Showing posts with label John Hurt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Hurt. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 10, 2013

Twilight Fatigue

Ready to have your mind blown? I actually kinda liked a movie based on a Stephenie Meyer book.

No, really!

Naturally, it wasn't any of the absurd Twilight movies - for which I hold nothing but disinterest in at best and contempt for at worst - but Meyer's sci-fi story The Host that actually shows the upper limit of her imagination. Released in 2008 as the first of a proposed trilogy, the basis for the story - an alien invasion in which not only our world but our minds are invaded by alien consciousnesses - makes for a much more interesting tale than sparkly vampires and idiotic love triangles. I've always been a sucker for post-apocalyptic tales, and while The Host doesn't have the nuclear fallout or crumbling infrastructure of such stories, its human element was what I was looking most forward to when I visited the theater that day.

You won't look human for long...
Saoirse Ronan plays Melanie Stryder, one of the last human beings left on planet Earth. In the future, we have been invaded by an alien race known as "Souls", parasites that invade the minds of people and wipe clean the human identity, replacing it with their own while they live out the lives of our bodies. The only indication that they're no longer us are the bright blue eyes that make them easily recognizable to others. While surviving the initial invasion alongside her little brother, Melanie is soon captured and implanted with a Soul that calls itself "Wanderer". Wanderer is tasked with retrieving memories related to a human resistance that continues to fight back. But fueled by thoughts of her family and loved ones, Melanie manages to maintain her sense of identity and forces Wanderer to escape and try to find the other humans before the Souls can.

Guess which one is ombrophobic!
There's one part I left out of the above plot description, and that's the complex love story that Meyer ineffectively plugged into the story as Melanie's primary goal (over, you know, survival). Before Melanie was captured, she met a young named Jared (Max Irons) and the pair started up a relationship that was rudely interrupted by the whole "alien embryo" thing. When she (as Wanderer) rejoins the humans, not only is she immediately rejected by Jared (who doesn't realize that she is still in her own body) but is approached by another young man, Ian (Jake Abel), who grows attached to Wanderer's personality. Yes, it's another love triangle, although taking the disparate personalities into effect it's more like a love Fermat's Last Theorum. As a narrative tool it's silly and ridiculous and completely ham-handed in its implementation.

First she's being hunted by Nazis, now she's hunting humans.
Thankfully, romance is not Melanie/Wanderer's only motivation. Director and screenwriter Andrew Niccol has worked on his fair share of science fiction (Gattaca, S1m0ne and In Time), and it shows in the rest of The Host's story, which takes a wonderful sci-fi concept and clearly understands the difference between human drama and dramatics. While some things might never get explained (just how did a species of benevolent space caterpillars invade our planet anyway?), Niccol does the smart thing by focusing not on the invasion but of the aliens who struggle to identify with this new species that they have subjugated. The universe the movie opens up has more potential than many sci-fi flicks in recent memory, and is one of the bigger spectacles in a film that doesn't really spend its money on extensive production design. The sets that are in place might be low-tech, but do a good job of creating both modern and tribal worlds for the planet's two factions.

Why didn't the aliens just develop contact lenses?
The acting isn't bad either, though its at times brought down a notch by weak dialogue and mediocre scenes. The trio of Ronan, Irons and Abel are all solid presences, and the talented Ronan is at her best when conversing between her two very different mindsets. They might at times be hilarious, but while others see that as unintentional, I see it as a conscious rise in the levity in an otherwise dour tale. Humor notwithstanding, there are talented actors among the cast, with John Hurt, Frances Fisher and Diane Kruger lending their veteran talents. I firmly believe that without these people, The Host's performances would damn it to infamy on the level of Atlas Shrugged.

Like most women, she's of two minds about EVERYTHING.
As long as you can forgive or otherwise ignore the ill-conceived romance story and the fact that it comes from the same author as Twilight, there's a lot to like about The Host. It's got a decent story, good acting, and doesn't embarrass itself in the visuals department either, thanks to Niccol's eye behind the camera. It's by no means a must-see, but it does represent a decent standby in a year when there really haven't BEEN many must-sees thus far. I feel like I say this a lot right now (and hopefully that will change soon), but as long as your expectations are low, there's no reason not to enjoy this straightforward release. If you still aren't sure it's worth a trip to the movies, it definitely WILL be a fair rental option in just a few months.

Friday, January 6, 2012

Tinker Tailor on Mr. Anderson


When British author John le Carre released his fifth novel featuring Secret Intelligence Agent George Smiley in 1974, he can be forgiven perhaps for not realizing what he had on his hands at the time. The first novel in what became known as his Cold War-set "Karla Trilogy" went on to become a bestseller of international proportions, had radio and television adaptations made, and remains one of the best known British novels to date, completely revolutionizing the spy drama in the process. So when Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy finally was given the cinematic treatment by director Tomas Alfredson (who made the original Swedish Let the Right One In), there were those fans of the book whose response was “it’s about time!” It helped that the cast brought in was chock full of talent, from standouts like Gary Oldman and Colin Firth to perhaps lesser known Tom Hardy and Toby Jones. Would any of these stellar abilities get any lasting recognition for such a renowned title? And how does this well-anticipated film fare over the course of a two hour movie when both previous adaptations had to be slotted into seven-part miniseries? My trek to the theater to add this to my yearly film allowance would hopefully answer that.

