Fantastic Beasts - The Secrets Of Dumbledore

 

Dumb Or Dumbledore

Fantastic Beasts - 
The Secrets Of Dumbledore
USA 2022
Directed by David Yates
Warner Brothers Blu Ray Zone B

Warning: Spoilers ahead. And please keep in mind I wrote this one some time ago... before real life events moved on.

Fantastic Beasts - The Secrets Of Dumbledore is the third in the series of Harry Potter prequels written for the screen by the writer of the original novels, J. K. Rowling. Now, I absolutely loved the first film in this series (more so than the Harry Potter movies... I’m not exactly a fan of Potter and his fellow tykes) which I reviewed here but I thought the second movie, Fantastic Beasts - The Crimes Of Grindelwald (reviewed here), was a bit of a let down and felt like a stepping stone of a movie. This third installment in what I’m hoping will be running for the number of films originally planned, certainly works a heck of a lot better than the previous movie but, even though it’s way more entertaining, this one is a bit of a mess, to be honest. 

Once more, Grindelwald has changed his visage because of, presumably, Warner Brothers mixing up art and PR with certainly bizarre allegations made against Johnny Depp*. Why they think those audience members strangely not in the Depp camp would be unable to suspend disbelief like anyone else and not get the art mixed with the people behind it is beyond me but, whatever, he’s been replaced with Mads Mikkelsen... who, to be fair, always makes for a good bad guy. 

Among those back from the previous films are Eddie Redmayne as Newt, Dan Fogler as Jacob, Alison Sudol as Queenie and Jude Law as young Professor Dumbledore. Then there’s Ezra Miller, who seems to be on a real bender in real life with various criminal charges brought against him. Warner Brothers’ seem to be reacting to this in the same way as they have with Johnny Depp and they keep postponing The Flash*. However, he’s not got as much presence in this movie as he did in previous installments and, at the end of this one, there’s the open ended opportunity for his character to just dissappear from the films from now on (should Warner Brothers’ do the right thing and make some more of them). Since the script is credited as being written by J. K Rowling and Steve Kloves... but ‘based on’ a screenplay by J. K. Rowling, I can only assume some ‘PR idiots running scared’ studio politics forced a rewrite of the material to make some alterations to Rowling’s original intent? 

And then we have the most noticeable absence in the film... Newt’s love interest and quite strong protagonist of the previous movies, Tina, as played by Katherine Waterston, is almost entirely missing in action from this installment. She has one brief shot near the end and then a couple of minutes at the conclusion of the movie... her disappearance being ‘explained away’ as being that she’s now a very busy person. 

Really? I mean, WTF? 

She was one of the best characters in the movies and now she’s been shunted out. Now, there were the usual COVID delays on this movie, plus the politically motivated ones but I’m also hearing she disagreed with comments made by Rowling (and blown up bizarrely by social media trolls) and that she was deliberately sidelined. I don’t buy that... what have personal viewpoints got to do with making art (and the horrible box office which wags the dog, for that matter)? I suspect scheduling conflicts due to COVID may have been an issue and, again, I suspect it’s why we have the ‘based on a screenplay’ credit on this picture. 

The story itself seems a lot weaker than the previous two, with the ingenious device of making the plan of the protagonists proof against those who can see the future by not having a real plan and obfuscating it from those who are even supposed to be executing it... allowing for the convoluted stitching together of set pieces to remain unchallenged by any collective raising of eyebrows from the audience. It’s a sound concept though so... it just about works. Surprisingly, this doesn’t make the identity of the end game protagonist any less easy to see coming a mile off but, yeah, it’s not a film about surprising anybody, for sure. 

And it’s a big, dumb(ledore) Hollywood blockbuster but it looks fantastic, has a great score by regular composer James Newton Howard (occasionally referencing John Williams’ themes at certain key points... like the obvious one for scenes taking place at Hogwarts), some good staging of certain scenes and some really nice acting turns... if you want to see Eddie Redmayne scuttling sideways and dancing like a lobster as a mechanic of successfully executing a rescue operation, then this is definitely the film to see. 

All in all, I had a really great time with Fantastic Beasts - The Secrets Of Dumbledore and I think fans of the series will appreciate it. I will, however, say three things that I see as problems with it. One is the fact that, if the previous film felt like a stepping stone to something bigger... this doesn’t feel like anything bigger at all... it feels more like a compromised story with an open ended, semi-conclusion in case no more films in the series are green lit. 

Secondly, the motivations of the turncoat actions of Queenie in the previous film are almost completely not addressed. I’m still none the wiser as to why she joined up with Grindelwald at the end of the previous movie. No idea what that was about. 

