Sneakers - more propaganda

When I got this through the post from LoveFilm I was struggling to remember why I ordered it. Eventually I recalled that one of our resident electronic engineers / tech obsessives at work told me I should see it. After watching it I can see why. 'Sneakers' is a film that anyone with an interest in electronics and gadgets would have loved; especially in the early 90s, years before the modern age of futuristic gadgets. Plus it has an outstanding cast (Robert Redford, Sidney Poitier, Ben Kingsley, Dan Akroyd, Mary MacDonnel + others), I can see why it came to me recommended.

The film follows Robert Redfords's Martin Bishop and his small band of techies who make a living by having banks commission them to break into their vaults - to demonstrate their weaknesses. One day Bishop is contacted by men from the government and told that they want to use the skills of his group to get into a secret beyond he's ever seen before. Though he initially refuses, he has an 'interesting' past and is somewhat strong armed into helping them. When their plans start to unravel, in classic Hitchcockian style the only way Bishop can escape from a certain fate is to barrel headlong towards it.

Despite being a 15 certificate 'Sneakers' is something of a kids film. There's some comedy mileage and although several people are killed there's no violence shown at all. The film seems somewhat quaint now-a-days, and though standards have changed over the years it's more likely that the early 1990s depictions of the internet and gadgets with flashing lights are what give that impression. It would be rather harmless stuff if it were not for a central plot point that had me in a rage - i.e. the PROPAGANDA. Allow me to expand:

The central point of the film turns on Kingsley's character trying to convince Redford's character that the anarchy and freedom that they sought in their youth as hackers is now possible on a global scale. Kingsley argues that where in the past they could irritate a single bank, now he has the power to bring down the whole system - a world where there's no control, money or power. So I'm sitting there thinking "This is a great idea" - and then suddenly Kinglsey's the bad guy. From nowhere, he becomes this Bond villain with secret lair and goons that Redford's group has to break into and steal back 'the chip'. All because he expressed a vaguely anti-capitalist sentiment.

I believe I've opined several times before that the US government doesn't need to actively control Hollywood's media output, the American movie industry does a better job than the Soviet Union ever could of implanting pro-establishment ideology on to an impressionable population. 'Sneakers' seems to be another in a long line of such movies; in which a character is the bad guy for the simple reason that he opposes the status quo. Seriously, watch 'Sneakers' and tell me what it is about Ben Kingsley's character that makes him the bad guy. I promise you there's nothing in it beyond simple pro-establishment propaganda.

So, yet another moderately entertaining film ruined for me because I like to stop and think about what it is I'm watching. Maybe one of these days I'll turn my brain off when watching a film. This'll probably be the last review of 2011, top 5 of the year coming up in 2012...

Julia's Eyes

Any Guillermo Del Toro 'presentation' is worth a look in. He's got a knack for being involved in making effective and moving thrillers, and I like watching films in Spanish, perfect combination. Julia's Eyes follows Spanish astronomer Julia after the recent suicide of her twin sister Sara. Both sisters have a genetic disorder than means their eyesight will progressively deteriorate with time. Stress adds to the process, so when Julia becomes convinced that Sara's death was caused by someone else her eyesight starts to deteriorate rapidly.

We the audience are aware from scene 1 that something potentially otherworldly is going on, as we see Sara's 'suicide' - a figure appearing out of nowhere to push her off a rickety chair and send her to her death. When Julia and husband Issac arrive at Sara's house Julia struggles with the reduced levels of light and thinks she sees someone else hanging around. Neither Issac nor the police are interested in what she thinks though, so she goes off to meet Sara's friends and slowly becomes convinced that someone mysteriously inconspicuous killed her sister.

As the film progresses, Julia experiences several states of sightedness, each of which is used with some effectiveness to add chills. For example, when Julia is totally blinded for a period the camera never shows us anyone's face. The film shies away from becoming a full-on horror, instead it feels like an X-Files monster of the week episode - reminded me a bit of the Eugene Tooms arc for those nerdy enough to remember. It also holds back on gore until very close to the end, to the extent that you're not at all expecting it when it happens - again, very effective.

