The Green Hornet – 4*

by

Posted: 15/01/2011

Not to be confused with Ryan Reynolds’ The Green Lantern, out soon, this is another superhero-story-cum-film adaptation of Trendle and Striker’s action hero drama from director Michel Gondry that stars Seth Rogen and Jay Chou as a pair of vigilantes by night, ridding downtown of its unsavoury characters and growing drugs problem. And it’s unadulterated goofball pleasure, with Rogen as his zaniest finest.

Co-written by the once-cuddly comic actor who is shrinking by the film, The Green Hornet certainly more slapstick action comedy than serious avenging caped crusader, as Rogen as immature newspaper heir Britt Reid – aka The Green Hornet – stamps his unique style of hormonal child-man antics and wordy rhetoric to the script, much to fans’ delight. Reid is your typical super-wealthy playboy brat who gets a rude awakening when his newspaper mogul father (played by Tom Wilkinson) is murdered, much like the Batman narrative. However, in this case, and unlike tormented Wayne, Reid treats the imminent threat to public order with disinterest and distain, wanting his superhero to be a bad guy with the authorities, and taking gleeful and irresponsible pleasure at putting not only himself in danger, but also his sidekick Kato (Chou). It’s like watching a frat boy come of age.

Chou as the Hornet’s superhuman weapon Kato says true to the original part, providing the gadgets and wow/pow factor in the film’s time-lapsed and thrilling stunts, rather than the dialogue, which is just as well as he’s incomprehensible most of the time. But Chou still gets to deliver a couple of witty one-liners to take his egotistical friend/boss/fighting companion down a couple of pegs, when necessary, and keep him focused on the job at hand. His comic timing and cool exterior nicely complements Rogen’s erratic nature, creating an engaging comedy partnership, where Chou often steals the scene. Rogen still doesn’t mind playing the fool, although a little less loveable and more egotistical here.

Austrian acting heavyweight and award-winning star of Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds, Christoph Waltz is deliciously devilish once again as the Hornet’s nemesis, Chudnofsky, hilariously teased by all his opponents for his bland and outdated dress sense, before he decides ‘red’ is the new black, as well as the colour of blood, and reinvents his image as ‘Bloodnofsky’. Waltz embraces the slapstick humour with deadpan fervour, making this character his own, as he did Landa, and fast nominating him as one of the most desirable villains of latter years to watch on screen. Waltz equals star quality with his every appearance, but it initially takes a split second to realise who you are watching, as Chudnofsky grows in character and strength throughout the story.

And no superhero story would be complete without the girl, Lenore Case, played by Cameron Diaz. Naturally, like a Lois Lane, she’s smart, beautiful and determined, and gives as good as she gets, becoming the brains behind the plan. For those at the wrong side of thirty, there is a poignant and hilarious dig at big corporation’s obsession with ‘youth equals fresh ideas’ to be enjoyed by those of that age, and Cameron shows her homed comic skills in delivering it. But that aside, Cameron is fairly unremarkable in this, playing Case in much the same as every other action-girl character she’s done – a comfort to fans, but hardly pushing the boat out.

Finally, maybe The Green Hornet and Kato should have investigated the case of the missing 3D because the film seems to be missing a 3D trick – especially as this technological cash cow means parting with more hard-earned cash at the box office. The only truly effective 3D part is the cracking and stylish cartoon title sequence at the end, and perhaps, the odd bullet or glass-shatteringly gleeful moment. 3D ought to make more use of the camera angle and framing, so that objects coming towards you, rather than merely a pricey tool to enhance a lot of wide shots with a little more depth of field. It’s some thing to think about, before forking out to see it in 3D.

That said, The Green Hornet presses all the right cartoon-caper buttons with some compelling and witty performances and a tongue-firmly-in-cheek stance for those wanting to be thoroughly entertained. It’s not as slick or as bad ass as Kick-Ass, and even lacks that dark side of such comic book stories like Batman, but it’s certainly full of self-ridicule, which is immediately inviting and thrilling for all who watch.

