Shed Your Tears And Walk Away Review

In Shed Your Tears And Walk, documentary film maker Jez Lewis returns to his hometown of Hebdon Bridge, Yorkshire, to try and discover why so many of the people he grew up with are dying of overdoses (drugs, alcohol or both) or else committing suicide. Lewis spends much of his time in the local parks where a significant portion of the town’s population, some still in their teens, many in their early twenties, go each day to get absolutely wasted on their poison of choice. He talks to a great number of people in his attempt to get to the bottom of why such a small town should have become so plagued by a very public waste of human life but the film centres on his friend Cass, seemingly off heroin but destroying himself with alcohol and never seen without a can of Special Brew. Lewis follows Cass being given just two years to live if he doesn’t change and his attempts to turn things around for himself, some abortive, some more successful, but always on that knife edge of reverting back to his old ways at any moment.

Shed Your Tears And Walk Away (the title coming from something Cass’ friend Silly says near the beginning of the film to describe his reaction to his own brother’s death) is an affecting, genuinely upsetting film. It is a stark look at alcoholism and drug addiction and it is made all the more frightening by the fact that Lewis is simply unable to come to a conclusion as to why it has come to this. There are potential explanations certainly, the absence of a Father or significant Father figure plays a reoccurring role in many of the people’s stories. Boredom is rife, opportunities limited, education or ambition nowhere to be found and a sense of alienation hangs permanently in the air. But even collectively, these answers seem insufficient. Several people die during the course of the documentary, including at least one that Lewis introduces us to. He has had five or six funerals in the last year and the parks and public spaces are filled with young men and women drinking and injecting themselves to death. This feels like a plague without a motive and the most frightening thing about that hypothesis is that it is also therefore a plague without an apparent cure.

What was staggering to me watching the film was the way honesty and denial could co-exist. Lewis’ interviewees talk of the epidemic of deaths in the town, talk of the “fucking idiots” who do whatever drugs they are doing as they themselves slur their way through the interviews with the ubiquitous Special Brew firmly in hand at all times. The same answers come up time and again as Lewis asks them why they’re doing what they’re doing. “It’s shit here isn’t? It’s shit. There’s nothing else to do.” Lewis suggests that they could leave the town but they all then respond that they don’t want to leave their mates and a couple of people are honest enough to admit that they are as frightened to leave as they are terrified to stay. This quickly brings you to the issue of people having to help themselves at the end of the day but the film gives the sense that none of these people see a way out. There is a resignation to this being their lot, awareness that it’s grim but the feeling that it can’t change. It’s very easy on the outside looking in to scream at them to just get on a train to anywhere and start again but the atmosphere is stifling and suffocating, their pain utterly palpable and you have a very strange sense that, even if they left the place now, the town would somehow always be with them. This becomes tragically and depressingly apparent when Cass, having left Hebdon Bridge for rehab in London and managed to stay off the drink for several months, produces a can of Special Brew on the train as he takes a dreadfully judged trip back home. His reasoning is that he wants to see the old place to renew his own sense of personal growth and change but you just know he does not have the strength or the will to maintain sobriety in the face of unremitting addiction. This gives weight to the argument that these people are simply addicts and there is nothing more mysterious about it than that. That each individual is an addict is all too apparent and undeniable. But quite why a significant portion of a small town ends up dead or dying from substance abuse is a much tougher and more disturbing question. The ending of the film felt abrupt as I watched it but, thinking about it afterwards (and you will definitely think about it afterwards) there was probably nothing else to show. We have seen these people at their worst, there are apparently no answers or solutions, what is left to say?

Lewis films the whole thing himself and is a presence throughout the entire film. You get a sense of his increasing panic as, more than once, he has to intervene in Cass’s situation to bail him out. He comes across as a man genuinely desperate to get to the bottom of a seemingly insurmountable problem and, even as he threatens to walk away, you just know he won’t be able to do it. I hate describing good films as “depressing” as that immediately puts people off going to see them but there is no way around it, Shed Your Tears And Walk Away is a depressing look at the dark side of a strangely picturesque little town. In a tiny release, the film is only playing at the ICA but, if you can manage it, it is well worth your time. Tragic, heartfelt, moving, it is a difficult watch but a film that will stay with you for a long time.

