The Thin White Holiday

The Thin White Dude's Reviews has been put on hiatus for at least two weeks, for I will be on holiday for the next two weeks. However, when I get back there is a guaranteed review for The Taking Of The Pelham 123 and while I'm in France I will attempt to see the two Mesrine films or at least something French. As someone famous once said, 'til next time, that's all folks.

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - Burma VJ: Reporting From A Closed Country

To open up this review, I must at least make further reference to the fact that I think that this is the year of the documentary film. With work such as Tyson, while certainly flawed, and the masterpiece Anvil: The Story of Anvil, this has already proved to be a great year for the documentary film. However, with the arrival of Burma VJ, it will prove to be an exceptional year. The premise of Burma VJ is that the film is shot entirely on amateur footage in Burma, a country ruled by a military dictatorship, with extreme suppression of the media, around the time of the September 2007 peaceful protests against the opression of the regime which Burma has been ruled under since 1962. Now, released at the start of last year, Sylvester Stallone's film Rambo was the first film in an English language to really show light the regime of Burma, if unsuccessfully due to the nature of the violent regime being used as a plot device for the film's action. However, with Burma VJ, I am very glad at the fact that quite an obvious issue of human rights has properly been given the light it deserves. This film is very important and sh0uld be released on wide release, if just to inform people of the hideousness of the regime. Very much the counterpart to Anvil, in which Anvil is very a little story, Burma VJ is a big story of a great issue which clearly needs to addressed. However, in a manner similar to Anvil, this documentary film is the kind of film that would be massively lauded if it was a piece of fiction. Throughout the film, through the efforts of undercover journalists, who generally have cameras hidden inside a bag, we are thrown into a world who's door's have been closed to the world. Also consistent in the piece is the unending tension as the camera takes us through the overcrowded streets, in which many government employees are in plain clothes near indistinguishable from the rest of the country's inhabitants. Interspersed with phone calls and recreations of the attempts of members of a suppressed and banned news station to get this footage to the public in order to cause uprising, this proves to as tense and almost in the vein of classic conspiracy thrillers from the 1970's. A number of critics have cited the recreations as a means of undermining the actual footage. I do not believe this does so. I believe that it highlights the human emotions rampant throughout, and the recreations create a coherant story of the struggle of the Burmese people against the regime. It also helps highlight the neccessity for freedom of speech in the press and the power of the medium of technology and film these days. Many people who see this will be moved to activism as a result in my opinion, and the fact that this film has in fact has been able to be made highlights just how signifcant film is in our world, particularly in highlighting the injustices and human rights situations around the world. Also, whenever the protests are actually going on, you feel so great and so triumphant at the unity of humanity against oppression, particularly when the government agents attempts to take the journalists covering the events into detention but the monks supporting the protest encircle them. Director Anders Ostergaard has crafted a piece which is of significant importance and for which he should be very. This film, which encapsulates so many different emotions, good and bad, should be preserved as a time capsule of the triumph of the human spirit and unification over the forces of evil.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 9.4/10

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - Burma VJ: Reporting From A Closed Country

To open up this review, I must at least make further reference to the fact that I think that this is the year of the documentary film. With work such as Tyson, while certainly flawed, and the masterpiece Anvil: The Story of Anvil, this has already proved to be a great year for the documentary film. However, with the arrival of Burma VJ, it will prove to be an exceptional year. The premise of Burma VJ is that the film is shot entirely on amateur footage in Burma, a country ruled by a military dictatorship, with extreme suppression of the media, around the time of the September 2007 peaceful protests against the opression of the regime which Burma has been ruled under since 1962. Now, released at the start of last year, Sylvester Stallone's film Rambo was the first film in an English language to really show light the regime of Burma, if unsuccessfully due to the nature of the violent regime being used as a plot device for the film's action. However, with Burma VJ, I am very glad at the fact that quite an obvious issue of human rights has properly been given the light it deserves. This film is very important and sh0uld be released on wide release, if just to inform people of the hideousness of the regime. Very much the counterpart to Anvil, in which Anvil is very a little story, Burma VJ is a big story of a great issue which clearly needs to addressed. However, in a manner similar to Anvil, this documentary film is the kind of film that would be massively lauded if it was a piece of fiction. Throughout the film, through the efforts of undercover journalists, who generally have cameras hidden inside a bag, we are thrown into a world who's door's have been closed to the world. Also consistent in the piece is the unending tension as the camera takes us through the overcrowded streets, in which many government employees are in plain clothes near indistinguishable from the rest of the country's inhabitants. Interspersed with phone calls and recreations of the attempts of members of a suppressed and banned news station to get this footage to the public in order to cause uprising, this proves to as tense and almost in the vein of classic conspiracy thrillers from the 1970's. A number of critics have cited the recreations as a means of undermining the actual footage. I do not believe this does so. I believe that it highlights the human emotions rampant throughout, and the recreations create a coherant story of the struggle of the Burmese people against the regime. It also helps highlight the neccessity for freedom of speech in the press and the power of the medium of technology and film these days. Many people who see this will be moved to activism as a result in my opinion, and the fact that this film has in fact has been able to be made highlights just how signifcant film is in our world, particularly in highlighting the injustices and human rights situations around the world. Also, whenever the protests are actually going on, you feel so great and so triumphant at the unity of humanity against oppression, particularly when the government agents attempts to take the journalists covering the events into detention but the monks supporting the protest encircle them. Director Anders Ostergaard has crafted a piece which is of significant importance and for which he should be very. This film, which encapsulates so many different emotions, good and bad, should be preserved as a time capsule of the triumph of the human spirit and unification over the forces of evil.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 9.4/10

