doctor that he is very lonely and the member of his family that he was closest too growing up was his nanny. This gives a sort of back story and explanation to Albert’s lack of self confidence which is summed up one night at home by Logue’s wife - “Perhaps he doesn’t want to be great. Perhaps that’s what you want.” But the King is determined to overcome his problem and aims to deliver his first major speech as monarch that leads the country into the second world war.

The pre-war context in very interesting, with Winston Churchill (Timothy Spall) making several appearances following King George V’s death. Churchill tells Albert the country needs a strong King which makes him doubt if he can deliver.

The story is played out with a elegant pace and smooth transitions between historical changes allow the narrative to simply flow on screen. That is ultimately due to Firth’s strong performance leading the way. The film is shot within crisp and beautiful royal settings that as well as looking immaculate also bring the audience further in to the royal family and highlight the magnitude of Albert’s problems. Other strong performances by Rush and Bonham Carter help tie everything else together to form a powerful package of a film that is sure to be one of the hits of the festival. And judging by the reception it’s had before it’s theatrical release (January 2011) I’m sure it will be a box office success too.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17 minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

Movie Review Archive

54th BFI London Film Festival: Carlos (2010)

Carlos, 2010.

Directed by Olivier Assayas.
Starring Édgar Ramírez, Alexander Scheer, Nora von Waldstätten, Ahmad Kaabour, Christoph Bach, Susanne Wuest, Anna Thalbach and Julia Hummer.


SYNOPSIS:

A biopic of the Venezuelan revolutionary and international terrorist Carlos the Jackal.


Before Osama bin Laden became the world’s most wanted fugitive in the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks, one man was synonymous with international terrorism – Ilich Ramírez Sánchez, a.k.a. Carlos the Jackal. A South American revolutionary-cum-mercenary responsible for a number of high-profile attacks throughout the 70s and 80s, The Jackal’s bloody rise to prominence and subsequent downfall serves as the basis for Carlos, an exhaustive 5½ hour biopic from French filmmaker Olivier Assayas (Irma Vep).

Premiering out of competition at Cannes earlier this year, there are currently two versions of Carlos doing the rounds – a truncated 2½ hour ‘theatrical’ cut and the complete ‘trilogy’ version, which was originally developed as a three-part miniseries for French television. While it may have been intended for the small-screen, Carlos’ lavish production values, Assayas’ cinematic pedigree and a strong performance from Édgar Ramírez (The Bourne Ultimatum) in the title role all combine to deliver a hugely-ambitious and impressive take on one of the most notorious figures of the late-twentieth century.

The first part of the film deals with Carlos’ entry into the world of international terrorism as a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, building his reputation through a succession of kidnappings, bombings and RPG attacks on Israeli airliners. Forced to flee Europe after the murder of two police detectives, Carlos is given sanctuary in the Lebanese capital of Beirut where he hatches his most infamous crime – the 1975 raid on the Vienna headquarters of the OPEC oil cartel. This raid takes up the majority of the second episode and is masterfully recreated in a riveting sequence that begins with the kidnapping of sixty hostages and murder of three. After negotiating for Austrian authorities to broadcast a message about the Palestinian cause, Carlos and his team demand the use of a DC-9 and look to pull off an audacious escape only to find themselves taxiing between Algerian, Libyan and Iraqi airspace in a desperate search for asylum.

Unfortunately after delivering such an impressive middle-act the film stumbles somewhat in its concluding part, with Carlos' dwindling influence and eventual incarceration drawn out in comparison to the frenetic action of the preceding episodes. As with Steven Soderbergh's two-part biopic Che (2008), there are times during the film - particularly towards the end - when you begin to wonder whether the lengthy running-time is really all that necessary. However, that's not to say this ruins the film by any stretch of the imagination - at its peak it rivals the likes of Munich (2005) and United 93 (2006) for drama and intensity and is certainly one of the best television productions I've seen in a long time.