8/10

Dogtooth Review

I actually saw Dogtooth last weekend but I’ve been holding off writing the review because I needed to give the film time to settle. I wouldn’t be much good as a professional reviewer would I? “Yes I know this film was released a fortnight ago but I’ve been letting it settle.” Actually, a quick look at Empire’s website reveals it was released April 16th… Whoops! Anyone reckon I’ll be three weeks late reviewing Tom Cruise in Knight And Day (“I’m the guy! I’m the guy!”) Liam Neeson in The A Team or Sly Stallone in The Expendables? Well who cares? The heart wants what it wants.

Anyhoo…

Watching Dogtooth, I REALLY wasn’t sure about it. It’s very, very slow, the single location stifling, its subject matter difficult and challenging. But Dogtooth has stayed with me, its many dark and disturbing moments nestling and taking permanent residence in my mind as I look back and think… who the fuck comes up with something like this?!?

A married couple (never given names) keep their three children permanently confined to the house and the garden, somewhere in the Greek countryside. The Father is the only one who leaves the house, driving to work each day. The children, two sisters and a brother, are in their late teens/early twenties but, despite being physically mature, are still basically infants in their minds, their notion of the “real world” where cats are dangerous predators and indeed the entire world beyond the walls of the house are filled with unrelenting dangers, completely manufactured and contrived by their parents. This is done seemingly to preserve the parents’ notion of their children’s innocence, although their exact motivations are never fully articulated and are open to interpretation. The son experiences the bizarre contradiction of emotional childlike innocence with the sexual appetites typical of a young man and to satisfy his desires, the Father brings home Christina, security guard at his place of work. Christina of course can’t help but bring some sense of the outside world with her and, as the children’s behaviour as a result of their upbringing intensifies and the parents’ controlling lies necessarily deepen to compensate for her influence, well, you just know that none of this is going to end well.

One of the things that strikes you watching the film is the matter-of-fact way it deals with its material. There are moments of dreadful violence, explicit nudity and sex (God bless the Europeans) and the piece as a whole is very, very dark. But there is never any hysteria, or for that matter, much in the way of the traditional cinematic build up that signals something bad is about to happen. These moments occur suddenly and spontaneously, much as most acts of sex or violence do in real life. Music is used incredibly sparsely and much of the film occurs in the beautifully sunny back garden, complete with fantastic looking swimming pool, the bright visuals serving to underscore the darkness of the story. The film definitely takes some getting into. Around fifteen minutes in I found myself becoming irritated and very much needing the film to “click” which it did do, but I wonder now if that had something to do with my reticence to jump on board for the rest of it at the time. Very little actually happens and the various things the family get up to, the sampling of anaesthesia to pass the time, play fights that would be harmless if they were children except that they’re very much not children and so real damage is done, and Christina’s visits, have an anecdotal, incidental feeling to them.

Interesting also is the sense of bone dry humour that permeates the film. Writer/director Giorgos Lanthimos finds the blackly comic in scenes that should be nothing but harrowing. Even as the world the parents have so carefully constructed begins to unravel around them, there are moments when you simply don’t know whether to be appalled or amused. It’s this sense of world that is the best thing about the film. 97% of Dogtooth occurs in one location but the characters and their situation are so believable (which is weird given how outrageous the story is) that you absolutely feel drawn into a bizarre, unsettling and completely new world. This is one of the best examples of a film that makes a distinction between its world and its setting, the world strange and uncomfortable, the setting seemingly mundane and familiar and it’s this disconnect between the two that contributes enormously to the tone and atmosphere of the piece. Whatever way you react to the film, what's for certain is the fact that you've never seen anything like it before.