Thirdly, the definite lack of presence of Katherine Waterston’s character in this really hurts the film. It just feels wrong and is very conspicuous... just not a good idea, at all. If an actor can’t fit in with your schedules and she’s essential to the movie (as I feel Waterston was) then rearrange your schedules, is my advice. Other than those three things... an enjoyable movie and I certainly hope that Warner Brothers’, despite the low box office returns on this one, get off their high horse and get on with the series without worrying about what their actors and writers are doing behind the scenes (which is, frankly, none of their’s... or the audience’s, business). 

*Yeah okay... that kinda shows the huge gap between when I wrote this review & when I’m publishing it.

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald

Spell Being

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald
2018 UK/USA Directed by David Yates
UK cinema release print.

Once again, I should perhaps take some time to remind my readers that I am not the biggest admirer of Harry Potter. I saw the movies once each at the cinema because my father loves the books and I went with him but, I can’t say I enjoyed them all that much... although some were better than others and they were certainly all very well put together. That being said, I loved the first spin off film from a few years ago, Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them (reviewed here) and I was staggered at just how cinematically subtle the handling of the script by author J. K. Rowling was on that one, especially since these Potter prequels are not actually based on any books of hers.

I was going to leave this one until I brought the Blu Ray home to my father later in the year but I figured I might as well go and catch Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald at the cinema before it came out of circulation and, I have to say that this is not nearly as great a movie as the last one. I don’t know what’s happened here but this seems to me to be much more like a Harry Potter movie and much less the more subtle entertainment of the last Fantastic Beasts installment.

Now, in the last film I loved the four main characters played by Eddie Redmayne (Newt Scamander), Dan Fogler (Jacob Kowalski), Katherine Waterston (Tina Goldstein) and Alison Sudol (Queenie Goldstein)... but it has to be said that while they are all reprising their characters here and, mostly, have a chunk or two of screen time, they are not in this movie nearly as much as they perhaps could have been. After a fairly good start, this film seems less about giving these lovely characters the spotlight and more about trying to cram in as much interconnecting back story for future dramatic intrigue as the writer and director are able to shoehorn into the already impressive running time. Which is a shame because, although it does seem more like a regular Harry Potter movie (which obviously isn’t a good thing as far as I’m concerned), it does seem like nothing much happens in this installment and characters do feel like they’ve been badly neglected. Not in terms of character progression, for sure... you get a sense that both Newt Scamander and Queenie Goldstein are moving on in their mindset and that things could get quite dark and treacherous in future movies (of which I think there are roughly another five planned). However, I did feel kind of shortchanged and some sequences, like time spent highlighting certain beasts, felt blessedly less protracted but also like they were only there to remind everyone about the first film... so not too happy on that count either.

The film looks and sounds spectacular and, as usual for the series, there are some not bad, half inventive concepts being thrown around but for me, the spectacle of the thing is just another element that takes away from the true magic of the characters and the way they relate to each other in this case. Also, this film seems very steeped in Harry Potter lore, including the addition of Dumbledore as a younger man played by Jude Law and we even spend some significant time in Hogwarts at certain points in the film. So Muggles like me have no chance when it comes to all the things that might have possibly made me go “Ooh!” at certain points. I did recognise the name LeStrange but that was about it.

Also, some of those big effects sequences seemed, to me, to be a little harder on the eye and more confusing to decode than what I am usually used to dealing with. I did find myself wondering what was going on at certain points but it was still pleasant enough to look at, for the most part. And, Johnny Depp, reprising his role as villain Grindlewald was a pleasure to watch... he’s rarely dull and he tends to hold the eye when he’s on screen.

Another fine element of the film is James Newton Howard’s follow up score to his previous one and it hits the all the right notes it needs to. Once again he teases Hedwig’s Theme from the Harry Potter films before really giving it some welly for certain sequences... which is strange since Hedwig is nowhere in sight. Presumably this means that current and probably future directors are using the melody to denote the magical world itself rather than focusing on a specific character or, in the case of this theme, a specific character’s owl. Either way, it’s a nice score and I’m looking forward to giving the CD I’ve got waiting a spin sometime in the New Year.

Other than that... not much more to say on this one. I’m hoping the direction of this one is just a temporary glitch and that the next installment can get back to the smaller stories on the canvass... namely the romances between the two sets of leading characters. I can’t say I’d recommend Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald to many people unless they are already heavily into the Rowlingverse... it’s certainly not a good jumping on point. I just hope things will become a little clearer in the next movie because, honestly, this one lost me a little.

Red Sparrow

Nate N’ Sparrow

Red Sparrow
2018 USA Directed by Francis Lawrence
UK cinema release print.

Red Sparrow is a Cold War spy thriller based on a novel, the first part of a trilogy, by ex-CIA agent Jason Matthews. So I guess you can certainly say the writer of the source material knows where he’s coming from in terms of the nuts and bolts operating procedures used in the story and this certainly, I think, comes through in the filmed version.

