AICN-Downunder: 2001 In 70MM With Dullea & Lockwood!! Reviews Of A GUIDE TO RECOGNISING YOUR SAINTS, IRRESISTIBLE, And MORE!!

My God... it's full of stars!

AICN-DOWNUNDER

Five minutes after the tickets went on sale, I was on the internet hitting refresh every twenty seconds, waiting for the page to come up. It didn't. I was panicking. See, I like to think the best of people, and in that sense, I assumed the rest of Melbourne would be just like me. I assumed that the moment people found out that Keir Dullea and Gary Lockwood would be taking part in a Q&Afollowing a 70mm screening of 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY at The Astor, that it would sell out faster than Barry Sonnenfeld.

The crowd ended up being pretty big, but it didn't quite fill the place. Still, I had my ticket sitting safely atop my Stanley Kubrick Archives book for months in advance, as I patiently counted down the days. Now, some people who will certainly get a shout out in my last will and testament last year gave me an original 2001 poster from the 1968 British release. In the ten or so months since they gave it to me, I've been meaning to get it framed, but just never got around to it. Boy, am I glad I procrastinated. It now features signatures from Gary Lockwood and Keir Dullea.

As cool as all that was, I had to break my rule of not bugging famous people for photos and get one with Mr Dullea. See, I couldn't quite believe it when the Astor announced the Q&A. It never occurred to me that anyone who appeared in 2001 could possibly exist in real life. I had to get photographic evidence. The photo -- which is now up on my MySpace page, because you haven't truly experienced anything unless you've recorded it on MySpace -- is one my most prized possessions. Keir Dullea looks surprisingly like his aging makeup from the end of 2001; I'd place him somewhere between when he was standing in the bathroom and when he was eating dinner. With the possible exception of meeting Chuck Jones when I was about seven, this is perhaps the coolest person I've ever met.

The Q&A itself was pretty good, even if we were subjected to more than a couple of "So, what did it all mean?" and "Do you want to hear my theory?" questions. Mr Dullea also pointed out that the 70mm print is hands-down the best he's seen since the film's premiere thirty-eight years ago. The whole experience left me in a bit of an overjoyed daze, and a week later I'm still coasting on it a bit. Oh, and the 2001 poster was taken to be framed the very next day.

NEWS

If you're a stupid person, you probably read with great interest the reports that Russell Crowe is interested in playing Steve Irwin. If you're a marginally-less stupid person, you probably waited patiently for the reports that it was complete and total crapshite. Yes, because it's very easy to make fun of the former lead singer of 30 Odd Foot of Grunt, some magazines can make up any old shit and sell it as news. And if you -- the guy who made it up because Rusty once turned up fifty minutes late to your interview with him -- still don't feel bad enough for just flat-out inventing this bullshit, I'd like to point out that you're getting a lecture on journalistic ethics from a guy who writes for Ain't It Cool News. That's gotta sting.

Nadia Tass, the Australian director who actually made some okay films until she dropped off the radar, is coming back to Australia to direct her next film, LOVE AND MORTAR. The film was written by Tass and David Parker, and will star Deborra-Lee Furness. The film begins shooting in Melbourne next year with a budget of AU$6mil, which is roughly six times the budget of a normal Australian film if you tripled its budget and added another seven hundred grand or so.

AWARDS, FESTIVALS AND SCREENINGS

6th ANNUAL BONDI SHORT FILM FESTIVAL

Hey kids! Get those films in, 'cos the Bondi Short Film Festival closes on November 2nd. This year's winner will receive a prize that includes two return flights to Utah, accommodation, VIP tickets to the Sundance Film Festival, and a chance to sleep with Robert Redford.

2006 TORONTO REBELFEST INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL

RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW, the first film by local actor Matthew Newton (son of Bert, trivia buffs), has taken out Best Feature in Toronto. The film was shot two years ago, and -- unlike many Australian films -- managed to haul itself up out of the post-production quagmire to achieve completion and get to festivals.

SHORT FLICKS 2006

This Tuesday, all of your Melbournianites head down to ACMI to catch this year's Short Flicks screening. I'll be there to support my buddy Joel and his film BOWLING FOR BRAINS (and by "support", I mean take off my underwear and throw it at the screen), but I'm looking forward to the rest of the programme as well. The show starts at 8pm, and you don't have anything better to do on a Tuesday night, anyway.

