Killing Bono

Dir. Nick Hamm
Starring. Ben Barnes, Robert Sheehan, Pete Postlethwaite

Talk about a winning title. I mean, that's all the marketing you need, really. Who's going to go see something called 'Source Code,' which sounds like a computer programming movie about the invention of binary code, when they could see something that promises the attempted murder of the worlds most self satisfied rock star. Brilliant.

In actuality 'Killing Bono' isn't about a calculated assassination attempt on Bono as one might hope/suspect. It is a film based loosely on the true story of the McCormick brothers, Bono's schoolmates, who started a band around the same time he did and struggled endlessly to find success while U2 swiftly rose to fame and fortune. Older brother Neil (Ben Barnes) is the frontman and maker of the bands decisions (almost always bad ones) and guitar playing younger brother Ivan (Robert Sheehan) is left to face the consequences and lament on missed opportunities.

Killing Bono is often silly, occasionally funny, mostly ridiculous, but all around fun, exactly as a good hearted Rock 'n' Roll film ought to be. It doesn't miss a beat, as the McCormick brothers are constantly trying to catch a break, failing miserably, then getting back up and trying again. Their story reminds me a bit of Anvil! but somehow much less heartbreaking.

My only complaint of this film is that I found it hard to believe that anybody who truly wanted to succeed at something could manage to make literally all of the wrong decisions in their journey of trying to achieve it. Neil is a difficult protagonist to get behind because we know every time a good opportunity is about to come up, he will inevitably blow it, usually because of his wounded pride and jealousy over Bono's success and his own failure. Luckily the talented Sheehan makes Ivan a worthy antidote to Neil's frustrating stupidity and stubbornness. Also Martin McCann is so charming and winsome as the eponymous rock star, it almost made me like the real Bono, consequently. I said almost.

But possibly the star of the film is the stylist. It's truly a hilarious history lesson in Rock fashion as the McCormick brothers desperately and whole heartedly buy into every trend and movement the rock genre has gone through. One scene they are dressed punk, the next Glam rock, then heavy metal. Before you know it Ivan is donning a curly mullet and a trench coat. I don't even know what genre that fits into, but it was awesome. It is in this identity crisis that one can try and find a bit of a message in the film. Maybe they didn't succeed because instead of creating their own identity they tried to mimic whatever trend was the success at the time...so without confidence in yourself and your own image, you won't succeed...or something like that.

Don't think too hard about it because this film is just meant to be enjoyed and unlike its two main characters, it knows exactly what it is, and strongly succeeds in being it.

Age of the Dragons

Dir. Ryan Little
Starring. Danny Glover, Vinnie Jones, Corey Sevier

As someone who is well-versed in such Syfy Original Movies as 'Bats: Human Harvest,' 'Puppet Master Vs. Demonic Toys,' 'Sharktopus,' and 'Monsterwolf,' I knew I'd need the same goggles I wear to enjoy those films, for my screening of 'Age of Dragons.' For those of you who have the grave misfortune of not yet being acquainted with this film, allow me to elaborate. For years Herman Mellville's "masterpiece" Moby Dick sat on the shelves of bookstores gathering dust. No one had the forethought or the audacity to give it the attention it truly needed: a cinematic re-telling replacing the whale with a dragon and starring Danny Glover and Vinnie Jones...Until now.

That's right, literary scholars. I know you haven't been this excited since the invention of the printing press, but calm down, because it has happened. I give you Danny Glover playing Captain Ahab, a man obsessed with revenge after a childhood encounter with the elusive white dragon left him with a dead sister and a badly singed face and body. Henceforth, he spent the rest of his life hunting the dragon. Cue young Ishmael (Corey Sevier), an expert harpoonist hoping to join Ahab's crew with his Eskimo friend, Emile Hirsch. They want to bring down some dragons in order to sell some sort of glowing liquid which is valuable for some reason or another. The crew includes Stubbs (Vinnie Jones) and Rachel (Sofia Pernas), Ahab's daughter and love interest to pretty much everybody in the film because she's the only female. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say liberties may have been taken.

Despite having some pretty solid source material to go off of, 'Age of Dragons' suffers from a few glaring plot loopholes. For example, despite all of the crew knowing from the get-go about Ahab's obsession with finding the white dragon, they are all surprised and subsequently outraged when they are ordered to abandon the quest for the secret dragon ooze and go after Whitey. Were they not listening to the narration? Also, since dragons live on land and not in the sea, Ahab's ship has been turned into a sort of Noah's Ark on wheels. Well, I assume that it's on wheels, but I can't say for sure because the source which propels this craft is never revealed. I can't help but picture the film's entire crew inside the thing, pushing it, wishing they'd never responded to the Craig's List ad: "Strong Grips Needed for Moby Dick Remake."

Additionally, the dialogue is delightfully bad. It teeters dangerously on the line between modern prose and desperate attempts at Old English. It has that classic problem of all the characters sounding exactly the same, except for Vinnie Jones who's probably the only one with an accent. There's also an utterly redundant strain of narration that constantly gives us useful information like: "We slept in the cabin most nights," over a shot of them sleeping in the cabin most nights. The special effects are striking...in that you are struck wondering whether or not they were done in iMovie, or whether or not that's the same backwards flowing waterfall as in Anaconda. Danny Glover, when asked to comment said, "I'm too old for this shit."*

Rant and rant as I love to do, I can at least say one thing: the film was entertaining...except for when it was supposed to be entertaining, in which case, it was kind of boring. But if you've got love for the whole B movie Sci-Fi Dragon quest thing, I can almost guarantee you won't be let down. If that's what you're after, it delivers on some to most fronts. You know what I always say, "Keep those expectations low and you'll never be disappointed."

