THE ARISTOCRATS - I get it. In fact, I got it all too soon.

THE ARISTOCRATS is a documentary about a joke. The joke is a shaggy dog story designed to shock people into laughter. As comedian Paul Reiser says, "It's all set-up". So we see 100 comedians (apparently, I didn't count) tell the joke. It goes like this: A wife, husband, kids, dog (variations thereupon) go into a talent agent's office. They say, "You gotta hire us. We have this great act!" So the talent agent says, "So what is the act?" They then recount the act. It is the nastiest, crudest, most vicious stuff you ever heard of. There needs to be sex (incest, besti*lity, whatever), excrement, the most gross things you can think of. Each comedian goes gross in their own particular way, spins the story wild and large - two minutes, twenty minutes - manic, deadpan - the most disgusting stuff you can think of. The family come to the end of describing the act. The talent agent sits back and says, "Wow. That's some act! So what do you call that?" The family responds in chorus, "The Aristocrats!"

At this point you might be thinking, "I don't get it." And that begs the question whether it is a valid criticism of this documentary that despite the fact that it features many comedians all telling a supposedly hysterical joke, the film is only sporadically funny. In fact, the only two times I really laughed, the humour did not derive from the Aristocrats joke itself, but from the fact that the comediens were doing impressions of famous people telling the joke. Kevin Pollack tells the joke as Christopher Walken and Mario Cantone tells the joke as Liza Minelli. Pure Comedy Genius.

I think it is fine if we don't find the re-telling of the joke that funny. We can still take three things from the movie. First, the movie is a masterclass for wannabe comedians, because from the way in which the different comedians approach the joke you can see something of their technique and talent. Not only that, but you discover some really great comedians that haven't done a lot of TV or film before. Second, you can enjoy this movie in the same way as you get a perverse kick out of a car crash: it's horrible, you feel gross for being interested, and yet there is something compelling about watching Carrie Fisher a.k.a. Princess Leia saying "my mother was a golden showers queen" when we know that in real life her mum is the peaches-and-cream cutie from Singin' In the Rain, Debbie Reynolds.

Third, there is a social point to be understood about how society has changed and what is funny has changed with it. Back in the day when female stand-up comedians couldn't wear sleeveless dresses on network television for fear of immodesty , telling a joke about rim-jobs would have been daring and provocative - almost political. In today's world, sexual acts really aren't taboo. I mean, we have golden showers, rim-j*bs and f*ltching on South Park and a young girl pleasuring herself with a champagne bottle live on British network TV. This is our new "reality". The new taboos are jokes about 9/11 and racism. So unless, you recast the joke, it is devalued.

The comedy masterclass, the bizarro-Carrie Fisher moment and the point about how taboos have changed are all valid subjects for a movie and interesting up to a point. My real criticism of this movie is therefore not that I didn't find it that funny, but that it is just too long. We get all the messages of the film after about 45 minutes and the remainder is just a bit repetitive.

THE ARISTOCRATS premiered at Sundance 2005 and went on limited release in the US and UK in autumn 2005. (The fact that the movie was Unrated by the MPAA meant that some exhibitors would not show it.) It goes on cinematic release in the Netherlands on the 9th February 2006 but was released on Region 2 DVD last week.

NORTH COUNTRY - Manipulative and morally disingenuous

NORTH COUNTRY gets a lot of stuff right: the cast, shooting, editing etc are all fabulous and more power to Charlize Theron and Frances McDormand for their nominations. The minutes flew by, I spent much of the flick in tears, and I really enjoyed it. But I am deeply conflicted about the underlying message in this film and the way in which the director, Niki Caro, handles the material. I can't discuss those difficulties without revealing key plot points, so if you haven't seen the movie you should probably look away now.

