Easy A (Will Gluck, 2010)

I’m not really a huge fan of teenage comedies so I didn’t have high expectations for this film. Nevertheless, I was pleasantly surprised.

I rolled my eyes at the plot (of course, being a teenage film, it has to revolve around virginity, it seems). Olive Penderghast (Emma Stone) lies to her friend that she slept with a guy, and it’s overheard by Marianne, a zealous Christian classmate (played by Amanda Bynes). Problem is, Marianne spreads the rumour around the school, and then of course, Olive develops a reputation as a tramp, sleeping around with every guy. In what is probably a more unusual twist, Olive actually embraces the attention and fuels these rumours but then things start getting difficult for her. Through in a few subplots and you’ve got yourself the basis of this film. Interestingly, the film is narrated as a web cam confession, where Olive is telling her side of the story and guiding the audience through the story’s events.

What I like about Easy A is that there are a plenty of one-liners and clever dialogue − I describe it as a sort of Juno-esque film. And I also found it clever that it ties in with the novel The Scarlett Letter, which Olive happens to be studying at school. One of my favourite scenes was this one:

It’s not a particularly eventful montage but one that sets up the running gag throughout the film with Natasha Bedingfield’s “Pocketful of Sunshine”. (There is also some other good music in the film, from artists like The Pussycat Dolls).

On the other hand, there are some really strange characters, such as Olive’s parents − I would love to meet parents who are actually like that, as well as a guidance counsellor with an interesting story of her own (played by Lisa Kudrow). Also, I found some of the scenes in the film very artificial and hard to believe. I’m young enough to remember my highschool experience and either the film portrays a distinctly American highschool experience, or reality is being slightly exaggerated. For instance, the fact Olive can suddenly just be best friends with Marianne, or that she can be best friends with such a seemingly opposite person, or even that Todd is somehow unconvinced by the rumours the rest of the school believes (ah, the power of love). I get that this isn’t a serious film and these instances may be serving as sarcastic instances meant to parody teenagers but to me, they seem like conveniently placed events that serve to advance the plot (and more than the usual degree of “convenience” I expect in film storylines).

Anyway, the film touches on many other teenage themes, like body image and self-esteem, friendship, loyalty and love. I like when one of the teachers talks about Facebook and how rumours can spread online, and sometimes even the mundane nature of social networks, which I found amusing. It’s actually a pretty clever way of getting a message through to teenagers about problems with online gossip.

When I heard that this film had received a Golden Globe nomination (Emma Stone for Best Actress), I’m sure I wasn’t the only person left bewildered − “Are teenage comedies like this supposed to win awards, especially when they’re competing with those more ‘serious’ drama films?” I think that’s probably a common attitude to award shows like the Golden Globes and the Oscars, an attitude which has been enforced over the years. I mean, we didn’t see anyone from American Pie winning an Academy Award, for instance? However, though there were a few unusual nominations (in my opinion), after watching this film, I wholeheartedly endorsed the nomination for Emma Stone. It was Stone’s character that really drove this film and without the performance she gave, I think the film would not have been as effective.

Yes, there were cringe-worthy moments and stereotypes, and what I feel were unrealistic situations, yet in the context of this film and with an entertaining talent like Emma Stone, these flaws were forgiven.

3.5/5

Anne Hathaway as Catwoman

Warner Bros. have announced that Anne Hathaway will play Selina Kyle (a.k.a Catwoman) in the upcoming Batman film, The Dark Knight Rises.

Christopher Nolan will be directing the film, which will also see the return of Christian Bale as Batman, as well as the addition of Tom Hardy, who is set to play Bane (a character who hasn't appeared in the Batman films since Batman & Robin in 1997.

Other stars signed up for The Dark Knight Rises include Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine.

The film is scheduled to be released in Australia on July 19, 2012 and in the USA and UK a day later.

Toy Story 3 (Lee Unkrich, 2010)

I must admit a gasp of horror came from my mouth when I found out there was going to be a third Toy Story film. Haven’t enough classics been revisited by the hungry Hollywood machine? Nevertheless, I was one of the millions of people pleasantly surprised by what is a pretty decent film.

One of the main obstacles that would’ve faced the scriptwriters was the character of Andy. Over the first two movies we saw him grow up but in this one there is no denying that Andy, who is now leaving for college, no longer plays with Woody, Buzz Lightyear and all his childhood toys. Apart from Woody, whom Andy intended to take with him, the other toys were mistakenly donated to local childcare, Sunnyside (instead of taken to the attic). What appears as a nirvana for toys soon becomes hell and Andy’s toys try to escape.

Each of the subsequent Toy Story films are freshened up with the addition of new characters − this third film was no different. The main new characters thrown into the mix this time include a revengeful and abandoned purple teddy bear, a toy baby and a Ken doll, who provides plenty of entertainment. Ken’s romance with Barbie provides a comic/dramatic subplot and some of the most amusing scenes (such as when Ken is modelling clothes for Barbie):



Then of course, there are the old favourites: Woody, Buzz, Jessie, Slinky, Rex, Mr & Mrs Potato Head, etc. It’s also good to hear the familiar voices of Tom Hanks and Tim Allen, who the film would definitely not be the same without, plus there is also Joan Cusack as Jessie and Michael Keaton as Ken. Another thing I like about Toy Story is their end credits − their either bloopers or in this case, an epilogue showing the toys’ new lives.

