I normally avoid animated movies, but I feel I have to support Nick Park and Aardman Studios. I'm glad I did as Early Man was a very clever and very funny film. Mainly down to a superb script and endless jokes from Mark Burton and James Higginson. When stone age man meets bronze age man, competition ensues. The characters and voices are wonderful, from Chief Bodnar (Timothy Spall), Lord Nooth (Tom Hiddleston), Dug (Edde Redmayne), Goona (Maisie Williams - Park has invested the most skilful footballer with the name of his beloved Arsenal fans) along with Johnny Vegas and others. Nick Park himself grunts away as the wonderful Hognob, but it his direction and overall creative genius that elevates this film to the heights of great animation. There is so much packed into this visual treat that it requires further viewings to appreciate all the subtle gags. And I loved the tribute to "The Full Monty" when our lads go training to the backing of Mud's "Tiger Feet", this time performed by New Hope Club. As long as we have Aaardman, there is hope for us all.
There is no doubt that Guillermo del Torro has made a visually stunning movie. But why did I find The Shape of Water emotionally unengaging? The acting was terrific, the wonderful Sally Hawkins leads a great cast with Octavia Spencer, Richard Jenkins and Michael Shannon on top form. The production design deservedly won the Bafta and should win the Oscar. However, for me, it was the screenplay that did not cut it. It seemed ordinary and awkward. This is typical of del Torro. He should really stick to directing and let some better writers hammer out the script. I guess that is why I'm not a big fan of his mostly fantasy movies. Because of this, I found the first part to be much better, as the creature stayed menacingly in the water and there were themes of American/Russian conflict that could have worked through very well. But as soon as the creature stood up and we saw an actor in a costume, I gave up. How this can be in the running for best film, and gained the Bafta for best direction, I will never know. There would have been a very good film here if only it had not lost the plot.
P.S. Did they pinch the flood from Paddington 2? Sally Hawkins should have been nominated for an Oscar from this film as well as the above.
Paul Thomas Anderson makes a different type of movie altogether, and Phantom Thread follows in the footsteps of Punch-Drunk Love, There Will Be Blood and The Master. His new film is very theatrical and is almost totally confined within the houses belonging to top British couturier Reynolds Woodcock. Daniel Day Lewis is perfect for the role, although I did find the affectation he gave the part a little grating by the end. But it is Lesley Manville who stars as his sister Cyril. They are both unmarried and the introduction of a young waitress that Reynolds meets (Vicky Krieps as Alma) and brings into the household, is the essence of the story. So how can this spin out to two hours? We see a lot of dressmaking, measuring and trying on. Not in itself uninteresting, but slightly too repetitive. Yes, the costumes (dresses) are gorgeous and deserved the Bafta. The script is OK but not gripping enough to stand the length of the movie and it's concentration on breakfasts and the cutting room. Again, there are other films I preferred this last twelve months that did make the list for best picture.
P.S. So why did I prefer Early Man to the other Oscar nominated movies above? It had heart and a wonderful script.
No comments:
Post a Comment