Now before I go any further, I have to say that I went into this movie knowing it was pre-cut for release in the UK... which is something I almost never humour or entertain. However, the trailer really intrigued me so I made one of my rare ‘window shopping only’ cinema trips. If I liked this ‘selected highlights’ version of the movie then I would buy the full, uncut version from the US market when it comes out on Blu Ray. Which I will be doing, as it happens. However, I really wouldn’t consider the UK presentation the same as being able to actually watch the movie itself. Why? Because I consider even a single frame (one 24th of a second) excised from a movie to be an incomplete edition and not the full work of art. I remember well the old late 1980s TV showings of Blade Runner (reviewed here) where, just the removal of one single swear word totally changed the underlying atmosphere of a specific scene and gave a different emotional hit from it. So... no... watching a movie with cuts is not the same as watching the actual film and I’m both ashamed and offended that censors in this day and age still exist. And I am certainly not giving any respect to the studio who released this and allowed it to be cut just to get a lower rating. Forget the money, guys, it’s about the art... let it lose money, it’s not that important. Art is more important. Entertainment is art and art is not a business. I know that’s a totally naive and less than credible thing to say about the Hollywood money machine but I don’t care... unless we strive to reach that ideal then we’ll never, ever get there.

So anyway... Red Sparrow is not the film I was expecting it to be.

It looked, from the trailer, like an edgier version of the film the Marvel Black Widow movie... if that ever sees the light of day... should be but, although it certainly is edgier than I would imagine Marvel would let their Natasha film be, this one isn’t an ‘action’ thriller by any sense of the expression and if you’re looking for a ‘high octane’ guns and explosions kind of movie, you’re definitely in the wrong place.

This film is actually a proper spy thriller.

It has an edge to it for sure but it’s more like a brutal version of something that John Le Carre or Len Deighton might have written so, oh yeah, I’m definitely a big fan of this film (or what little I saw of it... one of the cuts made is clumsy and obvious so I'm looking forward to seeing the ‘Jean Rollinesque’ pay-off to a certain, early sequence in the film).

Jennifer Lawrence is an actress who impresses me more and more with every film I see her in. I didn’t see her Hunger Games films by the same director (who is no relation to her, despite the surname) because the Young Adult nature of the source material put me off but everything I have seen her in, I have sat up and taken note. I hated Aronofsky’s Mother! (reviewed here) for example but, even in that, you can see what a great and dedicated performer she is and my respect for her deepens with Red Sparrow because, well, it’s a really brave part to take on and she really runs with it. Considering you have some real acting heavyweights in the cinematic ring with her on this one, such as Jeremy Irons and Charlotte Rampling, she does a really good job and more than holds her own. Watching her career now with a lot of interest.

The film is about her character, Dominika Egorova, once a world famous ballet star but now recruited, due to circumstances I won’t spoil here (even though they’re on the trailer), to the secret government division of agents code named the Red Sparrows. It’s specifically about a plot concerning US intelligence operative Nate Nash (played by Joel Edgerton) and the identity of a Russian mole he is trying to keep secret. The film tells the story of the grey areas where the lives of these two agents overlap and penetrate each other. It raises the obvious questions about whether Dominika is committed to the Russians or whether she is really helping the Americans and, any weaknesses in the story come, I think, from the writing more than anything else. For instance, there’s a scene where you will definitely find out one way or another, whose side she is on  but I was pretty sure the way it has been set up to make you think the opposite of the truth of the situation was, in itself, giving the game away. Another slightly problematic thing is the identity of the mole, who I was pretty sure I had guessed correctly from the outset and when the reveal came later... again, it was the obvious choice. That being said, there is a nice bit of shenanigans with that character right near the end of the film where Dominika pulls her own trump card which is a moment I didn’t quite see coming... although it makes perfect sense with the way the recruitment of her character is pitched at the start of the piece.

However, these little obvious things really don’t stop this movie from being a tight spy thriller and I really enjoyed this one a lot more than some of the other, recent attempts to juggle the expectations of ‘action thriller’ as opposed to ‘spy thriller’ in modern cinema. There’s also some really great stuff going on with the way the film is put together too... asides from the nude scenes with Jennifer Lawrence which, of course, are already leading this movie into ‘great’ territory. ;-)

For instance, there are some nice things done with the sound in certain sequences, such as the boiling sound of a whistling kettle transmuting into the squeak of an opening door in the next scene. Also, the crosscutting of the plot set up with Nate and the introduction of Dominika’s character in the pre-credits sequence, long before either of these characters meet in the chronology of the story, is handled really well and could have gone completely wrong but it’s edited very competently and doesn’t lose the atmosphere of two things coming to a simultaneous, mini climax.