Dogtooth is not a film for everyone. To be perfectly honest, I'm not entirely sure it's a film for me. But it’s disturbing and odd in the best possible way, claustrophobic and unafraid to push buttons and provoke. It’s incredibly detailed (sometimes painfully so) completely thought through and executed with understated confidence in the most unflinching way imaginable. It’s also a film that gets under your skin, crawls into your brain, curls up into a ball and refuses to go away. The only solution? A bit of Tom Cruise grinning his way through a romping caper movie. Preferably as a super spy. Maybe riding a motorcycle while shooting at the bad guys. With a title that employs the worst pun in recent years.

Hey look, I’ve eaten my greens. Now I just want some dessert.

7/10

The Brothers Bloom… well it’s not really a review to be honest

Is it possible to review a film you’ve missed a considerable amount of because you were asleep? Of course it’s not real sleep, the cinema is way too loud for a good, proper sleep. It’s like the kind of non-sleep you get on long haul flights where your eyes are closed and you’re semi-dreaming but with each little shudder the plane makes, you’re basically awake again. Even if it’s possible, I’m not sure it’s fair so I think the best thing to do with The Brothers Bloom is to say, I missed much of it and it has received lots of good reviews so take from that what you will. What I saw of it annoyed, irritated and bored me quite considerably. I’m not a fan of con movies generally and I hate quirky films (“Look at me! I’m so quirky! What will I do next?”). Brothers Bloom is meant to be “charming” but I found it very, very grating.

A late night the night before coupled with an early screening probably didn’t help but whatever. Not for me. However I probably haven’t given it a fair go so I won’t presume to score it.

On the plus side it’s better than Shrink.

No Ellie don’t do it…You can’t make me…Think of the children Ellie…Won’t SOMEONE think of the children!!!!

The great thing about this blog is the autonomy I have to write the reviews the way I want to write them. Sometimes I forget there even is an editor-in-chief in charge of the whole affair. Until days like this. When she pounces. Like a cobra. A cobra issuing instructions to her film reviewer that go against every atom of his being.

Sigh…

Shrink is released this week.

I was hoping this cinematic abomination would just quietly yet shamefully die in a corner of the room. But I’ve been asked by SOMEONE to remind everyone that this utter waste of celluloid is getting its cinema release this week. I’m not going to repeat myself. Here’s my original review:

http://eggmagmovies.blogspot.com/2010/04/shrink-review.html

Ignore Empire’s 4 star review. It’s wrong, wrong, wrong. This weekend sees the release of The Brothers Bloom (Rian Johnson’s much delayed follow up to Brick) and Michael Winterbottom’s highly controversial The Killer Inside Me. If you’re escaping the sunshine for a movie this weekend try either of those. I’m hoping to have them both reviewed by next week but, even though I haven’t seen them, I’ll bet, no, I’ll GUARANTEE that they’re better than Shrink. Go see Prince Of Persia. Bollox to it, go all out and drag a razor across your eyeballs by seeing Sex and the Fucking City. Go to the beach, do a fun run, play Buckaroo, do anything, ANYTHING but go see Shrink.

I’ve done what I was asked to do! Damn you Ellie Good! Damn you straight to egg-hell!!!

Sex And The City 2 Review

Fuck. That. Film.

No I haven't seen it but, whatever.

Fuck. That. Film.

Four Lions Review

“Fuck mini baby bells” might just be my favourite line in a film so far this year. It comes from dim witted, would be terrorist Waj, in response to an anti-Western rant from his brother Omar justifying their particular Jihad. It’s one of many brilliant lines from writer/director Chris Morris in this somewhat scattershot but funny and, at times, moving tale of the eponymous four lions' attempt to martyr themselves by blowing up the London marathon.

