Genre: Comedy
Director: Chris Addison
Cast: Anne Hathaway, Rebel Wilson, Alex Sharp, Ingrid Oliver, Dean Norris, Nicholas Woodeson
Runtime: 1 hr 34 mins
Rating: NC16 (Sexual References)
Released By: UIP
Official Website:
Opening Day: 9 May 2019
Synopsis: A remake of the 1988 comedy Dirty Rotten Scoundrels, in which two down-and-out con artists engage in a "loser leaves town" contest.
Movie Review:
The Hustle is the latest female centered movie to arrive at the big screen after the all-female reboot of Oceans 8 and Ghostbusters. Let’s just say the final product is not going to make internet trolls any happier.
In short, the story of The Hustle is a reboot of the 1998 comedy, Dirty Rotten Scoundrels starring Steven Martin and Michael Caine. Never mind you have never heard or watched the original but the updated version pulled a gender-switch by having Rebel Wilson playing the Martin role while Anna Hathaway plays the role performed by Caine.
On the wealthy French Riviera lives a sophisticated con-woman by the name of Josephine (Hathaway) whose daily routine of conning rich stupid old men is interrupted by the arrival of small-time crook, Penny Rust (Wilson). Rather than subjecting herself further to Josephine’s tortures and humiliation, Penny demands to be Josephine’s partner instead of being her student. Thus, the only way to settle their score is for either one of them to win a bet that is to win the affection and most importantly, half a million out of the pocket of a young techy millionaire, Thomas (Alex Sharp).
If you have seen the original, the meat of the plot remains unchanged except all the original funny gags have been swapped with rather poorly unimaginative ones. And if you have been following the trailers, that “garbage bag” gag is the only sole saving grace which obviously have been spoiled by the marketing team. That is actually saying a lot for a movie that runs at a slim 94 minutes.
Essentially, The Hustle is filled with Wilson’s usual boob, fat and sex jokes which honestly goes flat after 15 minutes and as a producer here, she is ironically doing the opposite of trying to make a movie that showcases the power of woman. Her trademark free-wheeling and deadpanning her way through is just not worth the price of admission with a sequence (sounds pretty funny on paper) that requires her to go “blind” ended up rather pointlessly.
At least, Hathaway tries hard to be funny but ended up being too campy to be ticklish despite her best attempts to put on several phony accents and persona. Hathaway might be a good actress but she is never a comedienne. Still, she looks amazingly gorgeous in stilettos, fake wigs and a wide range of designer dresses and costumes. Sad to say, it’s a wrong pair up although both ladies have strengths of their own.
“No man will ever believe a woman is smarter than him.” It’s indeed a smart statement for Josephine to proclaim. The Hustle struggles every minute of screentime to modernize, update the relevancy of today’s world but with the highlight of the entire swindle being Hathaway feeding Wilson with a French fry dipped in toilet water then unfortunately, the social commentary has failed tremendously.
Movie Rating:
(Works better for streaming, in fact Wilson manages to pull off a fast one in real-life for MGM to put in the money for this disastrous remake)
Review by Linus Tee
SYNOPSIS: A feared critic, an icy gallery owner and an ambitious assistant snap up a recently deceased artist's stash of paintings -- with dire consequences.
MOVIE REVIEW:
2014’s ‘Nightcrawler’ saw director-writer Dan Gilroy and leading actor Jake Gyllenhaal forge a electrifying dynamic through a satire on modern-day journalism, and it is no surprise therefore that Gilroy and Gyllenhaal have decided to continue their creative collaboration with an equally satirical piece. This time, both have trained their sights on the contemporary art scene, taking the opportunity to skewer its pretentious denizens while taking the perennial tension between art and commerce to violent heights. And oh, while we are on collaborations, we might add too that Gilroy’s spouse Rene Russo is also in both movies.