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - Moon

Okay, in the fallout of my movie review explosion, I managed to see two more films in the space it has taken to finish them, and the first of these is Moon. Now Moon has gotten quite a good bit of hype of publicity as an independant film and being the first movie in quite some time to tackle straight science-fiction for quite some time. Also garnering attention is it's director, first-time filmmaker Duncan Jones. Now I'll get this out of the way quickly out of respect for Jones, who really has strived to make his own name as a creator, for many years he was more famous as Zowie Bowie, also known as the son of David Bowie. Now, anyone who has been in my company for at least thirty seconds probably knows that with regards to my music tastes that David Bowie is probably the closest thing that will come to as a god for me, so put it this way, poor Duncan had alot to set himself apart from, especially in this viewer's eyes. However, I feel that Jones himself here is the best element in the film altogether. This is the kind of film I would love to make for a debut. As the head creative honcho on this project, Jones shows great restraint to pull Moon into the realm of current science fiction which usually revolves around robots hitting each other and explosions, and keeps Moon entreched in the realm of intelligent science-fiction. Unlike the only other real intelligent science-fiction movie of note recently, Sunshine, the film does not stray from it's original concept and instead remains firmly entrenched in the ideas which make the film so strong in the first-place. Also, now I will not spoil this as when I went in I did not see any trailer's or promotional material, but merely as an intelligent science-fiction fan. There are numerous plot turns throughout the film, the first beginning around the end of the first act, twenty-five or thirty minutes in. Now, one thing that certainly deserves to commended is the structurally perfect screenplay by Jones and Nathan Parker. With Jones coming up with the original ideas, twists and turns, Parker's additions to the screenplay in keeping the film consistently interesting as Sam Bell, played by Sam Rockwell, the only human precence throughout the entire film, moves through the plot and discovers more and more behind what he has been told by his employers as he is out his working post, The Moon. Parker gives some excellent dialogue for Bell as a character throughout and GERTY, the cliched onboard computer system which is very HAL and Mother. Which brings me to the performance by Sam Rockwell. Rockwell manages to maintain composure in what would surely be a difficult role and as someone who is more or less acting the entire film by himself, really shows maturity in this performance. The little nuances in his performance as the Sam Bell character are very interesting, and the fact that he does not perform Bell as extremely extroverted or over-the-top is a wise move on his part as an actor, for it fit's in with the fact that this is intelligent sci-fi, with ideas being put across, particularly those which focus on human emotion emotion. Also, on the technical side of things, cinematography is solid and the artistic direction, while not unique, certainly adds an element of depth and realism to an otherwise fantastical idea. Finally, the editing is top-notch, fitting in brillaintly with the film's top sound design. However, there are one or two elements which really got to me with Moon. For starters, while certainly satisfying, I felt the film's payoff, the ending, could have really been worked upon better. That does not mean it is a bad ending, it's just that with what has preceded, you really do feel that maybe there should have been more thought put into the climax. Now, the one thing that did really annoy truth be told was the score. Alot of people have been claiming that the score by Clint Mansell was great. I don't believe it was personally. I do not think that the score was appropriate for the film, and whenever I was watching the film in the cinema, I found the score rather intrusive, which is one thing a score should never be. That does not mean Clint Mansell is a bad composer by any means, I mean Clint Mansell was the recipient in my last years Best and Worst of The Year for the award for best comosition, I just felt the score was inappropriate for this film. However, while I did have certain issues with Moon that stop it from being a masterpiece, this is certainly an accompished and solid piece of work for which all as a finished project all involved should be proud.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 8.8/10

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - The Hangover (Repost)

Sorry about the repost, I forget to add the poster to the film. And don't take any of the high horse biblical crap seriously. For reviews sake, you'll understand. Peace out. The Thin White Dude.

