BRIGHTON ROCK (2010 - Cert 15)

In many ways perhaps I am the perfect audience for this updated version of Graham Green's often revered novel. I've not read the book, I've not seen the 1947 adaptation starring Richard Attenborough, in fact, somehow, I've managed to get to 30 years old without being told anything substantial about either.  So, on a chilly midweek night when I utilised my brand new lifetime membership at the Prince Charles Cinema for the first time, would it prove to be a case of ignorance is bliss?



It's clear that Rowan Joffe, the first time director entrusted with this remake (although he isn't a complete novice - he had writing credits for the recent The American and 28 Weeks Later) thinks that the story is an important one as he tries to give it much more an epic and cinematic feel than is often applied to British productions. And I have to say that he makes a very good stab at it and for the most part succeeds. Big bold shots of the waves crashing in towards the seafront, with a score that very much reminded me of Taxi Driver and Shutter Island, building to a crescendo, and then falling silent - the viewer is under no illusions that something bad is going to happen. He is very daring with the camera and creates some beautifully juxtaposing shots such as one with a row of colourful, quaint houses with a huge, dark tower block directly behind it. It's a statement about the time in Britain 1964, in which the film is set, and it's when Joffe focuses on the era, rather than the original's 1930's setting, where the film works. The set up of the film, although not what it is actually about, is essentially a gangland/gangster story where a murder by Pinkie (Sam Riley) causes big ripples and must be covered up at all costs. Bringing this story into 1964 is a brave move but one that, at times, clicks into place. The Mods and Rockers descend onto Brighton and Pinky's penchant for violence and ruthless streak all of a sudden becomes something with a social context, not just a trait of that particular character. 1964 was also the year of the last hangings in the UK, so bringing the story forward any further would mean a very different fate if police caught those committing the murder. There is also an underplayed, yet I found very hard to watch scene, in which a father signs away permission for his daughter to marry, for £175. Often films will be set in a era just so that a character can wear a cool hat, but the decision of when to set Brighton Rock was one with a lot of intention.

Having said that, large parts of the film are dull and far from fresh. It may be because we are over exposed to films, TV and stories of gangsters, but the plot line involving rival gangs going after each other and eluding the law, speaking aggressively in smoky rooms and threatening revenge all got a bit boring. I even looked at my watch at one stage, which is never a good sign, especially when I wasn't wearing one.

However, as I said previously, the film isn't actually about gangsters. It's about Pinkie and his descent into madness through desperation and the lengths to which he will go to in order to avoid capture. Even more integral to proceedings is the doomed relationship, between Pinkie and Rose (Andrea Riseborough), doomed because of the control and manipulation they both have over one another, and how blind and oblivious love can be. At times, the scenes played out by the two of them are great, full of tension and boiling over with potential conflict, a hair's breadth away from violence. At others though, they feel overly laboured and, the be frank, dull. Sam Riley, who I loved in Control and was good in the strange and interesting Franklyn, is inconsistent in Brighton Rock. There are scenes where he has me totally convinced of his unpredictability, then 20 minutes later, my mind wandered and I was put off by his strange accent. Riseborough however is very good. Delicate and determined all at the same time, walking a tightrope, I sensed that she could go either way at any point. One to watch. More established names appear in the supporting cast - Helen Mirren has fun as Rose's maternal boss figure, trying to save Rose and expose Pinkie. She is as always very good. John Hurt is watchable but in a role that I couldn't help but feel was a bit pointless. Phillip Davis plays what he always plays, Phillip Davis I think. Andy Serkis plays a caricature of a rich gangster boss, sitting in his hotel room in immaculate clothes with camp overtones - decent but a bit odd (not in a good way).

So, if you haven't picked it up yet, it's a film of hits and misses. There are great scenes in there, particularly an attempted murder amongst the riots of Mods and Rockers and an escape on a scooter along the seafront. Equally though there are a number of scenes that really test the patience. It's ambitious  and brave - a remake of such a highly regarded film could have been safer with less risks, but the fact they have tried to do something interesting with the material should be commended. Plus it has an ending that really makes amends for the rest of the film. The final confrontation is tense and dark, and unexpected, but the very last scene glides towards what I thought was to be a slightly predictable, if upsetting, denouement, only to veer away at the last minute to something very different and even more hearbreaking. A great finish to an otherwise patchy film.