BOX OFFICE

There are few things that true lovers of cinema like more than finding out which film made more money than which other film, and that's where this bit of the column comes in. Ranked and filed for your enjoyment.

1. TALLEDEGA NIGHTS: THE BALLAD OF RICKY BOBBY
2. THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA
3. MONSTER HOUSE
4. GARFIELD: A TAIL OF TWO KITTIES
5. BARNYARD

RELEASED THIS WEEK

No amount of pleading will convince your little sister not to see this film, Anne Hathaway plays Hollywood fugly, Geoffrey Wright takes his pentameter and iambics it up like it's going out of style, we get the funniest film about oppressed Iranian women thus far, Will Ferrell is funny, and Cillian Murphy's bone structure fights for Ireland.

AQUAMARINE
THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA
MACBETH
OFFSIDE
TALLADEGA NIGHTS: THE BALLAD OF RICKY BOBBY
THE WIND THAT SHAKES THE BARLEY

REVIEWS

Four reviews for you today. Four. Never let it be said that Latauro doesn't love you. And by love you, I mean in a completely inappropriate, feely manner. Below, you get a review of two pretty good films, one contender-for-end-of-2006-top-ten-list film, and one big drop of the ball. That's right, four big reviews for you to sink your gums into. Enjoy.

A GUIDE TO RECOGNISING YOUR SAINTS

No doubt, the biggest appeal to many of you for this film will be, as it was for me, the cast list. Robert Downey Jnr, Rosario Dawson, Chaz Palminteri, Dianne Weist, Shia Le Bouf... that's not a cast to frown at. Well, the good news is that they're all excellent in the film. Palminteri in particular, gives the best performance of his career, and Weist is unrecognisable. The bad news is that most of them seem to be in different films from one another.

It's a tricky criticism to have. Shia La Bouf is brilliant, and Downey Jnr is as great as he always is. The problem is that they're supposed to be playing a younger/older version (respectively) of the other, and it doesn't quite work. Not on a physical level, not on a performance level. They're mismatched, and when Downey Jnr appears at his parents' house, you almost expect them not to recognise him at all.

If you can get yourself past that hurdle, though, you will find a really well put-together film that is at its most successful when it's showing you a different world to the one you're used to. There's not a huge amount of story to be found here; it's more about the journey these guys are going on. I think the fact that it's written and directed by Dito Montiel -- whose memoir this film is based on -- is a bit of a mistake. The guy does an excellent job with all the details, but in an overall sense, I suspect he's a bit too close to it all. In trying to capture as many details as possible, I don't think he's objective enough to find the film's narrative.

These two issues -- the incompatible casting and the overly-broad story -- are the only real problems with the film, which (despite what you think I might be implying) is actually very good. The film sucks you in, and you feel like you're there on the street, or in the kitchen, or on the roof with these guys. In these moments, you don't care about needing any sort of standard dramatic plot; you just want to watch these people interact and play their characters. The film is about who these people are and how they reached that point, and as a character study it's really quite amazing. Believe it or not, even Channing Tatum (the big dumb blond guy from SHE'S THE MAN and SOME DANCE MOVIE THAT'S ABOUT TO COME OUT) is excellent. Seriously, the guy holds his own against Palminteri, who, as I said, is better in this than he's ever been before.

Given there are a few key moments that hinge on you believing that these people over here became these people over there (and I didn't believe it), you might find yourself taken out of the film a bit. But rest assured, all the stuff either side of this is superb; it's certainly a film worth catching.

LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE

If there's one thing I hate about lazy American drama (other countries do it as well, but this particular brand of laziness seems particularly married to the US), it's how they interpret conflict equating drama. Conflict is drama, so says everyone from the Greeks on down, but more often than not we see this conflict arising from two normally-reasonable characters suddenly becoming unreasonable to they have an excuse to yell and scream. It's tedious watching characters suddenly break their mold to service a forced plot device, and it reeks of poor writing. So how do you do it well? If you're ever asked this question in the future, simply refer them to LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE. It's not only a great film; it's a bit like a how-to manual on how to write a great film.

LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE is a character-driven story revolving around the template phrase that makes all movie-goers nervous: a dysfunction family attempting to something something something before the thing happens. Because so many Dysfunctional Family Dramas end up in histrionics and unlikely conflicts, you forget that it ain't the car that's the problem, but the driver. So why does SUNSHINE work where so many others don't? Because right from the get-go, we're introduced to six characters individually. We see them separate from anyone else being who they are, and while these fifteen second vignettes don't exclusively create an empathy within the audience, they do lay the groundwork for the empathy that will come over the course of the film.

I won't ruin the experience of watching the film unfold by describing any of the characters to you (and given the film is character-drive and not story-driven, this would completely de-ball the film and its quality), but I will take a moment to pour praise upon the actors. Toni Collette proves again why she's the best working today, maintaining her character whether she's speaking or not, whether she's in focus or not. Your eye naturally goes to her in a scene, and yet she manages to avoid repeating any of the characters we've seen her play before. Given her character has the least "dysfunction" of the group, it's a testament to her skills that she stands out as much as she does. Greg Kinnear and Alan Arkin are both great; particularly Arkin, who plays a role I've not seen him play before. He's not bumbling and loveable in this, but grouchy and abrasive. It helps that he hasn't really played this type of character before; a stereotypically grouchy actor would not have the same resonance. Paul Danois also excellent, taking what could have been your standard sullen teen role and giving it more depth than these films usually allow. Abigail Breslin is phenomenal as the seven-year-old Olive, fueling my theory that 2006 is the year of Flawless Child Performances.

The stand-out for me, however, is Steve Carell. This is the first time I've really seen him attempt anything dramatic, and given how invested I am in his "Daily Show" "character", his artificial awkwardness in "The Office", and the legendary Brick from ANCHORMAN, I was actually hesitant about seeing him display any genuine humanity. I like him as an untouchable clown, and, fearing the illusion might shatter, I didn't want to see him, well, play a person. Amazingly, Carell playing a real human being did not irrevocably shatter my view of him. In fact, he helps fuel my other theory, which is that comedians are almost always such great dramatic actors because their comic timing allows them to hit every note -- both comedic and dramatic -- with frightening precision. Carell is so damn good in this film, I'm actually going to stop talking about it before the fawning becomes too embarrassing. But yeah, he's good.

The film is equal parts comedy and drama, and there are no moments where you feel it's treading water. There isn't the perfunctory "well, these two characters need to hit this sort of moment because it's this sort of film" scene that makes you look at your watch. My only complaint is there is one decision taken about halfway through that does seem like a contrivance, and it does cause the characters to do a few things you wouldn't necessarily believe they would do, but it was something I was able to quickly forgive.

Hats and pants off to writer Michael Arndt and directors Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris for proving that the dysfunctional family genre is not exclusively the domain of lazy TV movie of the week hacks and coasting indie filmmakers looking for a career placeholder. My face was actually aching a little when I emerged from the screening room, due to the surprising amount of laughter that the film evoked. I'm already looking forward to picking this up on DVD and watching it again. Highly recommended.

FAST FOOD NATION

This review is going to be the thematic sequel to the LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE review. Not just because only a few hours after seeing both Greg Kinnear and Paul Danois in LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE, they both turned up here, but because I'm going to make you all suspicious about the breadth of my viewing experience by again namechecking "The Daily Show". See, "Daily Show" has been running for a decade now, and to celebrate, they're running a series called "Ten F$%#ing Years". In one of the segments, they played an interview I'd never seen, where a bearded hippie-type is asked the following question: "Your sign said 'Reduce Deficit', and you shouted 'no blood for oil', and you were chained to a rural health organisation. What's your message?"

I'd like to ask a similarly-structured question of Richard Linklater, whose light-hearted treatise on the evils of fast food production is well-intentioned, but far too meandering and unfocused for its own good.

At first, I thought this film was going to be in the vein of THANK YOU FOR SMOKING, but as it progressed, I realised its intentions were loftier: FAST FOOD NATION wants to be a TRAFFIC. (Side note: has TRAFFIC become the arthouse version of DIE HARD? Just as SPEED was DIE HARD on a bus, SYRIANA is TRAFFIC: OIL, and FAST FOOD NATION is TRAFFIC: BURGERS. One to ponder over drinks and opiates. Now, back to the review...) There are many different plotlines, and as the film moves along, these plotlines change and turn into other plotlines. There are too many balls in the air; too many stories being told and too many messages being imparted, and the film sabotages itself before it reaches the second act.

