The Man Behind 'A Most Violent Year' - Interview With J.C. Chandor (The Hollywood News)

 

‘80s-set corporate morality tale A MOST VIOLENT YEAR has been earmarked as one to watch more than most. Echoing Sidney Lumet’s urban thrillers of the ’70s, it brings a fresh sensibility to the genre by casting two of American cinema’s true up and comers – Oscar Isaac and Jessica Chastain.

Looking to the past while paving a way to the future, the talent behind the project is writer/director J.C. Chandor. THN got the chance to sit down and talk turkey with the man himself. Expecting him to be a serious-minded sort, we were surprised to find Chandor open and talkative about his work, giving detailed insights into everything from his leading lady’s fingernails and getting tributed by Jonah Hill, to the elements that inspired the highly-intriguing end result…

THN: The setting for the film is very specific and gives the story its title. What came first for you, the setting or the characters?

JC Chandor: The characters were definitely the starting point, and then they sort of needed a home. So I built up these characters… and there was a very sad school shooting. Very catastrophic situation where a young kid just went nuts and shot up a little elementary school near me, and I had kids who were in an elementary school at the time… And I found myself literally Googling the phrase ‘What was the most violent year in New York City history?’ Then all these crime statistics came up, and I found this chart… this movie starts, it takes place in January of ‘81, so 1981 is basically when, you know, the statistics started to peak, it was the crash, the wave… And my characters suddenly had a very specific home and I had a good title. (Laughs)

So, an unusual starting point perhaps, but one that was inspirational to you..?

Yeah. I find that a lot of interesting things come from that, and from numbers. Just following where it takes me. I remember Stanley Tucci gave a speech in my first film (MARGIN CALL) where it’s all about numbers, and it’s a great character moment for him, because you’re seeing his intelligence, but you’re also seeing what he cares about, and his regrets and everything else. But it came  from this fun search… it turns out there’s a website where people chart every bridge in the United States… and I actually found a real bridge in a real place, and then I just started running math on that particular city and everything else, and his entire speech in the movie basically wrote itself. (Laughs)

 

Moving onto Jessica Chastain… This is certainly a type of role I haven’t seen her in before. How did you develop that character and performance between you?

She’s wonderful, she was very involved… Jessica signed on very early in the process. She read a very early draft of the piece and was integral… I had a bunch of ideas I hadn’t put in yet, and I would slowly pitch those to her and it was a real collaboration on that role.

In this particular instance we just knew the character’s wardrobe was so important, as a formal presentation to the world, of who she was or who she wanted to be. So my costume designer and I, with Jessica and with help from the Armani Collection who Jessica had worked with before… they basically opened up their archives to Jessica and my costume designer, and they got to go in there and find this woman… and it was a blast from there, the long fingernails… her Mom had fingernails that were of similar length. That was of course a sign in that period, which was that you didn’t have to do manual labour in your house anymore. Almost a form of a corset basically, because you didn’t have to, obviously… and so that was what was going on in that period and this character was certainly trying to present that image to the world. The irony was she was integral to the success of that company, only by using her head instead of her hands.

Speaking of her hands, there’s that now-famous scene where she’s talking with David Oyelowo and she flicks the cigarette… I understand that became quite a talking point?

(Laughs) It has. In fact an actor that I know, nice guy… at one point, I’d met him once but I didn’t know him very well at that point… He was walking by my wife and I in a pub, and he kept doing this thing, smiling at me then doing this thing Jessica does, and then mouthing something. It was actually Jonah Hill! And I said to my wife ‘Why does Jonah Hill keep mouthing at me and making this gesture?’ We’re like old forty year olds with young kids, we aren’t exactly up on the latest trends. (Laughs) And she’s like ‘I have no idea, have you ever pissed him off?’ And then he finally comes over ‘cos he realizes we are not getting what he’s doing, and he’s like ‘That was so disrespectful’, or whatever she says in the film…

And then you twigged?

He said ‘You didn’t you know this was from your movie?’ We both looked at each other and laughed tremendously. That is all Jessica, and that’s what’s so fun, when you let someone… both she and Oscar are Juilliard-trained actors, they went to school together, and the amazing thing about classically-trained actors like that is that they get so comfortable with that role and with that material… The words become the Bible for them, and then they are so free to add all these other things to those words. That line is of course exactly the way it was in the script, but then it’s so fun to see an actor or actress then take it and make it everything and more than you ever thought it could be. It’s pretty cool when you see that.

 

Regarding Oscar Isaac… an interesting thing for me is the dual nature of his character. He tries to avoid violence but appears confrontational in his business dealings and can be an aggressive operator. Do you agree or did you take a more sympathetic view?

