filmgaze.com - Part 19

LFF 2014: The Imitation Game ****

Posted: 22/11/2014

The life of the brilliant-minded Alan Turing is not known by most. That will certainly change after this film, The Imitation Game, with the genius British logician and cryptologist forever associated with cracking the Nazis’ Enigma Code and helping the Allies win World War II. But inventor of the modern-day computer – as is suggested here, is stretching the truth a little.

–

What will also be established is Benedict Cumberbatch as one of Britain’s leading actors with his outstanding portrayal of Turing. Some might cynically say it’s total awards-baiting in production and delivery, though it is Cumberbatch’s finest hour.

–

Mathematician Alan Turing arrives at Bletchley Park, code-cracking HQ to attend an interview with Commander Alastair Denniston (Charles Dance). What he seriously lacks in social skills, he makes up for in numbers brilliance, recognised by MI6 spook Stewart Menzies (Mark Strong). He is recruited into a team of code-crackers led by ladies’ man Hugh Alexander (Matthew Goode) that includes Scot John Cairncross (Downton’s Allen Leech) and Peter Hilton (Matthew Beard).

–

His colleagues tolerate Turing’s odd behaviour but don’t like him much. This resentment increases when he starts demanding resources to build his code-cracking BOMB machine (so-called because it ticks) and is then put in charge of the others. Turing recruits crossword whiz Joan Clarke (Keira Knightley) – about the only person who likes to spend time with him. But time is running out to crack the Nazis’ Engima Code, as well as the patience of Top Brass.

–

The performances are faultless, with Cumberbatch delivering some immensely funny retorts without consequence. Turing’s interview with Denniston is a prime example, that the man managed to achieve anything is incredible with his catalogue of social faux pas. There is also another scene that involves getting soup for lunch which is equally delightful. These are the comedy moments in a film that is about serious stuff. Knightley and the rest of the cast are naturals – as expected, the former effortlessly providing her Atonement-style clipped responses.

–

In fact, director Morten Tyldum fits the Brit period drama mold perfectly, with any reference to his brilliant black Norwegian comedy Headhunters long suppressed. Indeed, the whole process while beautifully achieved, does feel like many other Brit war period dramas. What really makes Turing tick – aside from his codes and his first love affair with another boy at school – will be left a little too ambiguous for something that is supposed to be a biopic.

–

The really emotive part that strikes a chord is the ending when the to-and-fro narrative finally centres on events in the fifties, after Turing was arrested and investigated for a homosexual act. Finally, Cumberbatch is given some leeway to get under Turing’s skin and truly act out the character’s suffering from chemical ‘treatment’ to suppress his improper (and illegal) impulses.

–

The Imitation Game is a gripping and well-crafted period dramatisation of British national pride – the ending suggesting national shame at not recognising national treasure Turing when he was still alive, as well as the very real side effects of homophobic ignorance. Indeed Cumberbatch and co should be proud of their achievements here.

4/5 stars

By @FilmGazer

Follow on Twitter

Third Person **

by lgileskeddie

Posted: 21/11/2014

Paul Haggis (of Crash fame) has gone for the ‘romance’ route this time in exploring relationship highs and lows. That’s not to say he’s gone all rom-com slushy, rather his interwoven tale, Third Person, starts out to be three separate troubled affairs that eventually connect by the end credits.

The story plays out in New York, Paris and Rome. Michael (Liam Neeson) is a Pulitzer Prize-winning fiction author desperately trying to recapture his talent in a Parisian hotel room by completely his latest book, only to be interrupted by a visit from his mistress, Anna (Olivia Wilde), while escaping the fallout of a tragic event back home.

Meanwhile, Scott (Adrien Brody) on business Rome comes across a beautiful gypsy woman Monika (Israeli stunner Moran Atias) at a bar who has no money to pay off traffickers who have her little daughter. In New York, Julia (Mila Kunis), an ‘jobbing’ actress is trying to make ends meet in dead-end jobs while yearning to get custody of her young son who is living with his father Rick (James Franco) after an incident of abuse.

