The Thin White Dude's Reviews - The Internship

Directed by: Shawn Levy

Produced by: Vince Vaughan

Shawn Levy

Screenplay by: Vince Vaughan

Jared Stern

Story by: Vince Vaughan

Starring: Vince Vaughan

Owen Wilson

Rose Byrne

Max Minghella

Joanna Garcia

John Goodman

Dylan O'Brien

Jessica Szohr

Music by: Christophe Beck

Cinematography by: Jonathan Brown

Editing by: Dean Zimmerman

Studio(s): Regency Enterprises

Wild West Picture Show Productions

21 Laps Entertainment

Dune Entertainment

Distributed by: 20th Century Fox

Release date(s): June 7, 2013 (United States)

July 4, 2013 (United Kingdom)

Running time: 119 minutes

Country: United States

Language: English

Production budget: $58 million

Box office revenue (as of publication): $63, 250, 984

Rightio, it's the twelfth of July, which means in my country either batten down the hatches like there's an ongoing game of Nazi Zombies or get out there and join Lord Summerisle dancing around various flaming effigies. I'm open-minded enough to say let people celebrate in their own way, but for me, this means good weather out the back with a cold one, a review or two, and a bit of gardening getting done.  Even still, with Belfast being put on hold for a day or two (Pacific Rim had to open today of all days!), I'll be putting out a few reviews. I've got This Is The End, Man Of Steel and The Act Of Killing on the way for definite, and hopefully I'll get some more done, as WWE Money In The Bank is this weekend, I'm heading to London on Thursday, have my Scout troop on camp at the end of the month and I'll be working most of August, so, although it may a bit more sporadic in terms of reviewing, I'll do my best, and you do your best to keep your eyes posted!

Okay, preamable ramble done, let's get crackin' with The Internship. The second collaboration between actors Vince Vaughan and Owen Wilson after 2005's Wedding Crashers, the film has already been the source of much ridicule, for one as a bloated advertisement for Google, and also as a poorly timed release, both given the ubiquitousness of the Internet/Google so it's not a hip new comedy and that this is the kind of comedy that would have been done in the early-to-mid 2000's. This was parodied to brilliance in a great video by The Onion entitled 'The Internship' Poised To Be The Biggest Comedy Of 2005. The film is directed by Shawn Levy, who has a bit of a mixed bag of tricks, but was responsible for the wholly underrated, wholly overlooked and wholly entertaining 2011 Hugh Jackman pic, Real Steel. Anyone who can make a gem like that deserves to be given a chance, no matter how terrible their latest movie looks. In The Internship, Billy McMahon (Vaughan) and Nick Campbell (Wilson) lose their jobs as watch salesmen when their employer goes out of business (it being another of those post-2008 'frighteningly relevant' economic crisis plot devices!). Billy, unbeknownst to Nick, decides to apply for an internship, enrolling the two of them for prospective employment at Google, for which they are accepted due to their unorthodoxy. As you might guess, I went in with low expectations, so, let's see how things unfolded.

Starting with the good (believe me, there is), I must say that I went into the film with all that excess baggage and then some, thinking that this was going to be a thoroughly noxious two hours. However, despite this, I surprised myself and my good pal over at Danland Movies when about half an hour in we concluded that we both were enjoying the film. It's one of the strangest experiences I've had at the cinema, in that I walked out kind of shell-shocked at just how much I enjoyed it. I understand it's essentially a two-hour advertisement for Google and is at minimum five years too late in terms of the basil exposition set-up stuff, but I did enjoy the film. While Owen Wilson is reliable, Vince Vaughan is the real surprise, given that his presence onscreen is usually the harbinger for comedic desecration. It's obvious that there is a sort of self-awareness given that Vaughan is acting here as a guy whose speciality is sales, and the good thing about this is that oftentimes the script works around Vaughan just gibbering on, talking complete bullshit, which is what he does very well. Also, as far as an onscreen duo, Vaughan and Wilson have great chemistry, which does lead me to wonder as to why they haven't worked together more often. As far as the script is concerned, I know it isn't chopped liver (given that I don't eat meat, that's probably lost on me, but you get the point), but there are some well-written set pieces and dialogue. It's obviously outdated humour, but the interview segment with Vaughan and Wilson struggling to get to grips with videoconferencing is a standout moment, especially given how terrifying Vince Vaughan looks in close-up with the shot being from the perspective of the computer's webcam. The dialogue too, with the two messing up now-ubiquitous phrases and their obviously amateur approach to things despite pretending to be more experience and mature than their younger fellow interns is rather funny. On a personal note, although I'm very much "on the line" (hence my chosen format for reviewing), I am in many ways a technological luddite, so I did find their struggles endearing. Furthermore, it is also a film that is not afraid to be self-deprecating, Vaughan in particular being on the receiving end of numerous jokes about his desire to hog the free workplace puddings. Finally, although he has a mixed bag at times, Shawn Levy once again proves that he is, when working with the correct material, a director who can direct well and deliver an entertaining movie. His Real Steel became the namesake for my Most Overlooked Film in my annual awards, and his latest here might be early shoe-in for the win come next award season.