No. I mean, I think he is a believer in the rule of law and the backstory that Oscar and I kind of dreamed up with him is… physical violence as a matter of pragmatic thinking… You know, logic in a common sense. So I don’t think he’s opposed to the use of force in all cases, and in policing and anything else. He’s not some kind of pacifist, but as a pragmatic, logic-based individual he realizes that in his particular instance, and I would think in most instances of business, which is what he’s most interested in, it’s a last resort if at all, and it’s a matter of your emotions getting the better of you… if you were to resort to that… good things are not going to come from it. And I think he believes that in a lot of different ways.

But as a citizen of planet Earth he is a very ambitious believer in animalistic instincts, and is a believer in capitalism and that it is a very successful way of organizing individuals and trying to motivate them and move the ball forward… so as a pragmatist he’s pretty ruthless. And obviously there’s a moment in the movie where, for me at least, his character completely shifts, which is the moment he speaks to the wife (of his delivery driver protégé, who gets hijacked during the film and flees the scene)… he basically says ‘I’m not going to let the mistakes of others stand in my fucking way.’ So that is brutal in its cold honesty. He will step through you… and if you are standing directly in his way through your incompetence, panic, weakness…

Of course what he says right before that, is: ‘Why did he run?’ I think he understands why he had a gun… Oscar and I discussed this actually, would he have fired the guy if he had just found out the guy had armed himself? And we never came to a conclusion, maybe Oscar did. But what he says in the script, which of course is what you have to believe of the character, is he goes ‘Why did he run? Why did he run?’ And it’s that moment of panic, which is essentially, I think, in Abel’s mind, is really just weakness… At that time in New York City there were famous cases, legal cases, of people who were arming themselves and shooting people dead in “self defence”, so the kid probably wouldn’t have been in that much trouble, he probably would have been back home two weeks later, frankly… I think that sort of weakness is a brutal… That’s capitalism and survival of the fittest. Is he unlucky for having been born at the time he was, for coming to America when he did, for choosing that neighbourhood to live in? Abel did not face that when he came to New York in the 1960s, he was like a young immigrant kid, he had a very peaceful time to grow up with. So that’s where the luck of it comes in… Anyway, probably a little too many layers there for most people to pick up on, but there you have it.

 

Talking of capitalism and what-have-you, this is an ‘80s-set film where that ethos came to the fore in society. Were there any other movies of the period that influenced you?

I think from memory, absolutely. My movies, at least the three that I’ve had the opportunity to make so far, have all started out as lighting exercises basically. And so as a writer I certainly don’t go back and watch other films of a period or of a genre, or come at something purely the way a director would… Because a lot of directors I greatly respect will go in and watch the fifteen greatest and the five worst movies ever made in a particular genre when they’re about to dive into it.

Very specific numbers!

Yeah exactly, as sort of an exploration. But as a writer I certainly don’t do that. And then I think, not as any organized thing… once it’s written it’s sort of crystallized in my head in a way, so then I don’t want to go back and do that.

I think the memories of films, going all the way back to the 1940s, classic Hollywood gangster films kind of stuff… You know, that opening scene of Jessica, she’s like the classic femme fatale… where she’s in a negligee in front of a mirror with a cigarette putting on make up. (Laughs) It’s literally out of a film noir or something. But by the end of the film it is in fact her signature that is the final signature that you realize is needed to seal this deal, and at that moment the archetype from that type of film is slayed, because certainly the woman wouldn’t be the last, most powerful penstroke.

So I’m playing off of those movies, and in a way the films of the ‘70s were kind of playing off the ‘40s and ‘50s, they were reinventing those films. So I’m certainly playing off audiences’ memories of those experiences. And obviously the fact that Oscar has, and has had since the day he graduated from Juilliard, which has followed him his entire career… he has this certain Pacino element.

The character runs a heating oil business… there’s a neat story about that actually. The restaurant we shot that scene in where he walks up to the table and the other families are sitting around the table… We chose this restaurant which was a classic Brooklyn red sauce joint, and the bartender was an old, great guy, and he looks at the lighting, and he looks at what we had done to the room… And I was sitting down at the bar writing something in a notebook as we were shooting. He says to me… you know, where we were shooting, the section of Brooklyn that has a bunch of canals in it, where heating oils and different gasolines were stored, exactly like what was going on in the movie… he said after the GODFATHER films came out all the guys from that industry used to start having all their normal, boring business meetings in these formal settings – they were almost recreating the movie! Is art imitating life, or is life imitating art? (Laughs)

My Dad was a stockbroker and he said after WALL STREET came out suddenly everyone started dressing like those guys. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Oscar and I, maybe in retrospect, might have overplayed that a little bit, but it was certainly fun that you got to play with your expectations, because obviously the two characters… his character and the Godfather… couldn’t be more different. That guy was inheriting an empire, and this is a guy trying to make one. In terms of the American experience those are two very different sides to the spectrum.

