The Rooster

A tough one to review because you know it's not going to be a box office hit.

Watching it, though, I was thinking how long it had been since I'd seen a real character piece. You know, I mean something that wasn't just quirky or dark or subverting expectations. This was a character piece of old. This was staring into the abyss (this is a Wall Street reference). It's a tale for those who've walked with the black dog, been at society's fringe, and/or at some time been a pariah of the community - not a pillar.

I hate to say that it's probably a men's film because I'd surely not want to discourage the inquisitive minds of the fairer sex from having a look. Nor would I want to restrict the universal themes of the movie to a select audience.

I'm not a feminist and I believe men deserve to have their stories told but I found this to be a tedious journey trying to explore the minds of broken men. The exploration itself is at the pace of a snail, I found myself and my girlfriend looking at our phone because many of the scenes just were too quiet that nothing was really going on. I love quiet and poetic cinema and always applaud the use of restraint in storytelling, especially not to over-indulge with so many film-making trickery and camera angles.

This film did not tell a story well, instead it indulged itself with men behaving like boys and a chance for an esteem actor such as Hugo to have fun and act like a fractured, naughty little boy.

The other actor seemed to play it very calm, but I felt his presence was not quite there.

I didn't know what this film was about, maybe I wasn't paying attention, maybe it wasn't clear enough or maybe I'm just not intelligent enough.

It seems to be a theme in Australia where directors like to mimic other styles of Aussie storytelling, it's the tedious and horse-flogging style of really dragging it out.

As they say boys will be boys.

This is so much more than a mystery. It is a beautifully crafted story about friendship and Hugo Weaving deserves every award going around for an absolutely authentic performance (Phoenix Raie is brilliant too). The background of the story is a man dealing with depression but it is not a sad film - without giving anything away it turns all your expectations on their head. The script is perfect and sparing - at its heart it is a film about male communication, how hard it is and how kindness and trust are so important. I have never seen anything like it and have not stopped thinking about it since I saw it two nights ago.

"The Rooster," starring Hugo Weaving and directed by Mark Winter, is a cinematic gem that I was lucky enough to see it at MIFF. Hugo Weaving's performance is exceptional. He effortlessly embodies the complex character, bringing depth and authenticity to every scene. Mark Winter's direction is a revelation. He masterfully navigates the narrative, creating an atmosphere of suspense and intrigue that keeps you on the edge of your seat. The pacing is spot-on, and Winter's ability to capture the essence of each moment is truly remarkable. His visual style adds an extra layer of depth to the film, making it a visual treat.

The Rooster's screenplay is equally impressive. It weaves a compelling story filled with unexpected twists and turns, making it impossible to predict the outcome. The dialogues are sharp and thought-provoking, adding layers of complexity to the characters and their motivations. The cinematography was also a real standout for me!

Did not have overly high expectations of this one, but 15 minutes into it, I found it to be quite moving, and was looking forward to it continuing in that vein. But the next 45 minutes ( I gave up at the hour point) just left me confused, bored, semi depressed, and struggling to make sense of the two men's behaviours? There have seemed to have been a rash of 'men in crises' films these past few years, some good (Whale) some not so good (Beau is afraid), with Rooster falling into the not so good category IMO.

Production values are good, with atmospheric visuals and soundtrack, editing is neat and tidy, apart from a couple of jarring scene transitions.

There are only two main characters, one likeable the other not, but ultimately ( well, up to 60 minutes) I found I did not care what happened to either of them, even though their unremarkable back stories were explained (in unremarkable ways).

Maybe the final 40 minutes makes it all make satisfying sense? I will likely never know.