The first, and by far the greater of the problems, has to do with the subject matter of this film. NORTH COUNTRY is touted as a movie about sexual harassment and the first successful class action lawsuit in the States. A group of female workers in a steel mine were subjected to degrading and violent abuse, took the company to court and won. However, the victim on whom the movie concentrates has a whole slew of problems. She was raped by her school teacher and bore his child - something she could not admit to in a small and judgmental town. Later, she suffered domestic abuse and fled her husband, taking her two small kids back to her parents. Her father disapproves of her and her mother is powerless to object. Not only is the victim, Josie Aimes, played by Charlize Theron, a victim many times over, but even her best friend is serially downtrodden. Glory, played by Frances McDormand, also experiences sexual harrassment, but she is also suffering from a debilitating illness.

When Josie decides to sue the steelworks the director makes the decision to focus on her as a victim of rape. The courtroom scenes hinge on the idea that if we believe her when she says she was raped, we will believe her when she says she was harassed. In an interview after the screening, Niki Caro, the director, claimed that this was a deliberate choice. She wanted to explore the fact that in the US judicial system (time and again, she singled out the US as being a particularly illiberal, unprotective and invasive regime) a women's sexual history is put on the line. That's true. But surely the point is that even if Josie Aimes had fucked her high school teacher, and slept with every married man in the plant, she still would not deserve to have her life threatened on the job, and would still deserve the full protection of the law. By making her whiter than white, Caro gets dangerously close to suggesting that we should sympathise with her because she is inherently good, not just because she is wronged. On the one hand, Caro wants to say that a woman's sexual history is not what is on trial; on the other, she still feels the need to prove Josie innocent of all charges of inappropriate sexual behaviour. It is for this reason that I think Erin Brokovich is a better film - at least less morally disingenuous. Erin can wear fuck-me shoes and a boob tube, and maybe even be a bad mother, but it doesn't stop her being a damn good lawyer.

A second and related criticism is of the countless ways in which the script steps over the line from epic to melodrama. Two particular occasions stand out. First, in a pivotal scene around two thirds of the way through the movie, Josie Aimes goes to speak at a Steelworkers' Union meeting. Her aim is to be heard, and to try to convince some of her female co-workers to fight the case with her. What happens is that the steelworkers shout her down, and her father, who has previously been dead against her, stands up, goes to the podium, takes the microphone from her, and speaks, eloquently, in his daughter's favour for the first time. I had a number of problems with this scene - it appeared unconvincing that the father would have a sudden shock conversion. Another member of the audience said that she found the scene frustrating because the father was also denying Niki a voice - wresting the microphone from her, underlining the fact that only a man can be heard*. Either way, the scene is one of those Hollywood melo-dramatic moments, where a sudden rush of eloquence silences a room.

The second really melo-dramatic moment occurs about five minutes before the end of the film during a court-room scene, where the truth of the rape has just been revealed and suddenly other female co-workers stand up to become part of the class action law-suit. This is particularly ludicrous and blatantly manipulative when the chronically ill sidekick has to tap her objections on her wheelchair. I like to call this the "I am Spartacus" moment, or if you prefer a more recent movie reference, the "Oh Captain, my captain" moment. It is the moment when the movie simply jumped the shark.

NORTH COUNTRY premiered at Toronto 2005 and is on release in the US. It goes on release in the UK on Friday 3rd February, in Germany on the 9th Feb., in Austria on the 10th Feb. and in France on the 8th March 2006.

*Niki Caro replied by saying that while that particular audience member may have found it unsatisfying, she knew plenty of people who did find it satisfying. The implication was that the audience member was simply wrong. Now I know that I can be strident in my views on flicks, but I always know that everyone has the right to their own reaction. For a Director to simply tell you that you are wrong and she is right - that there is only one valid way to experience and interpret a film - is a massive and unprovable philosophical claim - not to mention massively offensive. I can honestly say that in all my years of seeing directors and actors present their work to the NFT, I have never seen any couple as dismissive of their audience (and indeed, in another comment too long to go into here, of their peers) as Theron and Caro.

UNDERWORLD: EVOLUTION & AEON FLUX - when hot chicks in PVC jump-suits aren't enough

There's not a whole lot I want to say about these two movies, both of which are derivative, feature ch*cks in rubber suits, have confused narratives, banal dialogue and zero characterisation.

