Fury: Review

Fury is a film of mud. Muddy roads, muddy fields, muddy people. The filth created by the mechanised destruction of WW2 is clinging and pervasive, both physically and morally. The film’s characters are caked in the dirt and horror they’ve been through as we join them as their campaign draws to a close. However, while the crew of the titular tank clearly teeter on the edge of mental stability, it is the metal walls surrounding them that, quite contrary to being a claustrophobic symbol of their misery, in fact hold together their collective and individual psyches. The walls are adorned with photos, medals and memorabilia, and we are given the sense that the men in fact need this enclosure and inherent, almost enforced, companionship, encapsulated in their repeated assertion that it is in fact ‘the best job (they) ever had’.

We join director David Ayer’s film in April 1945. Germany is in the midst of capitulation as WW2 draws to a close, yet the fighting continues. The crew of ‘Fury’, led by Brad Pitt’s (Moneyball, Inglorious Bastards) Don ‘Wardaddy’ Collier, Shia LaBeouf (Transformers, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull), Michael Peña (End of Watch, American Hustle) and Jon Bernthal (The Ghost, Wolf of Wall Street) are joined by Logan Lerman’s (Percy Jackson & the Lightening Thief, The Perks of Being a Wallflower) fresh faced addition to the group. Trained as a typing clerk yet thrown into the midst of battle with a matter of weeks’ training, Lerman’s Norman Ellison is our insight into the crew as he must quickly learn how to fit in and perform to the standard expected of him by men who know that, in a five man tank, there can be no weak links. 

Ayer continues, as in 2012’s impressive End of Watch, to provide an unflinching look at his chosen subject matter, fully displaying the gore of battle for the film’s entire duration. It is however, in the film’s design that it shines most. The costumes, locations and most importantly, the vehicles, are entirely convincing, with the production in fact making use of genuine working WW2-era tanks. All of this lends a necessary realism to the film as a whole, in particular the action set pieces, which at times are presented as all out slogs of persistent explosions, while at others feeling more like orchestrated acts of precision. This variety is welcome, but what is maintained is the atmosphere of desperation among the tank crews, not only to succeed, but to survive. 

What good work the film does in establishing its gritty realism, is unfortunately somewhat inhibited by the script and plot. From Pitt’s battle hardened commander, Lebeouf’s religious minded ‘Bible’, Bernthal’s unhinged and violent Grady through to Peña’s driver ‘Gordo’, Fury’s characters rarely stray far from stereotype. While the performances in these roles are good, with Pitt and Lerman given the most room to show their talents, Fury does often drift into the realms of predictability in terms of plot beats and character development. The finale in particular, is excessively overblown and takes the film’s tagline ‘War never ends quietly’ far too literally. It is in the moments where Fury dares to deviate from the expected norm that it feels more its own film but these moments are regrettably infrequent.

However, while there is at times a desire to see Fury do something different, what cannot be argued is that what the film does, it predominantly does incredibly well. While the plot is somewhat formulaic, the set pieces, production design and performances elevate the film, allowing it to provide an engaging display of the effects of war on both individuals and the collective. Ayer skilfully handles the film’s quieter moments, safe in the knowledge that they convey their desired message without having to spell them out through scenery chewing diatribes of exposition. An intense and gripping watch, not for the faint-hearted, Fury is not to be missed as we rumble into awards season.

4/5

The Adjustment Bureau: Review

Upon recently deciding to dig out a copy of The Adjustment Bureau, the first time I’d seen it since its theatrical release, I was struck by the statutory quote from a critic on the box cover, stating “Bourne meets Inception’. This comparison struck me as somewhat erroneous, besides the fact that Matt Damon (of Bourne fame) stars in the film and there are certain Inception-lite psychological elements to the premise, they have little in common. The Adjustment Bureau lacks the same kind of frenetic kineticism and mystery as Damon’s Bourne trilogy, not to mention, Inception’s intellectualism. If anything, the film bears closer resemblance to the Wachowski's The Matrix, with the idea of seeing behind a curtain we weren’t even supposed to know was there, exposing a controlling background force. Regardless, this is not to say that The Adjustment Bureau is not an enjoyable watch. 