Right from the start, Gilroy sets out the ‘types’ he intends to lampoon. There is the pompous ‘art critic’ that is exemplified by Gyllenhaal’s Morf Vandewalt, who relishes and cherishes the power of his reviews in elevating and ending careers. There is the power gallery owner that is personified by Russo’s Rhodora Haze, who has no qualms manipulating those around her to her selfish advantage. There is the greedy museum curator in Toni Collette’s Gretchen, who decides to turn to advising millionaire clients and runs around town trying to convince others that she is running the place. There is the has-been artist in John Malkovich’s Piers, who is struggling to find his next big hit, as well as the up-and-coming complement in Daveed Diggs’ Damrish, who is determined not to become like Piers.
Watching them dance, slither and hiss around one another at the Art Basel in Miami is a gleeful delight, although it does take some getting used to their lingo. But Gilroy has far more devilish designs on these characters, revolving around the spirit of a mentally anguished painter named Ventril Dease which still haunts his artwork. Rhodora’s assistant Josephina (Zawe Ashton) finds Dease’s body in the hallway of her apartment building, and following a cat into his unlocked home, finds the trove of ghoulish paintings which prove so original, disturbing and mesmerising that just about anyone who regards them is instantly transfixed.
Sensing an opportunity to get rich and get famous, Josephina ignores the words of the Dease’s caretaker, who had told her that the artist wanted his work destroyed. Unfortunately for Josephina and everyone else lucky enough to profit from his art, Dease’s hatred and ill-will accumulated from years of abuse and violence have somehow been preserved in his paintings, and one by one, comes to haunt those who seek to profit from them. Be warned – each one of these kills is pretty gory, perhaps even more so than the typical horror movie, and Gilroy leans heavy on horror tropes to build up the sense of foreboding before each death.
Whether you enjoy the second and third acts of ‘Velvet Buzzsaw’ depends on how much you want to see these self-absorbed, egoistical types meet their end at the hands of a vengeful artist looking for comeuppance on those who have turned his creations into commodities. It isn’t difficult to guess who Dease chooses to kill first, but as predictable as that may be, Gilroy uses each of these occasions to emphasise just how these characters continue to pursue their own agendas with little regard for anyone else, even as these others seem to be dying or meeting unnatural ends in uncanny ways.
Frankly, Gilroy’s satire loses its bite as it becomes more and more a full-blown horror/ gore movie, even as his setting (i.e. within the art world) proves intriguing. One late sequence has an already freaked-out Morf hearing voices from inside his head while enclosed in a sound exhibit that supposedly contains whale intonations recorded 20,000 feet under the sea in the Mariana trench. Another has Gretchen’s lifeless and severed body being mistaken for an exhibit by visitors at the gallery until her own assistant sees her and realises just what happened. Oh yes, like we said, you’ve got to have a somewhat twisted sense of humour to enjoy these subsequent scenes.
Thankfully, Gilroy’s passion for his ideas is matched by Gyllenhaal’s committed lead performance, evolving from an unplaceably accented, hyperarticulate obsessive into a troubled, even tormented soul questioning everything from his work to his romantic choices over the course of the film. And we dare say that it is Gyllenhaal who holds the film together, finding genuine sympathy in someone who is forced to re-discover his sense of self as well as his view of the world around him. Though Gyllenhaal won’t be winning any awards this time round, it is impressive how he gives shape to Gilroy’s creative impulses. So while ‘Velvet Buzzsaw’ is no ‘Nightcrawler’, it still proves a fascinating enough watch – after all, this is arthouse horror, in the most literal sense of the word. .
MOVIE RATING:
Review by Gabriel Chong
Genre: Action/Thriller
Director: Han Jun-hee
Cast: Kong Hyo-jin, Ryu Jun-yeol, Cho Jung-seok, Kim Ki-bum
RunTime: 2 hrs 13 mins
Rating: PG13 (Some Violence)
Released By: Shaw Organisation
Official Website:
Opening Day: 28 February 2019
Synopsis: Min-jae (RYU Jun-yeol), a rookie police officer with a natural born talent for driving, is assigned to the perfect team: the Hit-and-Run Squad. But at the same time, for police detective Si-yeon (KONG Hyo-jin), it is a place she is unjustly demoted to for doing her job. The two team up to arrest the rich and powerful speed maniac Jae-chul (CHO Jung-seok) who is suspected of committing crimes for his obsession for speed.
