The Prestige

The Verdict: Professionally made, if slightly turgid. A great cast does well enough, but a range of dislikeable characters and a thoroughly self-important feel mean you'd be better off watching 'The Illusionist'.

The Rating: 6/10

Featuring a truly excellent cast, 'The Prestige' promises much, right from the first words of dialogue, where the tease of a plot twist is dangled before us by none other than Mr. Michael Caine. Michael informs us that the true magician delivers a trick to the audience in three parts. The pledge is a promise to the audience, a statement of fact. The turn is the trick itself, the moment where the illusion happens, but the Prestige.. well, that's when you deliver the 'wow', that's the moment when the audience reaction shifts into the realm of wonder.

So, right from the off, we're expecting a trick in the movie as well, that the plot will have a 'prestige' moment... now, I'm no expert in suspense, but I'm of the opinion that the best plot twists are.. and stay with me here... unexpected..? (Controversial - Ed) I didn't really appreciate a friend ruining the Sixth Sense for me, and I felt the same pang of muted anger when Sir Michael revealed an impending surprise to come. So, the language is a little couched, but the message is loud and clear.. and it's in the title for gawd's sake! .. 'Expect a big trick at the end people!' They may as well have called it 'The Big Plot Twist' for all the secrecy that surrounds the prestige moment of this movie.

Hmmm, maybe I'm getting a little cynical here. (Just a tad - Ed). There is a lot to like in this movie. Christian Bale is one of PCMR's favourite Hollywood actors (since 'American Psycho'), Hugh Jackman has shot up the league table since making 'The Fountain', and Christopher Nolan has got to be one of the more exciting directors working in Hollywood ('Memento', 'Insomnia' and 'Batman Begins' were all very good). Add into the mix the supporting heavyweights of a certain Michael Caine, Scarlet Johansson, Andy Serkis (looking decidedly human for a change) Piper Perabo and, um, David Bowie (Ziggy! The StarMan himself! - Ed) and you get the formula for a winning movie, right? Well, in PCMR's humble opinion, not exactly.

The story centres around the rivalry between Alfred Borden (Bale) and The Great Danton, also known as Robert Angier (Jackman). The two men start their careers together, but for a variety of reasons, each eventually becomes the nemesis of the other. Borden accidentally kills Angier's wife, and Angier responds by shooting Borden, all in the first fifteen minutes of the movie! So right from the off, you can see why they wouldn't be on each other's christmas card lists.

The rivalry hinges around the jealousy of these men for the situation of the other. While Borden is happily married - to the casual observer at least - Angier becomes steadily more bitter. Borden eventually develops a new trick, called The transported man, and Angier becomes obsessed with trying to figure it out.

I don't want to ruin the plot of 'The Prestige' for you folks, but the reveal of the trick to Borden's illusion is pretty stupid. I'm not one to normally say 'I could see that coming', but let's say that this 'twist' was telegraphed, signposted, highlighted in bold and luminous yellow on-screen, and then tattooed on Scarlett Johansson's cleavage in case you were distracted. Well... everything except that last part.

So Angier, unable to figure out this painfully obvious trick, (the big eejit - Ed) travels to California to meet a certain Mr. Tesla. Mr. Tesla is played by a certain David Bowie. David Bowie employs a certain accent in this movie which is like a cross between Shortbread Tin Scottish, and Harrison Ford Russian (remember that submarine movie?!). It is truly remarkable that Nolan allowed Bowie to use this accent, but he was probably in awe of the man, and we can forgive him that I suppose. (Don't be saying bad things about David Bowie now! - Ed) The thing is, Bowie's character is just so patently ridiculous, and I couldn't get past that as I listened to his Mittel-Europaische-Glasgow-Celtic twang. (At least Michael Caine had a good cockney accent - Ed)

(*Sigh*).. Anyway, I should add that the narrative of the Prestige is really quite unnecessarily complex. The movie begins with Borden (Bale) in prison reading Angier's (Jackman) journal, and cuts to a flashback. Then in the flashback, we see Angier reading Borden's journal, and off we go to another flashback. Nolan successfully manipulated the narrative of his story to creative effect with 'Memento', but in this instance it jarred with me. Why not start from the beginning Chris!? It worked with Batman!!

This is a professionally made movie, and the cast are all quite good (except for Bowie's accent, which of course I mentioned already.. but just in case you missed it, it was terrible). the film looks lovely, and the leading men all get to sport a variety of amusing fake beards quite regularly, which adds a little novelty value. Unfortunately, all the fancy window-dressing can't disguise the lack of a decent prestige moment to reveal to the audience in the end. Sadly, the twists and turns seemed drawn out, predictable, and a little silly for me. Add the fact that the two lead characters are pretty much miserable gits, obsessed with one-upmanship, and you get a movie that I found difficult to warm to.

In a 'celebrity deathmatch' between 'The Prestige' and 'The Illusionist', my money would be on The Illusionist to get medieval on Christopher Nolan's effort. Now that movie had pedigree. For me, this one was a little flattered by the critics, and, dare I say it, I would recommend caution before rushing out to watch it. Let's just say it's a little more Paul Daniels than Derren Brown.

Indigènes (Days of Glory)

The Verdict: Relevant, moving and extremely well-crafted, this ensemble piece is a fantastic addition to the cinematic cadre of war movies.

The Rating: 8/10

Since donning the movie reviewing mantle, I've become increasingly aware of the disparity between what film critics think audiences should see at the cinema, and what the punters really go and watch. As for the punters, they seem more than willing to - in their droves - watch movies that are universally panned by critics. Witness some of the recent top ten flicks across the pond: 'Wild Hogs', 'Ghost Rider', 'Premonition', 'Epic Movie', the list goes on. On the flip-side of this, there are the movies the critics call 'must-sees', 'if you only see one movie this year...' and so on. 'Thank You For Smoking' springs to mind as well as the excellent 'Half-Nelson' and these would fall into this category. For some reason, the marketing men can't get the wide distribution or the audiences for these pictures, despite them being recognised by critics and awards ceremonies alike as 'best of breed'.