However much I have talked well of this film, especially given how pleasantly surprised I was, I'm still willing to acknowledge that it's a movie that does have a share of flaws. The script by Vaughan and Jared Stern has some great stuff, but it is also highly predictable (block A fits into the space A part of the Early Learning Centre toy), going in places we have seen done a thousand times before (literally, in my case!). Also, while the first two acts are uniformly solid, the third act does lag seriously and tries to put in this false twist in the tail that things might not actually turn out as well as they should so as to create some dramatic tension. As such, not only is it a poor third act, it also adds significantly to the seriously bloated two-hour running time. Another thing that doesn't help this third act problem is the utterly saccharine score by Christophe Beck. A regular thorn in my side, this the second film in as many months I've had to see with this dribblesome murder-by-numbers bore compose a film, and once again, he fails with flying colours. You've heard the old adage "if you don't have anything good to say, don't say anything at all," right? Well, it applies to music as well. My final issue is that as a whole, the film, while good, does not aspire to be anything great, and the filmmakers seem content just to let this play second fiddle to great contemporary comedies such as Rango, The Artist, Toy Story 3, Cemetery Junction and I Love You Phillip Morris. 

Despite my feelings that the script was predictable, that the third act was significantly weaker than the first two, that it has a saccharine score by Christophe Beck and that it's content settling for second best, The Internship is a better comedy than I could have possibly hoped for. Vince Vaughan and Owen Wilson have great onscreen chemistry, and there are some finely written set-pieces, with the videoconference job interview being a highlight (Will Ferrell also makes a welcome and suitably shameless cameo), and director Shawn Levy proves that with a decent enough script and cast to work with that he can efficiently make an entertaining movie. Although it's nothing special, it's far better than anything you'd expect it to be, and I left the cinema grinning like a cheshire cat knowing that I'd enjoyed a good comedy.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 6.7/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis (Still) hot

The Internship Trailer

The Thin White Dude's Movie Of The Month: Sabbatical/May-June 2013 - Evil Dead

Like a lot of horror movie fans, I walk into any horror remake with an element of trepidation, especially given my past experiences with cinematic butchery of classic films (I'm looking at you, Platinum Dunes!). Aside from the central premise, it goes completely in it's own direction, with Fede Alvarez making a masterful debut feature and the character of Mia (played to excellence in a star-making turn by Jane Levy) has a great degree of complexity. One of the best horror movies in recent memory and a right good rollick! Groovy!

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 8.4/10

Runner-Up: Good Vibrations - Flawed, but more good going for it than bad. Great lead performances by Richard Dormer and Jodie Whittaker, 1970s Belfast being lit like a moody noir by Ivan McCullough and featuring a terrific soundtrack. 

Honorable Mention: Beware Of Mr Baker - Not the best of documentary biographies, but a fascinating insight into the fascinating character of Ginger Baker

Anomaly: The Great Gatsby - I had to eschew my traditional reviewing format to get my point across with this movie, so, despite my relatively negative conclusions, I'm going to have to watch it again on the basis that it did present a genuine challenge as far as analysis is concerned.

Second-Most Deadly Disease: The Hangover Part III - The thing is is that the first two Hangover movies provoked a reaction: negative, yes, but a reaction nevertheless! Here, I was bored to tears!

Avoid Like The Plague: After Earth - At first, even though I knew it was bad, I thought my primary response was one of indifference. I realised that was my brain blocking out my true emotions, as reviewing it induced mild nausea in recollection of how truly terrible it was. 

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - After Earth

Directed by: M. Night Shyamalan

Produced by: Caleeb Pinkett

Jada Pinkett Smith

Will Smith

James Lassiter

Screenplay by: Gary Whitta

M. Night Shyamalan

Story by: Will Smith

Starring: Jaden Smith

Will Smith

Music by: James Newton Howard

Cinematography by: Peter Suschitzky

Editing by: Steven Rosenblum

Studio(s): Overbrook Entertainment

Blinding Edge Pictures

Relativity Media

Distributed by: Columbia Pictures

Release date(s): May 31, 2013 (United States)

June 7, 2013 (United Kingdom)

Running time: 99 minutes

Country: United States

Language: English

Production budget: $130 million

Box office revenue (as of publication): $199, 141, 216

Aloha there folks, I'm belated as ever. This is my last review for the month of June and the two films I saw during my sabbatical, and then I'll be following it up with a Film of the Month post. For July, I've already seen The Internship and This Is The End, and have plans to see Man Of Steel, The Act Of Killing (a documentary produced by Errol Morris and Werner Herzog, which I've heard good things of), World War Z, Pacific Rim (which I'm looking to!) and others, so, for all the very latest in movies and what have you, keep your eyes posted!

Today's film up for analysis is After Earth, also known as (at least to me, anyway!) The Smith Family Robinson, given that the major selling point of the film is a collaboration between Will Smith and his son Jaden, their first onscreen outing together since The Pursuit Of Happyness. Jada Pinkett Smith, wife to Will and mother to Jaden, and Caleeb Pinkett, her brother, also have producing credits alongside Will Smith's regular producing collaborator James Lassiter, which lets you know that this is, for all intents and purposes, a family affair. It's also the first directorial work of M. Night Shyamalan since The Last Airbender, a film which continued the ongoing downward spiral of a director who, not ten years ago, was heralded as a contemporary heir to Hitchcock and one of the most exciting people in Hollywood. After producing 2010's Devil, a serviceable horror-thriller, Shyamalan was roped into doing this by Will Smith, both of whom had planned on working together in the past. Basic synopsis here, a vessel, commanded by General Cypher Raige (Will Smith) crash lands on Earth, the difference being that this is one thousand years after humans were forced to abandon the plant after a series of cataclysmic events, and the place is now inhabited by highly evolved creatures that, though blind, are able to smell human fear and kill them as a result. Raige is injured in the crash landing, and it is up to his son Kitai (Jaden Smith), who failed to become a member of The Ranger Corps as a result of recklessness, shaming his Ranger father, to recover a rescue beacon to have them be saved and live up to his father's reputation and need to be acknowledged by him. I'm done with that, don't get me started on all that 'ghosting' shit!

