The Brave One

Although I like Neil Jordan's films, I probably wouldn't have watched 'The Brave One' had it not been for Jodie Foster's presence. I have always had a platonic fondness for her; we kind of grew up together.

Jodie plays a radio presenter called Erica Bain. One night, she is out walking her dog with her fiancé when three men seize the dog, demanding a reward for its return. When they refuse, they are attacked by two of the men, while a third films the action on a camcorder. Erica is beaten up and is in a coma for three weeks. When she comes round she is told that her fiancé is dead and to her, her life is effectively over, even her dog is missing. The police are not a great help and her way of coping is to buy an unlicensed gun and seek out the men responsible.



When she is witness to a shooting in a shop and is threatened by the killer, she pulls out her gun, kills him, and walks away. Then she comes across some youths terrorizing subway passengers, when they pick on her, she shoots them dead. So it goes on. The police realise a vigilante killer is on the loose but don't know who it is.

One day she is asked to attend a line-out to identify a man the police think is responsible for her fiancé's death. She recognizes him, but doesn't pick him out. Instead she finds him and the others. She manages to kill two of them but she is stopped from killing the third by the detective on the case, Detective Mercer (Terrence Howard). Instead he lets her kill the last one using his gun, leaving her gun at the scene and so framing them as the 'vigilantes'. Hmmm. Dodgy ending but never mind.



It is really just a standard revenge movie, albeit with a female lead. Although it does explore how grief and violence can change a person irrevocably. Erica herself realises that she is a stranger to herself, that she has reinvented herself as someone else.



It's a film that sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. Jodie Foster is good, as ever, but not outstanding.

Caramel

We see a Lebanese film called 'Caramel'. The film takes place in modern-day Beirut, in a beauty salon called Si Belle. The title refers to the caramelized sugar used to wax the salon’s customers. The story follows five women as they cope with various 'life' dilemmas, generally involving romance. Surprisingly for a film based in Beirut, there are no references to war or politics which is some achievement and a positive one.

The owner of the salon is Layal, played by Nadine Labaki, who also wrote and directed the film. Layal is too caught up in an affair with a married man to notice the attention she is getting from a traffic policeman who flirts with her while slapping parking tickets on her car. Who says romance is dead? The 'caramel' also comes in useful for inflicting pain on her lover's wife, when she ends up in the salon.

Meanwhile, her employees at the salon have their own problems. Nisrine is about to get married, but is worried that her husband-to-be will find out that she's been putting it about rather than saving herself for him. She goes to see if a surgeon can fix the problem for her.



There's Rima who has more of interest in women and takes to fondling the hair of a customer she fancies, as she washes it and talks them into getting it cut short.

There's Rose, an elderly seamstress who hopes to find love with a chap called Charles but is thwarted by the slightly demented Lili, who she looks after. Lili's favourite pastime seems to be collecting parking tickets from other people cars.

Finally there's an odd side-story about Jamal, an aging actress, who just seems to be worried about getting old and tries to cling to her youth. Don't we all.

The movie shows that even modern day Beirut still operates under old Islamic laws, it’s just now that western influence means that short skirts and mobile phones are allowed. Layal finds that you cannot book a hotel room unless you are either married or a prostitute, while a couple can easily get harassed by the police just for sitting talking in their car.



Maybe the storyline was simple and clear but I still got lost, probably because I'm not a girl. There were too many stories going on at once for me and as it was Lebanese, we had those subtitles things again. I do find it hard to follow subtitles and pictures at the same time.

It's certainly a girl's film; all the men in the film were a bit of an afterthought and as a man, I felt very sorry for the old chap, Charles, who got stood up at the end.



It's been likened it to a Lebanese 'Sex In The City', which is perhaps why it mystified me, they could have made quite a good soap opera out of it but thankfully they didn't. It was better made than that and well acted. An interesting but not particularly thrilling insight into a different culture. I found it all a bit depressing because in the end I'm not sure that anyone actually got what they really wanted.

Persepolis

'Persepolis' is the film version of Marjane Satrapi's autobiographical graphic novels and recounts her life up to the age of 24. It’s filmed in the same style as the novels and is therefore an animation in 2D, mainly black-and-white. None of your big budget CGI here. Satrapi even co-directed. It is made in French and as usual I found the subtitles a little fast at first but I soon got the hang of them.