And here is the final movie in The Thin White Dude's Reviews Explosion, The Hangover. Now, to give a little bit of context, this is the comedy sleeper hit of the year, which has not only made large amounts of money financially, but also has mysteriously for this type of film, garnered a fair amount of critical acclaim, with reviews such as "one of the most enjoyable comedies of the year" and "an excellent bromantic comedy" (catchy pun, ey?) being garnered upon this film. However, I feel it is time to hand me the reigns to my horse, as I ride through the deserts of the film world, and deliver my sermon from atop a mountain, what is my opinion of The Hangover. Anyway, plot is basically, three lads, each of them of varying personalities, go to Las Vegas with their friend who is getting married, and have one last night of excess before he surrenders himself to the horrors of marriage. Now, the problem, and the Macguffin of the film, is that their friend gets lost in the ensuing mayhem, and must find him before the wedding, hence the film's title. Now, I'll be fair and pragmatic here and open with what is good about the film, the script's dialogue is certainly witty and full of laughs, the kind one would associate with hanging around with a group of close friends. Each of the personalities comes across very well as a result of this dialogue. Also, and perhaps the best thing about the movie, is the role played by Zach Galifianakis. Effectively an exaggerated and comedic version of Dustin Hoffman's Raymond Babbit from Rain Man (a point smartly referenced on more than one occassion in the film), he plays this role rather well. It is no acting masterclass, but it is certainly a step ahead of the cardboard cut-out cliche that this kind of character has become, and his character is often found to gain the most laughs and most sympathy, thus he becomes more three-dimensional thanks to Galifianakis' performance. Also, some of the gags around which the movie has been clearly constructed are genuinely funny. For example, the fact that the men are lambasted with the baby in what is in many ways a pastiche of Three Men and a Baby is pulled off quite well, and is an intelligent subplot which helps tie together the film with many of the other subplots and helps each of the character's come out as distinct personalities. Also, the fact that the men cannot remember the night before at all and piece it together like a puzzle is an interesting idea, leaving the discoveries of their previous night's exploits to bring the odd gag. Which is where I start to unleash the angry Old Testament Dude. Whenever I say that there is the odd gag, I mean just that. Unfortunately for this film, which is clearly one of those "laugh out loud, we're so absolutely hilarious" films, the gags often fail to rub off and come across on me. Maybe The Hangover is an acquirred taste, but for me it is by no means an intelligent comedy. Now, for those who think when I say "intelligent" comedy I mean sophisto-satire comedies like Dr. Strangelove, I do not mean that. I think that Animal House is an intelligent comedy, which is the film which is probably responsible for this and the recent upsurge of these films, but we will get there later. To start, I said that some of the gags come across well. I think that the gag with the baby is great, the initial mystery behind the tiger is funny and the idea of them forgetting everything is smart. However, the movie does not really work on anything bar attempting to make the gags be as ridiculous and over-the-top as is possible. Words of advice to the screenwriters, they did not come across properly because you did not work on the bits in-between the "whoop-whoop" laughs, which compose of much of the film. The other two leading characters are poorly written and as a result their performances by Bradley Cooper and Ed Helms are completely unconvincing and nauseatingly boring. Also, the structure of the film is all wrong completely, causing everyone to be suspensed in space-time continuums of moments of excessive boredome and dullness. Also, Todd Phillips fails to keep control of this film, all the more proving his flaws as a director, which have come out before in his previous works, all more or less the same film. He needs to try something else as a director, because this stuff while it makes money, certainly does not make classics. What every happened to the likes of this gross-out, over-the-top comedy classics such as Animal House, American Pie and even the recent Superbad. How come a minority of films are able to thrive so well as brillaint films, and the audience are willing to eat up horrible pastiche's which do nothing more but remind them that these are not the same as those classics? I am sick and tired of the recent upsurge of these "Dude, Over-the top" comedies, because the jokes are all the same, and if they are done right, that's acceptable, but so marry fall flat on their backsides and fail, asking for mother to come and pick them up for comfort. I hate them. Also, why is Mike Tyson in the film? After having seen Tyson in which he is sick of the way people see him as a thug, in this, playing a piano and singing "In The Air Tonight" is an obvious contradiction and is sadly twistedly ironic and tragic, and punhing Zach Galifianakis in the face enforces peoples view of him as a damaged animal who is psychotic and borderline unapproachable. In conclusion, while boasted some very witty dialogue, the odd funny gag and a good performance from Galifianakis, the rest of the film is boring, the script is rubbish, the other two leads are poor, and Todd Phillips needs to reconsider his occupational position in the near future.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 4.1/10

