LFF: Let Me In -4*

by

Posted: 04/11/2010

It’s very easy to become a film snob about any US remake of a recent and internationally acclaimed foreign-language film. But if the material it’s based on is of a high calibre, then the film-makers are already off to a flying start. Such is the case with Cloverfield director Matt Reeves’s take on Ajvide Lindqvist’s exceptional and best-selling Swedish novel, Let The Right One In. If you haven’t had the pleasure of watching the original 2008 Swedish screen adaptation of the novel’s same name, then Reeves’s version, shortened to Let Me In, is a triumph all on its own – minus the subtitles.

Let Me In may be a film about a vampire, but it’s real concept is that of a tender coming-of-age tale of two, seemingly, alienated ‘children’. It gently exploits that all too familiar feeling of being the outsider at school and in the local community of your peers to full haunting effect. This, coupled with the supernatural element, is what gives the film its offbeat and stirring atmosphere. That said the Swedish film was more successful at cultivating this, wisely leaving the human sacrificing punchline until much latter on in the plot. Reeves’s version seems to deal all its cards at once, opting to reveal why the strange new girl-on-the-block’s father kills at the very start of their arrival, and taking away a lot of the first film’s mystery.

However, in the US film’s favour, it adds a climatic and exhilarating car crash scene from the rear passenger’s point of view that’s not in the original, and although it’s peppered with police action, like an episode from Hills Street Blues, it also does away with the weirdly-placed cat attack and weakly developed community vigilante episode of the Swedish version. In hindsight, having a detective on the trail to make the bloody bathroom discovery makes more sense. Thankfully, Reeves’s film doesn’t fall victim to titillating blood-sucking attacks, although his tunnel scene seems a little too sci-fi and stylised. The look of the film is near identical, a kind of magical, snowy fairyland with a sinister undercurrent. But snow in New Mexico sounds like a contradiction in terms.

What makes the US remake instantly engaging is Reeves’s casting of the right ones in the leads, even managing to improve on the astounding performances in the original. Kick-Ass star Chloé Grace Moretz who exploded onto the scene in the comic book adaptation with a tirade of abuse and attitude is new girl Abby with a nocturnal secret. Moretz captures the imagination completely as the seemingly fragile and untalkative young soul who walks barefoot through the snow, but has the wisdom of someone much older. Kodi Smit-McPhee, the odd-looking kid from grim post-Apocalyptic drama The Road (with Viggo Mortensen), is perfectly cast as social outcast Owen, balancing the right amount of angst, vulnerability and charm to depict a teen in torment. He even looks the part as a kid with the world on his shoulders, with only one friend who seems to get him – Abby.

This is where the US film ventures more into controversial territory. The original ‘implied’ elements of paedophilia, whereas Reeves confronts this aspect of Lindqvist’s story, but without overstepping the mark. Abby gently caresses her father’s face (played by the ever remarkable Richard Jenkins) that implies more than just daughterly affection. There is also the issue of Abby’s grooming of Owen to be her next companion/guardian that seems innocent at first, but considering who and how old Abby really is, is slightly disconcerting to say the least, luring this impressionable child away from his home life. However, none of these episodes are depicted in bad taste as they are woven into the whole child-cum-adult ritual of teen experimentation, whilst growing up.

Let Me In is a genuinely solid remake that produces some consistent, engaging and mature performances from its young leads, and rekindles the enthusiasm you first felt for the original film. It’s also very topical, addressing not only the vampire element that seems to be the obsession in film and on TV at present (True Blood, The Vampire Diaries, Twilight etc), but also the subject of bullying. Ironically, the age group it portrays will not be able to see it, but as a certificate 15, it will not be missed by all those of school age and blightened by this issue. Let’s hope the draw of Chloé Grace Moretz can do it justice at the box office because it deserves its chance of success.

4/5 stars

By L G-K

Due Date – 3*

by

Posted: 04/11/2010

A new buddy comedy from The Hangover maestro Todd Phillips sounds like one to watch, especially with the former hit’s cuddly star Zach Galifianakis in the frame again. And it is, in many respects, because this safe bet for Phillips dishes out the genre’s formulaic mix of chaotic sketches, emotionally revealing moments and morals aplenty.

