Noah

I have no great knowledge of the bible, so I can’t speak to the accuracy of the events in Noah, but I can imagine some things, were embellished, heightened or just plain added into make this one of the most interesting biblical epics in a long time.

I realise, that Noah has come under some flack in a variety of circles, mainly religious groups, either because of depiction, story or that they show Noah himself, a prophet. Something that certain religions take offence to. Before going to see it, you really need to push all of this out of your mind and take the film on its own merits and adaptation of the story. As essentially it is an adaptation, yes of a sacred tale, but this is Darren Aronofsky and Ari Handels (co-writer) take on this most memorable story.

Noah is Aronosky’s sixth feature film and bar 2006’s The Fountain his most ambitious and visually arresting. It follows more in the vein of The Fountain, than his other works, which have been more grounded and intimate stories such as Pi or The Wrestler, in that it is a story told on a grand scale, befitting the original story.

The film follows Noah and his family, after he receives a message in a dream where the Creator tells him that there is going to be a great flood to wash away all of the wicked and evil people in the world. Most of us will have heard the story, or at least be familiar enough with it, but Aronofsky does offer up a few surprises along the way.

Russell Crowe is kind of the go to man for historical epics as he is able to bring a weight and believability to the role and considering how well known this man/character is, the film needed a actor to invest in. The Noah we are given here, is very much a man suffering under the weight of the task given to him as well as the apparent contradictions that come with it. All of this is slowly and brilliantly portrayed by Crowe as Noah’s beliefs and understanding are constantly under attack, leading him to make a terrible promise to his son, Shem and his wife, Ela.

Noah looks stunning from first shot to last shot. While some of the big ark scenes are completely computer generated, they still hold up next to the rest of the cinematography by Matthew Libatique. The Watchers (fallen angels appearing as rock creatures) and especially the growth of a river sequence is probably my favourite in the film.

The siege of the ark sequence, which comes around half way through, is up there with the great modern action scenes of its kind, a much shorter Helm’s Deep. It feels dirty and frantic as the rest of the world (seemingly) battles to get onto the ark as the rain begins to fall.

Artistic licence has undoubtedly been taken with original story, the rock giants and Cain’s people I believe, aren’t mentioned in it. But to me at least, they bring more to the film than they take away. It adds a grand scale to the story and also a more personal/idea edge to it.

If I were to have a complaint about the film, it would be that it could have done with being five to ten minutes shorter. But while there is no one sequence or scene that stands out, towards the end some people in the cinema, most notably the man next to me, were starting to huff and puff and move about in his seat.

You will have heard bad things about it the film, but don’t believe them. I heard one radio personality refer to the rock creatures as Transformers, a statement so laughable I looked down my car radio in disbelief.

While it may not adhere strictly to the bible story itself, it is no doubt a sweeping, entertaining and engaging cinematic experience. It needs to be seen on the big screen.

Director: Darren Aronofsky

Writers: Darren Aronofsky and Ari Handel.

Still Searching: Thoughts on the Uncharted Film

A few months ago there was an announcement that there would be a film adaptation of The Last of Us, arguably one of, if not the greatest video game ever created. It combined addictive gameplay, a masterfully plotted story, stunning visuals and some of the most layered and detailed characters you will find anywhere in any medium.

When Naughty Dog, the studio behind The Last of Us, went beyond and set a new benchmark, it was highly likely that someone would come along and want to make this sweep storm into a film. For me a mini-series on something like HBO would be the best way to approach this kind of adaptation, but no one is listening to me.

There is one huge question you have to ask when contemplating a The Last of Us adaptation.

Where the fuck is Nathan Drake?

In what would be undoubtedly an easier adaptation and one that offers guaranteed sequels and a regular presence in the summer blockbuster dogfights, its baffling that the often rumoured Uncharted adaptation is still nowhere to be seen. So far.