This interview appeared on The Hollywood News.

A Most Violent Year DVD Review (The Hollywood News)

Imagine if Sidney Lumet had directed THE LONG GOOD FRIDAY. That instead of a blood-soaked gangster thriller about a man trying to better himself with guns and fists you had something more thoughtful, yet just as sinister. Writer/director J.C. Chandor’s third film takes the backdrop of New York at the outset of 1981 – the notorious year of the title – and uses it as context for the engrossing story of an entrepreneur trying to operate the cleanest way possible in the murkiest of environments.

Oscar Isaac plays Abel, who runs a heating oil company and finds himself in a dilemma when delivery driver Julian (Elyes Gabel) is hijacked by armed thugs and the fuel stolen. His wife, mobster’s daughter Anna (Chastain), wants him to man up and take the battle to his enemies, but he’s looking for the “most right” way to handle the situation. “Most right” instead of “right” – that definition is key to the way Isaac thinks and to how he goes about eventually resolving his woes as it becomes increasingly clear he’s being targeted by unknown competitors.

Though the performances are all good (showcasing a trio of actors who are going to be important over the next few years), it is Isaac who forms the core of the movie. His dilemma is a fascinating one – despite his attempts to follow a code and not resort to violence he is steeped in it, and to a certain extent has entered willingly into a warzone in the first place. Right hand man Albert Brooks describes an investigation by the DA (Oyelowo) as a “badge of honour” in a business where getting grime under your fingernails is part and parcel of the game. Abel is a purveyor of threats and intimidation when it comes to his own interests, and with Isaac’s contained intensity it’s only a matter of time before things get physical. His dual nature is what makes A MOST VIOLENT YEAR so interesting.

Chandor and cinematographer Bradford Young recreate the dingy glamour of THE GODFATHER, enhancing the restrained feel of a story that could easily spill over into the extreme but doesn’t. The run-down locations, covered in graffiti, look like they’ve been there for decades (though apparently the vandalism was added in post-production!). Chastain boasts an array of Armani-based looks, and at points resembles Michelle Pfeiffer in Brian De Palma’s SCARFACE, appropriate given the echoes of Moroder-style synthesizer amongst Alex Ebert’s sparse soundtrack, which is both elegant and suggestive of an approaching menace.

There’s a single action sequence involving a chase through a tunnel that works wonders, playing out as an atmospheric riff on THE FRENCH CONNECTION. And while there’s an inevitable human cost paid at the end of the tale, it’s combined with an icy air of self interest, as everyone is revealed to be somewhat fluid in the morality department. All’s fair in business – an apt conclusion to events set in the era of “Greed is good”.

What stops A MOST VIOLENT YEAR from being a classic is the fact you simply don’t engage with the characters. Poor Julian gets the rough end of the deal, but he’s very much a side character. No-one in the main cast has a redeeming feature, and while Isaac’s situation is watchable, you view it as a detached observer rather than someone who cares about what happens. Maybe this was Chandor’s idea, setting the piece as he does at a time when surface became the be and end all of society. However if that’s the intention I still felt rather removed from proceedings.

The features are exhaustive. You get short featurettes giving a thorough insight into the process, some longer sections delving a bit deeper and as a pleasant diversion for fans there’s a friendly chat between Isaac and Chastain, who it turns out went to school together. Crucially there isn’t an abundance of repetition (outside of the promotional clips) and the cast and crew are articulate.

Chandor’s achievement here is taking a genre that in the hands of a lesser director would be a stylistic exercize, and making it breathe again with a bit of intelligence, bringing something new to the table via complex characters and a mature sensibility. You won’t be rooting for these people, but their scenario will stay with you long after the credits have rolled.

This review appeared on The Hollywood News.

Midnight Run Blu-Ray Review (The Hollywood News)

In 1988 Universal released MIDNIGHT RUN, a high-profile action comedy. It contained several elements that were unusual for a film of its type. For starters, Robert De Niro was the lead. The idea of this brooding method actor playing it light was virtually unthinkable at the time, with ANALYZE THIS a decade away. He appeared alongside Charles Grodin, hardly a stellar name. The men improvised some of their dialogue. Danny Elfman delivered a score about as far removed from his usual style as it was possible to get. It found success at the box office, though perhaps it’s inevitable the result ended up as more of a cult offering, never quite getting the critical attention it deserved. As it rolls into town on Blu-ray, there’s never been a better time to reappraise the production as one of the most underrated buddy movies of all time.