Sadly, I have the distinct feeling that 'Indigènes' will be the a bit of a critic's darling, while remaining a stranger to most of the cinematic audience outside of France. And that's a real shame, because it's the type of movie that could really have a wide appeal. Quite simply, it's a great war movie.

The title roughly translates as 'Natives' ('Days of Glory' sounds more like a Will Ferrell vehicle - Ed) and the story is set against the backdrop of the Second World War, where regiments of North African soldiers from Morocco and Algeria are enlisted to fight on the side of the French Army in the 'motherland'. The main characters in 'Indigènes' all experience different facets of the complex relationship between a colonised people and their motherland, especially in the context of fighting for a country that for the most part, they've never seen before. Although the motto of the motherland is 'liberté, egalité, fraternité', the war-time reality faced by the North African infantrymen was far from free, equal or fraternal.

Their training consists of written exams, and when the North African recruits arrive at the front, they are hardly prepared for battle. Led by the grizzled sergeant Martinez (Bernard Blancan) this rag-tag bunch of recruits soon learn the realities of battle, but this story is about more than that.

Jamel Debbouze is a comedian by trade, but he produced this drama, and takes the lead role as the likeable Said, a one-armed peasant who his mother behind in the desert sands of Morocco. Sergeant Martinez takes Said under his wing as his dogsbody/assistant, and the two develop a strong bond. This bond develops despite the constant tension between the sergeant and the rest of his men, who give Said grief for making the sergeant's coffee and fetching his shirts and what have you.

Messaoud (Roschdy Zem) is a sharp-shooter, who falls in love with a French belle in Marseilles, and then cannot understand why his letters to her seem to go unanswered. Abdelkader (Sami Bouajila) is ambitious, and wants to get ahead in the army. Yassir (Samy Naceri) just wants to get through his tour with his skin, and that of his constant companion and younger brother, intact. (Incidentally, Naceri is almost unrecognisable here as the cab driver from the phenomenally successful 'Taxi' franchise.) Martinez, meanwhile, is actually a North African, but is hiding the fact because of the impact he knows it will have on his army career.

This ensemble cast jointly received the best actor award at Cannes last year, and the film had such an impact that Jacques Chirac, after seeing the movie, decided to resolve the situation it highlighted, that of unpaid pensions to the recruits from French colonies during the war. This fact alone should be an indication of how powerful the film is.

It is dark in parts, as each character is exposed to a different level of institutionalsed racism in the French military. Messaoud's letters are censored, Abdelkader is passed over for promotion, and the troop are consistently passed over for shore leave, exposing them to the harsh winters of the Vosges and Provence. Martinez constantly fights between keeping the men in line with his command, and encouraging the powers that be to recognize the 'pieds noirs' - as they are derogatively called - the same rights as the rest of the French military. However, in spite of the military powers, this group of characters continually struggle to maintain their dignity. As one by one, they seem to lose faith in the value of their mission, Abdelkader's leadership becomes more prominent, but will his unshakable loyalty and belief to convinve his war-weary colleagues to continue fighting for their recalcitrant motherland, and perhaps even paying the ultimate cost?

The scale of this movie is perfectly measured, to allow the audiene to gradually get to know each of the central characters. As the movie builds towards it's inevitable climax, when this small group is charged with defending Alsace against the Nazis until reinforcements arrive, each character is well defined and familiar to us, and I found I was genuinely interested in how each character would end up.

Let me be clear though, this is not a war movie in the same vein as 'Saving Private Ryan'. The battle scenes are not sweeping and wide in scope. The view the audience is given of the battles is either up close and personal, from the point of view of the central characters, or seen from a safe distance, from the point of view of the generals surveying the battlefield through binoclulars. The one I would most readily compare it to is possibly 'The Dirty Dozen', if only because the spirit of the story is similar. These guys start the story from the very bottom of the ladder, and struggle through the entire movie. PCMR has a soft spot for movies like this, where the central characters spend most of the movie trying to cope, or figure out the situation they find themselves in. (think 'Empire Strikes Back', 'The Matrix', 'Seven', 'The Big Lebowski')

Also, the Ireland and U.K. audience in particular should be able to relate to the difficult theme of colonialism and the complex relationship between a colonised people and the colonial power pulling the strings on their behalf. This runs through the core of what Indigenes is all about, and is at the heart of the difficult situations with which each of the central characters is faced.

So, I though it was great, and despite my increasing despair as to whether the critic's voice really has any impact on the audience in the case of movies like this, I'm going to heartily recommend 'Indigenes'. (Jeez, chin up PCMR, one man's irrelevance is another man's.. er... important stuff.. - Ed) I really hope you do get to see it, because it's worthy of your time and won't disappoint.

Sunshine

The verdict: Looks great, sounds amazing, and loaded with adrenaline-fueled action. An excellent addition to the science fiction genre, fans will enjoy the knowing nods, and newbies will likely be blown away.

The rating: 7/10


So PCMR managed to attend my first ever premiere last night, at which there were even a few stars present, and paparazzi to boot! Well, there were a few shifty looking geezers with zoom lenses hanging around outside the IFI in Dublin, but their invasive lenses were more likely reserved for a glimpse of Cillian Murphy’s arrival than that of your favourite semi-anonymous internet movie critic. (Don't they know who you are!? – Ed). Danny Boyle was also there, along with the deceptively named science advisor for the movie, a certain Brian Cox.

