JohnJoss Reviews

Match Point (2005)

Almost perfect

[8/10 · 8 January 2006]

Woody Allen, who has been struggling in his most recent films, is in top form here, aided by sterling performances from his leads as described in all the other reviews here. He manages to capture London and the upper crust perfectly for the bulk of his intended audience: Americans.

He loses two stars for two reasons: a sluggish 'first act,' which often drags and violates one of the principal dicta in film-making: move as far forward into the action as possible--any sensible audience will 'know' what brought us to where we are; the second reason is that (and Woody Allen must have known this) some of the film was apparently shot for television, with 'talking heads' that loom fifteen feet tall on the theatre screen and overwhelm the viewer. On the home screen, this would be in acceptable scale but on the big screen it's overpowering.

This would have been a perfect 10 had it been a 90-minute film. As it is, it's remarkably good and speaks excellently to Allen's sensitivity to British culture and behaviour, and his mastery over nuanced plot details.

Jonathan Rhys-Davies is magnetically watchable as he processes the realities around him, conveying emotion and meaning even when not saying anything (a good test for acting skill). It might have made him more credible as one who had come from a humble Irish background had he used the slightest hint of an Irish accent, but that's not a serious criticism except for the accent-aware (guilty as charged, m'lud).

Breakfast on Pluto (2005)

Almost brilliant

[5/10 · 29 December 2005]

This brilliant and original film presents themes that challenge the sensibilities and comfort levels of general audiences. This is excellent, in an era in which guns, gore, special effects and sequels to earlier dreary moneymakers are the principal fodder peddled cynically for the groundlings: 21st-century Hollywood Hell. PLUTO's locales, characters and behavior--Ireland and London in the '60s, priestly sex, child abandonment, the then current popular music, cross-dressing, terrorism--are difficult to capture and communicate but the film addresses these issues bravely and well. It fails in specific ways that reduce the over-all rating: it is so episodic and formless that it is hard to focus; Murphy's often brilliant performance in voice, gestures and mannerisms is nevertheless inconsistent in detail (example: Kitten's sources of support are incongruously absent); Neeson does not apparently 'age' over the 20-year sweep of the film; without needing to have everything spelled out, one would often like to understand more about the context of particular scenes where (in the film) motivation and character are insufficiently formed. As it is, incongruous behavior and reaction permeate the film and frustrate even the most sympathetic audience member. Every director is a compulsive achiever who wants to see his or her vision realized, but if only someone close to Neil Jordan had taken him aside and said "Yes, but . . . " in these areas the result would have been clearer and more enjoyable. What could have been a glorious success is dragged down by these problems, yet PLUTO is a great achievement anyway. But God and the Devil are in the details and here Jordan has snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

Passport to Pimlico (1949)

Wonderful whimsy

[31 August 2002]

I saw this film as a boy living in Chelsea (next door to Pimlico) and found it utterly charming. Curious, isn't it, how a film that one appreciated so long ago should remain firmly embedded in the memory. Other critics and reviewers have discussed the plot and actors, so there is no point in repeating their revelations. I would say, though, that it reminds me, in retrospect, of THE MOUSE THAT ROARED in its approach to the, ahem, inconsistencies of life. And it brought Post WWII London to life with clarity and power, with cinematography and dialogue that were entirely to the point. My complaint, now that I live in the U.S., is why the **** we can't get this film on VHS or DVD for enjoyment here. Much like that other spectacular comedy of a few years later, GENEVIEVE.

Birthday Girl (2001)

Mencken was right--you'll never go broke underestimating the public taste

[23 February 2002]

Nicole Kidman is an interesting actress, going back to DEAD CALM, but this travesty of a movie is unworthy of her. Why (except for the money) would she have bothered to be involved? Who decides (i.e. via 'green light') what to foist on the public? Is the Kidman 'name' enough to recover the investment? How cynical are the clowns behind the curtain? Trying to empathize with this film is like trying to understand the minds of psychotics. It can be done, but--unless you are a professional psychologist, cop or lawyer--why would you want to? The lead characters are shallow, brain dead and unlikeable. The cinematography is leaden and uninspired. The script? Where could one start in an attempt to plumb its trivial shallows? This is a small, indeed tiny movie for small, indeed tiny minds. To make matters worse, many excellent scripts, actors and moviemakers won't get the chance to succeed when the distribution system is clogged with this sort of appalling junk.