Based on the book of the same name by iconic sci-fi writer Philip K. Dick, Damon stars as David Norris, an ambitious politician with dreams of reaching the Senate and beyond, but with controversy never far behind him. In the aftermath of one such incident, circumstances align for him to meet Emily Blunt’s (Looper) contemporary ballet dancer Elise. The two seem made for each other, but it is soon made clear to David that they cannot be together, all because of the men from the titular Adjustment Bureau. As we are told, they are ‘the people who make sure things happen according to plan’, ensuring we do not stray from our predetermined fates. However, such is the effect Elise has had on David, he resolves to struggle against the trilby-sporting businessmen of fate to be with her. 

The performances here are not revelatory but enjoyable nonetheless. The interplay between Blunt and Damon, essential if we are to believe in the stakes he would fight against for her, works well. Their banter back and forth as well as the more genuine displays of affection are entirely convincing with the film itself falling more into the category of a romantic drama than straight up science fiction. Support is given by the likes of Anthony Mackie (The Hurt Locker) and Terrence Stamp (Wanted), with the former faring better than the latter. Mackie is engaging and watchable, yet Stamp feels as though he is merely picking up the paycheque with his facial expressions rarely straying far from ‘distinctly disgruntled’. 

The film moves along at a reasonable pace, with the closest to an action sequence being Damon running about a bit, without ever really setting the world alight. Somewhat peculiarly the film’s initial political backdrop seems to rather hastily become little more than an afterthought, in spite of the importance afforded to it in the progression of events. The Ides of March this most certainly is not. However, this does allow for the romance at the centre of the film to take centre stage and with good performances and likable characters, popcorn movies have certainly delivered worse in the past. 

Overall, The Adjustment Bureau is an absent minded pleasure (albeit a somewhat forgettable one), particularly for those prone to such wistful diversions in wondering what our own pre-determined plan might hold.

3/5

Others with your browsing history also read...

In the meantime while I try and produce something worth reading, why not have a look at the handful of pieces I worked on for Redbrick Film in my time with them? Just follow the link below to my profile...

http://www.redbrick.me/author/thomaswilliams/

A disturbance in the force...

It has been some time since this blog saw the light of day, like the Ark of the Covenant in Raiders of the Lost Ark, it was stored and hidden from humanity in a metaphoric wooden crate. However, it has returned (with any luck to a better standard than Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, but time will tell) to spout more of my nonsense. While the films featured may not always be new, or any good, hopefully you'll enjoy the read and maybe even find something you've never heard of that you might just fall in love with.

Wish me luck.

Safe House: Review

Safe House is the new film from director Daniel Espinosa. As his first foray into the world of film making in the English language he could ask for few better starts than to direct Denzel Washington (The Bone Collector; Training Day) and Ryan Reynolds (Buried; Green Lantern) in an exotic all out action movie. Washington plays experienced rogue CIA agent Tobin Frost, arriving in Cape Town he strikes a deal for some very valuable information, bringing the deal to the attention of those who have a lot to lose from the sharing of such information.  Reynolds on the other hand plays the antithesis to Frost. As Matt Weston he is the junior ‘House Keeper’ managing the CIA’s safe house in Cape Town. Trapped in the house, he craves better jobs in which he doesn’t have to stare at four walls, but with little field experience and no way of gaining any, he finds himself frustrated. That is until Frost enters his world. Brought in by a CIA team the safe house is breached and the villains of the piece attempt to hunt Frost down. Going on the run Weston must keep Frost in his hands while his mind is toyed with, forcing him to question where his loyalties lie and just who he can trust.

It is this central relationship which ultimately will determine the fate of the film and, clearly, it works. Washington is on fine form, and even though Reynolds is the man we mainly follow, the presence of Tobin Frost is consistently palpable. Playing equal parts cold calculating killer and violent sociopath, Denzel is also able to make us care about his character, potentially somewhat concerning considering what we see him do! While Washington is obviously the main source of the film’s star wattage, to give no mention to Reynolds would be a disservice. Stepping out of his rom-com comfort zone in recent times Reynolds kicks, punches, grimaces and scowls appropriately while also making his a character that we can get behind. This brings us onto one of the film’s best features: its fight scenes. In many action films the fight scenes are athletic and almost dance like. However the fights in Safe House are more in line with those seen in Matt Damon’s Bourne trilogy, meaning they are visceral and brutal. Every punch has real weight and the standard shaky-cam action puts us right at the centre of things. In addition to this, the use of location is fantastic. Filmed in Cape Town, the colours are bright and vivid, providing the perfect playground for the action to unfold in. In particular, a night-time chase through a township is particularly brilliant.