It also delivers great chemistry from its leads, Robert Downey Jr. and Galifianakis as unlikely travel companions with a goal to get from A to B with the least amount of trauma possible. Well, a little bit of collateral damage is vital to maketh the movie. But much as this has been described as the poorer man’s Planes, Trains and Automobiles (substitute Thanksgiving for an imminent birth, Steve Martin for Downey Jr, and John Candy for Galifianakis), Due Date is still an entertaining and contemporary version with enough heart and commendable acting to last its distance.

Downey Jr is highly-strung architect Peter who’s trying to get home to his heavily pregnant wife, Sarah (played in a fleeting few scenes by Kiss Kiss Bang Bang co-star Michelle Monaghan), who is about to go into labour at any moment. Unfortunately, due to Peter’s temper and one particularly provocative passenger called Ethan (Galifianakis), the pair joins the ‘no-fly’ club, and have to resort to putting up with each other’s company in a car (initially), driving across country to L.A. in the nick of time.

The laughs are uneven, and there are the obvious ‘eyes-roll-to-the-ceiling’ clichés. But on the whole, the Downey Jr-Galifianakis bromance works an absolute treat, as they each play their own brand of quirky insanity off one another in the film, with both having their moments to play ‘deadpan’ then ‘loopy’ at different stages throughout.

Galifianakis easily slots into his imbecile man-child role again, but with a camp little mince and a trophy dog this time – Ethan’s sexuality is never fully revealed, though he’s going to Hollywood to become an actor; go figure. Downey Jr is both the instigator and the mirror for all goings-on in a role that seems practically effortless for such a versatile actor. It’s undoubtedly the Downey Jr-Galifianakis pairing that holds the attention until the very end; the trouble is the ending disappointingly fizzles out, like a duff Bonfire Night rocket, prompting a ‘that it?’ response when the end credits roll.

Is it enough to say this type of film is about the leads’ chemistry, and not the fairly obvious plot line? It could be argued, yes it is, but with ‘seen-that-a-zillion-times-before’ déjà vu moments, like getting in trouble with the law and going on the run in a clapped-out vehicle, it could be argued that Phillips got lazy and unimaginative, or on the other hand, he simply delivers what we’re eagerly expecting. The bodily functions scene is amusing but tired, as are a few other scenarios. But the biggest and unexpected laughs come from a Peter moment with a brat kid of the local drug dealer (as ever, brilliantly depicted by Juliette Lewis), and the ‘drinking Dad’ car discussion, said in all frankness that is hilarious – Jamie Foxx plays a fairly unremarkable cameo, here, but makes for an injection of tasty eye candy.

Due Date is not quite fully hatched, and could have done with a little longer incubation period and character development to enhance some of the potentially intriguing scenarios. What’s also shameful on Phillips’s part is all the great comedy talent (Lewis, Foxx, Monaghan and Danny McBride) that could have been put to better use. That said Due Date offers a fascinating screen partnership in Downey Jr and Galifianakis, making up for any lack of originality in plot. It certainly isn’t The Hangover, but it’s like the mild hangover from The Hangover after-party success, and an enjoyable stopgap until the sequel arrives next year.

3/5 stars

By L G-K

LFF: Neds – 4*

by

Posted: 03/11/2010

Scottish Actor/writer/director Peter Mullan (The Magdalene Sisters, Orphans) may well have struck gold with his first internationally marketable feature, Neds – even though its broad Glaswegian dialect takes some getting used to, and resulted in subtitles at its world premiere in Toronto. What Mullan gets right every time that translates, regardless of language, is his casting and his actors’ performances, be that down to ‘pot luck’ as he admitted at the BFI London Film Festival, or not. Mullan has a magic touch for gritty realism, and Neds is no exception.

Mullan claims Neds is a ‘personal but not autobiographical’ coming-of-age tale set in 1970s Glasgow, where gang violence is rife, and being born into an environment without prospects is like a heavy chain around any bright young kid’s neck. Neds may not be autobiographical, but it does have some obvious personal investment, that’s for sure, to allow for some brilliant improv and direction. Mullan plays a violent and sadistic drunk, so we can only guess whom his character is based on, although he remained guarded when asked.

