Red (2010)

Most people who goes to see 'Red' know exactly what they are getting themselves into. A light-hearted action comedy featuring a parade of commercially and critically lauded stars? It is a pretty easy commitment to make. The more unexpected parts of the movie are the strength of the supporting cast and the overall slickness of the script itself. This movie was virtually guaranteed to be enjoyable due to the cast alone but, admirably, it has aspired to be more.

As expected, the main cast are uniformly brilliant. Every time Frank Moses(Bruce Willis) encounters an old acquaintance, the air becomes thick with implied relationships and past experiences. The bond between the characters in the film is really an allegory to their relationships as actors: they all have been hardened professionally from their years of experience in the business. A sense of mutual respect resonates throughout the film. The audience knows all of these older actors and, as such, quickly engages with their characters in the context of the film. It does not take long for us to start imagining their working together when they were younger, giving a tremendous depth to the characters without the need to bloat the script with lengthy scenes of exposition.

Impressively, the other actors manage to complement the top billing very well. Mary Louise-Parker plays Sarah Ross, a lonely middle-aged woman who manages to get tangled up in the spy games around her. Her character is unexpectedly endearing compared to the 'damsel in distress' that I was expecting. Louise-Parker plays her as a strong willed woman with a (somewhat unsettlingly) positive outlook on the dangerous events in the film. Her face often fills up with childlike wonder as she imagines the excitement of life on the road with a spy- not the usual weak-willed, throw away love interest! Karl Urban, who plays FBI Agent Cooper, is one of the youngest members of the cast but has an extremely impressive presence on the screen. His introduction scene blends a cold physical exterior with an emotional personality as he calmly talks to his family on the phone whilst assassinating a target: something that may sound cheesy on paper but works extremely well given the tone of the film.

The primary reason that the characters are so important is that the script is surprisingly dialogue-heavy. When the action scenes come they are short and snappy, never outstaying their welcome. This means that the characters themselves carry the film, rather then the cinematography. I found myself in a similar situation as to when I saw 'Iron Man' a few years ago, where I found myself more interested in a phone conversation between characters then the action sequence that followed it. To my mind, this is a healthy direction for films as it allows the focus to be put more on acting and less on expensive special effects and frills. In most films the technical side should be supporting the acting, not the other way around. Action films have traditionally been particularly guilty on cutting corners with scripts in favour of extra explosions, and I am grateful that 'Red' did not.

The Social Network (2010)

It is pretty unbelievable to think that a movie about the creation of 'Facebook' would be anything but dry. That is why this film is so successful: it manages to take subject matter that wouldn't be very appealing to most people and make it thoroughly engaging. A lot of this was made possible through creative liberties, ensuring that the story progresses at a decent clip without becoming overly complicated.

The concept of old vs new is the core of the film. The 'old' educational institution of Harvard is shown as being ignorant of the importance of 'Facebook' and social networking in general, whilst the younger students at Harvard focus on personal projects rather then course outlines. Watching 'Facebook' grow in the dorm rooms of Harvard as the students skip classes and coursework elicits a feeling of freedom. Likewise, 'old' business is portrayed as outdated and backward-thinking compared to the progressive, individualistic nature of the modern generation: listening to the way that 'Napster' changed the operation of the music business is indicative of this. The 'new' is neatly encapsulated in the main character, Mark Zuckerburg (Jesse Eisenberg). He is a social recluse whose college life seems to be very different from that of his fellow students'. The irony comes from the fact that Zuckerburg understands social society better then anyone else in the film: the website is successful because he knows exactly what college people want to know about each other, such as their 'relationship status'. Eisenburg plays him very cautiously: it would have been very easy to exaggerate the extent of Zukerburg's awkwardness, making him appear autistic or otherwise. Instead, Zuckerburg appears aware of his surroundings, but also very focused and determined to achieve his goals. His goals often come at the expense of his relationships, but Zuckerburg is shown as aware of this rather then simply being oblivious. It is a very brave choice, as it makes the main character significantly less likeable then if he was simply unaware of the problems he was causing. Personally, I still felt myself in Zuckerburg's corner, if only for the drive he was shown to have. As the most self-motivated character in the film, his own sense of morality is often shown as being different, but not necessarily worse.

The tone of the movie suggests that it is trying to appeal to two specific audiences. One is the group of people who are already aware of the history of the website and want to see how it has been appropriated into a film. The other set of people it seems to be approaching are those who have disregarded 'Facebook' as a toy or fad. It is these people who the film is trying to reach, not in a judgemental or critical way, but in an educational sense. I would guess that few people would have expected to hear the volume of money that passes through the company: the numbers thrown around in the interview scenes with the lawyer are staggering. One of the best examples of this is when Zuckerburg becomes fed up with a particularly invasive line of questioning and reminds them that, whilst he doesn't generally care for money, he has spare change enough simply to buy the companies that are suing him if he was so inclined. This is a striking wake-up call in the middle of the film: the person in the scene who actually wields the most power is not an adult in a suit, but a young guy in a hoodie.

