I can't believe I'm saying this, but ROMANZO CRIMINALE is in desperate need of a montage

ROMANZO CRIMINALE (Crime Story) is an Italian mafia movie directed by a long-time actor and relatively new director called Michael Placido. It is based on the book written by Giancarlo de Cataldo. The movie is loosely based on the true story of a mafia gang that rose to prominence in the 1970s - using the proceeds of a kidnapping to sell heroin in Rome, before becoming an arm of the Italian government - planting bombs and carrying out assassinations to frame the Red Brigades and shore up the established powers. Naturally, it all ends in tears before bedtime.

Apparently, the book is rather good. By contrast, the movie lands on the screen like a big, dead fish. It goes through the motions of a classic crime movie. Indeed, all told it is little more than a loose collection of cheap references to better films - from THE GODFATHER to SCARFACE to ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA. But thanks to pedestrian editing and writing - a style of storytelling that has no energy - the movie creakily unwinds over two long, long hours. The only life centres on the character of Patrizia - a prostitute purchased for one of the gang members, played by Anna Mouglalis - better known as the face of Chanel. Otherwise, the decent cast of actors are left floundering by weak, derivative material.

Part of the problem may be that the rise of the gang never seems credible. One minute we see them talking about taking on Rome - the next minute they're hoovering up cocaine, driving limited edition sports cars and buying hookers houses. I never thought I'd say this, but ROMANZO CRIMINALE is in *desperate* need of a montage showing the gang beating up some incumbent hoods or generally kicking ass Joe-Pesci style. Otherwise it all seems like Disney does mafia: "Make me a Don!" Admittedly, ROMANZO CRIMINALE does get a bit more violent later on but it follows a rather Michael Corleone avenging The Godfather sort of a pattern, except with less good actors, script etc. Very disappointing.

ROMANZO CRIMINALE is available on Region 2 DVD.

HOLLYWOODLAND - great performances mask a structural mess

HOLLYWOODLAND purports to be a movie about the truth behind the apparent suicide of George Reeves. Reeves was TV's first Superman. The problem with the movie is not so much that it doesn’t tell you who did it. After all, it’s touted as one of Hollywood’s great unsolved mysteries. The problem is that actually, bluntly, I just didn’t give a shit. And the reason why I didn’t give a shit had nothing to do with the acting – which varied from fine to brilliant. It was to do with the way in which the writer and director had chosen to frame his story.

Ben Affleck has won awards for his performance as George Reeves, both as Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor. I think that this confusion as to whether or not his character is at the centre of the film is indicative of the fact that the writer and director really haven't made up their minds as to what the focus of the movie is. Is it on the charismatic and tragic George Reeves? It’s certainly a compelling story. We meet him as a slightly out-of-shape actor – a real gent – but down on his luck. He aspires to take on serious parts in quality films but he can’t get a break. He ends up starring in a cheap kids serial just to earn some cash. But, almost to his embarrassment, the serial turns out to be a huge success – to a nation of kids, he is Superman. Reeves drinks heavily and rues his cheap fame. Typecast, he can’t break into serious films. He’s also railing against the possessive hold of his sugar-mama – the wife (Diane Lane) of the VP of MGM (Bob Hoskins) – and takes up with a young brazen actress from New York – “to make him feel young”. It’s a tragic story of a man who, despite success, is not satisfied that he has lived up to his potential – and Ben Affleck portrays his inner turmoil well. It’s his best performance in years – not because Affleck went through a phase of being a lesser actor, but because he chose terrible parts.

Thing is, as fascinating as this story is, we never get a handle on it because it’s essentially a partial story told in flashbacks – little vignettes uncovered by a private detective investigating George Reeves’ alleged suicide. Half of me wishes the director had just used a conventional biopic format and let Reeves’ story have some time to breathe, but the problem is that the over-laid detective story is in some ways the movie's greatest asset. This is because as much as it destracts from George Reeves it contains the stunning performance of Adrien Brody as the private detective, Louis Simo. Simo is hired by Reeves’ mother to investigate the alleged murder. Brody’s performance is pure charisma – he plays Simo as a guy with intelligence, charm and an eye to the main chance. But he’s more than just a natty line in sports-coat and smart line for the press: he’s a good man. Although he starts off on the make – drumming up a little press to keep the mother’s cheques coming, he is genuinely aghast when he realises there might be some truth to her claims. He genuinely wants to protect his girlfriend from the mess and seems to have a real need to get some closure on the case. You sense that the director wants to make a big deal about Louis’ relationship with his young son as well. I can see why the director wants to do this – it helps flesh out Louis’ character as well as show the modern audience just how popular Reeves was with the kids and just how much his death affected them. This plot strand is interesting and well acted – but once again, it just distracts from the main story and further confuses the issue of just who’s story this is.