4/5 stars

By L G-K

LFF: Blue Valentine – 4*

by

Posted: 15/01/2011

Where did all the love go? Writer/director Derek Cianfrance’s Blue Valentine is a super sensitive and tragically taunt tale of a marriage that implodes slowly over time, after one of the sweetest wooing moments seem on film in many years involving a ukulele. From the offset it you feel uneasy, that things in the visually idyllic family surroundings are not quite right – and it isn’t just the disappearance of the family pet either.

Cianfrance’s modern romance captures the authenticity (the ups and downs) of a contemporary marriage with stark honesty and clarity that to watch it often leaves you feeling slightly voyeuristic and uncomfortable at times, like an unwilling fly on the wall to events spiralling out of control. It’s a perfect cinematic example of a wonderful script, good directing and ingenious casting.

The partnership of Ryan Gosling and Michelle Williams is a mesmerising one as husband and wife, Dean and Cindy, who have a little girl called Frankie (film newcomer Faith Wladyka). The reason this ‘family’ are so believable on screen is Cianfrance had them living as a unit in the same house for a couple of months – even sharing birthdays, before filming commenced. As they say, practice makes perfect, and the filmmaker’s preparation obviously paid off.

The quality of the acting makes it heartbreaking to see the couple disintegrate, and the power of the final attempt at reconciliation at in themed hotel room draws on every emotion from the viewer, from humour to disgust. This film has been vilified for Cindy’s erratic sexual activity in that moment, but you can almost understand where her self-destructive, almost sadomasochistic nature comes from as she tries in vain to find love, after growing up a sterile home life of past. It’s as though she won’t allow happiness in her life, or needs punishment for doing so. Williams’ character, alone, is a fascinatingly dark and complex one that leaves you questioning just who the real Cindy is?

Neither party is without fault, and Gosling as Dean has a temper, which surfaces towards the end, putting the final nail in the coffin of the relationship, even after a pathetic attempt at another chance. It’s a combination of years of pent up frustration at losing control over his family and it’s as raw to watch as it probably was for the stars to act.

The film seems to punish working-class Dean for being a romantic and falling for college girl Cindy. Like a latter-day Romeo and Juliet, their love is doomed from the start. His lack of drive surfaces later on, as everyday life means putting food on the table, over his dreams. It’s certainly a brutal depiction of life after the honeymoon period is over.

In the end, the film suggests that passion alone cannot save a marriage – could even the class-orientated out there be right that chalk and cheese cannot mix? Blue Valentine throws up many questions that are only addressed after the film is over because the leads’ performances are so astoundingly captivating to watch. The only niggling criticism is some of the jumping back and forth in time feels slightly confusing; whether it’s deliberate to disorientate us as to when the cracks begin to appear is unclear? Even for a non-linear storyline, it sometimes jars the viewing experience. However, on the whole, Cianfrance’s drama is truly magnificent and deserves Academy Award recognition for Williams and Gosling’s performances alone.

4/5 stars

By L G-K

Henry’s Crime – 3*

by

Posted: 15/01/2011

Director Malcolm Venville’s new film, Henry’s Crime, has all the subtleties of a Woody Allen caper and the oddly mismatched characters of a Coen Brothers production, but without the latter’s distinguished expertise on plot development. That said, and with hindsight, it proves to be a charming and indulgent watch because of some delightful performances from the likes of James Caan and Vera Farmiga – even with the slightly ludicrous plot points along the way. It’s a little piece of life in set in Buffalo New York, performed with all the theatrics of Chekhov’s last play, The Cherry Orchard, that’s being staged in the film, making you wonder whether Venville is actually being ironic?