This movie shows the 'Facebook' company staring down traditional business conglomerates in a similar fashion to the way the 'Beatles' shook up the music world in the Sixties. Watching something new having a ripple effect on the rest of the world is both unsettling and awe-inspiring, and this film provides the window to see just how important both 'Facebook' and the concepts powering it truly are.

The Town (2010)

Criminal characters in films are often portrayed in a glitzy, glamorous fashion. This is especially true of American films, where movies such as 'Ocean's 11' portrayed its rogue gallery almost the same way as they would a baseball team: pet names, endearing traits and a general sense of their actions being mischievous rather then harmful. In this sense, 'The Town' is a very brave film as it doesn't sugar-coat the actions of the criminals, regardless of their role as the central characters in the film. Instead, the audience is constantly made aware of the repercussions of their actions.

The setting is Charlestown, which is given almost as much character as the actors give their personas. The majority of the characters are from the 'Projects', a very bleak part of town that appears to be a series of run-down apartment blocks. The slums and bars are depressing in their squalor and is is obvious that the people who live there have developed an attitude of 'us and them' regarding the wealthier inhabitants of the city. We are told at the very beginning of the film that Charlestown produces a huge number of bank robbers year on year, as if the trade is passed down father to son. This is evidenced by the main character, Doug MacRay (Ben Affleck.), whose father is in jail for the same crimes that his son is now committing. We follow MacRay as he leads a crew through a series of robberies, whilst trying to reconcile this secret life with the one he hopes to have with his new girlfriend, Claire Keesey (Rebecca Hall), who happened to be involved with an earlier crime. Although the film is about crime, the majority of time is spent with the characters in their lives outside of the actual robberies. Watching the way they live and seeing how the culture of Charlestown has influenced their lives gives great depth to the characters, allowing the audience to feel a sense of personal engagement with characters that would otherwise had been unlikable and, therefore, expendable.

The main strength of the film is in its portrayal of the characters. MacRay is forced to divide his loyalties between various people and sacrifice things on both sides. We are also introduced to the notion that, even if he can escape with Claire, he probably does not deserve to. It is this idea that really hits home: the characters in the film are accountable. Their past actions are not absolved because they suddenly find a life outside of crime. We are not encouraged to root for the criminals, as even MacRay finds their methods and attitudes increasingly deplorable. The FBI is not portrayed as a self-serving agency, but rather a force for good. The audience is given space to decide for themselves what the criminals deserve, which for many will mirror the outcome of the movie.

If you go into this movie expecting the slick dialogue and chemistry of 'Ocean's 11', you will be very disappointed. Then again, that would be akin to seeing 'Titanic' and expecting a straight-faced documentary of the voyage: it completely misses the purpose of the film. 'The Town' is a serious look at the motivations and backgrounds of a very select group of criminals, forcing the audience to examine their own ideas of morality and law.

Let Me In (2010)

It is difficult to find a decent 'review' of 'Let Me In'. Most of them spend the entire time debating the ethics and need for a (virtually) shot-by-shot remake of a foreign film. As such, they miss the whole point: telling people whether they enjoyed the movie or not. As someone who hasn't yet had the chance to see the original movie in its entirety yet (not an easy task for someone living in Australia, short of pirating the original movie), a wide release in a format more comfortable to myself is greatly appreciated. This is what I like to think of as the main reasoning behind the remake: giving the original film a better chance of being seen by a greater audience.

The two main characters in the story are a young boy, Owen, and a young 'girl', Abby. Owen is played by Kodi Smit-McPhee as an awkward young boy who struggles when relating to others. It is a testament to the strength of both his acting and the script itself that we find him endearing rather then unsettling: he spies on neighbouring apartments using a telescope, steals money from his mother for sweets and practices stabbing the school bullies to death with a knife on the tree outside his block of apartments. We are drawn to him by his social standing as the underdog, the 'weak kid' who gets picked on at school with little hope hope of redemption. There are darker aspects of his character that clearly separate him from the sickly-sweet 'troubled teens' who populate the majority of Hollywood films. When Abby arrives in his block of flats, she is portrayed as a troubled youth, through her lack of shoes and socially awkward demeanour. She is played by Chloe Moretz, who manages to tread the line between innocence and maturity very successfully. There are clear parallels between Abby and Owen, making their relationship seem organic rather then simply a plot point.

The focus of the film is on the development of Owen's personality. After Abby tells him to stand up for himself, we can see that her presense has caused a dramatic shift in his self-confidence. The reason the film is so compelling is that the audience is constantly questioning their own sense of morality. We are often encouraged to be on the side of Abby and Owen, then confronted with a tremendously violent scene that demonstrates that horrible things will be done to innocent (and not so innocent) people because of Owen and Abby's actions. The film does a great job of showing the two sides of Abby, startling the audience by the speed with which she can move from a savage animal to an innocent young girl. Watching Owen hugging Abby without regard to her bloodstained clothing is heart-warming in a very strange way. It is this sort of scene that brings conflicting emotions to the surface in the audience, which is something that the movie does very often to great effect.

The film doesn't draw a clear line between good and evil, which proves to be a good thing. Grey areas are usually more interesting then plain black and white. This film doesn't just dabble in grey areas: it wallows in them, daring the audience to follow. That is commendable in any movie, whether the characters speak English, Swedish or Chinese.