Possessor

A good test of our new TV is the film Possessor which is streamed from Broadway Cinema via Modern Films. It is directed by David Cronenberg’s son Brandon and it certainly shows influences of his father’s work.

Tasya Vos (Andrea Riseborough) is employed by a company that offers remote assassinations. Basically they kidnap and drug someone who has access to the person they want to get rid of, imped a microchip in their skull and then allow one of their staff to take control of their mind and body via super-bluetooth (or something). Just like a computer game.

Tasya is the company’s top assassin but she's been working too hard and needs a break from her job. Too many long hours, killed too many people, you know how it is and she’s begun losing touch with own life. She’s so used to being other people, she has to rehearse being herself before she goes home at nights to her husband and son. She isn’t going to get a break though because her boss (Jennifer Jason Leigh) needs her for the biggest job the Company has ever had.

Her next job to take out John Parse (Sean Bean), the CEO of some mega company, along with his daughter Ava (Tuppence Middleton) using her boyfriend Colin Tate (Christopher Abbott) as the weapon of choice, making it look like some massive mental breakdown on Colin’s part. This is at the request of Ava’s step-brother who would gain by inheriting the business.

The assassination is only a partial success as Colin seems resistant to being fully taken over. Ava is killed but Parse escapes. When Tasya attempts to cut her losses and flee by forcing Colin to shoot himself she finds that she can’t make him do it.

Meanwhile a shocked Colin cannot understand why he’s killed his girlfriend or why he is suddenly getting memories of another person life, that of Tasya’s. Confused, he kills a friend of his before tracking down Tasya’s family and confronting her husband at gunpoint, demanding answers he isn't going to get.

Personally, I was disappointed that the film drifted off its more straightforward assassination plot line and into everyone’s weakening grip on reality. Something which vastly accelerated the body count and where it’s not always entirely clear what is going on and who was in control of who.

Battle Of The Sexes

The Battle of the Sexes is primarily about the exhibition tennis match in 1973 between possibly the best female tennis player at that time Billie Jean King (Emma Stone) and three time Wimbledon men’s champion 55-year-old Bobby Riggs (Steve Carell).

However the film is much more than that, focusing on the off court drama as well. It tries to cover the formation of WTA (Women’s Tennis Association) and King also falling in love with another woman at the same time. In a way it’s a mini biography of her life but it has to shuffle the timeline and some facts to do so. 

King was indeed instrumental in the formation of the WTA after she became annoyed that the male players were receiving cash prizes up to eight times that of the women, despite the fact they attracted just as many spectators. So in 1970, King and seven other women started to set up their own breakaway tournaments which led eventually to the formation of the WTA in 1973. The WTA went on to be hugely successful and is still going strong today.

 

1973 was also the year that Riggs, a self-proclaimed male chauvinist pig who was clearly missing the limelight, challenged the then world number one Margaret Court to a match. In his eyes this would prove that men are better than women at tennis and well better, full stop. He easily beat a poorly prepared Court on what became known as the Mother’s Day Massacre.

When he subsequently challenged King she also accepted, despite previously saying that she wouldn’t but now feeling that she needed to fly the flag for womankind to make up for Court's failings. Riggs wasted no time in ramping up the acrimony by going on TV to proclaim that women only belong in the kitchen and the bedroom.

King seems to take the latter bit of advice on board, although not in a way that Riggs would have appreciated, when she takes her hairdresser Marilyn Barnett (Andrea Riseborough) back to her hotel room. It is also not greatly appreciated by King’s husband Larry (Austin Stowell). 

In reality Barnett was actually King’s secretary and the affair had already been going for two years but the film alters this point despite the reality being possibly even more fascinating. Along with the fact it was Barnett who outed her secret superstar girlfriend eight years later. 

Their relationship, as well as disrupting her marriage, doesn’t do a lot for her concentration on the tennis court but she bounces back to beat Riggs in rather exaggerated movie style in their game at the Houston Astrodome.

Despite my initial reservations the film is surprisingly entertaining, smart and well-acted. It also has the potential to educate, inspire and make you 'google', in a time when not enough films attempt to do so. 

Stone is once again excellent, among other things making her relationship with Riseborough very believable. If anything the film attempts to cover too much and spreads itself a bit thin to do so. It does actually make me want to see a full biopic of BJK.

Death of Stalin

Armando Iannucci’s ‘Death of Stalin’, adapted from a graphic novel, shows the aftershocks of Josef Stalin’s (Adrian Mcloughlin) death in 1953 through decidedly British and comedic eyes. Indeed the Central Committee of the Communist Party is portrayed as about as well run as the worst of the worst of British’s Councils back in the 1970s, only more violent.

The film opens before Stalin’s death with the authorities having to restage a piano concerto because Stalin has asked for a recording of it after the fact. So rather than tell Stalin it’s not possible, the producer (Paddy Considine) forces the orchestra and the audience to stay put while they do it all over again. This involves bribing the pianist (Olga Kurylenko) and finding a new conductor, who turns up in his dressing gown.

Then Stalin has the audacity to die which causes chaos. For a start they can’t summon a competent doctor to confirm his death or to ascertain the cause of it because Stalin has imprisoned or executed them all.

