Films of the Month: January

 This segment will deal with the films that I have seen so far this month, both current releases as well as classics I have seen for the first time. Having recently bought some Elizabeth Taylor films, of whom I've seen very little, I also have a large collection (19 in total) of Marilyn Monroe films, of which I have seen a few.

 Anyway I started of the month watching Mission Impossible 4: Ghost Protocal at the cinema. I found it quite enjoyable, and though many are quick to criticise Tom Cruise, it's hard not to be in awe of his incredibly youthful looks, as well as his tremendous physicality the role demands. Whilst Mission Impossible lacks the gravitas and complexities of other modern spy films, it definetly fills a welcome void, as a light action film that one can enjoy for it's sheer entertainment. Of course it wasn't a grounbreaking cinematic venture, but I enjoyed it nonetheless, and felt more than satisfied by the end of it.

 My next cinematic visit, took me to see Meryl Streep in the The Iron Lady. Being one of the few people to be able to publicly admit that, I'm an amdirer of Thatcher, who regardless of your personal feelings, was an important person who shape modern Britain. Sadly the film didn't live up to the woman it was based upon, though Meryl Streep gives an impressivesly strong performances, espescially for an American, of the British Prime Minister. The film sadly fails to capture the divisivness of Thatcher, and also lacks the content which makes her story so interesting. Instead it decides to concentrate on her recent bouts of senility, where she is haunted by the memories of her husband Denis (Jim Broadbent). This whole charade felt like a convuluted plot device, designed to give Broadbent more screen time. It all came across as rather superfluous, and due to it dominating large amounts of the films run time, meant Thatcher's story of rise to power and tenure as leader was given a back seat. The parts that were shown were rather rushed and underdeveloped, though some of her speeches were included and well delivered, there was a lot of her political life that was simply omitted. At the end of the film, I felt pretty underwhelmed overall, and thought it was an opportunity missed, espescially given Streep's performance.

 Now to the last film I saw at the cinema, which thankfully was a vast improvement on my previous outing. The Artist was a film was a film I went to with slight trepedation, in spite of the overwhelming positive reviews, my main fear was that it was just a gimmick that would overshaddow some of the great silent films of the past. Despite not being a massive fan of silent films, I find that some of the greatest from this medium to be unlike any other art form and are truly magnificent. However, The Artist did manage to capture the essence of this era majestically, it's style served as a wonderful homage to the silent era, and it's use of grand scale props and sets, gave it that feel of grandeur and excess that defined Hollywood of this era. There were wonderful little nods as well to films not only from this era, but also films that had obviously inspired the director over the year, such as Sunset Boulevard, Singin' in the Rain and even Fellini's 8 1/2.
 Despite what I felt was a slow start to the movie, it suddenly burst into life as the audience began to see silent megastar George Valentin (Jean Dujardin) refuse to submit to the studios demands of making only talking pictures, and succumb to a career of obscurity and alcoholism. Whilst, a woman (Bérénice Bejo) he accidently encounters during a promotion for one of his films is suddenly catapulted into stardom with the arrivel of talkies. There is also an underlying romance that develops between the two, that develops throughout the movie, but his arrogance causes him to become reluctant to pursue a relationship with her.

                                      

 Being a huge fan of Greta Garbo, I could not help but notice the parallels of their affair and that of Garbo's with John Gilbert's. Dujardin's character is mostly based around Gilbert, though Bejo's character is an American "flapper" type as opposed to Garbo's exotic "vamp". Dujardin's character story however, strongly resembles Gilbert's, even after both their downfall's, they both became severe alcoholics. Though some of Dujardin's character does draw from other silent stars such as Douglas-Fairbanks and his name is an obvious reference to Rudolph Valentino. Though physically, to me he most resembled Gene Kelly, probably helped by the fact that many elements of the story were very reminescent of Singin' in the Rain. Despite these obvious parallels, both leads were incredibly distinct and moving in their performances, considering that they were relying mainly on is expressionism, it could have been easy for them to over-emphasise, but never did this film turn into mime. It was also nice to see a good representation of Hollywood stalwarts such as John Goodman as the mogul-like film Producer, James Cromwell as the loyal butler and even Malcolm Mcdowell made a brief cameo. Overall, It was refreshing, fun, touching and warm; and despite my initial reluctance, I had to admit this was a very good film, though I imagine most avid cinephile's will long to watch one of the great silents whilst watching this. Because as good as this film, it is only imitation, it lacks authenticity and doesn't quite live up to the sheer scale and exuberance of the greatest silent pictures of the 20's. Still, I'm sure this is going to perform well at the award shows this year, and no doubt will feature on my end of year film review.