Third Person is a credible tale of grief and hardship, but it doesn’t endear us to any of the characters along their journeys. They all appear selfish, almost narcissistic in nature that empathising with any of them is a stretch – unless you are a parent, then it lazily taps into that engrained feeling of forlorn at being absent from your child.

Actually, it’s another Neeson meal ticket with a juicy ‘leading’ part for the action old-timer: He gets to intertwine with a younger woman. Indeed, Third Person feels like a middle-aged man’s wet dream with the ideas of escapism to luxurious European surroundings while having an exciting (if unhinged) young woman obsessing after you. Neeson and the others all give commendable performances, though nothing that stands out. In not really connecting with any of the characters embroiled in their lot, the film drifts from one scenario to another, all watchable, before you get the clever ‘twist’.

Indeed there is a moment in the film that ‘doesn’t feel quite right’, where a prop is out of place and starts you thinking what the heck is going on? In this respect, Haggis is a master of tying up loose plotlines into a conclusion that makes you wonder at his skill. The rest of the time getting there feels altogether very samey as other such films. It’s as though you are party to what’s going on, thrown into each couple’s situation but without all the details needed to truly become absorbed. This makes the status quo less enriching.

Third Person is another lesson in Haggis non-linear storytelling, something you can’t fault the writer-director on. It’s just a shame that the characters feel too detached to qualify for our sympathy. This is where the film fails down, as the twist is clever – though the more astute out there might twig in advance from the film’s tagline, “Life can change at the turn of a page”. Perhaps that’s too much of a clue and gives the game away before you embark on watching? In fact, the trailer summarises most of the couples’ issues anyway.

2/5 stars

By @FilmGazer

Follow on Twitter

Nativity 3: Dude, Where’s My Donkey?! *

by lgileskeddie

Posted: 13/11/2014

They say bad things come in threes. When it comes to writer-director Debbie Isitt’s third Nativity film, things go from bad to worse. True, Dude, Where’s My Donkey?! is geared towards adult-chaperoned kiddies ready for a cheeky pre-festive giggle – and Mr Poppy (Marc Wootton) and his donkey Archie are back (again) to oblige, like an annoying panto duo long past its prime.

The pull for the older crowd this time seems to be Martin Clunes and Catherine Tate, with Celia Imrie thrown in for chaotic measure. Whereas the latter plays adequately to type as the harassed new headmistress, all the former does is throw doubt as to their mental capacity at the time of accepting the roles. Do not expect a play on Doc Martin grumpiness, or anything like a Tate comedic treat.

Also, think ‘musical’ rather than kiddie comedy as at every available opportunity things burst into (irritating) song, usually led by one of the oldest junior school pupils ever seen. By the way, this braces-wearing teen ‘starlet’ is absent from some promotional posters, a massive slap in the face for someone tasked with kicking off each musical rendition with such enthusiasm.

St Bernadette’s needs help again to stay open (someone must be paying off Ofsted). After taking the kids to the local shopping centre, man-child Mr Poppy comes up with a great idea; enter a flash mob dance competition headed up by pop star Bradley Finch (Adam Garcia) and win a trip to New York. Hence this will show what a great school St Bernadette’s is that it can’t possibly be closed. There’s only one hurdle in the shape of new headmistress Mrs Keen (Imrie) who wants unqualified supply teacher Poppy gone and the school returned to order.

Along comes new teacher Mr Shepherd (Clunes) to step into Poppy’s place. With the big clown still haunting the school premises, Shepherd begrudgingly agrees to Poppy’s flash mob theory but then gets kicked in the head by accident by Archie the Donkey and loses his memory. He can’t even remember his own cute daughter, Lauren (Lauren Hobbs, the only star quality), or his fiancé, Sophie (Tate) who is waiting in New York to marry him. Poppy and kids decide to help get Shepherd’s memory back and win the competition.