One final point brings me back to the issue of the unsolved crime. Like I said, this didn’t bother me too much, but it certainly makes HOLLYWOODLAND a different kettle of fish to, say, CHINATOWN and LA CONFIDENTIAL, both of which have Byzantine plots that do eventually resolve themselves. By contrast, in HOLLYWOODLAND, the alleged murder is more of a MacGuffin to allow the director to explore two interesting characters and the impact of Hollywood’s latent corruption and greed on their lives. Of course, CHINATOWN and LA CONFIDENTIAL are also brilliant examinations of the cruelty and decadence at the heart of LA and they do this stuff far better than HOLLYWOODLAND, which deals with corruption on a domestic rather than systemic level.

I am pleased to have watched Hollywoodland and can recommend it purely on the grounds of production design, Adrien Brody’s outstanding performance and some decent play from Diane Lane and Ben Affleck. But Brody aside, I can’t quite understand the Oscar buzz. This week alone I have seen more impressive performances in movies like SHORTBUS, INFAMOUS and BUENOS AIRES 1977. Moreover, performances aside, in terms of narrative structure I think this movie is a real mess.

HOLLYWOODLAND played Venice 2006 where Ben Affleck won Best Actor. It opened in the US in September and in Italy in October. HOLLYWOODLAND opens in the UK on December 1st and in the Netherlands, Spain, Brazil, Argentina, Belgium and France in February 2007. It opens in Australia and Germany on March 15th.

BE WITH ME will appeal to more than the usual art-house crowd

To begin with, BE WITH ME – the new film from Singaporean director Eric Khoo - is a serious test of patience. It has precious little dialogue and the visual style is deliberately simplistic and functional – using DV and minimal lighting. The content of the film could be a series of statements: old man buys food; old man puts food in compartment of motorcycle; old man cooks food; old man puts food in tiffin; old man goes to hospital; old man walks along corridor; old man feeds wife; old man sits with wife; old man goes to store; old man serves customer….This is not all, though! For there is an inter-weaving plot - again with no dialogue. Fat man goes to diner; fat man eats noodles; fat man eats oyster omelette; fat man drinks tiger beer (maybe this is why he has a pot belly, thinks Bina007); fat man goes home; fat man eats braised pork; fat man works at surveillance officer; fat man ogles beautiful executive; fat man buys nice writing paper; fat man struggles to tell girl he loves her; fat man stalks girl in shopping mall. And yet, there is more! There is another plot strand. Again, no dialogue but a series of close-ups on instant messenger screens, text messages and caller IDs. Two teenage girls have a fling, to the sound of corny day-time TV music, but one deserts the other for a boyfriend. The jilted girl is so crushed she attempts suicide.

What binds all these stories together and lifts them above the painfully artistic is the narration of a deaf and blind woman. I say narration but actually her story is related through close up’s of what she types, very occasionally through what she says, but mostly by observing her day-to-day routine while subtitle run at the bottom of the screen. This seem fitting to her condition. It is a remarkable and true story about a young girl whose parents hardly care when she looses her senses and who loses all hope of ever going to school. But a series of kind people rescue her and she ends up on a scholarship to a prestigious American school for the disabled. Now in old age, she teaches at a school for the disabled back in Singapore and her autobiography affects each of the main characters in the other plot strands.

This is not an easy film to approach and at first can seem willfully obscure. But as you settle into the rhythm of the movie it becomes captivating. The central story of this remarkable woman definitely lifts the film out of the “one for the art-house crowd” category.

BE WITH ME is on limited release in Singapore, France and the UK.

THE PRESTIGE - Christian Bale is ENGLISH!

This review is posted by guest reviewer, Nik, who can usually be found here.

Some people have accused me of being gay for Christian Bale in the past, and chief amongst the accusers myself. And yes, it's true, I am bent for Bale - but there's a jolly good reason. This man simply doesn't get himself involved in anything less that a great movie - his acting performances are always superlative - and the dynamic range of his skills is nothing short of breathtaking. And he has a fucking great body.

That said, I cannot claim that any of these things attracted me to see THE PRESTIGE. In fact, not a single factor in the film's favour weighed on my mind as I collected my ticket from Bina007 at the Odeon West End, since the screening I attended was the "surprise film" of the 2006 London Film Festival, and no-one knew the film title until the opening credits. Before the film, an organiser of the Festival came on stage and asked for suggestions as to what the film might be. A few people did shout "The Prestige". I shouted "Debbie Does Dallas - or am I in the wrong cinema?" That anecdote has nothing to do with this review, I just thought I'd tell you it so that you could fully appreciate my gutter comedy, and how I added to the audience's cultural experience that evening.

