FILM: The Place Beyond The Pines (8/10)

Why did I watch it?
I'll admit it, I was drawn to this film by the Drive factor of the trailer. Ryan Gosling playing what looked to be a simplistic small-time bank robber, making his getaways using his 'unique set' of skills, being a brilliant motorcycle rider, seemed to be echoing many of the best traits of Nicolas Winding Refn's film.

What's it all about?
Set in Schenectady, N.Y (meaning 'the place beyond the pines' in Mohawk), the film transpires to be much more than the trailer advertises. Three chronologically told stories, dominated by relationships between fathers and sons, weave together the lives of two families inseparably across two generations. Gosling plays travelling motorcycle stuntman Handsome Luke, who after returning to Schenectady, learns he is a father following a fling with Romina (Eva Mendes) the previous year. By chance his path collides with ambitious police officer Avery Moss (Bradley Cooper), himself father to a one year son.

Should you watch it?
Director Derek Cianfrance's film links together three separate, yet interlinked, stories of two families in a manner that is certainly not without risk. Roughly a third of the film's two hour plus running time each, the shift in narrative and characters, certainly from the first to second, is so sudden that it caused the film to lose all momentum on two occasions. Being led, deliberately no doubt, in one direction by the trailer, I found myself checking my watch after 50 minutes, so sudden is the shift in story. Second time around was less of a shock, as I began to appreciate what Cianfrance was trying to achieve. However, given the fragmented nature of the narrative, being asked to invest in three stories, each slightly less enjoyable than the previous, totalling two hours plus  is stretching the capacity of the audience.

That's the negatives out of the way.

If you ride like lightning, you're going to crash like thunder

Saving and driving The Place Beyond the Pines into success, is the standard of the film's cast and Cianfrance's and cinematographer Sean Bobbitt's visuals. Starting with the cast, the performances of leads Gosling and Cooper are first rate. Gosling's bank robbing rider channels all of the raw, stoic cool, audiences have become accustomed to, while Cooper is excellent as the troubled, professionally and emotionally, police officer, under pressure from wife, father and colleagues. The accolades shouldn't stop there, Mendes gives an emotionally fraught performance as Luke's old flame, Ben Mendelsohn was my favourite as Luke's partner in crime and Ray Liotta dials in the menace as only he can as a corrupt cop asking more of Avery. Youngsters Dane De Haan and Emory Cohen, also hit the right notes with their performances, even though I have to say I didn't like either character.

Going back to the visuals, the film looks stunning, with some excellent vistas and use of colours, interspersed amongst the scenes of bikes racing through streets and forests and personal nature of close-up shots during more intimate scenes.

Certainly different to what I was expecting when I took my seat, Cianfrance took some risks with the plot and didn't win them all but The Place Beyond The Pines is nonetheless a strong film anchored by an excellent cast, superb visuals and strong script.

TV: Spartacus: War of the Damned (9/10)

Why did I watch it?
Because I am Spartacus.

What's it all about?
After disposing of Praetor Glaber at the end of Spartacus: Vengeance, Spartacus' rebellion marches on and takes control of the city of Sinuessa en Valle to house it's growing numbers. Meanwhile, the Roman Senate turns to the ruthless and powerful Marcus Crassus to lead his legions, including his son Tiberius and a young Julius Caesar, to defeat Spartacus.

Should you watch it?
Fans of this hugely entertaining show will love this epic final season, which closes the chapter on Spartacus' journey from Thrace to Batiatus' ludus to hero of the slave rebellion.

The final season sees Spartacus as de facto leader, supported by the gladiator heroes of the previous seasons, Crixus, Gannicus and Agron. The leaders routinely clash of the rebellion's direction and objectives, Crixus in particular driven by uncompromising vengeance on the republic, dreaming of smashing an army through the gates of Rome, while Spartacus has grown more responsible, dreaming of a free life for his followers if not for himself. Seeing the two spar reminds of seasons of old. Gannicus also mellows, and finally finds a cause to fight for other than the traditional spoils of victory, wine and women.

Are you not entertained?

Following the precedent of previous seasons, War of the Damned is loaded with copious amounts of blood, sex and scenery chewing speeches, perhaps even more than before. The montage at the beginning of the first episode beats 300 for blood spilt and sprayed across the screen. The scheming and trickery of Lucretia and Illythia from past seasons is replaced by that of Caesar and Tiberius, fighting for the lead role under Crassus. I originally disliked the casting of Caesar, but after time newcomer Todd Lasance won me over with his ambitious, scheming, hot headed take on the famous leader.

