"A Single Man" (2009)

I'm by no means an unbiased reviewer. I'm not necessarily a good reviewer, because I'm not too open-minded about films in general, and my gut reaction is usually the one that stays with me throughout a film. And my gut reaction is not to like films that end unhappily. I love happy endings. There are some notable exceptions, but generally if a film is depressing, I won't like it. I don't watch films to be depressed. I suppose it's a credit to the movie if it can move me enough to make me unhappy, but I don't enjoy watching those types of movies. They are not, in my opinion, good movies.

Now that I've got that out of the way, I must admit that I did enjoy "A Single Man," despite the fact that it was incredibly depressing. One reviewer described it as Bereavement, by Dior, and that's exactly what it feels like - a long and depressing perfume advert. It looks beautiful, and some of the dialogue is very clever and heartbreaking. Colin Firth is fantastic as usual, but by no means versatile in this. He basically plays a repressed, gay version of Mr. Darcy. But the moments when he expresses his pain are phenomenal, and really the only enjoyment you can glean from the whole movie.

It follows a day in the life of a homosexual professor of English Literature, George, who is trying to cope with the loss of his partner. He contemplates suicide throughout, and the lighting is quite interesting in that it changes from gray when he's thinking about killing himself to brightly colored when confronted with reality. The whole film looks wonderful, and you can see the director, Tom Ford's, fashion sense throughout. Everyone is beautiful, and beautifully dressed, except for Nicholas Hoult, who plays a student of George's, and who wears a ghastly pink sweater in nearly every scene. I don't know what Tom Ford was thinking there.

The other major issue I had with the movie, aside from the depressing part, is that the only person you like in it is George. Everyone else seems shallow and superficial, even George's best friend, Charley (Julianne Moore), who believes his homosexuality is just a denial of his true, heterosexual feelings for her. You're not left liking anyone, or anything about George's life, and you can quite see why suicide would be his best option. The moments that are meant to uplift you often don't, and you're just left feeling that life without love is dreadful. Which it is. But I don't want to watch a movie and be reminded of that.

"Babar: The Movie" (1989)

 

This was a childhood favorite of mine, but I hadn't watched it in years until one of the songs from it suddenly appeared in my head out of nowhere, and I got ahold of a copy of it. Often you look at your childhood films or TV shows through rose-tinted spectacles, but sometimes you realize they're just not as good as you remembered. I'm happy to say that this is not one of those times.

Everyone is probably familiar with Babar, King of the Elephants, and in this movie he recalls the time when, as a young king, he had to save his kingdom of Celesteville from attack from Rataxes and his Rhino army, with the help of his future wife, Celeste and his monkey friend, Zephyr. It's actually all terribly exciting, clever, and well made.

It really is a wonderful family film, with slapstick jokes that the children can enjoy (which I did, immensely!) and lots of witty jokes for adults. There's a whole song about the ridiculous complexity of bureaucracy, which you don't fully appreciate until you're older and have experienced it! And I recently discovered that a few of the voice actors doubled as villains in "The Care Bears" TV series, which I also used to watch when I was younger. The revelation really blew my mind. But I suppose it's only appropriate that two integral pieces of my childhood should be linked. They don't make 'em like this any more, and that's a shame.

"Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time" (2010)

 

This is another live-action Disney adventure, in the style of the Pirates of the Caribbean series, and you can honestly tell. It even shares the same producer, Jerry Bruckheimer. But more than that, it shares a similar, convoluted plot, which I assume would make more sense if I had played any of the "Prince of Persia" games. Sadly, I never got into them, but I nevertheless enjoyed the film for what it was: fantasy action in the tradition of the Arabian Nights.

The stunt-work was absolutely incredible, and I don't envy the shape Jake Gyllenhaal had to get in to be able to perform some of them. But the action is smooth and frequent, without being boring, which is a risk for me in an action film. I was also tremendously impressed with Gyllenhaal's accent - if I didn't know better, I would have assumed he was born British. You are left wondering why everyone in Persia appears to be British, but I'm not objecting to that as British actors are often the best. And it's always good to see Ben Kingsley in anything. He's such a joy to watch, even though I felt he was underused in this. Still, the moments where he got to basically play Claudius from "Hamlet" were wonderful. And Alfred Molina, who appears to be Disney's new character actor, lent his talents to some much-needed and genuinely very funny comic relief. Gemma Arterton was suitably beautiful and regal, although liable to get on one's nerves. This, however, is more the fault of the character than her.

Overall the film looks great, but it's very choppily edited, and, as I've mentioned, the story is very complicated. Gyllenhaal's Prince Dastan, who isn't a real Prince of noble blood, but rather an orphan from the street adopted by the king, invades a rival kingdom with the aid of his brothers and under the advice of his uncle Nizam (Ben Kingsley). Through coincidence (or is it Destiny?) he finds a magic dagger that has the power to turn back time, which has been entrusted to Princess Tamina to keep safe. When Dastan's father is murdered and Dastan blamed for the crime, he and Tamina must flee and return the dagger to its rightful place before it falls into the wrong hands and destroys the world.

Like I said, it's not a very logical film, but it is a good summer blockbuster and handy if you want to watch for escapist entertainment, rather than anything too intellectual. I would also like to give kudos to Richard Coyle, who plays Dastan's brother, Tus. He is, apparently, an alumnus of my University, the University of York, and so I'm proud that he's amounted to something. It gives hope to the rest of us. 

"The Lodger: A Story of the London Fog" (1927)

 

As a fan of silent films, Alfred Hitchcock, and Jack the Ripper, I have been keen on seeing this version of the tale for quite a long time. "The Lodger" is based on a short story Marie Belloc Lowndes, and has been remade several times, but this is the original cinematic version, and, in my opinion, the best. (On a side note, there were a couple of radio versions as well, including the pilot of the radio series "Suspense," of which I am an enormous fan. The pilot episode was also directed by Hitchcock, but was left unfinished, to keep us in perpetual suspense.)

The plot is simple: In Victorian London, young, pretty girls are being slain by a mysterious figure known as the Avenger. An old landlady is taking an interest in the murders, like everyone else, when suddenly a mysterious figure shows up on her doorstep to inquire about the room she has for rent, which he accepts on the condition that he be left alone. Although he initially seems a pleasant enough man, the lady becomes suspicious of the stranger and convinces herself that he is the Avenger. She becomes obsessed with keeping her own young, pretty daughter away from him, which is easier said than done as the daughter's fascination with the Lodger increases...

In most versions of the story, the landlady's suspicions are confirmed and the daughter has to be saved at the last moment from the murderous clutches of the Lodger. But Hitchcock has added a few twists of his own to the story, by updating it to a contemporary setting and leaving the viewer guessing if the Lodger is the murderer or not until the final few moments. You can really see Hitchcock's directorial brilliance developing here - there's some animation during the dialogue slides, which, to my knowledge, is unique to silent films at the time, and several innovative shots, my personal favorite being when the Lodger looks out the window and the shadow of the window-frame, in the shape of a cross, falls upon his face.The title character is played brilliantly by Ivor Novello, who is not only strikingly handsome in this, but also lends incredible pathos to a man who may or may not be a murderer. He never seems to overact, which is difficult in a silent film, and the love scenes between him and the daughter are positively romantic, in that wonderful, old-fashioned way, when a kiss was so much more than a kiss. The pace of the film is also comparatively quick, so it's a good one for those unfamiliar with silent films to start out with. A genuinely wonderful movie.