To start with the good about After Earth (and to be frank, there ain't much), I'm actually going to compliment director M. Night Shymalan. The material he has to work with isn't exactly up to scratch, but you can tell he's doing his best with it, even if he has been reduced to a director-for-hire role. After Earth could really have been one of the worst films ever made, but Shymalan does at least attempt to keep some semblance of control. Also, even if it's not particularly well-executed, the central father-son in peril premise is enough to garner a relative degree of interest. Finally, although this is obviously a personal thing with me, I felt for the big giant condor and the stuff with it's chicks. Maybe it's an animal lover thing, but anytime a movie pulls the old 'dog in peril' trope, no matter how many times I see it, I still go with it, so, wahey, you got me again!

However, that is about as much as I can manage to say in favour of After Earth as it is otherwise a uniformly terrible film. The reason I say 'uniform' is because it's not a film that, no matter how bad, makes me actively angry, but rather one that is just consistently boring. I tell a lie, bland is probably a more appropriate word in relation to this film. To start with the issues, and I'm not going to stay on the script as usual, because there are so many things wrong here, but the script is a mess. The basil exposition stuff in the first act takes way too long to explain, and as a result, it takes approximately thirty minutes before the film actually gets going, and when it does, boy does it move in predictable ways. I don't know if Gary Whitta and Shyamalan could have written a more dull, textbook script, because this just takes the single most predictable route possible, and it's not like they even gave this predictable route a bit of character along the way. Right down to the dialogue, it's things that we are all well and truly familiar with. Also, I'm not going to rag the actors too much (and I'm certainly not going down the nepotism route, which is a ridiculous tabloid-esque form of journalistic mud-slinging), but at what point was it decided they would talk like they do? After one thousand years, it's understandable that human speech patterns would change, hell, they probably wouldn't even be speaking English, but do the Smith's really have to talk like a bunch of stilted mannequins? I think HAL 9000 had more character, and this is me talking about Will Smith, a man who sweats charisma! Although Will's the star, it's Jaden's movie, and frankly, he fails to get across to me the necessary emotional curve that his character is meant to be going through. In fact, his depiction of Kitai comes across as pathetic and irritating, also problematic that the script doesn't do anything to convince us that the character is something worth rooting for ("not going to rag the actors too much..." hmm?). The other main outstanding issue with the film for me is that, despite being a film with a budget of $130 million (that's a whole hundred million more than District 9's $30 million budget), technically the whole thing looks pretty low-rent. The actual ship itself before crashing looks something in between rejected models for 2001: A Space Odyssey with flimsy bits of cardboard and paper maiche spray painted brown. Also, I know it's meant to be a tight space, but really, you're going to have a slightly elevated walkway at one point? Talk about undercutting practicality! Also, some of the props look decidedly like a contemporary equivalent to the kind of things you'd find in 1950s science-fiction b-movies like Teenagers From Outer Space (an underrated pic, I might add). I mean, the things that Kitai has to use every twelve hours in order to breath in Earth's atmosphere (which really could have been done as capsules or something) look like they've essentially inserted egg yolk into two ceramic dishes glued together! Also, once we're off on our journey, although there was (purportedly) a good bit of location shooting done in Costa Rica and Switzerland, most of it has that look we associate with a sound stage, with not a whole lot of actual location work being done. Problematic too is Peter Suschitzky's cinematography. A fine d.p., unfortunately here not only does he go for digital photography, which undercuts the low-rent effects and production design, the film is also pretty brightly lit, so that we can actually see how poor some of the film looks. What he should have done is played the illusionist and gone for a lot of low-key lighting, so that we were unable to see how shoddy the overall thing looked. I'm sure I could point out more issues with the film, but frankly I feel burnt as I had etched most of the movie from my memory and recalling it has now given me mild nausea.

What I have come to realise in the course of this review is that although After Earth is a film that does not actively prod me and annoy me into thinking it's a bad film like something along the lines of Project X, a film that is absolutely hateful but to get too angry about would be to do it a compliment. However, despite a very few little things that save it from being one of the worst films I have ever reviewed, After Earth is still a godawful wreck of a film that is so bland, so dull, so without character as induce mild nausea in yours truly just recalling it, that it's not far off being one of the worst. Dull, dull, dull, bland, bland, bland, blah, blah, blah!

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 1.1/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Haven't you got the point (nausea!)

P.S. I had to go all the way back to Vampires Suck in 2010 to gauge how bad I thought this film was! Incidentally, if you google The Thin White Dude's Reviews and Vampires Suck together, you can find my spamming of the official Facebook with my review which got me banned from the page and abuse reported against me. Toodles!

After Earth Trailer

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - Star Trek Into Darkness

Directed by: J.J. Abrams

Produced by: J.J. Abrams

Bryan Burk

Damon Lindelof

Alex Kurtzman

Robert Orci

Screenplay by: Roberto Orci

Alex Kurtman

Damon Lindelof

Based on: Star Trek by Gene Roddenberry

Starring: Chris Pine

Zachary Quinto

Zoe Saldana

Karl Urban

Simon Pegg

John Cho

Benedict Cumberbatch

Anton Yelchin

Bruce Greenwood

Peter Weller

Alice Eve

Music by: Michael Giacchino

Cinematography by: Dan Mindel

Editing by: Maryann Brandon

Mary Jo Markey

Studio(s): Bad Robot Productions

K/O Paper Products

Skydance Productions

Distributed by: Paramount Pictures

Release date(s): May 2, 2013 (London premiere)

May 9, 2013 (United Kingdom)

May 16, 2013 (United States)

Running time: 133 minutes

Country: United States

Language: English

Production budget: $190 million

Box office revenue (as of publication): $443, 865, 011

Alrighty there, minions, it is I, back again (recurring theme is recurring theme). I say that because frankly my mojo has been thrown all out of kilt, and while I could put it down to The Great Gatsby genuinely throwing me for a loop (I am now contemplating seeing it again), I think it can be put down more to a case of outright laziness in the face of the open plateau that I now face. Having now graduated from university, I'm worried that I may become the noughties' equivalent to Benjamin Braddock and spend the rest of my days listening to Simon & Garfunkel while flitting between various Mrs. Robinson's (not Iris!). Not forgetting my penchant for gross exaggeration, I will be getting on with my movies reviews, business as usual. I've got this and a review for After Earth coming in, which I will follow with a review for the month of June (also including the two films I reviewed at the start of the year), and then get on with July (I've already seen The Internship), so, ladies and germs, keep your eyes posted!

