Bored Now's Home Viewing

Dr Jekyll & Sister Hyde (1971)

         Legendary Hammer craftsman Roy Baker Ward here turns his hands to twisted, and ripe spin on the classic horror tale.  Once again set in Victorian, London, Dr Jekyll (Raph Bates) embarks upon a radical experiment, using fresh female hormiones from stolen corpses in an attempt to wipe out common diseases.  Of course this madcap venture back fires famously, and the result is the creation of Jekyll's highly sexualized and deadly female alter-ego Sister Hyde!  Soon, things get out of hand and there is a killing spree across Whitechapel, with the lives of Susan Spencer and her brother Howard, also intengled.

The subversion of plot and characters is a cruical part of this malodramtic horror, and the scene is nicely set by David Whitaker's heightened, score, which in itself, plays like a character in the film.  The classical opening piece of music, drifts along beside, the gentle deep redness of a velvet curtain.  This gives us a setup for what is to come.  During the opening scene, Ward's camera drifts from a shot of a dead rabbit and the butcher who killed it, we then take in the sleepy Victorian landscape, with a whole host of murky characters in a busy town centre.  This leads us to a joyful call girl on her way to turn tricks. However, rather than showing us her journey in linear fashion, Ward intercuts this, with a Policeman approaching, and further shots of the butcher and the knife.  We then cut sharply back to the call girl who is suddenly, and brutally murdered by a knife! This use of discontenity editing, throws the viewer in and out of the scene, and makes them question what is about to occur, or even who is commiting the murder.  Things are further complicated by the shot of the Policeman standing over the dead body, before cutting to Dr Jekyll who is revealed as the real killer. 

The direction also navigates through tight spaces, creating fresh life to what otherwise could have been, stuffy, and flat sequences.  I like the camera movements, during an early scene where Jekyll first meets with Prof. Robertson (Gerald Sim).  The shots are fluid for the most part, keeping a tight track of the characters back and fourth conversation.  Their quick movements, and buttoned up dialogue hints at something more theatrical lurking, but then the tightly framed close-ups and fragmented shots, such as Robertson's cheeky gaze at Susan Spencer (Dorothy Alison), for whom he has quickly become attracted to, suggest a televisional mode of direction.  But, whereas many directors would linger on these shots, in stand Ward wipes us back into the Robertson's interaction with Jekyll.  Such close-ups and framing of character's expressions also serve the function of the cheesy and observational form of comedy.  Lewis Fiader as Howard, Susan's brother, often resembles a sly, camp, Carry On outcast.  His dry features play off, the naughty suggestions of his lines and delivery, such as the moment when he finds out that Jekyll appears to be entertaining a female (in fact he has seen sister Hyde).  His struggle to restrain the glee and ripe delivery of the line, "who would have thought that Dr Jekyll would know a woman like that, didn't know he had it in him."  There is even some good camp joy to be had in the suggestion than Howard's jealousy over Susan's interest in Jekyll is linked to a certan romantic torch he might hold for his sibling.  His playful smirk, following her suggestion that he carry a box, "you did want to help afterall" could be a brief nod to this.  

Of course, these slight mannered character moments, are later subverted into something all the more malodramtic, twisted and rich.  The transformation scene of Jekyll into Sister Hyde is a delightfully, playful, and yet unhinging piece of film.  Bates perfectly sells the conflict and struggle of the character.  The scene again blends dramatic acting, with something more thearical.  The visual style and movements of the character upon transforming, are inventively chronographed through the rich music, and wide open space of the scene.  Martine Beswick as Sister Hyde then does a fine job of portraying the devilish rapture of the more confident, yet sister personality.  The loss of control during the shot of him/her feeling the breast in the mirror, is the perfect round off to a truly remarkable scene.

Again, as a point of contrast, some of the murder scenes have multed colour tones, the setpieces delivered with some of the fine precision of some of Dario Argento's finest killings.  As the tension builds, the odd seduction scenes such as the one with the Prof. are super fun, and yet minor connect the dots moments, in order to the lead us to the character's final third struggle/breakdown which is gloriously camp fun, filled with dramatic flair, and stylish energy.  The ending is maybe a bit predictable, but then it was never a film about the ending.  A cult gem, as rich and joyful, as perhaps any screen version of the original text.

Keith Beard.