The beauty of Toy Story is that audiences of all ages can relate to it. There are many familiar faces and personalities of the toys, which I’m sure most people have felt attached to at some point in their life. There are also a lot of clever gags set up along the way and unlike a lot of other animations being released nowadays, it seems to be a well thought-out film with attention to detail and effort put in to keep the viewer engaged. The action is quick and there is something happened in every scene. Also, what really surprised me, was the emotional impact of some of the scenes. I know it is just a fictional story about talking toys but it somehow manages to connect with the audience at a deeper level in some parts of the film, such as the flashback to when Lotso was lost by Daisy or near the end, when the toys believe they are about to be burnt alive.

So overall, it was worth seeing the third instalment of one of the most popular animations ever made though of course, for me nothing will beat the first film of the series. I think, just like Andy, director Lee Unkrich we should finally say goodbye to this fond franchise − it’s a nice bit of nostalgia but now it’s time to grow up and put the toys away.

4/5

Oh, Woe is Me (Hélas pour moi) (Jean-Luc Godard, 1993)

This felt like a different Godard film - I think the first one I’ve watched that explores the issue of faith and God in such detail. The (minor) plot is about how the spirit of God may have entered the body of Simon (Depardieu) to experience a more carnal love and desire for his wife Rachel. Meanwhile, we see a book publisher arrive to try and investigate whether this happened.

The film features some great lines, clearly hinting at the artificiality of the situation in that they are not people but actors: “We’re not some characters in a novel”, and when Simon and Rachel are talking about break-up, Simon says “we didn’t act out that scene very well… No one bought it. Ask them.“ “we need to redo the scene”. As per usual, Godard comments on the nature of cinema itself: “Cinema language is imperfect” and quotes literary references: “Do not go gently into that good night” (said twice).

It also features some more amusing lines such as, “Did u know the Communist Manifesto was published in the same year as Alice in Wonderland?” and the intertitle: “Thus, gradually the past returns to the present through the imaginary stage of a visual experience which always draws attention”, before we hear a voice-over say “Wild Orgy”, which turns out is the name of a video that we then see, as we discover the voice is coming from a woman in a video rental shop. I can never just get used to the fact of how clever Godard is, and this film just makes me want to see a comedy film by Godard, if he ever has made one. There were some really weird sounds, such as when we hear an American voice-over saying “quit talking and start talking”, which turns out is a pinball machine which the character walks past. There’s also this weird bird noise, as well as what sounds like a French Stephen Hawking type robotic voice-over, which actually made me laugh (as well as consider whether there was a problem with my computer’s sound). Like he does in a lot of his films, the sounds often started before we saw the scene, or sometimes overlapped into the next

Onto the visuals, well the whole film was divided into sections called “books”, they weren’t very clear-cut parts and with the often multiple voice-overs at once (meaning heaps of quick subtitles to read), I didn’t have a lot of time to take in what was being said. I think maybe a dubbed version would be better. Also, I don’t know if it’s a homage to his Swiss background, but on the boat that went past neat the start, it read “italie” yet there was a little Swiss flag attached to its rear. I really liked the long shots, such as Angelique and her boyfriend (?) when the publisher (?) is spying on them from behind a tree − we see them walk past and then the shot lingers there until the spying man finally comes into the foreground. Also, some brilliant shots of Anne, where it starts of as blurry but then slowly she comes into focus as she comes closer. Those were wonderful to watch. Not to mention the amazing use of lighting, sometimes that’s all I was focused on: lights reflecting off book pages, people, etc. A big bonus of this Godard collection (made up of Passion, Prenom:Carmen, Detective and Oh, Woe is Me) is the bonus half-hour feature: “Jean-Luc Godard: a riddle wrapped in an enigma” which I discuss below.

An interesting film, not his best but some of the technical camerawork made up for any confusion in narrative (which it ends up I did comprehend, as I wasn’t sure if I was meant to think there was god in Depardieu?). Turns out that is the general consensus, added to the fact that Depardieu’s name is a play on the word God (“dieu”).

3.5/5

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Part 1) (David Yates, 2010)

Many people have praised the latest Harry Potter film as one of the best in the series and I agree. It is quite different from the earlier films, particularly the first. We see less Hogwarts students (and hardly any Hogwarts itself) and more of the wider magical community. Harry, Ron and Hermoine are out in the real world (well, ‘real’ magical world) and on the quest to defeat the darkest wizard, Lord Voldemort.

Another way this film differs is its darkness and violence − there are fewer light-hearted moments and more dramatic, intense, life and death situations. It definitely seems like the Harry Potter series is growing along with its audience. Those early fans of the books and first films are now older and this film caters to the evolving audience.

So most of this film we see the three friends try and track down the Horcruxes in order to destroy Lord Voldemort (actually it’s mainly Harry and Hermoine, as Ron is a bit more temperamental). This group of young wizards has grown and now they’re taking on huge responsibilities. While they pretty much have the future of the wizarding world relying on them to help defeat the Dark Lord, they are quite alone in this film, both physically, as they stay in quite isolated environments, and emotionally, as now with Dumbledore dead, they don’t really have any powerful adults they can trust and who understand their “mission”.

So all these elements combined into a quite entertainment film. Though I was a fan of the books and thus, would have slightly different expectations than someone unfamiliar with them, I found that I had actually forgotten of the details in the later books. So I roughly knew the story but all the same I was surprised and engaged in the story. Definitely one of the best films in the Harry Potter series − looking forward to the final one.

4.5/5