Bah! Humbug! Yes, it’s like putting the boot into a local kid’s school nativity play when the little poppets are merely trying their best but are consistently upstaged by Mr Poppy’s idiocy. As creepy as a grown man preferring the company of kids is, Wootton’s portrayal is no more cringing than that of Cbeebies’ Justin – but at least the latter is educational in his entertainment. What becomes rapidly tiresome is the pairing of Wootton and Clunes as a pair of fools, resorting to fart jokes to get laughs – however curious it is witnessing Clunes in colourful jeans. There is no expected playoff of Poppy’s ‘innocence’ against a Doc Martin haughtiness that is perhaps expected by older viewers.

Tate as Sophie spends most of the time stressing on a phone, marooned in a NYC hotel for virtually the entire film, then being dolled up like the Christmas tree fairy for various dance scenes and the predictable Xmas wedding. In fact, returning character, the evil Gordon Shakespeare, played by Jason Watkins seems to come into his camp own this time around, leading his well-bred troupe into a ‘Gangnam Style’ flash mob dance that is one of the only entertaining musical pieces. Title tune, Dude, Where’s My Donkey?! is not. Tuneless but catchy, it has the same effect as watching any kid’s panto performance – one being encouragingly supportive but enduring bum notes through gritted teeth.

As things get sillier and parents begin to wonder why they put their kids through this (this parent included), Archie makes a final appearance – as does the rest of the cast – up the top of a famous Big Apple landmark. Bizarre is not the half of it. But if all else fails, just sing along to disguise what an ass the whole sorry thing is. Note to director: look up the true meaning of ‘flash mob’ too.

1/5 stars

By @FilmGazer

Follow on Twitter

Interstellar ****

by lgileskeddie

Posted: 13/11/2014

With concerns about our planet’s ailing health, and our renewed interest in what lies ‘out there’ among the stars, The Dark Knight director Christopher Nolan’s new apocalyptic sci-fi Interstellar couldn’t come at a better time to play on our fears and curiosity. It’s set in a parallel ‘now’ on Earth that feels alien, even though it could just been around the corner as a possible reality. This odious atmosphere creates civil unrest and an instinct to literally explore our wider horizons. In this sense, we tap into the lead characters’ strong will to survive.

As the Earth’s atmosphere is changing, making it increasingly uninhabitable, a team of explorers that include farmer and former NASA space shuttle engineer/pilot Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) and scientist Amelia (Anne Hathaway) are launched into space to find a possible planet that can sustain our existence in another faraway galaxy.

Naturally Nolan, the film has a foreboding presence made all the more disturbing by our imaginations running riot. The ‘enemy’ is mankind itself that has created the current situation. Nolan skilfully compares man’s selfish nature in a couple of intimate subplots with the universe itself (and their insignificance to it). The result makes us seem more ignorant and vulnerable. It is a sobering realisation.

Although there is a sense of urgency as the explorers navigate new worlds, Nolan’s film never seems rushed. There is a natural passing of time, even as the explorers’ aging process stands still. In fact, there is a wealth of information to Interstellar to digest – too much sometimes when it comes to the quantum physics angle. In true Nolan style, he delivers one of his most cerebral films yet. This is not a film for parking your brain outside the cinema. It requires an investment and then some – possibly a second viewing.

With the likes of award-winning actors McConaughey and Hathaway on board, Nolan’s film matches its wealth of subject matter with a richness of A-class acting talent. McConaughey is fully engaging as Cooper, a family-centric father who has to make the ultimate sacrifice. It feels like the part the actor has been waiting for, after recent winning performances. McConaughey is no stranger to having to dominate the frame while surrounded by or causing controversy. Cooper has an edgy side, making him a fascinating to watch. He is also our ‘guide’ throughout the adventure. What happens to him and Hathaway’s characters is head-scratching stuff. Again, attention needs to be paid to get the most out of Interstellar.

Enveloping the human drama is some stunning production design and cinematography as each landscape is as much an organic player. This gives the film an additional dimension to be studied. There are also pockets of action as things go less than smoothly on the mission, counterbalanced by activity back home that heightens tension and breaks up the mind-blowing science on offer. Beware an (unintentionally) amusing element at times when Nolan’s answer to the universe appears to be ‘love conquers all’. Maybe it does.