Putting aside my initial disappointment at the lack of a red carpet, (Temple Bar not quite being Cannes after all - Ed) I gradually got excited about the prospect of this movie. Danny Boyle's second film since '28 Days Later', 'Sunshine' is a science-fiction epic three years in the making and written by the same geezer who wrote the aforementioned zombie-genre reboot - Alex Garland. As the hum of anticipation grew in the IFI lobby, I realised I was really looking forward to this one.

Danny Boyle has helmed two of my all-time favourite movies, namely 'Trainspotting' and '28 Days Later'. I was a student at the time Trainspotting was released, and so part of the film's target audience, but the finished film was undeniably a revelation, exhilarating, exciting and intelligent, while at the same time managing to have an appeal broad enough to drag bums into seats in cinemas. These traits seem to have become trademarks of Danny Boyle's recent career, and are really quite rare in mainstream big studio output. '28 Days Later' was a properly huge international success for Boyle however, and also launched Cillian Murphy’s now burgeoning movie career with a bang. Apart from these two, Boyle has delivered a few qualified successes ('Millions', 'The Beach') and also – cough – 'A Life Less Ordinary'.

Boyle's decision to delve into the science fiction genre with 'Sunshine' is not one he has taken lightly. In the Q&A session after the premiere (.. show-off - Ed), he referred to feeling like Stanley Kubrick was a real presence in his mind while making this movie, watching over Boyle’s shoulder as he agonised over the minutiae of production design. This influence should not be lost on the viewer as 'Sunshine' opens with a panoramic external view of a CGI spaceship, immediately evoking Kubrick’s monolithic star-fest.

As well as '2001', Boyle has also been heavily influenced by what he perceives as the two other biggest successes of the genre, namely Tarkovsky’s 'Solyaris' and 'Alien', with a dash of 'Das Boot' to, um, boot. This should give you a flavour of the kind of atmosphere to expect from Sunshine, dark, brooding, and claustrophobic, with an element of horror to add to the mix.

In fact, Sunshine resembles Alien more closely than 2001, in that it is an ensemble cast, with no obvious star to play the hero we all expect to be the last man standing. The template of the hopeless space mission to save the earth has been done to death before, of course, with many notable failures - or popcorn movies at best - ably demonstrating how not to do sci-fi. The two that spring most readily to my mind are the deplorable, life-threatening 'Sphere' – the only movie I have come close to walking out of in a cinema – and 'Event Horizon', which by contrast was really quite good, although it didn't entirely live up to its promise.

So Sunshine works from the boiler-plate of these movies, and attempts to salvage some originality from the confines of their collective legacy. I have to say, in PCMR's humble opinion, Boyle has managed to rise above the drek, and produce an original and entertaining science fiction movie with 'Sunshine.'

So to get the plot synopsis out of the way, it's 2057, and the crew of the aptly named 'Icarus' are travelling towards our now dying sun. Their mission is to reignite the fading star with their massive payload, namely a disc-shaped bomb the size of Manhattan. The earth is dying as a result of the sun's fatigue, so essentially the success of this mission will mean the crew are (drum roll please).... yep, they're saving the world.

The ensemble cast play well off each other, unsurprisingly since Boyle insisted they all live together for a fortnight before filming started. Chris Evans in particular is strong as Mace, the Alpha male of the crew. Also, Cliff Curtis, as the psych officer, gives a chillingly effective and ambiguous performance. Rose Byrne too is doe-eyed and innocent, and a perfect foil to Evans. Cillian Murphy is not playing to type here, as his character is quiet and something of an outsider to the main group, but as the chief physicist on board the Icarus, his expertise will ultimately determine whether the mission will succeed or fail.

The movie differs from, say, 'Armageddon' in that we are never given glimpses of anxious family members on Earth waiting for news of the crew. (Awww… let’s hope it’s at least a little like 'Lost in Space' though – Ed) The movie is set entirely inside and around the Icarus, and this claustrophobia adds to the realism of the proceedings on-screen. Like 'Alien', the pace is quietly relentless, starting quite slowly, but gradually building to a breathless, exhilarating climax.

The visual effects employed, a genuine technical headache for a sci-fi director to deal with, are distinctive and truly stunning in this movie. The sun has never looked like this on celluloid before, and the vivid yellows and oranges of our nearest star are contrasted with the blues and grays of Icarus' interior, the greens of the ship's Arboritum, and of course the darkness, both of space outside the ship, and also inside when the lights go out, but that’s another story…

The movie sounds fantastic, thanks to an atmospheric electronic soundtrack constructed by Underworld, bolstered by Orchestral contributions from John Murphy. The sound itself is remarkable too, and the crispness and power of the sound quality contributes to the more dramatic moments of the adrenaline-fueled third act.

There is an element of horror in the movie too, no doubt inspired by 'Alien', but although these parts are creepy and in parts a little gory, the horror never overtakes the action and ultimately adds to the mystical nature of the crew's mission, especially in the third act of the movie.

PCMR would recommend Sunshine as an action-packed visual treat of a cinematic experience, and although it won't be the best film you'll ever see, perhaps even the best film you see this year, it has enough quality, excitement and above all, unpatronising action and dialogue to keep even the most confirmed anti-sci-fi fan amused. If you're still unconvinced about the sci-fi element of Sunshine, perhaps cast your mind back to your impression of zombie movies before you saw '28 Days Later'…

Fans of science fiction will appreciate the homage paid to Stanley Kubrick, Tarkovsky and Ridley & Ripley, but Boyle manages to sprinkle enough originality into proceedings to make Sunshine a more than welcome addition to the genre. (Plus you get to do an impression of Noel Gallagher every time you say the title - Ed)

In short, it looks and sounds great, it's well scripted and well-acted and the plot builds towards a dramatic, if a little chaotic, climax. I'm reluctant to only recommend it to fans of science fiction, because it is a very good representation of some of the best elements of the genre. When a film has this much going for it, why deny yourself the experience? It won't be a waste of your time.