That’s basically it for story. Omar and Waj travel to Pakistan for training. Meanwhile convert Barry recruits rapper Hassan to the cause and nervous Fessel worries over making the bombs and starring in the obligatory homemade video with a box over his head to preserve his identity. On the downside, Four Lions feels like it belongs more on TV than in a cinema. Scenes don’t feel like they build upon each other to form narrative as much as they come and go as funny, engaging, stand alone segments. In fact they feel less like scenes and more like individual sketches, a product perhaps of Morris’ background and that of his writing partners Jesse Armstrong and Sam Bain, most famous for writing Peep Show. At a certain point this started to get to me and I found my interest waning. This also means that the finale could come at any time because there isn’t much of a sense of narrative build. We could get our protagonists to London now, half an hour ago or not for another hour; let’s just see what happens. On top of that, the gags come thick and fast and I personally found that there were as many that missed the mark as hit. In particular, I simply didn’t believe the character of Waj. Moments like him mistaking chickens for rabbits and asking who was on the phone after Omar makes the telephone gesture with his hands and talks into it while making a speech are big, obvious gags, and indeed had many people in the audience I saw it with laughing hysterically. This is a character type that is very recognisable from television sitcoms. Going back to Malary in Family Ties all the way through to Joey in Friends via Dougal in Father Ted, many sitcoms use slow, stupid, dim-witted characters to provide much of the humour with their ineptitude. The problem for me is that this is a film, not a sitcom, and, on the big screen, I found the character unbelievable and the humour obviously scripted rather than coming naturally from the situations and characters. Because all of the humour that works does come from the characters and situations, it just makes this all the more apparent. Also, much of the mock arguing and pretend rambling suffered from this same problem; it felt staged and scripted and I didn’t quite believe it. I would have been interested to see what Morris as writer would have done with a more experienced film director guiding the material. Also, given Morris’ background, particularly thinking about Brass Eye, I was actually expecting the film to go closer to the bone. Having made the decision to tackle this material, the film ends up playing it surprisingly safe.

But this is to get the negatives out of the way so as to concentrate on the positives. Four Lions is generally well written and very well acted, particularly by its lead Riz Ahmed as the only marginally less hapless Omar leading the quartet towards their destiny. Omar is radicalised yet also Westernised, his slightly more free form Islam contrasting with the rigidity of that of his brother Ahmed who believes in Islam at its most Old Testament (to mix my religions) but is utterly opposed to the violence his brother espouses. This makes for a really interesting juxtaposition between a character steeped in his religion, with all the negatives (from our perspective) that goes along with this, particularly in the treatment of women, but who is ultimately peaceful and a character who has probably never read the Qur’an all the way through and is, on the surface, more “acceptable” (again, from a Western perspective) but has latched onto a popularised, corrupted misinterpretation of the faith and is capable of killing innocent people as a result. It’s also interesting how all the references of the would be Jihadists are Western, to the point where a character at the Pakistani training camp refers to Waj and Omar as being like Mr Bean, Rambo and James Bond. Hassan reveres Tupac but is later outed as a Maroon 5 fan. This goes alongside numerous anti western rants and tirades. It’s a subtle and very deliberate contradiction in the writing of the characters that reveals the absurdity of their ill informed opinions and actions. The film is laugh out loud funny and its humour ranges from the witty to the slapstick, the death of one character at the hands of the guys’ own bombs branded as martyrdom because he also happened to kill a sheep for example. The police and other security forces emerge as every bit as useless as the cell they are chasing and this results in one of the film’s funniest moments when two snipers, under orders to take out the terrorists dressed up as fun runners, can’t distinguish between a Wookie and the Honey Monster and engage in an extended argument about the differences between the two over their radios.

The film also has a couple of very striking and moving scenes, Omar saying goodbye to his wife before setting off to blow himself up, and explaining the notion of suicide bombing to his young son through use of The Lion King are the two standouts. The latter reminded me of that horrible yet brilliant and compelling scene in Happiness when paedophile Dylan Baker explains his proclivities to his son who is upset that his Dad doesn’t want him. Four Lions doesn’t quite push its scene that far but it’s cut from the same cloth and resonates amidst the mayhem of much of the rest of the film. That mayhem, one would hope, won’t distract audiences from the very serious nature of the material and the importance of discussing the topic. Four Lions is satirical, pointed, intelligent and funny. Everything you’d expect from the man who made Phil Collins talk about “nonce sense.”

And yes this review is weeks late, I know. What can I say? I've been busy enjoying the sunshine!