Its star, Keanu Reeves, who looks alarmingly plastic and pallor in this, seems to have cultivated his deadpan, almost android-like expression from The Matrix and The Day The World Stood Still days into one semi-warm and human portrayal as Henry. This may well be a factor of our empathy with Henry’s unexciting lot in life, more than anything else. The tollbooth worker seems to be sleepwalking his way through life, simply surviving, even after being fingered as the getaway driver for a bank robbery he has no idea is being carried out by a so-called former ‘friend’, and his wife going off with and falling pregnant by one of the men responsible for getting him banged up for three years.

Part of the waiting throughout is for Henry to burst forth with a lot of pent up rage and energy, but we sense that Henry has got so used to bottling his feelings and disappointment that it will take a real lively and influential character to trigger this. Enter Caan as old lifer Max who’s been so institutionalised it takes some persuasion on Henry’s part to get him to leave prison after being paroled. Caan gives one of his best comedic performances of late, becoming a comforting father figure and best friend to Henry. Nevertheless, this is where the film’s believability is first questioned: Would a bar with a newspaper cutting about a blocked up tunnel leading from the theatre to the bank still be there after being discovered in the Prohibition years, and with all the high tech bank security around today? Possibly. Still, you roll with as it’s way to experience the absorbing talents of Caan as a confidence trickster at play, coaching Henry, and providing some of the delightfully humorous moments in the film.

Henry has a bumpy introduction to spirited and sarcastic TV commercials actress Julie (Farmiga) who is starring in the play across the road. Farmiga makes a significant mark once more, and is truly magnificent, mixing balls with vulnerability as Julie, which she gets to unleash at cantankerous prima-Donna theatre director Darek (Peter Stormare). But even with Farmiga in the frame, long-gone is the old Reeves’ ‘Ted Logan’ spirit that was still alive and kicking in Point Break, with the actor never allowing Henry to fully come to fruition in following his dream (robbing a bank/playing the lead in the play). Instead, Reeves prefers to play Henry with a little too much frustratingly low-key enthusiasm that it makes the actor seem like a vacuous one-trick pony, which he isn’t, suppressing any real passion that we desperately need to see at the end.

Despite its plot holes, meandering nature (at times) and believability issues, the ensemble cast brings sparkle to the rather mediocre-scripted Henry’s Crime, and are the primary reason for seeing it to conclusion. The film also feels exquisitely nostalgic in manner, like a good old-fashioned, 40s/50s-styled crime thriller with a vein of comedy pulsing through it, but with a contemporary overhaul. In fact, this could be Venville’s thorn in the proverbial side as Henry’s Crime is unsure of how it wants to be portrayed. Still, it’s not a crime to catch it and enjoy the supporting cast for who they are, even if Reeves lacks the charisma of a 40s/50s anti-hero, like Cary Grant.

3/5 stars

By L G-K

LFF: Conviction – 3*

by

Posted: 15/01/2011

It’s hard not to be a tad cynical about this Oscar-paint-by-numbers offering from director Tony Goldwyn and screenwriter Pamela Gray because that’s just what Conviction is: a shamelessly wanton Academy Awards contender with a double-statuette-winning leading lady in Hilary Swank to boot. It is, nevertheless, watchable.

Conviction has the melodrama, the struggle, and the real-life story claim, as well as doing its duty in highlighting the worthy cause of the organisation in the story, The Innocence Project, that tries to exonerate wrongly convicted people through DNA. By any standards, it’s Oscar gold.

That said, even with Swank putting her heart and soul into the role of legal eagle Betty Anne Waters who puts herself through law school to defend her older brother, Kenny, who is convicted of murder, and Sam Rockwell coming on board as Kenny, sentenced to life in 1983, the rather bland and play-safe script restricts what could have been a monumentally powerful film with plenty of scope for the audience to reflect on.

Understandably, there are bound to be legal factors that gagged Gray creating something zestier in nature; she makes sure she doesn’t overstep the mark, only going after the might that is the flaws in the US legal system, rather than the intriguing political aspects of the case at the time, namely the involvement of Martha Coakley, Attorney General of Massachusetts. There is also a tenuous film link between Waters getting her law degree and how she overturns her brother’s conviction, even though the film details other, peripheral aspects of the legal process that she must navigate to get accredited.

