The Extraordinary Adventures of Adèle Blanc-Sec (2010)

aka Les aventures extraordinaires d’Adèle Blanc-Sec

2013 #9
Luc Besson | 107 mins | Blu-ray | 2.35:1 | France / French | 12

The Extraordinary Adventures of Adele Blanc-SecBased on the long-running bande dessinée (aka “comics”) by Jacques Tardi, The Extraordinary Adventures of Adèle Blanc-Sec is occasionally sold to English audiences with a handy quote from Empire: “Amélie meets Indiana Jones”. I’ve never seen Amélie (though, funnily enough, I ordered the Blu-ray in a sale last week), but I still think that’s a pretty fair summing up.

Adapted from two of Tardi’s tales (the first and fourth, fact-fans), Adèle Blanc-Sec is set in 1912 Paris, and concerns the titular adventuress’ quest to resurrect an Egyptian mummy who may be capable of healing her sister, while also having to deal with an escaped pterodactyl. Pretty instantly you can see this isn’t what we Brits typically think of as A French Film… that said, the often farcical tone allies itself with another preconception about the French, so that’s OK.

Indeed, this lightness — fairer to say silliness — might alienate some viewers hoping for more Indiana Jones and less Amélie. There’s a sequence in Egypt that’s very much in the Indy mould, and much of the stuff with the pterodactyl too, but it’s always underscored and surrounded with humour. Caricatures and exaggerations abound. Gratuitous nudity - gratudityAnd if that doesn’t put you off, the introduction-heavy opening minutes might, dense with introductions for disconnected characters and locations. Stick with it, it sorts itself out.

The film finds itself with a 12 certificate in the UK, and that age might be the perfect target audience. There’s dinosaurs and mummies, car chases and fireballs, derring do brushing up against irreverent humour, and even some boobies. Hurrah for the Frenchies’ casual attitude to nudity — its appearance here is in every possible way gratuitous, and yet with a snippet of plot information that means you couldn’t snip it out without creating an obvious jump. It’s only these fleeting nipples that prompt the film to be higher than a simple PG (the BBFC’s explanation is here), though there’s a mildly harsh edge to some of the action too. Should a man being guillotined be funny? Well, it is here.

Star Louise Bourgoin is/was a model, which you can believe from her looks but wouldn’t know from her performance. Her Adèle is quick-witted and funny, terse but likeable, and she’s prepared to don all sorts of daft and occasionally unflattering disguises in service of both story and laughs. An able supporting cast includes Bond villain Mathieu Amalric, unrecognisable under heavy prosthetics, who is unfortunately underused. Some reports say this was planned as a trilogy (whether the sequels are still in the works, I know not), so perhaps he was being established for that purpose.

Silly sheepDirector Luc Besson managed to build up something of a following with a regular output of films through the ’80s and ’90s, perhaps culminating artistically with the exceptional Leon, which he followed with US-styled (but French-produced) sci-fi epic The Fifth Element and an ill-received re-telling of the story of Joan of Arc. For much of the ’00s he moved further behind the scenes, writing and producing a flurry of mainstream-flavoured Euro-produced crossover hits — film series such as District 13, Taken, Taxi, The Transporter, and more can all be attributed to him. Adèle Blanc-Sec isn’t his first time back in the director’s chair since the ’90s, but while there’s nothing wrong with its production, nothing suggests Besson in particular needed to be calling the shots either. Maybe someone more intimately familiar with his previous work would see something I didn’t, but though it’s all competently handled, there’s nothing to remind you this is a man who once helmed some truly great films.

The music is by Éric Serra, who murdered the score for GoldenEye with some electronic modern rubbish instead of the classic John Barry-inspired style David Arnold brought for Tomorrow Never Dies through Quantum of Solace (and, one hopes, he’ll bring to Bond 24, after Thomas Newman’s bland and self-copying effort on Skyfall). Serra has clearly spent the intervening 15 years learning how to copy, however, as there’s a distinct John Williams flavour to the music. I’m not objecting — this is an Indiana Jones-esque tale and Indiana Jones-esque music fits like a glove.