Movie Review:
Fans of The Fast and the Furious franchise would remember Han, an Asian dude who first appeared in The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (2006), and met with an unfortunate demise during the film's climax. Proving to be a popular character, the filmmakers managed to have him appear in subsequent instalments. Played memorably by Sung Kang, an American actor born to South Korean immigrant parents, the character may be one reason why you’d want to check out this Korean movie about crime, action and most importantly, car racing.
The story follows a female cop as she is demoted from an elite team to a hit and run squad. Together with her new teammates, they investigate a case involving a former F1 driver turned businessman. Shady dealings, bribes and cover ups are unveiled as the team digs deeper, and engines are revved up to hunt down the baddies.
Sounds like a story from the popular American franchise that deals with illegal street racing, heists and crime fighting? Maybe that’s where the folks behind this action thriller got their inspirations from. But how we wished things moved a tad faster in this 133 minute popcorn movie.
The build up during the first hour is decent, as we are introduced to the different characters and their seemingly intriguing back stories. There is the female lieutenant who doesn’t have Lady Luck smiling in her direction, the former convict who has become a law enforcer (check out his tattoos!), the stammering antagonist who looks like he is going to go berserk anytime, and a suave prosecutor who has something up his sleeves. Of course, there are car chase sequences that set the adrenaline rushing.
Then things start feeling bogged down by heavy handed drama. Tear inducing scenes are introduced, and we are expected to feel melancholic. The jarring pacing makes viewers wonder why the characters are shifting focus from investigating a case to getting all mopey about life. These dramatic moments feel out of place, and things might have been better if director Han Jun Hee made the decision to shave off 20 minutes from this part of the movie.
Fortunately, the ensemble cast delivers. Kong Hyo Jin (Be With You) has the right amount of resentment and angst in her to pull off a relatively unlikeable female protagonist. Ryu Jun Yeol (A Taxi Driver) has a pretty face, but he hides it behind a geeky and socially awkward front to portray a rookie who has a thing for driving fast cars. Cho Jung Seok (The Drug King) gets to have more fun as the bad guy. Watch out for a scene where he forces a drill through a helmet into a poor guy’s head. We have seen this somewhere else before, but we are guessing it might have been a sadistically satisfying experience for the actor holding the drill. Elsewhere, supporting characters are played by veteran actor Lee Sung Min and popular boyband Shine’s Key.
In terms of action, you can’t expect Hollywood standards but there are some decent car chases and fight scenes which will please the majority of viewers. The movie has a mid credits scene which introduces a new character (ahem, wasn’t this how Deckard Shaw was introduced?), but we aren’t sure whether that’s necessary. That depends on how fans will lap this movie up.
Movie Rating:
(Move a little faster, will ya?)
Review by John Li
Genre: Action/Comedy
Director: Lee Byeong-heon
Cast: Ryu Seung Yong, Lee Hanee, Jin Sun-kyu, Lee Dong-hwi, Gong-myoung, Shin Ha-kyun, Oh Jung-se
RunTime: 1 hr 51 mins
Rating: PG13 (Some Violence and Drug References)
Released By: Encore Films
Official Website:
Opening Day: 28 February 2019
Synopsis: The narcotics team works hard day and night, but their performance remains at an all-time low, leading them to become the ugly duckling of the police department and potentially face dismantlement. Captain KO gets intel about an international drug deal and embarks on a risky undercover mission with his entire team. In order to establish around-the-clock and up-close-and-personal surveillance, the team takes over a rundown chicken joint across the street from the drug gang’s safe house. But things take an unexpected turn when Detective MA’s yet unrevealed culinary talents begins to shine, turning the chicken restaurant famous overnight. Should we chase chickens or criminals? When customers begin to flock in, undercover work gets pushed to the back burner so the detectives can focus on frying chicken. As a result, the team misses the big drug deal, even though it happens right under their nose. Now, with nowhere to go, the detectives launch a desperate mop-up operation.