Neds that stands for ‘Non-Educated Delinquents’, or ‘chavs’ to others, plays out like a powerful and engaging dichotomy set in a claustrophobic pressure-cooker environment: violent and tender; terrifying and humorous. This is interesting, considering Mullan’s story was originally about violent knife crime – as poignant today as back then, but became an emotional journey about adolescence and growing up. The change in direction allows Mullan some leeway to inject humour through its cheeky and sardonic repertoire and fun music score that accompanies the brutal fight scenes (like Irving Berlin’s ‘Cheek To Cheek’). Its parallels with This Is England will not be lost – an easily influenced boy falling in with the wrong crowd, but it’s a standalone contender destined for box office success all the same.

The story follows studious and confident, working-class John McGill from the start of a glowing academic career at secondary school, to his derailment by the class and lifestyle he’s born into, after experiencing social discrimination, as he ventures deep into knife-wielding gangland. This may seem like classic Brit social realist film-making, or kitchen-sink drama from its synopsis – and in some respects it is with its bunch of disillusioned young men. But its lead character still manages to cling onto a haunting humanity, played by newcomer and fellow Scot Conor McCarron, making you root for him until the bitter end.

McCarron gives the kind of performance you’d expect from a seasoned pro, never once missing a beat opposite Mullan in some of the most harrowing scenes of the film. McCarron as McGill displays both baby-faced vulnerability and menacing psychosis, with one shocking moment being his graveyard revenge on a boy who threatened him years earlier on a school crossing. We empathise with his spiralling anger and frustration and his limited life choices, given his near-hopeless surroundings, signalling Mullan’s expert character development.

Neds is another human story full of charisma, guts and determination to push dividing social issues to the fore on screen. Its compassion is its driving point and the key to its success, reflecting the real-life passion and charm of its creator, Mullan.

4/5 stars

By L G-K

Jackass (3D) – 3*

by

Posted: 03/11/2010

Toilet humour, eye-watering blows to the never-regions and Evel Knievel-style stunts are on the Jackass (3D) menu in this film. But as the title suggests, what you also expect, even before head prankster Johnny Knoxville’s grand announcement at the start, is all of the above in glorious, gut-wrenching 3D. Let’s face it; that’s the key selling point, this time around.

Halloween may have just been, but there’s a sense of having been tricked, rather than treated, as the 3D is virtually not existent. It feels like a last ditch attempt at squeezing a little more cash out of (you) the franchise, before the boys get a little long in the tooth and retire. In fact, never mind Wee Man and co, Knoxville is looking older and alarmingly gaunter in this film – distinguished grey aside, so you can’t help wincing when he’s headbutted by a disgruntled buffalo, or bitten on the behind by a dog. The whole team still appear to enjoy the day job, but their once youthful enthusiasm and insanity is waning with every new challenge set. Even serious nutter Steve-O seems a little more reserved than usual and lacking his usual spirit.

Like all Jackass stunts, there are those that are funny, and others not. The funniest thing is the high-five moments and a spot of dentistry, courtesy of a Lamborghini. The unfunniest is an exploding ‘butt volcano’ in the midst of the train set, plus supposed 3D bodily functions from the point of view of one of the team’s manhood. It’s hard to tell whether this was meant to be in 3D, or just poor-quality home-movie video. Whatever; it’s just not funny, guys.

The main problem with jumping on the 3D bandwagon is a lot of the stunts require wide shots to establish and see exactly what’s going on. Sadly, 3D just isn’t doesn’t work in this respect. Plus with a whole team of behind-the-scenes expects on tap, you’d expect a little more thought to have gone into filming from angles that really make the 3D work, rather than seeing wrenching cameramen trying to get their own five-minutes of fame.

The grand finale seems to be the only true 3D aspect of the whole charade, when the team do slo-mo action dives around a set, whilst being obliterated (something that should have happened a long time ago, in our humble opinion). Oh, and apart from Chris Pontius’s nauseating, full-frontal exhibitionism, there are flying rubber dildos in 3D to laugh at (or not). There just seems to be very little that’s new or inventive for a proper 3D cinema experience, and that’s our main gripe.

For Jackass fans, it’s great to see the boys back in town, plus a cameo appearance from Beavis and Butt-head – who also sell the promise of a 3D experience at the start. But don’t expect anything groundbreaking in the 3D stakes, as you’ll be sorely disappointed.

3/5 stars

By L G-K

LFF: Another Year – 4*

by

Posted: 02/11/2010

If film-making is about capturing truth and reality, however uncomfortable to watch, then Mike Leigh is the master. His improvisation method results in the most sincere and heart-felt performances on screen and his latest film, Another Year, is no exception. It’s another triumphant Leigh study of relationships, family and loneliness, filled with laughter and sadness in equal measure that asks only of its viewer to listen and reflect.