So, today's movie up for review is Star Trek Into Darkness. The sequel to J.J. Abrams' 2009 Star Trek reboot, Into Darkness sees the return of more or less every major cast and crew member involved in said film, which is already a good thing, given that Star Trek (2009) was a great science-fiction film in a year that also featured District 9, Moon and Avatar. For those of you don't know (for those who do, I'm telling you again!), I'm a big fan of J.J. Abrams. I'm flying through Lost at present (co-created with Damon Lindelof, also a writer and producer on Abrams' Star Trek work), and since 2006's Mission Impossible III, Abrams has been a creatively productive roller coaster, with just about everything he touches turning to gold (and dollars), so I was pretty excited to see this. In this instalment, Captain James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) and Spock (Zachary Quinto) violate the Prime Directive of Starfleet, exposing the Enterprise to a planet's civilisation during one of their missions, losing command of the Enterprise. Admiral Pike (Bruce Greenwood) is reinstated as it's commanding officer, and convinces Starfleet to be assigned his first officer. After a bombing in London, Starfleet commanders meet to discuss what to do with the perpetrator, rogue Starfleet agent John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch), when said rogue agent ambushes the meeting, killing Pike in the process, before leaving for Klingon homeland Kronos. After convincing Fleet Admiral Marcus (Peter Weller) to let him take Pike's place, Kirk leads the Enterprise crew on a mission to Kronos, his motivations in this mission being dubious, and the plan for Harrison, to be either captured or executed, is very much in the air when we get on our merry way. Let's dance!

Starting off with the good about Into Darkness, technically the film is a piece of wizardry. The whole mise-en-scene, encompassing the departments of production design, make-up, special effects etc. is a marvel to behold. With a near $200 million budget, you'd figure that it should be up there on the screen, and Abrams and co certainly deliver on that promise. Also, returning cinematographer Daniel Mindel does a fine job of capturing the majesty of the production, and also, in terms of the action sequences, delivers a film that is both frenetic and wholly in focus, something that can be quite hard to do with today's action movies. Furthermore, the collaborative editorial work of Maryann Brandon and Mary Jo Markey give Into Darkness this brilliant seamlessness, particularly in the harmony between what is literally physical and what has been created in post-production. Into Darkness, like much of Abrams' productions, have this sense of reality that is wholly legitimate, a trait that is sometimes lacking big-budget blockbusters, but is certainly featured here. Another aspect of the film that must be mentioned is some of the acting. Now, of course this is an ensemble cast, but there are a number of standouts. Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto are solid once again, and Peter Weller makes a stake as a believably commanding Marcus. However, the standout here is definitely Benedict Cumberbatch. I know what part he plays and all of the various arguments, such as the racial casting (which is, frankly, bollocks!), but I'm still stubbornly going to keep spoilers out of this. Regardless, Cumberbatch delivers a mighty performance. The quality of franchise villains has certainly improved dramatically since Heath Ledger's Joker in 2008's The Dark Knight, and Cumberbatch enters that pantheon. For Harrison, he has developed this marvellously venomous voice, speaking with great eloquence but as though the sounds are coming from the belly of a dragon. You can feel shivers from every little bar of intonation emerging from Cumberbatch. Speaking of The Dark Knight, my personal favourite scene in Into Darkness, which is clearly in dept to the interrogation scene of the former film, involves I suppose 'the great revelation,' where essentially Cumberbatch goes on a magnificent three-to-four minute soliloquy, his facial expressions and remarkable sense of pace giving complete legitimacy (almost sympathy) to his character's motivations. His presence in this scene does more for plot and exposition than about half-an-hour screen time at different point in the film,

which brings me swiftly on to what I find wrong with Into Darkness. Don't get me wrong, it's a work of technical wizardry and the acting was solid, especially that of Benedict Cumberbatch, but, strangely, many of the key players in the Abrams crew fail to deliver this time. Damon Lindelof made a comparison between Into Darkness and The Dark Knight, and while one can recognise the tonal similarities, Into Darkness does not live up to the qualities of the latter picture. Despite an admittedly daring attempt to tell the basil exposition parts in the midst of action sequences a la The Terminator, it still does unfortunately come across as window dressing to a weak backbone. As the old saying goes, you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig. After the brilliant synthesis of the first Abrams Trek, this is most disappointing, particularly when you have a potentially iconic villain in Cumberbatch. Also, I've criticised Michael Giacchino in the past, not because I don't like him (I do very much, in fact!), but because his scores are the type that lend themselves to the possibility of teetering over into screeching histrionics: he is often at his best when he writes simple themes, such as those featured in Lost. Here, the level of grandiosity and big orchestral sounds undercut the seriousness of the picture, and I know I've invoked The Dark Knight twice already, but part of what works on that film is that Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard scribed subtle (but big) themes that fit the action (incidentally, I was wrong the first time about Inception's score: it's terrific). Finally, although artists aren't often the best gauge of their own work and, granted, it has been four years since Abrams Trek Mark 1.0, I still think that there should have been a bit more time and effort in pre-production dedicated to redrafting the film. This is a first for criticism, but as the spearhead of the project, J.J. Abrams should have been aware of the issues involved in the script. I'm sure he may have felt studio pressure, but this represents a slight in his roles, both as producer and director, which is a shame from Abrams really, because I expect more from him.