Another thing the director seems to like to do is to set up expectations of a sequence by showing you what happens with a different character earlier in the film and then upending that expectation the second time around. Such as showing the presence of another character’s nasty demise in a similar situation before leading up to it again with a slightly different denouement. This is something which another great spy thriller, The Quiller Memorandum (reviewed by me here), does in its opening phone booth sequence, setting the audience up for a similar moment much later in the film. In Red Sparrow, this technique almost takes on metatextual proportions when one of the characters uses a video of a sequence to deliberately foreshadow the possibilities of ‘what comes next’ to one of the other characters in an interrogations scene. So the film really wears its foreshadowing on its sleeve here and demonstrates an awareness of how those same, subconscious tricks used on the audience can also be brought into play in the context of the movie itself.

Another thing which got me into the cinema to see this was the promise of a new James Newton Howard score. This composer has grown on me over the years and my appreciation increased after I saw a London concert last year. This isn’t, as I’d initially expected, in the same kind of mode as his excellent score for Salt (movie reviewed here) but is a much slower score with a lot of Russian flourishes (or possibly the Westernised perception of Russian musical phrases) peppered into the mix. I suspect it will take me a few stand alone listens to fully get into but it will be getting a proper CD release at the end of the month so I will, at least, get a chance. There’s some stuff in it, especially in a later scene where Dominika meets Nate in his apartment, which plays out like something Bernard Herrmann might have written for it so, yeah, definitely looking forward to the physical release and it certainly works in the context of the movie itself.

The film has a wonderfully ambiguous ending too. I am in no way spoiling it but, now that I know the source material is a trilogy of novels it certainly makes more sense that things aren’t so ‘spelled out’ for the audience and I can only hope (although somehow doubt) that the director and actors reunite for two sequels. Time will tell, I guess.

Red Sparrow is definitely a solid recommendation from me, especially to fans of spy movies which don’t just limit themselves to the action packed confections of the James Bond or Jason Bourne movies. A proper espionage thriller with a very cold sting to it and something which deserves to do a lot better at the box office than I expect it to. Absolutely go and see this one because it’s rare these days that movies like this are let out the gate, so to speak. Stupid plot holes for sure (like how can a world famous ballerina go under cover by dying her hair blonde?) but a top notch thriller, nonetheless.

Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them

Bestiary In Show

Fantastic Beasts And
Where To Find Them
UK/USA 2016
Directed by David Yates
Warner Brothers Blu Ray Zone B

I’m really not much of a Harry Potter fan, it has to be said.

Unlike my parents, I’ve not read any of the books avidly and the only reason I’ve seen the films, once each, was because they dragged me along to the cinema to see them as each new one turned up. Alas, due to circumstances beyond their control, they never got to see this at the cinema so, instead of being dragged to my local flea pit to see it last year, I instead found myself watching it with them in a communal Blu Ray session so... I’m probably not the best candidate to give you a review focusing on the 'authenticity' of a story set in the Harry Potter universe.

What I can do, however, is at least give a view of how it works as a film and, it has to be said, this one’s not bad at all.

For me, the setting of 1920s big city America coupled with a central cast who aren’t a bunch of teenagers solving groovy mysteries is a good start at not alienating me completely and it’s also lucky I quite happen to like Eddie Redmayne as an actor, who plays the lead character here (yes, I even didn't mind him as that shouty bad guy in Jupiter Ascending, reviewed here... I have a lot of time for him).

Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them dealt me its first surprise in that Potter creator J. K. Rowling actually wrote the screenplay... which isn’t based on a novel. What’s more, it doesn’t look like she had any help doing it (unless there was an uncredited script doctor in the mix) and so I have to say I’m very impressed that someone who is used to writing narrative based in novels is actually able to express themselves so quickly and competently in the rather more different medium of film. The more cynical part of me might say that’s no big surprise since she’s obviously been involved, to some degree, in the successful series of films based on her Harry Potter books for a fair few years but, nevertheless, the fact that the majority (for me... I’ll  get to it in a minute) of the film holds up as a cinematic whole is quite amazing and so she definitely is someone I should probably sit up and take more notice of at some point.

Not only is it a coherent movie... it’s also a fast paced one, which actually builds up characters and situations the audience can actually care about while still managing to cram in a heck of a lot of good ideas. The fact that she has an excellent cast such as Redmayne, Katherine Waterston, Samantha Morton, Dan Fogler, Alison Sudo, Ron Perlman and Johnny Depp obviously contributes greatly to the characterisations but, even so, the dialogue is quite well written and so is the way in which certain set piece events impressively move the story along in an efficient yet, wildly entertaining manner. And believe me, I didn’t expect to be writing something like that about this movie.

We also have Colin Farrell thrown into the mix who is not, I have to say, an actor I usually have a lot of time and sympathy for but, since he’s playing an obvious villain here, that kind of worked for me too, in actual fact.

