Tom Ricks (Ethan Hawke) isn’t having a good time. He arrives in Paris in the hope of reuniting with his daughter, but is soon thrown out of his ex-wife’s home amid accusations of prior violence and a restraining order. After falling asleep on a bus, he wakes up at the end of the line having been robbed of his suitcase and cash.

Still in hope of having some contact with his child, Tom manages to find a cheap room in a hovel and to supplement his income with a strange CCTV job that merely involves opening a door for people, without knowing what’s on the other side. He has hopes of finishing his second novel (even though he seems to remember little about the first), and putting his life back on track.

He then meets a 50-something seductress, Margit (Scott Thomas) – the titular woman in the fifth arrondisement of Paris – as well as a young bartender (Joanna Kulig), beginning relationships with both of them. However Margit is not what she appears and may be a hint that the odd moments of violence and fractured nature of Tom’s existence are far from straightforward and that the film is more metaphysical puzzle than either drama or thriller.

Hollywood films sometimes get accused of having too much story and not enough character and emotion, but if anything The Woman In The Fifth goes too far the other way. It’s all character, emotion and mood, while the narrative is sometimes a little too obscure for its own good. The film does a great job of drawing you into the strange and intense existence of Ricks – helped by an unusually strong and understated performance from Ethan Hawke – but it’s so intent on being enigmatic and not making things too easy for the audience, that a lot of people will end the movie having little clue as to exactly what they’ve just seen. Some people won’t mind that, but others undoubtedly will.

There are various possibilities as to exactly what’s going on in this puzzle box of a film and towards the end the mist does slightly – even if not completely – clear, but if you’re the sort of person who demands concrete answers from your entertainment, you’re not going to like this. Director Pawel Pawlikowski has even said it’s not a film you should pick apart too much. If that’s not too much of a problem for you, The Woman In The Fifth is a truly intriguing and enigmatic film that does a very good job of posing questions and drawing you into a man’s fractured psyche, where reality and fiction, as well as the difference between how you perceive yourself and how you really are, all start to mingle.

Pawel Pawlikowski impressed the arthouse world and won two BAFTAs for his first two fiction features, 2000’s Last Resort and 2004’s My Summer Of Love. It’s taken him nearly eight years to follow those movies up, and with The Woman In The Fifth he takes the wonderful knack for mood he hinted at in his earlier movies to a new level. However his insistence on being obscure to the point of inevitably alienating a large chunk of the audience, does limit the appeal of the film.

That said, it’s easy to imagine this film becoming somewhat beloved by a certain section of arthouse purists, as it does make you think, has a wonderfully seductive mood and poses questions within question within questions. Ethan Hawke is excellent, with the movie playing on the fact that like the character he plays, he himself is a divorced father and author. Kristin Scott Thomas is, as always, a strong, steely presence, while Joanna Kulig – who makes her English-language debut with the film – could be another Pawlikowski discovery following Emily Blunt and Nathalie Press in My Summer Of Love.

The film certainly has a lot to recommend it, with the only question being whether the lack of any real sense of closure and plenty of unanswered questions will leave you intrigued or just frustrated.

Overall Verdict: A moody, enigmatic and endlessly intriguing film, with Ethan Hawke on top form. However it may be a little too obscure for its own good.

Reviewer: Tim Isaac

There are certain experiences in life that are quite difficult to convey to someone who was not actually there. They can be things you’ve seen, things you’ve lived through, or feelings you’ve experienced. This most definitely extends to popular culture as well. Nobody alive at the time could possibly convey in words the complete experience of seeing the Beatles live, or watching Star Wars on its original release.

And so it is that it is very difficult to describe, using the written word alone, just how big a deal The Muppets were in their heyday. The original run of the show went from 1975 to 1981, but thanks to repeat, syndication and movies, the incredible influence of Jim Henson’s creations drove on for at least another 15 years after that. Indeed, it was only the double blow of Henson’s death in 1990 and the meteoric rise of The Simpsons that finally led to the viewing public losing their Muppet fever.

But that was a long time ago, it’s been 12 years since Kermit, Miss Piggy and the rest graced cinema screens in the underwhelming Muppets From Space, so the question has to be asked, have they still got it? In the age of Pixar, can old-school puppet based comedy still grab audiences and be relevant? Let’s find out…

The story centres around Gary (Jason Segel) a completely human adult male whose brother Walter just happens to be a Muppet. This is clearly the norm in this universe, because rather than being carted off for experimentation or posed awkward questions about…y’know…the birth, Gary and Walter grow up quite happily together on a diet of TV dinners and The Muppet Show, with Walter in particular becoming the show’s biggest fan. During a vacation in LA, Walter discovers the plot of evil oil magnate Tex Richman, who’s out to destroy The Muppets’ old theatre so he can drill for oil then, and so he, along with Gary and his girlfriend Mary (Amy Adams) set out to reunite the legendary gang of entertainers and save the theatre.