Unafraid to champion two seemingly ‘dull’ filmic subjects – middle age and middle class – Leigh’s story places such a couple at its heart. It’s wonderfully refreshing to see this age group on screen, dealing with everyday issues such as family and extended family incidents that anyone can relate to.

Happily married Tom (Jim Broadbent) and Gerri (Ruth Sheen) are at the centre of a variety of lost or broken souls’ worlds, providing the comfort zone for them to gravitate to and supposedly heal in. The irony with their names is not lost, as we never see them quarrel once, merely ‘bristle’ at times, as they cope with another year of others’ issues.

Tom and Gerri’s comfortable and inviting home, or more accurately, their welcoming kitchen/diner is reminiscent of a Bread-style soap episode, where niceties and harsh realities are played out around a busy stove and a cup of steaming tea. Leigh also brilliantly depicts the home as both a sanctuary and a place of growing unease, almost injecting a separate life force into the walls that the characters play within and rebound off. Survival is the key in Leigh’s universe.

When what seems like mere trivialities to the rest of us start to impose on Tom and Gerri’s idyllic suburban life, they retreat to their comfort place – their allotment – to ponder over events, whilst doing a Good Life and growing prized veg.

Broadbent and Sheen are perfectly cast and so believable that you almost expect them to be married off-screen, too. They encompass that unique Englishness etiquette of stiff upper lip, tolerance and inherited values, conversely married with a large dollop of sarcasm and harsh judgment. These provide the history and inner motivation that Leigh’s characters always possess, making them feel so grounded and so real that they could be living next door.

As with all Leigh films, there needs to be a whirlwind of emotion that blows in and out to upset the status quo. In this film it’s Gerri’s motor-mouthed and downright neurotic work colleague Mary, an attractive and flirty divorcee with no personal life to go home to – hence she’s always hanging around and getting sloshed. Lesley Manville steals the show as Mary, managing to make her alternately intensely annoying and hugely likeable as we gradually empathise with her loneliness and despair, and as she tries to put on a brave face.

Indeed Tom and Gerri’s reaction is almost one of unconscious callousness and patronage towards Mary, their old, alcoholic friend Ken (Peter Wight) who’s on a path to destruction, and recently bereaved brother/brother-in-law Ronnie at allowing themselves to fall into such tragic ruts. Even at the beginning we are introduced to Gerri as a counsellor – in both the work and home sense – having to deal with a melancholy, bitter and self-loathing patient, perfectly played by Imelda Staunton. Gerri’s reaction is one of almost indifference as it’s another day of work, with another person not willing to change their lot. In fact you begin to get irritated with Tom and Gerri for not seeing Mary’s and the others’ inner struggles as they are so wrapped up in domestic bliss; even the ending does not provide a compromise, but only disconcerts you further. The goalposts always change as each character shows both endearing and ugly qualities. And this is the subtle Leigh magic.

The film’s humour is almost solely centred on Mary, especially at one point when she asks grieving Ronnie (David Bradley) whether he wants a cuddle – more for her than for him. There is another priceless moment when Mary jealously reactions to Tom and Gerri’s son Joe’s fun-loving new partner Katie (Karina Fernandez). What she sees in Katie is a youthful new beginning, as well as the end of her only ‘safe’ means of flirtation with the opposite sex. Joe, mischievously played by Oliver Maltman, is never truly fleshed out, possibly because as a product of his ‘accomplished’ parents, he’s obviously a contented and well-rounded human being. We just don’t know. Interestingly, Tom and Gerri do have an estranged daughter who we never get to see, so there are skeleton’s in the family closet, which makes Tom and Gerri either survivors, or cowards at not resolving the rift.

What is apparent is this film strikes at the heart of all of domesticated Brits; we’ve all known someone like each of the characters it portrays. It also questions the sobering feeling of loneliness and even alienation felt by most at some point and, unashamedly, drags it to the attention. This is another Leigh ingredient that makes his films so disquieting and powerful that the lighter moments come as entertaining relief. Another Year is another excellent Leigh-by-numbers creation to proudly add to his collection of life portraits that will never go out of fashion, but just mature nicely with age.

