The King's Speech (2010)

I worked with an actor/director a couple of years ago who described “Shakespeare in Love” as an 'actor's movie'. He encouraged everyone to go and watch it again, looking out for little side-jokes and jibes at the profession that will only be noticed by those with training. At the time I thought that was a little pretentious, but on watching the film it became clear: everyone involved in “Shakespeare in Love” was in love with acting as a craft. The nature of the film gave them a perfect springboard for what amounted to a good-natured roasting of their livelihood. The reason I feel the need to describe this is that “The King's Speech” left me with the same impression.

The crux of the film rests on the interplay between the (soon-to-be)King George VI and his Australian speech therapist, Lionel Logue. King George VI, affectionately known as 'Bertie' to his close friends and family, is played by Colin Firth. There is a tremendous sense of internal strength to his performance, as he manipulates the limitations of the character's speech impediment and transforms it into an endearing trait. Firth is known for his excellent vocal performances, so seeing him work with a character like this demonstrates his versatility and technique. Geoffrey Rush plays Lionel Logue, whose Australian nationality and expressive personality are the antithesis to the reserved, quiet nature of the king.

The script is written in such a way as to allow Firth and Rush simply to act, without the need for gimmicks or a wide selection of secondary characters. Watching Lionel leading Bertie out of his comfort zone with unusual vocal exercises is a delight, particularly when the audience is treated to an uncomfortable Bertie shouting out some truly filthy language. Whilst there are other notable performances in the film (particularly Helena Bonham-Carter, who plays Queen Elizabeth) it is the chemistry between Lionel and Bertie that the film hangs it's hat on, and rightly so.

The technical side of the film is fantastic, primarily because it never draws attention away from the actors. The director clearly had confidence in his troop because the normal pitfalls of period drama are refreshingly absent. Clothes and sets are all authentic, but never take centre stage. In fact, much of the film is set in tight corridors and bare rooms, such as Lionel's office. This is perhaps the main strength of the film: despite being a period drama, the script places emphasis on the people rather then the date. It is easy for the audience to empathise and relate to the characters because we are given access to their inner thoughts and anxieties, which are irrespective of the years within which the movie is set. Even when the film indulges in it's more glamorous areas, such as Wembley Stadium, it never is to the detriment of the dialogue. One joke seems to be a sly wink to this idea when, late in the film, Bertie becomes frustrated that Lionel is sitting in King Edward's Chair in Westminster Abbey before the coronation. Lionel, with a bemused look, tells him that “People have carved their names on it!” In a sentence, Rush takes all the pomp and glamour out of one of the most important artefacts in the world, situated in one of the most beautiful buildings in the world. As the camera stays steady on Rush's face in a close-up, the audience is made to realise that it is the characters in the film whom they are interested in and not the trappings that surround them.

Fair Game (2010)

“I'm only doing my job.” This is one of the most well-worn lines of dialogue in modern literature, especially when it is related to reporters. We are all familiar with the weathered, hard-nosed journalist in films, whose efforts help the working-class fight back against an oppressive government and the upper-class societies who serve to keep them afloat. It is a little confronting to be on the other side of this battle in 'Fair Game', as we witness the complete dissection of both a career and a marriage of a government employee under the spotlight of the media.

The story centres around Agent Valerie Plame, played by Naomi Watts. She portrays the character as self-reliant, often to the detriment of her outside relationships. It is apparent that she is a woman that has given her all to the service of her government. Watts effectively portrays the inner conflict of a woman struggling to maintain an outward appearance of strength for her children whilst trying to resolve a clashing of ideals internally. For a main character, she has very little internal dialogue, meaning the audience finds her motives and opinions in the conversations she has with other characters, as well as her body language. The audience can divine the majority of her character's emotions simply by watching her facial expressions throughout the movie, which is a testament to the strength of Watts' technique. Sean Penn plays Joe Wilson, Plame's husband. It was the government's falsification of his report from the start of the film that sparks the conflict. He is as stubborn and strong-willed as his wife, and it is their conversations that provide the human side of the characters. Most of the discussions with people in the government and assets in the field are laced with lies and subtext, as is to be expected in a spy film. Without the more open, emotional discussions between Plame and Wilson as husband and wife, this film would have begun to drag substantially by the end. It is the balance between these characters that ensures they remain compelling throughout the film.

