LADY VENGEANCE/ SYMPATHY FOR LADY VENGEANCE

Korea, 2005, 112 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Chan-wook Park.

One of the features of Korean cinema for almost the last ten years is that it has gone beyond martial arts to a proliferation of violent vengeance thrillers. Kim Ki Duk was an exponent of this kind of film before he moved to more contemplative dramas and thrillers. Kim Jee-woon does it all very stylishly so that you could feel quite guilty watching the ingenuity and style of a gangster film like A Bittersweet Life. Chan-wook Park has a worldwide reputation as well as at home. After making what looks like the beginnings of a trilogy with Sympathy for Mr Vengeance in 2001, he won the jury prize at Cannes, 2004, when (probably no surprise to see this) Quentin Tarantino headed the Jury with Old Boy. Now comes a third film, Lady Vengeance (chosen for the competition in Venice, 2005). It is stylish, thoughtful, violent.

Best to quote the director himself on his themes and gauge whether his words accurately describe his films. The main character in Old Boy says, ‘Seeking revenge is the only cure for someone who has been hurt”. The presumption is that this is the director’s own view. He says, emphatically, that it is not. ‘My view of vengeance has not changed… I still think it is the most foolish thing you can do. Revenge will do nothing to bring back what you have lost. It’s quite a simple concept, even children understand it, but adults, and sometimes even whole states, seem compelled to engage in these acts of violence’.

In the films, the central character has been cruelly victimised by an unscrupulous enemy. Old Boy has been incomprehensibly imprisoned for years and finds himself suddenly set loose and let loose. Lady Vengeance has spent thirteen years in prison, seeming the angel of kindness while all the time harbouring deep resentment and forming a network of fellow prisoners who will aid here when she is set loose and will pursue the man who destroyed her life. She meticulously goes about her plan. She was imprisoned for abducting and killing a child. The real killer has, meanwhile, killed again and again. Lady Vengeance assembles the grieving parents, along with the powerless police inspector, and tells them that the law will not do them justice. What follows is a horrific, almost ritual killing – although it is in the same vein, really, as Agatha Christie’s Murder on the Orient Express.

Where Lady Vengeance illustrates the director’s stance on the futility and the personal destructiveness of vengeance is in the use of the classical musical score and the times of quiet that the audience are given where they have an opportunity to get over the adrenalin rush or the horrified reaction and sit and contemplate what they have seen and felt before they leave the theatre. The revenge tragedy was a feature of the bloodthirsty era of Elizabethan and Jacobean times (think Hamlet). What does the revenge tragedy in Asian films say about our times?

DATE MOVIE

US, 2006, 83 minutes, Colour.
Allyson Hannigan, Fred Willard, Jennifer Coolidge, Carmen Electra, tony cox.
Directed by Jason Friedberg, Aaron Seltzer.

Yes, Scary Movie-like spoofing of romantic comedies, and crassly. No real reason to see it as it is not particularly funny and the send-ups show how good some of the originals were – although Jennifer Coolidge does a great Barbra Streisand in Meet the Fockers.

The main thing to do if you are a movie buff is to indulge in Trivial Pursuit making sure you have all the references, which include My Big Fat Greek Wedding, Shallow Hal, Meet the Parents, Meet the Fockers, Mr and Mrs Smith, Hitch, The Wedding Planner, The Wedding Crashers, Dodgeball, Jerry Maguire and a weak King Kong finale.

THE PIANO TUNER OF EARTHQUAKES

UK, 2005, 99 minutes, Colour.
Amira Cassar, Gottfried John, Assumpta Serna.
Directed by Timothy and Stephen Quay.

The Piano Tuner of Earthquakes is an exotic and difficult film. It was written and directed by the Quay Brothers, an American set of twins, Timothy and Stephen Quay, who went to London Royal College of Art and made short films. They have remained in England after a return to the United States where they worked as book illustrators. They used puppets and miniature objects in the various short films, experimental films, music videos, set design for theatre, ballet and opera. Their first feature film was Institut Benjamenta, 1995, a combination of live action and animation.