Sadly, the only controversy that the film managed to stoke is fuelling the wrath of renowned US feminist lawyer Gloria Allred who accuses Swank as executive producer (as well as star) of not involving the victim, Katharina Brow’s family, or showing them respect or compassion. There are so many layers and outcomes to this story that have been compacted to give Swank a showcase for an Academy Award, and the excuse that it’s not a tale of the crime and injustice, but a tale of a sister’s love for her brother doesn’t fully wash; there needs to be a universal hook for all, not just those fortunate enough to know a sibling’s love.

That’s not to say the story is not truly inspirational because it is. It’s an Erin Brockovich tale for the Noughties – without the corporate bite. The performances do not disappoint, considering the TV-style script and cinematography, and it’s fair to say that, in parts, Swank and Rockwell are utterly compelling as the sister and brother being pulled through an emotional wringer. Swank is like an aggressive Rottweiler most of the time that it’s exhausting to watch her crusading to free her brother. Rockwell revels in playing his vibrant character and his unpredictable mood swings, and is a joy to watch.

However, if anyone deserved an Oscar win for Conviction, it’s Juliette Lewis as Kenny’s not too bright and despicable ex, Roseanna Perry, for a repugnant but hilarious portrayal as the lying lush. Plus if there was an Awards category for clinching Best Accent, Minnie Driver ought to be a first contender as Waters’ friend and fellow lawyer Nancy Taylor, a character who also injects some much-needed humour into the intense proceedings.

It’s a word often used, but this film is ‘solid’ in its execution of the reputed real-life tale of struggle and retribution, and with Swank at the helm of a stellar cast, it will do well at the box office. What is disappointing is just how much better and consequential a film it could have been, had – we suspect – the film-makers been more daring in portraying events involving certain influential parties of the time, and got more involved in the legal side of things, rather than repeating the same dramatic encounters between sister and brother to hammer home the injustice.

It’s interesting how the film ends, too, understandably wanting to conclude on a high note, instead of revealing the rest of Kenny’s tragic story. This will leave some divided, but it seems like a cop-out, to be frank, when the real ending may have given the film its final sucker punch of reality at just how much time was (wasted) spent in the name of correcting a miscarriage of justice.

3/5 stars

By L G-K

Brotherhood – 3*

by

Posted: 15/01/2011

Hazy about what a ‘hazing’ means, the subject of aspiring writer/director Will Canon’s feature debut, Brotherhood? Well, it’s an initiation process involving harassment, and Canon’s frenetic, coming-of-age thriller takes you along on a US fraternity one, imprisoning you in the frat boys’ van from the word go, like an unwilling witness to the tragic acts to follow.

Brotherhood is gleefully energetic and somewhat intense from the start, almost theatrical in a way, where the characters actions propel the narrative forward, like a sinister farce, rather than reacting to surroundings out of their immediate control. These young men have created a world order of their own that collides with reality. In fact, the intriguing concept is the characters have the power to stop the catalogue of disasters happening at any time, but due to a misguided loyalty and peer pressure, feel they can’t back down. It will have most logical-minded folk shaking their head in frustration and disbelief.

A botched convenience store robbery, part of a college fraternity hazing, starts a catalyst for a series of events that forces new student and pledger Adam Buckley (Trevor Morgan) to take a stand to save a friend and fellow pledger’s life. Co-starring non-big-named actors Jon Foster, Lou Taylor Pucci, Arlen Escarpeta, Jesse Steccato, Luke Sexton and Jennifer Sipes among others, although fast-paced and action-orientated, the film manages to slow down to portray the principle characters’ personalities and how they conflict, each dealing with ideas of justice, integrity and redemption.

