The China Syndrome (Revisited)

The 70’s was a tumultuous time in modern American History; the hugely unpopular Vietnam War was coming to a close; The Watergate scandal saw the American Presidency embroiled in corruption, and the worlds international financial markets were headed towards collapse. Man has often created ways to push the destruction of society within a gasp of reality. The 70’s were arguably mankind’s luckiest decade: a period in history where we can look back and think “thank fu*k we dodged that one”.

I wasn't alive in 1979 when the thriller blockbuster “The China Syndrome” was released. The film was really an exclamation point on the preceding five or so years in the development of nuclear technology, it also signalled the real first signs that Greed and Power could ultimately destroy mankind. Nuclear power plants were springing up allover the United States, Russia and parts of Europe and they were expensive to run; the balance between safety and fiscal success was teetering on disaster. Nuclear energy had already proven its ability to cause mass destruction as early as the 1940’s with the atrocities committed on Hiroshima and other cities in Japan. The American’s were continuing to play with nuclear fire and chances are someone would be burnt increased with every passing decade.

The plot of 'The China Syndrome' captures this sentiment perfectly. It follows news reporter Kimberley Wells (Jane Fonda) as she and her cameraman Richard Adam’s (Michael Douglas) are witness to, and covertly record, an ‘Incident’ within a nuclear power plant whilst researching a story on alternative energy sources. The power plant’s shift manager Jack Dodell (Jack Lemmon) needs to decide between his loyalty to his work or his guilty conscience about disclosing the incident’s real magnitude. What plays out is an edge of your seat thriller that keeps you entangled right to the end.

I’ll admit my internal film Wikipedia had not previously registered the name James Bridges (director), after some research it was plain to see the guy knows his craft. Making only 8 films (Big Lights Big City), and all in the last 20 years of his life, Bridges utilises a number of unconventional techniques to tell his story. The biggest surprise for me was his choice to remove any musical score or sound track instead relying entirely on ambient noises. Any additional sound is produced by devices such as radio or TV commercials the result being that the only sounds we hear are those the characters hear. The technique is daring but it pays off by quickly building suspense. Other films have tried this technique only to add small snippets of strings or horns in one or two scenes; the Coen Brothers “No Country for Old Men” is a good example of this.

Jack Lemmon’s performance was nominated for an Oscar and rightfully so. He was amongst the best actors to ever do both drama and comedy at the highest level. There is not much one can say about Jack that hasn’t really been said. I will, however, ensure that I dig out some of his work that I haven’t seen as the year goes on.

'The China Syndrome’s' success for me was its ability to hold a mirror up to those profiting from sale of Nuclear energy. In 1979 just 13 days after the film was released disaster struck. As if just to highlight how topical The China Syndrome was, The United States experienced its worst nuclear accident on 3 Mile Island. More recently events in Japan have highlighted that the risk of nuclear power is still as topical as it was in the 70’s proving mankind’s greatest threat is mankind itself.

Shame - Is it possible to both love and loath? (Revisited)

Is it possible to both love and loath a film at the same time? I’m not trying to sound cliché, in fact it’s a very real question.  After watching Shame again for the third time in 2012 it has thrown me into complete internal disaccord.  I have certainly felt confliction on my journey thus far, but never to the extent which I could clearly define and feel both love and hate for a single film.  The credits rolled on Shame and again i was left feeling emotionally defeated, this due in part to the film's intense emotional intimacy but mostly due to the fact I spent the whole picture allowing myself to be romanced by the brilliance of film making, effectively ignoring the abhorrence of its subject matter.  It wasn’t until I left the theatre that I was able to reconcile the two and fully realise the inner battle I had experienced.

Shame is an unadulterated examination of one man’s battle with sex addiction and its impact on life, love and work.  To some this may seem like a desirable habitual fixation, the reality however seems nothing short of the personal enslavement and dependency you might see in a heroin junkie.

Our protagonist is Brandon (Michael Fassbender) and he is a sex addict. Shame introduces Brandon near the height of his addiction by which time it’s clearly apparent that his hyper-sexuality is in overdrive and now a mainstay of his daily routine, a routine of sexual solicitation and handmade satisfaction.  His perpetual cycle is interrupted when Sissy (Carey Mulligan) his lugubrious sister comes to live with him. He is made to supress his nocturnal compulsions, pushing his already volatile state of mind over the edge.

In his first film since the exceptional 2008 drama Hunger, Director Steve McQueen offers us a gritty, repulsive and downright filthy examination of human natures capabilities. An actor’s director, McQueen demands a lot of his cast; each scene is staged with an eloquent simplicity. Requiring at most two or three setups McQueen allows dialogue to run without the complexity of multiple cuts and camera angles, for me the film’s most powerful scenes were ‘locked off’ one camera shots.