The Illusionist

The verdict: A visual treat, well-acted and beautifully scored. Quality film-making and a great yarn.

The rating: 7/10

As is often the case with the Hollywood production engine, two movies are often released in close proximity to each other, despite treating similar themes, even the same subject matter. For every 'Troy' there's an 'Alexander'. For every 'Capote', there's an 'Infamous'. For 'The Prestige' (coming soon to PCMR), it seems there is also Neil Burger's 'The Illusionist.' (At least there was only one bloody 'Titanic' - Ed)

Burger's screenplay for 'The Illusionist' is based on a short story by Steven Millhauser, and Burger also directs. The setting is Vienna at the turn of the century where Chief Inspector Uhl (Paul Giamatti) is working on behalf of the dastardly crown prince Leopold (Rufus Sewell) to keep a watchful eye on the movements of Sophie (Jessica Biel), the woman who may one day be princess - for her own protection of course. Uhl is also given the responsibility of investigating Eisenheim (Ed Norton), a mysteriously talented magician perceived by the prince as a threat to his own authority. As it transpires, Eisenheim had a childhood relationship with Sophie, and their connection only drives the determination of Leopold to have Eisenheim arrested.

Oh, but the plot thickens folks, and while the yarn is being spun, the technicians behind the cameras contrive to create an immersive atmosphere with this movie. Philip Glass' orchestral soundtrack is subtle and haunting, and Dick Pope's Oscar-nominated cinematography, more traditionally at home in the stark English suburbs of Mike Leigh, illuminates the mysterious theatre stages of Vienna in a feast for the eyes. For most of the movie, the audience is placed in the theatre with Eisenheim's performance, illuminated by flickering candle-light and ready to be entertained.

The lead performances are quite strong, although the period drama accents are a little difficult to place, but this is never grating, as can be the case with many Hollywood period pieces - for an example of this, see 'Troy' above or, rather, don't. (Where is that pseudo-British accent supposed to be from anyway!? - Ed).

With the exception of the quite excellent '25th Hour', Norton may have been accused of phoning it in for some of his recent cinematic outings ('The Italian Job', anyone?). Considering the capabilities he demonstrated with 'American History X' and 'Fight Club', poor old Ed could make a fair claim to the question of 'where was I supposed to go from there?'. He has wisely moved on from the angry characters, however, and his performance in the Illusionist is nicely understated and suits the tone of the movie and character very well. Giamatti too, is reserved, but quietly effective, and Rufus Sewell does a nice job as the dastardly crown prince, despite bearing more than a passing resemblance to Jude Law, except with the addition of decent acting. (Zing! - Ed). Biel is also quite good as the woman who may be betrothed to Leopold, but who really loves the mysterious Eisenheim...

The real star of the movie is the story though. Like an old-fashioned mystery yarn, it unravels slowly and delicately, but unlike an old-fashioned stage magician, it actually reveals some of its secrets towards the end. The movie is beautifully crafted though, and were it not for the fact that the excellent 'Pan's Labyrinth' won the Cinematography Oscar over 'The Illusionist' this year, PCMR might be mildly peeved at the injustice of it all.

So, PCMR would recommend 'The Illusionist' as a solid night at the movies, being the type of well-told tale that should hold a wide appeal. It might be a little heavy on technical craft, but it's still a good story with enough smoke, mirrors and more importantly, plot to hold the interest of the audience right till the ending.

So, what odds now for Jerry Bruckheimer producing 'Paul Daniels: the movie' in 2008? (Now that would be magic. Giamatti to play Paul Daniels, Helen Mirren for Debbie Magee!? - Ed)

Harsh Times

The verdict: Gritty, dark, drama, that ends up being unnecessarily bleak for PCMR's taste, although Freddy Rodriguez is very good, and Christian Bale is frightening.

The rating: 6/10

David Ayer first attracted Hollywood attention on a large scale with his script for Training Day, the over-rated gritty cop drama that won Denzel Washington an Oscar. PCMR struggles sometimes to determine why some movies gain more critical praise than others, and Training Day is a case in point. I couldn't see what much of the critical furore was about with this movie. Despite two strong lead performances from Denzel Washington and Ethan Hawke, the movie itself was unsatisfying, and the last half hour in particular left me a little cold.

Aanyway, since when has PCMR’s voice influenced the machinations of Hollywood eh? Since Training Day, Ayer has written the excellent and criminally under-rated 'Dark Blue' (featuring one of PCMR’s favourites, 'Grindhouse' star Kurt Russell), and (ahem) the Colin Farrell auto-pilot vehicle 'S.W.A.T.'. But everyone needs a paycheck movie now and again right? Oh, did I mention that, before Training Day, Ayer also 'wrote' the screenplay for 'The Fast and the Furious'? Hmmm, perhaps Ayer’s resume means his box-office credentials are unshakable, but his soul may well reside in hell when judgement day comes. (Yikes! A little harsh, no? – Ed)

For his first foray into directing, Ayer helmed Harsh Times, a movie he also scripted, and with three big names filling the principal roles. Set in Los Angeles, Christian Bale plays Jim Davis, an Afghanistan war veteram with a desire to join the police force, and a pretty bad attitude. Also soon to star in Grindhouse, Freddy Rodriguez plays Mike Alonzo, Jim’s best mate, and a web designer who is also looking for work. Desperate Housewives' Eva Longoria plays love interest #1, Mike’s Lawyer girlfriend, who is supplying him with lunch money while he looks for a job.