Indeed, Canon’s film, born out of an eight-minute college short called Roslyn feels like a very personal reflection on such a situation – although the director claims he’s never experienced such a night like the one in the story – but without making their world seem alien to any audience. As the title states, it’s about ‘brotherhood’, however misguided that unity might be, and it translates well in the extreme to the UK gang culture epidemic (as the media would have us believe), making the actions of Adam and co seem as believable in any place, whilst compacting the class barriers.

In relation to class, what is quite disturbing is a supposed ‘cream of the American educational crop’ and possible future leaders having no more civility or self control than others less fortune or educated. In this respect, it’s a compelling study of pact mentality, shot in a gritty indie style to give it added resonance and significance. However, there is a touch of the low-budget, college B movie to it at times, plus some characters that feel merely one-dimensional – always an issue with so many players on screen at once.

That said Morgan is an exciting and promising acting talent, reminiscent of a young Sean Penn, both passionate and fiery but level headed and trustworthy. Morgan carries many of the scenes, stealing the limelight away from the likes of more established players, like Taylor Pucci, at times, who plays his wounded friend, Kevin, whose life hangs in the balance. This could be Morgan’s mark on the international film scene, if Brotherhood reaches a mainstream audience.

There is also a theatrical stand-off between the boys and their prisoner, a young black clerk called Mike (Escarpeta) who fuels many of aggressive, despotic and racist behaviour in a group who ought to know better. Canon could have delved further into uglier realms, here, although his end twist is a surprisingly unexpected one, showing the writer/director has a talent for the genre.

Brotherhood demonstrates some promising filmmaking talent and a fresh new eye for the genre, even though Canon allows the story to lapse into low-budget titillation at times. As a pop culture piece, it has enough angst and momentum to grab the youth market’s attention, and with an eager young cast on board, it will certainly prick the interest of such an audience.

3/5 stars

By L G-K

LFF: The King’s Speech – 5*

by

Posted: 06/01/2011

At any other time in recent years, a film about the Royal Family would only prick the interest of some at the UK box office. But with two royal weddings on the cards this year, there seems to be renewed domestic interest in our famous British family. Tom Hooper’s film, The King’s Speech, could not come at a better time. It’s not only a brilliantly written historical piece but also an utterly absorbing relationship study between a Royal and a commoner.

The credit for this cinematic tour de force goes to one of our finest actors, Colin Firth as speech-impaired King George VI (Queen Elizabeth II’s father), and an equally great Antipodean thespian, Geoffrey Rush as eccentric and unorthodox speech therapist Lionel George VI. There is an equally wonderful and immensely witty performance from Helena Bonham Carter, too, as the Queen Mother, Queen Elizabeth I, in her heyday.

All three actors are perfectly cast to illuminate the story and the King’s personal struggle with public speaking, after his brother, King Edward VIII (Guy Pearce) abdicates, with humour, frustration and respect. Firth and Rush are screen gold to behold, helped by Hooper’s close-up, and at times, almost claustrophobic camera shots that allow George VI to burst forth the anger at moments, with a string of expletives that will forever be remember by those who go to watch the film.

Hooper uses the camera and framing with meticulous detail to draw out every nuance and thought process from the characters, especially Firth who has the biggest challenge of conveying the inner turmoil of a man who could not verbally express what he wished. It’s almost like having an acting impediment for Firth. There is a beautifully shot scene at the beginning of the film, where the King visits a doctor in the hope of a cure. He sits in the forefront, with a concerned Queen Mother behind him framed by the light of a window. This appears to place the King in a ‘fake’ spotlight, putting him on show and highlighting his awkwardness further, all with very little dialogue present. These exquisite production values merely emphasise the quality of the film and its talent.

It’s also an enlightening film, not only about the Royals involved, but also about country on the brink of war with Hitler that would change European history forever. With George VI and Logue’s remarkable relationship that gets off to a bumpy start, but turns into an unlikely lifelong friendship, the film portrays how the class barriers are broken down in a time where solidarity was key with such uncertain times ahead. This is fascinatingly depicted when the Royal couple visit Logue’s menial working-class home, and appear as comfortable there, as any palatial setting they are used to.