*I have never spoken to Danny Glover. He has had absolutely no contact with me or this review. The views and opinions expressed in the interviews and/or commentaries are solely of the individuals and are not the views of BRITFILMS.TV, its parent, affiliate, or subsidiary companies.

The Tempest

Dir. Julie Taymor
Starring. Helen Mirren, Felicity Jones, Russell Brand

Shakespeare's The Tempest is the thrilling tale of a mysterious island, conjured storms, magical spirits, illusion, betrayal, love at first sight, and sorcery. You would think with the cinematic technologies of today, that would make for an epic adventure of a film. Especially when said film includes a talented cast and a visionary director. So...what was it that I just saw?

The film's script sticks closely to the Bard's narrative in all but changing the main character of Prospero to the female Prospera, played by Helen Mirren. Thus it is the story of the exiled Duchess of Milan, who has raised her daughter Miranda (Felicity Jones) on a mostly deserted island, with naught but a beast called Caliban (Djimon Hounsou) and a magical spirit, Ariel (Ben Whishaw) as their sole companions and servants. Prospera is learned in the magical arts, a talent that brought about her exile, and she manages to summon a great tempest to bring down a ship carrying her enemies. She then strands them about the island and through a series of manipulations and illusions, she tests her foes, eventually taking her revenge.

The decision to change Prospero's gender proves successful, as it adds a new dimension to her exile via witchcraft, a fate many powerful and intelligent women have suffered in the past. Also, the character's treatment of daughter Miranda becomes more understandably maternal, rather than oppressively patriarchal and mildly creepy as it would have come across with Shakespeare's original father figure. Helen Mirren shines in the role as well, and it becomes hard to imagine anyone else, let alone a man, filling those shoes.

So the question remains: What went wrong? Why was my only real emotional investment in the film trying to figure out whether or not Ariel had breasts? Let's pretend for a second that I'm not a product of the proverbial "MTV generation." Let's pretend that I do have an attention span long enough to focus throughout a film of entirely Shakespearean dialogue. Try as I did to follow every line, never having closely studied The Tempest, I think much of the nuance and allusion in the text might have been lost on me. Methinks I shall not be the only poor sod in the audience wondering what the fen-sucked codpiece they were all on about.

But let's assume that's not the biggest issue here. Honestly, there was just no common thread of an idea, evidence of pacing, or entertaining factor to the film at all. I suspect with different direction, Shakespeare's words could have been better brought to life. Director Julie Taymor has been so heralded for her innovative use of staging in theatre (i.e.The Lion King), but it's clear she's not the slightest idea how to navigate a film set. Her direction is so heavy handed, you really have to work to avoid it in order to appreciate the story and the strong performances from the cast.

The terrible visual effects (namely the annoying spirit lady/bloke, Ariel) look like they were merely stamped onto the film as a consideration after the fact. Taymor probably put the same amount of thought into them as she did the safety regulations for her Spider Man musical. Even the beautiful production design and the extremely creative costumes only serve as distractions from the blandness of the rest of the film.

Try as it does to be visually exciting and original, this mess of a film is just too unfocused and too dull to make Shakespeare's tale accessible for today's audiences.

Never Let Me Go

Dir. Mark Romanek
Starring. Keira Knightley, Carey Mulligan, Andrew Garfield

Sometimes it's good to catch a flick that isn't all popcorn and candy and happy endings. There's nothing wrong with delving a bit deeper. It's good for the soul. Never Let Me Go is definitely not the fluffy whipped creamy piece of cake kind of film. It's more like the meat and potatoes of cinema; a hearty main course that takes a bit of time to digest and afterward just makes you want to sit on the couch and watch bad reality TV for hours.

The film, directed by Mark Romanek, is based on the novel of the same name written by Kazuo Ishiguro and tells the story of three friends whose tragic destiny limits their lives to barely reaching adulthood. Cathy (Carey Mulligan), Tommy (Andrew Garfield), and Ruth (Keira Knightley) grow up together in a strangely idyllic boarding school where their health and well-being is given ultimate priority and they are told stories meant to frighten them from ever leaving the school grounds. They are eventually told that they are special children and their fate is to have their lives "complete" once they reach their early 20's. The story is mostly about the relationship between the three children and how a complex love triangle develops between them as they grow up.

It's a tragic but beautiful film that explores the basic needs of human beings, particularly when faced with the cruel fact of our own mortality. For the characters of the film, this fact is intensified as their time on earth is cut even shorter than the rest of us. And through them we find out what is most important to those whose time is running out.

Never Let Me Go is visually stunning as every shot seems to highlight the ephemeral beauty of nature and life. The sci-fi aspect of the story (of which I have tried not to divulge since it's cleverly only alluded to in the film's trailers) is only a backdrop to the believability of the three main characters and the complexities of their friendship. The unique bond between them is truly brought to life by Mulligan, Garfield,and Knightley who all give deeply moving performances. Their younger counterparts played by Izzy Meikle-Small, Charlie Rowe, and Ella Purnell respectively are perfectly cast and provide an impressive basis for the characters.

Despite all of the promising elements of the film, it somewhere along the line falls a bit flat. Perhaps it's because the tone is consistently ominous without really any relief. The film moves along at a steady pace without any distinct ups or downs making it feel like it only skims the surface of a story that should have many depths to explore. It's hard as well for an audience to sympathize with characters that simply accept their fate without really putting up a fight for what they want.

Never Let Me Go is overall a poetic and beautiful film that despite dynamic performances from all its lead actors doesn't quite carry the emotional depth that it ought to.