Catching up on Cinema

Now the bad weather has officially arrived I have attempted to catch up on my cinema viewing. Indeed one Thursday I attempted to see all three of the films on my list in one go but couldn't get the timing right. I had to settle for two that day and the third the following day. I could have fitted them all in the one day if I had been willing to go into the evening but that would have meant gaps outside the theatre trying to get fed and what have you. I saw "Me and Orson Welles" and "Harry Brown" together and "2012" the next day. If I were going to rate the films in order of quality that would probably be the same order, although all three were very entertaining.

"Me and Orson Welles" stars Zac Efron of "High School Musical" fame as a young student who gets himself into the 1930 Mercury Theatre production of "Julius Caesar" by the then 22 year old Orson, already an acclaimed genius. This was the first film my agent offered me an extra part in but it was before I retired officially so I couldn't take the opportunity offered. The film was filmed here in the UK and particularly in the Isle of Man, although the result on the screen looks authentically American. Richard Linklater as director obviously loved the material and obviously admires Orson Welles. In Christian McKay he finds a performance that totally convinces in looks, voice and mannerisms. The young Orson Welles is a genius but a really exasperating one and a lot of time is spent awaiting his arrival. The backstage view of the Mercury Theatre production are wonderful for an old theatrical ham like me. There is a reference to the bad luck that is bound to strike every production and the hope that it strikes before the dress rehearsals and opening night. Personal experience makes me accept that this concept of bad luck may exist as I am more superstitious than logical when involved in theatre. There are lovely performances from Ben Chaplin as the English actor playing Mark Anthony and from Eddie Marsan as the now legendary John Houseman. I was especially taken by Claire Danes (no surprise there, I can hear my regular readers comment) as Sonja Jones, a sort of production assistant. Sonja is certainly quirky and a little other worldly while being more worldly than our hero, young Richard played by Zac Efron. The latter actor of course is making the painful transition from teenage heart throb to dramatic lead.I thought he made the transition successfully. He is cursed with extravagant good looks, dark floppy hair and piercing light eyes (such as a younger George Clooney) but works against this to provide a believable performance as the young man given the opportunity to play Lucius to the Brutus of Orson Welles on a whim of the great man. I loved the theatrical rehearsal sequences and loved the fact that a production acclaimed now as a masterpiece was so nearly a disaster. Orson Welles is given to worrying that the inevitable "bad luck" of a production strikes before dress rehearsal and opening night. Recent personal experiences mean I now share this concern.

Harry Brown has been described as the English "Gran Torino", which I think I reviewed in an earlier post. There are similarities in plot as elderly ex-servicemen and widowers aim to avenge a friend's death by doling out their own form of justice. Both films are blessed with leading performances by great cinematic actors in Caine and Eastwood. I think the American film has the slight edge in being directed by Eastwood himself, who qualifies as one of the very best directors outdoing the Europeans at subtlety. The English film is directed by a young débutante, Daniel Barber. He does a very good job and certainly his film is very English and very contemporary. Both leads convince as ex-servicemen leading lonely lives, although Eastwood is slightly more convincing as ex-Korean war veteran. Both sets of experience impinge on the situation they find themselves in their respective films. Strangely enough the English film is far more violent and in-yer-face than the American one. I also felt the scale was more television than cinema. The American film offered a more universal angle and a solution to the same set of problems than did the English film. I would like to see both films again and back to back.

2012 stars John Cusack. It is described as an epic adventure about a global cataclysm bringing an end to the world and the heroic struggle of the survivors. Directed by Roland Emmerich of "Independence Day" and "Day After Tomorrow", the film is packed with great cinematic set pieces of vast destruction. It is also laden with a pathetic script and some gaping flaws in logic! Cusack does try to hold the film together as does Chiwetel Ejiofor but both are outdone by Woody Harrelson as Charlie Frost. The scale of the events leaves little room for the humans. It certainly is a treat for the eyes and the ears although the brain feels a little neglected after a running time of 158 minutes. I think it's better than "10,000 B.C." but spectacular action cannot compensate for poor scripts and poor understanding of human psychology. Emmerich should spend more time looking at "Harry Brown" and "Gran Torino" to learn we are interested in how other human beings react in unusual situations - somewhere there is a quote about nothing is more illuminating in cinema than a close up of the human face!