4/5 stars

By L G-K

Paranormal Activity 2 – 4*

by

Posted: 22/10/2010

Remember that feeling of not knowing what you were in for with the first film, and the subsequent dread that stopped you getting a good night’s sleep after watching? Don’t believe anybody who said they weren’t affected by Paranormal Activity; they’re telling porkies. The second film works on the same premise as the first; that CCTV doesn’t lie, only we now know what the deal is, so it’s more a case of waiting for things to kick off and get hell-raisingly freaky.

That’s where Paranormal Activity 2 will win/fail for fans of the first – the waiting. Initial reaction from some is that it takes too long to bring to boiling point, with the first terrifying bang happening a good 20 minutes plus into the film. But you could look at it from this perspective; the film-makers are goading you (as you are familiar with the territory), keeping you hanging on, until they decide when. Indeed, it’s still a highly effective, edge-of-seat experience, helped by the combination of hand-held camerawork and CCTV, which gives it a realistic quality and instant believability. To be honest, the waiting is not too much of an issue, but it’s the fact that some of these ‘emptier’ scenes could have been put to better use, like in the first film – or trimmed.

This time it’s a family’s turn to feel the demon’s wrath that includes a loved-up couple with a newborn son and a teenage daughter who all live with their Spanish nanny and dog. They have the seemingly idyllic, affluent lifestyle in the sun (somewhere in America), as we are proudly taken around their comfortable home in the first few scenes, whilst they introduce their newest family member, Hunter, to their abode on camera. All’s well so far…

Enter ‘Aunt Katie’, played by original cast member, the buxom Katie Featherston who turned into a demonic maniac in the first, dispensing with her boyfriend Micah (Micah Sloat) like a rag doll. This is the moment that you realise the connection, and want to scream, ‘NO! Get her out!’ at the unsuspecting household, the mother of which turns out to be Katie’s baby sister. We are also presented with the message that this ‘footage’ is recorded 60 days before Micah’s death, so it’s like a prequel to the first film, and it implies that one of the girls is the originator of all these paranormal episodes.

Version 2 actually pays homage to legendary horror, like Amityville Horror (spooky basement that bangs and scratches), The Exorcist (possessed family member) and Poltergeist (creepy TV and radio static), complete with a scene that makes you want to repeat blonde little angel Carol’s infamous words, “They’re here…” There’s even a reference to The Omen, with baby Hunter like an emotionless mini Damien-in-the-making, at times, letting off deranged-sounding giggles. It also has the standard horror ‘what-not-to-do’ moments, such as opening a door, alone, after loud thumps have just echoed off it, and playing that fun family pastime, the Ouija Board, when the oldies are out. It also has some silly aspects to it, and boldly points to a possible third film, too.

In short, and not wanting to reveal too much more, fans of the first should go and see Paranormal Activity 2 as it ties in neatly with the first, whilst still offering bang, scream and growl for your buck. Admittedly, it doesn’t have quite the freshness of the latter, but this is hardly surprising. However, the franchise does have a lot of mileage still, and it may well give some a sleepless night – if nothing else, it’ll have you clutching a crucifix under the duvet in anticipation.

4/5 stars

By L G-K

LFF: Carlos – 4*

by

Posted: 22/10/2010

Good guy or bad guy, does it really matter? The real-life person in question needs to have a winning charisma that translates well onto screen, and makes for a powerful story to watch, however long the film lasts. Carlos runs at 334 minutes, but it’s advisable to see it in its full-length glory to get a true sense of how the infamous Jackal, nee Ilich Ramírez Sánchez, came about and became a fugitive in every country he set foot in, before his subsequent capture. The shorter version does miss out key points, like Carlos’s association with the Japanese Red Army that led to his involvement in future, multinational terrorist operations. Some of what you watch is understandably hearsay, but the actual timeline of events watched on a big screen makes for captivating viewing.

Think The Baader Meinhof Complex (2008), and you instantly get the picture of its filming style, which has French writer/director Olivier Assayas’s mark all over it: scenes shot and edited with dynamic purpose, emulating the mood of the moment and, therefore, forever altering the pace. It’s energetic and compelling, bringing to life historical situations, but wisely, not always showing Carlos in a favourable light. This is important to see how ego got in the way of this man’s aspirations, as well as to highlight his flaws, making us more empathetic, too. As times change, the Carlos who is portrayed in the end seems like a broken, washed-up version of the arrogant man in his element in the 1970s-1980s. He is still portrayed as a fighter until the end, stubbornly refusing to surrender his ideals, which makes him almost inspirational in a warped sense.