For a show that many dismissed as trashy and gratuitous, Spartacus is surprisingly accurate (for a TV show) with respect to its historical basis. Spartacus' rebellion was squashed by Crassus, he was betrayed by Sicilian pirates, the names of Oenamaus, Gannicus and Crixus were among the rebellion leaders and those captured were crucified along the Appian Way into Rome.

The final episodes build up to the inevitable ending, firstly dedicating suitable time to Crixus, before a fantastic finale worthy of the show's epic nature, culminating in some emotional final scenes. The closing credits returned many of the fallen character over the four seasons and as a touching gesture were book ended with both Liam McIntyre's and Andy Whitfield's Spartacus. Gratitude.

Overall, a fantastic show featuring a cast of largely unknown bunch of Aussies and New Zealanders that only got better and one that will be sorely missed. 

On to The Borgia's for my over the top historical fix.

FILM: Lockout (7/10)

Why did I watch it?
I recorded this off SkyMovies last week, remembering that the trailer looked like a tongue in cheek one-man versus the world action-fest.

What's it all about?
Guy Pearce is Snow, a framed CIA operative offered freedom in exchange for saving the President's daughter (Maggie Grace), whose life is in jeopardy after the inmates of MS: One, a maximum security space prison, breakout during her humanitarian visit. Simple as pie. 

Should you watch it?

For me, Lockout is one of those odd guilty pleasures. It was probably far from the best film released during it's week of release, never mind the month or year. It's a straightforward, short, fast paced, guns blazing, one man action vehicle that doesn't make any attempts to be cleverer than it needs to be. Guy Pearce stands in for the likes of Russell, Seagal, Willis, Arnie or Sly as the likeable rogue protagonist.

It's unusual to see Pearce play a genuine all action-hero but he seems to be enjoying himself delivering some of the most sarcastic one-liners in film history, courtesy of co-writer Luc Besson and directors Saint & Mather. In fact, Snow literally barely says anything at all other than acerbic barbs directed at either villains or his damsel in distress. The relationship between Snow and Emilie, and the situation they find themselves in, reminded me of that of Steven Seagal and Erika Eleniak in Under Siege.

MS: One....we have a problem

With a budget of $20M, Lockout is relatively low budget and almost B-movie like but if you can get past the occasionally ropey CGI, place tongue firmly in cheek and accept it for the guilty pleasure it is it's capable of satisfying that action movie itch you get from time to time. Just imagine the most average parts of Die Hard, Under Siege and Escape from New York all rolled into one!

FILM: The Taking of Pelham 123 (6/10)

Why did I watch it?

A few years old already, I caught this on TV recently. I would like to go on record as saying I have not seen the original film or read the book so I won't be commenting on the necessity of the remake or judging it against anything other than its own merits.

What's it all about?

Denzel Washington and John Travolta square up as good and bad guy in Tony Scott's retelling of the 1974 original film. A group of terrorists led by Ryder (Travolta) hijack a New York subway train taking it's passengers hostage for ransom. Denzel Washington plays Walter Garber, a rail control centre operator unluckily overseeing the train's operations that day.

Should you watch it?

I'm going to get straight to it, upset fans of the original and say that on the whole I quite enjoyed this film. Don't get me wrong it is definitely not without it's flaws, none more so than the hugely anti-climatic ending, cut-out bad guys (except Travolta) and terrible character writing for James Gandolfini's Mayor but up until the ending I enjoyed Tony Scott's fast paced and stylish direction and Washington's performance. The opening sequence, in which the train is hijacked, is a fantastic sequence of New York both above and below ground, framed through quickly edited long-taken blurred shots of colourful taxis and trains all played out to Jay-Z's 99 Problem's.

Travolta's role see him reprise his familiar, unhinged and over the top villain from Face/Off (as Cage) that I can cope with in reasonable doses. Unfortunately, he is given a really clichéd profanity heavy script that doesn't do the film any favours.    

The film works best when Ryder and Garber are separate and playing traditional roles of terrorist and negotiator and begins to stall when Garber leaves the office to meet up with Ryder. The less said about the film's ending the better.

TV: The Walking Dead (S3) (8/10)

Why did I watch it?
The second season of The Walking Dead was often criticised but despite its weaknesses I still enjoyed watching it and there was never going to be any doubt that I would be tuning in to see where Rick and co ended up after abandoning the farm.

What's it all about?
After leaving the relative sanctuary of the farm and cleaning house with regards to Shane, Rick leads the group onwards through Georgia, ransacking house after house of food, weapons and the inevitable zombie squatters. That is until they come across an abandoned prison, where similar to Hershel's farm, they decided to set up camp. Meanwhile, the identity of Andrea's saviour is revealed and the pair travel to Woodbury, a safe barracaded town of residents led by 'The Governor' (David Morrissey). 