Marjane is the daughter of a fairly well off couple in Teheran. Persepolis is what the ancient Greeks call Teheran. The film is, if nothing else, a good history lesson. We learn how the Shah first came to power, with the British government's role in manipulating the situation for the sake of oil depicted as a puppet show. Her family are supportive of the revolutionaries fighting against the Shah's regime but unfortunately rather than the hoped for revolution, once the Shah is deposed he is replaced by the fanatical religious regime that is still in power today.

As she grows up she becomes an avid collector of Western culture, particularly of music and collects bootleg heavy metal and punk. Everything changes though when her uncle is executed by the regime and bombs destroy her neighbourhood as the country gets embroiled in the seven-year long Iran-Iraq war.



She is a precocious child and as she gets older, her parents worry about her outspokenness, as she protests against the regime at school and in other public places. So, for her own good, her parents send her away to complete her education.



She spends her teenage years in Vienna, where she befriends a group of misfit students and enjoys the usual tribulations of being a teenager. She doesn't though feel that she fits in and returns home, where the regime is getting ever more repressive, and where all the women must wear the veil.



The 'star' of the film/cartoon is probably her wise old Grandmother, who has seen it all. She coaches Marjane in life; tells her to always have integrity, not to compromise and to never give in. She is the moral voice of the film.

Things don't work out back home either, she gets married, but it is a mistake. Eventually her parents again persuade her to leave. She goes to France, where she has remained ever since.

The story is always interesting and often darkly humorous, while the approach to telling it is original, if a bit quirky. I think the simplistic animation re-emphasises that the story is told from a child's point of view and works well. Although the situation is simplified you still come away feeling educated. It's never sentimental and doesn't preach. You also come away feeling that you've got to know Marjane Satrapi. Highly recommended.

Joy Division

'Joy Division' is the second of two films focusing on the life and times of the influential Manchester band. Whilst not quite as entertaining as last year's 'Control' mainly because it lacks a big enough dose of Curtis, which was brilliant added by Sam Riley in 'Control'. As much as director Grant Gee would, I'm sure, have liked to interview Curtis, this was clearly not possible. It is still though an interesting and informative film, particularly for a fan like me.

It also lacks a contribution from Deborah Curtis, perhaps contractually bound not to appear, as it was her book that 'Control' was made from. It does though benefit from the insight of Curtis's lover Annik Honoré, who appears to be the only person who noticed, before the event, that Ian Curtis' lyrics were effectively his suicide note.



Grant Gee gets intelligent input from the three surviving members of the band along with other key people from the period such as Tony Wilson and Paul Morley. Regrettably contributions were also not possible from manager Rob Gretton and producer Martin Hannett both, and I did not realise this, are no longer with us. It's a good job they made this film when they were still enough people around to interview. Tony Wilson died not long after it was made.

Hannett, who developed their sound, was often acknowledged as the 5th member. There was a great quote from him, that the band were "a gift to a producer, because they didn't have a clue".

The film includes, as well as interviews, old footage, and new photos of 'Things That are Not There', important Manchester locations also no longer with us.

The film follows the band from their inception through to their eventual success and Curtis' decline with epilepsy and the severe mood swings caused by his medication. By 1980, Curtis had already attempted to commit suicide once but had failed. The band didn't seem surprised he'd tried again just shocked he'd succeeded.

The best parts of the film are of course the precious live footage and the excellent music. We also learn the origins of the famous album covers and the concern in the ranks after Curtis' suicide when they realise that the still unreleased 'Closer' has a tomb on the cover.



Within weeks of his death, their live favourite 'Love Will Tear Us Apart' was released and went top 10, giving the band their first hit. The album with the tomb on the cover soon followed. Popularity arrived at last.

At the end we see a recent performance by New Order, with the three remaining members playing 'Shadowplay'. This is overlaid on a clip of Joy Division playing the same song. Surprisingly it works quite well.

Happy-Go-Lucky

Tonight's film is Happy-Go-Lucky (with hyphens), the latest film from Mike Leigh.

Poppy Cross (Sally Hawkins) is thirty and a Primary School teacher working in London. Her approach to life is to not take anything too seriously or preferably not seriously at all. Of course there's nothing wrong in being upbeat but she is annoyingly cheerful, far too 'up' for her own good and it actually makes her into an immensely irritating individual, along with her equally exasperating friends and her sisters. However once you get past your initial annoyance at her, the film grabs you as it contrasts Poppy with the other characters in the film and their different approaches to life.