The juxtaposition of the quirkiness of the wizarding world we are familiar with now from the Potter series of movies (and books) with the 1920s big city milieu really works very well and everything slots together in a fashion which, at times, made me think of watching certain Terry Gilliam movies in my youth. That being said, there was one problem I had with it but, honestly, it’s only a minor one...

The zoo that the main character played by Redmayne carries around with him in his suitcase, which kinda works like the TARDIS in Doctor Who in terms of the inside being vastly bigger than the outside, features in a couple of scenes but the very first time we are taken in there... it kinda outstays its welcome just a little bit. While I can see where an overly long CGI sequence introducing us to various beasts is probably a great scene for kids, I kinda got bored with it in the same way as the extended Enterprise vanity shots in the original Star Trek The Motion Picture (reviewed here) failed to quicken my blood as a young ‘un. However, I have to remember that, as I am now approaching 50 years of age, I’m probably not the primary intended audience for a movie like this and so... yeah, it is what it is and it doesn’t ruin the movie, for sure.

Other than that overly long section, though, I certainly didn’t find myself getting bored by any of the other sequences in the movie, which are all a lot more faster paced and which never got in the way of character development. Indeed, I can’t wait to see what happens to Dan Fogler’s character in any of the sequels because I really had a fondness for him in this and his final fate is something which is not uncommon in modern science fiction but which is handled so beautifully and tenderly here that... well, you have to wonder how Rowling was able to write anything quite so subtle and equally have to wonder how much of that cinematic sophistication in the handling of certain scenes was aided by the director and actors in terms of the conceptual input. You also have to ask yourself if it actually matters too because... what is cinema if not a collaborative art form?

Not least is the collaborative input of James Newton Howard's excellent score which takes Johnny Williams’ Hedwig’s Theme, quite literally, as a starting point and then gently but surely takes us on a new musical voyage completely appropriate to the movie. That being said, there was a scene where Williams’ theme resurfaces in the last third of the movie for a moment and I was trying to figure out why that particular piece of leitmotif was being used here. I suspect if I knew more of the subtle references from the books and previous movies, which I’m pretty sure must be scattered about in here too, I’d have my answer but... ah well. That stuff is off my radar.

So there you have it. A movie I never really wanted to see turns out to be quite a good film and most certainly a well crafted one. If you are a fan of the Harry Potter series then you are probably going to want to take a look at Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them, especially since I suspect the narrative will be linking in a lot more strongly in terms of the characters etc. in the next installment. For muggles like myself it’s probably not so essential but, even so, I quite enjoyed this one.

The Tourist

Venice Wailer

The Tourist
USA/France/Italy 2010
Directed by Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck
Optimum Blu Ray Zone B 

I got really annoyed when I missed this movie on its cinema release back in 2010. I’d seen the trailer for The Tourist about three weeks before it opened and the way it was cut together made it look just like a kind of modern remake of something like Alfred Hitchcock’s North By Northwest, with the lead actors Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie standing in for Cary Grant and Eva Marie Saint. Alas, the movie only stayed for a week at the cinema and it coincided with a point in my life where I was obviously unable to free up the time to see it then. However, it never went out of my mind that I should get around to seeing this one day, despite the less than mixed and mostly negative reviews it got at the time.

Flash forward to late last year when I found a Blu Ray copy in my local Computer Exchange shop going for the princely sum of £1.50. I figured, with two such prestigious actors in it, I really ought to give it a go... especially at a price like this. Due to some technical difficulties at home, I ended up screening this on the same day I bought it and, I have to say, that the movie wasn’t what I was either hoping for, nor expecting.

The plot is, it has to be said, straight out of one of those old Hitchcock style thrillers, with Jolie being constantly watched by the police in case her lover, Alex, who escaped with millions of pounds belonging to a Russian mafia boss, tries to contact her. The catch is, since he’s had reconstructive surgery, neither she or the police no longer know what he looks like. If you’re sensing an end of movie twist coming this early on in the film, by the way, even from this quick summary... yeah, you’d be right. When he does send her a contact note, she is told by him to take a certain train and to pick up some guy of the same height and build to use to throw the police off their guard. However, the burnt letter used to contact her is reconstructed by the police, which is something he didn’t see coming. Or did he?

The police, led by Paul Bettany and his boss, Timothy Dalton,  are onto the fact that, when Angelina Jolie as Elise picks up Johnny Depp’s character Frank, he’s not the real deal. What nobody counts on, including Alex, is that the Russian mafia boss Reginald, played by Steven Berkoff, is also out to get Alex and, unlike the police, they believe this is the real Alex and they want their revenge... plus, you know, the money back. It’s down to Frank and Elise to charm and flirt their way around against all odds until the finale of the picture, in a twist so obvious you will see it coming from very early on in the film.