SEX & DRUGS & ROCK & ROLL (2010 - Cert 15)

The musical biopic is one of my least favourite types of film. They tend to be predictable, formulaic and more often than not they are guilty of portraying their subject in a far more positive light than they might deserve. An exercise in nostalgic worship, which might be nice if you're a fan of Ray Charles, but it doesn't make for interesting viewing for any old cinema goer.

Ian Dury isn't someone I know a vast amount about. I know and love some of his music but I certainly wouldn't hold myself out as an expert on his back catalogue and claim him to be one of my idols. However, I have heard enough over the the years, from a good mate of mine, to know that he lived a very interesting life, had a lot to come to terms with and was a hell of a long way from being a conformist. Based on the small amount of knowledge I have, as I popped in the DVD of Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll, I was confident that there was enough in the tank to ensure that the story of Ian Dury, as told by first time writer Paul Viragh and first time feature director Mat Whitecross, was not going to be the run of mill 'journey' of a musician.



And in all honesty, that assumption was pretty much spot on. The story is cleverly set up as a Dury performance, on stage, reciting his poetry, with brightly coloured, energetic, visual imagery and animated sequences, telling the story of his life, which is then effectively portrayed to us in flashback. The film opens in darkness, with Dury (played by the chameleon Andy Serkis) walking on stage towards us, pausing, before lights flash on and he unleashes a tirade of his rhymes at us. It's a great opening and immediately has us thinking of Dury as a performer, not one of us. This portrayal becomes even more cunning when it's compared to the Dury we see in the dull tones of the flashbacks. Immediately two separate persona's are created, the on-stage Dury and the one who struggles with relationships and has to come to terms with his affliction resulting from polio. Don't be fooled, that last sentence is very much the tone of the film - this is not a bundle of laughs by any stretch of the imagination. It's another of the things I admired about the film - it isn't a vehicle solely to celebrate the life of Dury. It's a portrait of a man, warts and all, at times charming, at times repulsive. It's brave and straight away lifts it above other music biopics.

While we are on the subject of portrayal, I must get on to the performance of Andy Serkis. He obviously made headlines initially as the man behind the digital Gollum in Lord of the Rings, but he has promised a lot since then. His Dury is the moment where he really put his marker down as an acting force to be reckoned with. It's not a full on impersonation of Dury, but it's very close. I've looked at some footage of Dury and Serkis is spot on, on and off stage. The renditions of songs are particularly impressive, Serkis throwing himself into it fully - it could almost be Dury. It isn't just the accuracy of his performance though, it's also the intensity of it. Whenever he is on screen he got a reaction from me, whether I was moved to tears, anger or disgust, he had me convinced.  My favourite scene sees Dury speaking to disabled kids at his old school, one second he is teaching them about rhythm, the next he muses on the existence of God. Gripping stuff. Also, when you consider the lengths he went to when striving for accuracy (he stopped using one leg to allow the muscle to reduce so he could authentically echo Dury's polio damaged leg), making Daniel Day-Lewis and Robert De Niro seem like the cast on Hollyoaks, you have a real stand out performance of a tortured soul, coming to terms with a disability, surprisingly absent from the Bafta nominees list.

It isn't just a film about Dury though. The other important character is Baxter, Dury's son, played by Bill Milner (Son of Rambow). Much of the film centres on the relationship between father and son and how they both adapt to one another. At times it's very touching and upsetting, at others it feels slightly laboured and there to act as a device to develop the story. Milner is very good, but at times his scenes feel out of tone to the rest of the film - just padding.