We learn a lot about Bale’s character, Jim in the opening two scenes. He has been traumatized by his war experiences, is in love with his Mexican girlfriend and wants to join the police force so he can marry her and settle down. However, it becomes clear from early on that Jim has some 'unresolved issues' as Dr. Phil might say. Put another way, he’s basically a complete mentalist.

Ayer has set his movie in Los Angeles, and PCMR got the feeling that the film was based on the Cypress Hill song 'Insane in the Brain'. That song starts with a little sample of what sounds like a Hispanic gangster saying "who you tryin’ to get crazy with, ese? Don’t you know I’m loco!?" This quote essentially sums up Christian Bale in 'Harsh Times', and is an indication of the style of dialogue in the movie, set as it is in a principally Hispanic and crime-ridden area of Los Angeles.

This movie is from the 'Training Day' boilerplate, essentially two guys driving round a city with bad things happening. The premise is of Bale driving Rodriguez around while they look for work. Unfortunately, Bale gets refused from the police force quite early on in the movie, and the moment this news is revealed to him turns out to be his first moment of red mist. His response to this news is to 'get fucked up', so the two boys score some weed, get high, and then try to pull some birds. (Shouldn’t that be: "score some bee-atches, puto?" Ahem – Ed) Unfortunately, the very bad things start happening fairly early on in proceedings.

Christian Bale is excellent, as ever, in this movie. Unfortunately, rather than becoming a career-high performance, as Denzel enjoyed from Training Day, Bale’s character is really just an angry young man. We don’t learn too much about this guy before he went to the war, except from one friend who says he 'used to be mellow'. Rodriguez’s character, and performance are possibly more interesting however. All through the movie, Bale’s more easy-going companion marshals him and watches out for him, and the relationship is the core of this movie. Bale’s performance may attract the plaudits from this movie, but Rodriguez is genuinely good as well, in a more under-stated way. One could even argue that playing a psycho freaking out is easier than playing his buddy in the passenger seat, concerned for his friend’s mental health.

The movie is dark and gritty, set as it is on the streets of Los Angeles. However, it is a little bleak for me, and the last act in particular crosses the line into unreal territory that jars a little with the street realism that comes before. The two male leads are excellent however, and PCMR would argue that Bale has the presence and charisma to become one of the best in the very near future. Rodriguez too, makes a great claim for himself as a support player, and 'Grindhouse' should send him into the big leagues. Eva Longoria plays supportive girlfriend #1, and this role won’t exactly endear her to any feminist fans she may have gathered from Desperate Housewives. (Ummm… you haven’t seen the show then? – Ed)

Of note also is a great little supporting turn from Terry Crews, who also turned up in 'Idiocracy', playing the future president of the United States. Crews has a nice few minutes on-screen, and was excellent in 'Idiocracy' to boot. PCMR predicts big things for this guy, who you will most likely recognize as the father from 'Everybody Hates Chris'.

So, 'Harsh Times' is, well, a little harsh. I found it unnecessarily bleak, but thought the two leads were excellent. If you like your cop dramas dark, unsettling, and are a fan of A-list actors playing nut-jobs a la DeNiro in 'Taxi Driver', then Harsh Times may be for you. However, most of the audience may be a little unsettled by it’s misogyny, glib outlook on life, and hollow acts of senseless violence to consider it anything more than big-budget trashy entertainment. Christian Bale may have to choose his roles a little more carefully if he wants to leave behind a body of work to merit the investment he makes in his roles. (Although he got a lot back from this one, being the executive producer and all – Ed)

Idiocracy

The Verdict: Mike Judge's future-shock view of American Idiots, good but not great.

The Rating: 6/10

It's a crazy world we live in, folks. I don't watch much television, but I've seen the trailer for Eddie Murphy's 'Norbit' on tv at least twice now, an indication of the kind of promotion budget this movie has garnered. A spectacularly brainless exercise in boiler-plate movie-making, almost completely devoid of any creative intelligence, Norbit has ingredients lifted from 'The Nutty Professor' (multiple characters all played by Eddie Murphy), but its essentially a rip-off of the detestable Martin Lawrence fat-suit car-crash that was 'Big Mommas' House' (or possibly the imaginatively titled sequel - 'Big Momma's House 2' - Ed). Meanwhile, 'Idiocracy' is struggling to survive, having slinked onto American cinema screens last September without so much as the existence of a poster or trailer. It tanked, but the lack of promotion budget can be explained quite simply after viewing the movie, which lampoons big corporations such as Fox Television quite excellently. (Hmmm - Ed)

The writer and director of Idiocracy, Mike Judge, is essentially a satirist, possibly best known as creator of 'Beavis and Butthead', or the far superior King of the Hill. However, he has also directed a great movie comedy, 'Office Space'. This little gem suffered the same distribution purgatory story as Idiocracy, but has since attained a real cult status on Dvd.

Idiocracy is a very different egg to 'Office Space', however. Set in the future, it's a comedy about an army officer named Joe - your average everyman, played by Luke Wilson - who agrees to undergo an experiment. Together with a female civilian from 'the private sector' - a hooker named Rita - the two are cryogenically frozen, with the intention being to defrost them after a year. However, the experiment goes awry, Futurama-style, and the pair wake in the year 2505.

The main premise of the movie is that the evolution of America is favouring the dumb. While the idiots conspire to totally neglect family planning, and conceive offspring at a frightening rate, the intelligentsia consider the decision to have kids interminably, and often end up not having any kids at all. The result of this syndrome? Greater numbers of idiots, and ever decreasing numbers of smart people. Mike Judge's simple premise provides a fair few laughs in this alternative vision of the future, quite different from the usual sci-fi fare where the world is either a post-apocalyptic charred hulk, an advanced industrial dystopia, or a culturally elevated, technologically advanced utopia.