However, Safe House is not a perfect film by any means. If you come expecting a plot on the level of Inception, you are likely to be disappointed. The story is completely serviceable while at the same time being predictable, twisting and turning appropriately if unremarkably. Added to this, Brendan Gleeson (The Guard; Green Zone) and Vera Farmiga (Up in the Air; Source Code) are tragically underused as the background CIA staff and feel like little more than plot devices. In a similar vein, the inclusion of a love interest for Reynolds, while clearly intended to add emotional depth to the character, feels tacked on. It succeeds to an extent but ultimately feels more like a proverbial tick in a box.

Overall, Safe House may not be the most intellectual film of the year and the lack of participation given to Farmiga and Gleeson borders on criminal but as a basic, enjoyable, action film for a Friday night, Safe House is brilliant. Washington and Reynolds are both fantastic and provide an adrenalin ride that relentlessly serves up car chases and fight scenes against a gorgeous backdrop worth anyone’s ticket fare.

4/5

Shame: Review

Shame, the new film from director Steve McQueen, has received a lot of buzz, especially with it being Oscar season. Intrigued by the rave reviews, despite the somewhat daunting topic of sex addiction, I decided to give Shame a try. The praise for Michael (Hunger, X-Men: First Class) Fassbender’s performance as the film’s protagonist Brandon is entirely justified. He exudes equal parts menace, agony and indifference in ways which are entirely believable. Credit must surely go to the McQueen-Fassbender partnership with this being their second film together after the 2008 film Hunger, the film that provided Fassbender’s breakthrough performance as Irish hunger striker Bobby Sands. It must be said, Shame is not a study of sex addiction itself. It is in fact a broader study of addiction and the effects it has on its victims. Brandon is clinical in his seduction and subsequent disposal of any woman around him. However his sterilised and methodical existence, controlled by his urges, is disrupted by the appearance of his sister played by Carey Mulligan (Drive, An Education). Mulligan also excels and provides further evidence of her phenomenal acting talent. As Sissy she yearns for Brandon’s affection only to be constantly spurned. It is such feelings of affection that do not seem compatible with Brandon’s way of life as illustrated by his failure to perform sexually when with someone he in fact knows and has a connection with. His subsequent spiral out of control is affecting as we see a man heading towards self destruction, becoming less and less of a human being, all in search of something he cannot help but want. In addition to the performances, the way the film is shot is also spectacular. McQueen’s visual style fits the film perfectly with Brandon’s apartment, a clean place of straight lines and symmetry being the obvious example. While being set in New York, the location is never the main focus. Filming in the Big Apple in some films seemingly constituts the requirement for aerial shots showcasing the city, but not in Shame. Every shot has the characters as the focus, for instance, Brandon jogging is shown through a long panning shot with him as the unwavering focus, despite whatever is shown in the background, whether it be scaffolding or signature New York billboards. This sums up the film’s strength, as the focus is on the characters and what addiction does to them, as opposed to addiction on its own. While not without flaws, a tendency for scenes to outstay their welcome being one of the main issues for me personally, Shame is nonetheless a fantastic film that will surely be in the headlines come the Baftas and the Oscars.

4/5

The Iron Lady: Review

The Iron Lady can almost be seen as requiring two separate reviews. The film tells the tale of the rise and fall of Margaret Thatcher (Meryl Streep; Mama Mia!, Julie & Julia), from grocers shop owner’s daughter to Prime Minister. Her story is told through a series of flashbacks as experienced by a present day Thatcher, suffering from dementia. Therefore there is a clear split in the film between the experiences of her political life and her current struggle with mental illness. Meryl Streep as Thatcher provides a spectacular performance. While not exactly the obvious choice to play such a controversial and well known figure, Streep throws herself into the roll and embodies Thatcher incredibly. However, the strength of her performance cannot save the film from being problematic. The flashback sequences, where we are told of her rise through politics, are genuinely interesting and compelling. Including impressive performances from Alexandra Roach as a young Thatcher, I found myself wishing that this constituted the entirety of the film. Sadly, the present day scenes with Thatcher struggling with flashbacks and the grief of losing her husband Dennis (Jim Broadbent) do not reach the same high standard. These scenes feel as though they are from a different film altogether and consequently The Iron Lady feels somewhat diluted as a consequence. A greater attention to Thatcher’s political life would have enabled greater focus, for instance on the Falklands War. As it is, this film is let down by the way it is told. An interesting subject matter and Streep’s virtuoso performance save it from failure, but it could have been drastically improved if it decided what story it wanted to tell.

3/5