Movie Review:
It felt like somebody’s birthday party. Plus there’s fried chicken.
Between the snacks crackling and the people chuckling, the atmosphere at the premiere was buzzing with cheer. I haven’t witnessed such an easy sense of mirth at a screening for years now, no doubt helped by the continuous rain of laughter at the antics onscreen. The verdict’s in - Extreme Job clocks in easily as comedy of the year for this reviewer.
Back home in South Korea, the statistics also agree. The film is the fastest comedy to reach two million views, taking only four days to achieve this feat, while also becoming the second most-watched film ever, in the country.
Even the madcap synopsis is a winner: A group of underperforming detectives earn no respect in the force, and their reputation as a bungling squad limits their assignments. Their Detective Chief Go (Ryoo Seung-Ryong) is given one last chance to redeem the team with a lead on a high-profile criminal leader, Mubae (Shin Ha-Kyun), so he invests his pension on an ailing fried chicken joint as the perfect sting operation headquarters. They get unexpected success, not with their covert spying, but with their winning recipe, and is catapulted into fame as the hottest restaurant in town.
Director Lee Byeong-Hun is a natural at the helm. The film is silly fun, with a range of humour that should please every viewer. And while the core stays zany, it never becomes juvenile or lame. Together with writer Bae Se-Young, the script is a zesty piece of entertainment realised by Lee’s extraordinary control and leadership.
The sharp writing is dealt to an equally capable cast. Lee Ha-Nee, Jin Seon-Kyu, Lee Dong-Hwi and Gong Myung never let up on their timing, delivering quick punches of dry wit and cold observations to hilarious effect. They are like a family that don’t get along, but come together, fuelled by their need for validation and bonded by their mission.
The expressive cast delivers slapstick with exceptional body acting, keeping their performances from becoming lame. Their comic timing distributes the pacing for a flowing continuous tone. This commitment is a fine quality of Extreme Job, where even side characters like the original fried chicken restaurant owner, or a thug perform their roles with gusto. This enthusiasm infects the audience with the same.
And as ridiculous some of the situations are, it’s still surprisingly believable. As the detectives react to happenchance, their efforts stay grounded - it’s only their reactions that remain dysfunctional, and injects zing into every event. From swivelling whiteboards to hide them from curious customers, to the detectives’ meticulous but random phone greeting for their restaurant, their daily run-ins are a riot to watch as they unfold.
Before you peg this as a standard, stereotypical rigmarole, do yourself a favour and give this South Korean comedy a Go. I promise you enough surprises (especially in the later half) to change your mind. You’ll be hungry for more.
Movie Rating:
(A stellar production juiced up by sharp performances. It’s laugh-a-minute, knee-slapping fun for everyone, even if you don’t usually have a taste for wacky films. Comedy of the year, easily)
Review by Morgan Awyong
Genre: Horror/Thriller
Director: Manussanun Pongsuwan
Cast: Ploy Sornnarin, Ja Sutida Kiatkitcharoen, Best – Nattasit Kotimanuswanich, Ong Thana Tantranont
Runtime: 1 hr 21 mins
Rating: M18 (Sexual Violence)
Released By: Clover Films
Official Website:
Opening Day: 7 March 2019
Synopsis: When the picture of a ghost becomes viral, death will soon follow... After winning in an augmented reality game, Tang found herself ended up in an abandoned building. Without any regards, she took a picture to commemorate her winning. When she returns home, she realized that there was another ‘girl’ in the picture she took earlier however, she was alone. Soon, she starts seeing the mysterious ‘girl’ and it keeps haunting her. She sent the photo to her friends seeking for their help to find out the identity of the mysterious ‘girl’ in her picture. And everyone who received the picture is also haunted by the mysterious ‘girl’ in the picture… Words begin to spread about the haunted picture, and nobody can get away from this.