In Judge's vision of the future, the idiots, quite literally, rule. Language has devolved into a hybrid of street vernacular, valley girl slang, and grunts. Corporations own government departments, the most popular tv show is called 'Ow, My Balls', and the big Oscar-winning movie in the year 2505 is called 'Ass'. Guess what, it's an 80-minute close-up of a bum, which farts occasionally... Somehow, Judge managed to include the brands of existing large corporations, such as Fox themselves, as well as 'Starbucks' and 'Fuddruckers' (an American fast-food chain), although his vision of how these corporations will manifest themselves in society in the future is possibly a little close to the bone of how they actually behave today... Although I'm not sure if Starbucks are offering 'Adult Lattes' just yet.. (I think I see why Fox wouldn't promote this movie - Ed)

Judge is satirising the Jackass-style dumbing-down of the world, and he hits a few sweet notes in this movie. The production design is far larger in scale than 'Office Space', with the use of CGI effects in a number of wide shots to emphasize the state of the nation in 2505, after the idiots have taken over. Luke Wilson's character is imprisoned for 'talking faggy', and his compulsory IQ test on admittance proves him to be the smartest man in the world, but what will he choose to do with this new-found - albeit relative - intelligence?

Wilson is amiable enough in the lead role, and Dax Shephard is also quite good as Wilson's guide, one of the future-shock idiots who happens to be Wilson's lawyer. (You may remember this guy from 'Punk'd', Ashton Kutcher's MTV show). Maya Rudolph is capable enough as Rita, the hooker who is convinced her pimp is still going to find her, even though she's 500 years into the future!

The movie itself is a pastiche of great ideas, and Judge's satire of the outcome of the dumbing down of American culture hits the mark. He makes his point quite well, and from quite early in proceedings, the main premise is simply reinforced by a large collection of visual gags, of which there are enough to hold the interest of the audience. Unfortunately though, there aren't that many belly laughs to speak of.

Also, I got the impression the plot was a little light on, well, character, exposition and resolution... There is a plot with a beginning middle and end, and there are three main characters, each with their own story, but the events of the story are pretty much used as vehicle for Judge to portray another satirical idea on screen.

All told, it's intelligent in it's satire, but a little lacking as a coherent piece of movie entertainment. It's quite ironic that Fox has decided not to promote this movie, however, as it contains an ominous picture of what the world will look like after 500 years of movies like 'Norbit'. (Yeah yeah! Ummm... that movie sucked! Or something.. mm hm, he he mm he! - Ed)

And the Oscar goes to...

Well, PCMR may have gambled on Clint Eastwood winning best director, but is never one to pass up an opportunity to say ‘told you so’ – waay back in September, I predicted Scorcese would pick up the gong for the excellent 'The Departed', and the academy have finally invited Marty to the Oscar party, giving him the opportunity to deliver one of the best Oscar acceptance speeches ever to boot.

Your guide to all the major winners are listed below, with links to PCMR’s reviews included for your consideration. You'll find many of the other nominees reviewed here too, just use the navigation bar on the right to browse the titles...

Best Picture
The Departed

Best Director
Martin Scorcese – The Departed

Best Actor
Forest Whitaker – Last King of Scotland

Best Actress
Helen Mirren – The Queen

Best Supporting Actor
Alan Arkin – Little Miss Sunshine

Best Supporting Actress
Jennifer Hudson – Dreamgirls

Best Adapted Screenplay
William Monahan – The Departed

Best Original Screenplay
Michael Arndt – Little Miss Sunshine

Best Editing
The Departed

Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography and Best Make-up
Pan's Labyrinth

Best Documentary Feature and Best Song
An Inconvenient Truth

Best Visual Effects
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest

Curse of the Golden Flower

The verdict: Excellent epic Shakespearian regal tragedy set in Tang Dynasty China... and it's got ninjas, bee-atch!
The rating: 8/10

PCMR's Recipe for Curse of the Golden Flower

Take two cupfuls of 'Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon', and pan-fry with one-third of 'The Last Emperor' (finely chopped).
Next, add half of Mike Leigh's 'Secrets and Lies', a pinch of 'Eastenders' and bring to the boil.
When the mixture is boiling, add a half-pint of 'Macbeth' and two tablespoonfuls of Battle Spices extracted from 'The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers'. (Don't worry if you don't have the Lord of the Rings Trilogy to hand, any large-scale battle spices will suffice, 'Braveheart' or 'Troy' for example).
Now would be the time to add two cloves of cleavage from 'Dangerous Liaisons', and then leave to simmer.
When the mix has been simmering for a good hour, add a sprinkling of 'Oldboy', and just a pinch of 'Ran' to flavour.
After two hours, serve on a bed of Chow-Yun Fat and enjoy!

'Curse of the Golden Flower' is the most expensive Chinese movie production ever to hit cinema screens. Starring a trio of Crouching Tiger veterans, Golden Flower is a tragic tale of the emperor and his royal family, set in the time of the Tang Dynasty in ancient China. Chow-Yun Fat is excellent as the emperor, but this is essentially the story of the empress, and Li Gong steals this movie, so excellent is she as the tragic matriarch of this most dysfunctional of royal families. If you saw 'The Queen' recently, and thought the Windsors had a few issues, you ain't seen nothin yet buddy.

The emperor has three sons, the eldest of which is from a previous marriage, and who the emperor believes to be unfit to inherit the throne. For this reason, he is in the process of deciding to make his second son Jai (Jay Chou) the crown prince. Things get dark and complicated very early on, however, as the Empress appears to be infatuated with the eldest of the three sons, the crown prince Wan (Ye Liu) - but don't worry, no blood relation here, so it's not that bad, right? (Hmm - Ed) Ahem... aaanyway, the emperor may or may not have gotten wind of this, but he has decided to poison the empress, by adding a fungus to her daily doses of anemia medicine that will slowly drive her mad.