Interstellar is a powerful smorgasbord of scientific and faith-related ideas wrapped up in an intergalactic adventure. It blows the mind in its reasoning while simplifying the importance of us preserving our quality of life and our communications. This is Nolan in scintillating freefall. Just tune in for the ride or you will get left behind.

4/5 stars

By @FilmGazer

Follow on Twitter

LFF 2014: Fury ****

by lgileskeddie

Posted: 29/10/2014

War makes for a powerful cinematic theme. It’s the backdrop for many a personal struggle. End of Watch (2012) writer-director David Ayer’s Fury is no exception. While about the physical horrors of combat, it’s also a sobering coming-of-age drama, told through the eyes of a new tank recruit. It also addresses the psychological effect on the battle-hardened men who have begrudgingly made their Sherman tank their ‘home’.

In fact, that’s exactly how the metal monstrosity feels – a place of both danger and perverse sanctuary. Ayer juxtaposes the confines of the tank’s interior with the outer world that’s equally constraining, set behind enemy lines in Germany. It’s a very different take on WWII than we’re used to seeing.

It’s April 1945, a few months before WWII ends, and as the Allies make their final push into Nazi Germany, a US tank commanded by experienced and hardened army sergeant Don ‘Wardaddy’ Collier (Brad Pitt who is also exec producer on the film) is central to securing the route along the way.

Tragically, Wardaddy has recently lost one of his five-man crew, but the Allies need his and his men’s help, so send rookie Norman Ellison (Logan Lerman) to join them, totally unprepared for tank life or the immediate horrors of war. Ellison soon learns the hard way, toughening his resolve. The final confrontation sees the crew out-numbered and out-gunned with the enemy marching towards them.

You can really taste the blood, sweat, dirt and primal fear within the tank as Ayer vividly recreates the unimaginably cramp conditions – complete with pans across the interior’s ‘décor’. It’s certainly a unique dimension, but one Ayer is no stranger to with his leads riding around in a patrol car in the 2012 film. He is expert at revealing the interpersonal moments between characters, the camaraderie, before the action kicks in.

In the action stakes, Fury is a triumph. One of the most exhilarating scenes is a tank-to-tank standoff in a field that ramps up the tension to breaking point. In others, Ayer sets out to shock with cold, hard realism – no character is safe, it seems, and it becomes unclear as to whether anyone will be left standing to tell the tale. On the contrary, the resultant ending seems a little incredulous and very Hollywood-stylised – probably to win over American audiences, although Team Wardaddy should have heroically done that already without much effort. That said the parting post-battle aerial shot of the fallout mitigates any thoughts of stylisation.

The casting is exemplary. Pitt is his usual charismatic self, though as Wardaddy who has faced many demons, he switches from being deplorable and apathetic to protector and trusted mentor, as he witnesses elements of his former self in the terrified Ellison. So, still the good guy but he has to work at keeping the balance more here.

Lerman (of Percy Jackson fame) has clearly moved on from teen productions, making a significant impression in this serious role. However, the standout performance on the night – possibly career reinvigorating – goes to Transformers’ Shia LaBeouf as the faith-wavering Boyd ‘Bible’ Swan, one of Wardaddy’s loyal team members. LaBeouf redefines himself in this, playing a damaged character clinging to humanity and civility. It’s the most powerful performance of the lot, supported by some excellent turns from Michael Peña (of End of Watch fame) and Jon Bernthal as the rest of the motley tank crew.

Ayer excels at character pieces, and Fury is such, first and foremost. It’s compelling in every sense, a tank western to appeal to all those into final shoot-outs. This is also Pitt, grittier than Lt. Aldo Raine, just pure damaged goods playing out his own kind of rough justice, questionable even as survival tactics. Fury also serves as a stark reminder of the graphic horror of WWII – as Ayer puts us right in the middle of it, when the usual American portrayal of this period is very much romanticised. That’s the big whammy setting it apart from its wartime peers.

4/5 stars

By @FilmGazer

Follow on Twitter

LFF 2014: ’71 ****

by lgileskeddie

Posted: 12/10/2014

This is Northern Ireland Troubles behind ‘enemy lines’ (from a British military perspective), a powerful cat-and-mouse game that makes ’71 an exhilarating watch from the start. There needed to be a fresh angle, which writer Gregory Burke evokes, making sure that there is enough Belfast streets-located violence to establish and drum home the effects of the sectarian violence, but to also ensure that it’s not an action replay of other films in the same genre.