 I also finally got round to seeing Warhorse, a much talk about film adaptation of the hit stage play. It had already received quite a bit of critical acclaim as well award recognition, for me though it came across as a slight letdown. The problem with it is that it was directed by Steven Spielberg. Now, I'm a massive fan of Spielberg espescially his earlier work, but what I mean by saying he is the problem, is that he is a director renowned for emotionally charged movies. With Warhorse, he already has an emotionally charged story, and so with the combination of the two it became susceptible to too many moments of melodrama. Spielberg doesn't do himself any favours either, as he dwells on these moments, as well as putting in touches of comic relief that just come off as ludicrous. The result is a film that over indulges and comes across as phoney, and certain elements come off as filmschool-esque from Spielberg (such as the Gone With The Wind style red sky ending). Another problem is that in trying to base a film predominantly on that of the horse, has resulted in some substandard performances from the supporting cast. Even the usually reliable Emily Watson and Benedict Cumberbatch come across as rather tame, meaning the horse dominates film in the way that he isn't meant to. Having said all that, if you can immerse yourself in the film and not over think it too much, I'm sure it can be a richly rewarding experience, which I'm sure the majority of film goers will appreciate. The elements of the war are well captured, and the battle of the Somme feel's like something out of Remarque's All Quiet On The Western Front. For me personally though, it just didn't quite amount to anything other than an above average popcorn flick, hardly the genre defining piece that we've become accustomed to from Spielberg.

 Now for the past classics that I've only just got round to seeing for the first time this month. I'll begin with Woody Allen's 1983 mockumentary Zelig which I managed to catch at the BFI Southbank. To be honest with you, I haven't seen nearly enough Woody Allen stuff (not even Manhatten or Annie Hall!!), but there's no doubting the man's a comic legend. Zelig seemed a bit ahead of it's time, as it merges Woody Allen's chameleonic character into documentary footage from the 1920's. The story is centered around Zelig's (Allen) ability to absorb the people around him and change into him. It essentially has the same neurotic edge about it to other Allen films, but set in entirely new and somewhat surreal circumstances. As a keen fan of the period I really enjoyed seeing him merged with people such as playwright Eugene O'Neill, actress Carole Lombard and even disastrous former presidents such as Herbert Hoover and Calvin Coolidge (I'm still not sure as this was a subtle nod to Zelig's own involvement to their disastrous economic policies of the 20's).
                                            
 But again this is what Allen seems to be so good at, bringing out people from the past who interests him and sharing them with his audience in an engaging fashion. As for the story itself, it is of course ridiculous and contrived, but that's the point, as without this there would be no comedy. Zelig himself evolves into a celebrity on his own, and whilst under the care of Dr. Eudora Fletcher (Allen's then partner Mia Farrow) they develop feelings for each other as she tries to cure him of his problem. Allen's ability to let the audience connect to his character on an emotional level, as well as being able to clown around to effective amusement, just further demonstrates his own ability as comedic actor as well as director. The mockumentary style is highly inventive and original and the seemless method of merging the actors into old documentary footage is impressive. This method was later repeated by Robert Zemeckis in Forrest Gump (1994) when the technology had advanced substantially. Overall I found a very enjoyable and an engaging piece and would look forward to seeing it again, but first I'll have to make Allen's other work a priority.

 During the month I also purchased an aforementioned collection of Elizabeth Taylor and Marilyn Monroe films which I'm still very much in the process of watching. First I watched Monroe's The Prince and the Showgirl, which featured one of my favourite all time actors Laurence Olivier. Considering the current furore over My Week With Marilyn (2011) (which I'm yet to see), I thought it'd be a good time to check this one out. To be honest, I found it nothing more than okay. I imagine that it's the kind of film you'd enjoy more if you were a big fan of Marilyn Monroe, for me it just felt a bit too long and slow at times. Possibly due to it being played out more like a theatrical production than a film. Also, despite being a fan of Olivier, I found him a bit too rigid to warm to in his role as The Regent, but I will concede that it was quite quirky and some good moments of amusement too. I do feel that without Marilyn the film would have been long forgotten, despite her personal problems at the time of filming, and her apparent lack of professionalism on set, I think that she carries this piece with her usual "ditzy" blonde persona. I also liked that resolve at the end, didn't fall into the usual Hollywood trap of romanticism over realism, but other than that I couldn't fall for the romance between the two leads, as I say Olivier remained so cold, that it was hard to sympathise with him. Still an interesting piece, if just for historical value.
                                         