Oh mummyI suppose Adèle Blanc-Sec won’t be to everyone’s tastes. Comparisons to the Stephen Sommers Mummy have been made, but its tone is sillier still than that and not everyone approved then. That’s before we get on to its occasionally scrappy nature, including a slightly overlong third act. But that’s piffle I say, because in the right frame of mind it’s all rollicking good fun. I sincerely hope those mooted sequels happen.

4 out of 5

The UK TV premiere of The Extraordinary Adventures of Adèle Blanc-Sec is on Film4 and Film4 HD tomorrow, Friday 1st February, at 9pm.

It placed 10th on my list of The Ten Best Films I Saw For the First Time in 2013, which can be read in full here.

What Do You Mean You Haven’t Seen…?

12 for 2013


There are an awful lot of Absolute Classic movies that I’ve never seen. I think that’s true of many of us, but I write a film blog where I try to see quite a lot of films every year, and I’ve been doing it for six whole years now — I have fewer excuses than most.

So this year I’m setting myself a little challenge. Within my regular challenge, that is. I’ve compiled a list of must-see movies that I haven’t actually seen, and this year I’m going to try to watch them all. I’m going to aim for the not-insurmountable (I hope) target of one each month, hence the “12 for 2013” thing. (Yes, this would’ve worked better last year. Hush you.)

To help govern this process (because there really are an awful lot of films I could choose from here), I’ve made up a few, fairly arbitrary, rules:

  1. I must own it on DVD or Blu-ray. If I care enough to have paid money for it without seeing it, I really should’ve watched it. And I own enough unseen stuff that I don’t want to complicate this with buying more (which I’ll inevitably do anyway) or downloading stuff (or whatever) just to see it.
  2. It must appear on both the IMDb Top 250, for regular-people-voted popularity (especially after the change on vote limits last year), and the top 250 of They Shoot Pictures, Don’t They?’s The 1,000 Greatest Films, for critic-approved quality (and 250 rather than the full list for equality with IMDb). (Both lists were taken from their position last Sunday, not that much/anything will have changed since.)
  3. Major stars or directors will only be represented once. After I did my comparison for rule two, I noticed that Kubrick, Hitchcock, Chaplin and Bergman factored heavily. To prevent undue dominance, then, each is locked to one film.
  4. Blu-ray beats DVD. Rear Window comes out of the comparison higher than North by Northwest (indeed, it’s higher on both IMDb and TSPDT), but I only own the latter on BD, so it wins the Hitchcock slot.
  5. Recommendations from others. Provided they comply with the first two rules (primarily) and the next two (to a lesser extent), anything that someone has recommended gets a little boost.

The method for executing said rules was to compile a long list of unseen-but-owned films from each list (total: 91), see how many were on both (total: 25; if you allow the full TSPDT 1000, another 20), then split the difference between their places on each to see which came on top overall. Then I eliminated those that fell under rule 3 until I had the top 12 films.

In that ranked order, then (we got here in the end!), my “What Do You Mean You Haven’t Seen…?” 12 for 2013 are…


Seven Samurai
IMDb #17 / TSPDT #7

City Lights
IMDb #41 / TSPDT #26

Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
IMDb #39 / TSPDT #29

Lawrence of Arabia
IMDb #67 / TSDPT #13

North by Northwest
IMDb #42 / TSDPT #57

Bicycle Thieves
IMDb #92 / TSDPT #14

Raging Bull
IMDb #100 / TSDPT #18

Touch of Evil
IMDb #131 / TSDPT #21

The Seventh Seal
IMDb #119 / TSDPT #53

On the Waterfront
IMDb #116 / TSDPT #91

The Night of the Hunter
IMDb #175 / TSDPT #40

Once Upon a Time in America
IMDb #78 / TSDPT #147


Interesting that exactly half hail from the ’50s. Don’t know if that says more about the lists or the gaps in my viewing.

For the curious, I had to skip six films under rule 3 to make that final 12, and those were: Rear Window, Modern Times, A Clockwork Orange, The Shining, The Gold Rush, and Wild Strawberries. That doesn’t mean I won’t watch them (or indeed any others from the longer list) this year, but it does mean they’re not part of my ‘official’ aim. (In related trivia, high-ranked omissions via this method include 12 Angry Men (6th on IMDb, only 475th on TSPDT); City of God (21st on IMDb, only 592nd on TSPDT); The Searchers (8th on TSPDT, not on IMDb); and The Passion of Joan of Arc (20th on TSPDT, not on IMDb). Plus, It Happened One Night, which I happened to watch earlier in January, would come 16th on my list.)

