Split Cert: 15 / 117 mins / Dir. M Night Shyamalan / Trailer
Well, I hadn't actually planned on watching a comedy in my first #FilmDay of 2017. Then again, I'm fairly certain that James McAvoy and Anya Taylor-Joy hadn't planned on starring in one, either. The Saturday-afternoon audience*1 laughed regularly throughout this over-ripe tale of teenage kidnap and mutilation. Not in outright derision, but not in a nervous breaking of the tension either. There was a core of people, youngsters in particular, who found the psychological torment genuinely funny. I found it hard to disagree.
But I'm getting ahead of myself.
Split is an abduction-thriller centered around an antagonist with 'split-personalities', written and directed by M. Night Shyamalan. There, that's pretty much spoiled it for you now. Sorry about that.
While I was rather entertained by this film, it lends itself to a 'blind viewing', ie one where all the audience knows beforehand is that the film is a thriller. Because the sad and unavoidable fact is, Split would actually work far better without the plot-feeding trailers. Or the plot-feeding poster. Or M. Night Shyamalan's name being on it. For a while, his attachment to a project was a badge of assurance, a qualification. But the writer's slavish adherence to upping the cinematic ante is more of a pre-emptive stumbling block (because it's not really A Twist if the entire audience is sitting waiting for one). The further Shayamalan tries to push the envelope of credibility, the more his work becomes typical of itself and more ordinary as a result.
As is increasingly the way, the modern-day Roald Dahl presents an intricately written, solidly acted and competently directed story which manages to shoot itself in the foot with a frankly laughable third-act. The handling of abuse and abduction themes is every bit as indelicate as the film's exploration of mental illness. Although to be fair, none of this should actually be taken too seriously*2, so it's hardly an authority on delicate issues.
McAvoy probably does best out of the whole thing. His rapid-fire switching between three personas is like a reasonably impressive showreel for a performer who's already proved their worth and hasn't been asked to submit one. I have to assume young James took the gig for kicks rather than any professional advancement. Riding an ill-deserved shotgun is Anya Taylor Joy as Casey, who plays the progressively-undressed-kidnapped-teen better than the role deserves (and just a tip Anya, The VVitch" was a great breakout role, but after Morgan and now this, please have a word with your agent). The only other significant screen-time is allotted to Betty Buckley as Doctor Fletcher, a character who seems to exist solely to telegraph exactly what's going to happen for the rest of the film. Her character spends the first two acts spouting utter bollocks, then the third not believing what's happening despite being the authority on it. That's not character development so much as the narrative enemy of the entire movie. The film starts and continues in a very silly vein*3, albeit with a poker-straight face.
But for all my sniffiness, Split is quite good fun in its own disposable way, and you should at least get a laugh out of it.
I myself snorted at more than a few lines of dialogue. And I must confess that I heartily guffawed in the film's final scene, if only for how long the camera lingers on what should have been a half-second 'was that what I thought it was? punchline. Better still, the aforementioned comedy-crowd audience remained largely silent at this moment, although I suspect that's down to them being too young (despite gaining admittance to this 15-cert) to actually get the joke.
Because it's framed as a teaser, but rest assured it's more of a joke…
The director's body of work.
This is definitely one for the fans.
If you have nothing better to do on a Saturday night, sure.
It doesn't need it, though.
It achieves what the audience will require of it, if that counts?
No.
No.
I think I heard one buried in the final dramatic sequence, but I'm not going to watch the film again to find out so no.
Level 2: That James McAvoy's in this, and he was in X-Men: Apocalypse alongside Rose 'Dormé' Byrne and Oscar 'Dameron' Isaac.
*2 Unless of course you work in the mental-health or social-care sectors, in which case you're probably already used to face-palming yourself into oblivion every time a new 'schizophrenia' movie is produced, anyway. Although credit where it's due, this movie (iirc) doesn't actually employ the S-word in its script. Although with a story as lurid as this one, it doesn't have to..
*3 Example of random stupidity: When the central character uses brute-force to escape from a bolted-shut store cupboard, the locking mechanism would splinter away from the wooden door and frame long before the metal bolt would bend - as seen in the film. Unless he also has the power to super-heat metal without setting fire to the surrounding material and the film forgot to mention that. It wouldn't surprise me, to be honest.
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
Jackie Cert: 15 / 100 mins / Dir. Pablo Larrain / Trailer
We're at that point again where I'm longing for something light to watch in the cinema. Not necessarily dumb, just something to lift my spirits rather than make me stroke my chin or massage my temples. In a clear move of marketing tar-brushing, the trailers before today's movie about a newly-widowed woman from the 1960s were for Loving, Patriots Day, Hidden Figures, The Founder and Denial. All fact, no fiction. Y'know, as if the news isn't awful enough these days, and I'd want to escape that by going to the cinema to see that life's always been shit for some poor bastard*1. Well thanks, Ian Hollywood. Thanks a bunch.
But still despite its setting, Pablo Larrain's Jackie manages to - somehow - be at the less-harrowing end of the scale. Using an interview with Life magazine's Theodore White as an intercut framing device, it's the story of Jackie Kennedy's reactions and coping mechanisms in the aftermath of the assassination of her husband. And I say story advisedly; I love that in film's opening scene, we're unequivocally told that what follows won't be a documentary to be scrutinised by the audience, but the considered and edited opinion of its protagonist and 'author'. From the initial setup, a week after JFK's assassination, but even back into the re-created archival footage of Jackie Kennedy, Natalie Portman completely embodies this huge sadness in her portrayal. Not so much a sense of loss, but of being lost; and of the vacuum that exists before someone allows themselves to grieve.
