Showing posts with label don cheadle. Show all posts
Showing posts with label don cheadle. Show all posts

Saturday, 2 February 2013

REVIEW: Flight (2013)



There are lots of films that deal with addiction, often by layering scenes of deprivation and drug abuse with rock music, an attempt to show the attraction of the drug and set it against the toll. Flight is a similar film, with a Scorsese-like Rolling Stones heavy soundtrack. Though it treats the overcoming of drug addiction as a redemptive and religious spectacle, the effects of the drug seem to be its primary focus.

Flight starts with a tense and spectacular plane crash, its low death toll crash landing an apparent miracle thanks to pilot Whip (Denzel Washington), who just so happened to be drunk and high whilst flying the plane. When the lawyers start to take over, the fact that the crash was due to bad maintenance comes to be less and less relevant as Whip faces the possibility of life imprisonment for criminal negligence.

Flight charts Whip’s addiction to alcohol and drugs with a fascination reserved for people who live outside society’s rules and who don’t care who knows it. Yet it is full of corny religious imagery and a strong need to redeem an apparently unredeemable character. The film suggests that there is comedy and rock-scored euphoria in Whip’s frequent descents and yet insists on a religious conversion, placing bets on both sides – God and the demon drink. How are we supposed to take the scene in which Whip is asked to pray alongside his co-pilot and his somewhat deranged and unblinking wife? Is Zemeckis laughing at them or does he wholeheartedly believe in what they are saying? Why are the filmmakers much more attracted to John Goodman’s crass, annoying Harling Mays than Whip’s disabled co-pilot and his wife? Ultimately, the film seems to validate the religious couple and yet still presents drug abuse in an aesthetically pleasing way. Every time Whip snorts a line, the moralizing disappears, the soundtrack cranks up and the camerawork goes for stylish, music video aesthetics where it was rather tame and slow-paced before. It is a case of a film pulling in two different directions and failing to cohere. Washington’s strong performance grounds the film to a degree but ultimately, it is difficult to know what the film is trying to say. Either alcohol and drugs are cool or they are damaging and either religious sloganeering is the way to salvation or it is comical and unrealistic. Whip’s redemption feels like the kind of thing that has to happen in a Hollywood film about drug abuse and yet it does not seem to cohere with the sentiments of the filmmakers.

Whip himself does not seem to be want to be saved until an unsurprising change of heart very late in the film. Addiction films are often overcome by the opposition of what the protagonist wants and what the audience wants and Flight is no different. If Whip feels that his life choices are for the best, who are we to insist that he alters them? Ultimately, however, Whip’s degradation and eventual transformation are just not that interesting and the little-mentioned legal manoeuvrings of Hugh Lang and Charlie Anderson (Don Cheadle and Bruce Greenwood) seem a lot more important and morally complex.

Zemeckis is in control when directing CGI spectacle and the plane crash sequence is the best in the film, but he is hopelessly lost during the adult scenes involving emotion and conversation. The fact that Whip is a functioning alcoholic is addressed but even this complexity cannot be sustained as the film rushes towards its black-and-white conclusions. When he introduces junkie Nicole (Kelly Reilly), initially all ill-fitting clothes and needle marks, he adds a soundtrack of shrill electric guitar twangs to show how serious it is and then opts for a porn film set conversation which immediately strains credibility. The film starts with full frontal nudity, played casual though clearly intended as a rather childish shock tactic to outrage the morally conservative. However, Flight is uncomfortable with such transgressions in the way that only a big budget blockbuster can be and there is an air of the film scaring itself with its own apparent awards season boldness. When Flight tries to be gritty, it just sounds shrill and looks ridiculous, Guy Ritchie trying to channel Ken Loach.

The film feels like the work of a deeply religious and conservative man who is yet too much of a hipster to wholeheartedly back his own sentiments. Flight is a religious film – Whip’s addictions are frequently linked to his atheism - and yet it is embarrassedly so. It aims to please, its controversial subject handled in such a way as to make everyone happy and no one angry. The film concludes with the self-flagellation of a confession and a horribly tacky scene of reaffirmation and self-definition. In the end, it has nothing to say about drug addiction and a lot to say about the simplistic and superficial way that Hollywood can treat such issues.

Friday, 15 July 2011

REVIEW: The Guard (2011)

  The Guard is directed by John Michael McDonagh, the brother of respected playwright and filmmaker Martin McDonagh (Six Shooter and In Bruges). Similarities in tone between the McDonagh’s two features make comparing them almost impossible. While Martin's earlier Belgian-set hit man comedy is the superior film, John Michael's buddy movie is far from disappointing.
  Brendan Gleeson is Sergeant Gerry Boyle, a Galway police officer, who takes his job lightly, preferring shoot 'em up games, alcohols, drugs and prostitutes. When reports come in that a half billion-dollar drug shipment is going to arrive on his patch, Boyle is teamed up with strait-laced FBI officer Wendell Everett, played by Don Cheadle. Alongside their mutual dislike pay-offs, blackmails, psychopaths and a bag of guns complicate things. On top of this, Boyle has to cope with his dying mother Eileen (Fionnula Flanagan).
  Any plot synopsis of this film can't help but make the film sound hopelessly clichéd. However, one of the film’s most successful features is the fact that it breathes new life into the formula. Its hard to think of it has a film in the vein of the Lethal Weapon franchise, especially because McDonagh makes the film his own. Sequences familiar to the genre are followed by more strange and outlandish scenes, such as when the film’s villains (Ian Cunningham, Mark Strong and David Wilmot) philosophise about their profession while watching fish in an aquarium. There are enough scenes like these to make the film feel fresh, often funny and somewhat experimental.
  However, none of this would matter if a less convincing actor had played Gerry Boyle. It is hard to think of a recent film that has been so geared towards one actor. Brendan Gleeson may not be stretching his ability very much, but he is almost note-perfect in the lead role. He’s played this kind of role several times, but rarely in the lead role and arguably never with so fine a script. Don Cheadle does not get much to do, playing what is mainly the straight man, the foil to Gleeson’s cop. Though he does have a few good lines. Undoubtedly, however, this is Gleeson’s film and he walks away with it.
  The film is cynical and offensive (no one comes out of it well) but it has a heart. Like his brother before him – Martin made a hit man comedy with characters with morals, regrets, hopes and dreams – John Michael McDonagh gives the buddy cop movie a shade of melancholy. He is not afraid to deal with loss in the scenes with Boyle’s dying mother. As with In Bruges, some scenes are quite moving, though many of them end too quickly. As well as this, Martin McDonagh could work on your emotions covertly, whereas with his brother, you always know when the sad bit is coming. That said, it is a welcome addition to the genre.
  Ending with the knowing flamboyance of the final shoot-out, The Guard is a lot of fun and very funny. Though John Michael McDonagh doesn’t quite attain the brilliance of his brother’s film, it remains a film worth seeing. As we wait for Martin McDonagh’s second feature, this is a worthy surrogate.