The Last of Us, is hardly a family friendly jape. It’s misery and despair wrapped in a ball and tossed down a road to an eventual horrible death.

For those of you unfamiliar with the series (go and buy a Playstation 3, all three games and book a week off work).  In the meantime, I’ll give a brief outline of what Uncharted is. At least to me.

In terms of videogames, it’s probably closest to something like Tomb Raider, it was in fact dubbed “Dude Raider” (or something close to this) on the release of the first trailer. If you were to compare it to a film, it stands pretty firmly as an updated version of Indiana Jones.

During the games, you traverse the globe, searching for some kind of treasure or lost civilization. This search is usually made a tad challenging by either being pursued by, or in a race with a mercenary or secret society, out to claim it for their own.

So let’s look at what kind of film we would get from an adaptation Uncharted. Tonally, it is a lot lighter than The Last of Us, there is a lot more humour, even if it is often sarcastic and very dry at points. The series is a reflection of Drake as a whole. Adventerous, charming witty, but also dangerous and ruthless.

The way I see it, is that it would sit somewhere between an Indiana Jones film, most likely one of the Nazi ones as their tone was just that bit more serious. Then mixing it with a modern action film like Casino Royale as Drake is very capable of getting his hands dirty, especially up close and personal.

Humour would play a significant part in the film, but not one that would tip the film into the action/comedy genre, something that the Marvel films have done, to the detriment of some of its films. Nathan Drake and Victor Sullivan, Nate's older partner and the man who has essentially raised him, have a really quick 'back and forth' relationship, filled with jokes.

The obvious risk with a film like Uncharted is that it could easily turn into a CGI filled forgettable action fest. Yes, the set pieces and really big moments in the game are spectacular, the rooftop escape and train sequence in Among Thieves are two of the best you will play through anywhere, but it’s the characters that people care about. In the same way that Spielberg did with Indiana, and other clever directors have done with other big characters, sticking to practical effects is a must. Most audiences are smart enough to realise when you switch to a digital version of a character and at least for me, I check out of those moments.

A case in point, would be the Mr Smith fight in The Matrix Reloaded, the first half of it is impressive, it’s Keanu Reeves or stunt perfomer and it looks great, but when it changes to a digital Neo (yes technology has advanced), it just isn’t the same, the movement is off and there is a lack of emotional investment as a result. So if we do have lots of supernatural or cursed bad guys in the series, get out the make up and latex and leave the pixels at home.

Contrast that with The Last Crusade and the tank chase in the desert, arguably a bigger and longer set piece, yet almost all of it was practical, there is a real man hanging from the tank or jumping onto the horse. There is a connection there to the action, we know the limits. It’s this kind of direction that the Uncharted film should take.

For me, the weight and quality of any big budget film isn’t in the big action sequences, it’s when you realise the stakes and the consequences for the action and decisions that the main characters are involved. What is left of their world, if this or that happens.

When things get bleak, or we get into dark part of the film, is it severe enough, is it scary. Think of Temple of Doom, we see a man have his heart taken out, we’ve seen the fate of the slaves in the mines and what people will do keep the temples secrets undiscovered. If they don’t get out, Indy and the others will die badly or spend the rest of their lives as slaves to a cult. They are stakes that you can believe in.

I’ve talked about the series, but without its main man, this series would lose its spirit. A weird blend of John McClane, Indiana Jones and James Bond, with the seeming invincibility of Matrix (Commando). He’s a genuinely likeable guy, funny and for the most part does the right thing. But it’s in those other moments, where Drake really comes to life, the difficult decisions and realisations that he is only human and that there are somethings he just can’t do.

As with any big tentpole film based on something that already exsists, fans will wait for the inevitable announcement of will play the main character, or any character and then proceed to go crazy on messageboards and Twitter.

So just for fun, I’ll quick put forward three possible names for who could bring Nathan Drake to life.