Should you watch it?
The first thing that struck me during the season premiere was how skilled and comfortable the group have become in dealing with zombies. There has clearly been some time pass between seasons and in order to survive the group have become deadlier and more immune to the fear of zombies, especially in small numbers in open spaces but I found that in doing so, I didn't feel the fear, suspense or shock that I previously did either.

Perhaps sensitive to criticism of the slow nature of the last season, some pretty major events occur within the first four episodes this time around, reducing the number of the prison inhabitants by two and introducing (and in one case reintroducing) the residents of Woodbury to our screens. The show definitely improves with the introduction of Woodbury's de facto chief, The Governor. Already a merciless leader with some disturbing but well meant secrets, he becomes an increasingly violent madman after clashing with Michonne and the character becomes the driving force of the reminder of the season's storyline.

The story was again bogged down in places by frustrating character development. Rick and Lori's domestic issues, Rick's mental breakdown and Glenn and Maggie's issues post-Woodbury kidnap all being examples of the show not being at it's best.

 

Eye'll be seeing you.....

The season is action packed, by the end zombies only really appeared as extras outside the prison perimeter, as the story focused solely on the impending battle between The Governor's Woodbury and Rick's prison. Caught in the middle of the two was Andrea, who had the most frustrating character storyline of the season and overtook Lori and Carl (no mean feat) as the show's most annoying character. Just as the season finale looked set to reveal the victor once and for all, it didn't. No cliffhanger, no nothing, the finale only serving to give polite notice that the personal duel had been postponed to next season.

With at least it's third showrunner taking over the helm for season four, The Walking Dead will need to hit the ground running next time around.

BOOK: The Hundred-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out of the Window and Disappeared, Jonas Jonasson (9/10)

Why did I read it?
The wife picked this one up in the bookshop and I read it after her after reading good things about it on-line at the 50BookPledge.

What's it all about?
The book's title is fairly self-explanatory but doesn't give away the full picture. The hundred year old man in question is Allan Karlsson, who escapes from his nursing home on his one-hundredth birthday.    What the title does not allude to is that during his hundred years, Allan, by chance and due to his non-prescriptive political and religious views, subtly influenced some of the major events of the twentieth century. The story of his past combines with his latest adventure on the run from the nursing home. 

Should you read it?
The Hundred-Year-Old Man is probably the craziest story you will read all year. Both stories told; Allan's present day escape from the nursing home (the man is a hundred years old!) and the story of his life, are fascinating tales, full of unexpected twists and turns. The circumstances in which Allan travelled across the world taking part in wars, coups and revolutions reminded me hugely of the film Forrest Gump, which is by no means a criticism.

Owing to the dry sense of humour of the book's protagonist and the ineptitude of the local police force, both stories become almost black comedies. Flitting back and forward between  Communist Russia, the Korean War or pre-revolution Tehran and present day Sweden, the story never slows down in the slightest and I found it a joy to read owing to the combination of history, humour and outright fun. Another must read from Sweden.

FILM: Thirteen Days (8/10)

Why did I watch it?

Caught a description of this film in the TV guide and it appealed to my interest in all things historical. Also, I had just finished reading Tom Clancy's The Sum of All Fears, which culminates in a stand-off between the US and Soviets that teeters on the brink of nuclear war so this film seemed apt.

What's it all about?

Thirteen Days follows the actions of US President JFK (Bruce Greenwood) and his administration and military during the thirteen days that followed the discovery of Soviet nuclear missiles on the island of Cuba in 1962 as the two world superpowers edged towards nuclear war. At the centre of the decision-making alongside JFK, Kevin Costner stars as adviser Kenny O'Donnell and Steven Culp as Robert Kennedy.

Should you watch it?
Led by strong performances by Greenwood and Culp, Thirteen Days is an interesting and taught political drama, even if the final outcome is known to all (hint - we weren't all incinerated by mutual nuclear destruction). In addition to the Kennedy administration, the narrative covers the roles of both the military and US UN representatives in the crisis. I've always thought that the roles of military personnel in movies is clichéd in the manner they always push for war, but seeing as this film depicts actual events (according to the source book) it turns out that that is actually the case. In fact, in this case the military chiefs repeatedly undermine JFK's restrained  by not cancelling a planned atom bomb test or spy flights close to the Soviet Union.

The script faithfully recreates actual speeches given by JFK during the crisis, 'not merely peace in our time but peace for all time' and both Greenwood and Culp accurately nail the Boston Irish accent of the Kennedy family. Unfortunately the same cannot be said for the film's lead and producer, Kevin Costner. His accent veers from credible to laughable to non-existent during the film and his failings are only highlighted by his co-stars' performances.