To conclude my overall analysis (and this is probably a bit tacked on, I won't lie), Star Trek Into Darkness is a work of technical wizardry, with the cinematography and editing helping to contribute to highlighted a strongly-established mise-en-scene. The ensemble cast is uniformly strong, but most outstanding is a terrific turn from Benedict Cumberbatch, who joins the pantheon of iconic franchise villains in contemporary franchise cinema. However, it is also a film whose script lacks a true backbone, requires a lot of work with less window dressing, and, for a change, has an authorial slight or two on the part of J.J. Abrams. It's indicative of the overall piece when the best scene in the film is the revelatory interrogation scene, one of it's few quieter moments and yet it's most engaging. You expect more from this talented a collaborative effort.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 5.9/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Hot! (I haven't been privy to weather like this since last year in France and my whole physiognomy is simply not used to Northern Ireland being this damn warm!)

Star Trek Into Darkness Trailer

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - Beware Of Mr. Baker

Directed by: Jay Bulger

Produced by: Jay Bulger

Nick Friedman

Julie Goldman

Jeff Sanders

Omar Soliman

Screenplay by: Jay Bulger

Starring: Ginger Baker

Music by: Ginger Baker

Cinematography by: Eric Robbins

Editing by: Will Cox

Owen Rucker

Caitlin Tartaro

Studio: Insurgent Media

Distributed by: SnagFilms (United States)

Artificial Eye (United Kingdom)

Release date(s): November 28, 2012 (United States; limited release)

May 17, 2013 (United Kingdom/Ireland)

Running time: 100 mins

Country: United States

Language: English

Production budget: N/A

Box office revenue (as of publication): $116, 476 (Domestic Gross only)

Ahoy there strangers, me again. Although things have admittedly slowed up over the past couple of weeks (Lord knows, other aspects of my life have been rather busy), I have been continuing to watch movies, and following this review, expect one's to come up for Star Trek Into Darkness and After Earth. Before we get started, I wish to dedicate this next review to the memory of James Gandolfini. In case you don't know, I'm also someone who watches certain television series', and right at the top of that is The Sopranos. I only just recently finished re-watching the show, and while it is certainly an ensemble effort and the series has a terrific writing team and crew, it was Gandolfini's Tony Soprano who was the apex, and the physical embodiment of everything that is good about The Sopranos. A magnetic screen presence, behind his hulking and intimidating frame lay a gentle soul with a twinkle in his eye, and when he smiled the way only he could, you just wanted to reach and give him a big bearhug. My thoughts go out to his family members, whose grief I cannot possibly fathom to imagine. Rest In Peace, big man!

So, with no stone being left unturned, let's get down to this. Today's review is on Beware Of Mr. Baker, the title of the picture being a reference to the sign that confronts a visitor upon entering the residence of one Mr. Baker. Namely, the legendary Ginger Baker, widely considered to be one of the greatest rock drummers of all time, though he himself (as explored in the film) contends with that label, seeing himself as following the tradition of jazz drumming, and taking in the influence of African music and rhythms. Sometimes preceding his artistry (not unlike the great Oliver Reed), however, are the tales of excess and debauchery during the peak of his fame, which created an aura around him as a bit of a rock 'n roll wild man. Director Jay Bulger, having wrote an article for Rolling Stone on Baker (The Devil and Ginger Baker), uses his established rapport to develop this documentary on the man, who lives in South Africa with his fourth wife. Right, synopsis sorted!

Starting off with the good regarding the film, much of it's strengths derive from the subject himself. Ginger Baker is a legendary figure in music before you even approach him from a documentarian standpoint, and from this position the legend only continues to grow. One of the most unpredictably entertaining interview subjects in a film for quite a while, Baker regularly shows disdain for the set format. Poor Jay Bulger has to ask the questions, and often gets an expletive-laden retort for his troubles. Indeed, the film opens with Baker attacking the filmmaker with his cane over Bulger's intentions to interview those who knew the man. Baker has many brilliant stories to tell, and serves as an appropriately well-informed narrator to his own tale. Also, now in his seventies, Baker's voice has a world-weary quality that gives the film a sense of legitimacy and despite being from London, he has enough of his own personal twang to make the view continue to listen to what he's saying. The film is really at it's best moments when Bulger embraces Baker's contradictions and the fact that the man is essentially in a constant conflict with himself. Despite his being, for all intents and purposes, a horrible man to his family and friends, the refusal to judge this man and view him objectively is to the film's credit. Furthermore, having this conflict gives moments when Baker reminisces about his favourite drummers and about his feeling more akin to his horses and than other humans gives him (and the film) a true sense of pathos. It's a very entertaining movie at times, but most especially when we are being told a straight story with the eponymous Mr. Baker at the centre.