Bradley Cooper, Chris Pratt and Jake Gyllenhaal. While Cooper and Gyllenhaal are both established A-listers and would undoubtedly lend this franchise the weighty star power it would need at first, Pratt is a rising star and with this years Guardians of the Galaxy looking good so far, it wouldn’t be a stretch to someone like him, who has shown a good body of work, to grab the role.

Gyllenhaal is probably the closest physically to Drake, not that something like that should really come into consideration. If an actor gets the role and character, then give him the job. But Gyllenhaal would also bring probably the darkest interpretation of the character, especially considering the roles he has played recently and done the best work with.

Cooper, brings arguably the biggest name, at the moment and probably the most bankable too. His comedy timing, especially the more cutting stuff would fit in with the way that Drake talks and delivers some of his most memorable lines.

Each man would have their advantages and disadvantages, but luckily, there is a plethora of actors out there capable of doing the job.

I won’t throw any writers (I’m free though) or directors names forward for the job, instead I’ll talk about what would be an even more important aspect of this adaptation. The writing. It is something that Naughty Dog takes very seriously, especially as Uncharted is an on-rails experience for the most part.

As I covered earlier, it is the relationships between the core characters that is one of the series’ greatest strengths. You’re given people to care about and root for. This is something that no matter how good the gameplay is, cannot be cheated out of. Call of Duty is a pretty good first person shooter, but can you honestly say there are any characters you a deeply invested in?

Focus on the characters, the spectacle is easy, Naughty Dog have already given you three games worth off stunning set pieces. Worry about giving us real people, characters who are interesting, bring them to life like the games did.

So if you get into a conversation about The Last of Us, even if you are a fan of the idea, ask the person the question I posed earlier on. Because that is a series that deserves and would work as a film.

Where the fuck is Nathan Drake?

He’s still waiting

Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Note: There are no spoilers for The Winter Soldier, but some plot details for The Avengers are given away.

I have openly said that the first Captain America film The First Avenger was, and still is the worst of all the Marvel Studio’s films (It also sits in my bottom three of all time), as it served as little more than an extended introduction to The Avengers. With Phase Two (set between the first and second Avengers films) part of Marvel Studio’s plan, we are seeing a lot more character specific films and ones that don’t entirely exist to set up a future film.

The basic story, as I will try and avoid spoilers here, for The Winter Soldier, is after a number of attacks on SHIELD's assets and officers, leading to an assassination attempt on one character'slife, which Cap has information on but can’t say anything about, Captain America is then forced to go on the run to try and clear his name.

Led by Chris Evans as Captain America, who still carries a hope that everything can be clear and that people will do the right thing, even though he himself works in a suspect organization, built on factions within other factions, each one with their own morals and objectives. His struggle with this, even though somewhat marginalized at times, is similar to Superman’s in Man of Steel, as he wants to trust the world and do good, but just can’t push aside all of his doubts.

Samuel L Jackson as Nick Fury is as entertaining as he has been in all of his performances, although this time there is more to it, he is vulnerable and open to serious challenges regarding his direction of SHIELD.

Scarlett Johansson, reprises her role as Black Widow, the arrogant but very competent assassin. Bar The Avengers, this is the film that has given us the biggest glimpse into her past and the crimes that she has committed in the price, as well as showing just how far she is willing to go. It’s a welcomed change of pace, to see more of this character that at times has been an underdeveloped character.

The action sequences in The Winter Soldier are light years ahead of what we see in The First Avenger, they have tried to minimize the amount of green screen and dependence on CGI, instead choosing to shoot as much as they can in camera. The first thirty minutes has the best sequences in the film, a night raid on a ship and one of the best, if at times over the top, car chases you will see this year. The only shame is that Cap isn’t in the car chase, which is probably the action set piece in the film.

As the film goes on, some of the action sequences begin to go on for too long, far past the time when the ‘this is awesome’ or ‘look how cool this is’ factor has left the scene. There are about ten or twenty extra dead (and incompetent) henchmen than we really needed.

