Broken

Why is there always an independent British that will undoutedly make me cry? Last year it was Tyrannosaur, and this year it's this hidden gem, that apparently debuted at Cannes last year, but of course this being Australia it didn't come out here until this year in May. And because of university interrupting my life, I didn't get to see it until this weekend, so it might be dying down in terms of cinema screenings, but it's still on at Nova quite a few times, in case anyone actually wants to go see it after reading this. And you should. Like Tyrannosaur, this film has incredible emotion. Unlike Tyrannosaur, it's not as dark as you think it will be. But first, a summary.

Skunk (Eloise Laurence, in her movie debut) is an eleven year old diabetic who lives with her brother, Jed (Bill Milner), and her dad Archie (Tim Roth) in a normal British suburb. One day, Skunk shockingly watches as one of her neighbours, Rick (Robert Emms), who lives with his parents, is suddenly beaten up by another neighbour, Mr Oswald (Rory Kinnear), an agressive man with three daughters. This event triggers a downward spiral in Skunk's life, as she starts high school and is bullied, while her father begins a relationship with her au pair, Kasia (Zana Marjanovic). The stories of these three families all intertwine with each other, bringing together a tragic, yet strangely life affirming conclusion.

So, this is based on a 2008 book by Daniel Clay that was inspired by To Kill a Mockingbird. And yeah, there are similarities. Scout and Jem are phonetically similar(ish) to Skunk and Jed, Archie is also a lawyer like Atticus was, Skunk gets a boyfriend named Dylan, who serves as the Dill of this movie. There are other similarities, like Rick being the Boo Radley character, who is misunderstood and a little creepy, and I guess Cillian Murphy's character Mike could be the Tom Robinson, since he is inadvertently accused with getting one of Mr Owswald's daughters pregnant. But one shouldn't base how good a film is on how well it adapts something, one should review the film as an entity in it's own right. Which is what I'm going to do now. I may come back one day and talk about how it kinda works as an adaptation of To Kill a Mockingbird, but right now, let's just focus on Broken.

Eloise Laurence is going to go far. For her first film, she manages to hold everything together, and creates a likeable, cheeky and realistic character in Skunk. Also, the connection between her and Tim Roth is so believable. The scenes just between these two were the highlights of the film. Unfortunately, there aren't enough of them, only about 3 in total. But that complaint turns into a compliment because the film expertly paced. It's very plot driven, with each character given enough time to forward the plot. Yet, there are some quiet character moments as well, like the little scenes between Skunk and her dad. And while I would love to see more of those scenes, they would probably make the film drag.

 
Broken only lasts 90 minutes, but it is quite slow. However, that isn't a bad thing. Slow is quickly becoming a compliment for films among the arthouse scene, and as I said earlier, the pacing is perfect. It feels like it's just a character study, yet on reflection all the little incidents that happen all contribute to driving the actions of the character, and direct the plot forward So, while some may think that it is rather plotless and slow, for me it just shows that the film uses good story-telling to create a non-formulaic coming-of-age drama.

The acting is also really excellent. I know I kinda got talking about Eloise Laurence then got distracted by the pacing, but let's get back on track. Tim Roth is excellent, and it is nice to see him in a meatier role than the extended cameo he had in Arbitrage last year. Cillian Murphy is also good, but in a more supporting role than the advertising suggests. Rory Kinnear is scary good, and you really feel like he is an out of control man who cannot cope with the grief of losing his wife and the responsibility of raising three out of control daughters. Robert Emms is also quite chilling, portraying a man who is very mentally disturbed, and whenever he's on screen you just think that something is going to go wrong. Which it does. Whoops, spoilers.

So, the story is a little predictable and quite depressing, but there is a liveliness to it, that comes from both Eloise Laurence, and some of the techniques that they use at times. Towards the end, it goes a little dreamlike (for reasons I will not divulge), and there is some symbolism that is very ambiguous. It could mean the passing of childhood into ... teenage hood? Or it could simply be leaving the past behind you and looking forward into the future. I think it's more the former, a long-winded way to tell the audience that our main character is growing up.

Another thing that happens a lot is that the filmmakers will show the end result of a scene before showing the events leading up to what actually happened. The most obvious (and the one with the least amount of spoilers) is at the beginning, when Mr Oswald attacks Rick for no reason that the audience has been given yet. After the attack, we flashback to see what aggrevated him to start beating Rick up, and no, I'm not going to tell you what it was. If you want to find out, go see it for yourself. This trick is repeated a couple more times to the point that the novelty of it wears off a bit. But it's still interesting and refreshing to see a different approach to the show don't tell rule.