Movie Review:
Viral is really an updated version of The Ring, but minus the finesse and scares. In the midst of playing an augmented game called Ghost Hunt, Tang (Ploy Sornarin) captures a spirit photo and excitedly shares it with her friends. One by one, they start seeing the female ghost in their environment.
Supposedly.
The thing is, Viral sets out with an intention, but never finishes any of its agenda. Director Manussanan Pongsuwan referenced the obsessive mobile culture and an actual haunting from her previous flick, but fails to deliver the impact she seeks.
The reason for this, is really the fickle plot points that trip over themselves throughout the film. In a bid to flesh out the film and give depth to the characters, Pongsuwan loses control and ends up with a pile of loose ends and underdeveloped scenarios.
There’s the sudden love triangle between Tang and her best friend’s boyfriend Wit (Nattasit Kotimanuswanich); Kitty’s (Ja Sutida Kiat Kitcharoen) privileged but latchkey child situation; Tang’s lack of friends except Tern (Ong Thana Tantranont); and of course the whole mystery behind the haunting. But as much as these are introduced (and in the most awkward of ways), they don’t serve the story in any aspect.
A better script could have rallied the themes together, but what we have is a lazy exposition piece. The whole thing reads like an instruction manual that nobody cares about.
Which might explain the performances, which are, in short, terrible. The whole performance by the entire cast feels like a rehearsal run, with the actors purely delivering the lines to move the story along. Kotimanuswanich fairs a little better than the rest, but the two female leads Sornarin and Kitcharoen are the worst offenders.
Sornarin pretty much sleepwalks through the entire film, save for two exaggerated screams when she sees a rat and her father. Her reactions to the ghost is best described as a bewildering - a mixture of slow comprehension and annoyance. I mean, she walks briskly away at almost every encounter with the ghost, like she just saw a person handing out flyers.
So it’s pretty much a non-event at this point, and the “viral” urgency non-existent beyond this foursome. When Pongsuwan had enough of her fade-out edits and the counter was nearing the 60-minute mark, she decides to quickly wrap up the film, by revealing the backstory of the spirit in the most unremarkable way possible.
In fact, in a scene just before the girls find the body (you knew that was coming), there was a particularly amusing moment when they saw the spirit sitting in the grass. They did what all should do in such circumstances - hold hands and highwalk hurriedly away through the field. Their annoyance with our supernatural victim is millennial apathy done right. I would like to think that that would be my own reaction when my friend sees a poster for this film at a local cinema.
Movie Rating:
(A horror non-event, with actors merely delivering lines in an awkwardly instructional script to a fractured and thin plot)
Review by Morgan Awyong
SYNOPSIS: When accidentally destroying his workplace gets successful salesman Teddy (KEVIN HART) fired, he can’t find another decent job unless he finally gets his GED. But two major things stand in his way: Carrie (TIFFANY HADDISH), a teacher with no time for grown-up class clowns, and Stewart (TARAN KILLAM), Teddy’s high school nemesis-turned-principal who will do anything to see him fail. Now every school rule is about to be broken when they all go head-to-head in a wild battle of wits, pranks, and lessons you can’t learn in books. Night School is in session!
MOVIE REVIEW:
Kevin Hart attempts to pull off a humorous, hartfelt tale about not giving up in life but Night School turned up to be a way-too-long, filled-with-too-little-laughs comedy that fails miserably.
Hart plays Teddy Walker who drops out of high school to become a barbeque grill salesman. But when a proposal to his girlfriend went wrong and in turn causes him to lose his job, Teddy realises he needs a GED (equivalent to a diploma) to get a new job at his friend’s investment firm. The only way it seems is for him to go back to his high school to attend night classes under unorthodox teacher, Carrie (Tiffany Haddish) with a bunch of assorted misfits as his classmates.