But do not let this put you off the action is entertaining and there are genuine stakes and moments of peril within these sequences. Something that was lacking in the previous film and the majority of Marvel’s films.

One common thread running within the Marvel films (bar Tom Hiddleston) is that the villain often seems neglected or under developed, they are evil for the sake of being evil. Here, with The Winter Soldier (I will avoid giving away his identity), we have a villain, who is actually dangerous and evil with a caveat, but due to his mystery and anonymity, he becomes more interesting to watch.

He comes across as a lesser version of The Joker from The Dark Knight as he just  from nowhere and causes havoc and destruction while clocking up a staggering body count around him. I know the The Winter Soldier has a personal relevance to Cap, more so than Joker to Batman, but in terms of the way the character is utilised, he shares cinematic similarities. 

He isn’t given the dialogue or scene stealing moments that Joker had, but while that does fit the character, it would have been nice for him to be given one or two dialogue driven scenes to give him more depth. Sebastian Stan, does well to create a character and not a caricature with a largely silent performance.

This is the first Marvel film where they have tried to inject any kind of real world subjects or questions into it. There is an obvious and under acknowledged thread about surveillance and then later on a line or two about whistle blowing.

Unfortunately, these ideas are the ones that elevate a film and give it weight, while it may not have been Marvel’s aim to give us these big weighty ideas and questions, I feel that they missed a real opportunity. Anyone comparing this to a Tom Clancy, political thriller had better stop now.

The problem of shared cinematic universe is for me starting to raise some questions for me about the rules Marvel have set, while in the cinema, I turned to my wife and asked, “Where's Iron Man? Hulk? Thor? Or Hawkeye?” It’s hard to believe that not one of these would have shown up considering what was going on.

Yes, they are not all on great terms, but at the end of The Avengers they at least get on (the same can be said for Iron Man 3). Also, the events of the last three solo films do not take place at the same time, the TV show Agents of Shield has proved this. So if you are going to have this kind of interconnected films and shows, you had better start justifying why they aren’t helping each other.

While it didn’t quite reach the hype that it had coming in, this is probably Marvel Studio’s best film to date, as it curbs the humour significantly and focuses on making it’s characters interesting whilst giving them an engaging plot to follow them through.

Directors: Joe and Anthony Russo. Joss Whedon (post credits scene).

Writers: Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely (screenplay). Ed Brubaker (story).

The Grand Budapest Hotel

The Grand Budapest Hotel is Wes Anderson’s eight feature film, following up on from 2012’s Moonrise Kingdom, but also it is my first experience of a Wes Anderson film, bar trailers and clips of his previous works. So I wasn’t sure how his unique filmmaking style would go down, as just from watching a few seconds of the trailer, it’s clear that it is a style almost completely unlike anything else out there.

The plot for Budapest is simultaneously, complicated and simple at the same time. The basic plot follows the concierge of The Grand Budapest Hotel Gustave (Ralph Fiennes) in his job of running the luxury hotel. Tending to his elderly female guests in a very caring and “hands on” approach. One particular elderly woman is scared to leave the hotel this time as she fears it will be the last time they see each other. Gustave brushes it off and manages to get her out of the hotel.

A few days later she is found dead and with his new lobby boy, Zero, Gustave sets out to pay his respects. During the reading of the will Gustave is left a priceless painting, much to the anger of the family. Deciding not to wait, Gustave and Zero steal the painting and start a mad dash to avoid the law and the family.

Mixed in with this, is a love story, the start of a war and the running of the hotel while Gustave is away. Which is more important to Gustave is up for you to decide.

Ralph Fiennes, in his first Anderson role, is magnificent in the role of Gustave. He glides through the hotel with the air of a flamboyant and sympathetic dictator. He barks instructions at his staff while schmoozing with his guests in the lobby. Fiennes brings a flair to the foul language that Anderson’s script uses almost as punctuation marks in the dialogue scenes. The cast is staggering, with big names popping up to fill small roles, the film is held together by Fiennes, in which everything else rotates around.