It's good to see some other British actors such as Mackenzie Crook, Noel Clarke and Naomie Harris in such an interesting British production - they all turn in good showings. Ray Winstone is Dury's dad and is his dependable self, although he doesn't have enough of a part to stretch himself and show some flair. Tom Hughes, also seen in Cemetery Junction, is very good as Chaz Jankel and should have a good future ahead of him. I'll look forward to seeing what he has in store next. Toby Jones is the one that really jumps out from the supporting cast as Hargreaves, the nasty teacher at Dury's school. Its true that we always remember the bad guys but Jones loves it and is a real bastard.

Serkis, all make it very watchable. I imagine it's a must see for all Dury fans, but for any fan of well made cinema there are plenty of reasons to be cheerful.

BURKE AND HARE (2010 - Cert 15)

John Landis' return from a 12 year break from cinema was an event in 2010 that didn't really get as much press as it should have done. A hiatus of over a decade from the man who brought us An American Werewolf in London, Blues Brothers, Trading Places and the affectionately remembered The Three Amigos, should really have been greeted by huge fanfare, but the waters barely rippled.

In many ways, the story of Burke and Hare, is classic Landis. Serial murders in Edinburgh between 1827 - 1831, committed solely for the purpose of selling the corpses to a doctor for research (a historic and brutal version of Cash Converters) is the perfect combination of the darkness of death and the farcical lengths people go to for economic gain, ideally suited to Landis' blackly comic visions.



He gets a good cast on board as well. Burke and Hare themselves are played by Simon Pegg, the film geek's leading man, and Andy Serkis, a brilliant actor with cult status for the choice of some of his roles. They couldn't be a better fit for a film heralding the return of a director held in such high esteem by film buff-dom. Isla Fisher is a good addition as well as the love interest, attractive but goofy and comedic in her own right. Tim Curry and Tom Wilkinson are present and correct as rival doctors trying to beat each other to advances in the medical profession. Christopher Lee has a little cameo, a couple of British TV comedy favourites turn up in Paul Whitehouse and Jessica Hynes. Oh and Ronnie Corbett plays the head of the militia. Remarkable.

So, great director, ludicrously dark yet true story, dependably decent and slightly mental, if unspectacular casting. It has to be a sure-fire black comedy hit.

Perhaps it should have been, but quite frankly it's all a bit of a mess. The story itself rumbles along at a good pace, predictable at times but with enough coming from leftfield to make it interesting. The narrative follows Burke and Hare, the killers, and has them as the 'heroes' of the piece. I liked the fact that we were being asked to side with the bad guys, rather than the usual tale of good vs evil. That isn't the problem though, it's the tone of the film, and more specifically the comedy that I take issue with. There are some nice dark comic touches as our heroes try to become murderers and have varying levels of success. But then Landis resorts to broad slapstick comedy and a whole host of lines that just don't cut the mustard. I did chuckle a few times, but this was mostly to do with Pegg's delivery rather than anything else. He could read the back of a cornflakes box and make it funny. Serkis is annoying, and barely trying, for the vast majority of his time on screen, Curry and Wilkinson are good fun, Fisher does well and is likeable, but the best turn in the film has to go to little Ronnie Corbett. He's not brilliant by any stretch of the imagination, but he is a laugh and is never dull.

It all felt a little diluted...the true events should have given Landis and the writing team plenty to harvest, both in terms of comedy and interesting characters. Instead, the film relies on Simon Pegg's facial expressions and the noise of breaking bones for the majority of it's comedy, rather than the potential in the story of two Irish immigrants and the combination of the business theory of supply and demand and murder. The characters are two-dimensional at best, there solely to fall over or say funny things, which is a shame because the ending is braver than the rest of the film leaves you expecting and it would have had at least a bit of emotional impact if some care was made with creating characters instead of cardboard cut outs. This is made all the more frustrating when you consider that an American Werewolf in London is still one of the finest examples of doing this sort of thing properly. It makes me think it's more to do with laziness rather than anything else.

Massively disappointing as a Landis fan, a Pegg fan and a cinema fan. Worth a look though for Ronnie Corbett, and it's a shame that the best line of the film is used in the trailer.