I considered assigning each a specific month, but that’s counterproductive — what if I fancy November’s film in February, or can’t be doing with March’s film until June? So I’ll just select one per month as I feel like it. Who knows, maybe I’ll even end up watching them faster. Stranger things have happened.

And I’m only posting this now because I’ve actually seen one for January. What is it? Well, in an attempt at eliciting some form of (fake) tension, you’ll have to wait until Friday morning’s January update to find out! Gasp!

And on that bombshell…

Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, Part II (2013)

2013 #7
Jay Oliva | 76 mins | Blu-ray | 1.78:1 | USA / English | PG-13

Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, Part IIThe two-part animated adaptation of Frank Miller’s comic, regularly voted among the top three stories ever told in the medium, concludes here. If you’ve not seen Part I, I recommend you start there — I imagine you could follow much of Part II without it, but why bother?

In the second half of Miller’s tale, the Joker is being released from incarceration to appear on a talk show, apparently reformed. Batman doesn’t believe a word of it, but the new police commissioner isn’t about to let Gotham’s vigilante have his own way. Meanwhile, in Washington D.C., a President concerned about the ramifications of Batman’s return has a little chat with a red-and-blue-clad chum…

Miller’s original work is most often consumed as a graphic novel these days, but it was originally published as four individual parts and is consequently quite episodic. What screenwriter Bob Goodman has done with his adaptation is manage to make it feel like a story of two halves, with each movie being largely self contained — you could stop at the end of Part I and feel you’d had an entire tale, I think. Here, elements from Miller’s fourth chapter are introduced earlier (at least, that’s how I remember it, but note I’ve not read it for years), lending Part II the sense of being a whole movie, rather than two back-to-back shorter tales.

Dark Knight fight!Nonetheless, a pair of big battles form the cruxes around which the story works: Batman vs the Joker, and Batman vs Superman. I won’t spoil the outcomes for those who’ve not read the book, but both are excellently realised on screen. Action can be tricky in comics — you’re stuck with a series of still images to convey fast-paced, often intricate movement. I also generally have the impression that action sequences are not 2D animation’s forte — too many frames need to be drawn, too many different angles to make it quick and exciting enough. The Dark Knight Returns is one of the exceptions, however, and the two big sequences in Part II — as well as a couple of smaller ones — outclass anything in Part I, which was good in the first place. I’d go so far as to say the Superman fight improves on the novel’s version, at least in a visceral sense — Miller delivers Batman’s internal monologue and a certain pleasing disregard of Supes, while Oliva wisely skips any kind of voice over and delivers the entire duel blow for blow. It’s a fantastic climax.

It’s also quite dark and brutal, particularly during those action scenes. Translate this shot-for-shot to live action and I don’t imagine they’d get away with a PG-13, even from the violence-friendly MPAA. Producer Bruce Timm revealed in one interview that they were concerned they’d get an R even for the animated version. The UK Part I classification of 15 is much more in step with the content.

The JokerThe story may provide some déjà vu for those only acquainted with live-action Batman, because Christopher Nolan borrowed liberally from Miller’s TDKR for his TDKR, The Dark Knight Rises. This is even less obvious than the Batman Begins / Batman: Year One issue, though, because most of what Nolan used is in Part I, and most of the story he told wasn’t remotely similar. Still, you may spot one or two correlations.

As Batman, Peter Weller’s vocals are largely fine but sometimes lack heft. His rousing speech to a massed army sounds more like a weary chat than a bellowed rallying cry, which is just poor direction… or an uncooperative star, I don’t know which. Lost and Person of Interest star Michael Emerson makes a great Joker though, understated and calm but with a loony edge. He wouldn’t be right for every tale of the Clown Prince of Crime — sometimes you need Mark Hamill’s crazed cackle — but for Miller’s older, sneakier version, he’s bang on. Elsewhere, Ariel Winter’s shining moments came in Part I, and Mark Valley is a bit of a limp Superman — this is pretty much a piss-take of the Big Blue Boy Scout, but the voice doesn’t go OTT to match. Indeed, never mind over the top, it’s barely halfway up.