But back to the point, it came as no real surprise to me that the surprise film was THE PRESTIGE, and that it turned out to be as good as I'd hoped. After all, a surprise film has to meet the highest standards of excellence so as not to disappoint or alienate a broad cross-section of the audience. And I can assure you, no-one was disappointed.

THE PRESTIGE was, as the magic and illusions it portrayed, captivating from the get-go. The all-star cast including Scarlett Johansson, Michael Caine, Hugh Jackman, and even David Bowie wove a magic spell around a talented script - and had the audience on tenterhooks awaiting the next twist, turn, and pitfall of the plot. The musical score, often overused in such dark and sexy thrillers, was subtle as it added to the tension - barely noticeable but used with great impact just as any good accompaniment is.

The plot itself was tense and thick and thrilling - allowing you to suspend disbelief over those aspects that were genuinely counter-historical or a-scientific - because such aspects were genuinely incidental next to the personal tragedy of the two main characters. Two magicians, played by Bale and Jackman respectively - the former twisted by and prisoner to his art - the other equally twisted and darkly obsessed with a past tragedy in his life, and by the jealous rage and anger at his illusionist counterpart whom he blamed for causing it. There is a tangible homoerotic tension between the two - as their obsessions with their art and with each other tear them and their families and their relationships with women apart. One has the impression of an almost Shakespearian pair of star-crossed lovers taking their lives. The passage of their death marked love being the two hour traffic of the film.

And it is the power of the performances of these two, Bale in particular, that makes the movie. It is astounding, looking back at the movie once the final twist has happened, just how incredibly hard Bale's character was to play to make the scenes believeable. His relationship with his wife was characterised by a struggle between loving his art more than her some days - and loving her more his art on others. Imagine the task for an actor to have to say "I love you" and mean it in some scenes, and the same line but not mean it in others - and each time communicate emotionally which it is to the audience. The subtley of that insincerity - and the finesse with which it is portrayed in THE PRESTIGE - is awesome.

This is a very dark movie. It is a world where obsessive love and obsessive hatred meet in equal quantities - a world of illusion where we are constantly left wondering what is real and what is not. Such a world will not be to everyone's tastes - and if you're looking for comedy or a light touch entertainment, go and see BORAT instead. But if you're looking for superlative acting performances - drama, plot, production values and score that is second to none - and a movie experience that will make you want to come back for more - then this is the only show in town. I cannot recommend it any more highly than that, my friends.

Oh, and there's something I should add. Christian Bale is English!!! It's amazing, he speaks like a bloody cockney in this movie! I think it may have been that that finally exorcised the ghost of Patrick Bateman, a ghost that haunted me when I saw BATMAN BEGINS.

THE PRESTIGE played Rome and London 2006. It opened in Singapore, the US, Hong Kong and Malaysia earlier this month. It opens in Brazil, Serbia, South Korea, Thailand and Venezuala on November 2nd, the UK on November 10th, and in France and Australia on Nov 16th. It opens in Finland and Italy on December 22nd and in Estonia, Belgium, Germany, Iceland, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Russia and in the Netherlands in January 2007. Finally, it rolls into Japan on April 21st.

Bina007 adds: Christian Bale has, to my mind, made some shocking movies, not least SHAFT and some mediocre ones, most recently - Harsh Times. But for every mis-step there are a handful of absolute diamonds. THE PRESTIGE is definitely one of them.

BUENOS AIRES 1977/CRONICA DE UNA FUGA - tense thriller

BUENOS AIRES 1977 is a new movie from the Uruguayan writer-director, Israel Adrián Caetano. It is based on the autobiography of a goal-keeper called Claudio Tamburrini who was abducted by Argentine para-militaries in 1977, tortured, held captive for over 4 months and eventually escaped. It is an unpretentious movie. It does not lift its eyes from the decaying colonial mansion in which the alleged terrorists are held. Those seeking edification on Argentine history will be disappointed. But in a way this is the secret of the movie's success. By showing us only the experience of the prisoners, it maintains a feeling of claustrophobia, fear and tension. Indeed, despite the fact that we know the prisoners escape because the movie is based on their testimony - the final escape scenes had me literally on the edge of my seat.

The director achieves this tension by using an outstanding sound design and photographic techniques that pump up the contrast and drain the colour - creating a surreal disconcerting visual and audio environment. But the success of the movie is really down to an outstanding central performance by Rodrigo de la Serna. He is probably best known to European audiences as the guy playing opposite Gael Garcia Bernal in THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES. Here he has to show the shock, outrage and fear of a normal man being tortured for information he cannot give. Most of the time he has to act with a scarf covering his eyes - and it is a physical performance rather than one resting on the delivery of dialogue. What's really impressive is that Caetano doesn't show any graphic torture. He relies on the way the actors look and act to convey what they have been through.

