The Prestige

IMDB

Sometimes good films come almost out of nowhere. When I went to see School for Scoundrels, a preview for The Prestige was shown. I had never heard of it before, but the mood of the preview and the cast put it on the must show list. To my pleasant surprise the film opened this week, so I slipped out to watch it as soon as I could.

There were three main draws to the cast. The first was Christian Bale. This guy is somebody who I have enjoyed watching since American Psycho, and most recently he showed how Batman should be done. Next up was my fellow countryman Hugh Jackman, who really made his name for himself in my book with his portrayal of Wolverine. And the presence of Michael Caine just sweetens the deal – this guy has been pumping out great celluloid for years, with classics such as Dirty Rotten Scoundrels, Goldmember and Secondhand Lions just to name some highlights. The film also features Piper Perabo (remember Coyote Ugly?), Scarlett Johansson (very good in The Island, I thought), David Bowie (I did not recognize him when I saw him on screen, unlike his appearance in Zoolander) and Andy Serkis (most people remember him rendered rather than filmed).

Christopher Nolan wrote the screenplay (along with his brother Jonathan) and directed the film. I like his style of film-making – Memento and Batman Begins were both extremely well made, with fantastic atmosphere and electric tension at times. Seeing this has inspired me to see Insomnia, which I had previously avoided based on an ignorance of who was responsible for it.

One comparison which some people will not help making is to The Illusionist, which also had magic as a thematic element and was also a period piece set in old Europe. After seeing and thoroughly enjoying both films, I can safely say that the similarities are very superficial. I think that The Illusionist is more of a story about romantic rivalry, where The Prestige is a story about professional rivalry. This fundamental difference in the story drives the end result to be constructed very differently.

The film is about two magicians, Rupert (Hugh Jackman) and Alfred (Christian Bale) who start out together under the tutelage of Cutter (Michael Caine). Some people have painted the story as the two being friends that become rivals, but I would more accurately characterize it as aquantances who become rivals. There is an element of distrust between them even at the beginning of the film, which blossoms into a very passionate hatred by the time the film is done. Rupert and Alfred eventually create careers of their own, attempting to sabotage each other whenever they can and learn the secrets of each other’s magic. This brings Rupert all the way to Colorado (a long way, considering things are set in late 19th century London) to meet with Nikola Tesla in an attempt to construct the ultimate act.

The film does have a bit of a twist to it, and I have read some other commentary on this. I think that this film is best enjoyed by watching it without reading too much about the twist. Some people have commented that they needed a second viewing to fully see what was going on, and some people leaving the cinema at the same time as me seemed to not understand what was happening. Personally, I had suspicions about what was going on about halfway through. The story leaves a lot of hints here and there, and there are many layers to “the trick” in this film, so the details of what was happening were tough to tell until the very end. The way that the layers are folded onto one another and the way that you can cast back to earlier moments of the film to see what their significance was is very satisfying.

I think that this is one of the best films that I have seen recently. The intensity of the characters is amazing, and the two protagonists bristle with energy throughout the whole affair. Some people have said that they find the characters shallow, but I think that they show the nature of obsessive personalities very accurately. If you don’t have an obsessive personality yourself or don’t know somebody who has, then you might not agree, but otherwise you will know what I mean when you see it.

The atmosphere of the film is great. The two landscapes are London and Colorado Springs, and both are brought to life with that gritty realism that I love (although things look suspiciously cleaner than they would at that time period, but the purpose of things is to entertain, not educate). Sometimes the storyline weaves between the past and the present in a way that does not preserve clarity, but I am unsure if this was a desirable trait or a subtle flaw in the presentation.

This was a very riveting film, especially considering the two plus hours of content. Pretty much everything, from the casting, the acting, the story, the cinematography, the editing, the special effects – is top notch and blended together superbly to create a unique film that defies classification into a generic genre. All that I can add is to implore you to watch it, hopefully without some less considerate reviewer ruining it for you.