If your taste runs to vampires, werewolves and British character actors camping it up, you should opt for UNDERWORLD: EVOLUTION. Bill Nighy does a hammy five minutes at the start; Derek Jacobi embarasses himself for five minutes near the end; the baddie is a Scottish actor called Tony Curran who was a minor character in the cult British TV drama, This Life; and these are the *good* points. Oh yes, and we get Brit Kate Beckinsale running around in a PVC suit, directed by her husband Len Wiseman, who obviously has a penchant for this sort of thing. He also directs one of the most cringe-inducing sex scenes since Shopgirl. But, hey, what do I know? This movie topped the charts on both sides of the Atlantic, and took more money than analysts expected. I guess that means we'll get Underworld 3 - at least I assume that is narratively possible because I was so freakin' bored I left ten minutes before the end. Still, I doubt narrative incoherence would prevent Wiseman for committing another crime against cinema if there were enough phat cash in it.

On the other hand, if your taste runs to science fiction flicks like THE MATRIX, you could submit yourself to AEON FLUX - a shameless Hollywood cash-in starring Charlize Theron in, oh yes, a PVC suit. In a distopian future, the last city on earth is Berlin and it is run by a nasty Big Brother type. Aeon Flux - ridiculous name, I know, but then what isn't in this movie? - is part of a highly trained, ruthless efficient, Spanish inquisition, sorry, insurgency. She runs around blowing shit up, doing cool stunts and uttering what are meant to be witty one liners. Clearly, the screenwriter thought "amateurs" was going to be the new "I'll be back". AEON FLUX suffers in comparison to UNDERWORLD 2 for the lack of overtly camp acting, although Frances McDormand does have a totally bizarre hair-do that elicits a few chuckles on first appearance. Still, that is scant reward for handing over your twelve squid on a Friday night. The only hope is that, as AEON FLUX lost money in the US, a sequel is not on the cards.

UNDERWOLRD EVOLUTION is on release in the UK, US and France and goes on release in Germany on the 2nd March 2006. AEON FLUX is already on release in the US. It goes on release in Austria on the 3rd February, in France on the 8th February, in Germany on the 16th February and in the UK on the 17th February.

THE OSCARS - The seven sins of omission and comission

So, the Oscars are out, and as usual, the Academy have been smoking crack and/or bought off by expensive studio marketing campaigns and/or bowed to political correctness. Once again, thanks to the uncomfortable mix of all-out greed and West-coast liberal politics, we have a list of nominations littered with earnest yet crappy movies. But before we take a wrecking ball to the nominations, let’s start with what little they got right. Brokeback Mountain leads the way with 8 nominations, including nods in the all-important Best Film, Best Director and Best Actor categories. Capote also scores high with 5 nominations including Best Actor and Actress for Philip Seymour Hoffman and Catherine Keener. Walk the Line also gets 5 nods, and its good to see Bina007 favourites, Hustle and Flow, Junebug, Syriana and Transamerica getting some recognition.

Now on to the sins of omission. I really only have two beefs on this account. First, why only two nods for A History of Violence? This is a superb flick and deserved a nod for Best Film, Best Director for Cronenberg, Best Actor for Viggo Mortensen and Best Actress for Maria Bello. I reckon this is going to be the “Goodfellas” of 2005. Years from now, History will be seen as a classic film. The second sin of omission is in the Best Foreign Film category, which is replete with worthy crap or pretty fromage. Where is the Cannes Palme d’Or winner, and my Best Film of 2005, Hidden/Cache?! Where is the movie that changed the face of cinema, Kung Fu Hustle?! Where is the fascinating French flick, The Beat that My Heart Skipped? Craziness. Pure craziness. Once again, history will prove me right, but in the mean time, I remain unsurprised and pissed off.