What follows includes numerous twists and turns, with each character involved in a dense web of intrigue that threatens to literally tear the family apart. The empress, aware of her husbands intention to poison her, busies herself by embroidering numerous chrysanthemums, the titular golden flower, but does she have a plot up her own sleeve, or is she simply going slowly insane?

The scale of this production is really quite breathtaking. The imperial palace is the setting for almost all of the action, and it is a place of vivid colours and dense ritualistic protocol, playing host to countless servants working on behalf of the different family members. In the scenes where we are exposed to palace life, director Yimou Zhang gives the audience the occasional glimpse of just how much manpower goes into, for example, the preparation of the average day in the palace. Sweeping wide shots of thousands of extras, all costumed and made-up to the hilt, are employed to reinforce the scale on which the palace operates, and the lack of CGI effects only serves to make the effect of this portrayal ever more acute. And the cleavage! There's blummin loads of it on show, more than even 'Dangerous Liaisons', I reckon... smashing stuff.

In keeping with the epic spirit of Crouching Tiger, there is also the required dose of large-scale battle action to enjoy. However, where 'House of Flying Daggers' fell down in this regard, Golden Flower succeeds. Rather than overloading the audience with one immense battle after another, the battle scenes in Golden Flower are used sparingly, and so have greater effect when they eventually splash across the screen in vivid colour, and also notably with nothing but real actors on show.

Also, there are ninjas, dude!! The ninja warriors in Golden Flower are mean, dammit, and they certainly mean business. The scenes with these guys will have people like Quentin Tarantino punching the air saying things like "that's what I'm talkin 'bout!", and why not, because they brilliantly executed and exhilarating to watch.

Although the storyline is tragic to the point of being melodramatic, the balance between the large-scale battle sequences, and the assorted personal difficulties of the royal family members is well handled by director Zhang. The battles, when they occur, are not the focus of the picture, but integrate well with the rest of the movie.

Li Gong's performance is truly excellent, and Chow Yun-Fat, once again, delivers a portrayal of a troubled emperor, loaded with regal charm and charisma, and of course replete with the occasional perfectly-timed arched eyebrow or two. ('Troubled emperor' is always a good part to be offered - Ed) The three sons are each played quite well, but Jay Chou is the best of them, and is the hero of the piece.

This movie deserves to be seen on the big screen, as the scale is honestly larger than anything you will have seen before, with the possible exception of 'Metropolis' or something from Akira Kurosawa. PCMR will recommend it as an intelligent, dramatic story, with seriously excellent battle sequences that are worth the admission price alone. The movie borrows heavily from other similar films that have preceded it, and also from Shakespearian plays such as 'Macbeth', but when the finished product is as coherent, sumptuous and exhilarating a cinematic experience as 'Curse of the Golden Flower', PCMR sees absolutely no problem with this. If you're still unsure, then let me go out on a limb here: it's better than 'Crouching Tiger' or 'House of Flying Daggers'. ('nuff said. - Ed)

Before Night Falls

The verdict: a bittersweet, dream-like, impressionistic view of a tortured artist's life. Javier Bardem is excellent.
The rating: 7/10

Set against the backdrop of Revolution-era Cuba in the 1950's and 60's, 'Before Night Falls' is a biopic of Cuban novelist Reinaldo Arenas, documenting his tempestuous life from childhood in rural Cuba in the 1940's, through his career as a novelist in Communist Castro-controlled Cuba in the 1960's and 1970's. Arenas' early literary output attracted positive critical attention while he worked at the Biblioteca Nacional, where he entered various literary competitions. By the late 60's, his published novels and openly gay lifestyle were attracting the wrong sort of attention from the oppressive military forces, and he became known as something of an anti-establishment figure. Arenas was eventually imprisoned for publishing a novel abroad without the consent of the government, and for 'ideological deviation' from the cultural mores espoused by Castro's regime. This movie is the essentially the story of how Arenas survived all these experiences.

Javier Bardem plays the Cuban novelist, and if you are unfamiliar with the Spanish actor, PCMR arches an eyebrow suspiciously in your general direction. This Spanish actor is something of a force of nature, first coming to the attention of PCMR in 'The Sea Inside', an heavyweight performance of the highest order, albeit in a film that some may consider melodramatic. Given that he is a Spanish actor, and not short of talent, he has also turned up in an Almodovar or two, and PCMR also remembers a pretty excellent Bardem performance in 'Live Flesh', a quirky movie, even when measured against Almodovar's own off-beat standards. In 'Before Night Falls', Bardem again delivers an excellent performance, and literally becomes the character, to the point where the audience forgets the actor is performing. Bardem is also playing a character that requires a real physical transformation, as Arenas' demeanour is introverted and, well, quite gay.. but Bardem pulls it off. (Ahem.. I say! More tea, vicar? - Ed) These are just some of the hallmarks of a great performance in my book, and Bardem delivers on both counts.

For novelty value, Johnny Depp also turns up in this movie in a couple of excellent cameos, as too does Sean Penn, but to less effect. Depp play two characters, and his first appearance is gut-bustingly funny, but fans of Jack Sparrow may not want to watch. No spoilers here, but this 'part' has to be seen to be believed!

Revolution-era Cuba lends itself well to cinematic represenation, with its latin rhythms, cocktails, fat cigars, and heady atmosphere of sexual revolution providing ample material for the director with a good eye and sufficient talent. Julian Schnabel really captures the moment and the ambience of the era, combining the exhilaration of wild parties with the constant threat provided by the omnipresence of the oppressive military forces.