7/10

Heartless Review

Sometimes I hate London. £12.95 to sit in what amounts to an oversized living room at 5.00pm on a Tuesday in Leicester Square to watch Heartless. I have a Cineworld Unlimited Pass but of course Cineworld weren’t showing it so I had to stump up the cash. Also, as much as I love Mark Kermode, I think I need to get savvier to the films he likes. Heartless was his film of the week last week. Admittedly it was a pretty shabby week for films but even still. He wasn’t alone though. There were a few middling to decent reviews for this British horror film from writer/director Philip Ridley, his first film in 13 years. The link to this blog on the spankingly, awesomely refurbished Eggmag website warns readers that “I’m a hard man to please.” But honestly, I don’t LIKE being negative, I don’t ENJOY coming down on films, particularly when I’ve PAID £12.95 to sit in an oversized living room to watch them.

Enough preamble. With emphasis on the amble.

Jim Sturgess plays Jamie Morgan, a young man with a heart-shaped birthmark across his face. Jim wears his hood up constantly to shield himself from the stares and taunts he regularly receives. Jamie lives in the East End where gangs of hoodies prowl the streets. Except that in this film, hoodies may not be the young kids we’ve all come to know, but actual demons lurking in the shadows. There is a lot of are they/aren’t they demons, a family tragedy, a pact with the Devil, lots of heart ripping, a truly hilarious use of cling film and a last act that, suggests it’s offering a few conclusions and is letting you make up your own mind but, for me, was emphasising one particular interpretation in the pursuit of a twist that amounts to nothing more than a pretty lame cliché.

Which is a shame because there are points of interest in Heartless. The idea of the hooded gangs as demons is a nice one. This works best when we catch glimpses of hoods disappearing behind walls or buildings but even when we first see an actual demon beneath the hood (not actually the spoiler it appears to be, don’t worry) it’s a surprisingly convincing effect. London’s East End is shot in a suitably grimy, graffiti covered way which makes for some atmospheric shots and moments and Jim Sturgess delivers a good performance, even if his character is hampered by being somewhat one note. Apart from Sturgess, the acting is very hit and miss however with Jamie’s wayward nephew in particular managing to ruin the scenes he is in. Also watch out for Noel Clarke making a great bid for the 2010 Most Pointless Character award.

There are a couple of insurmountable problems. The first is that what we basically have here is a new take on the old Faustian story which is fine. But it takes an absolute age for the Devil, or Papa B as he is known here (I wonder if I could get people to call me Papa G?) to turn up. Papa B’s entrance and the deal he strikes with Jamie is basically the crux of the film but we spend way too long watching and following the demons first which, though a nice idea as I say, in the end becomes somewhat redundant to the narrative. It’s no great spoiler to reveal that what Jamie wants is to lose his birthmark. The way this is dealt with though is very unconvincing and kind of over the top. The birthmark has left Jamie something of a recluse, single, living with his Mum etc etc etc. The birthmark is definitely evident and, I guess you could say disfiguring, and I’m certainly not naïve enough to think that people wouldn’t have some reaction, but people stare and recoil and react as if his head had been dipped in acid and was about to fall off completely. This happens repeatedly and to the point of being kind of laughable. It would have been much more interesting if, for example, people had not reacted at all and Jamie’s self consciousness and confidence issues had still been there. This would have made it much more of a character issue, an internal issue, and made his pact with the Devil more tragic as a result. As it was, I found it difficult to believe. The aftermath of the deal, in which things go briefly right for Jamie, is thoroughly unconvincing and by the time we get to the cling film (rocketing its way into the top 5 favourite scenes of the year list) the heart ripping and the cop out ending, the film and its near two hour running time have long outstayed their welcome.

As with Alice Creed, I’m trying to give British horror and thriller a go but it’s just not happening. At least it’s not for me. A couple of nice scenes, a few moody shots and one or two good ideas do not make a film. Heartless was in need of a restructure at the script stage to focus its story and intentions but never received it. An opportunity wasted.

4.5/10