You’d be right to think “So far, so standard”, but to do so with any negativity would be to misunderstand the concept of The Muppets since their origin. Henson’s genius in creating the original TV show was to take something very hackneyed and outdated (in the original show’s case, the music-hall/variety show concept) and embrace those cheesy ideas with gusto, and the same applies here. All the ideas are clichés – getting the old gang back together for one last show, saving the sentimental location from money grabbing schemers, etc – but it’s executed with such knowing, self-referential aplomb that the audience is immediately in on the joke and along for the ride.

Some credit for this has to go to Jason Segel himself, not only as a fine comic performer but as the c-writer of the script. One of the criticisms of the Muppets more recent TV escapades (A Very Muppet Christmas and the disastrous Muppets Wizard of Oz) has been the over-reliance on current pop-culture humour, but here Segel strikes a fine balance between the slick comedic style of the new millennium and the retro slapstickery and visual gags that made the Muppets so appealing in the first place.

On the human side of things, Chris Cooper cuts an amusing villain (although perhaps he should steer clear of rapping from now on) and Amy Adams is solid, if slightly underused, given the musical nature of the piece and her previous storming performance in 2007’s Enchanted. As for the Muppets, well…they’re The Muppets, each an amazingly well realised character with more personality than a great deal of performers in cinema who aren’t operated by hand. Those concerned that new arrival Walter might upset the balance needn’t fret; he fits in nicely, an unassuming and quite dignified soul in contrast to the wackiness of the regulars.

Brett McKenzie of Flight of the Conchords is the man entrusted with the always vital task of great music in a Muppets movie, and for the most part he gets it dead on. There are a couple of slips, notably the slightly cringey Amy Adams/Miss Piggy duet “Me Party” and the aforementioned Chris Cooper rap, but Man or Muppet is superb, well worthy of its Academy Award nomination, and the all-chicken version of a recent hit will be stuck in your head for days afterwards.

The Muppets Movie, far from being a rehash of a tired format, is a reboot in the best possible way. It successfully marries old and new, retro and modern, and throws some good old fashioned laughs in for good measure. It doesn’t quite measure up to the finest moments of the TV show or the classic that is Muppets Christmas Carol, but even from the most cynical perspective, it’s hard to see how they could have done much better.

Overall Verdict: It’s like they never left. If you like the Muppets, you’re in for one of the most enjoyable cinema experiences you’ll have this year. If you don’t like the Muppets, well firstly check for a pulse, but don’t write this off, it’s unpretentious fun at its very best and proves that after 35 years the Muppets are still a phenomenon…doo doo dee doo doo…and so forth.

Reviewer: Alex Hall

 

I was seven-years-old when the original Star Wars movie came out, but for some reason after watching the first trilogy I missed Phantom Menace on the big screen and just never bothered to see the subsequent films. So I was really excited to be invited to the 3D theatrical re-release of the 1992 prequel, which is set 32 years BBY (before the battle of Yarvin)

Watching the current seven-year-olds having their picture taken with Storm Troopers in the foyer, I went on to have a photo session with Darth Maul, visited a green-screen photo booth where I was superimposed onto a commemorative photo, before taking my seat at The Empire Leicester Square. I felt like a kid again.

A camp old luvvie gave a short welcoming address, who turned out to be C-3PO himself, Antony Daniels, and then that awesome theme tune by John Williams kicked in and the classic introductory text scrolled up, looking fantastic in 3D.

For those who missed the story the first time around, two Jedi Knights, played by Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor (as the young Obi Wan Kenobi, watch for continuity errors as his ponytail move either side of his head in different shots), are sent to negotiate a dispute about trade routes and stumble into an invasion of the planet Naboo. They rescue the gothic-japonesque child queen (Natalie Portman) and escape to a small planet (filmed in the Tunisian desert) where they meet a nine-year-old Anakin Skywalker (Jake Lloyd), a slave who’s a technical engineering whizz/boy racer.

Having decided that “the force is strong in this one”, the Jedis enter the boy into a Ben Hur style chariot race to win his freedom from the Muppet Show reject puppet called Watto, who looks like a disabled flying bluebottle. They leave the boy’s mother behind to face a life of slavery (probably as punishment for her acting). The boy develops a crush on the queen, who’s pretending to be a servant. Enter the demonic and mysterious sith lord (Ray Park, voiced by Peter Serafinowicz, who has a grand total of three lines – interestingly, owing to the contact lenses used, the actor never blinks throughout the film, until the scene where he dies and then he blinks just once). War breaks out. Boy blows up battle station and saves the day… and all reworked into 3D. I wish they hadn’t bothered. I think the fans I saw leave the cinema early might agree.