Her younger sister is very downbeat with exams looming and pulls no punches with her comments. Her other sister has settled down, got married, is pregnant, has a house and a pension but is bitterly jealous of Poppy's freedom. Her fellow teachers have equally dull lives. Her headmaster's weekly highlight is a Flamenco class hosted by a teacher with men issues. Another teacher, Tash is swamped by the demands of her large family.

Despite being supposedly happy with her lot, Poppy has no boyfriend, which is presumably because she's simply unliveable with. Less clear is why her saner flatmate Zoë (Alexis Zegerman) is single.



She also doesn't drive; instead she cycles everywhere. The reason for this, I assume, is because she is incapable of taking anything seriously it makes her un-teachable when it comes to driving. This is proven when, after the theft of her bike, she decides to learn.

Her policy in life seems to be to try and make everyone else happy but that is not a challenge she is set to win when faced with Scott, her practically psychopathic driving instructor (Eddie Marsan). Scott is the exact opposite of happy. He's an angry, frustrated, lunatic of a man tortured by his past. He berates her for wearing heels and for not concentrating. She dangerously pushes her luck too far with him. An oddity in the film is that we are told her driving lessons cost £22.50, yet Poppy always pays in notes and never receives any change. I wonder why she's tipping him?



Her urge to do good and make people happy takes her into some dangerous situations such as when she befriends a homeless man but also reaps dividends when she correctly diagnoses a boy at school who has trouble at home and she calls in a social worker. Bizarrely the social worker asks her out. Seemingly not being satisfied dealing with troubled children he also fancies a go at the not-so-grown-up Poppy.

It all makes for very watchable viewing. There's some great scenes, one of Poppy in colourful tights and a g-string getting her back sorted by a physiotherapist, springs to mind.

Regardless of what happens in her life Poppy never stops smiling. Her attitude, irritating though it can be, is probably a lot better than the approach taken by other people in her life and that’s perhaps the point Mike Leigh is trying to make.

An excellent film.

Son Of Rambow

Tonight, ‘Son Of Rambow’. Set in the early 1980's, somewhere in Hertfordshire, the movie concerns a young boy named Will Proudfoot, who comes from a family hooked on the Plymouth Brethren religion. The Plymouth Brethren reckon they are God's 'chosen ones' and their beliefs keep Will 'sheltered' from music, TV, books and other ills of society. Instead he channels his imagination into doodles on the toilet cubicle wall and elaborate drawings scrawled all over the pages of his bible.

He's not even supposed to mix with 'ordinary' folks but as he's at a normal comprehensive school this is inevitable. This is how his oppressive little world collides with the totally extraordinary one of Lee Carter, the school tearaway, amateur bootlegger and filmmaker. When Lee ‘saves’ Will from punishment at school, he manipulates him into being his stuntman for a film he plans to enter in the BBC Screen Test competition. You remember Screen Test don’t you? Michael Rodd and all that. It ran for years until it was axed in 1984 after it was entrusted to Mark Curry. The prize for winning the young filmmakers' competition was usually a movie camera. I remember wanting to send a film in myself but the problem was no one I knew had a camera and the only way of getting one seemed to be to win one on Screen Test but first I needed a camera... so it never happened.

The two boys are similar in some ways, both lack positive influences at home. Will’s died whilst mowing the lawn and his mother is... well... Plymouth Brethren. Lee has no parents at home at all, his mother seems to be permanently abroad, he lives with and seems to look after his elder brother, bizarrely in a care home for elderly folks that they own. One of the patients turns out to be Eric Sykes.

In other ways the boys are polar opposites, yet they form an unlikely friendship. One moment at Lee's house, changes Will's view on life forever. He gets to see a pirated copy of 'First Blood' on the forbidden television and suddenly there is something to channel his imagination into. The boys set about a remake of sorts of 'First Blood' which they call 'Son Of Rambow'. Will turns out to be practically indestructible as, in his role as stuntman, he tumbles from trees, gets catapulted through the air, and swings from a rope into a lake, even though he can’t swim.



They get on great until a French exchange student called Didier appears on the scene. He, along with his entourage of English pupils, muscles in on the film and everything goes pear-shaped. The film dwells too much on Didier where the main interest is really Lee and Will but despite that flaw we still get a terrific offbeat story of growing up and discovering friendship via rebellion. It’s all terribly predictable but that doesn't matter at all.



It's funny but not slapstick, it even made me laugh. It's touching but not overly sentimental. It’s light entertainment but also has some more serious subplots. Indoctrinated child escapes from psychological bullying by religious group?