But these feel like niggles, because on the whole The Dark Knight Returns, Part II delivers exactly what you want from an action-packed Batman animated movie. The Dark Knight rises!There were many sceptics when DC first announced they were going to tackle such a sacred Bat-story, and not all were convinced by Part I. I don’t imagine Part II will change their minds, but for those of us who did enjoy the first animated interpretation of Miller’s seminal tale, this is even better. In fact, even without its first half, I’d say it joins the ranks of my very favourite Bat-films.

5 out of 5

Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, Part II is out on DVD and Blu-ray in the US from Tuesday 29th January 2013. No UK release date has been announced.

It placed 9th on my list of The Ten Best Films I Saw For the First Time in 2013, which can be read in full here.

Special (2006)

2012 #40
Hal Haberman & Jeremy Passmore | 78 mins | DVD | 1.85:1 | USA / English | 15 / R

SpecialA lot of praise was slung Kick-Ass’ way for being the first superhero movie genuinely set in the real world, showing the actual problems someone might face if they tried to fight crime behind a mask and a cape. But it wasn’t the first film to hit such a vein, just the most high profile.

One of the forerunners was this, in which a bored man signs on to a drug trial that, it turns out, gives him special powers — levitation, running through walls, etc. Or does it?

If you’re looking for comparisons, Special is more in line with Super than Kick-Ass. It doesn’t quite have James Gunn’s crazy surreal touch, but it shares the low-budget realist aesthetic and a surprisingly recognisable cast (albeit with smaller, TV-er faces here).

One might also argue it’s not strictly a superhero movie per se, more a comedy-drama about a man with mental health problems… though it’s less bleak or inappropriate than that might sound. That doesn’t mean it’s devoid of action or special effects, but they emerge largely in the third act and mostly serve a different purpose to the norm. Or, to put it another way, this isn’t as much of a sci-fi/fantasy film as you might expect.

That IS specialThose after a more genre-aware “real world superhero” movie would do better to stick with Kick-Ass or Super, but those who might embrace something a little different — especially something with an indie sensibility — would do well to take a look. Indeed, being a comic fan is certainly not a prerequisite for enjoyment here.

4 out of 5

Room on the Broom (2012)

2012 #94a
Jan Lachauer & Max Lang | 25 mins | TV (HD) | 16:9 | UK / English | U

Room on the BroomFrom the makers of the successful Christmas TV shorts The Gruffalo and The Gruffalo’s Child comes another adaptation of a children’s book by Julia Donaldson and Axel Scheffler.

This one concerns a witch, her broom, and all the creatures that want to ride on it. It’s a simple story with simple rhyme for little kids, of course, but that’s where its joy lies. Pre-schoolers are treated to far better poetry (because, ultimately, that’s what it is) than the dreary stuff us adults are meant to engage with. Along the way there’s moral lessons and whatnot too, which even if you can see coming, are freshly presented.

The animation retains the claymation-esque style employed for the previous two films, and consequently looks just as good. The creatures are all imbued with acres of character, mainly thanks to the animators — there’s an all-star voice cast, but as each has about two lines to deliver (literally, with the exception of the narrator), it’s in their actions and reactions that most of the character comes through, and consequently that most of the story is told. For what it’s worth, voice work is provided by Simon Pegg (narrating) with Gillian Anderson, Rob Brydon, Timothy Spall, Martin Clunes, Sally Hawkins and David Walliams.

Those seeking adult-aimed sophistication must look elsewhere, but for a family audience — or anyone who’s a bit of a child at heart — I think this is charming fare, more or less the equal of any short film Pixar has to offer. If these adaptations are to become a regular Christmas Day treat, you’ll hear no complaints from me.