And the film is charming to an extent. The dialogue writing wouldn’t look out of place in those old 1950s romantic thrillers this movie is presumably trying so hard to invoke. Alas, the plot itself is a little too simplistic and, in all honestly, the pacing is far more sluggish than you might expect from one of these kinds of films. Also, some of the acting just seems a bit off, to be honest. Both Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie both seem to be suffering from a distinct lack of chemistry with each other in this one which is odd, considering they’re usually both pretty amazing. Jolie is playing quite a sophisticated, intelligent femme fatale (with her own twist, as it happens) but her laid back approach to the line delivery in this seems to leave the performance just a little ‘flat’ in places. One also has to wonder just how super intelligent she is, by the way, when after being told to pick out someone of the same height and build as Alex, she manages to pick up Johnny Depp’s character when he’s not even standing up... so she is highly unlikely to know just how good a match he is, methinks.

Depp himself is oddly lacking the charisma one might associate with such a great acting legend. One wonders if he isn’t so into the idea of making his ‘mild mannered Maths teacher’ so different from Elise’s former lover that he is deliberately playing the character as a sort of ‘drab’ and uninteresting person. Either way, that’s how he seems to come across in this movie... which isn’t a good thing.

The other problem with this movie is that the there’s relatively little action in it. Sure, there’s a scene where Johnny Depp is running chaotically across rooftops, avoiding the bullets of the Russian mafia and, yes, there is a high speed boat chase through the canals of Venice at night but... these action sequences are both a bit far and few between and, ultimately, quite dull when compared to some of the stuff we have seen in various action thrillers over the last couple of decades. It all seems very lethargic and you would think a strong cast like this would deserve a little more imagination put into the writing and the way in which the film has been structured, to be honest.

James Newton Howard’s score is appropriate but not one of his best, as far as I’m concerned. I’d like to hear it away from the context of the movie (and I may well have a look at sourcing a cheap copy on CD at some point in the near future) but it’s ultimately very reflective of the type of movie that this film is trying to be... which is a shame because I think JNH has written some great scores in the past and he deserves a little more recognition but... yeah, I don’t think this one will do that.

And that’s about everything I’ve got to say about The Tourist  right now. The end twist is something which, as I’ve said, most audience members will see coming extremely early in the picture and, although there’s nothing really terrible about this movie, it’s not got anything remarkable going for it either, that’s for sure. I read somewhere that this had a very troubled pre-production history with various actors and directors dropping out at certain stages. I also read it was a very quick shoot and neither of these pieces of information surprise me, to be honest. The fact that people have had a tough time describing it as either a comedy, a thriller or something in between probably says it all about this brave but ultimately lacklustre movie. Not a film I could recommend to anybody but, I do appreciate the various people involved trying to cobble together a movie which focuses on old style glamour shenanigans, rather than some of the ‘played out’ stuff we’ve been seeing at the cinema just recently. The problem is, it just doesn’t work here and so, ultimately, it’s just a bit of a dull movie. Which is a great shame.

The Bourne Legacy

A Franchise Re-Bourne

The Bourne Legacy 2012 USA 
Directed by Tony Gilroy
Playing at UK cinemas now

Warning: You will inherit a legacy 
of spoilers if you read this review.

You know, I really loved that first remake they did of The Bourne Identity with Matt Damon ten years ago. I’d not seen the 1988 Richard Chamberlain version (don’t worry, finally got my “cute derriere” in gear and put it on order after I typed those words... a review will be forthcoming) so I went into the cinema back in 2002 expecting... well... nothing much. I was so pleased and amazed by the quality of that first film. Everything was done perfectly and I loved the fact that Franke Potente was in it and being given a halfway decent role. It didn’t hurt that Ludlum was involved with the production on that one and Doug Liman’s assured direction combined with some powerhouse performances from some very strong actors, glossed over with some very well put together action sequences, meant I saw it multiple times at the cinema and was literally counting the days until the DVD release.

Sometime before the sequel, I read the first two of Robert Ludlum’s original trilogy of novels, The Bourne Identity and The Bourne Supremacy, and saw that they’d deviated quite a bit from the tone and some of the story elements of that original novel in the first movie, but that there were still strong links and similarities to the novel to not get too upset about it. Alas, all that went out of the window with the second movie which went off and did its own thing, suffering the same “buy the title and write something completely different” fate that the later Bond movies did. It’s a shame because the original plot of the novel where Bourne and his very able wife, working with the government to flush out Carlos the Jackal, makes for quite an interesting story. Instead, for the movie bearing that title, the writers and producers decided to kill off Bourne’s wife/girlfriend in the first ten minutes or so and just turn it into a revenge frame up story.

I wouldn’t have minded so much, maybe, if the film had been as addictive as the first one but Paul Greengrass’ direction was a little less than I’d been hoping for on this one and I also found the way the action sequences were edited very hard to follow. It was only Bourne’s confession to the daughter of two people he’d killed for the government at the end of the movie and then the little “whoop” of the end of his conversation with Ann Archer’s character, right at the end, that lifted it above the run-of-the mill action thriller.