The hype is justified, with an incredibly strong showing from Portman, often overshadowing the rest of the film. Because the story is presented as a curated and often jumbled series of moments, the narrative isn't continuous, so we often cut straight into a scene where Natalie's going full-belt down the dramatic highway. The rest of the cast support ably but it's really not their film, so their performances are almost played down by the combined work of editor Sebastián Sepúlveda and cinematographer Stéphane Fontaine. I could envision a stage-adaptation of this being performed well by a lone actress.
And it's perhaps this disconnect between the eponymous lead and everything else which leaves me liking Larrain's movie rather than loving it*2. Having not lived through those days personally, I found that I wasn't particularly moved by anything I saw, just deeply fascinated.
All in all, definitely worth a watch, but I'm not sure if I'd get anything out of another pass…
*1 It's debatable how emotionally harrowing The Founder is going to be of course, since it's basically the story of how McDonald's got franchised out. Although if you've ever worked in McDonald's, I imagine the point still stands.
*2 Most disconcerting moment: "PRESIDENT JOHNSON!" bellowed one in-audience commentary provider at the moment when JFK's VP was sworn into office. Thankfully, the same panto-regular waited until the film's closing credits until booming "SHE MARRIED… THE GREEK!" to everyone and no-one. This was, coincidentally I'm sure, the very same cinema where a screening of Eli Roth's Knock Knock apparently had its own audience-participation section. Although the accent of this heckler tells me it was a different punter, at least.
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
Sometimes, you just know that the first-draft of a movie script was written in crayon. Also that no further drafts were considered necessary. Welcome to a film where the cinema staff performed IQ tests on patrons on the way in and out of the screening, to make sure no permanent cumulative damage had been done. Welcome to what is basically continuous chase/fight sequence, briefly punctuated by Toni Collette*1 pouting. Welcome to an actioner for viewers who find Vin Diesel's Fast & Furious movies "a bit complicated". Welcome to that performer's character flirting with every female on-screen while you bite off the inside of your own cheek. Welcome back, Xander Cage*2…
You know the drill, Diesel takes his shirt off and things explode for two hours, in lieu of a screenplay. That Paramount have seen fit to unleash this unasked-for threequel in the middle of January, should go some way to illustrating their confidence in it. It's a movie for a certain type of punter. This afternoon's screening played to eight people; all white, all male, all unaccompanied. Okay, I was in that bracket too, but hey.
The plot*3 centres around Cage and his expanding band of misfits working to recover a magic box being used by The Bad Terrorists™ to weaponise satellites by making them fall out of orbit (and apparently doing so to a metre-precise target-zone). Except obviously The Good Spy Agency™ is morally dubious, as well. And then people from The Bad Ones™ turn out to be The Good Ones™, and 45 minutes in none of it actually matters. One thing's for sure though, Vin Diesel plays A Good One. We know he's good because all of the women want to have it off with him, and pretty much all of the men can't help paying him compliments at every turn or getting punched in the face as a consequence. That is the film. Almost as good as that time Diesel made a full movie about his own Dungeons & Dragons character.
I'm not going to go into the myriad logical inconsistencies presented throughout the film's run-time; xXx doesn't deserve that level of analysis. Things might be different if it was All Good Fun™ at the same time, but this is lazy, reductive and staggeringly misogynistic, with Diesel's vacant grin being the icing on the already substandard cake. At least Assassin's Creed had the decency to keep a straight-face while it insulted everyone.
*1 Vin Diesel I understand, he just needs the attention. But what kind of gambling debts has the award-winning Toni Collette racked up that she's been roped into this absolute shower? At least she looks mortified at the lines she's been asked to read…
*2 I'm a little surprised that for the third Triple-X movie they didn't go for the title/tagline X3. The imminent Trainspotting sequel seems to have no problem repurposing Terminator's T2 abbreviation, and if it's okay to plagiarise something from a movie as great as that, then the third X-Men movie should present no moral conundrums, surely? And not to get too spoilerific, but Return of Xander Cage has had no problem at all in lifting Deadpool's "something stuck in your teeth" gag, as well as having Sam Jackson's agency-boss fake his own death for an end-of-movie funeral service in pretty much exactly the same way as Nick Fury did in Winter Soldier. No, seriously.
*3 I am of course using the word 'plot' in a sense every bit as loose as the screenplay itself. The word 'screenplay' also used loosely.
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
Oh, hello there. I've been to see Rogue One again, and rather than bore you silly with nitpicking and needlessly in-depth opinions, I've made you some Skittlez character-posters instead*1.
[ Click for Big (opens in new window) ]
More soon.
You're very welcome.
All of The Star Wars.
Yep.
It does.
It's a strong showing.
Nope.
Yep.
Level 0: It is Star Wars.
Although if you really wanted to go the long way round with it…
Rogue One features the mo-cap and voice work of Guy Henry, a face perhaps more familiar to UK viewers as a long-time Holby City regular, as is Hugh Quarshie who rocked up in 1986's Highlander alongside Clancy Brown, an actor who appeared in Cowboys & Aliens, as did a certain Harrison Ford, who headlined 1992's Patriot Games, a film which featured Pip Torrens, who also had a role in 2012's Anna Karenina alongside Domhnall Gleeson, who played one of the Weasley's in Harry Potter & The Deathly Hallows, a film that also starred Mr Guy Henry from off of Rogue One…
*1 You may well call that a cop-out, but I assure you that if you did you'd be very right indeed. Snarking aside, I haven't finished with Rogue One yet, there'll be more words in a future review.
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