Now, while the film does not contain enough problems to severely irritate me, there are problems that inhabit the film nevertheless. As mentioned, the film at it's best when a straight story is being told. However, there are certain times in which the film begins to show traits that seem to be inherent in a lot of postmodern cinema. The methods used to tell the larger picture, however, are too multitudinous and do not contribute anything to the film. For instance, the pop art by way of printing press presentation of the Mormon Sex In Chains case covered in Errol Morris' Tabloid may have fit that film, but here, some methods (particularly the animation sequences) go into overkill. What this needs to be is along the lines of Capturing The Friedmans or Gimme Shelter, not This Film Is Not Yet Rated. Ginger Baker is a large and engaging enough figure without the need for him to be dressed up with all these extra frills. This is a problem that, while not necessarily damning a film, has become inherent in recent documentaries, which have this second-nature obsessiveness with transgressive Baudrillard post-modernity. While (as mentioned) not condemning the film, this is the issue at the root of the problems that permeate the film.

In short, Beware Of Mr. Baker is a film that is at times as troubled as it's subject. However, it's troubles come not from the subject, but from issues to do with the methods used to approach it. Methodological research would show that, theoretically speaking, Beware Of Mr. Baker is not a unified, cohesive piece, but instead inappropriately scatterbrained. Nevertheless, even with the issue(s), it is, at it's best, a fascinating, objective portrait of a conflicted man. Baker is never anything less than thoroughly engaging, and he makes for one of the most interesting interviewees I have seen as the subject of a documentary film for quite some time. Although it has flaws, Bulger seems to also recognise the good material, and when Beware Of Mr. Baker tells a straight story of the sign entering the estate of the namesake, it flourishes.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 6.8/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - "Anyone got a compass?" (I need to get my bearings)

Beware Of Mr. Baker Trailer

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - The Great Gatsby

Directed by: Baz Luhrmann

Produced by: Baz Luhrmann
Douglas Wick
Lucy Fisher
Catherine Martin
Catherine Knapman

Screenplay by: Baz Luhrmann
Craig Pearce

Based on: The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald

Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio
Tobey Maguire
Carey Mulligan
Joel Edgerton
Isla Fisher
Jason Clarke
Elizabeth Debicki
Amitabh Bachchan

Music by: Craig Armstrong

Cinematography by: Simon Duggan

Editing by: Matt Villa
Jason Ballantine
Jonathan Redmond

Studio(s): Village Roadshow Pictures
Bazmark Productions
A&E Television
Red Wagon Entertainment

Distributed by: Warner Bros. Pictures

Release date(s): May 10, 2013 (United States)
May 16, 2013 (United Kingdom)

Running time: 143 minutes

Country(s): United States
Australia

Language: English

Production budget: $105 million

Box-office revenue: $301, 298, 103

Aloha there, my pretties! I say aloha because for a change the weather is absolutely fantastic over here. For the past week or so (with the occasional flash-flood), we in The North here have had clear skies, twenty-degree heat (centigrade for those interested) and I'm starting to work up a sweat just lying in bed! Anywho, much as I'm basking in the rays of the sun (I almost forgot what they felt like), I've been seeing a film or two, so after this one, expect a review for Beware Of Mr. Baker, the Jay Bulger documentary about drummer Ginger Baker. As ever, for all the latest blah blah blah, keep your eyes posted!

I'll just have to say from the outset before I get properly started that today's film is a rather unique case. Baz Luhrmann's The Great Gatsby is adapted from the 1925 F. Scott Fitzgerald novel of the same name, a book which is (quite rightly) considered among the greatest of 20th-Century literary classics. Fitzgerald's work has been adapted to the screen before, most notably 1974's The Great Gatsby, featuring Robert Redford in the title role, and David Fincher's ambitious but turgid 2008 adaptation of The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button, but Baz Luhrmann's a different kind of beast altogether. The central story, following Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire) in reminiscing his friendship with Jay Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his unwittingly becoming the witness to numerous secrets and lies involving Tom and Daisy Buchanan (Joel Edgerton, Carey Mulligan), sticks very much to the original Fitzgerald source, but stylistically Luhrmann takes a different route altogether. So much so, in fact, that it defies the usual format that I take in reviewing a film. Normally, my third and fourth paragraphs deal with the pros and cons of a given film respectively, but The Great Gatsby is a film of such a strange identity that I'm going to have to break down the wall temporarily in order to truly get across my (oh my) opines. So, the following paragraph will deal with what I see as the 'first part' of the film, up a certain 'turning point,' and the fourth paragraph will look at the 'second part' of the film. Thinking about how I was going to approach this in a review took a bit of time, and I've decided that this format will work best in getting across my views.

Now, I'm just gonna shoot from the hip on this one, because the first part/half of The Great Gatsby is a colossal monstrosity. I know that what Baz Luhrmann is trying to achieve in establishing the outright decadence of the Roaring Twenties, about how despite prohibition being in order, alcohol was arguably easier to access than it was when it was legal, but most of the first part of the film is simply dreadful. Aside from an interesting prologue with Tobey Maguire at the beginning, I found little to no redeeming factors about this section of the film. The cinematography is a big problem, nigh on nausea-inducing. I'm wondering if this is down to the fact that I was watching a 3D film in 2D, but I don't know what they were doing with the frame rate, because I doubt I'm they only one who feels this way. The amount of long zoom and tracking shots are simply unnecessary, and go beyond a stylistic quality, instead infusing it with an illusory sense of gimmickry. Every shot just SCREAMS at me, and even down to the sharpness of the cuts made in the editing suite, I felt like someone was vociferously attacking the negative. The screenplay too is pretty messy. Yes, you can do whatever you want in the process of adaptation, and that Luhrmann's theatrical qualities come across in the final cut, but what they do in these gigantic party scenes adds nothing to the narrative. They could have established the outright decadence, fallacy, the proverbial 'Tears Of A Clown' stuff with about a quarter of the screen time dedicated to these scenes. Also, while I thought highly of the slow reveal of the character of Gatsby, at what point is necessary for every second line of that character to be "... old sport." We already know it's Gatsby and that's his trademark from within a minute or two in his company, don't have DiCaprio jabber on about constantly. It makes the film borderline parodic and undercuts the character if you overtly have gibbering "old sport" as often as the script entails it. The soundtrack/score as well is a screaming honking mess. The original score is by Craig Armstrong, a composer whose work I normally like very much (particularly the subtle minimalism of his contributions to NEDS), but here it is all loudness and has the effect of someone attempting to use the methods of blast fishing, triggering explosives to conjure my brain activity up to it's uncomfortable nth. degree. The soundtrack too, a daring move I must say, is a failed experiment. I have no problem with contemporary urban/hip-hop music being used in this period movie, hey, better to try and fail than to not try at all, but it really doesn't work. Much of the party music ends up coming across as silly, and even the use of George Gershwin fails to fit the mood of the piece. This issue reaches it's nadir with the Emeli Sande cover of Beyonce's Crazy In Love in an atrociously misjudged scene just before Gatsby and Daisy meet again. I know it sounds snobbish and pretentious, but it's use actually conjured a number of laughs from the audience, who were probably just doing so out of not knowing what to do in the midst of such an awkward audio-visual conundrum. I, on the other hand, according to a friend who I saw the film with, continued to sigh and breathe heavily until the scene where Gatsby and Daisy reunite...