An entirely decent thriller without any great histrionics, over-reliance on special effects or mis-placed gore, 'Julia's Eyes' is something of a surprisingly good find.

Weird Film Night Xmas Special - Rare Exports

An occasionally-funny, low budget proper weird film, 'Rare Exports' is a Christmas spoof set in the mountainous wilds of Finland. The premise is this: Santa is in fact a legendary monster a la Grendel who was trapped under ice and rock by the ancients of Finland. When meddlesome English-speakers arrive with tools and dynamite looking for the true Santa - they unwittingly unleash an unspeakable ancient evil. Or do they?

Sounds like a bit of a horror film so far, and it could have been if the main characters were not an inept trio of local hunters and their two intrepid sons, all of whom bumble around in the snow and accidentally kidnap this apparent Santa risen-from-the-earth. It's also pretty low budget film. There are characters that we never see, ropey blood and gore special effects and an ending that in a higher budget film would have warranted at least a small amount of CGI. This is hardly a complaint though, the low budget seems to have kept it trim and to the point. Refreshing in the modern age of 'anything goes' on screen.

The film's probably not well-acted enough to be genuinely a comedy. But at 80 minutes it's a great length for a silly spoof that no-one for a second should take seriously. 'Rare Exports' is an eccentric and subversive film that's an ideal antidote to the now-standard commercialisation of the Christmas period - something it ends up nicely lampooning at its conclusion.

The Box

The second slightly odd film I've seen recently is much more mainstream - 'The Box' stars Cameron Diaz no less, with James Marsden and Frank Langella. The film is made by the same guy who directed 'Donnie Darko', and has a similar unworldly vibe. Diaz and Marsden play the Lewises, an unremarkable couple living in mid-1970s Virginian suburbia. One day they recieve a package containing a box with a button on top and an explanation from Langella's mysterious Arlington Steward; press the button and you will get a million dollars, but someone will die. Or leave the box alone for a day and nothing will happen.

This is something of a mystical film that uses a lot of misdirection, Twilight Zone style (the film is indeed based on an episode of that TV series) music and hinting at science fiction concepts to create an unsettling atmostphere. Marsden's character works at NASA, on a project looking for life on Mars. The NSA are in town, obfuscating, spinning and behaving mysteriously as they might a typical X-Files episode. All the while there's this box, the button and what pressing it might mean. And once that decision's been made, the consequences.

Just who is Steward working for that they would go to such trouble just to test the resolve of the Lewis family? The NSA, a shadowy organisation within the government, Martians, or perhaps an even higher power?

Enjoyable, but I'm sure if you think about it too much it doesn't make sense.

F - Hoodie Horror

Kicked December off with a couple of oddish films. First up was 'F', a British thriller that was made about a year ago in the middle of all the hype about 'feral' teenagers running amok. Remember all that? The story follows Robert Anderson, a teacher who is attacked in his class and becomes obsessed by the idea that kids are out to get adults. A year passes and he is separated from his wife, drinking before classes, estranged from his daughter (a pupil in his class) and generally on the fringes of society.

Cue an attack on the school a la Assault on Precinct 13. Shadow-faced attackers wearing grey hoodies and possessing extra-ordinary ninja powers attack the school in the evening when all the characters we've been introduced to happen to be hanging around. Blood and carnage follow.

Despite setting up a tense atmosphere and delivering several seriously grotty makeup-laden death scenes, the film is only 75 minutes long and fails utterly by bailing out at the end. The film just peters out and fades to the credits just at the point when things are being set up for a finish. Did the budget run out or something? I don't understand how the ending could ever have made sense in the mind of a script writer. Unless they're trying to imply that something other-worldly has happened, or that Anderson has imagined the whole thing and is in fact responsible. But that makes no sense either. To elaborate further would be to provide spoilers that no one wants. It's only 75 minutes, why not have a look yourself?