Gary Oldman: classic curmudgeon
In the wake of a blown operation in which British spy Jim Prideaux (Mark Strong) is shot and captured by Russian intelligence operatives, a shakedown is performed at the top of Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service, forcing out "Control" (John Hurt), the SIS’s director, and his right hand man George Smiley (Gary Oldman). Control is convinced however that one of the four men left in charge of the SIS in his departure is in fact a mole, funneling secrets to Russian Intelligence. When Control, already ill, passes away, it is left to Smiley to ferret out what few clues can be found and to see which of the four operatives, code-named Tinker (Toby Jones), Tailor (Colin Firth), Soldier (Ciaran Hinds) and Poorman (David Dencik), is the culprit, and whether the mole has anything to do with the top secret source of intelligence from Russia, known only as “Witchcraft”.

Yes, books... you might have heard of them
As I mentioned before, the exhaustive cast is one of the major draws if Tinker Tailor appeals to you. Gary Oldman reminds us of what a star he used to be in the nineties, as recent years have seen him starring in less-than-reputable titles or tagging on side roles in big series' like The Dark Knight or Harry Potter. Given center stage, however, he cuts a swath through the material in front of him, with every deliberate motion and dour grimace given for a very good reason, with no wasted energy to muddy up his delivery beyond exactly what is needed. It doesn’t hurt that he’s surrounded by a stellar supporting cast, most notably Colin Firth as a rival Intelligence head and one of those suspected to be a mole. Firth plays up the clichéd British arrogance for the role, but because he’s Colin fricking Firth his performance doesn’t come off as trite or silly. Other standouts include Toby Jones as the smug new head of the SIS, Benedict Cumberbatch as Smiley’s confidante and overly cautious agent, and Mark Strong in a relatively small role as Jim Prideaux, the agent (and Firth’s character’s best friend)  whose capture sets off the whole mess. Kathy Burke impresses in one scene as a foul-mouthed source of information (I guess her character had a larger role in the book), vacillating between helpful and flirty with Smiley. Unfortunately, crushing the story of the book down to a two-hour film means a whole got left out, including a lot of back-story for suspects played by Ciaran Hinds and David Denick. It’s a shame as both are well-regarded actors who would have benefited from a little more screen time. Also impressive is rising Hollywood star Tom Hardy as young agent Ricki Tarr, whose appearance in London allows Smiley clues to the mole in his midst. Hardy, nearly unrecognizable with a shaggy head of hair, shows that no matter the role, no matter how out of place it might seem for him, he can do it. It’ll be a shame to see his career go mainstream (such as in the upcoming This Means War), but if there’s any justice in the world, his name atop billboards will inspire people to see his films sooner rather than later.

What's more ridiculous; his career ascension, or his hair?
The aforementioned plot compressions create other problems besides just glossed-over characters. On one hand, the story feels told as if no crucial details are left out, and the tension the film bears throughout feels completely natural to a spy thriller like this. On the other hand, the tension is born from square one, with little downtime for the viewers to stop and catch their breath amid all the potential treason. While no major details feel left out, the same cannot be said for minor, clarifying ones, and some narrative miscues will throw the viewer off for whole scenes at a time, especially some featuring Mark Strong early on. Overall, the whole thing feels as though you need to have read the book to fully appreciate the experience of seeing this film. This is unfortunately the byproduct of plot shrink, and thankfully it’s no more than a minor nuisance on the film as a whole. Sure, some characters and plot points would have made far more sense with a bit more prodding, but for the most part such details would have been nice additions, not necessary exposition.

He may not get an Academy Award, but he's still Colin Firth!
For a film based on a beloved novel, there were certainly plenty of places where a lesser filmmaker would have screwed up. Thankfully, Alfredson did his source material due diligence and brought together the perfect cast, melding them into a story that would have devolved into drawn-out mumbo-jumbo without a strong hand to guide them. This is one of the few times I will argue that a film should have been LONGER, but thankfully this is no reason not to see what amounts overall to a very good film. While perhaps not reaching “Must See” status, it’s just a rung below, and even if you don’t see this Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy in the theaters, I hope you’ll at least consider it a serious rental in a few month’s time. More importantly, I hope the Academy will show the film and especially lead Gary Oldman more love than the Golden Globes have. Oldman deserves a Best Actor nomination for his efforts, as much for how he has been ignored in today’s Hollywood as he has been vindicated in this international thrill ride.