As I mentioned briefly, Anderson’s style and look of the film is very unique. Visually, Budapest at times looks like a slightly better funded version of a Monty Python film, particularly the mountain scenes and the external shots of the hotel and the local town. I’m sure there are other styles and film makers that have influenced him, but for me, this was what came to me first and has stuck with me.

Anderson, considering that the film operates in three different time periods, has used the aspect ratio of that time (more of less) to differentiate between them. Although, it is the grander settings of the 30’s section that receives the most restricted and box like ratio, whereas the 60’s and 80’s period get a larger and more recognisable ratio, but for nothing more than a lot of conversations in an empty hotel. (sentence too long)

The rest of the cast, bar Tony Revolori (Zero) and Saoirse Ronan (Agatha) have only a few scenes and cut through the journey of Gustave and Zero at random. Harvey Keitel as a New York accented jail breaker is a particular treat.

But it’s Revolori who, bar Fiennes, is the stand out in this film. He manages to keep his cool despite the problems that he is faced with, Gustave's over the top personality and his love of Agatha. Most of his lines are delivered with a dead pan edge of that talks down to whoever he is conversing with, which gives him an equally powerful and weak standing amongst the characters.

The Grand Budapest Hotel will, I’m sure be quite divisive, if you don’t get it within the first ten to fifteen minutes, then it’s extremely likely that it may not be for you. It has a very unique look and with it a unique voice when it deals with some of it’s weightier issues. A run of the mill comedic drama this certainly isn’t.

I certainly enjoyed my visit to The Grand Budapest Hotel. Who wouldn’t?

Director: Wes Anderson

Writer: Wes Anderson (screenplay and story) and Hugo Guinness (story)

The Top Five Films of 2013.

It’s that time of the year again, the Globes, BAFTA’s and Oscars have passed by and at last it’s come to big one. The Stu-ies. It’s the same deal as last year. Any film released in the UK in the last twelve months or if they became eligible for the Oscars were all in the mix to be on this most exclusive of lists.

5. The Place Beyond The Pines

Derek Cianfrance’s generational crime drama, was one of the biggest surprises of the year for me. Initially when I saw the first few images from it, I was less than enthused about seeing seeking it out. For a film that shows the damage a parent, or lack of one can do to a child, it also entertained from start to finish. Yes, the films chapters get stronger as the film progresses, but no chapter drags and each presents a fully formed film, at the mercy of what came before and affecting what follows.

Director: Derek Cianfrance

Writers: Derek Cianfrance, Ben Coccio and Darius Marder.

4. The Hunt

How would you react if someone you had known all your life was accused by your young daughter of exposing himself to her? Would you believe your best friend? Or your young daughter? Within that premise and those questions is the truly horrible scenario we see primary school teacher Lucas forced into. Ostracised and instantly hated, his life is torn apart, not by the truth or his own actions but the fear of those around him.

Mads Mikkelsen, should have quite honestly been nominated for every single Lead Male acting category this year. Few got close to the level of performance he gave us this year. But no doubt due it not being in English, it counted against him, Thomas Vinterberg and the film as a whole. Expect an English language remake in the next two to three years.

Director: Thomas Vinterberg.

Writers: Thomas Vinterberg and Tobias Lindholm.

3. The Wolf of Wall Street

Let’s be honest, the trailer for this film was better than a lot of what came out this year. It shut people up in the cinema, it actually got their attention and you could people saying “I want to see that” after it finished.

For, me the third in a loose trilogy with Goodfella’s and Casino, Wolf is the funniest Scorcese film in a long time and arguably his best film since Casino. It’s sprawling but also closely focused on this one man who climbed so high and became so powerful that he could almost do anything he wanted, have anything he wanted and get away with it…almost.