Admittedly, like any made-for-TV saga, there are parts of the story that lag. That said the one factor that drives the film is the outstanding and believable performance from Édgar Ramírez as Carlos who embodies him totally, keeping you gripped, thrilled, appalled and generally astounded by the versatility, vanity and brilliance of the notorious guerrilla-fighter-cum-businessman. Like his character, Ramírez oozes confidence in the role and actually gives real-life ladies’ man Carlos more sex appeal than he really deserves. The fact that the actor has grown up living in several countries adds to his impressive multilingual delivery, so Ramírez can concentrate on the task at hand of being Carlos, rather than the tricky job of getting the multitude of accents right.

The film follows Carlos from his revolutionary days, fighting with the Palestinians in Jordan, before joining the Hassad and becoming one of its lead masterminds of active operations. It also captures the moments during the 1975 OPEC meeting when the oil ministers were kidnapped in Vienna, and ironically, still managing to show a compassionate side to Carlos. It then focuses on his years leading up to his missions with East German wife Magdalena Kopp (impressively played by Austria’s Nora von Waldstätten).

Assayas makes sure all of Carlos’s operations and political dealings are recreated in great detail, ending with his arrest in France in 1994, after being kidnapped in Africa. It’s like a visual history lesson in terrorism, but serves as a fascinating look at how such figures of terror evolve – ‘one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter’, so the saying goes.

Assayas’s frankness absolutely comes across in his direction that results in a credible, almost pseudo-documentary feel that is both informative and captivating. Combined with Ramírez’s huge talent, Carlos becomes an intriguing biographical experience-cum-action thriller that will hopefully attract a healthy mainstream interest at the box office – even if it’s just catching the 165-minute version.

4/5 stars

By L G-K

LFF: Africa United – 4*

by

Posted: 21/10/2010

In a gloomy world full of socio-political issues, especially in relation to screen portrayals of Africa, it’s refreshing to watch a film that  champions the power of positive thought, fuelling the story from beginning to end. It is a vibrant and positively charming journey that captures the true, fighting spirit of Africa, it is an amazing movie.

Africa United from debut director Debs Gardner-Paterson is such an inspiring film as it takes young and old on a vibrant and charming journey through several African states (Rwanda, Congo, Burundi, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe and South Africa) to capture the true fighting spirit of Africa.

As the title suggests, it unites all who watch it because of its colourful vitality and infectious childlike awe that kids can relate to and adults can relive and this notion overshadows the football element. It’s like an African Enid Blyton tale, where anything can be achieved and obstacles can be overcome, when you put great young minds together.

That said the serious issues facing the continent are intertwined effectively in this coming-of-age tale, with the opening scene more like an HIV/AIDS awareness campaign than the start of a feature film, designed to grab your attention. The big issues are apparent, or never far from the surface, but are dealt with in a matter-of-fact way that does not render them superficial, or allow them to dampen this tale of considerable hope.

Part of this successful balance that Gardner-Paterson strikes, is due to the film’s magnetic and mega-optimistic, young protagonist, Dudu, played by newcomer Eriya Ndayambaje. Self-styled football manager Dudu sets off with his football prodigy and best pal Fabrice (Roger Nsengiyumva) and his bookish little sister Beatrice (Sanyu Joanita Kintu) to the Rwandan capital, Kigali, to audition Fabrice for a part in the 2010 World Cup opening ceremony.

The trouble is they take the wrong bus, resulting in a whistle-stop tour of African states and meeting escaped sex worker Celeste (Sherrie Silver) and former child soldier Foreman George (Yves Dusenge) who decide to join Dudu’s ‘team’ – let’s face it, what more do they have to do? The acting is far from polished, but its rawness merely adds to our empathy with each character’s plight and willingness to support their venture.

The camera simply adores Ndayambaje to the point of the aperture opening several stops whenever his happy, animated face fills the screen, and radiating us with a feeling of sunny warmth. Ironically, when we first set eyes on Dudu, he is instructing his audience (and us) on how to make a football out of an inflated condom, a plastic bag and a ball of string in a delightfully playful, almost ‘stand-up comedic’ fashion that is both highly amusing and frankly alarming because of the African HIV/AIDS pandemic message.