Bored Now at the Movies

Hitchcock/Truffaut (2015)

       Kent Jone's concise document of the famous meeting between French New Wave marrick      Truffaut and the older statesman of supense Alfred Hitchcock is almost as tightly woven and 

 full of cinematic verve and richness as a Hitchcock masterpiece.

The film nicely balances several strands and themes, which is bookended by crucial transcripts of the interview between the two directors, and some in-depth analysis of Hitchcock films as described by a impressive range of modern filmmakers.  The two highlights from the talking heads for me came from Martin Scorsese in his explanation of the banality of the connect the dots moments in Psycho, and a very telling query by David Fricher in wondering just how the modern power houses of acting such as Pacino and De Niro would re-act to Hitchcock's highly demanding regime?  To me this raised a very modern concept of actings having too much power on the set, and the suggestion that the idea of the auteur director could be a fading one.  This is a rare moment in which Jones examines Hitchcock's suspect treatment of actors, espcially those of actresses.  A element which is randomally nodded at by Richard Linklater at one stage, but then I guess that would have been a different film.  The least successful talking head I felt was James Gray.  His moments of hyperbolic interjections felt forced, and served to over state the director's role, almost as if he is trying over shadow both Hitchcock and Truffaut himself.

The film makes a compelling case for Hitchcock being undervalued at the time, and further suggest the irony that his most commercially successful spell was all too brief a period.  It presents Truffaut as a champion of the underappreciated artist, and his influence on showcasing Hitchcock's true talents.  A thrilling and engaging cinematic document throughout.

Keith Beard.

Bored Now at the Movies

Deadpool (2016)

       One of the most eagerly anticipated comic book adaptations of recent years, and conversely, one  of the best reviewed movies of 2016 so far. Deadpool is also notable as being the first ever eighteen  certificate comic book picture in history.  It is the filmmaker's desire to make the film more edgy,and  to keep the comic book audience on side which I believe its big flaws.

The ever improving Ryan Reyolds takes on the title role as former special forces operative Wade Wilson who following a tortuous experiment at the hands twisted, but flash wiz kid Ajax (Ed Skrein),develops abnormal healing powers, allowing him to morph into Deadpool, an rogue anti-hero out for revenge.  Stand-up and improv guy T.J. Miller plays geeky best friend and bartender Weasel, Morena Baccarin plays girlfriend Vanessa whom Wade can't face following the physical results of the treatment, and subsequently must win back/rescue from Ajax.  Stefan Kapicic and Brianna Hildebrand play Deadpool's oddball partners in crime Colossus and Negasonic Teenage Warhead respectively. 

The one big positive is Reyold's charismatic performance.  His deadpan, and sharp witted delivery is well suited for this more sacarstic and cynical comic book hero. The actor also smoothly embodies the physicality of Wade/Deadpool.  Some of the action setpieces are well staged, and the film has a slick, but distinctly gritty visual palette.  However, these aspects also highlight the massive issues with Deadpool.  Firstly, yes Reyold's does steady job in the title role, but I he does well within a restricted characterisation.  By making the character so cold, and frankly unlikeable, the film distances him from the viewer (or at least this viewer).  As a result, Wade/Deadpool lacks the complex humanity seen for example, in the recent Batman films.  The upshot is that when he embarks on his revenge mission and attempts to save his ex-girlfriend I just didn't care.  Of course, this is part of the film attempting to be post-modern and edgy.  Call me old fashioned, but I like to be invested in these things.  Personally, I never cared when Wade was supposedly dying because I never liked Wade, and I cared even less about his mission to save Vanessa, because I never for one minute believed that he truly loved her.