School for Scoundrels

IMDB

I knew that eventually I would have to see this film. Anybody who reads my reviews (all 3 of you) will know that the cast of the film are often a deciding factor for me to decide to watch it. And when Jon Heder makes a new film, it gets a free pass because Napoleon Dynamite was so bloody good. The only concern from watching previews is that Jon will just reprise the Napoleon character, and not branch out and do something different. I think that the guy has awesome talent, but the Hollywood money machine will find it hard to resist making “Napoleon Dynamite in the city” or “Napoleon Dynamite meets [insert cliche here]“. I am sure that it will get him a paycheck and tickets to parties with The Rock, but eventually he will lose his draw.

The good news is that Jon does not simply act like Napoleon in this film. Sure he starts the story as a bit of a doofus – but his character changes and develops during the course of the movie to become something else. Towards the end he even starts to get a bit of a glint in his eye, making him more of a human being and less of a caricature of one. The movie also does not have a surreal feel to it like Napoleon Dynamite did – it is filmed on the streets of New York and does not make a story of the surroundings. I wish that more films were shot outside of Manhattan, though. I like the big apple, but too much is filmed there in my opinion. There are oodles of cities in the US that can be used for a film like this one. I don’t care if it is filmed in Vancouver, as long as it is obviously set somewhere interesting.

So we have established that the film is not a cheap Napoleon Dynamite clone. However, as well as being a remake of a similarly named 1960 screenplay, it also has very similar tones to Anger Management. Consider the presence of an older more established actor (Billy Bob Thornton vs Jack Nicholson), a nervous too polite protagonist, a sweet love interest for that protagonist, a classroom environment for learning, and a competition between the old and the young. Not only that, but Billy Bob is also staring in a film called Mr Woodcock where he plays a gym teacher fighting constantly with his future stepson (played by Seann William Scott). Maybe I am seeing too many patterns where they don’t really exist (and I have been known to stick papers with numbers on the wall) but the meme of the old generation and the new competing in some fashion and learning something about themselves seems to be very common.

A lack of originality does not neccessarily negate entertainment, however. Many action films could be considered to have a similar arc, and they are mostly fun to watch (especially when a lot of shit gets blowed up). And School for Scoundrels is pretty funny most of the time. It does however suffer from a slightly too high squirm factor, though. This is the term I have for movies where I cannot watch what is happening, because I feel so embarrassed for the character on the screen. If you squirmed through Meet the Parents then you know exactly what I am talking about – this movie defined the genre for me. Ironically enough, Ben Stiller does have a small part in School for Scoundrels too. Maybe his influence on the set adds some squirm to everything?

Most squirm movies are normally very funny for it though, and this is no exception. Jon is a great character actor, and Billy Bob plays the old bastard extremely well. Jacinda Barrett plays the Australian girl next door love interest very well (I recognize her from Ladder 49, where she did a good job as well). Sarah Silverman plays the bitchy flatmate a bit too well, and Michael Clark Duncan does his bit with some unexpected flair at times. I am glad to see him branch more into comedy lately, because he does it well and it is not just the easy thing of playing a soldier or football player in every movie.

The ending actually worked out different to what I thought it would, which lent the movie an unpredictable feel, which is a good thing. If you want a nice popcorn flick with a bit of a laugh I recommend this film. I think that you will find it better than you expected.

The Departed

IMDB

If you don’t want to read the voluminous post that is about to come, then I can summarize this for you very easily – this is a damn good film. If you want to find out why I think so, move on….