In fact, the ending could be staged on any sink housing estate, and it’s this sense of ‘reality’ and possible familiarity that really grounds proceedings. In addition, ’71 stars one of the most exciting Brit actors to date, Jack O’Connell, who highly impressed with his angst-ridden portrayal of ironically-named Eric Love in LFF 2013 gritty prison drama Starred Up.

O’Connell plays young soldier Gary Hook, newly posted to Belfast in 1971 to assist the Ulster Constabulary in carrying out searches for IRA activity. He leaves a younger charge behind in the UK (this part of the story is unclear as to their relationship), as he experiences his first day on the streets. Tragedy mixed with lack of military command – accidentally abandoned by his unit – propels disoriented Hook into a dangerous situation, hunted by Sinn Fein while trying to get back to his barracks. A further explosive situation means he is also at danger from those supposedly on his own side.

This nail-nibbling drama has O’Connell’s magic touch to thank for its full impact. The actor seems to ooze violence and pent-up frustration like a ticking time bomb. His character here is no more vulnerable as in the 2013 film, only this time, Hook’s actions are mostly reactionary to his current situation. Amidst the storm there are brief snatches of reflection from Hook as he meets a cocky young boy who tries to help him. The rest of the film is a dangerous chase through open and confined spaces, accompanied by a feeling of hopelessness but propelled forward by the will to survive. It’s infectious as you want Hook to survive at all costs, if not for rendering the former futile if he does not.

Resident nasty Sean Harris stars as Sergeant Leslie Lewis, again proving his physical and acting prowess in such a role that will forever have him typecast but will bring him regular work for decades to come. Like O’Connell, his forte is putting his audience on edge as he has us wondering as to the full extent of his character’s capacity for malice. Lewis is no exception, turning out to be the biggest threat. In a sense, debut feature-film director Yann Demange has the right tools in place to coax out the best – and he does a fine job that is pure tension on tap.

The hard-hitting drama totally captures the surroundings of the decade too, shot in subdued, grainy tone to make it more relevant. However, because of the estate setting, this gives ’71 a surprisingly current, ‘street-wise’ feel, perhaps opening it up to a wider, younger audience who could empathise while make comparisons with life at the height of the Troubles. It’s an interesting take on the genre.

’71 will have you on the edge of your seat throughout. Like its lead character, there is no respite, even when Hook gets wounded. Adding a brilliant score from David Holmes further cements a cracking first feature for Demange and O’Connell’s natural flare for such action-drama parts.

4/5 stars

By @FilmGazer

Follow on Twitter

The Maze Runner ***

by lgileskeddie

Posted: 12/10/2014

What do you get when you cross Lord of the Flies with Lost? The answer is The Maze Runner, a screen adaptation from the first novel in the trilogy series by James Dashner. It has an appeal for all – the idea of living hand to hand and fending for ourselves in some great dystopian existence, but it’s certainly a ‘first film in the saga’ crafted flick, designed to prick the interest of those not familiar with the books as to what lies behind the maze. Who is in control? With snippet flashbacks and an intriguing ending, it’s guaranteed to get return visits for the sequel, if only to find out what the hell is going on?

Sixteen-year-old Thomas (Dylan O’Brien) wakes up to a crowd of similar-aged boys looking down at him in a cage lift that lands in what’s known as ‘The Glade’, a lush area of land/woodland surrounded by the high rocky walls of a maze. He has no recollection of who he is, and he wants to know why he is here – as does each boy. The answer seems to lie in the maze, but the only people allowed to enter are ‘Runners’ to collect more answers. They must return before the maze closes at dusk and transforms.

This has fantasy, sci-fi and social drama all mixed up into one film. Naturally, the hook is the very same thing that the lead character wants to know: who put him there and why? Unlike Lost that cleverly throws in the odd puzzle to keep us occupied and things ticking along evenly, this is a one-trick pony of ‘finding a way out of the maze’ to find the answer. It means that the mystery dulls at points, where our interest in the living arrangements should pick up.