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - The Hangover

And here is the final movie in The Thin White Dude's Reviews Explosion, The Hangover. Now, to give a little bit of context, this is the comedy sleeper hit of the year, which has not only made large amounts of money financially, but also has mysteriously for this type of film, garnered a fair amount of critical acclaim, with reviews such as "one of the most enjoyable comedies of the year" and "an excellent bromantic comedy" (catchy pun, ey?) being garnered upon this film. However, I feel it is time to hand me the reigns to my horse, as I ride through the deserts of the film world, and deliver my sermon from atop a mountain, what is my opinion of The Hangover. Anyway, plot is basically, three lads, each of them of varying personalities, go to Las Vegas with their friend who is getting married, and have one last night of excess before he surrenders himself to the horrors of marriage. Now, the problem, and the Macguffin of the film, is that their friend gets lost in the ensuing mayhem, and must find him before the wedding, hence the film's title. Now, I'll be fair and pragmatic here and open with what is good about the film, the script's dialogue is certainly witty and full of laughs, the kind one would associate with hanging around with a group of close friends. Each of the personalities comes across very well as a result of this dialogue. Also, and perhaps the best thing about the movie, is the role played by Zach Galifianakis. Effectively an exaggerated and comedic version of Dustin Hoffman's Raymond Babbit from Rain Man (a point smartly referenced on more than one occassion in the film), he plays this role rather well. It is no acting masterclass, but it is certainly a step ahead of the cardboard cut-out cliche that this kind of character has become, and his character is often found to gain the most laughs and most sympathy, thus he becomes more three-dimensional thanks to Galifianakis' performance. Also, some of the gags around which the movie has been clearly constructed are genuinely funny. For example, the fact that the men are lambasted with the baby in what is in many ways a pastiche of Three Men and a Baby is pulled off quite well, and is an intelligent subplot which helps tie together the film with many of the other subplots and helps each of the character's come out as distinct personalities. Also, the fact that the men cannot remember the night before at all and piece it together like a puzzle is an interesting idea, leaving the discoveries of their previous night's exploits to bring the odd gag. Which is where I start to unleash the angry Old Testament Dude. Whenever I say that there is the odd gag, I mean just that. Unfortunately for this film, which is clearly one of those "laugh out loud, we're so absolutely hilarious" films, the gags often fail to rub off and come across on me. Maybe The Hangover is an acquirred taste, but for me it is by no means an intelligent comedy. Now, for those who think when I say "intelligent" comedy I mean sophisto-satire comedies like Dr. Strangelove, I do not mean that. I think that Animal House is an intelligent comedy, which is the film which is probably responsible for this and the recent upsurge of these films, but we will get there later. To start, I said that some of the gags come across well. I think that the gag with the baby is great, the initial mystery behind the tiger is funny and the idea of them forgetting everything is smart. However, the movie does not really work on anything bar attempting to make the gags be as ridiculous and over-the-top as is possible. Words of advice to the screenwriters, they did not come across properly because you did not work on the bits in-between the "whoop-whoop" laughs, which compose of much of the film. The other two leading characters are poorly written and as a result their performances by Bradley Cooper and Ed Helms are completely unconvincing and nauseatingly boring. Also, the structure of the film is all wrong completely, causing everyone to be suspensed in space-time continuums of moments of excessive boredome and dullness. Also, Todd Phillips fails to keep control of this film, all the more proving his flaws as a director, which have come out before in his previous works, all more or less the same film. He needs to try something else as a director, because this stuff while it makes money, certainly does not make classics. What every happened to the likes of this gross-out, over-the-top comedy classics such as Animal House, American Pie and even the recent Superbad. How come a minority of films are able to thrive so well as brillaint films, and the audience are willing to eat up horrible pastiche's which do nothing more but remind them that these are not the same as those classics? I am sick and tired of the recent upsurge of these "Dude, Over-the top" comedies, because the jokes are all the same, and if they are done right, that's acceptable, but so marry fall flat on their backsides and fail, asking for mother to come and pick them up for comfort. I hate them. Also, why is Mike Tyson in the film? After having seen Tyson in which he is sick of the way people see him as a thug, in this, playing a piano and singing "In The Air Tonight" is an obvious contradiction and is sadly twistedly ironic and tragic, and punhing Zach Galifianakis in the face enforces peoples view of him as a damaged animal who is psychotic and borderline unapproachable. In conclusion, while boasted some very witty dialogue, the odd funny gag and a good performance from Galifianakis, the rest of the film is boring, the script is rubbish, the other two leads are poor, and Todd Phillips needs to reconsider his occupational position in the near future.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 4.1/10