The third movie, I suspect, is even more messed up in terms of faithfulness of adaptation because, as I understand it, the novel follows a continuation of the Carlos The Jackal storyline. This is jettisoned in favour of a movie which takes place, for the majority of its running time, sandwiched in between two shots from the end of the last movie, a little like Paranormal Activity 2, which manages to pull off the same trick. The story is intelligible enough, given life more than adequately by actors who could imbue the reading of the back of a cornflake packet with an almost unbearable sense of gravitas, but again the action is confusing and John Powell’s score just seems a little too subtle on that third outing... but the first two scores were such modern masterpieces, perhaps he found it too hard, or frankly, too boring, to pen something more like the first two. There is certainly a progression of thematic material here but it just doesn’t hit the right notes, if you’ll pardon the pun, for me to give it regular spins like I do the first two scores.

With Greengrass and Damon bowing out, the producers still wanted some more of the Bourne cash coming into their coffers, so this time around the story, such as it is, focuses on another agent in the field, Aaron Cross, played by up and coming actor Jeremy Renner (Hawkeye in Thor and The Avengers). There’s a lot of sleight of hand going on around this movie to tie it into the original trilogy of movies by setting it at the same time as the last one and editing in shots and sequences from the previous movie to make things feel like you’re watching a bona fide Bourne movie, when in actual fact you are watching what could easily have been a non-franchise action movie.

Even the score by M. Night Shyamalan’s composer of choice, James Newton Howard, starts hitting you with thematic elements from John Powell’s previous three scores for the franchise, even underscoring the famous Universal logo as soon as it starts to appear. Various bits of leitmotif are played with or inverted as a progression in this score, in a much more pleasing way, it seemed to me, than Powell’s own thematic progression in The Bourne Ultimatum. I can’t wait to hear how this one plays on the CD soundtrack.

The movie starts off with Renner on a kind of refresher survival course for the shady government bureau who ran the Treadstone and Black Briar programmes in the first three movies. This is designed to establish two things about this character who, by the way, is never referred to as Jason Bourne... , thankfully (Someone he isn’t... it’s “legacy”, remember?). “Thing one” is that he’s a tough guy... breaking a record time to complete the refresher by two days without even realising there was a record to beat. “Thing two” seems to be to show that he’s a lot more laid back than Damon’s Jason Bourne character was in the first three movies. He may be a lean, mean, killing machine but he’s also a lot more human than a lot of his un-met colleagues.

Also set up is the new premise that this branch of the intelligence agency, at least, have their super soldiers on drugs with a series of coloured pills to enhance both physical abilities (a green pill) and intelligence (a blue pill). The events of the third movie with Jason Bourne on the loose means the decision comes to terminate the majority of the various similar government agents/assassins in the field. For many, this is easily accomplished by instructing their agents to replace their blue and green pills with a yellow pill which will kill them shortly after swallowing. Being as he is in the wilderness, however, Renner is hunted with rocket firing drones instead, until he manages to lose his hip implanted ID chip (the same kind Bourne had cut out of his hip in the first movie in the series).

Meanwhile, a doctor is ordered by the government to take out all the high level scientists researching the drugs and he succeeds in killing the whole team apart from Dr. Marta Shearing, played by the brilliant Rachel Weisz, before turning the gun on himself. When the agency come to rectify her lucky escape at her house a little later, and you will definitely see that coming way before Shearing does, Aaron Cross comes to save the day, as he needs the drugs he thinks Shearing makes to keep him going. The two go on the run to Manilla so science whizz Dr. Shearing can concoct a viral lock to keep Cross off his blues permanently... pursued by the agency, the police and a super assassin the next stage up from the previous government super soldier programmes known about thus far. Yeah, okay. It’s a bit of a convenient and cringeworthy story element I suppose.

And as you can see... the plot on this one is very much a step down and long monologues about the science behind the drugs and intense high security meetings within the intelligence agency don’t quite hide the fact that this is a basic run, jump and chase story with a less complex plot than many other action movies out there at the moment. As such, I suspect, the producers might have been better making this as a stand alone film outside of the Bourne universe.

That being said though...

Just because the story is simplistic, this doesn’t stop the movie from being any good. The acting is top notch, as you’d expect from the cast assembled from this one, and the action/suspense sequences are quite well handled (better than in the last two) with all the run-jump-shoot-drive shenanigans being edited in a much more coherent and pulse-pounding manner. The final chase scene is a little anti-climactic, perhaps... you never do see Cross and the other super soldier go toe-to-toe in anything like a fist fight... but there’s a definite plus in that Rachel Weisz’s character shoulders a lot of the responsibility for the elimination of this threat and I was quite pleased that the final showdown, which I hadn’t even realised was the final showdown until it was over, was handled in a less formulaic manner. The story expectations really needed some kind of a lift.