Next, the five sins of commission, and I’ll take these in nominations order. The third, fourth and fifth sins involve bad but “worthy” films that got mega-nominations. In each case the director has tried to tackle serious subject matter but has ended up stating the obvious in a really dull and patronsing manner. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I give you Good Night and Good Luck, Munich and The Constant Gardener. In the case of the former, we get a patronising history lesson; in the case of the latter two, we get narratively confused, bombastic, mediocre thrillers.

The seventh sin, also one of commission, is the inclusion of Pride and Prejudice anywhere near the Oscars. This was a very very mediocre adaptation, which made narrative compromises that undermined both the love story and the satire at the heart of the story. While I can just about forgive the “technical” nods for costume and such, I cannot forgive nominating Keira Knghtley for her role as Elizabeth Bennett when all she did was looked petulant. This hurts even more when you realise that Maria Bello missed out on a nom. for A History of Violence. I can only put Knightley’s nom. down to the fact that she is championed by Jerry Bruckheimer, who clearly wants to create a mega-star. She is destined to be the Judi Dench of her generation – the one English actress everyone recognises, who is nominated for performances regardless of their quality.

The full details of the nominations are below. As usual, I have put the films I think should win in bold type. I have asterisked the ones I think will win:

BEST FILM: BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN*,

CAPOTE, CRASH, GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK, MUNICH. BEST DIRECTOR: Ang Lee for BROKEBACK*; Bennett Miller for CAPOTE; Paul Haggis for CRASH; George Clooney for GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK; Steven Spielberg for MUNICH. BEST ACTOR: Philip Seymour Hoffman for CAPOTE*; David Strathairn for GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK; Joaquin Phoenix for WALK THE LINE; Heath Ledger for BROKEBACK; Terrence Howard for HUSTLE AND FLOW. BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR: William Hurt for A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE; George Clooney for SYRIANA*; Matt Dillon for CRASH; Paul Giamatti for CINDERELLA MAN; Jake Gyllenhaal for BROKEBACK. BEST ACTRESS: Felicity Huffman for TRANSAMERICA; Judi Dench for MRS HENDERSON PRESENTS; Keira Knightley for PRIDE AND PREJUDICE; Charlize Theron for NORTH COUNTRY; Reese Witherspoon for WALK THE LINE*. BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Catherine Keener for CAPOTE; Amy Adams for JUNEBUG; Frances McDormand for NORTH COUNTRY; Rachel Weisz for THE CONSTANT GARDENER*; Michelle Williams for BROKEBACK. BEST ANIMATED FEATURE: WALLACE AND GROMIT*; HOWL'S MOVING CASTLE; CORPSE BRIDE. BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE: MURDERBALL*; DARWIN'S NIGHTMARE; ENRON: THE SMARTEST GUYS IN THE ROOM; MARCH OF THE PENGUINS; STREET FIGHT. BEST FOREIGN FILM: SOPHIE SCHOLL*; DON'T TELL; JOYEUX NOEL; PARADISE NOW; TSOTSI BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY: Emmanuel Lubezki for THE NEW WORLD; Wally Pfister for BATMAN BEGINS;Rodrigo Prieto for BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN; Robert Elswit for GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK*; Dion Beebe for MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA. BEST EDITING: Hughes Winborne for CRASH; Mike Hill and Dan Hanley for CINDERELLA MAN; Claire Simpson for THE CONSTANT GARDENER; Michael Kahn for MUNICH*; Michael McCusker for WALK THE LINE*. BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY: Larry McMurty and Diana Ossana for BROKEBACK*; Dan Futterman for CAPOTE; Jeffrey Caine for THE CONSTANT GARDENER; Josh Olson for A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE; Tony Kushner and Eric Roth for MUNICH. BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY: Stephen Gaghan for SYRIANA; Paul Haagis and Bobby Moresco for CRASH; Grant Heslov and George Clooney for GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK; Woody Allen for MATCH POINT; Noah Baumbach for THE SQUID AND THE WHALE*. BEST COSTUME DESIGN: Colleen Atwood for MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA*;Gabriella Pescucci for CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY; Sandy Powell for MRS HENDERSON PRESENTS; Jacqueline Durran for PRIDE AND PREJUDICE; Arianne Phillips for WALK THE LINE. BEST ART/SET DIRECTION: KING KONG; MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA; GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK; HARRY POTTER 4; PRIDE AND PREJUDICE*. BEST MAKE-UP: STAR WARS III; NARNIA; CINDERELLA MAN*. BEST ORIGINAL SCORE: BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN;* THE CONSTANT GARDENER; MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA; MUNICH; PRIDE AND PREJUDICE. BEST SONG: It's hard out here for a pimp from HUSTLE AND FLOW; Travellin' through from TRANSAMERICA; In the Deep from CRASH*.BEST SOUND EDITING: WAR OF THE WORLDS; KING KONG*, MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA. BEST SOUND MIXING: WAR OF THE WORLDS; NARNIA; KING KONG*; WALK THE LINE; MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA. BEST VISUAL EFFECTS: KING KONG*; WAR OF THE WORLDS; NARNIA.

