BustingBlocks

So this is a bit of an odd one, I think. The first half is a Western. A good Western, with humour. You can watch Paul Newman and Robert Redford do anything and it’s going to be entertaining and attractive. And the scenery is beautiful. 

 I don’t, however, think that the second half works even nearly as well. 

Around halfway, the characters travel to Bolivia. (It was released in 1969, I’m not spoiling). This is shown via a montage, which is overlong and not especially interesting. Paul Newman looks oddly not-like-Paul-Newman in it. 

Anyway, we get to Bolivia. There’s another montage. It’s just less interesting - watching two men trying to find their place in a worl moving too fast is fun to watch and compelling but underwritten - as it Goldman ran out of interest and sent in a “will this do?” script. 

Tim (Domhnall Gleeson) is told, when he turns 21, that the men in his family have the power to travel in time. A speech written by anybody other than Curtis and delivered by anybody other than Bill Nighy, and you might be forgiven for saying “No, Richard, they can’t” and going to watch a Michael Bay movie, which at least doesn’t expect you to believe the unbelievable. 

Tim uses this power to get what he wants. The obvious problems of money and power are ignored as well as the problems obvious after about 13 seconds of thought. This is a time travel movie which isn’t remotely concerned with time travel, and a rom-com which couldn't care less about romantic love. 

Instead, Curtis moves beyond his usual themes (though obviously incapable of not using a romance as his framing device) to instead discuss father-son relationships and powerlessness to create real change. But it doesn’t really achieve - or seem to want to achieve - any sort of highbrow thoughtfulness about fate. 

The film uses its source material, which let us remember is only 3 chapters in the Bible, as a guideline to hang a frankly utterly bonkers plot from, rather like Versace and a supermodel. A lot of the film's wackier elements, such as the massive 20 foot rock monsters (yes, really) serve to make the beginning of the film as action packed a film about a big construction project can be. Grand Designs it ain't. 

The final hour or so changes tack rapidly, allowing the actors to really use the material. Russell Crowe's Noah, driven mad from the possibility that he may never hear God's voice again, spends most of the final act doing a rather unsuccessful Jack Nicholson impression. He portrays Noah as a one man apocalypse bringer. It's an really quite boring performance, lacking much depth and any sympathy. Although much credit has been given to Jennifer Connelly as his much put upon wife, it's actually Emma Watson's performance as the wife of one of Noah's sons and ultimately the Eve of the whole human race that really stands out. I completely bought her portrayal as a woman who has seen much and expects to see more, defying God for her children.

I'm getting to 12 Years a Slave late. It seems like everybody has been to see the film and loved it. I saw the film at the Odeon in Sheffield, for which the word "fleapit" was probably invented. It's a pet peeve, but why do people feel the need to bring in enough food for half the country for a three hour period?

The film's great. Solomon Northrup is a free black man who is tricked into coming further South than he should, is captured and sold into slavery. The film follows his life and his attempts to get back him for, unsurprisingly, 12 years. Chiwetel Ejiofor leads a fantastic cast, with particular mention to Benedict Cumberbatch and Lupita Nyong'o (who must surely be up for Best Supporting at the Oscars).

The film looks beautfiul. Every single frame could be isolated from the film and shown as a piece of art in its own right. The music, mostly diegetic, helps create an oppressive yet beautiful atmosphere in the hot southern sun. 

I don't really get Formula One. It's very expensive cars going round a track for far too many laps for far too long. It seems to be dominated by the same teams and people every year, and I don't understand if it's supposed to be a manufacturing competition or a driving competition.

Rush converted me. I have seen the light and it's name is the 1976 Formula One championship, specifically the rivalry between James Hunt (Playboy, loud, foppish, Chris Hemsworth in full Thor mode) and Niki Lauda (Quiet, thoughtful, Austrian). The film follows the two throughout that year.

Although there are things your can criticise - the characters are very broad, and the continued use of over-obvious commentary grates - what really stands out from the film is the noise. Dear god is this a loud film. Hans Zimmer is credited with the soundtrack but the real star of the show is are the engines running the gamut from a low background purr to a full throated roar of a predator about to strike. 

Elysium is a strange one. It stars Matt Damon (Bourne) as Matt Da Costa, a convicted car thief in a world in which the rich live on the titular space station, whilst the poor  (10%? 50%? 99.9999%?) of the population remain on Earth. 

An obscenely contrived accident at work leaves Da Costa only 5 days to get to Elysium, where his injuries can be cured. Nothing can be that simple, of course, and Secretary of Defence Jessica Delacourt (Jodie Foster) wants to prevent anybody from Earth reaching Elysium. Because of...well, it's not really important, presumably. The movie certainly isn't going to explain.

However, Sharlto Copley makes up for both of these. From the minute he is first on screen, he demands the viewers' attention.

But, not even he can save the film from its poorly written plot. Both dialogue (sample line: "That's what I'm talking about!" (Presumably the 1990s decided to be involved in the writing of this film) and plot holes (Top secret data being encrypted. Then not. Then AS EASY TO USE AS YOU LIKE EVERYBODY HAVE A GO).