5 out of 5

Repo Chick (2009)

2012 #35
Alex Cox | 84 mins | TV | 1.78:1 | USA / English | 15

Repo ChickAlex Cox’s belated non-sequel (despite the title, there are apparently no links besides some cast members) to cult favourite (and 2012 Masters of Cinema release) Repo Man. It’s also the second of his “microfeatures”: films shot for a budget below the Screen Actors Guild cut-off of $200,000. Although it was written for a budget of $7 million, by shooting his actors quickly (in ten days) on green screen, then putting in sets made from toys, Cox made the entire film for closer to $180,000. It’s not going to work for every film, but perhaps there’s some lessons big over-expensive Hollywood productions could learn…

Not everything, though, because Repo Chick is definitely an acquired taste — which may be an understatement. Most reviews on the internet seem to be negative; most people will tell you it’s awful; and I could sort of tell it was rubbish… but at the same time, I sort of loved it. Everything is heightened. This is emphasised by the incredibly mannered greenscreened-actors-on-toys visual style, but the performances and plot are pitched at the same daft level, so that it all kind of works… in a crazy cult-y kind of way. The humour is equally quite broad; satirical, but on the nose about it.

It’s been asserted that there are no likeable characters, which I don’t think is true. The titular Repo Chick, Pixxi (Jaclyn Jonet), starts out as appallingly irritating as her obvious inspirations (the Paris Hiltons of this world), but somehow she grew on me. I think it’s around the time of a montage which shows her to be an exceptionally gifted repo person — from then on, she’s the hero, and I was properly rooting for her by the end.

I'm a Barbie girl...True, the other characters are mostly dim and unlikeable, but is that a problem? We don’t need a film full of characters we like (otherwise we’d never have villains) — do we need there to be any? Or is the problem not that we don’t like them, but that their dimwittedness makes them too-easy targets for humour? I suppose it’s easier to just hate the film than grapple with such questions.

I’m not going to assert Repo Chick is actually a misunderstood masterpiece. As I’ve said, it will only appeal to a specific audience (and not one that’s easily defined), the satire can be blunt, and it does get a bit repetitive towards the end — all the stuff on the train once the real plan has been revealed could’ve been cut back. But, overall, Cox makes his point about doing things cheaply very well, I think… though, at the end of the day, it’s only going to work by embracing the craziness of a style such as this film’s toy sets. You’re not going to get Sin City for such little money.

Repo Chick should be a mess. In many ways, it kind of is. It’s not for everyone — it’s not even for most people — or even many people, come to that — but it worked for me. I sort of loved it.

4 out of 5

Django (1966)

2013 #4
Sergio Corbucci | 92 mins | Blu-ray | 1.66:1 | Italy & Spain / Italian | 15 / R

DjangoThe ’60s were a pretty exciting time for cinema. In France, the Nouvelle Vague were tearing up the rulebook and pushing forward their own techniques; in Britain, the James Bond series was ditching kitchen sink drama in favour of reinventing the action movie, turning itself into a global phenomenon in the process; and in Italy (and Spain) they were pulling a similar trick on that most American of genres, the Western.

Say ‘Spaghetti Western’ to most people and what they’re envisioning is the work of Sergio Leone, but you and I know it stretches much further than that. Aside from his works, the original Django is arguably the best known, so successful it spawned over 50 sequels and rip-offs (only one, made 21 years later, is official). With Quentin Tarantino adopting the name for his latest cinematic outing (in UK cinemas from today), I imagine its renown has only increased.

The titular gunslinger (Franco Nero, dripping with silent tough guy masculinity) is a mystery wrapped in an enigma, walking into a near-deserted town on the US-Mexico border dragging a coffin in his wake. There he runs afoul of a local Major, who consequently descends on the town with his 40-strong army… and that’s just act one! That alone would sustain plenty of films, but Django has more in store.

Django with a small gunMuch of the film plays as an action movie. There’s a lot of atmospheric ponderousness at the start, but once things kick off they rarely let up. In just over 90 minutes the film rattles through a damsel-in-distress rescue; a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it shoot-out; a 40-on-1 massacre; a raid on a fort; a barroom brawl (one of the stand-outs, that — anyone who thinks handheld ShakeyCam fights are a modern invention should take a look); a tense, silent escape; a brutal punishment (or two); a valley ambush; and a graveyard stand-off. I think that’s all, but I may have missed some. It’s practically a definition of bang for your buck, which I’m sure goes a long way to explaining its popularity.

It all culminates in a final act that’s remarkably fatalistic, almost to Shakespearean levels. Without wanting to spoil too much, nearly everything goes wrong and hardly anyone makes it out alive. The answers about Django’s past aren’t exactly cheery either. It’s all a bit doom and gloom, though ultimately not as depressing as it could be. But almost.