... and then, after over an hour of screen time, strangely, it became a movie. (At this point, I've left the review for five-six days, as I'm heading over to Donnington to work at Download Festival and I need my beauty sleep, thank you!) As you might have gathered from what I have mentioned in relation to Tobey Maguire, I was uniformly won over by the film's actors, even when surrounded by the utmost ridiculousness. Maguire plays a great Nick Carraway, whose boyish enthusiasm for the world around him is gradually chipped away. Keeping it in the realm of subtlety, Maguire never goes into melodramatic histrionics to put across the character's arc. Also strong is Carey Mulligan, playing the character of Daisy right down the middle and walking the proverbial tightrope with grace. It's a part that really could have gone either way, with her seeming either too much a moll or an adult waif, but Mulligan does it just right. Once again proving herself a fine screen actress, for all the movie's faults, this remains a memorable performance. Also strong are Jason Clarke (an actor who's gaining my interest more with every role) and Joel Edgerton, whose Tom Buchanan is throughly reprehensible, and Elizabeth Debicki is an impressive Jordan Baker, but some space must be given to Leo DiCaprio's Gatsby. As a physical presence, he fills the shoes of the part very well, even amidst the script's rather overt attempts at self-mythologisation. His part is an example of the second-part tonal shift. He becomes not just a figurehead, but a human being. The whole movie (from a directorial standpoint, Luhrmann begins to have flourishes of brilliance here) improves drastically, and the script almost seems to develop a self-awareness of it's own flaws and the fact that it would be wise to actually make an engaging movie. The cinematography and editing too calms down a bit, and Luhrmann realises that this is a drama and not a Michael Bay film. Even the costumes, which struck me as too bright and forthright, seemed to have their colours muted to an acceptable degree  At it's best moment, Luhrmann's Gatsby can be very touching and heart-rending, which does lead me to conclude "Why couldn't the rest of the movie be like this?" I don't think they needed the first half to be as brash as it was to get that point across, for the second half is a genuinely serene and engaging piece of cinema. A bit of restraint did this film the world of good.

However, for all the restraint and genuine qualities of the film's second half (which include a modest, serene script, Luhrmann directing with control, the cinematography and editing working in a manner befitting the mood of the piece, the terrific cast at it's very best), I still find it impossible to get past just how much I detested the first part. The cinematography was overt, too stylistic without any contributing quality to the narrative and genuinely nausea-inducing, as loud visually as the soundtrack was aurally, none of the soundscapes (original score, hip-hop/contemporary jazz soundtrack) fitting in to the narrative. There was an incredible sense of gimmickry, particularly in the party scenes, that was hard to overcome. Even when I did the (admittedly) enjoyable second half of the film, the looming monster that was the first half still prevailed. I'll admit the purposefulness of the direction and that it's meant to be this way, give the devil in Mr Luhrmann his due for trying to do something interesting but it simply didn't work on an overall aesthetic or emotional level. It's a shame, because I did work with this movie, and from a reviewing standpoint it certainly posed a challenge, but ultimately the scales of justice were tipped slightly in favour of the colossal monstrosity against the serene drama. The Hall of Justice has spoken.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 4.7/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Good (now that this conundrum of a review is done!)

P.S. As I said, I'll give the devil in Mr Luhrmann his due for trying.

The Great Gatsby Trailer

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - The Hangover Part III

Directed by: Todd Phillips

Produced by: Todd Phillips

Daniel Goldberg

Screenplay by: Todd Phillips

Craig Mazin

Based on: Characters created by

Jon Lucas

Scott Moore

Starring: Bradley Cooper

Ed Helms

Zach Galifianakis

Ken Jeong

Heather Graham

Jeffrey Tambor

Justin Bartha

Mike Epps

John Goodman

Music by: Christophe Beck

Cinematography by: Lawrence Sher

Editing by: Debra Neil-Fisher

Jeff Groth

Studio(s): Legendary Pictures

Green Hat Films

Distributed by: Warner Bros. Pictures

Release date(s): May 23, 2013 (United States)

May 24, 2013 (United Kingdom)

Running time: 100 minutes

Country: United States

Language: English

Production budget: $103 million

Box office revenue (as of publication): $199, 240, 908

Hey gang, so I took the weekend off, but you can't say I lack dedication to my craft, if my unconstructed rambles can indeed be considered as such. Despite being absolutely skint (I put Queen's University to blame for that: brilliant minds that they are schedule an exam on a Saturday and I miss £200 worth of work, just sublime), I'm making a brave effort (especially with my computer dogging up) to keep up with all the latest in the cinemas. Thanks goodness for my Strand loyalty vouchers and a QFT membership. So, for as much of the shebang as I can keep up with ('all' is a bit of a strong declarative, methinks), keep your eyes posted!