The self-referential, comic book humour is just too heavy handed, and the results of this, along with the film's attempts to appeal too much to its core audience creates multiple problems. The action sequences may have a certain zip and style to them. On the other hand, the over relience on slow motion camera movements, and overally stylized violence gives them a dated feel, and to me they seemed too derivative of early Tarantino films and The Matrix, you know those films released during the mid-late 90s!  Many of these scenes are attempting to be too clever by half, in fact much of the film in general is.  The post-modern humour is taken to the extreme.  It gets to the point where every five seconds a scene will be broken up so that a character, normally Deadpool can break the fourth wall, or force feed us a random pop-culture reference which has no impact on the characters or story.  When it works well, post-modern humour is a brief moment, which works because the audience has character engagement outside of it, and because it is working to add to an established character(s) within the universe of the film/television show.  In this case we get over drawn out, smug, and dense running commentaries which breaks up the flow of the narrative too much.  As a result of appealing too much to the core comic book audience, the gender politics are outdated, and rotten. Simply speaking the treatment of women is sexist.  Poor Baccarin (known for credible roles in Firefly and Homeland) represents the stereotypical, highly sexualised, nerdy geek babe, who is always in position to serve her man.  Basically, Vanessa is the idealised dream girl for the largely teenage and male comic book crowd.  The other female representations are reduced to a mix of weird, but quirky, or weird and muscle bound.  Depressing.  

Keith Beard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xithigfg7dA

Bored Now at the Movies

Hail, Caesar! (2016)



The Coen brothers have had a very mixed history with comedy.  Due to its unique visual style and oddball humour, plus a fantastic cast the Big Lebowski (1998) proved a landmark in 90s pop culture, whereas The Hudsucker Proxy (1994), Raising Arizona (1987), and their 2004 remake of the much loved Ladykillers produced a mixed bag of results between them.  However, the film of theirs which hit a bum note of smugness was Burn After Reading (2008).  It was a classic example of a one note comedy stretched way too far, and it seemed to me like the Coens and their Hollywood buddies having way too much fun, whilst forgetting that they were actually making a movie...

          Hail, Caesar! belongs in the upper section of those films.  For me it was a gloriously cheeky, and visually delightful pastiche of the golden age of Hollywood made by filmmakers who understand the conventions, and are in a position to critique them.  Josh Brolin plays Eddie Mannix an uptight and conservative Hollywood Executive who throughout the film is at constant pains to keep the private lives of his stars (Scarlett Johansson, Alden Ehrenreich) under wraps or at the very least to control the story and put a positive spin on it.  Things take a turn for the worse when troubled leading man Baird Whitlock (George Clooney) goes AWOL during the filming of the high budget epic Hail, Caesar!  The production is thrown into chaos as a result.

       Without ever attempting to be a shocking or stinging attack on the Hollywood system (perhaps because the Coens know on what side their bread is buttered?), Hail, Caesar! is a wonderfully layered and thrilling visual delight which still has plenty of fun at the expense of the eccentric nature  of the movie business, and its performers.  What I really enjoyed about the film was how it played to the target audience of film buffs or people of a certain age looking for a nostalgia trip, and doesn't sell out its values for a wider audience.  For example the sub-plot where Whitlock is kidnapped by the communist writers eager for him to join them in rebelling against the studios is very much a niche joke. A stand out scene for me was the one where Mannix calls a meeting with a collection of religious figures in an attempt to get the portrayal of Christ right in HC.  Not only does the scene play wonderfully on the safeness of Hollywood politically, but to me it seemed to be parodying the flaws of writing committees within the industry.

      The trick of the film is that the humour and insider gags never feel smug, or serve as a device to distance the audience from the world of the film.  The framing of the film within the film scenes are seamless and done with an air of authticity, which sucessfully immerses the audience within those scenes, while allowing the joke to work organically.  For example, the lavish, and yet kitsch muscial scene featuring Burt Gurney (Channing Tatum) and his fellow sailors is credible in its visual flair, and because of the audience's knowledge of such throw back musicals. Yet the scene is heightened on a performance level just enough sell the parody without being heavy handed, and of course the context of viewing it in 2016 adds further self-referential humour.



          The cast of familiar Coen brothers favourites (maybe an inside gag in itself) all deliver hughly enjoyable turns, and one real surprise was new name Alden Ehrenreich who really excelled as the corny, but fragile hunk Hobie Doyle who more than anyone seems lost within the madness of Hollywood.  However, I felt that certain cast members were used all too briefly.  For example Scarlett Johansson is very effective as the spiky actress DeeAnna Moran, but only appears in a couple of scenes, while Tilda Swinton gives a smart turn as gossip columnist sisters, but once again her appearances were too brief.  I felt that the final half the film dragged at times , and perhaps some of the communist writer scenes could have been trimmed to make more room for these characters.  However, for the most part a richly enjoyable, and exciting Coen brothers film which should hold up on multiple viewings.


Keith Beard.