Did anyone write a better script than Terence Winter this year? No. He made a took an unlikeable man who took advantage of countless people to make himself stupidly rich and didn’t make him that likeable. He made him and his group of followers interesting, funny, depraved, stupid but never likeable. This, right here, is the secret of the films success and it’s greatest strength.

Director: Martin Scorcese.

Writer: Terence Winter.

2. Captain Phillips

I could quite easily have put this joint first place. It was that close. Both films in which life on the water plays an integral part to the story.

I could only vaguely remember the events as they played out a few years ago and as a result wasn’t sure what happened or how the hostage situation ultimately came to an end.  So I was relatively blank when this film started and let it carry me along. Like Paul Greengrass’s other work, after about five minutes you hooked and in Phillips you are only introduced to both Phillips and Muse. By the time the two meet, you are in deep as the tension starts to crank.

A lot of people talk about stakes when it comes to films. Here the stakes are, as far as action films go, relatively low, just one man. Although what that one man signifies is a lot bigger. As you see from America’s response. It’s by this time, roughly half way through, that you’ll know if you’re in. As tensions become almost unbearable in the lifeboat and the SEALs wait for instructions from their commanders before the lifeboat reaches the Somali coast.

How Tom Hanks was overlooked by the Academy is quite frankly, farcical. There wasn’t a better two or three minutes of acting than at the very end of this film.

Director: Paul Greengrass.

Writer: Billy Ray.

1.Mud

Jeff Nichols third feature film, his best so far and the best film of the year. Captain Phillips pushed it close, but for me this never dropped from my top spot from when I say it back in October. A mix between a modern western and Huckleberry Finn, Nichols created a whole world and filled it with messed men, women and children (Two of the best child performances you’ll see anywhere).

Considering that Matthew McConaughey has just one an Oscar for Dallas Buyers Club, I am actually surprised that he didn’t get anything for Mud, as for me he gives a much more interesting and engaging performance here.

I could go on and on about Mud, but the best advice I could give to you is to go and buy it and watch it for yourself and see a film that has been tragically overlooked by the academy and hasn’t received the worldwide recognition it deserves.

I eagerly await Jeff Nichols next film.

Director: Jeff Nichols.

Writer: Jeff Nichols.

Her

Spike Jonze fourth feature film is Her and the last of real awards films to be released this year and his first as both writer and director, having previously worked twice with the brilliant Charlie Kauffman on Being John Malkovich and Adaptation.

Her follows Theodore (Joaquin Phoenix), a letter writer for a large company, who is still suffering from the breakdown of his marriage. He lives alone and only has a few friends, both seemingly as awkward and unhappy as he is. But with the introduction of a new Operating System, Samantha (Scarlett Johansson) arrives in his life. From here on we watch as their relationship grows from of friendship to lovers.

As with last years The Master Phoenix has taken on a role with a man who he has characterised so easily with his posture. Freddie Quell in The Master was a twisted and hunched degenerate. Theodore often walks with his arms crossed, or his jacket pulled closed, protecting himself from everything around him. It’s only when he is with Samantha that his body relaxes. The best examples are the scenes with Amy (Amy Adams), especially the first time, as comes across as carefree and even happy for a few seconds.

For large parts of Her it is just Theodore on his own, talking to another voice. Even the technology that Samantha inhabits is tiny and barely visible. But Phoenix keeps it small, not trying to fill the quiet or static moments; he could have gone big, to try and create a sense of urgency or heightened drama. But both he and Spike Jonze slow things down and let the material play out at a much more natural pace.

The version of the future we see in Her is relatively subdued compared to other futuristic imaginings, specifically of Los Angeles. It does draw comparison to the more optimistic Sci-Fi of the seventies, when everything would turn out clean and white, generally a decent place to live, unlike the post Blade Runner futures.

The technology we see, bar for the advance nature of the OS, isn’t far fetched, everything runs quicker and is smaller, those are the only real “stretches” we see bar the borderline frightening speed at which the OS can develop and evolve.