Carlos received its UK premiere at the London International Film Festival earlier this week in its 'trilogy' form, which by all accounts is far superior to the 'theatrical' cut. Having only seen the former I am unable to offer a comparison myself but I would certainly not want to miss one moment of the gripping OPEC hostage sequence, which really is worth the price of admission in itself. It may lose its way a little towards the end but the first two episodes make the complete version of Carlos a must-see, although your backside will probably thank you for waiting for the home release.

Carlos is currently on limited release in UK cinemas and hits DVD and Blu-ray on November 1st.

Gary Collinson

Movie Review Archive

54th BFI London Film Festival: West is West (2010)

West is West, 2010.

Directed by Andy DeEmmony.
Starring Aqib Khan, Om Puri, Linda Bassett, Robert Pugh, Emil Marwa and Jimi Mistry.


SYNOPSIS:

The dysfunctional Khan family continues to struggle for survival in the North of England during the 1970s. Under heavy assault from his father’s tyrannical insistence on Pakistani tradition, 15-year-old Sajid is packed off to the Punjab to stay with the wife and daughters George abandoned 30 years earlier.


West is West is the follow up to the critically acclaimed British success East is East (1999). And as the title of the film suggests it takes a look at the Khan family in a different setting from their last outing in Salford. This film follows George Khan (Om Puri) and his youngest son Sajid (Aquib Khan) when they go to Pakistan to visit the religious son from the first film Mandeer (Emil Marwa) and the family George left behind when he moved to England thirty years ago.

Right from the off we are introduced to George the way most people remember him - dominating and the head of his family. In the opening scene he is marching Sajid to school (he has been bunking off as he is being racially bullied) and telling his highly tolerant wife Ella (Linda Bassett) what food to buy from the shop. At the end of East is East there is a subtle sign that George has changed his ways slightly, but will the same happen in this film?

Mandeer is struggling to find a wife out in Pakistan due to his father’s reputation. When George returns to his homeland he struggles to accept the fact he is not respected and welcomed as much as he would have liked. After being caught skipping school and being arrested for shop lifting George drags Sajid along with him to teach him some respect. George says of Sajid “He [does] not know who he is.” The same can be said about George.

What made the first film interestingly funny was the Khan family dynamic: George wanted his children to be raised as traditional Pakistani muslims in England but they wanted to live freely and do what they wanted. This time around they have all flown the nest, although we see a brief glimpse of rebellious son Tariq (Jimi Mistry) who is now working in a hippy boutique. In the first forty minutes or so I couldn’t help but feel like the humour was forced somewhat. Now that the dysfunctional family dynamic was not there, or at least not on the same level, the laughs felt like they were thrown in as an attempt just to entertain. However having said that when Ella and her sister Anne (Lesley Nicol) arrive without warning in Pakistan to see why George hasn’t come home, their whole ‘fish out of water’ situation is genuinely funny. There is a great scene when Anne is telling George’s first wife Basheera (Ila Arun), who doesn’t speak a word of English, how much she likes her kebabs, “and I know kebabs” she says of herself. In a later scene Anne has to go to the toilet outside, to which Ella gives her advice to “just let it go and think of Salford.”

The language barrier also plays a huge part in one of the most poignant scenes I have scene in a British film for a long while. Basheera and Ella have an altercation when they first cross paths, however during a sand storm they are alone in a room and instead of tempers flaring Basheera tries to explain that she knows that George is no longer in her heart, he is now part of Ella’s. The writer of both films, Ayub Khan-Din, said the scene where Basheera and Ella communicate with each other was very hard to write because of the language barrier, but after several drafts he realised that language wasn’t needed to give the scene relevance and purpose.

But it is arguable that this film is a coming of age tale about Sajid, the youngest member of the Khan clan. The divide between the Western and Eastern cultures is kept at the front of people’s minds due to Sajid’s behaviour. He arrives in Pakistan not wanting to learn about the culture or meet his distant relatives. He insists on wearing a suit George bought him and is reluctant to wear traditional Pakistani attire. When Sajid feels more settled, which is mainly down to his blossoming friendship with a local Sufi (holy man) and a goat herder called Zaid, he gets fitted with more suitable clothing and declares “comfortable, I feel comfortable,” both in the clothes and in his heritage.