I don't really want to say anything else because a lot of the joy found in the film comes from not knowing that much about it. Usually, I hate trailers that don't tell me what goes on in the film because they frustrate me, but I am thankful for this one. I will say that it did make me cry, well, the ending did. And even now that it's been a couple of days since I've seen it, thinking about it still makes me cry. This film is so breathtakingly refreshing, not only for the new story-telling techniques it uses, but it takes a genre that has been stretched in every way possible, the coming of age genre, and gives it a new life, even if it does take inspiration from an old favourite. Female orientated coming of age stories are so rare, and generally focuses on teenage girls rather than pre-pubescent, so I am really pleased that this is as good as it is. If you are interested, I can't recommend it enough. Until next time, readers.

Four Rooms (List Movie)

Tim Roth, what are doing? Why are you doing that? No one walks that way, seriously! What the fuck is going on!! ... This is an odd movie. You might even say it's a fucking odd movie. The idea is a good one, 4 directors are given 20 minutes to create a scenario based in a different room in a hotel involving the bell-hop (Tim Roth). But it doesn't work! This is a big fucking mess, so messy I'm already swearing too much in the first fucking paragraph! It's not the sort of movie you'd expect to see Tim Roth, I know that much. Though I've only seen him serious roles so I can't really talk. But we'll get to that later. Since there are four segments in the movie, this review will go through each of them in more detail. There may be spoilers, you have been warned.

Room one takes place in the Honeymoon Suite and is directed by Allison Anders, called The Missing Ingredient. A coven of witches meet to try and bring their goddess, Diana (Amanda de Cadenet), back to life after being turned to stone on her wedding night forty years ago. Each of the witches, Athena (Valeria Golino), Elspeth (Madonna), Jezebel (Sammi Davis) and Raven (Lili Taylor) have each brought the ingredient that they need in order to completed the spell. Eva (Ione Skye) was meant to bring semen as the final part, yet was unable to do so. The only way that they can complete the spell is to seduce Ted the bell-hop, and gather his semen whether he likes it or not.

Madonna was nominated for a razzie for her very brief appearance in this segment. But her part is so small that it doesn't really offend you, though she is quite bad. As an opening story, it's pretty good. The problem is that it's really quick, and because it's first, it runs the risk of being forgotten by the end of the film. And it is kinda forgettable. Except for Tim Roth. Now, in the other rooms, Tim Roth's acting isn't as noticeable because the other actors are overacting themselves, or the situations are more bizarre (yep) than this one, so the character becomes justified in being over the top. In this segment, the women seem to be going for more natural performances, so Tim Roth's overacting stands out too much. Overall, it is a different story, but isn't done well. The end result is something unfortunately more forgettable than it should be.

Now, the second room, directed by Alexandre Rockwell, has some funny moments, but this is definitely the strangest and least memorable of all the rooms. After getting a call for ice from one of the rooms, apparently room 404 where a party is taking place, Ted heads up with the ice only to end up at the wrong room and with a gun in his face. The gun belongs to Siegfried (David Proval), and he is waiting for his wife's lover, also named Theodore, to appear for him to threaten. His wife, Angela (Jennifer Beals), is tied and gagged, and Ted is forced to play out a psycho-drama with Siegfried becoming more and more unstable. Eventually, Ted manages to escape just as the real Theodore arrives. The segment ends almost exactly as it began, with a close up on the room number, with the last number scratched, leading the audience to wonder if it was indeed room 404.

So what's the main problem with this part? The pacing, to put it simply. It's too fast, too much happens in too short an amount of time. Which is odd, considering each segment lasts roughly around 20 minutes, but if a little more time had been taken to make things a little clearer then this would've worked better. And that's the other major problem that I had with the room, it was incredibly unclear what was going on. Looking back, all I can really remember are flashes of Tim Roth's expressions and Jennifer Beals with a gag in her mouth. Oh, and that part where Tim Roth is halfway stuck out of a window. While it kinda makes sense by the end, the payoff isn't funny or clever enough for you to really care. One interesting coincidence, though, is the Beals and Roth were reunited in the TV show Lie to Me, in which they played a divorced couple. The fangirl in me is pleased.

