Qrobur Reviews

The Lobster (2015)

Leaden, juvenile and dreary nonsense

[4/10 · 23 March 2016]

Is it a satire? Is it a drama? Is it a comedy? No, it's an earthbound turkey.

Yorgos Lanthimos appears to be a director in the mould of Roy Andersson, that is, somebody who has mistaken miserabilist absurdism for profundity and who literally projects it at us on the narcissistic assumption that we all think the same. Fortunately, most of us do not.

'The Lobster' is a failure for a number of reasons. First, a satire is supposed to point out the absurdity of a state of affairs by depicting it absurdly but recognisably. However, nowhere in this film, except towards the very end, is there a relationship that is at all recognisable, absurdly contorted or otherwise. If 'The Lobster' is a satire, it misses its mark because it's not clear at what mark it aims. Secondly, is it a comedy? If you conceive of a comedy as something that makes you laugh, chuckle, smile or even is a little amusing, 'The Lobster' is not a comedy. There is a complete dearth of humour in this film; black, dark, twisted, absurd or any other kind. Thirdly, is it a drama? Well maybe, in a thin, unsatisfying manner. Of course, this film has no substantial dénouement so I'd argue it's not a drama. 'The Lobster' has another debilitating flaw. It appears to be two films and it's hard to avoid the impression the second half has been tacked onto the first because the director and writers had little idea what to do with the original material.

So, what is 'The Lobster'? In passing, there is some decent cinematography and Ireland is made to look sternly beautiful on these occasions. However, above all what 'The Lobster' is, is absurd. Regrettably, this isn't the kind of absurdity that has something to say about the human condition. It's the kind of absurdity that is preposterous and uninteresting.

I think it's absurd this film was made. It appears to be the product of an immature mind with an inchoate understanding of human relationships. The result is dismally boring.

A Pigeon Sat on a Branch Reflecting on Existence (2014)

Lugubrious, superficial and tedious

[3/10 · 14 September 2015]

In 1877 John Ruskin famously said of a painting by James Whistler that he was "flinging a pot of paint in the public's face" when dismissing it as not being art.

My reaction to this film is quite similar. Yes, it's a film in the sense that it's a sequence of scenes intended to be viewed on a screen. Also, I suppose Roy Andersson believes he's making an important point about something - the banality of Man's inhumanity to Man, perhaps - with it. However, the idea that a running joke that is not funny, is itself funny, is not funny; or, at least, it's not funny in Andersson's hands. This nominally absurdist film is turgid, mirthless and all but featureless. It's extremely slow-paced, deliberately so.

Consequently, it seems to me that Andersson has made a kind of "anti-film" as a metaphor for people's lack of empathy for each other. In doing so, he has completely defeated his own purpose as it's likely none but a very small minority of people could find much of worth in such a boring (non-)film.

Almost as if Andersson lost conviction in his approach, towards the end of this assemblage of flat scenes there is a pair that, although shot in the same low-key style, are nasty. It's hard to avoid the impression that Andersson thought he had better do something unsubtle to make his audience understand that he appears to draw some moral equivalence between an everyday lack of empathy between people and more heinous acts.

So we come back to Ruskin; whatever this effort is, I don't think it's a film. Does it have some other importance? I don't think so.

The Piano Teacher (2001)

Unshocking, but solidly directed and written

[6/10 · 8 June 2015]

I suppose there are some who will watch this film and, being naïve, will be shocked by the sado-masochistic nature of the relationships it depicts into reaching for fanciful explanations of the story. If so, this would do no more than betray their lack of familiarity with those unusual, but not particularly rare, traits.

To be clear; this is not the greatly symbolic film some ill-conceived reviews would have you believe. Instead, it's a fairly straightforward effort about a person with masochistic tendencies. Other than the fact that this person lives with her domineering, wheedling mother, we are told nothing of the life that led her to develop these tendencies, so we are left simply to observe the consequences of her having them. Those consequences range from somewhat interesting, particularly in the first part of the film, to mildly disturbing.

The saving grace of the film is Isabelle Huppert's performance as Erika Kohut, ably supported by Annie Girardot as her mother. Unfortunately, the role of Walter Klemmer, unconvincingly written as it is, cannot be saved by Benoît Magimel and constitutes the film's major defect.

If you're looking for some metaphysical profundity about the human condition or a cutting allegory about society, look elsewhere. This is a sometimes clumsy depiction of masochism and particularly of sadism partially, but not wholly redeemed, by some fine acting.

American Sniper (2014)

This is a disgrace of a film

[1/10 · 13 January 2015]

First, let me say that Eastwood's direction, Cooper's acting and the screenplay are all competent. Were this film a wholly fictional account of a warrior with special skills put in the service of his comrades it would be quite serviceable, though no more than that.

However, here was an opportunity to show the complexities of a man hailed as an American hero; and by complexities, I mean the thoroughly odious aspects of Chris Kyle's character. The man enjoyed killing people, regarding his targets as savages, and he bragged about killing looters in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina - even if he didn't, because we don't know for certain, what kind of man declares proudly his murderous inclinations? In short, he was far from a good man. Dismally, you would never know this from the simple-minded depiction of him as an all American Hero in Eastwood's film.