These influences are clearly seen in The Piano Tuner. In one sense, the film is less of a movie than a video installation, a moving work of art that could be viewed as people walk through a museum rather than sit in a cinema watching a narrative unfold. There are all kinds of experimental designs, machines, varying grades of colour and lack of colour to give the film its unreal atmosphere. This is an extreme example of magic realism.

The plot is difficult to follow: it focuses on an opera star about to be married, her being murdered on stage. A doctor, Dr Droz, takes her corpse to his laboratory by the ocean. He is a maker of musical automata. He also employs a piano tuner to look after his objects. Also in the household is a seductive and maternal housekeeper. The piano tuner becomes entranced with his work, with the song that he hears – only to discover that it is the opera singer brought to life and the doctor’s intention is to have her sing in his diabolical opera. He falls in love with her – and the audience realises that he is the same actor who portrayed the opera singer’s fiance.

The film is unusual, beautiful to look at in its different kind of way. Amira Cassar (The Anatomy of Hell) is the opera singer, Gottfried John, a veteran of many films as a German character is the doctor and Spanish Assumpta Serna as the housekeeper.

The film can be appreciated as an avant garde experiment rather than as a film of entertainment.

DER FREIE WILLE (THE FREE WILL)

Germany, 2006, 165 minutes, Colour.
Jurgen Vogel, Andre Hennicke.
Directed by Matthias Glasner.

The film opens with a man in his 20s gazing out to a cold sea on a bleak beach, wind blowing. Another of those European tales of existential angst. And this opening is not misleading. This is a 165 minutes close-up of a man who is minimally sympathetic, of his obsessions, his angers, his pathology, his attempts to come to terms with himself and his failure. The large philosophical question is: has this man free will for his actions and his moral decisions or is he programmed or is he continually impeded by his fragile and disturbed mental states. Can he be redeemed?

This being a German film, there are no obvious or, especially, happy answers.

Not everyone will be able to watch this film in all its detail. After a visceral scene of eruptive anger, Theo (Jurgen Vogel) rapes a woman on the beach, more viciously than we really would like to see. He is arrested and serves a gaol sentence. He has taken medication to control his libido and has been allowed to go off it. Is it possible for him to change his basic drives? Is it possible to control them?

Free Will keeps us in Theo’s company for almost three hours. He is certainly not a person we would like to be acquainted with. Yet, the film asks us to be with him, to understand as best we can, to wonder what can be done. As with paedophilia, is rage rape a drive that can be cured? Must we be realistic and pessimistic? And if so, what does society do? What do authorities do?

The other two characters at the centre of the film are a damaged man who serves as a companion/counsellor and Nettie, escaping from a dominating and possibly abusive father, who falls in love with Theo. At first repelled, she finds the good in him and hopes that she can help him.

The end is overwhelmingly downbeat, fatalistic.

THESE FOOLISH THINGS

UK, 2005, 107 minutes, Colour.
Zoe Tapper, Anjelica Huston, Andrew Lincoln, David Leon, Leo Bill, Terence Stamp, Lauren Bacall.
Directed by Julia Taylor- Stanley.

This may not be your glass of Dom Perignon (there is more of that around in this film than cups of tea, except for the poor actors who live in lower class digs, living in hope of getting and audition and a part). The setting is London, 1938-1939, the world of the West End theatre, the more genteel end while Mrs Henderson was operating the Windmill just around the corner from Shaftsbury Ave.

This film is a labour of love for the writer-director, Julia Taylor- Stanley, who has adapted a 1930s novel by Noel Langley, There’s a Porpoise Close Behind Us. However, she has so situated the screenplay in those times that it comes across very much as an anachronism: nostalgia for those who love the period, quaint (at least) for those who are unfamiliar with it. However, it is often salted a little (from the prevailing more sugary taste) by some intimations of the gay world and camp language and behaviour.

It comes across as Mills and Boon filtered through Stephen Fry.

An aspiring young actress (Zoe Tapper), daughter of a theatrical diva, tries for a career, is attracted towards a young playwright while falling in love with a sympathetic director. A vain, gay leading man tries to humiliate her and seduce the playwright. Her jealously obnoxious cousin creates mischief. However, a wealthy American entrepreneur (Anjelica Huston), the grande dame of the theatre (Lauren Bacall) and a sardonic butler (Terence Stamp) are on her side – even after her extraordinarily unconvincing audition as Ophelia which the screenplay says is marvellous.