Indeed, there are some nice performances from some of the leads, including the Brits, with an all-grown-up Thomas Brodie-Sangster of Love Actually fame as the affable, level-headed Newt, and Will Poulter as feisty, paranoid Gally showing his exciting acting talents once more. O’Brien more than ticks the attractive lead box too. The politics in The Glade are interesting enough to carry the film – the idea of breaking down social conditioning to rebuild a simpler existence. However, even though we need to remain more in The Glade to establish the order and the role playing, this does slow the pace down – our interest in danger of waning. Hence those who have not read the books naturally questioning what’s not translating well to film? Are we missing out on key suggestions as to the characters’ psyches?

The action in the maze is fun enough, complete with the Grievers, great spider-like hunters that seem to be the boys’ initial first-line enemy. These Terminator-style entities hold far more clues than first thought. However, before challenging them, what is fascinating is the boys’ varied reaction to their ‘imprisonment’ by them. It’s the ‘fight or flight’ scenario; some are ready to confront them to get to the faceless ‘authority’ behind them in order to bring about freedom and change, and others wish to live in a gilded cage, a captive environment. It’s this predicament that the story explores through the boys’ actions that is far more interesting than action in the maze itself. Though the latter has its moments, it’s been seen and done many times before.

So we will just have to wait and see in Part II. It’s the hope of being rewarded for our patience, and the ending has enough fascination to drive that curiosity until next year with The Scorch Trials. Meanwhile, like the other futuristic utopia, The Hunger Games, The Maze Runner needs to gather more pace in the next installment to make any lasting impression. Though once this first film is seen, it’s a guaranteed money spinner at the box office, ironically with what is essentially, an old hap plot done better in Lost.

3/5 stars

By @FilmGazer

Follow on Twitter

Gone Girl ****

by lgileskeddie

Posted: 12/10/2014

Imagine the person you thought you knew best was not that person at all. It’s the perfect screenplay twist to what is essentially wrapped up in a standard missing person’s crime drama. Added to which, this mystery, Gone Girl, is directed by none other than Se7en director David Fincher, a master of the downbeat, edgy and moody cinematic screen. What fans of the 2012 best-selling Gillian Flynn novel of the same name should know is the author and screenwriter has rewritten the book’s ending, supposedly to better ‘fit’ to the whole sordid situation. It makes for uncomfortable but engaging viewing.

After bar owner Nick Dunne (Ben Affleck) gets a morning call to say his front door has been left open, he returns home to discover his living room in disarray and his wife, Amy (Rosamund Pike), has vanished. Nick’s world is then turned upside down as her disappearance is investigated and he becomes the prime suspect amid an intense media circus.

Fincher favours his somber palette throughout, creating a feeling of foreboding before there is anything to feel wary about. We are instantly put in the mindset that the outcome is going to be bleak. The intriguing thing is, there is a mounting suspense within a calm and controlled pace that is brought to fruition by punctuated moments of action. In a sense, it’s contrary to the urgency of finding the missing person. In fact, the ‘momentum’ is actually provided by the growing media frenzy – Dunne himself has a rather non-proactive attitude that seems strange considering his spouse is missing. It’s these contradictions that keep things alert.

Affleck is well cast as Dunne, a tired guy who’s aspirations have long been shattered and the chance of an ‘easier lifestyle’, downsizing to his hometown from NYC, broken as his ghosts come back to haunt. Affleck delivers ‘average, ordinary guy’ easily, one with obvious faults so that we can judge then doubt him but also sympathise.

However, the real surprise delight is Pike. Having read the book, this critic had initial reservations about her in the role; could she convey a satisfactory darker side that the part needed? She has probably delivered one of her finest acting moments, playing with our ingrained perceptions of her capable, likeable personality then taking us down a deeper, darker path as Amy. Being apt at portraying a natural reserve, Pike demonstrates an exciting new niche here for more sinister roles. Her moment of triumph as Amy is actually the very end as we’re still left mesmerized by what could happen next?