The Oscars are awarded on March 5th 2006.

THE RAZZIES - It's official: Seventies remakes DO suck!

With lots of portentious and pretentious movies receiving awards from the great and good (read rich and powerful) of cinema, it is time to savour the best of all the award shows: THE RAZZIES. The Razzies are the inverse of the Oscars for two reasons. First, they highlight the worst, rather than the best, of 2005. Second, unlike the Oscars, the Razzies usually get it right. How can we forget the Oscars tragedy of Goodfellas losing to Dances with Wolves in 1990, Pulp Fiction losing to Forrest Gump in 1994, let alone the wonderful LA Confidential losing the frickin' Titanic in 1997. So, I give a lot of repsect to the RAZZIES, not least because they seem to share by fear and loathing of seventies remakes. Moreover, the Razzies' tagline is "cremating cinematic crap for 25 years!" So, here are the nominees, with, for what it's worth, the movie or person I think *should* win in bold:

WORST FILM: Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo; Dirty Love; Dukes of Hazzard; House of Wax; Son of the Mask.

WORST ACTOR: Rob Schneider, Deuce Bigalow; Will Ferrell, Kicking and Screaming and Bewitched; The Rock, Doom; Jamie Kennedy, Son of the Mask; Tom Cruise, War of the Worlds.

WORST ACTRESS: Jessica Alba, Into the Blue and Fantastic Four; Tara Reid, Alone in the Dark; Jennifer Lopez, Monster-in-Law; Jenny McCarthy, Dirty Love; Hillary Duff in Cheaper by the Dozen and The Perfect Man.

WORST SUPPORTING ACTOR: Hayden Christensen, Star Wars III; Eugene Levy, Cheaper by the Dozen 2 and The Man; Burt Reynolds, The Dukes of Hazzard and The Longest Yard; Alan Cumming and Bob Hoskins, Son of the Mask.

WORST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Jessica Simpson, The Dukes of Hazzard; Carmen Electra, Dirty Love; Paris Hilton, House of Wax; Ashlee Simpson, Undiscovered; Katie Holmes, Batman Begins.

WORST DIRECTOR: Jay Chandrasehar, The Dukes of Hazzard; Nora Ephron, Bewitched; John Asher, Dirty Lovel Uwe Boll, Alone in the Dark; Lawrence Guterman, Son of the Mask.

WORST SCREENPLAY: Deuce Bigalow; Bewitched; Dirty Love; The Dukes of Hazzard; Son of the Mask.

Worst remake or sequel: Deuce Bigalow; Bewitched; The Dukes of Hazzard; House of Wax; Son of the Mask.

Most tiresome tabloid targets: Tom Cruise, anti-psychiatry rant; Tom Cruise & Katie Holmes, Oprah's couch, The Eiffel Tower, "Tom's baby"; Paris Hilton passim; Ashlee Simpson, Jessica Simpson and Nich Lachey, The Simpsons, Ashlee and Jessica and Nick; Britney Spears & Kevin Federline passim.

