niall-14

It's a disturbingly honest film portraying a hauntingly familiar life and how it is affected by the seamy drug/underworld of Sydney's Asian community. That's not to say that only the Asian community has drug and underworld problems, but it makes for an interesting and colourful backdrop for a complicated but compelling story. In fact, even now two hours after we left the cinema, I'm still mildly troubled by the seeming hopelessness of the confused lives portrayed. It was so real, so close to the bone. The characters could easily be you, or me. As another reviewer stated:

"There's no light-the tunnel goes on forever." A pretty accurate assessment.

I've heard it said that for Blanchett and Weaving their performances rank as personal bests, but I'm not all that sure I'd go that far with Weavings. He was good, very, very good as the broken-down drug-ridden ex-football star but Blanchett's performance as the reformed addict desperately trying to get her life together, to set up her own business and actually resurrect something from the pathetic life she has, was absolutely amazing. Her character is both complex and simplistic all at once. You can detest and love her, feel sympathy and disdain and find by movie's end you're aware that she could so easily be you.

Included in the cast as perennials the likes of Noni Hazlehurst, Lisa McCune and Sam Neill all played sound parts but not a patch on the leads. The balance of the cast are movie journeymen/women who have many and varied backgrounds. None were overly outstanding, although I found the character of Jonny, Blanchett's former boyfriend played by Dustin Nguyen to be quite well done. He disgusted me for what he was and what he wanted to be and that's the actors art.

Go and see this flick. It's an outstanding example of the Australian film industry's capabilities. I rate it 8 out of 10.

At the risk of running against what I've read in most of the critics reviews, I liked this film.

This movie was anything but historically or archaeologically accurate. Still, it's about what one can expect from a Hollywood epic in this day and age, and an epic it most surely is. From the special effects of the 1,000 ships stretching from horizon to horizon, to the massed fight scenes encompassing hundreds of suitably garbed warriors, this flick rivals Ben Hur and then some. Surprise, surprise, the acting isn't half bad either. Forget about historical accuracy for 160 minutes of thereabouts and immerse yourself into an age of humanity when barbarism and honour stood side by side, ankle deep in fresh gore. When the ability to fight and die for your city-state overrode any other considerations, even unto the death of your nearest and dearest. An age when every man could be, and probably was, a king for a day, or at least a few years, over his own patch of the Mediterranean.

I think I enjoyed 'Troy' primarily because of the character portrayals, which were - different. Achilles, played by Brad Pitt, and extremely well played I thought, wasn't the overall ruthless fighter he's been made out to be by Homer. Oh, sure, he could fight, and until he was killed, he always won, but in Pitt's portrayal Achilles he was something less than the ultimate killing machine. Achilles was a troubled individual, seeking an end he knew was coming, and seemingly demanding it to show itself as he expected any other enemy to do. Son of a Goddess and a mortal man, I gathered he was more than a little angry that he turned out to be not quite immortal after all. Arrogance, seething anger, troubled psyche, tenderness and a searching desire were encompassed in Pitt's character and artfully so.

Helen of Troy, nee Sparta, played by Diane Kruger, was a fairly meaningless part for the young lady, but she does have the primary attribute for the character, that of a flawless complexion and a stunningly illustrated beauty, no doubt enhanced for the cameras, but stunning just the same. Her few real 'meaty' parts of the script were well carried, and I congratulate her for what must have been a deceptively difficult role.

Eric Bana, that son of an Aussie soddy, performed brilliantly as Hektor of Troy. His bearing and demeanour as Crown Prince of Troy was the most convincing I've seen him play yet, even down to his death at the hands of Brad Pitt. Every centimetre Trojan royalty, every centimetre the honourable human being. Good guys usually finish last, but he was dead well before the two hour mark.

Orlando Bloom as Paris, younger brother of Hektor presented the love-struck sibling to a tee. His youthful innocence and fresh-faced looks completed the picture extremely well. His incompetence and fear on the field of single combat before Menelaus (Brendan Gleeson), the cuckolded husband of Helen, King Of Sparta and brother of the movie's villain, Agamemnon (Brian Cox) was well done, giving me the feelings of both disgust and disappointment at his failing and fear for his ultimate death. Of course, it doesn't happen there, with the story taking a twist which leads into the over-sized wooden equine saga, and from there into the eventual sacking of Troy by the massed Greek forces of Agamemnon and Odessyus (Sean Bean - most recently as Boromir of LOTR fame), with Achilles blundering through the death and destruction, seeking his own love and ultimately, the end he knew he was seeking but couldn't pin down.

The only part of the movie I can honestly say I didn't like was the death of Achilles, ironically at the hands of Paris. I won't spoil the surprise for those of you who haven't seen the flick, but when the demise of Achilles comes, you'll know what I mean as the camera draws back from the supine form of Pitt, lying in death. I've been told of the reasons behind the term, 'Achilles Heel' but if you follow the 'Iliad' and the legends surrounding the death of Achilles, you'll understand just how banal the scene is. All said and done, the film is a portrayal of the human factor at its most base, running off the twin elements which encompass both the soaring future and ultimate degradation of the species - Love and Honour.

The detriments aside and no movie is perfect, I'm still going to recommend this film as a solid 7 out of 10. It's an epic, it's a spectacle and above all, it's a story and a damn good one.

We'd seen the shorts for 'Taking Lives' back in March and decided that because Kiefer Sutherland was in it, an actor we both like, then it should be a good flick. Well, it was a good flick. Not a brilliant flick or one that would leave you wondering the why/what/when or where of the plot after you leave the cinema, but a good story nonetheless. Kiefer Sutherland didn't play a very big part at all, in fact, I'd probably have to say his part was marginally better than a cameo. Ethan Hawke, as the mercurial character, James Costa and Angelina Jolie, playing FBI special agent Illeana Scott, play the main character parts, and except for the end-play at the movies' end, Ethan Hawke plays his part well. Angelina Jolie, at least from this males perspective, suffers from the 'Lara Croft' syndrome, in that I kept trying to judge just how big, or small, her tits really were. I thought she played her part well, but missed a certain element of what I was expecting from her character, something I can't quite nail down. Maybe it has something to do with a quick comparison between her character and that of special agent Clarisse Starling, played by Jodie Foster in 'Silence of the Lambs', which I found myself performing about half-way through the movie. Unfair I know, but there you have it.

Overall, the story was a good one and well played out by all concerned. It's a pity it was situated in French-speaking Canada, as, even though like most English speakers, I find the French accent smooth and alluring, when you're trying to understand important statements in a mystery murder thriller, being spoken by a Frenchman, it's bloody annoying to have to concentrate so damn hard on what's being said and missing the rest of the action in the scene. All in all, I'd say it was an entertaining Sunday arvo well spent. I give 'Taking Lives' 6 out of 10.