I don’t normally comment on the format in my reviews — especially Blu-ray, which I never feel well enough qualified to offer detailed comment on — but it’s fair to say the US Region A-locked BD from Blue Underground has questionable picture quality. Some would say it was atrocious. The film begins with a note that this transfer is from the original negative and there were some age-related faults, but if that leads you to expect the odd scratch or speck of dirt, you’d be wrong. Detail, colour, and so on are actually all very strong, Django with a coffinbut it’s like watching something on a not-quite-correctly-tuned analogue TV; like you’ve found the channel, but you’re one or two points off the optimum frequency. Or, to put it another way, it’s really snowy. As I said, I’m no expert in BD quality, but this looks like it needs a sympathetic dose of DNR. No one but fools want a waxy Predator-esque hack job, but the mess here is equally distracting. When the odd clear bit comes along, though, it looks gorgeous. There’s a UK version out on Monday, but obviously I have no idea if it’ll be any better.

Django is exactly the kind of film you’d expect Tarantino to love: violent (so violent it was denied a UK certificate until 1993), yet classically stylish, but with boundary-nudging parts, the odd vein of dark humour, and a rough-round-the-edges feel (no doubt because they started shooting without a finished story, and never had a full screenplay!) It’s not as slick as Leone’s work and, even with Tarantino shining a spotlight on it, won’t challenge the Dollars films or Once Upon a Time in the West for a place at the top table. But it is entertaining.

4 out of 5

As noted, Quentin Tarantino’s Django Unchained is in UK cinemas today, while Argent Films release a UK Blu-ray of the original on Monday.

Moonfleet (1955)

2012 #91
Fritz Lang | 86 mins | TV | 2.35:1 | USA / English

MoonfleetMoonfleet is probably what you’d call a curio. It’s a colour CinemaScope Hollywood adventure movie from a director best known for epic German silents or dark film noirs; it’s not been passed by the BBFC since its original release in the ’50s, meaning it’s never been released here on DVD or (presumably) even VHS; I believe it’s also unavailable in the US; yet despite this dearth of attention in both the country that made it and the country in which it’s set, a poll in France’s Cahiers du cinéma ranked it the 32nd “most essential film”, besting the likes of Battleship Potemkin, The Godfather, Seven Samurai and The Passion of Joan of Arc. That probably explains why it has been released on DVD in France.

It was brought to my attention by a passionately positive article in MovieMail’s catalogue (because they currently sell imported copies of the French DVD), and then I caught it in the middle of the night on Channel 4, complete with sign language accompaniment. It’s based on a children’s adventure novel by J. Meade Falkner, though going by comments from the novel’s fans it makes some considerable changes that they find none too impressive.

Rendered on screen, it starts out feeling like a Dickens adaptation — part Oliver Twist, with orphaned blonde poppet John Mohune arriving by foot in the titular village, and part Great Expectations, with an unwilling guardian in a run-down, closed-off mansion and an attempt to forcibly send the boy to a distant boarding school. Gradually it becomes more overtly exciting, with smugglers, hidden treasure, adventures down wells and crypts, Moon fightfights and chases of various kinds, a dramatic shoot-out on a beach, midnight escapes, and so on.

These moments provide some of the excitement one hopes for from a swashbuckling adventure, but they take a little while to trot along and feel hard-won. It’s difficult to see what so inspired the voters in Cahiers du cinéma’s poll, but then the French have always had their own ideas about cinema. On the bright side, between the film and the comments online, I do quite fancy reading the original novel.

At the very least, Moonfleet deserves more recognition as a curious aside in the accepted narrative of Fritz Lang’s career. Plus, for fans of mid-century Hollywood adventure movies (of which I’m sure there are more than a few), I imagine it’d be right up their street.

3 out of 5

Another aside from Lang’s Hollywood career, war film An American Guerrilla in the Philippines, is on Channel 4 today at 12:35pm.