Likewise, there is not a shred of awareness in the film that the US involvement in Iraq might have been illegal and was certainly catastrophic for the Iraqis. The film's approach is to display every Iraqi man, woman and even child as intent on murdering "good" American troops and therefore deserving of their fate, both at the end of Kyle's rifle and under the boot of American troops generally.

I don't know what Eastwood was thinking when he made this film. Perhaps he saw an easy way to make money by appealing to the misplaced patriotism of some Americans. What I do know is that this is a disgusting film.

The Theory of Everything (2014)

This is a work of fiction, not a biography

[6/10 · 3 January 2015]

Let me state the good things about "The Theory Of Everything". First, Eddie Redmayne does an excellent job of conveying the progressive degeneration of Stephen Hawking's condition. Felicity Jones is good, if a touch too saintly, as Jane Hawking. Secondly, the storyline of the film is formulaic but competent. This makes "The Theory Of Everything" pleasant, occasionally funny and occasionally emotionally involving.

It is neither Redmayne's nor Jones' fault that that their parts bear only a passing similarity to the people they are depicting. However, it is wholly the writers' fault that the story departs grossly from Jane Hawking's book, upon which the film is said to be based, in several places. Characters are invented, scenes that never took place are interpolated into the story and some real events are shifted in time for purely dramatic effect in a way for which not even Stephen Hawking could provide a proof! In short, "The Theory Of Everything" has to be taken as mostly a fictional representation of the lives of the Hawkings.

If you go to see this film simply to be entertained and don't mind whether or not what you see is accurate, then you will be entertained. However, if like me you dislike wondering whether or not one scene is reasonably true to the facts but the next one is an invention - or vice versa, or that both are true, or that both are fictional - you may be irritated.

I find it troubling that so many films purporting to depict the lives of real people or historical events distort the truth with a total disregard for the consequences of spreading what, in effect, are lies. "The Theory Of Everything" falls squarely into this unedifying category.

The Imitation Game (2014)

Fine acting but an highly inaccurate story

[6/10 · 1 January 2015]

The story of the breaking of the German ciphers during WWII is a significant one, deserving of an accurate telling. The story of Alan Turing, a key member of the team that developed the methods and machines that broke those ciphers is an important one, also deserving of an accurate telling.

"The Imitation Game" is neither of these films. The story told by this film is watchable, Cumberbatch renders Turing sympathetically and, somewhat to my surprise, Knightley takes the thinly written role of Joan Clarke and turns it into something with a fair bit of heft. However, this film's story takes such liberties with the facts that it really cannot be recommended. This is *not* how the German ciphers were broken and it is not even a reasonable depiction of Turing's life, particularly so when it comes to the atrocious way he was treated after the war.

You will not find Harold Keen or Gordon Welchman in this film, the writers preferring to insinuate that Turing was wholly responsible for the design and building of the bombe machines (except that Hugh Alexander is credited with the idea for improving their working that was actually Welchman's). However, you will find a Soviet spy in Turing's hut when in fact he did not work there. I could go on and list other inaccuracies.

If you are unaware of the stories of Enigma and Turing, you may find this a quite interesting film to watch. If you are aware of these stories I think you may find it difficult to swallow the gross misrepresentations of both.

I consider that filmmakers, when depicting real people or events, have a responsibility to tell the truth and not distort things simply for dramatic effect. When this responsibility is ignored the filmmakers have decided to, in effect, spread lies in the name of entertainment. "The Imitation Game" may be entertaining but it makes this dismal mistake and cannot be recommended.

Ilo Ilo (2013)

Absorbing story of a family and an outsider under pressure

[7/10 · 29 September 2014]

Set at the end of the 20th century during the onset of a major Asian economic depression, Ilo Ilo depicts Teck, his wife Leng, their disruptive young boy Jiale and the maid, Teresa, whom they have hired to help look after them. The growing external pressure of the economic depression to which Teck and Leng are subjected is combined with the internal psychological pressures generated as Jiale's initial hostility towards Teresa mutates into a close friendship.

Singapore is a wealthy but rigid society where status is regarded as important. As well as being a subtle depiction of the interplay between family and an outsider it also reflects the society within which it is set. It makes for absorbing watching.

Coming Home (2014)

Thoughtful and rewarding

[7/10 · 29 September 2014]

During the Chinese Cultural Revolution Lu is incarcerated far from his wife Yu and daughter Dandan. He escapes briefly to find the former is frightened but devoted, the latter hostile to him.

At the end of the Cultural Revolution Lu is rehabilitated and sent home, only to find that his wife is suffering from a catastrophic condition that means she cannot remember him. The film centres on Lu and his now reconciled daughter's efforts to restore her memory and their family life.

Slow-paced, beautifully shot and bittersweet, the story is unravelled and revealed in a thoughtful and moving manner.

The 100 Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared (2013)

A marvellous film of many kinds

[9/10 · 3 September 2014]

This film follows the progress of Allan Karlsson, a simple man with a predilection for blowing things up, after he leaves his nursing home to embark on a journey that will take him wherever it takes him. Through flashbacks we see that this is a metaphor for his entire life. Karlsson has, it turns out, been with several significant figures of the 20th century and, unwittingly, has profoundly affected its course.