Much of the movie seemed to be out of focus, only sharpening up at the 3D highlights. Perhaps this is because it’s cheaper to trick the eye than to create the attention to detail used in Cameron’s Avatar? The blurry quality made me realise what great cinema is all about, fantastic cinematography, but here it’s often obscured. There are a few good fight scenes where the 3D effect works really well, creating depth and pulling you in, but overall I felt visually robbed, even though there are less than ten minutes of the 136 minute running time where there are no visual effects of any kind.

Most of the alien/CGI characters are irritatingly voiced and definitely aimed at the children’s market and merchandising. But if it’s a fast paced, action packed kiddies film you’re after, then this is a great bit of escapism.

Trivia: The queen’s name “Padme” is the Sanskrit word for “lotus”. “Yoda” is a name also derived Sanskrit and means “warrior”. The chant during the “duel of the fates” is from a 13th century Welsh poet and translated into Sanskrit.

Overall Verdict: 3D is just a gimmick to resell an old movie, but if it’s a fast paced, action packed kiddies film you’re after then this is a great bit of escapism. Good to see on a big screen but 3D effects add less then they subtract.

Reviewer: Neil Jewitt – who in the census before last was officially listed as a Jedi Knight.

 

The film Big Miracle is set in the far reaches of our world; in the cold, isolated town of Barrow, Alaska. With a close connection to the land and it’s animals, the local people live a life mostly cut off from the outside world.

Directed by Ken Kwapis (He’s Just Not That Into You, The Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants), this based-on-a-true-story rescue tale is told and executed in a fantastic manner, and is both charming and engaging.

In Barrow we meet intrepid young news reporter, Adam Carlson (John Krasinski), who’s on a mission to further his career as a news journalist and presenter. Although the town is somewhat unexciting, it’s easy to empathise with Adam’s enthusiasm for the job as well as his infectious charm with the locals. In a far less remote setting we meet Rachel (Drew Barrymore), a young Greenpeace activist who is fighting on the side of nature and animals, and is first seen being thrown out of a press conference where a new oil drilling deal is being announced.

Whilst out shooting some footage towards the end of his time in Barrow, Adam sees an usual sight – two adult and one baby Gray Whales, trapped in a small breathing hole in the ice. With winter approaching these whales missed their chance to get to open water and are now stuck too far inland, with only a hole in the ice to allow them to breath. The situation is dire, as there’s nowhere for them to swim to without drowning, and the effort of keeping the hole open is slowly driving them towards dangerous exhaustion. Adam captures this story and it quickly spreads like wildfire across the globe – the plight of the whales capturing the world’s heart.

Unbeknownst to the whales, their situation is the catalyst for a whole series of events. It becomes apparent that the film is not really about the whales, but about the people who are affected by them. This subtlety is what sets the film apart from most generic family flicks, as it actually has some real depth to it. Although the characters are themselves simple and the plot relatively straightforward, the strength of the film is the portrayal of the lives of the characters who unite to save the whales.

There are some strong dynamics evident in these relationships: the USA government and the Russian government trying to work together (despite the Cold War still raging during this 80s set tale), the relationship between Adam, Rachel and another news journalist, the dolled-up news presenter Jill Jerrard (Kirsten Bell), who is the polar opposite to down-to-earth Rachel. There are more dynamics set up between the traditional people of Barrow and the influence of the modern world on their way of life; which is one of the most poignant relationships in the film. All of these combine throughout the film to make for engaging but still light-hearted viewing.

This film is definitely recommended family viewing as it touches on some very important issues of both a global and personal nature. It’s heart-warming and simple nature will allow children to find it entertaining and the story of the fight to save the whales is told in an adult-enough fashion to keep Mom and Dad entertained too.

Overall Verdict: Big Miracle is a real delight, and one that will be a pleasure for adults to watch as well as children. There’s a great story with plenty to learn, an interesting insight into the lives of the people in such remote places, and a great cast that really brings this tale to life.

Reviewer: Kevin van der Ham

Young Adult has Oscar pedigree written all over it. Directed By Jason Reitman (nominated for Up In The Air and Juno) in collaboration with everyone’s favourite hip writer, Diablo Cody (of Juno fame), and with the beautiful and talented Charlize Theron (Oscar winner for Monster) starring.

On paper it would appear that Mavis Gary (Theron) is a successful, beautiful 37-year-old writer living life to the full in Minneapolis, who’s enjoying all the trappings that life should bring a former prom queen. However, it is obvious from the opening scenes that her life is in a mess. She wakes up from a drunken stupor, having fallen asleep on her bed fully-clothed. She shuffles round her dishevelled apartment, drinks Coke for breakfast, prepares breakfast for her and her dog Dolce from ready made packet food, whilst watching The Kardashians on TV.