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - Anvil! The Story Of Anvil

To open up this review, all I have to say is that it is about bloody time, eighteen films into the year of reviews, that I finally arrive at the first masterpiece of the year. And that is by no means an understatement. Apologies if I am not exactly leaving the review to much open interpretation, but in case you haven't caught on already, I am about to speak very gloweringly about this film. Between this and Tyson already, this is certainly proving to be a good year for the documentary film. Anyway, to build a little bit of background context, Anvil were a reasonably successful thrash metal band at the beginning of the 1980's. However, as this film documents, over the years their success has waned, but unlike many bands whose decline has forced them into retirement, Anvil still remain. This film is a story of that journey. Really, in my honest opinion, like any good documentary, Anvil tells an interesting story. However, one of the rarest things which is nailed in a documentary is the fact that it is so interesting a story that if it had have been a piece of fiction, it perhaps would have been worse. Steve "Lips" Kudlow, lead vocalist and guitarist for the band, is very much an extravagant character, and is the driving force of the band, very much your stereotypical rock vocalist, almost a parody characiture. With his unending enthusiasm and giant heart, whereas as a film character he would be annoying, as a real person, his determination wins us over. Robb Reiner, the band's drummer on the other hand, is very much a representation of the audience looking upon the spectacle. Often very sick of rock and roll and questioning why he still does it despite their obvious failures and lack of financial gain from it, the reason it seems he stays with the band is because of loyalty to his childhood friend and love for him and the band. The way that the film portrays the two is very much in the manner of classic film duos, inseperable from the other, like one living entity, each with their own traits contributing to the composit. Put it this way, I had cried by the half-an-hour point in the film, and by the end of the next half-hour, I had cried again. Anvil is a really human story which is completely accessible and easy to understand, even for those who are not metal fans. The themes approached in the film (yes, themes in a documentary), include that of determination, hardship, friendship, dreams, and each are pulled off with great savvy. I think that a large part of the credit for the end product of the documentary has to go to director Sacha Gervasi. Having served as a roadie for Anvil on three different tours in the 1980's, it is pretty obvious with the way that they are portrayed that he is a fan of the band. However, Gervasi, unlike director James Toback of Tyson, directs this documentary with an even balance, even suggesting throughout the film at a number of stages that part of the problem for the band's decline was the band themselves, a very daring move for a documentary. However, I think that Gervasi's further scrutiny and the band's frankness seem to let the more challenging material come to light, particularly in the interviews with Anvil's close family and friends, who are more or less in consensus that they have failed in their dream. The band however, continues to drive on. Gervasi captures this portrayal of the invulnerability of the human spirit brillaintly, but there also other contributors to be acredited. In my opinion, much of the film's success also belongs to the work of the film's editors, Andrew Dickler and Jeff Renfroe, who do an absloutely fantastic job of keeping the film short, sweet and very tight with a lean running time of only ninety minutes including credits. However, you do not feel that a moment of this time has been wasted. Every moment onscreen is appropriate and you feel that with the way the editing work has been done, making the film uplifting, tragic and humourous, often within one scene, that if the film had been chopped in a different manner, it could have ended up leaning more towards only one of those audience emotions. However, Dickler and Renfroe work let's the film dip into all of those emotional pots. In conclusion, I read a review on Rotten Tomatoes by Tim Robey of the Daily Telegraph. He says that this will not slight the Citizen Kane of the genre, Some Kind Of Monster. Sorry Tim, you are wrong. Some Kind Of Monster may be the Lawrence of Arabia of the genre, but this is the Citizen Kane of the rocumentary genre. It is an absolute masterpiece, and already a shoe-in for this year's Best Picture nominations of my own. I cannot remember of the last time I roared at that the screen wishing for the band's triumph. Any film that conjure these emotions from someone in my opinion deserves to be recognised, and in my opinion, it is also one of the best film's of the decade. In case you still don't know, I like this film.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 9.7/10