The film is presented as an expose for America's military interests in Iraq. However, I felt the more important issue was the ease with which American media could be twisted and manipulated to serve the needs of the government. Whereas governments have suppressed media in past war efforts to protect their interests, this film shows that modern times dictate another path. In an era where internet and mobile phones facilitate unbroken streams of news, it seems more beneficial to feed irresistible news to the masses and distract them rather then fruitlessly try and keep secrets from the omnipresent eye of mass media. This film serves as a warning to the public about the dangers of an unstoppable media system, as well as the importance of being informed as an individual. The apparent ease with which the general public was turned against the truth was frightening.

One of the most effective scenes in the film is actually as the credits start to roll and the scene transitions smoothly into the news footage from the actual court hearing. It helps to drive home the fact that this was not a fiction. This is not a spy film where secret government agencies bring down evil warlords in distant lands; it is a retelling of the time the President of the United States told a barefaced lie in his address to the nation, which almost lead to the destruction of a loyal government servant and her family. This was one of the most frightening films I have ever seen.

The American (2010)

Fans of the thriller genre, beware. Although marketed as an action-packed spy film, 'The American' spends less time chasing shady individuals through dimly-lit alleyways and more time indulging in the majestic scenery of sunny Italy. This may not be the movie many people are expecting, but hopefully audiences can move past their preconceptions about the film and enjoy this slow-paced, eye-catching love letter to the Italian countryside.

George Clooney stars as Jack, a man with a shadowy past and quiet demeanour. Most people will find this a little unsettling, as Clooney is usually associated with charismatic roles, but the change-of-pace provided in this film demonstrates his dramatic range. The manner with which he speaks is short and sharp, whilst he appears more concerned with not being noticed then anything else. His reserved nature is offset by animated conversations is drawn into with the various Italian characters. Father Benedetto (Paolo Bonacelli) is one of the first countrymen that Jack encounters after arriving in the village of Abruzzo. He is a wonderful character that quickly transcends the 'wise old man' role that I initially assumed he would fall into by being unexpectedly assertive when introducing himself to Jack. He shows a worldly understanding that comes as a shock, considering the isolation with which the town itself is presented. The other character of note is Clara (Violante Placido). She works in a local brothel which Jack starts visiting shortly after he arrives. Before long, a bond is formed between the two that goes beyond their physical relationship and Jack makes moves to leave his 'work' behind and start a new life with Clara. Clara and Jack are similar in many ways: they are both strong, independent and have questionable backgrounds. It is an unconventional relationship in unconventional circumstances yet the honesty in the interactions between the two characters makes the relationship feel completely natural, not convoluted.

The actors do a fine job, but there are two other stars of this show. The first is the script, which manages to do more with less seemingly effortlessly. There is very little dialogue in the film but we as an audience do not feel cheated. The characters do not rely on long bouts of exposition to establish the backgrounds of their particular characters. Rather, there is enough implied through subtext to satisfy the audience. This is important because it allows economy of script, giving the characters more time to interact with other characters in the present. This helps maintain the pace of the film, which is important considering the second star of the show: the cinematography. The sweeping views of the city are lengthy and stunning. Every frame is immaculately designed to show off the colours and architecture of the old buildings, cobbled paths and the mountains that surround them. Interior scenes are shot with the same love and care. Small cafes and lavish restaurants are shown in contrast to the workshop that Jack has turned his room into, all of which helps to give flavour to the wider surroundings.

There is no denying that 'The American' will be too slow for some. There is very little emphasis on action and the tone is unlike the majority of films that filter through to the worldwide stage. However, for others it will be a breath of fresh air. The charm of this film is undeniable.

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.