Anyway, we now move onto the best part of the movie, Room 309, The Misbehavers directed by Robert Rodriguez. Oh lord, the shit hits the fan here! A man and his wife (Antonio Banderas and Tamlyn Tomita) go off to a New Years Eve party leaving their two kids (Danny Verduzco and Lana McKissack) under the care of Ted, who is instructed to look in on them every half hour. I don't want to say anything else about this part. It's better if you're just surprised by the bizarre events that follow. Plus, too much happens to explain it very well in a paragraph. Unlike the previous segment, the Misbehavers uses it's time well, not dragging the plot through the mud but also not going 100 km an hour. Also, the ending line is excellent!

One of things that is kinda off putting about this part though, for me anyway, is that Ted's character changes for no good reason. While he wasn't the best bellhop in the previous segments, he becomes rather nasty, especially towards the children, who react to what happens to them naturally yet with a slight exaggeration. Ted just kinda acts like a dick in this part, and becomes more of a villain. But apart from the sudden gear change, which I can only put down to different directors and Ted having enough of the shit he's gone through already, this is an excellent short. If you see this without seeing any other part of the film, it still makes sense. And above that, it's fucking hilarious! If you don't want to watch the whole thing, then at least watch this part.

In between the Misbehavers and the Man from Hollywood (the Quentin Taratino segment) there is a little scene where Ted calls his boss, Betty (Kathy Griffin) to tell her about his night so far. But before he gets to speak with her, his call is answered by a stoner named Margaret played by Marisa Tomei. Yep, Marisa Tomei plays a stoner. This is my favourite character of the entire film. She is only onscreen for about 3 minutes, but for me she steals the picture. The clip is on youtube if you want to check it out, and do! Anyway, back to the plot, and onto Tarantino's contribution.

For his last job before he quits for the night, Ted is called to the penthouse suite where director Chester Rush (Tarantino) has asked for numerous and assorted items, including a block of wood, a donut and a 'hatchet as sharp as the devil himsel!' Ted brings these to the penthouse, where he is reunited with Angela from the second room, and he meets Chester's friends Norman (Paul Calderon) and Leo (an uncredited Bruce Willis), and he finds out why Chester has ordered such a random collection of stuff. He and Norman have a bet taken from an episode of Alfred Hitchcock Presents, where Norman has to light his cigarette lighter ten times in a row and he wins Chester's car. But if he fails to do so, then he has to relinquish one of his pinkies. Ted is asked to do the chopping, being offered $1000 in return.

The Man from Hollywood is the longest section, which is really why the first two rooms aren't as good as the second two. Tarantino demanded more time to tell his story, which meant that parts from the other rooms where cut out. This makes me dislike this section somewhat. Another thing that makes me dislike this room, is that the pacing is too slow. It takes about 15 minutes for Chester to tell Ted why he has brought him up to the penthouse, and then a further ten minutes to actually finish off the segment and movie. Of course, the time is filled with Tarantino's trademark references and swear-fests, but it doesn't work within this context. Again, if this had been a short all on its own, it would've worked better, but as a whole, it brings the movie to a complete stop. Though the ending is pretty funny and almost worth the wait. Almost.

Now, let's just take a quick look at the film as a whole. Does it work? Not really. Is it entertaining? Hell yeah! This is one of those messes that you dream would happen more often. Once you see it, you understand completely why it is a cult film. There's bad dialogue, cringe-worthy acting in parts, it's too long, incredibly pointless and it has Tim Roth in a comedic role. To be honest, Ted is the best and worst part of this film. The best, because his character is able to hold the film together and through some subtle hints in Roth's acting (though maybe subtle isn't the right word) you get a deeper character through repeat viewings. The worst, because his overacting is so funny as to be distracting from the rest of the film. Did I like it? Yes, in a way. It is odd to see Roth so animated when I'm used to him in more serious roles, but he is memorable. Also, the third room is an excellent short, and I will keep saying that.



Would I recommend it? Well, if this has sparked any interest, then seek it out. Otherwise, I'd say you should watch it for the so bad it's good quality that it has. It isn't for everyone, but if you like bad movies, then this should entertain you at some point along the line. Now, November is almsot over, I've completed my 50,000 words and hopefully I will be back on schedule to for some more reviews within the next few days. I'm not sure what I'll be reviewing, or when, but it will be something! Until next time, readers.