Dirty Laundry (2012)

aka The Punisher: Dirty Laundry

2012 #62a
Phil Joanou | 10 mins | streaming | 3:1 | USA / English

New Punisher logoUnveiled at San Diego ComicCon and then released on YouTube in July 2012, Dirty Laundry is an unofficial short film starring Marvel character the Punisher. It’s a fan film, really, but the twist is it’s made by the production company of Thomas Jane, star of the 2004 film version of The Punisher, who reprises the role too.

A short tale clearly inspired by so many Westerns (Frank Castle, the Punisher, sees bad stuff going down, doesn’t want to get involved, but then realises he Has To), it’s designed as a tribute to the character, who’s arguably been ill-served by the three big screen versions to date. I presume it’s also meant to act as some kind of proof-of-concept pitch, though I’ve not specifically seen anyone involved in its production say that. The subtext, however, is that this is how the makers believe a Punisher movie should be done.

For that reason you’d assume the director was some young up-and-comer, eager to prove what he can do. In fact, Joanou is 50, directed U2’s Rattle and Hum documentary in the ’80s, helmed some films no one’s heard of and a couple of episodes of TV shows no one’s heard of, and his last work was The Rock crime/sport drama Gridiron Gang in 2006. Which just goes to show you shouldn’t assume things.

He will punish his laundryThe one glaring flaw (unless you hate realistic CGI-aided bloody violence, in which case there’s that too) is its use of music from Hans Zimmer’s Dark Knight score. It kind of works, but it’s such an iconic and unique score that it’s instantly recognisable, which is distracting. If they can produce a professionally-shot 10-minute film with professional actors, why couldn’t they get someone to do some music? Or at least use unfamiliar library tracks?

Considering it breaks both Marvel/Disney’s character copyright and WB’s music copyright, and thanks to starring Proper Actors & That it’s been relatively high-profile, it’s a miracle it’s still on YouTube after all this time. It’s a fairly effective depiction of a fan-favourite character, though, so long may it remain.

4 out of 5

Rules of Engagement (2000)

2012 #32
William Friedkin | 122 mins | TV | 2.35:1 | Canada, Germany, UK & USA / English | 15 / R

Rules of EngagementSamuel L. Jackson and Tommy Lee Jones star in this military courtroom thriller from the director of The French Connection and The Exorcist. Jackson is the commanding officer who may have done Something Wrong during a mission; Jones is the old friend he asks to defend him by finding out The Truth.

Let’s jump straight to the heart of the matter, and arguably the film’s primary flaw, with a bit of trivia from IMDb. (Should you wish to avoid spoilers, skip the quote and the first paragraph after.)

The scene of Sokal viewing and destroying the tape after he sees it proves gunfire was coming from the crowd, was imposed by test audiences according to William Friedkin. The film was supposed to leave ambiguous whether or not [Jackson] did the right thing, depicting what happened through subjective viewpoints and never revealing the objective truth of what occurred.

Which just goes to show why test audiences are a bad idea. Friedkin’s original idea would’ve made a stronger movie, and this explains some of the choices and attempts at ambiguity displayed elsewhere. I thought the flashback Jackson has played more like an imagined version than What He Really Saw, but knowing he was right (from having seen the tape) makes it seem like he’s merely remembering.

That said, most of the time it feels less like the film is aiming for ambiguity and more like it doesn’t know how to guide us well enough in what to feel. Important points aren’t appropriately established, others aren’t appropriately dealt with, and Mark Isham’s score toddles on regardless while important moments slip by, such as the declaration of the final verdict: when it’s announced, the music continues on the “tension” setting for a while before petering out. I know some people hate heavy-handed music in films, but this isn’t that, it’s just misguided.

Overused lighting, underused GuyThat’s not all that’s bungled. There’s numerous instances of awkward editing by Augie Hess; a screenplay from Stephen Gaghan that clearly wants to be A Few Good Men (right down to several attempts at conjuring a “you can’t handle the truth” moment) but doesn’t exhibit Aaron Sorkin’s skill; relatedly, Guy Pearce’s prosecutor is disappointing underused (his character just needs more time, especially on his “I’ll only try with good evidence” facet); and the climactic court scenes, Friedkin and DoPs William A. Fraker and Nicola Pecorini go overboard with Dutch angles and chiaroscuro lighting.

There are good ideas in Rules of Engagement, but none of them are given enough weight. Couple that with several weak technical elements and it comes out a disappointment.

2 out of 5