As to be expected with these kind of tent peg movies, the film ends with the way clear for an inevitable sequel but with enough plot points tied up that it feels like the story could come to a close here if the producers let it. It’s not a bad ending and it leaves you with the slight hint of romantic promise for the characters, should they choose to go down that path.

All in all, if you were a fan of the last three movies and were attracted by the action sequences and the power-build, propulsive string bass and percussion lead, light techno infused scoring then you really shouldn’t have any problem with enjoying this movie at this level. It’s a pretty cool action piece. If, on the other hand, you were more enamoured of the story in the last three outings... well you might find some of the writing in this one a little dull and simplistic in places. I’d still say “give it a go” though. A little well choreographed action cinema can be just what the doctor ordered on occasion.

A Salt on Precinct Jolie

Salt 2010 US

Directed by Philip Noyce

Screening at cinemas now

There will be some slight spoilers here... you are duly cautioned.

There’s not a lot really that I can say about Salt of any consequence. It’s a fairly decently made, mostly entertaining action thriller which checks all the right boxes and cynically sets itself up for a sequel which I suspect will never be made... but don’t go in expecting anything more than that.

I’ve heard it bandied about that Salt is, perhaps, to be considered an intelligent action thriller. Is it? Well no, really it’s just got a halfway decent script and the lines are spoken with some conviction... and the action sequences, which take up most of the running time, are fastly edited but not too fast, thankfully, that you can’t make out what’s going on...

Let’s put it this way... it’s not unintelligent... it’s just not nearly as smart as it’s trying to be. All the twists and turns in this movie are amply telegraphed long before they are “revealed” to the audience. The identity of Salt herself for example and the, is she or isn’t she a Russian spy, thing. The movie tries to have it’s cake and eat it here by making her both who has defected her allegiance to the US government through the love of her husband (played by the King Kong Nazi from Inglourious Basterds). The director does his absolute best to make you think that Salt is “the bad assassin gal” but due to the sense of morality in the film they telegraph her intentions throughout by having her wound or incapacitate any of her fellow countrymen rather than kill them because, you know, she’s really working for the good old US.

Similarly, you’ll probably figure out who the real villain of the piece long before the movie tries to throw any suspicion on Salt herself. If you are in any doubt as to the identity of the “real” mole in the CIA is before you actually see him go into action then... well you’ve obviously been happily mollified by the balletic and energetically edited action sequences with which the film is laced.

No matter. The acting performances are superb and are exactly what you’d expect from such top-notch performers as Angelina Jolie, Liev Schreiber, Chiwetel Ejiofor and the aforementioned August Diehl... although to be fair, Ejiofor and Diehl are completely wasted and it was a bit embarrassing having a final one-on-one scene between Jolie and Ejiofor where Ejiofor’s character acted at complete odds with the character as you’ve seen him in the rest of the movie. His decision really doesn’t make sense but then again, neither does the rush ending. All Jolie’s character has to say is... “Hey, don’t take my word for it... just ask the president when he regains consciousness... he’ll tell you who it was”... but the film doesn’t seem to want to hang around for long enough to tie up all the loose ends.

I think my main criticism of the film is that it’s definitely trying to hit the same, projected, audience pleasing hotspots as the remake of The Bourne Identity. Again, it’s a bit embarrassing but you can almost see the accountants saying... okay, we want a scene where Jolie escapes from a building where everyone is after her... then we want a scene where she’s inching herself around a ledge on a high up building. Oh, and a scene where she changes her appearance please. Ooh... and can we have that bit where Matt Damon jumps in the water at the end of The Bourne Ultimatum in it please. Oooh... and how about starting the movie off with the post-credits sequence from Die Another Day (one of the worst Bond films ever made) but replace tortured up Brosnan with tortured up Jolie and then swap her back like in that movie. And all the while, we want a score which sounds exactly like John Powell’s Bourne scores pumping away in the background please... oh, but don’t get John Powell ‘cause he’s getting pricey... just temp track it with his stuff and then get James Newton Howard on it. He can copy anyone’s style.

My last paragraph says it all I think... I’d have sworn that the score was by John Powell in Bourne mode and nearly jumped out my seat when James Newton Howard’s name came up. Not his fault though... I expect it was heavily suggested to him that he sound like that and I suspect this may be yet another modern day crime against filmanity... temptrackitus.

All in all though, Salt was a fun ride at the cinema for those welcome times when you feel you can switch your brain off and just let the shadows and light wash over you. If you like convincingly delivered lines but with loads of foot chases, gun battles, explosions and stabbings then you might like to give this film a try... Salt is Peppered with sequences like these!