Meanwhile the jockeying to succeed him has already begun. Georgi Malenkov (Jeffrey Tambor) temporarily and controversially assumes control but he will have to battle to hold onto the leadership as Nikita Khrushchev (Steve Buscemi) and Vyacheslav Molotov (Michael Palin) state their cases. While Khrushchev is the semi-decent reformer and tries to take a more measured path to the top job, Molotov would remove anyone who got in his way. His approach is mild though compared with Lavrentiy Beria (Simon Russell Beale), who is the head of the secret police, but he doesn’t have many supporters and is messily executed for treason. 

The only people to say anything good about Stalin, perhaps not surprisingly, are his daughter, Svetlana (Andrea Riseborough) and his hot-headed son, Vasily (Rupert Friend). Things then liven up further when Marshal Zhukov (Jason Isaacs) turns up. Nothing portrays this more as a British spoof that Zhukov who appears to be a Yorkshireman with a very broad accent.

Depending on how good your knowledge of Russian history is it can be difficult to follow everything as the film is more focussed on it’s comedic angle than about walking you through the history. Although it is still informative in this way and appears to be highly accurate. You just might have to hit Wikipedia to fill in the gaps.

Although very well acted, I’m not sure the film is actually that funny and, for me, the history of it is easily the most fascinating aspect. An out and out drama might have been more effective but then would anybody else have watched it.

Birdman (or The Unexpected Virtue Of Ignorance)

Birdman is a black comedy of sorts about a man called Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton), a man typecast as Birdman, a superhero type character who pulled in the punters at the multiplexes and presumably ran for several pointless (you would imagine) sequels. Thomson, now ashamed of this 'selling out', wants to reinvent himself as a ‘proper’ actor on Broadway. Keaton, twice Batman of course before quitting to avoid becoming typecast himself, appropriately plays the lead.

In an attempt to prove himself, Thomson directs and stars in his own adaptation of a Raymond Carver short story. It is a bold attempt to be taken seriously but also a doomed one. Throughout he is persecuted by the character that made him famous. His Birdman alter ego keeps appearing in his mind, telling him that he will fail.

The public too do not want him to move on from Birdman and the critics, namely Tabitha of the Times (Lindsey Duncan), will never give him a good review because of who he is.

Then when his co-lead in the play is mysteriously knocked unconscious by a falling stage light, it is thought that his replacement well known method actor, Mike Shiner (Edward Norton), could well save the show. Mike though is exceptionally unstable. He gets drunk during his first rehearsal and later attempts to have sex with the female lead (Naomi Watts) whilst they're on stage.

He fails on that score but is more successful with Thomson’s daughter (Emma Stone), an assistant on the production and straight out of drug rehab.

Thomson’s quest is further derailed by his girlfriend (Andrea Riseborough), who might or not be pregnant, his ex-wife (Amy Ryan) who can't seem to stay away from him and his pushy producer (Zach Galifanakis).

Everyone is depicted as deeply flawed as the film takes a dig at actors in general as well as taking shots at a public that will shell out good money to see action packed rubbish.

Birdman is good but not fantastic and it isn't ground breaking by any means but in what looks like being a meagre year for award contenders it may be one of the best we get.

Shadow Dancer

We haven't seen an IRA thriller in a while, at one point you couldn't move for them. ‘Shadow Dancer’ is set in Belfast in 1993, to the backdrop of the ongoing peace process which resulted in the IRA ceasefire the following year. First though, we rewind to 1973, when Collette McVey was but a little girl. When she offloads an errand to the shops on her little brother, he comes back dead, hit by a stray bullet in the street.

Fast forward twenty years and Collette (Andrea Riseborough) is in London about to plant a bomb on the underground. Only, the authorities are on to her and she gets captured. They have enough information to put her away, where she will lose her son or, they tell her, she could become an informant and work for MI5.

She agrees, way too easily, which is one of a few things that are wrong with an otherwise impressive film. A lot of things seem a little too easy, not only is Colette easily turned into an informant but back in Belfast, although they are instantly suspicious of her return, particularly as CCTV coverage of her had featured on the TV News but nobody makes too much of it. They certainly don’t think to follow her to her regular meetings with Mac (Clive Owen) her MI5 handler. Perhaps because most of these meetings seem to happen in the pouring rain.

There is good tension in the film though. Gerry, the local IRA commander, is the one man who is suspicious. He knows there’s an informant in their midst and will happily use a little water torture on Colette’s brother to find out if it’s her. Possibly Gerry’s character and his role could have been developed further but the film doesn’t really dip into the politics of the situation and the full horrors of terrorism are largely absent from the screen.

The film prefers instead to pinpoint the distrust and paranoia on both sides. Whereas Colette has to betray her own side and family, Mac has his own problems, Gillian Anderson. Anderson appears briefly as a senior MI5 Officer putting obstacles in Mac’s path as she keeps him in the dark as regards the bigger picture in infiltrating this particular IRA cell. He starts to feel responsible for Colette when it becomes apparent she is just a decoy to take the heat off their main informant.

It's a good film, intelligent, suspenseful and well-acted. Riseborough is excellent and even Owen is sort of ok. It's just lacking in a bit of extra oomph.

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...