It's also a great chance for anyone who grew up in the 80's to do a bit of reminiscing. There's loads of great period detail with new wave fashion, music and some superbly exaggerated stereotypes. Then there's the excellent flying 'guide dogs for the blind' Labrador-shaped charity box. Remember those?

There are also some wonderfully irresponsible messages in there, such as the impression that you can light a cigarette by connecting yourself and your friends to the mains electricity. Don't try that at home kids.

On top of that all the performances are excellent, especially those by all the children. 'Skill on toast' as they said in them days.

Love in the Time Of Cholera

Set in Colombia, the film opens with a man falling to his death after trying to retrieve a parrot from a tree. In the next scene, an old man is laying in bed with a girl over fifty years his junior (nice work if you can get it). The ringing of the church bells, signifying a funeral, alerts him and strangely he casts aside the young girl, impressive chest and all. The first of many chests up for comparison tonight.

The old man is Florentino Ariza and straight after the funeral, he approaches the widow Fermina Daza, ignoring her distress at her husband's death and declares his everlasting love for her. Enraged by the gall of the man, she understandably tells him where to get off. Apparently, he made the same vow many years before and so the film takes us back fifty years in time and tells us his story.

When they were young, Florentino was a mere telegraph boy, who was besotted with Fermina from the first time he saw her. He is persistent, constantly pursuing her, writing her letters and they have a short romance. Her father tries to keep them apart and one day she rejects him totally. Then when she goes down with suspected Cholera a doctor is called. The doctor is Juvenal Urbino, the man who falls out of the tree. He immediately gets one up on Florentino when he cunningly persuades her to get her chest out in the interests of a very thorough examination. Ha, writing letters doesn't get you that far does it! He deduces it isn’t Cholera and so she lives. Her father is so gratified that he asks the doctor what he can do to repay him. I expected Dr Urbino, obviously impressed with what she’d shown him, to demand his Daughter there and then but he is more subtle, with the help of her father he gradually wins her over, and marries her.

Florentino (now played by Javier Bardem and looking like No Country For Old Men meets Bleak House) is distraught but remains obsessed with her. He vows he will stay a virgin until they are together again.



His boss takes him to the whorehouse to take his mind off things but he's not interested. His chastity though, only lasts until he bizarrely gets jumped by a mystery woman on a boat trip. Some you win, some you lose, I guess.

With his vow in tatters perhaps it's time to move on, eh Florentino? They say the best way to get over heartache is to channel your energies into something new and he certainly does that. He drowns his sorrows in the arms and amongst other limbs of many women, which adds a whole new dimension to being ‘on the rebound’.

He proceeds to have his way with anything that moves, if it's female, it doesn't matter if she's available or not. In fact after seducing one particular married woman, he scrawled a declaration of his ownership on her body and when she forgot to wash if off before she cuddled up with her husband that night, her enraged husband killed her. Slight over reaction perhaps but I imagine he was a tad pissed off.

He also keeps notes and records each of his conquests in detail, probably giving marks out of ten for each one. Just think what he could have done had they had Excel in them days. He could have done graphs and all sorts of fancy things.

If all this is meant to help him get over the pain of losing Fermina, it doesn't work. Apparently absence really does seem to make the heart grow fonder in his case, even if other parts of him have long since got over it and moved on to pastures new, and then moved on again... and again... By the time her husband dies and she is up for grabs again, 51 years, 9 months and 4 days have passed and Florentino is in the arms of his 622nd conquest when the funeral bells ring. Although it's a bit unbelievable that an old man can still pull so many much young women but I suppose it happens, just not to most of us.



In the end they do get together and he finally gets to bed the woman he was saving himself for. He assures her that he's 'remained a virgin' for her. He’s a card. Not that she believes him.

The film was a brave attempt to turn what I imagine is a complex book into a film and it's far from perfect but I enjoyed it. Although you didn't really get any emotional attachment with the main characters but perhaps that was the idea.

The biggest let down was by the make up department. The characters had to age by 50 years and it's done badly. Fermina at 70 just looked like a 30 year old who'd had too many vodka's, that is until she unveiled her chest for him, which is by now around her knees. It wasn't there when she showed it Dr Urbino all those years ago. I hate to think how they achieved that effect, perhaps they got a stunt double in. Oddly, only one actress is chosen to play Fermina throughout her life while two actors share the role of Florentino. Perhaps they went over budget.

The film ends with them on a river cruise and the Captain of the ship raising the flag of cholera, so that they won't have to call at any ports.

Suppose it's not a bad gig, working your way through 622 women and still getting the girl of your dreams.