"And slowly I turn...," and there stands before me The Hangover Part III. I have a bit of a storied history with this series of movies, so here's a bit of a preamble. Admittedly, I was one of the (vocal) minority who didn't like the first Hangover, which was a surprise hit back in 2009. Second time round, same old scenario, bumped up to eleven, The Hangover Part II was a horrible bit of work that would have been banned alongside Lucio Fulci and Ruggero Deodato pictures during the Video Nasty's scare of the 1980s. This time round, The Wolfpack (when are Daddy Long Legs and Kevin Nash gonna start picking up royalties?), after Alan (Zach Galifianakis) loses his father and has stopped taking his medication, reunite to take him to a rehab facility. However, on the way, they become involved in a plot involving the recent escapee Leslie Chow (Ken Jeong), who has stolen half of a $42 million gold heist from bad dude Marshall (John Goodman), and so the guys have to get in contact with Chow or else one of them (the one who always ends up missing) gets plugged. You get the story, roll the tape!

To start with the good on the film, I've been vocal about this in the past, but I think that Lawrence Sher's cinematography on these pictures contributes to a lot of what people (besides me) seem to enjoy about them. Not only does he handle the camera with grace, doing some great location shooting, he does know how to shoot a comedic scene. There's a real natural eye for how to make the scenes at least 'appear' funnier than they are. The case is no different here, and I hope that he continues to have a fine career. Also, the change in tone of the film to more of a caper/heist genre benefits in the expansion of Ken Jeong's Leslie Chow. In the past, I've found Jeong very annoying in his various capacities as a screen actor, playing the perennial 'crazy Asian' caricature in about eight different films I've had to review. Here though, there is a bit of depth and nuance to the part, and indeed, he's good enough that he threatens (and succeeds) in stealing the show from the wretched Wolfpack. While I didn't laugh beyond the sparse titter or two, most of them were as a result of Ken Jeong, so well done Ken, you now have my curiosity.

This is where we really get going. I've made no bones about the fact that I dislike the first two movies with an avid passion. I would be sitting in the auditoriums weeping and yowling like Tom Hardy in Bronson being surrounded by mental patients dancing to Pet Shop Boys, everyone else laughing while I sat there dumbly impotent in my intolerance to this terror. But my thesis to The Hangover Part III is different. Did I like it? No, same as before. However, the first two Hangover's at least provoked a reaction, one of revulsion, granted, but a reaction nevertheless. In the case of Part Trois, I sat in the auditorium with indifference to much of what was proceeding. Unlike the genre switch of Fast Five, The Hangover Part III's trade doesn't work, the screenplay by director Todd Phillips and Craig Mazin really stinking of lazy and tacked-on. It's like they are wringing the dishcloth until there is simply nothing left to give out, although that ship has long since sank. The movie was predictable as could be, and I must say that I saw must of the 'gags' coming a mile away, of course this thing is going to happen, he's going to do that, he's going to end up with that, it was just such murder-by-numbers material. Christophe Beck's score is rubbish again, being overindulgent and of the Emotional Heartstrings Orchestra variety, blah blah blah. Everyone involved, including the primary three actors, seem bored out of their minds and frankly, if no one involved is going to make an effort to try and push for the last hurdle, then neither am I. It's a sad moment for a movie when my highlights are hearing extracts from Black Sabbath's N.I.B. and Nine Inch Nails' Hurt, two bands who I'm going to see and who remind of what great art can be. I know I'm going off on one and not making a particularly constructive analysis of the details, but the prospect of revisiting this dribblesome bore of a film makes my eyes start to feel heavy (I'm yawning as I type this) and see an early night sleep as a tempting prospect. There's a shot towards the conclusion of the film (no spoilers, not that it'd make a difference) in which The Wolfpack cross a street from left-to-right in a shot that visually invokes the cover for The Beatles' Abbey Road. I just can't help but thinking this is a shoddy attempt at self-mythologisation, I mean, really? You're going to try and compare The Wolfpack (royalties from which I want a finders fee from 'Big Sexy' Kevin Nash) to The Beatles is simply absurd. This band of ingrates will never rise to the pantheon of the greats in the way that Lennon, McCartney, Harrison and Starr did, and I'm content just leaving it at that!

Frankly, I'm posting this conclusion about two or three days after starting this review. To me, there was little to no effort on the part of much of the cast and crew involved to make this Hanover instalment anything worth watching. It is only through the performance of Ken Jeong, who has finally convinced me, after about nine or ten movies, that he is a screen actor to look out for, and Lawrence Sher's cinematography, which was admittedly terrific, that redeems this from being in the bowels of cinema history. However, it is still one hundred minutes of one of the most outright boring films I can remember seeing for quite some time. The thing about the other Hangover films is that even though I didn't like them, I actively reacted to them. Even if it was a negative reaction, I still reacted. Here, I was in a primary state of indifference throughout, and if someone was to kick me in the head while watching The Hangover Part III, I doubt I'd be roused from my seat, bored to sleep as I was.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 2.9/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Sore (broke my leg press record at the gym yesterday and now glad to have my feet up and not be forced to endure another terrible movie. I'm watching Leon: The Professional today!)

P.S. What in the blue hell did the studios spend $103 million on?

The Hangover Part III Trailer