The plotlines themselves aren't exactly terrible, but they are misguided. The one about the Mexican workers being put in dangerous conditions, however, seems like a broader problem that would apply to many industries (not just fast food), and therefore seems a tad erroneous. Still, Greg Kinnear's plotline is always entertaining, even if it does adhere to a somewhat perfunctory structure. The one about the girl who works at a local Mickey's (the film's fictitious burger chain) doesn't really know what to do with itself, but it keeps its head above the water.

FAST FOOD NATION has a point to make, and wears the fact on its sleeve. In its eagerness to stick it to major fast food chains, it angrily tackles issues that aren't necessarily the exclusive domain of its target: the afore-mentioned Mexican labour problem; the girl whose uncle is worried she'll waste her life working at a Mickey's; the graphic documentary footage at the end where we see cows getting slaughtered. Yes, it's horrible the way that cattle is killed, but fast food joints aren't the only places that sell meat, and the graphic images are completely inappropriate in the context of this film.

The film is far too preachy, and any valid points it may have are drowned out in a cacophony of "And they do this! And this! And aren't you outraged?!?". I don't know many people who like being told what to think, and I suspect many will be resistant to the film's message. What's extraordinary about FAST FOOD NATION dropping the ball is that a film about the horrible things done in the name of selling burgers should be a walk in the park to make. How did someone as accomplished as Richard Linklater miss the mark so much?

IRRESISTIBLE

Now, to the Australian-made, Susan Sarandon-starring film that was shot only a few streets from my own place of residence, where I am typing this now. To all of those worried about AICN's nepotistic lack of objective film criticism: I shan't let the location's proximity affect my review in any way.

This is going to be yet another instance of me really liking an Australian film that nobody else will. I liked 48 SHADES, loved MACBETH, and now I'm going to admit that I really got into IRRESISTIBLE... but I know few others will. I'll tell you what I like about it: it's a movie of the week. It's a stock standard, midday thriller. Rather, that's what it should be. Actually, it's a movie of the week if everything was done well. The plot may seem a bit standard (woman with perfect family feels threatened by a younger woman... but is it in her head, or is this woman really out to get her?), but because it's done so well, I actually found myself quite enjoying it.

It's a movie of the week, except the dialogue is really well-written. It's a movie of the week, except the performances are all superb. It's a movie of the week, except there's some style to the direction. It's like writer/director Ann Turner purposefully took a genre that hadn't really been done that well, and showed us what potential it had.

The reason this film will be largely disliked is that at its core, from its very building blocks, this film is -- as I said -- a standard, domestic thriller. I suspect if you go in with expectations of a thriller, your mind will go to the SE7ENS and SILENCE OF THE LAMBSs that always top the list when the genre is mentioned. Aside from knowing the film's cast and shooting locations, I knew nothing going in, so when the film begun, I wasn't sure if I was watching a supernatural ghost story or a simple drama. The film took me where it wanted to take me, and I wasn't burdened with any pre-dispositions or expectations. I discuss expectations in nearly every review I write, and I think it's because they dictate your enjoyment more than almost anything else. I expected nothing from IRRESISTIBLE, and nothing fed my opinion of the film other than the film itself.

I doubt any of you would be the right audience for this film, though I suspect your mum might like it. Susan Sarandon does play an artist living in Melbourne's south east, married to Sam Neill and worried about getting old, and what mum wouldn't love that? The film's been out for months on DVD in the States, but will be released in Australia in the coming weeks. If you know nothing about the film, then I suggest you try something a bit different, and give it a look.

NEXT WEEK

- Aslan the Lion meets with President Bush to discuss concerns over how fauns are being represented to the world in Guillermo Del Toro's PAN'S LABYRINTH

- Indonesian president Megawati Sukamoputri will be played by Hilary Duff in the upcoming comedy ELECTRIFIED!: THE MEGAWATI DIARIES

- Halle Berry announces she will star in X-MEN 4, saying: "I love the challenge of playing a character I've never played before. This time, I'm going to make her a stuttering French schoolmarm!"

Peace out,

Latauro
AICNDownunder@hotmail.com