With the exception of a gross-out pubic hair gag, Night School stays relatively safe in terms of coarse antics. There are lots of improv comedy lurking around liked the first encounter between Teddy and Carrie at a traffic light. Some worked liked magic while others are just meh. Liked the gag about a Christian fried chicken outlet which simply doesn’t work. The funniest of all happened to be Teddy and his classmates trying to escape the school facility after stealing the test answers. You have Rob Riggle to thank for it.
For the most of the two hour running time, the jokes are mostly spread across Kevin Hart and the ensemble of students. Stewart, the principal whom Teddy bullied when he was young, Theresa, the underappreciated and lonely housewife, Luis, the singer-wannabe, Bobby the inmate who learnt via Skype with Rob Riggle and Romany Malco. The supposed laugh riot is so spread out that the second-billed Tiffany Haddish hardly gets the chance to shine despite her best attempt to banter and trading wisecracks with Kevin Hart.
What sounds like a promising comedy on paper never comes alive even with Girls Trip’s Malcom D. Lee at the helm and the inputs of six writers including Hart. The performers seem game on but the material seems dead on arrival. Night School is definitely one of Hart’s recent mishaps, we rather you check out Hart’s dramatic appearance in The Upside if you are drawn to his stand-up comedian persona. That one sure has more hart than this.
SPECIAL FEATURES:
There are over 16 minutes of Deleted Scenes to an already long movie and an Alternate Opening.
AUDIO/VISUAL:
Night School DVD delivers a serviceable Dolby Digital 5.1 soundtrack which is clear and solid. Music and surround sound effects are excellent too. Colours, texture and details are generally good although minor noise are expected on DVD.
MOVIE RATING:
DVD RATING :
Review by Linus Tee
|
BOOK REVIEW #29: THE ART OF IRON MAN: 10TH ANNIVERSARY EDITIONPosted on 21 Feb 2019 |
Genre: Biography/Drama
Director: Julian Schnabel
Cast: Willem Dafoe, Rupert Friend, Oscar Isaac, Mads Mikkelsen, Mathieu Amalric, Emmanuelle Seigner
Runtime: 1 hr 52 mins
Rating: PG
Released By: Shaw Organisation
Official Website:
Opening Day: 7 March 2019
Synopsis: In the villages of Arles and Auvers-sur-Oise where he has retreated to escape the pressures of Paris, Vincent (Academy Award nominee Willem Dafoe) is treated kindly by some and brutally by others. Madame Ginoux (Emmanuelle Seigner), the proprietor of the local restaurant, takes pity on his poverty and gives him a ledger, which he fills with drawings. Others are afraid of his dark mood swings. His close friend, fellow artist Paul Gauguin (Oscar Isaac), finds him so overwhelming he slips away, and his beloved brother and art dealer Theo (Rupert Friend) is unwavering in his support, but never manages to sell a single painting of Vincent's.
Movie Review:
When is Willem Dafoe going to win an Oscar?
After being a three time Best Supporting Actor nominee at the Academy Awards (Platoon, Shadow of the Vampire, The Florida Project), Dafoe has gotten his first Best Actor nomination for taking on the role of Vincent van Gogh. Eventually, it was Rami Malek who took home the prize for playing Freddie Mercury.
While playing van Gogh sounds like a huge challenge, nothing seems to faze Dafoe. Cinephiles can attest to how awesome the 63 year old is. The founding member of an experimental theatre company, the character actor has wowed us in countless films. From playing Jesus in The Last Temptation of Christ (1988) and portraying a sadomasochistic husband in Antichrist (2009) to becoming Green Goblin in Spider Man (2002) and Nuidis Vulko in Aquaman (2018), he has also done voiceover work in Finding Dory (2003) and Fantastic Mr Fox (2009). Is there nothing he can’t pull off?
In this biographical drama chronicles, we follow the Dutch Post Impressionist painter as he searches for inspiration. We see how his life is shaped by fellow artist Paul Gauguin (who is also unfortunately underappreciated until after his death), his brother Theo (an unfailing financial and emotional support), as well as several other characters who became the sources of his now famous paintings.