Actor Michael Fassbender (Inglorious bastards) is phenomenal in the role of Brandon; he was able to cut to the core of complex character, as vile as Brandon was I connected with almost everything Fassbender was selling me. Brandon’s sexuality obviously sits near the heart of the film, Fassbender was asked to give a lot, and luckily he had A LOT to give.  I would say however, whilst Shame is given the most restricted rating on offer in New Zealand, the film adheres to the contrived sexual simulations we have come to expect from cinema movies; anytime Shame deviated from this it seemed little more than to add shock value. 

There is a air of indifference about the importance of Sissy in the film - for me whilst nicely acted I saw right through McQueen’s thinly veiled attempts to make her relevant - ultimately she becomes an outlet for Brandon’s frustrations. There were subtle insinuations about the nature of the brother sister relationship, but left unformed this is of little relevance to our protagonist’s development.

All said and done the Shame is beautifully constructed and well-acted film, and for that reason I loved it. The ritualization of sexual addiction and the ugliness that ensues makes for a vexatious cinematic experience: for that reason it’s not one I’d want again.

Day 125 - The Town - 2010 (No Review)

The Town is a 2010 film directed by and starring Academy Award winner Ben Affleck along side Jon Hamm, Rebecca Hall, Blake Lively, Jeremy Renner, Pete Postlewaite and Chris Cooper. The Town is a continuation of Ben Affleck's love affair with Boston's murky underbelly following 2007's Gone baby Gone.

Want to write a review for this film? email theaterofthecommonman@gmail.com

Day 124 - Good For Nothing - The World's first Pavlova Western

I first heard about Good for Nothing in 2010 over the table at a poker game. Cohen Holloway (Boy, Eagle vs Shark) was regaling us with his attempts to get to the renowned Santa Barbara Film Festival for the world premiere of a feature Western he had recently shot. Hearing tales of Cohen's on screen adventures was nothing new, yet from that moment it’s fair to say I was fascinated with the concept of a full on balls to the wall Oater being shot right here in our own backyard.  For me Writer / Director Mike Wallis' childhood ambition to make a spaghetti western was inspired, we here in New Zealand have some breath taking scenery and could easily have slipped into the Eastwood and Wayne classics of old.  All it took was the right guy with the right vision to make it happen.

When it comes to a film’s budget, some are more equal than others.  In the case of Good for Nothing I imagine the fiscal limitations of Mike's cinematic endeavour would have been half the fun and more than likely half the pressure. Almost all independent film makers will be able to tell you a David vs Goliath story when it comes to self-financing a feature film and Mike’s is every bit inspiring. From what I can gather he and his fiancé Inge Rademeyer, who also happens to play the leading lady Isabella Montgomery, became disillusioned one day after attempting to buy a house. The pair who had met and worked at that legendary Weta Digital visual effects house in Wellington NZ decided to throw caution to the wind and reallocate the house buying capital to financing their respective dreams of making movies. 6 years later they have their first general release feature, the resplendent Good for Nothing.

Filmed in the asperous Mackenzie country, Good for Nothing is the tale of Isabella Montgomery’s attempts to travel to her uncle’s ranch in isolated back country.  Soon after her journey begins she and her party are attacked and killed by loan man (Cohen Holloway).  Isabella however is speared and taken as entertainment for the man’s god given urges. Although as we quickly learn, his rough exterior is a mask for an embarrasing case of impotence. Unable to fulfill his desires he goes in search a  doctor, any doctor that will fix him, while Isabella is dragged along for the ride.

There is much to celebrate with Mike, Inge and Cohen’s film. I think although I initially was let’s say 'curious' about Inge’s casting it quickly becomes clear the strong will she brings to Isabella is paramount to the film's success and ultimately is an inspired choice. Cohen as always, is a man to behold; his raw talent, good looks and pert posterior all complement the man’s wistful disposition.   What captured and engaged me above all was John Psatha’s purposeful score, I could get lost in his themes as for me he captured the sentiment of the film perfectly.

When critiquing film it’s hard enough to remain objective at the best of times let alone when you are facing the very prospect of writing about a friend. I have done it a couple of times already this year and felt that maybe I had been too conscious of others feelings and less fixated on integrity, so I had made the decision to remain true to whatever truth would come. So it was with a diffident stride I went to see the long awaited product of passion I had heard so much about, and without reservation I can say it was worth the wait.  

Day 123 - Dirty Rotten Scoundrels (No Review)

Hilarious night in with Steve Martin & Michael Caine in Dirty Rotten Scoundrels.  No review today, join me tomorrow as I watch the long awaited NZ Western Good For Nothing.