They did talk like that in those days and in the films of those days, but now…?

SUPERHERO MOVIE

US, 2008, 75 minutes, Colour.
Drake Bell, Leslie Nielsen, Sara Paxton, Christopher Mc Donald, Kevin Hart, Keith David, Robert Hays, Robert Joy, Jeffrey Tambor, Brent Spiner, Tracy Morgan.
Directed by Craig Mazin.

After all the Scary/Date/Not Another Teenage/Epic Movie spoofs, plus Meet the Spartans, we know, more or less, what to expect from these send-ups of popular films and anything else that comes to the screenwriter’s or director’s mind.

They are corny, inexpensive skits with a functional lookalike cast (but this time we also have Leslie Nielson as well as Uncle Albert with some really crass remarks in Nielson’s deadpan style), some really corny jokes, quite a number of bodily function jokes, some spot-on satire and generally a hit or miss approach to the humour. They are short and the custom is to have about ten minutes of more plot and a number of out-takes after the final credits, much of which is often funnier than the film. Here the out-takes seem like an alternate (and sometimes better) screenplay.

Not so long after Meet the Spartans and the send-up of 300 (and a lot of US TV shows), we now have a poke at the Spiderman series, a key-scene from Batman Begins, an X- Men interlude and a dollop of the Fantastic Four. Needless to say, Drake Bell as our hero, Rick Riker (instead of Peter Parker), is not the most super of superheroes. On a school tour, he is bitten by a genetically-engineered dragonfly and becomes Dragonfly, a Spiderman would-be, except he can’t fly. (This leads to some interviews with celebrities about flying, the best one being with a Tom Cruise impersonator – he looks the part and is really one of the best imitators for a long time – and there is more of his work in the out-takes than in the film itself, which is a real bonus.) Robert Joy is the Stephen Hawking parody – heavy but clever.

Sarah Paxton plays the Kirsten Dunst lookalike and follows the Spiderman scenario quite closely as does Rick Riker’s aunt. The villain gets a lot of time and some good lines and is played by Christopher Mc Donald for even more than it is worth. Needless to say, he is an evil scientist.

The flashback to Rick’s ineptitude in causing the deaths of his parents is a spoof of Batman Begins. And the tour of Professor Xavier’s academy gets some parody of the X- Men films.

As usual, you have to have seen the originals to follow these parodies and to appreciate whether the jokes hit their mark or not. Not a really great laugh-out-loud film (except in the post-credits material) but amusingly silly.

COLLEGE ROAD TRIP

US, 2008, 83 minutes, Colour.
Martin Lawrence, Raven Symone.
Directed by Roger Kumble.

This is a G-rated Disney film for audiences of the Disney Channel (where Raven-Symone? has been a child star and has her own series) and those who enjoyed High School Musical films. (It is probably safe to say that those who do not enjoy Disney Channel movies and series will find this comedy too basic, too sentimental, too predictable). On the other hand, if you are in a good mood, it is lightly amusing, though there are reservations about the amount of teenage girl screaming that goes on when friends get together, go on trips or have sleepovers.

And then there is Martin Lawrence. And then there is Donny Osmond.

Martin Lawrence plays a devoted father who thinks he is the model of love, care and communication but who is really a control freak who can’t see that his daughter (Raven- Symone) is 17 and on her way to college (the college where he wants her to go, not far from home). When she gets an offer of a place at prestigious Georgetown and wants to go with her girlfriends for her interview, Daddy insists on taking her (and her precocious stowaway brother who has secret plans for technology for the State Department and is accompanied by his chess-playing, toilet-trained (almost) pig friend, Albert).

Of course, most things that can go wrong, do go wrong, including car breakdown, travelling on a bus with Asian tourists, completely destroying a wedding party (well, the pig started it) and Dad finishing up in jail for trespassing at the sorority house. Of course, all things that can go right, do go right, including getting to the interview one minute ahead of time (after father and daughter sky dive into Georgetown, their first jump!). And reconciliation all round.