In this regard, the new finale should not disappoint fans – it could be argued the novel’s ending was too much of a reveal into Amy’s mental state. This one leaves things more ambiguous and threatening.

Gone Girl makes for a perfect screen adaptation as we doubt and redoubt events and character motives. It’s provocative and suggestive but never as dull as any wait to find a loved one would be in reality. You won’t particularly like anybody in this film at the end of it, but you will sympathise with certain elements of their struggle. With Fincher at the helm, the material gets extra malice injected.

4/5 stars

By @FilmGazer

Follow on Twitter

The Equalizer ***

by lgileskeddie

Posted: 27/09/2014

Approach this film version of the iconic 1980s TV series as a reboot – not a 2014 remake, and you won’t be disappointed. The fact that popular US actor Denzel Washington is in the lead role formerly brought to life by Brit Edward Woodward should pre-empt this too. There are still similarities in concept for fans – such as the aging anti-hero on a rough justice spree (minus the trademark mac though) – but the rest is in the hands of Training Day director Anton Fuqua who teams up with Washington again on this. The Equalizer may take time to brew then come to the boil, but Washington shows he’s not done with action roles yet either.

McCall (Washington) is a hardware store worker who quietly goes about his day job then comes home to an empty and orderly apartment at night. In the early hours he takes a teabag in a folded napkin with a book to read in the local café. He befriends a young girl called Terri (Chloë Grace Moretz) who dreams of being a singer but is a high-class escort under the control of Russian pimps. One night Terri never shows up, setting McCall in motion to find out why. He crosses paths with a Russian crime gang, triggering his former ‘secret’ past existence, in order to bring justice to those who are vulnerable.

With an action director like Fuqua on the project, you would be forgiven for thinking this would be a rapid display of one action-packed scene following another. However, it’s as though the director wants us to properly experience McCall’s controlled and deliberately slow pace of life as we are subjected to a whole lot of McCall/Washington contemplation. McCall’s OCD-like seconds-counting is equally important to show McCall’s inner restraint – while blatantly toying with our own patience. But we do need the calm before the storm so we can be suitably shocked by the violence that suddenly erupts.

Indeed, when the action does ignite, the director makes sure things are snappy and equally bloody/brutal, making Washington seem in the prime of his youth through clever editing. The best revenge part is at the end when all the baddies descend on McCall’s place of work. There’s immense satisfaction to be had watching McCall/Washington dispense with the Baltic evil using an array of handy tools – as silly as the slow-mo titillation gets, it IS pure thrills. In fact the appetite to see someone ‘get things done’ in an unstable real-life world is part of that gratification perhaps. Washington has also earned the persona of a person we can trust too.

The baddies are all out of the ‘Russian gangster handbook’ though. Interestingly, the middle ‘mad man’, Teddy, played by Marton Csokas (Covert Affairs, Sin City) – strikingly like some Hungarian Kevin Spacey in menacing mode – is McCall/Washington’s main nemesis here, making an intriguing opponent, however caricature-like with the obligatory Russian prison tattoos. As McCall gets to the top of the rotten apple tree, however, to confront the big boss (whose name ironically bears a resemblance to the Russian president), things come to, too abrupt a conclusion.

Added to which, Fuqua is guilty of padding out the plot when it’s not really necessary with superfluous characters, like the overly long stay at the Plummers’ grand residence (she a former Secret Service head, played by Melissa Leo, and Bill Pullman as hubby). Although interesting to witness McCall in his former working environment, they serve little else in terms of a plot driver that couldn’t have been nicely nipped and tucked to propel us onto the really gritty parts.

Still, Washington is so highly watchable in this beautifully-shot reload, and as the finale might suggest, could secure him an action sequel, the likes of which Liam Neeson probably hoped for with Taken (2008). That’s not a bad thing given Washington’s screen appeal and affability; The Equalizer is a sure thing at the box office. It’s not perfect, but neither is any vigilante and let’s face it, we’re in dire need of a hero to rely on and cheer for in the current global reality.

3/5 stars

By @FilmGazer

Follow on Twitter

Reviews in a nutshell