The Fighter

You can't say that Marky Mark isn't diverse. From the ‘Funky Bunch’ to Calvin Klein underwear to ‘Boogie Nights’ and an acting career. Now Mark Wahlberg is even producing films and in the case of ‘The Fighter’ both starring in them as well as producing.

‘The Fighter’ is actually based on a true story. It is the tale of ‘Irish’ Micky Ward (Wahlberg) a fighter trying to make a go of it in the ring. One of his coaches is his half-brother, Dicky Eklund (Christian Bale). Dicky was a boxer himself in the 1970’s and 80’s. His main claim to fame being his 1978 bout with Sugar Ray Leonard which made him somewhat of a local legend. Dicky still tells the tale of that fight, over and over again, where he knocked down Sugar Ray. Even though Sugar Ray may have tripped... and went on to win the fight.

Now years on, Eklund is being followed by a film crew, who he believes are making a documentary about his possible boxing comeback. In truth though, Dicky is now a shadow of his former self and the film crew are more interested in his drug addiction.

This habit makes Dicky an unreliable coach and he’s always late for training sessions. Micky’s manager would probably fire him; that is if his manager wasn’t his domineering mother Alice (Melissa Leo). Dicky and Alice organise all Micky’s fights for him but things have not gone well recently. Micky has become known simply as a stepping stone for other boxers on their way up to better fights.



The opening of the film is slightly annoying as we are introduced to the close knit but slightly dysfunctional family headed by the overbearing mother and with half a dozen or so even more annoying sisters. Once the film gets going though, it’s rather good.



After losing four consecutive bouts and being pushed, by Alice and Dicky because they all needed the money, into an unwinnable fight against a fighter from a higher weight division, Micky come to a realisation. He has tried to remain loyal to his family but it is costing him his career. They are holding him back and he knows it. If he wants to get anywhere in the boxing world, something needs to change.

When Micky hooks up with local barmaid Charlene (Amy Adams), she gives him the impetuous to do it and helps him pull free from his suffocating family. Which, of course, they don't thank her for. Adams is way out of her usual comfort zone in this film, this being a far more serious role than anything I’ve seen her do before and she does brilliantly.



When Dicky winds up in jail, both brothers eventually start to get their respective acts together. Dicky finally kicks the drug habit while Micky gets new management involved and starts boxing again. Mickey O'Keefe is now his sole coach. O'Keefe is a sergeant in the Police and in real life was the mentor of Micky Ward. O'Keefe plays himself, as in fact does Sugar Ray Leonard, who has a small part.

Micky moves up the ranks but still there in the background are his family, his brother still offering advice even from his prison cell. Then Micky gets a shot at the World Welterweight title against Shea Neary. Problem is, with Dicky now released from prison, can he reconcile his family with his girlfriend and his coach and get everyone on side for the biggest fight of his life?



Underneath it all Dicky turns out to be a nice guy, someone you'd actually want in your corner. Though, I’m still not sure about the mother. I didn't really know Melissa Leo before this. Her character is so annoying Leo must have done a really good job.



The cast are the real strength of this film, in which Bale is outstanding. It is much more than just a film about boxing and the main 'fighting’ take place not in the ring but outside it. Another good film, in a good year so far.

True Grit

‘True Grit’ has been remade by the Coen Brothers, which becomes the second remake I've seen this year and it’s only February. I hate remakes almost as much as I hate sequels. The Coens have attempted to justify their new film by saying they wanted to 'go back to the source material' of Charlie Portis' novel and do a more faithful adaptation rather than a remake of the 1969 film starring John Wayne. Which I think was a pretty good film first time around... wasn't it? It’s just a hazy memory and I haven’t read the book either.

The Great Lebowski himself, Jeff Bridges, plays Rooster Cogburn and Matt Damon is Texas Ranger ‘La Beef’ or LaBoeuf even. The undoubted star though is young Hailee Steinfeld, who is outstanding as a headstrong teenager, 14-year-old Mattie Ross. A stubborn girl who will stop at nothing to revenge her father's death. Not difficult casting though, just get a stubborn teenager to play a stubborn teenager, there's plenty around.