Worst screen couple: Rob Schneider and his diapers in Deuce Bigalow; Will Ferrell and Nicole Kidman in Bewitched; Jenny McCarthy and "anyone dumb enough to befriend or date her" in Dirty Love; Jessica Simpson and her "daisy dukes" in The Dukes of Hazzard; Jamie Kennedy and "anybody stuck sharing the screen with him" in Son of the Mask.

The results of THE RAZZIES are announced on March 4th

MUNICH - Stick to Dinosaurs, Spielberg

This review is posted by guest reviewer, Nik ...

Steven Spielberg has proven once and for all that being Jewish is insufficient qualification for making a movie about middle-eastern politics. Apparently, MUNICH - based on the events following the kidnapping and murder of 11 Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics - is supposed to be controversial. On the one hand it supposedly humanises terrorists and undermines security measures by the Israeli state, and on the other it allegedly panders to the International Zionist Conspiracy(TM). In reality - it does neither - but bores the viewer with pseudo-intellectual pap occasionally punctuated by loud explosions and gun-play. The only significant contraversies are that the cinema took £6.50 from me to watch it, and that the pick-and-mix cost 99p per 100 grams. Damn that Cineworld.

Okay, so some particularly naive Americans might be shocked that Israeli foreign policy isn't all fun, games and torture - the same people for whom the revelation in THREE KINGS that US foreign policy was based on oil prices and increased hegemony in the middle east came out of left-field. The Christian and Jewish right won't much like the idea that there is some sort of ideology and genuine feeling of grievance behind the activities of Palestinian terrorists. Similarly, the leadership of Hamas may feel unhappy that the film portrays heinous acts of terrorism against innocent Israeli civilians in a negative light. But for the rest of us - the ones who've had the intellectual capacity and time to think through the balance of national security and morality in the work of our intelligence services - and who know basic facts about international affairs - this film will be dour and patronising.

The content isn't challenging, the facts it reveals arn't shocking - unless you're easily shocked or deeply ignorant. The film neither captures the poignancy of the internal moral struggle within the lead protagonist - nor the thrill and excitement of spying. It both manages to fall between these two stools AND fail horribly at executing either. And to top it off, the score and camerawork is condescending - trying to impose a paint-by-numbers depth for the hollywood popcorn-munching audiences - who may be unable to cope without such strong editorialisation. In many ways, SCHINDLER'S LIST did the same - but frankly it was a film that had to be made - and whose content had to be respected because of its intrinsic gravity. Munich didn't, doesn't, and won't be.

By the end of the film, I had no sympathy for any of the characters in front of me - no interest in their lives or their teen-angst emotional struggles - and hoped with every passing scene for the film to end, to stop wasting more of my precious time. The gun-play, graphic violence and sex that had kept me carnally interested in the film, at least in passing, had left the building - and with it any semblance of hope for future enjoyment. The final scene of the film was suitably awful, and I walked out wishing I'd been watching gay cowboys making out. Or anything else, really.

I can only imagine the most facile and ignorant of people enjoying this flick - so if you fit that description, save up your pennies. Otherwise, even if you have an interest in the middle east, save your money and buy a good book on the subject, after a few hours of reading you'll have learnt more, thought more, and enjoyed more than your unfortunate counterparts who opted for the big screen instead. And Steven, stick with dinosaurs, extra-terrestrials, and ruggedly handsome all-action archeologists - it's what you do well - very well - it's what we enjoy. And there was me thinking you'd learned your lesson with AI...

MUNICH is on general release in the US and the UK, not that you ought to care. I don't know when or if it'll be released in France or Germany or anywhere else - I can only hope for them that they can read English and visit this blog often enough to be warned.

Bina007 notes that instead of watching MUNICH, which she also found politically obvious and cinematically hackneyed, you could go rent Kevin MacDonald's ONE DAY IN SEPTEMBER instead. It is a brilliant and Oscar-winning documentary which covers much the same ground as MUNICH. ONE DAY IN SEPTEMBER is released on Region 2 DVD today.