 The next Marilyn film I thought was a bit better, this time she shakes her usual "ditzyness" to play a femme fatale opposite Joseph Cotton in Niagra. Here Marilyn gives a solid performance as she plots, with her lover, to kill her husband (Cotton) over the falls, meanwhile a honeymooning couple also get caught up in the plot. It's a shame that Anne Baxter was unable to pursue the role that eventually went to Jean Peters, as the honeymooner playing the intermediary between Cotton and Monroe (though Peters fit the role well). The other star of the film are the falls themselves, which look spectacular, and are magnificently captured in technicolor. Though the plot is pretty standard, and plays out as expected, it still remains gripping and suspenseful. Another bonus of the film is that Monroe herself looks stunning, and is possibly in peak physical condition throughout the movie, and Joseph Cotton is aptly cast as the mysterious and vengeful husband. It's definetly worth a watch, as it stands up on it's own as a noir piece, plus I imagine it's one of Marilyn's better film both in terms of looks and performance.
                                            

 Now for my favourite movie of past classics of the month George Stevens' Giant. This is a film I had heard much about, and already being a fan of a similar anti-Western The Big Country I was looking forward to seeing this. I've never really been a fan of Rock Hudson or James Dean, but both excelled in this movie, though I feel the movie belonged to Elizabeth Taylor, who as well as looking her usual luminous self, gave a performance that seemed so beyond her mere 23 years of age. Based on a Texan ranch in the early 20th century, Rock Hudson meets Taylor whilst acquiring a stallion in Maryland, they soon fall in love and marry. On returning to the ranch, Taylor is witness to scenes of racism, shauvinism and class issues, which she deems immorale and ancient. She constantly conlicts with husband Hudson over the issues as well as the future of their family. At the same time, James Dean plays a ranch hand, who inherits some land after the death of Hudson's sister, which Hudson attempts to buy off him. Instead Dean keeps his land and finds his fortune in oil on the land. The two become bitter rivals over the next twenty years, as Hudson tries to deter the power of Dean's new found wealth.

 The film is a great social commentary piece and though it does dip in parts, it remains highly emotive as we the audience remain witness to the family's progression. As well as dealing with social inequality, it also presents a story of the corruption of wealth and jealousy, served through James Dean's character, who excels as the lonesome outsider (Dean died within days of finishing this film). The film also features early performances from Dennis Hopper and Carroll Baker as Hudson and Taylor's children. The laconic style is also similar to the style of my favourite Westerns, but I don't think it is suited to all audiences, and overall I think that Wyler's The Big Country is probably the better movie on balance. Still this is definetly an All-American classic, that I will no doubt revisit over the years.

 Passport To Pimlico was an Ealing comedy that I caught on tv one day, and being a fan of other Ealing products such as Kind Hearts and Coronets and The Ladykillers, I felt I owed myself to watching this one. With all the irreverance and originality that I had come to expect from Ealing Studios, the film served as a microcosm to the Berlin Blockade which was ongoing at the time of production. The residents of Pimlico chance upon an old treaty that declares their district part of old Burgundy country, thus rendering the area in effect it's own country. This allows residents to free themselves from the restrictions of rationing, which leads to Pimlico becoming a hub for trade amongst residents and other locals. The British government soon get involved and cut of Pimlico from the rest of London with the use of barbed wire, this results in some bargain hunters from other districts becoming trapped as they are without their passports. Soon the situation becomes exsaperated as Britain cuts off all supplies to Pimlico to try and force them to surrender their "sovereignty". But through press coverage fellow Londoner's become sympathetic to Pimlico's plight and begin throwing over food parcels and supplies.
                                                           
 Whilst maybe not quite as brilliant as the aforementioned movies, Pimlico really is another example of the great work Ealing comedies were doing during this post-war period. It features a plot that was part of social consciousness at the time, not only that, it seemed to capture that post-war empathy that Britons were starting to feel for each other in their communities, as well as other victims of war across the world. The feeling of wanting to be free of beauracratic restrictions such as rationing, were also prominent, and the film captured the feeling of citizens throughout Europe at the time. Ealing Comedies were very much of their time, but their time was a very important one in European history and the films are possibly the biggest part of British cinematic history, as well as being the embodiement of British spirit.