It is apt that this film about van Gogh is directed by Julian Schnabel (Miral), a filmmaker and painter well known for his large scale artworks set on broken ceramic plates. The film starts with a black screen and Dafoe’s haunting voiceover (incidentally, he also provided the narration for Vox Lux, Brady Corbet’s work about an artist struggling with her true self), and proceeds with an artistic approach with looking at life. Everything has a meaning, yet everything doesn’t. There are several existentialist moments where viewers will begin pondering whether social norm is the most important thing to pursue in life.
While it can be exhausting to sit through the 112 minute (not everyone may have the patience to appreciate van Gogh’s perspective on things), it is worth the effort just to be in awe of the first rate performances on display. Needless to say, Dafoe effortlessly pulls off a difficult role and audiences may end up empathising with the character. The camera loves the actor’s face – there are several close up shots exploring the well defined structure.
Elsewhere, Oscar Isaac (Life Itself) plays Gauguin with vigour, Rupert Friend (A Simple Favor) is convincing as a caring brother, while Mads Mikkelsen (Rogue One: A Star Wars Story) lends weight with his bit role of a concerned priest. Mathieu Amalric (Quantum of Solace) and Emmanuelle Seigner (Based on a True Story), who have worked with Schnabel on The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (2007), a critically acclaimed biography about how a man’s life changes after suffering from a massive stroke.
The stylistic drama is like a painting. While you may not fully appreciate everything on the canvas, there is a surrealistic sense of beauty. With every sequence, the film poses questions. What does it take to attain a peace of mind? Can being socially accepted and art go hand in hand? What is beyond eternity’s gate?
Movie Rating:
(Willem Dafoe is as compelling as ever in this film which gives us a glimpse of what might have happened during Vincent van Gogh’s last days)
Review by John Li
Genre: Drama
Director: Josie Rourke
Cast: Saoirse Ronan, Margot Robbie, Jack Lowden, Joe Alwyn, Gemma Chan, Ismael Cordova
RunTime: 2 hrs 5 mins
Rating: M18 (Sexual Scene)
Released By: UIP
Official Website:
Opening Day: 28 February 2019
Synopsis: “Mary Queen of Scots” explores the turbulent life of the charismatic Mary Stuart (Ronan). Queen of France at 16 and widowed at 18, Mary defies pressure to remarry. Instead, she returns to her native Scotland to reclaim her rightful throne. But Scotland and England fall under the rule of the compelling Elizabeth I (Robbie). Each young Queen beholds her “sister” in fear and fascination. Rivals in power and in love, and female regents in a masculine world, the two must decide how to play the game of marriage versus independence. Determined to rule as much more than a figurehead, Mary asserts her claim to the English throne, threatening Elizabeth’s sovereignty. Betrayal, rebellion, and conspiracies within each court imperil both thrones – and change the course of history.
Movie Review:
Like many Tudor dramas, ‘Mary Queen of Scots’ takes creative license with historical events, but few end up as frustrating as this long-gestating film from first-time director Josie Rourke and writer Beau Willimon (of Netflix’s ‘House of Cards’). It isn’t that it takes significant dramatic liberties with the rivalry between royal cousins Mary Stuart and Elizabeth Tudor, a.k.a. Mary, Queen of Scots and Elizabeth I, but rather just how dull, artificial and contrived the political drama ends up being. Heck, you’re much better off with Netflix’s ‘The Crown’, or any one of them Korean period palace dramas, or even China’s ‘Story of Yanxi Palace’ than this slice of period bullshit.
Right from the start, the film lays out where it will end as well as its intentions. From her prison cell, Mary (Saoirse Ronan) is led to the scaffold surrounded by British royals, whereupon her ladies-in-waiting remove her black dress to reveal a red gown underneath. Oh yes, Mary will be executed in the end on Elizabeth’s (Margot Robbie) orders, and the choice of colour signifies that she intends her death to be martyrdom. Mary’s last steps to her place of execution are intercut with that of Elizabeth’s in her palace courtyard, who exclaims with remorse as a gentle winter snow falls upon her. Can it be more obvious that we are meant to compare and contrast these two women?