The style Schnabel adopts is a dream-like, impressionistic view of Arenas' life. There are numerous dream sequences, most often when Arenas is facing difficult moments, but there are many of these, as the guy did not have an easy life, by any means. His character is part Walter Mitty, part Oscar Wilde, and always interesting to watch.

I would recommend 'Before Night Falls', but be warned folks, it's a little 'arthouse'. There are no simple conclusions drawn, and the style adopted by the script leaves a lot to the imagination of the audience, but PCMR would argue that this is no bad thing. The movie is shocking in moments, but generally bittersweet in tone, and it will make you feel better about your own struggles. Relative to what Arenas went through, still coming out the other side with his literary legacy intact, you can't help but compare your problems to potatoes of the smaller variety. Bardem's performance is worth the ticket price alone, and Johnny Depp's cameos are worthy of more than a little novelty value. But above all, this is an impressionistic, dream-like account of a life worth hearing about.

Metropolis (1927)

The Verdict: This is the template, the source and the inspiration, but it also happens to be a great movie.
The Rating: 9/10

PCMR was privileged to partake in a rare movie experience last night. 'Metropolis', Fritz Lang’s 1927 masterpiece was shown in the National Gallery of Ireland, with a new soundtrack commissioned specially for the Dublin International Film Festival, and performed live by eight-piece mini-orchestra 3epkano. Picture, if you will, the setting of a salubrious ballroom, replete with chandeliers and candelabras, expensive oil paintings hanging from the walls betwixt elegant marble pillars, with two sets of immense winding stairs flanking a large cinema screen at the top of the high-ceilinged chamber, and you have an idea of the theatre we attended yesterday evening.

Not entirely familiar with all things classical-music related, PCMR awkwardly applauded the band along with the rest of the crowd as they arrived, and they themselves looked a little nervous, reinforcing the nagging feeling that this experience was a little out of the normal cinematic comfort zone for everyone involved.

Then the movie started, silently at first, instructing us through frames that up to a quarter of the original print has now been lost, and that occasionally there would be gaps in the movie, but these gaps would be filled by explanatory frames. Then, the opening credits ran, and the band began playing…

If you haven’t seen Metropolis, you will have undoubtedly been exposed to images from it over the course of your lifetime, whether or not you are aware of it. Fritz Lang toiled and travailed for years over his labour of love like the mad artist he was, eager to create a lasting masterpiece. The results, strangely, look futuristic even today. Fritz Lang succeeded in demonstrating the wild possibilities offered by this medium, fresh and new at the time.

The movie itself is set in a non-specific future, and man has built a sprawling Metropolis, replete even with a new Tower of Babel. This world has two levels, the thinkers who live above ground level, and the workers who live underground. The workers operate heavy machinery in two ten hour shifts every day, while the thinkers relax in gardens and sport halls above, basking in the fresh air.

Freder (Gustav Fröhlich) is the son of the president and one of the thinkers, but one day, he witnesses Maria (Brigitte Helm) emerge from the lower level with some of the workers’ children. She is showing them the thinkers, and telling the children that these people are their brothers. Freder is immediately smitten, and when Maria and the children are unceremoniously shooed back down to the lower level, Freder pursues her. His journey to the lower level exposes him to the workers’ daily rituals, and in his first minutes there he witnesses a terrible accident and has a kind of manic vision. He also visits Maria, who acts as a kind of prophet on the lower level, speaking to the workers of the coming of a Mediator who will act as a bridge between the two levels of Metropolis and bring peace to the two peoples.

The main message of Metropolis is that the head (the thinkers) cannot work with the hands (the workers) unless the heart acts as a bridge. This simple parable runs through the heart of the story, and is the last line in the script. However, before this message is fully explained, the epic visual feast that is Metropolis unfolds before our eyes. The scale of this movie is still breathtaking today, and it is difficult to imagine just what kind of impact Metropolis might have had on audiences in 1927. It is at the same time a love story, a dystopic vision of the future, and a contemporary interpretation of a biblical story. It is also a frightening view of mob mentality, ominously warning of the dangers of acting without thinking, some ten years before the rise of the German far right. This movie was brave for its time, and still has much contemporary relevance today.

Although by today’s standards, certain scenes are drawn out and the acting perhaps a little hammy, (Watch out for the brilliantly lusty men toward the end – Ed) the audience can have nothing but respect and admiration for the movie by the time the closing credits roll.

I can’t help thinking that the soundtrack to this movie will have a big impact on the audience’s enjoyment of it, and 3epkano’s interpretation complemented the action brilliantly, especially in the last act of the movie, where the industrial grind of the workers’ routines gave way to dramatic drum rolls, as the workers rise to the upper level and confront the thinkers in a devastating climax. I haven’t been exposed to the other interpretations of the score, which include a version by Giorgio Moroder that sounds interesting enough, but this version worked very well indeed.

Metropolis is more than iconic, and as Roger Ebert pointed out, the images in the movie have achieved an even further elevated status than that of iconic, entering our collective consciousness to be used as a means of interpreting the modern world. The stories told in Metropolis are universal, both grand in their epic scale, and emotive at a human level. This movie may be flawed, but it is undoubtedly a masterpiece.

As a movie experience, nothing PCMR has experienced in recent memory has come close to the setting, soundtrack and visual feast provided by this showing of Metropolis. It has taken great restraint on my part not to give this one a ten out of ten rating. I would recommend you seek out a copy of Metropolis at your earliest convenience, and bask in its glory. Near every Hollywood movie of recent years owes it a grand debt, and Fritz Lang managed to demonstrate in 1927 what the cinematic medium was capable of. Many celebrated directors working today will never come close to achieving something like 'Metropolis', and to be honest, few would be capable.