And it is not just Sajid who has a change of heart whilst in Pakistan. Basheera says of George “I don’t know who he is, George or Jahangir (his traditional name)”. By the end of the film he finds out.

In the production notes producer Leslee Udwin says “the most unique and valuable gift we can give to our fellow beings is the freedom to be different from us and the understanding of what it is that makes them different.” And that is what the characters, especially George, learn over the course of the film.

Although many people will have seen East is East, those who haven’t will still be able to enjoy this film on its own level as a stand-alone movie. On the relevance of the story of West is West writer Khan-Din says “There are a lot of people who understand what it means to come back home and rediscover roots, and to trace the fact that in this process of leaving and coming back, you also become a bit of both.” This analyses can be adapted for many situations, for example moving from your hometown to live in an unfamiliar city, however throw it in a cultural context and it’s meaning becomes all the more powerful.

West is West is a beautiful film that, like its characters, is more mature than East is East. There is a lot of growing up in this film and that is something audiences will find interesting to watch and emotionally engaging. Whether you have seen the first film or not I highly recommend you catch this one.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17 minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

Movie Review Archive

54th BFI London Film Festival: Africa United (2010)

Africa United, 2010.

Directed by Debs Gardner-Paterson.
Starring Eriya Ndayambaje, Roger Nsengiyumva and Sanyu Joanita Kintu.


SYNOPSIS:

Three Rwandan children set out on an extraordinary journey across seven countries to achieve their ultimate dream of taking part in the 2010 Football World Cup opening ceremony.


Africa United has been dubbed this year’s Slumdog Millionaire and the hype around this feel-good movie set amongst third world scenery was certainly sufficient to cause me some logistical problems at my first ever press screening. A last minute venue change meant that for a while my attendance was touch and go, but given the plot of the movie this was perhaps appropriate.

Essentially a road movie, Africa United follows three Rwandan children, talented footballer Fabrice from a privileged world of exams and plasma screens, his “manager” Dudu and his sister Beatrice, who dreams of becoming a doctor and finding the cure to HIV. So far so generic. The three plucky adventurers gradually acquire friends, forming the “team for the dream” that aims to accompany Fabrice all the way to Soccer City in Johannesburg in time for the World Cup’s opening ceremony, where he was promised a place by a scout back in his village. Inevitably the journey does not run smoothly and the young friends must overcome many hurdles, some specific to the troubled continent of the title and others typical to the human condition. Despite this predictable format Africa United is far from being an ordinary film. Like Slumdog Millionaire it is distributed by Pathe and deserves recognition and success, but for different and in my view more persuasive reasons.

Unlike Slumdog Millionaire, which was based upon a successful novel, Africa United was built upon far slimmer foundations; a chance remark in January 2009. Unlike Slumdog Millionaire, which was helmed by the respected Danny Boyle and marked the culmination of that respect with global recognition, Africa United was the directorial debut of Debs Gardner- Patterson, who explained the origins of the story and the difficulties of casting with a few words before my screening of the movie began. I watched a nervous unknown make an uncertain speech but knew 90 minutes or so later that I had been in the presence of at the very least an accomplished filmmaker, and at best this country’s next big thing. She has crafted, created and steered a project from the inspiration of just a few words into a must-see movie experience, talked of in the same breath as an Oscar winner. It lacks the epic scope and romantic intrigue of Slumdog and is at its heart a simple tale of friendship, but feels better formed and is much, much funnier throughout than 2008’s Indian set smash-hit.