All in all, BUENOS AIRES 1977 is a great thriller if not overtly political. Well worth checking out.

BUENOS AIRES 1977 a.k.a CRONICA DE UNA FUGA a.k.a CHRONICLE OF AN ESCAPE went on release in Argentina in March 2006 and has since played Cannes (where it was nominated for the Golden Palm), Toronto and London 2006. It opened in Brazil and Mexico earlier this month and opens in France in February 2007.

FAST FOOD NATION - the agit-doc is dead! Long live the non-fiction fiction film!

I am getting a little bit tired of earnest liberal agit-docs that usually have little visually to do with cinema, could equally well be shown on TV, and tend to preach to the converted. Michael Moore may have increased the sale-ability of documentary cinematic releases and part of me is happy about that but the other part bemoans the seemingly homogenous product now flooding arts cinemas across the land. I've written too many reviews starting: "this week's self-explanatory documentary..." or "the point being...?" That's not to say that I don't agree with everything these docs are trying to say. I do. I just wonder how effective they are. Clearly no nasty evil polluter is going to slap down ten squid at his local cineplex to say a movie called "Nasty evil capital bastards are raping the rainforest!"?

So it was with real interest that I watched Richard Linklator's new movie, FAST FOOD NATION. And appropriate since I just watched INFAMOUS - a movie about how Truman Capote invented a new form of novel - non-fiction fiction. Capote's idea was to "bring alive" the facts of the case by applying fiction techniques such as emotional insight and inter-cutting narrative structures. Richard Linklater is pretty much following the same logic here. He takes a popular non-fiction book by Eric Schlosser that tackles the murky, hidden world of the industrial food industry in the USA. Linklater opts not to make another earnest documentary out of this material. Instead he gives us a feature length movie.

So, FAST FOOD NATION is not a documentary. It's also not a comedy or satire, although it contains the odd funny line. Rather it is a straight movie that contains three inter-twining stories.

The first story is about a group of Mexican illegal immigrants, including Wilmer "Fez" Valderamma and Catalina Sandino Moreno, who are helped over the border by Luis Guzman's pimped-out van driver and taken to a meat-packing plant in Colorado. There, watched over by the sleazy Bobby Cannavale, they earn a pittance which feels like a fortune to them and put their lives at risk in horrific jobs, turning live cows into frozen meat patties. This strand is brilliantly acted - showing for instance that Valderama and Canavale can play it straight. But be warned, the footage is not for the weak of stomach.

The second story is about some teenagers - played by Ashley Johnson and Paul Dano who work in a fast-food joint in the same Colorado town. The strand shows Ashley's character becoming politically aware thanks to her hip uncle, played by Ethan Hawke and, I kid you not, Avril Lavigne.

The final story is about a Vice President of Marketing at the same fast food company played by Greg Kinnear. He is sent to the same Colorado town to find out - quite simply - why there is cow shit in the meat patties. It's not hard to find out why. Everyone in town knows - from Kris Kristofferson's wise old rancher, to his maid, to the morally-challenged realist who brokered the deal - played in a chilling cameo by Bruce Willis.

The advantages of the non-fiction fiction structure is that it gives the viewer some emotional engagement with the issues. I know we should care as much about employees losing limbs at a meatpacking plant in real life, but thanks to the way our brains are wired, it's easier to care and to "get it" if we have some charismatic characters on screen. The other advantage is that we get a proper movie with proper production values, visual style (which in fairness is not that spectacular in this particular film) and sound-track. The disadvantage is that on occasion characters say stuff which is just not credible, because they are basically making a speech. It doesn't happen often but it does happen, especially when the Ethan Hawke character is on screen or when a radical student says, "The patriotic thing to do at this point is to break the Patriot Act". A gloriously seditious sentiment. Similarly, there is an extended discussion between the students as to why the cows won't leave their pens even when the fence is broken - a rather clumsy extended metaphor for humans who know fast food is made from shit-infused meat but still eat it.

Still, for all its flaws and clumsiness, I think FAST FOOD NATION is far more successful in conveying its message and simply entertaining its audience than the usual agit-docs. To that end, it's a noble experiment and hopefully one that will be influential.

FAST FOOD NATION played Cannes and London 2006. It is already on release in Australia and Germany and opens in the US and France at the end of November. It opens in Israel and Belgium in January 2007 and in the Netherlands in March.