A film as retro as corduroy flares, soda streams and a prawn cocktail always stands out, and it is this nostaligic edge which supports Potiche, but does it do much else than embrace these familiar icons of an era gone by?
Suzanne Pujol (played by Catherine Deneuve) is lost. Her place is at home as the ‘trophy wife’ but, according to her frighteningly ignorant husband, she is too good to cook and too respected to go out. She is the heiress to an umbrella factory but plays a back seat in its running as the men do the “proper work”. However, when her husband is taken ill, Suzanne is flung into the work-place spotlight and the aspirations she once had to break out of her domestic prison are now put on rejuvenating the business.
The films attention to detail should not go unnoticed, from the orange bubble writing to the swooshing sound of a scene change there appears to be very little which distances it from being an episode of Dallas. The trickery of true sophistication, to make it looks so tacky that we know it’s good. Lacquered with a soap opera finish and polished off with a kitsch infested story of modernisation.
Deneuve is seamless. By portraying Pujol as a woman who has lost control of her confidence rather than a victim of circumstance there is a lot more respect to go around. She perfects the power of her potential by being stylish, elegant and always sarcastic. Yet, even the capabilities of this portrayal cannot redeem the film from its predictability. From the start there is a sense of the characters inevitable success which makes the watching of it almost pointless. The direction from Francois Ozon confidently captures the 1970s in all its coiffured glory but he is unable to prevent it from being a film that has been seen a hundred times before. It finally seems that the genre of the triumphant housewife has been exhausted, at least in its typical sense.
It embraces the 70s as being “of the time” with an exact precision for all its backward glamour but that’s all it seems to do at times. The setting overtakes the plot which neglects any spontaneity or originality in its execution. We want Madam Pujol to succeed, and she does, with a fair amount of ease. Similarly, it is not funny enough to support the garish time it sits in. There are a few chuckles to be had, but any sustained laughter is left outside with the rest of the story. It’s a shame that a film feels it has to rest on its throwback laurels because like Pujol it has potential beyond its aesthetics.
President Obama impressed the crowd at last nights Correspondant’s dinner by ripping in to Donald Trump, flaunting his REAL birth certificate and even producing a trailer for his new biopic (see vid-of-the-week). Even though it seems the novelty of Obama-fever has definitely worn off in America, it is impossible to think that Britain will ever fall out of love with this liberal, smart and ambitious behemoth.
Tantilating glimpses have emerged of James Franco’s new project “Rebel” in which he has teamed up with the dark lord Hamony Korine. From this brief clip it seems even more exciting things are to come from Franco as he continues to infultrate and dominate every genre going. Bikes, machetes and Notorious B.I.G are are just another day in his bizarre world …
With his oh-so chiselled jaw, doughy yet soulful eyes and a smile that could weaken any knees Jake Gyllenhaal seems to have everything you need for a sparkling on screen presence – and normally he does. However, you need more than razor sharp features to keep your interest going in The Source Code. Directoe Duncan Jones showed enormous potential with his bizarre, claustrophic and inventive debut Moon yet the inspiration has faded in his latest work. I seem to be in the minority with this view as the film has received generally positive reviews which is baffling but perhaps justified by the frequency at which critics are jumping on a greater bandwagon … the “thinking man’s blockbuster”. Since the pesky genius-man Christopher Nolan unveiled his 10 year odyssey Inception, there has been filmic proof that the way to get quick money is not just through mind numbing expeditions such as Transformers. Yet there is a downside. These films rely too heavily on them thinking they are so intricately clever and complex when really they are films which have gaping errors, implausible conclusions and dialogue which is transparently poncey.
The Source Code falls right into the trap with stodgy dialogue loaded with cheesy sentiment and saccharin intensity despite the potential for strong performances throughout. The only explanation for anything that was happening was simply a re-utternace of the title. But why is he …? BECAUSE OF THE SOURCE CODE IDIOT HOLE!
All this head messing confusion makes my favourite film of the moment all the more sweeter. Submarine is the story of Oliver Tate, a pretentious 15 year old desperate for a girlfriend and for people to notice he is in fact deeply intellectually stimulated … he reads Salinger don’t you know. Director and IT Crowd actor Richard Ayoade brings an awkward fragility to the screen. It is a beautiful film where teenagers behave like real teenagers and adults are just as fucked up. Craig Roberts’ performance as Tate is striking, with a dead-pan demeanour throughout which provides the perfect canvas for his exploration of quirky first loves and dysfunctional families.
It seems bizarre to say but Submarine is unashamedly cinematic which each shot providing a stunning visual. Unlike The Source Code, the love which was put into making this film is so glaringly obvious with every affections and attention to detail providing even more sincerity. It seems a shame that films such as this are being sidelined by patronising blockbusters which talk you into thinking you are clever. Watching Submarine will educate you emotionally, a far more impressive achievement.
Hx
If life was only as simple as a dance machine. We could be a hop skip and a slide away from the perfectly synchronised relationship. Sadly we make bad moves and lose our rhythm along the way. Twenty two year old Scott Pilgrim finds himself dating a teenage groupie with a heart that is easy to break and eyes that are easy to well up. Then, across the library he spots a beacon of pink hair, falls in love and learns that in order for it to work there is a tiny stipulation, defeat the seven evil Ex’s which include Japanese twins and a bi-curious result of a promiscuous college era. Fights spontaneously combust and the optimism of youth remains.
Michael Cera finally shows he has more to give other than the fidgeting yet adorable high school geek. He delivers a confident and mature performance which adds sincerity to a film which could a flown away with its own fantastical agenda. There must have been an immense amount of pressure on Cera to pull it out of the bag which he overcame and superseded. Cera suits cinema, its hard to pinpoint why but it may be because his face cannot hide what it feels and watching him feels like watching someone tell the truth.
Its often the case that if a films plot works, the weakness lies in its cast. This is where SP bucks the trend as each performance, when taken individually never hinders. This lack of inconsistency both in quality and tone leaves the audience feeling nothing but charmed. There is a symmetrical innocence with the story and the actors and it feels like a treat to watch. There a two performances in particular worth mentioning. First is that of Jason Schwartzman who plays the ultimate evil Ex “Gideon”. He has an advantage in the fact that he possesses what we all want, the holy grail of comedy and that is funny bones. It’s hard not to laugh (in a good way) when you look at him. But even in his own right, Schwartzman delivers on every level. The only criticism I can think of is that this comic potential remained untapped for a chunk of the film as there was great scope to pack even more of a punch. Then there is Kieran Culkin who, if I am being truly honest I never knew existed till now. The gay best friend is a comforting role and with a dollop of camp and jotta pad full of bitchy remarks where can you go wrong? Ah ha! As with most of the film there’s a twist. He has a heart, he has a personality and he has it all on his own, bending all stereotypical gay roles ever made. You want to be his friend and what’s more you are glad that he is Scott Pilgrims. Despite his inherent gossip tenancies he knows inside out what the right this is and the film relies on this surprising moral compass.
Edgar Wright has done us proud. His innovation astounds, as every second is filled with something new and something quirky (but not in the sickening Zooey Deschanel style). 200 points here and a new life there, with each KAPOW our intrigue grows and it cements Wright in his path to becoming a Great British Director. The film rarely loses its pace or its heart. There are baddies which are bad and goodies which are truly good and with a plot that boils down to such simplicity where can it go wrong? It can’t because Wright maintain this simplicity and resits the temptation to over do it.