And Donny Osmond. He portrays an impossibly cheerful American ultra-extravert father whose daughter is a chip off the old block (and so is Mum when we finally see her). They have the habit of breaking into songs from musicals at every cheerful moment (when they off a lift ‘Getting to Know You; when they leave, Goodbye, Auf Wiedersehn, Adieu etc).

But Donny Osmond does get the final joke of the film which is a good one that sums up the heavily portrayed lesson about parents letting children grow up and be themselves.

SPECIAL (RX) SPECIOPRIN HYDROCHLORIDE


US, 2006, 81 minutes, Colour.
Michael Rappaport, Paul Blackthorne, Josh Peck.
Directed by Hal Haberman, Jeremy Passmore.

A very brief drama, a tour-de-force for Michael Rappaport. The writer-directors are from a film school and the film gives the impression of a small-budget debut feature. Not that this is bad. In fact, the film is quite interesting, especially in the way that it uses contemporary themes of comics, drugs and psychological breakdown.

Les (Rappaport) is a parking ticket officer (who can be persuaded to be lenient by drivers’ crocodile tears) who lives alone. His only two friends are a pair of brothers who run a shop selling comics.

He agrees to take part in a medical experiment, taking tablets which have been designed to suppress that part of the brain which produces low self-esteem. In a short time, Les finds himself levitating (he says he had always dreamed of flying), exercising telepathic influence and able to read minds. He thwarts a supermarket robbery and sees himself as a superhero. He also sees himself as being followed by suited pharmaceutical company agents who confront and bash him.

The two brothers are concerned. Is this really happening or not?

Rappaport is able to persuade us that Les really believes all that his drug-induced condition is causing him to experience – quite an alarming portrait of psychological breakdown and paranoia.

SEX, HOPE AND LOVE/ SEX HOPP & KARLEK

Sweden, 2005, 93 minutes, Colour.
Krister Henriksson, Ing- Marie Carlsson.
Directed by Lisa Ohlin.

Sex, Hope and Love is a Swedish drama with touches of comedy, wry comedy. At its centre is a very successful TV personality who hosts a reality show called Sex, Hope and Love. When his father dies, he returns to his home town after many years and has to confront his past while having to reassess his whole life. There is his brother who stayed at home. There is the middle-aged woman who was his sweetheart when he was young and whom he left behind. She is now married to a very good man but her teenage daughter is rebellious.

The film makes great use of the atmosphere of the TV reality show, its inanity, its attempts to offer profound wisdom but highlights its superficial nature. It critiques the cult of celebrity. However, the film focuses on the middle-aged woman and the effect of the return of the celebrity to the town, on her own emotions, the quality of her marriage, a secret about her daughter. The film ends with most of the characters having learnt some wisdom and some acceptance.

This is the kind of story that Ingmar Bergman might have told in the past – but more sombrely and without the gaudy trappings.

THE INTRUDER

Belgium, 2005, 109 minutes, Colour.

Koen de Bouw, Filip Peeters, Axel Dawseleire.
Directed by Frank van Mechelen.

The Intruder is a strong Belgian drama. It has an air of mystery, a search for a missing girl – and the case opens up corruption and deceit, cover-up in a small Belgian community in the countryside.

The central character is a doctor who is devoted to his fourteen-year-old daughter whom he is bringing up by himself. She disappears and his world falls apart. Skilful at the hospital, he begins to make mistakes, act violently and spend his time, after being dismissed, searching the railway stations and other centres for his daughter.

The plot is complicated when he meets a young girl at the railway station who reacts to the photo of his daughter. He takes her home and wants her help – but is then arrested for taking home a minor. However, he has a friend in the police force who supports him. When he follows the girl to the village, with the friend of an old pensioner in a caravan, and the love of a teacher with whom he has a relationship, he begins to probe the deceits in the town, behaviour of parents, disappearances of children, sexual abuse – and official cover-up. During the hunting season, the doctor’s life is threatened by the local authorities and he uncovers a conspiracy.

The film is continually interesting, taking the audience into an enclosed community and exploring the universal values and fears and violence when such community turns in on itself.