As she continually proves throughout the film she is well capable of taking care of herself, except perhaps when guns are involved. In her pursuit of the man who murdered her father, Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin), she seeks out Cogburn. Cogburn is a Federal Marshall with a reputation for not bringing in his prisoners alive, which endears him to Mattie. Unfortunately he is as equally effective at getting drunk as he is at killing.



I have a problem with one aspect of Rooster. At times you need subtitles to understand what he’s saying because his rambling is totally incoherent at times. The Coen's are big on accents, so I've no doubt they got the accent they wanted but when you add in that he’s a drunk as well... subtitles please. That's not something I usually say, I’m not into subtitles.



Beefy too is looking for Chaney but for another crime he committed, so he and Cogburn team up and set off in pursuit but refuse to take a ‘girl’ into Indian territory. Mattie is having none of that and she chases them down. They reluctantly accept her and set off across terrain where it always seems to be snowing, just like Sheffield.



Cogburn’s general behaviour and particularly his drinking soon cause Mattie to lose faith in him. She is right to be disillusioned as the trail to finding Chaney goes cold and only by chance do they eventually find him.

The film is actually a bit simple for the Coens. You keep looking for the hidden meanings but there aren't any. It’s just a straightforward, decent film and it’s much funnier than I expected. Rooster even turns out to be a bit of a hero in the end.

Good film but... I'm still not sure why they made it.

Brighton Rock

I hate remakes of anything and a remake of a film that is highly regarded as a classic of its time, such as ‘Brighton Rock’, should really be avoided at all costs. I haven’t, shamefully, read Graham Greene's book, nor had I, until last week, seen the original 1947 film and perhaps that is why I rather liked this remake.

The book and the film were set in the 1930’s but this remake by Rowan Joffe has shifted the action to 1964 and makes a few slight plot changes. This was bound to upset the purists, just like modernized versions of Shakespeare do but I kind of like those too. Personally I think if you're going to do a remake, at least do something a bit different with it. Straight copies are pointless.

So out goes the mob era and in comes a backdrop out of Quadrophenia. e.g. mods on mopeds on Brighton promenade, only it’s not. We had to go see this film because 1960’s Brighton has been recreated in Eastbourne and we were there when they filmed it. The dogs, well one particular dog, barked all the way through the filming, so there we sit in the cinema straining our ears trying to see if they’ve edited him out or not.



In this version, we get more of an intro and a bit more background to the characters. Not that this makes any different to the likeability of teenage sociopath and wannabe gangster, Pinkie Brown. Richard Attenborough was brilliantly sinister as Pinkie in the original, here Sam Riley (you know Ian Curtis) takes on the scowl but somehow he doesn’t seem as menacing as Attenborough. He's more moody teenager with an attitude problem than a gangster. The effect is much the same though. We feel zero sympathy for his character. Not that we feel any either for Rose (Andrea Riseborough), the nice Catholic waitress who falls for this moody Catholic thug.

Pinkie has murdered ‘Fred’ Hale, a man from a rival gang, and is prepared to cover his tracks by any means necessary. Rose is a potential witness to his crime, so in a bid to shut her up he pushes her into a sham relationship with him. Romancing her is not hard, the poor deluded girl immediately falls for him, hook, line and sinker even though he ignores her most of the time. What does she see him? Though suppose that’s a question we often ask ourselves of people today.



An explanation of sorts is offered when they visit the tower block where Rose lives. A tower block that looks very rundown, particularly considering tower blocks were a bright new idea in the 60’s. Rose lives with her father, a man who is as controlling as Pinkie is. So at least she’ll feel at home with him. Pinkie barters with her father for her hand in marriage, which will prevent her being forced to testify against him until he can find the moment to dispense with her permanently. In the end her father effectively sells her for £150.



Amidst all these crazy Catholics comes the level headed Ida Arnold (Helen Mirren) who is determined to unearth the truth and rescue Rose from the nutter she has betroved herself to.



It was a difficult film to remake but having bothered, I think they made a pretty good fist of it. Very enjoyable. Riley is good enough as Pinkie, as is Riseborough as Rose, well pathetic enough at least. It all ends in tragedy of course and I do love an unhappy ending. The classic scene remains, as in the original, when Rose cajoles him into making a record of his voice in a recording booth on the pier. On record he makes it pitifully clear that he despises her and her failure to ever find out what he said on that record makes a touching finale...