The key to this humour and indeed the crucial factor elevating Africa United from the good to the excellent is the performance of young Eriya Ndayambaje as lead character Dudu. To use one of the many football metaphors ever present in the film, director Gardner-Patterson is an excellent manager, for acknowledging the importance of playing her star player from the start. The film opens with Dudu charmingly explaining, in almost Blue Peter style, how to construct the perfect football from condoms. It took just seconds for his infectious smile to have the audience giggling and cooing at his cuteness and in the rare moments that his sheer charm wears off, the script by Silent Witness writer Rhidian Brook provides him with killer lines. Often the gags are football based, such as when Dudu and Fabrice discuss which animals their heroes would be, with Dudu correcting Fabrice that Ronaldo is not a lively baboon but an arrogant peacock. But there are also laughs galore for the whole family, football fans or not, certainly too many for me to remember here. Although one of the more obvious, simple messages of the film is that “impossible is nothing” when people come together in teams, it is an inescapable fact that Africa United would lose much of its power without Dudu; he is the authentic magnet at the core of the story, the star striker, or perhaps kingpin playmaker pulling the strings.

That is not to say there are not other important elements to the story and the film’s authenticity. It was shot in real locations in Burundi, Rwanda and South Africa and the scenery is suitably stunning and colourful. There are actions sequences with rolling cars and firing guns as well as gags, innocence and friendship. The entertainment covers a broad range from childish humour to grand themes of dreams and emotion, often all skilfully related linked back the central idea of the power of sport. For example the scene where Dudu chooses to leave his sister at a school so she can get the education she craves is not only incredibly emotional but again links back to the idea of management, as the others praise Dudu’s skills. Africa United also perhaps understandably owes a lot to the continent of the title and paints a refreshingly honest portrait of modern African life; one in which some, like Fabrice’s family, are well off and football shirts, cars and mobile phones are the norm, as much as HIV, AIDS and child soldiers are. By showing African life realistically and making it accessible it is impossible not to root for the likeable main characters and thus Africa United becomes the perfect advert for the continent, far more effective than appeals for aid crammed with images of drought and famine. Who would not want to support this ambitious team for the dream, with ambitions not so unlike yours or mine, but smiles and charm that are a whole lot cuter?

Africa United then will find it hard to escape the same old labels of “feel-good” and “family friendly” in the coming weeks before its release, but through the hype remember that this film has far more to offer beneath the surface and do your best to support it. It has been lovingly nurtured by British debutants in the film world, shot and edited with a distinctive, fun style, suitably scored and dotted with original, heart warming and amusing African animations that add another notch to its originality. Most of all watch out for Dudu, and Eriya Ndayambaje who plays him, as his performance alone makes Africa United unmissable.

Watch the trailer for Africa United here.

Liam Trim (follow me on Twitter)

Movie Review Archive

54th BFI London Film Festival: Let Me In (2010)

Let Me In, 2010.

Directed by Matt Reeves.
Starring Kodi Smit-McPhee, Chloë Moretz, Richard Jenkins, Elias Koteas and Cara Buono.


SYNOPSIS:

A lonely twelve-year old boy befriends his new neighbour and soon has to confront the reality that the seemingly innocent young girl is actually a savage vampire responsible for a string of murders in the town.


[Warning... here be spoilers]

For those who are not aware, Let Me In is an adaptation of the Swedish novel Låt den rätta komma in by John Ajvide Lindqvist, directed by Matt “Cloverfield” Reeves and starring Chloë Moretz, Kodi Smit-McPhee, Elias Kosteas and Richard Jenkins. It tells the story of 12-year-old Owen (Smit-McPhee), a lonely boy who gets bullied daily at school. When a girl moves in next door, he tries to befriend her. But she is no ordinary girl – she “needs blood to survive”.

This is not the first time the public has been exposed to this exact story. The Swedish version (Let The Right One In) was released in 2008 and has been critically acclaimed all over the world. Considering the two films are released so closely together, it is a difficult task to not compare the two. Seeing how similar they are even by the look of the trailers, it is almost inevitable not to refer to Let The Right One In during this review.

Let Me In commences in the middle of the narrative, in a time-wasting flash-forward scene. There seems to be no motivation for its use than to capture the audience instantly. A simple chronological flow would have created a tenser build-up and thus would have been more efficient.

The whole setting is very American. From the opening sequence in the hospital, we see and hear ex-president Ronald Reagan in the background appearing on TV. His presence dominates the beginning of the film. His speech about evil and sainthood in society presents and sums up the key points we are introduced to in the sequence: something wicked this way comes.