And yet, the film fails both itself and its audience by being an utterly muddled character study of either female protagonist. On one hand, it gives Elizabeth little to do, except engaging occasionally in tense conversation with her cunning advisor William Cecil (Guy Pearce, in a role he could have sleepwalked through) and survive a particularly nasty bout of smallpox. It doesn’t know whether it wants Elizabeth to be a spinster resentful that she is unable to be a traditional queen like Mary (who marries and bears an heir), or a kindred spirit who recognises how both of them are strong female spirits hamstrung by male politics, and indeed tries to have it both ways; in fact, it even imagines a meeting between both queens (that never happened) near the end just to reiterate the point that they are opposites only by circumstance.
On the other, it also cannot make up its mind just what sort of queen Mary should be. It wants Mary to be a progressive non-conformist who would not simply submit to the machinations of her royal council or of that of England’s wishes; it also wants Mary to be a feminist at heart, writing to Elizabeth to appeal for female solidarity by ruling in harmony and not “through a treaty drafted by men lesser than ourselves”. But then it would so readily have her falling for the charms of the lustful Lord Darnley (Jack Lowden), when pretty much everyone close to her can see that he intends to marry her out of ambition. Then when confronted with his treachery, Mary steadfastly refuses to divorce him out of blind allegiance to her Catholic faith; and worse still, she would later on out of spite put aside all vestige of solidarity and warn Elizabeth plainly that “if you murder me, remember you murder your sister, and you murder your queen”.
Quite frankly, it was truly vexing watching Mary vacillate between fierce and feeble, knowing damn well that it is not because Mary was like that in true character but because Willimon’s script just doesn’t know what sort of person it wants her to be. Even more frustrating is his insistence on squeezing every single bit of detail, no matter how forced, into the narrative, resulting in an unnecessarily convoluted second half that can scarcely give enough attention to each twist and turn. By the time we get to how her own royal council, including her most trusted aide Lord Bothwell (Martin Compston) turns against her to murder Lord Darnley, and subsequently her abdication of the throne, we can hardly be bothered about her impending doom at the blade of the English.
On her part, Rourke doesn’t do her film any favours, hardly attempting to smoothen out the kinks in the storytelling. Because of her theatrical background (she has been artistic director of the Donmar Warehouse theatre in London since 2012), the scenes have a staged-in feel, which adds to the overall stiltedness of the film. And what are we to make of the token diversity inclusions, including Gemma Chan as Elizabeth’s confidante Elizabeth Hardwicke, Adrian Lester as the English ambassador to Scotland Lord Randolph, and Ismael Cruz Córdova as Mary’s gay lady-in-waiting David Rizzio? Do we really need to practise such colour-blind casting; if so, why not go all the way and cast Chan or someone Chinese to play Mary or Elizabeth?
Even with strong lead performances by both Ronan and Robbie, ‘Mary Queen of Scots’ is a misbegotten period drama that should have left to die quietly when Scarlett Johannson dropped out of the title role back in 2012. However noble its intentions of female empowerment, it undermines itself by botching what its titular character represents, as well as that of her obvious foil. If you’re going to manipulate history, the least you could do is to make it worthwhile, and do so for good reason. Unless you wish to gaze at opulent sets and lavish costumes, you’d find nothing to enjoy about this period bullshit, so do not bother indulging it with your time.
Movie Rating:
(Muddled, incoherent and pointless, this period political thriller takes dramatic liberties with Tudor history and turns it into period bullshit)
Review by Gabriel Chong
|
ACADEMY AWARD WINNERS 2019Posted on 23 Feb 2019 |
| « Prev | 377 | 378 | 379 | 380 | 381 | 382 | 383 | 384 | 385 | 386 | 387 | Next » |
Most Viewed
No content.