The King’s Speech is a New Year’s shining gem in British cinema’s crown jewels, full of wit and decorum that the likes of Merchant Ivory is loved for around the world. With Oscar fever in the air, this should not be missed for Firth’s outstanding contribution alone, so believe the hype because it’s all justified.

5/5 stars

By L G-K

LFF: 127 Hours – 4*

by

Posted: 06/01/2011

An hour-and-a-half film about a man cutting his arm off to save his own life sounds like an intriguing concept alone. Coupled with the fact that said film is none other than the latest in Oscar-winner Danny Boyle’s (Slumdog Millionaire) arsenal and stars Golden Globe winner James Franco (Milk) should raise interest and awareness further. But what gives 127 Hours its immediate gravitas is the fact that it’s based on mountain climber Aron Ralston’s true story of courage.

Even with the serious and sombre subject matter, Boyle’s character shines through; a certain playfulness and carefree spirit that preludes the terrifying moment when all hope seems lost. Boyle incorporates as much of this in the rapid-paced editing at the beginning to show Ralston’s love of life and the outdoors. It’s like watching a fitness video or a travel programme without the voiceover, showing off the brutal landscape of Utah to its finest. When Ralston (Franco) meets two fellow explorers Kristi (Kate Mara) and Megan (Amber Tamblyn) Boyle wastes no time depicting more of the inviting terrain with its hidden pools.

The idea of an engaging script doesn’t seem possible, almost impossible, but what writers Boyle and Simon Beaufoy have done is move from action and dialogue to the psychology of Ralston, after the fall down the canyon. With the success of Buried starring Ryan Reynolds as a man in a coffin in 2010, it is possible to engage an audience in one location for the entire duration of a film. But the camera in 127 Hours often zooms out of the canyon to escalate the tension and urgency of the situation, as well as Ralston’s complete isolation, and it’s exhilarating stuff.

Franco is exceptionally well cast. Fit, intelligent, boisterous and passionate, he embodies Ralston’s highs and lows and leads us through the whole ordeal with more humour than you might first think in such a film. In fact, mirroring Boyle’s lust for life, Franco keeps us rooting for Ralston, seeing him never as a victim but as a survivor who reconnects with society in the end.

Boyle’s cinematography also never allows for us to get complacent either, and this prevents the film from becoming an ordeal for the audience to sit through. The grizzly moment is kept brief – even with CSI-style internal body shots of scraping bone and ligament. Indeed there is very little titillation involved; it’s all very tastefully done, clinical and surgical in the manner it’s shot.

127 Hours is a prime example of good writing, directing and acting in a film, where little happens, but a lot of human experience and emotion transpire. It also has action and fantasy where you least expect it. It is very individual, smart and economical in its depiction, and above all, positive in its outlook that makes it an ultimately inspiring and compelling watch.

4/5 stars

By L G-K

Season of the Witch – 2*

by

Posted: 06/01/2011

Nicolas Cage recently admitted he’s always wanted to be a knight, ever since the age of five. Well, it looks like he got his wish, chain mail, Crusades and all, in Season of the Witch, which is a curious mix of supernatural horror and historical period drama, with a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it cameo from one of Cage’s own personal screen heroes, Christopher Lee, all lumpy and bumpy from the Plague.

The film choice is hardly anything out of the ordinary or taxing for the ‘Prince of Supernatural’, Cage, who likes to dabble in the magical and unexplained and has done so in many of his previous projects, most recently The Sorcerer’s Apprentice for Disney. Sadly Dominic Sena’s film never seems to fully amount to anything on the grand scale that you would expect from a Crusading adventure involving a witch who is blamed for the spread of the Black Plague and a dollop of demonic presence.