With hindsight, it is difficult to determine the age group that the film is aimed at, but as a documentary piece with its clever little animated parts, it works well to alert youth to the serious health and social topics in an informative manner. At times, it’s like watching an educational video, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but it feels like being back at school, even with the fun elements involved.

It may also leave some adults/parents red-faced trying to explain some of the finer points, too, “like what is a sex worker, Mum/Dad?” That said Gardner-Paterson seems unforgiving about this: Kids have to know the world is not an equal or perfect place, right, so let’s ease the pain, without shattering their childhood dreams. Characters Dudu and his team are a metaphor for this, with football acting as the prejudicial stimulus and the salvation.

Whatever the film-makers say about Africa United not being a film about football and the World Cup, you can’t help wondering what kind of greater impact it could have had at the box office, if it had, had its release date around that time? Then, there is pretty much football to be had all year around, so it still works to prolong the thrill of the international sporting event – England’s performance, aside. Football serves as the uniting factor, like a cross-border religion or passport, but not the primary topic, so the film-makers can make claim to the former, it seems.

Africa United is a massive injection of hope, celebrating life and its stubbornness to suppress youthful distractions and dreams in some harsh realities. It’s a decent story, too, rather than just being a socio-political message. But for all its well-meaning intentions, spirit and attractive picture-postcard views of Africa, will it capture the attention and hearts of the average family faced with a programme of other kids’ films at the local pictures?

In playing down the football element and just re-labelling it as an African road movie, this may result in it be overlooked, which is sad, considering youth need as much exposure to positivism as possible today to counterbalance the all the negative aspects.

4/5 stars

By L G-K

LFF: The Arbor – 2*

by

Posted: 21/10/2010

Clio Barnard’s film The Arbor is thought provoking, primarily because of the social issues rising from life on a former rough estate that it flags. However, much as such issues capture the attention, their importance should not be confused with how good/bad a film it is at its core. The Arbor’s style of actors lip-synching to tape-recorded testimony by the family, friends and associates of working-class playwright Andrea Dunbar (Rita, Sue and Bob Too!) may prove too disconcerting for some to marry together. It does take some getting used to and appears like out-of-sync audio with the visuals at first, even with some commendable acting performances. That said, and playing devil’s advocate, it could be argued that this makes the story more immediate and impacting, though.

On first glance, The Arbor appears to be about how fame came to Dunbar, but it actually takes a different tangent and explores the impact of her actions (or lack of) on her family. Far from paying homage to Dunbar, this film doesn’t depict her in a favourable light, as a person or a mother. In fact she isn’t that likeable at all – tragic end aside, especially for any non-fans of her work, and becomes of little consequence in the film. Whether this was Barnard’s intention is hard to tell, but maybe Dunbar fans have a different opinion?

The more harrowing and captivating ‘sub-story’, which actually gives this film its real zest, is that of her Asian daughter, Lorraine (played by Manjinder Virk), and her disturbing account of life growing up in 1970s’ racist Bradford as a mixed-race kid. Again, the film grabs you because of the issues of drugs and infant mortality it recalls in her later years, as well as Lorraine’s ‘raw deal’ that she’s dealt. Lorraine may well have cause to feel that way, and whilst her narrative pulls on the heartstrings, you are very aware of watching a construct of events that feels slightly reproachable at times.

There is also the rather odd reconstruction of Dunbar’s play The Arbor set right on The Arbor’s green itself, ironically starring George Costigan, who played Bob in Rita. Whether this is meant as an introduction or a fresher to Dunbar’s work could be taken any way, but it certainly reminds you – as if you needed to be told – that you are watching a recount of a true story, plus the acting is commendable, and it’s the support of the local community looking on that gives this film its proud roots.

It’s hard to sell The Arbor, unless you have an interest in the playwright or in the area. It feels like another working-class tale of hardship – without the triumph of escaping it, much like a Ken Loach work. It also feels somewhat confused as to what it wants to be: fact based as fiction (as in the reconstruction alfresco), or pseudo-documentary with the archive footage of Dunbar. In fact it’s like snippets of both sewn together, but not necessarily harmoniously, and a Barnard experiment in how to offer a few novel ways of portraying gritty real-life tales.

2/5 stars

By L G-K