Setting it in the 1980s also works well, thanks to the costumes and set design. The detail reeks of personality. Every little thing from the ornaments in the house to the outfits (particularly Owen’s – he look like his mum dressed him) is great.

Owen’s character is a lonely one. He is an only child, he spies on his neighbours, he gets bullied at school and he is always hanging out on the playground by himself. He needs someone like Abby to enter his life, even if for a short while. He is outside quite a lot, making him open to the possibility of a friendship. It would have been more difficult had Owen been passive, stuck in his room, looking out on the world. He is clearly looking for companionship, but is too scared to venture outside his comfort zone (the playground) to seek it. So it must come to him instead. From standing up to his bullies to finally being set free in the pool scene at the end, her presence saves him from his loneliness and fears (cheesy, but true).

The outside is also where the two kids can be together. The playground is their sanctuary. They cannot stay indoors for fear his mother would find out about her and the scene in the arcade proves that locations other than the playground are dangerous for Abby.

Owen is portrayed by Kodi Smit-McPhee – the kid who bothered the hell out of me in The Road. His incessant whining and annoying face ruined the film for me. I expected to hate him in Let Me In, but he is surprisingly the better of the two young actors. He is incredibly natural and understands his character’s vulnerability. Owen’s development feels real and sincere, wearing his heart on his sleeve (with caution) like I have only seen very few child actors do.

Chloë Moretz, on the other hand, started off robotic. She felt pouty and amateurish, like the words were new to her and she was almost just waiting for the right cue to say her line. As the film progresses, however, she becomes more connected with her character and her performance improves. She is daring and dark. She is a tough one to embrace at first but as she gains interest in Owen, we can accept her.

Abby and Owen’s relationship is exciting to watch bloom because we can relate to the idea of first love, especially as physical contact breaks the barrier: it comes most significantly in the simple form of hugging and it is shy Owen who takes the plunge. He is the one who wants to commence a friendship. The first hug takes place in the playground as their friendship begins, the second one outside the arcade after she has been sick.

After Abby kills the policeman, she hugs Owen for the first time. The hugs symbolise each stage they go through in their companionship: friendship, love and death. All assumptions one may have about vampire movies and teenage angst are absent and instead, the spectators find themselves viewing a dark character piece based around the development of the puppy love between a young boy and his neighbour.

Technically, the camera work is spot on and there are a number of fabulous close-ups of the individual actors. This gives the audience time to focus on each character at a time and relates a great sense of what it is like to spy in on someone.

One of the most fantastically executed scenes is when Abby’s “father” kills a stranger in a car. The entire scene is filmed from the backseat and as the car rolls over, the music of Blue Oyster Cult provides the soundtrack. The set-up and audio work so well together that this grim scene is turned into something close to brilliant. It never lets go of the audience’s attention and provides one of the most exciting scenes in the whole film.

All these elements make Let Me In a great, very watchable film, but it has a major downside to it. The less-than-perfect CGI manages to ruin the scenes where Abby kills for blood. For a 21st century movie, you would expect better. There is no point in doing CGI in a movie when it is this bad. If anything, extensive use of make-up and stunts would have been far more efficient and would have allowed the spectator to stay connected with the movie. Instead, we are drawn out of the scene and giggle at the preposterous attempt at creating special effects. Abby does have animalistic attributes when she kills, but she need not look like a four-legged animal when the technology does not prove competent.

I cannot say Let Me In is as sinister and mysterious as Let The Right One In. It’s more straightforward and leaves little to the imagination. It does not possess the necessary delicate touches to make it stand out. Like for instance Eli’s (Abby’s Swedish version played by Lina Leandersson) androgyny. This comes down to a casting error. Moretz is not as cute or traditionally captivating as, say, Elle Fanning, but is girlier than Leandersson. Moretz’ physical attributes get in the way of a complete character representation, to no fault of her own. The mystery surrounding the female lead is not preserved in this film. She is not as freaky (for lack of a better word) and layered as in the Swedish film.