The film is comic, darkly comic, absurdist, farcical, a chase caper, an espionage thriller and, finally, peaceful. It is all of these things successfully in a way that Wes Anderson's "The Grand Budapest Hotel" attempted to be, but didn't quite manage. More importantly, the characters are entirely believable despite the often fantastical story lines. It is also beautifully shot.

"Life is what happens to us while we are making other plans." — Allen Saunders

Thoroughly recommended.

Snowpiercer (2013)

The journey is not that of the train

[7/10 · 28 August 2014]

Taken at face value, the somewhat ridiculous premise of this film — the last remnant of humanity trapped on a perpetually moving train upon which a strict class system has been put in place — isn't promising. However, seen as an allegory on religion, class stratification, revolution and even social evolution, there's a lot to be derived from the story it tells. I suspect it's one of those films that will seem more and more clever the more it is watched, though it works as perfectly serviceable Sci Fi thriller if you want to watch it like that. I was reminded tangentially of Kar Wai Wong's 2046, another clever film.

Tilda Swinton, who is nearly as ubiquitous as Scarlett Johannson but has the virtue of appearing not to play herself every time, is very good as Mason. The closing sequence is very beautiful.

Before Midnight (2013)

Very fine writing in a relationship film

[8/10 · 28 August 2014]

This is the third film in a trilogy the first two films of which I have not seen, so I'm assessing this as a film in its own right. Essentially a series of conversational set pieces, one an argument, heavily centred on the main characters Jesse and Celine, the film's strengths lie in its hyperreal dialogue and the depiction of a volatile relationship between two intelligent, emotional people. Interestingly, both I and the person with whom I watched this film felt we hadn't enjoyed it that much when it finished. However, 45 minutes later we realised we had been discussing it intensely without a break. Any film capable of that has something going for it.

If you're looking for action, plot or sweet romance in a film probably this one isn't for you. If you want something about relationships that's realistic and thought-provoking, probably it is. Lastly, Julie Delphy's performance as Celine is superb and Ethan Hawke is a good counterfoil.

Boyhood (I) (2014)

A soap opera in 2¾ hours

[6/10 · 17 August 2014]

Whilst I admire the technical achievement of editing what must have been a mound of material from over more than a decade into a reasonably coherent story, this film is the cinematic equivalent of a television soap opera. In a series of episodic scenes we see Mason Junior and his sister growing up fairly gently through the usual challenges of childhood, his mother go through a series of bad choices for partners and Mason's father change from being a flighty ne'er-do-well into a responsible family man, albeit not with Mason's mother.

It's all very pleasantly done, even the supposedly tense and confrontational moments, and it's beautifully shot, but I was fidgeting in my seat from an early point and the film never really held my attention.

The unusual background to this film is remarkable. However, the film itself is not.

Children of Men (2006)

The baby is a miracle, but 'Children Of Men' is stillborn

[5/10 · 1 August 2014]

There's no explanation as to why the planet's women have been afflicted with infertility. There's no explanation of how just one woman has become pregnant after 18 years without a child being born. There's no explanation of why the miraculously pregnant woman must reach something called the 'Human Project'. There's no explanation of why, at this time, the activists are trying to stage an uprising. There's no explanation of why they need, or think they need, the pregnant woman's baby in order for their uprising to succeed. There's no explanation of why the UK, albeit transformed into a fascist society, alone of the Western nations seems to have avoided falling into a state of anarchy.

So, we're left with a simple jeopardy film set against a sea of unexplained circumstances. The hero fights to transport the pregnant woman to a boat whilst being hunted by both government forces and the would-be revolutionaries; he succeeds but at the cost of his own life and those of his friends. The first half of the film plods along whilst it puts a few plot devices in place. The second is faster paced and generates a modicum of tension. However, at the end you are left thinking "what was all that for and what happened next?".

It's almost as if somebody scripted a great story about a dystopian future and somebody else was briefed to strip all the interesting stuff away and leave a fairly brainless 'damsel in distress' film in its place. What results is a poor, poor effort.

Frozen (I) (2013)

Far from a Disney classic

[5/10 · 26 April 2014]

I've rated this film 5 out of 10 for the following reasons:

1) The narrative is disjointed.

2) The music is forgettable. Some of the lyrics are distractingly inept.

3) The classic "good versus evil" theme of Disney films is badly handled. Prince Hans' transition from good to evil is thoroughly unconvincing. Queen Elsa's hovering between love of power and love of others is similarly so.

4) The sidekicks — specifically the snowman and the reindeer — who, as usual, are intended to provide moments of humour and to point up what is good are one-dimensional, with the snowman in particular being irritating.

5) The animation is no more than so-so in quality. It's time animators stopped relying on the kind of facial distortions found in Japanese comics, e.g. oversize eyes, unfeasibly round cheeks and turned up noses. These have become clichés.

I understand some backwards Americans have criticised the film for promoting homosexuality. This is arrant nonsense. It is merely a pale shadow of the glorious Disney films of yesteryear.