It’s a shame, considering it has a compelling beginning as some old hags get tried and dunked for dabbling in the dark arts and the stage is fully set for a fun and boisterous adventure between two comrades-in-arms, Behmen (Cage) and Felson, played by Hellboy himself, Ron Perlman. The two are seen slaying the un-Christian masses abroad, before stopping to think about their actions and getting an attack of conscience, then going AWOL to get away from the clutches of the 14th Century church. It’s an ideal screen pairing that works a treat with Cage’s sensitivity verses Perlman’s oafish presence. There are also some truly humorous moments, mainly due to Perlman’s Felson teaching a naïve knight wannabe a thing or two about survival. As a Cage-Perlman show, it ticks all the boxes, but it just isn’t enough to bring it out of mediocrity.

Basically, once apprehended and made to transport the witch (Claire Foy of newly-found Upstairs Downstairs fame), the knights’ journey seems to be virtually over, and their destination reached before there is ever time to really get into the swing of the adventure. There are also effects and the ultimate battle of good verses evil in a library – ever the power of the written word – that trigger memories of past vampire and demon films, with a touch of the Van Helsing in places. One amusing part is Perlman headbutting Satan that Hellboy fans will relish. Finally, for such non-Christian sentiment, the word of God prevails in the end; so Bible-fearing American audiences have little to fear.

The beauty is in the Cage-Perlman partnership of Season of the Witch, so if this is appealing, it’s certainly worth watching. What it lacks in plot it makes up for in casting prowess and spirit, even if the end result leaves a rather flat feeling.

2/5 stars

By L G-K

The Next Three Days – 3*

by

Posted: 06/01/2011

Paul Haggis is a master of tension building, from Crash to In The Valley of Elah, putting his characters through the emotional mill, and challenging preconceptions. On face value, his latest film, The Next Three Days, starring heavyweight Russell Crowe, is a surprisingly toned-down affair and a true popcorn flick. But it still has a Haggis dark side to it, tackling an equally compelling question; how far would you go for a loved one?

Crowe is exceptionally cast as a man with morals who spirals into survival, fugitive mode, after his beloved wife (remarkably well-played by Elizabeth Banks) is convicted of a brutal murder and gets life. His civility and faith in the system crumbles with each appeal that is floored, until he must make the ultimate choice to keep his family together.

It seems a little far-fetched and even fanciful – and it is, in places, especially the fleeing scene on the motorway near the end (as in the trailer). But what is fascinating to watch is Crowe as the husband, John Brennan, changing in personality over time and rejecting society’s ridge rules, in favour of creating his own logical reality, and one in which he can live as a family again.

That said, even with Haggis’s expertise, the film does feel lengthy and loses momentum in the middle, as Crowe as Brennan gets caught up in his own dark moods. Plus there is something missing that doesn’t quite elevate it above other such fugitive and anti-societal affairs that really could have allowed it to make a mark in the genre. Crowe does the best he can with the material, and the reason his character is so compelling is he allows us to connect and empathise with Brennan, before the film loses the plot a little and becomes a little self-indulgent.

There are very brief appearances from the likes of Liam Neeson and Kevin Corrigan that add to the casting pull, with Neeson in an intriguing anti-type villainous role that makes you sit up and take notice, compared to his usual dull Irish affair. There are also supporting cast that although necessary to the story, appear oddly mismatched, such as the two hapless detectives (played Jason Beghe and Aisha Hinds) who feel like they’ve dropped in from another TV cop movie to stake out Brennan. All the parts don’t always mix, even though there is a consuming protagonist at the helm that they all should revolve around.

This film is driven by Crowe, once again, which makes it an instantly compelling watch, and the fact that none of Haggis’s characters are painted in an entirely favourable, or even likeable light, makes them all the more flawed, real and captivating at times. It is a pity that the film loses its way, or it would have been a near perfect character study within a fascinating topic of ‘the little man verses the state’. This has absolutely been done before, but that’s half of the frustration when Haggis is involved as it’s a solid film as it stands, but could have packed a greater emotional punch, rather than resorting to TV crime dramatics and action-packed antics.

3/5 stars

By L G-K