It is a well crafted film with good intentions, but it does not explain its own necessity and that is its biggest failure. The fear that it would turn out to be a simple carbon copy of the Swedish film is justified. The differences are minor and quite insignificant, thus not making it completely its own. It is a movie that does not justify its own existence, simply because it is so close to the original movie. For the audience to fully appreciate the effort of Matt Reeves, he should have interpreted it in a radical way. It is a more personal approach to the script but even so, it fails to deliver.

Louise-Afzal Faerkel

Movie Review Archive

54th BFI London Film Festival: Another Year (2010)

Another Year, 2010.

Directed by Mike Leigh.
Starring Jim Broadbent, Lesley Manville, Ruth Sheen, Peter Wright, Oliver Maltman and Imelda Staunton.


SYNOPSIS:

An intimate portrait of a year in the lives of an aging but happily-married couple and their dysfunctional friends.


Another Year is Mike Leigh’s eleventh feature film, an interesting multi character drama doused with humourous moments though out.

The story follows the lives and emotions of Gerri and her husband Tom, their son Joe, Gerri’s work colleague Mary and several other friends and relatives over the course of a year. The film is split into the four season - spring, summer, autumn, winter - to represent the relationships of everyone involved; in the spring everyone is happy and getting along with one another, but come winter certain friendships and relationships turn as frosty as the weather.

Gerri (Ruth Sheen) spends most of her time keeping her colleague Mary’s spirits up. Mary (Lesley Manville) is growing old, but she is also increasing in loneliness. She is jealous of Gerri and Tom’s (Jim Broadbent) relationship and has a very big soft spot for their son Joe (Oliver Maltman). Later in the year Joe introduces his girlfriend Katie (Karina Fernandez) to his parents - and Mary, who is hostile towards Katie which upsets everyone and ultimately damages her friendship with Gerri.

On some occasions films with multiple protagonists have strong and weak characters - this is not the case with Another Year. Every character, their importance in the story irrelevant, is a believable, likable person who does not fail to entertain. Although Mary is a growing burden on Gerri and Tom she steals many of her early scenes with drunken humour and her need to find a man who loves her. Another delightfully entertaining character is introduced in the Summer; Ken (Peter Wight). Ken is another fan of alcohol, which is both his charm and his downfall. The development of the character’s relationships is interesting to see, with only Gerri and Tom feeling comfortable at their stations in life to start with. Mary has a crush on Joe, who innocently flirts with her which leads her on and is the catalyst of her emotional stability going into decline. Joe confesses to her in a very sweet scene that a lot of his friends are now married and he is still single. When autumn comes around he brings his new girlfriend Katie into everyone’s life and Mary is out in the cold.

The film’s running time is a little over two hours. Although laced with comedic moments, after the first hour and fifteen minutes the pace begins to slow down - in some scenes coming to an abrupt halt all together. There is a scene where Mary is left alone with Tom’s brother Ronnie (David Bradley), who is staying with his brother and Gerri for a few days after his wife’s funeral. The situation is uncomfortable and Mary and Ronnie, having never met before, step outside for a cigarette. Mary’s personality and emotions have been firmly established at this point however her scene with Ronnie seems very unnecessary. Apart from a few cheap laughs there is no real point to it. The scene is under ten minutes long but if feels a lot longer. The first 75 - 90 minutes show that Mike Leigh has made a genuinely interesting and entertaining film, however it starts to sag towards the end.

The target audience is also very clear. Unless you are under the age of forty you are unlikely to find this film entertaining. The issues dealt with - growing old, finding love, making new relationships later in life - are things most cinema goers will not be too familiar with. Some exceptions aside (I’m well under forty years of age but I enjoyed it!) I can’t see many youngsters choosing to see this film on a night at the cinema if it has to contend with the razzle dazzle of a high profile Hollywood movie. Anyone outside Another Year’s target demographic will face a battle with their concentration span.

Mike Leigh’s newest offering gives us humour, emotion, empathy and disgust in places. It is very well acted and the narrative is told in a delicate way. However it is a little longer than it needs to be and wanes off towards the end, but ultimately it has the potentially to be one of the British gems of this year’s festival.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17 minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

Movie Review Archive