First of all, the cast is reason enough to sign up for this, even on a crowded Friday night where you have to come back for the 10:15 because the 7:50 sold out. When I saw a preview for this film, the number of big hitters up on the screen made things look very interesting. It doesn’t take much to make me want to watch a film (hey, I write a review blog, for crying out loud) so the following made it easy:

• Martin Scorsese – Does this guy need describing? Ever see Casino?
• Leonardo DiCaprio – I know that a lot of people write this guy off as a pretty boy, but I think that saying that is weak. Romeo + Juliet was extremely well done, and Gangs of New York was also a great vehicle for him. He played his part well in Titanic, too. In this film he plays the fairly common role for him of the troubled youngster making good in a hurtful world, and it was not a stretch for him at all.
• Matt Damon – Another guy who sometimes does not get appropriate credit because of the attention he gets from the ladies. Good Will Hunting was brilliant, and The Bourne Identity films are something to behold. He was also fantastic in Syriana, which is under-appreciated by a lot of people. This is one of the few times where he plays a bad guy, which keeps him along the road he started down with Syriana of playing more complex roles. He was very spooky in this film, and I liked it.
• Jack Nicholson – The legend himself. To be honest, I have not seen a lot of him lately because he has been doing the kinds of films that I don’t get attracted to. But in films like A Few Good Men, he has made a very good showing of being an old bastard, and doing very well at it. He seems like a very good pick to play the gangster boss that he plays, and seems to relish in the role.
• Mark Wahlberg – Yet another guy who gets knocked for his female appeal, but is actually a great actor. I first saw him in Boogie Nights, but he really became a made man in my eyes in The Big Hit. And then there was Three Kings, The Perfect Storm, The Italian Job, Four Brothers, and now this. He was very well cast as a rough sergeant in charge of the undercover cops. Mark has a great style and presence on the screen in this film.
• Martin Sheen – An old legend, the father of the Men at Work boys, this guy has the biggest scroll bar in IMDB of them all. Doesn’t look like a guy to do a lemon, either, and he certainly did well here playing the old cop in charge of the undercover guys, barely reining Wahlberg’s character in.
• Alec Baldwin – This guy has started to play a recurring role as a real hard ass, but it is a very entertaining role. His portrayal of a rough boss cop talking shit to any and all that he sees is fantastic.

With a cast like this all that was needed was a decent story and script – there was nothing that could be blamed on the people here. The story is about a couple of guys in the academy. One of them (Collin Sullivan, played by Damon) is an inside man for a gangster (Frank Costello, played by Nicholson). The other (Billy Costigan, played by DiCaprio) becomes a deep undercover operative who starts working for Costello’s crew in an effort to bring him down.

Since Costello suspects that he has a rat, and the police suspect that Costello has a man on the inside, Sullivan and Costigan spend the film looking for each other and trying to avoid each other at the same time. Considering the subject matter of cops and undercover cops and gangsters, there are virtually no cliches in the film to speak of. The temptation to do the following was resisted:

• Have extensive arguments about whether a wire is to be worn or not.
• Have the undercover guy fall in love with a criminal girl while undercover, and then have to reveal that he is a cop.
• Arguments between the captain and the untraditional guy ending in a badge + gun on a table.
• Cops being killed right before they are about to retire (Mendoza!!!!).

The setting for the film was Boston, and having only spent 5 days there in my life, it was tough to fault it. The film spends considerable time talking about South Boston, and some of the actors have some slightly overdone accents, but there is definitely an attempt to make it immersive. The cinematography is not outstanding to the point of needing much mention, however, which is fine because this is Drama and it is not really needed.

One of the best things about the movie has to be the script. The banter between some of the characters is priceless, and the shit that they talk is very funny at times, but not in a way that detracts from the seriousness of the film. Where there is shooting or fighting it is brief, which lends some realism. Most fights are over very quickly, which tends to be how things pan out in reality.

The ending is somewhat novel, if a little different to what I expected. I think that maybe 10 minutes could be shaved off the film (it felt a smidgen long) but I would hesitate to pick out what could be removed. Overall, though, this is one of the best cop movies that I have seen for a very long time. There is nothing complex about how this is – the Director, the cast, the script are all very good and that is a simple formula for making celluloid magic.