After receiving a generic email from her High School boyfriend to announce the birth of his first child, and having had yet another unfulfilling date/sexual encounter, she throws everything in her bag (including Dolce) and follows the madcap idea of heading back to her hometown, in the hope of rekindling her relationship with her ex-boyfriend, despite the fact that he is married and now has his first child.

As part of the disposable wanting-everything-now generation, she feels it is her right to be with him. The rest of the film follows her desperate attempts at trying to steal her ex back, while deluding herself that he must be unhappy. She also befriends an unlikely companion, Matt Freehauf (played brilliantly by Patton Oswalt), who was crippled by the school jocks as they thought he was gay.

There are nods to many of today’s well known celebrities/characters, with today’s MTV generation brought up on a diet of Idol, The Kardashians, Twilight and Carrie Bradshaw. It is their life that Mavis believes should be her destiny, without actually investing time and effort into any sort of meaningful relationships.

Theron is excellent in the role of Mavis. A sort of anti hero, she excels at playing this tortured, alcoholic, witty, erratic empty character. Theron is fantastic in every scene, one of the best being the awkward baby naming party, where all her insecurities come to the surface.

The moral of the story is clear. You can’t help but feel sorry for Mavis Gary, but are perhaps hopeful that she can change her ways – or not as the case may be.

Overall Verdict: A brilliant portrayal by Charlize Theron, in the lead role, and by far her most convincing role since she picked up the Oscar for Monster. As for Diablo Cody, it’s not as good as Juno but better than Jennifer’s Body.

Reviewer: Stephen Sclater

Tension, unease, claustrophobia – all trademarks of Roman Polanski. If you enjoy watching people squirming in uneasy situations, he’s your man, and the obvious choice to direct a film version of Yasmina Reza’s Tony award-winning play. This is the man who made Knife In The Water, Repulsion and Frantic – toe-curlingly tense all.

Carnage is a four-hander, about two sets of parents whose sons have brawled and they meet up in a New York apartment to sort the problem out. It’s tense, terse and extremely funny – but does it add up to a film or merely a stage play in front of a camera?

It’s classic Polanski territory. John C. Reilly and Jodie Foster are Michael and Penelope Longstreet, whose son has had two teeth knocked out by Nancy and Alan Cowan’s boy. The Cowans, played by Kate Winslet and Christoph Waltz, visit the Longstreets in their New York apartment to work out what to do. Very early on it’s established this is not about money – the insurance will cover the dental costs – instead it’s a moral argument. Are the Cowans to blame for their son’s violent outburst? Is it just boys being boys? Is society to blame?

Initially it’s all very polite – drinks are made and drunk, flowers are complimented on, but pretty soon the cracks start to appear. Reilly’s Michael is an apparently easy-going man happy to accept that boys fight, and no fuss should be made, but it soon emerges his wife has ‘dressed him as a liberal’ and he believes in action over words. His wife Penelope is a highly-strung shrew, obsessed with the sufferings of Africa but even more obsessed with her book collection. Never has an on-screen wife given her husband such a withering look as when she discovers he has forgotten to put the Coke in the fridge.

The Cowans however are very different – doing very well for themselves, judging by their expensive clothes. She is determined to defend their son. He is happy to admit the boy is a ‘maniac’. Waltz’s Alan is an absolute hoot – playful, witty but with an underlying menace that comes to the surface too often. When Michael breaks out the whiskey the layers are peeled back, and the underlying menace really starts to come to the fore. His speeches are constantly interrupted by calls to his Blackberry, which reveal him to be a businessman who takes no prisoners.

Carnage is beautifully written and paced – as a play – but as a film it feels stilted and stifling. Polanski’s camera is trapped inside a small New York apartment (apart from the bookend shots of a park where the crime is committed), and it feels at times merely like a recording of an interesting theatre experience. The push and pull of the argument is sustained over the short running time, but every time the Cowans move towards the door with their coats on, it’s pretty inevitable they are going to be pulled back into the flat for the discussion to continue.

It’s an interesting debate which never quite comes to any conclusion, and unusually for Polanski there is no violence or deaths to conclude matters. The most violent moment is Winslet’s projectile vomiting over some precious art catalogues, one that will inevitably feature on YouTube for years to come – was it the apple and pear cobbler?

Overall Verdict: Effective but ultimately frustrating piece of moral theatre placed on the screen. It’s entertaining while it’s there but it leaves no great trace, a shame for a theme that suggests something far more meaty.

Reviewer: Mike Martin