Scarlett Johansson gives one of her best performances, and it is purely vocal…or audio. She grows Samantha slowly at first, cautiously integrating herself into Theodore’s life, helping to plan and arrange his day at first before she begins to think for herself and begins to “see” Theodore differently. It’s when Samantha and Theodore take that next step when we Johansson really comes into her own, at times confused and unsure of the nature of her feelings for Theodore, or his terror when she is away from him, that make it a believable and very human portrayal of an OS.

On of Her’s greatest strengths is the wit that Jonze instils in it, some of it obviously funny, but others have tinge of sadness to them. One example of each, the later first, is a group of people who are drawn to couples between people and OS’s and offer to be a surrogate sexual partner, remaining completely silent the entirety of the night/date.

The more conventionally witty/funny part of the film is the video game that Theodore plays, it falls somewhere between a Wii and virtual reality, but when that gives abuse back to you if you swear at it. Something to think about next to you scream at screen when you are playing Call of Duty, FIFA, etc.

Her does feel a bit long, but it’s hard to feel where exactly it drags, as no one scene is indulgent or there for the sake of some monologue or unnecessary visual pay off. If it had been five or ten minutes shorter, I think it would have been marginally stronger for it. But like with Dallas Buyers Club, I am picking at straws.

Spike Jonze and his cast and crew have created one the greatest films about love and the craziness/insanity it forces on all of us, all the while giving us a thoroughly possible and believable future.

Director: Spike Jonze

Writer: Spike Jonze

Dallas Buyers Club

Dallas Buyers Club tells the story of Ron Woodroof, an electrician and rodeo rider, who after being hurt in a work based accident, is told that he has HIV. At first angry and constantly denying the facts and possibility that he does have it, he begins to research the drug he is being given, AZT. But as controversy begins to build over the drug, Ron sets up his own clinic, where people can treat themselves with seemingly better medication.

Matthew McConaughey continues his resurgence of the last few years here with another stand out performance. The most noticeable thing part of his performance is the weight that he lost for this role, losing a lot of the muscle that we come to expect of him, reducing himself to gangly and frail looking man.

But beyond the physical transformation, as with Christian Bale in American Hustle, there is a lot to take from the character. We start with the hyper masculine Texan who looks down and jokes about homosexuals, to a man who through his work comes into contact and gets to know countless gay men, one of which becomes in a way his best friend.

It is a performance centred on change, but more than the usual predictable arc, we see Ron physically change for the worse, but becomes more understanding and caring in his personality. From a forgettable rodeo and womanizer to a man who did everything he could to improve the lives of many strangers.

Playing a character like Rayon, a transvestite/transsexual male hooker, it would be very easy to swing for the fences and go really big. But it shows Jared Leto’s restraint and understanding of the character that he plays it small and restrained. We can physically see the pain and confusion that he suffers in the way he moves and his actions. Leto tries to keep the characters pain hidden with his drug use and humour, but with every joke or line the character continues to unravel.

One of the most interesting parts of the film is Ron’s battle with the FDA, who have made a deal with manufacturers of AZT to push it as the sole cure/treatment for HIV. The FDA confiscates or bans the import or use of drugs that are proven to help sufferers in other countries. More of this subplot would have been interesting to me anyway and I would have loved to see it explained further, although it would have threatened to overshadow Ron’s personal story and we may have ended up with something like Traffic

If I have one criticism of Dallas Buyers Club, which in itself if a stretch, it’s that I feel it could have done to have been five minutes shorter, especially in it’s final act. No, I don’t know what scenes or shots should have been cut, but being a bit leaner would have certainly helped the film for me.

It may not getting the praise as a film, but for the two main performances it’s quality is undeniable and real rollercoaster of a story about man who did what he could for himself and complete strangers a like.

Director: Jean-Marc Vallee
Writer: Craig Borten Melisa Wallack