De Niro plays Jack Walsh, a cop-turned-bounty hunter, who is given a easy assignment, the “midnight run” of the title – escorting former mob accountant Jonathan “The Duke” Mardukas across country after he skipped a sizeable bail. Mardukas ran off with millions belonging to the fearsome Jimmy Serrano (Dennis Farina), giving the money to charity and becoming a national hero of sorts in the process. A smooth operation goes pear-shaped when Mardukas tells De Niro he can’t fly, and from there on in everything that can go wrong does go wrong, leading to an epic road trip packed with pitfalls such as raging rivers, a rival bondsman and bullet-spewing helicopters.  Everyone it seems wants The Duke captured or whacked before Walsh can turn him in and collect his own reward.

The main thing to say about the movie is that despite the high octane antics it has an easy-going likeability other films would kill for. This is down to the offbeat chemistry between De Niro and Grodin, a masterstroke of casting from director Martin Brest and his team. Walsh’s tough guy exterior gets the slow burn treatment from a laconic but mischevious Mardukas, and gradually he’s worn down until the pair become friends. The other factor is George Gallo’s excellent script, which bursts at the seams with memorable lines – “Is this Moron No.1? Put Moron No.2 on the phone?” is a particular favourite. Every character talks like a screwball comedian, but under Brest there’s a grit and an intimacy that makes it all seem natural.

Because you have De Niro and Farina in the frame, it also means the serious scenes carry a mighty punch. The scene where Walsh is briefly reunited with his wife and daughter (who he lost contact with following a bribery scandal at his former job) is beautifully-played and Serrano and The Duke’s fleeting scene together is a sliver of ice among the pratfalls. The biggest surprise is perhaps Yaphet Kotto as Alonzo Mosely, an FBI agent who falls foul of Walsh early on, enduring humiliation after humiliation. This is a great film about hard men losing their dignity, from Serrano’s exasperation over his lackeys’ incompetence to the stripping of Walsh’s rough-house shell by Mardukas.

Elfman’s rock-blues soundtrack is an absolute triumph and a shock if all you’ve ever heard from him are thundering strings for Tim Burton movies. There’s a bit of distortion on the opening music for this hi-def transfer, but this is a minor quibble, as is the fact you could argue the running time is slightly too long. We’re talking an embarrassment of riches rather than something that outstays its welcome. On Blu-ray the dusty vistas of life on the road (which took in a location shoot in New Zealand for some reason!) and the neon of Las Vegas look crisper than a lettuce on top of an igloo. 

Bonus features-wise, there are a few new interviews. De Niro and Brest aren’t present, but are around for the ‘Making Of’ vintage featurette. The key contributor is Grodin, who isn’t a million miles from The Duke himself, and whose unabashed approach to the work made him as fearless as the Italian American legend he wound up playing against. Who else would dare ask De Niro if he wanted to have sex with a chicken off the cuff on camera? As Joe Pantoliano (Eddie Moscone) remarks, he was the comedy glue that held the heavyweight show together.

Maybe the biggest compliment you can pay is that when it’s time for the journey to end, you feel genuinely sad these guys have to part. The door was open for a sequel, and TV follow-ups were made without De Niro and Grodin being involved. But it’s probably best this remained a one-off. Think Eighties movies about mismatched buddies are old hat? Stick this in your player and prepare to be amazed.


This review appeared on The Hollywood News.

TURN: Washington's Spies Season One DVD Review (The Hollywood News)

These days anyone can have an opinion on the use of military intelligence and the way governments use that information in conflict. Social media is awash with conspiracy theories, so it’s refreshing to see a show that takes everyone back to the American War of Indpendence, when the US was also a political chess board, but when things were supposedly simpler. The emergence of spycraft as a key element of battle in the late eighteenth century forms the backbone of TURN, a dense, frustrating yet ultimately thrilling narrative based on the book Washington’s Spies: The Story of America’s First Spy Ring by Alexander Rose.

As you’d expect the thrust of the series has multiple strands. At the heart you have Jamie Bell’s Abe Woodhull, a young farmer with an illustrious past. Living in the crisp coastal community of Setauket, his father is local magistrate Richard Woodhull (Kevin R. McNally) and it transpires the quick-witted Bell has a background in law. Though he’s settled with a young wife (Meegan Warner) and baby, he maintains a complex relationship with ex-flame Anna Strong (Heather Lind). That love apparently ended when their clashing convictions drove them apart. However when Bell is approached by fellow Setaukian and solider for George Washington Benjamin Tallmadge (Seth Numrich) to operate as a spy against the British Army who control their home turf, old feelings are reawakened as Abe discovers a new and dangerous lease of life. With me so far? I hope so.

After a pilot episode that has to do a bit too much in one go, Bell becomes a fully-fledged proto-spook, entering into his task with unusual gusto. The plot is as dense as any John le Carré novel, and while this is necessary to do justice to the history, it also works against TURN initially. Producers AMC have made something that requires plenty of foreknowledge about the war from the viewer. You could view this as treating its audience with respect – however, I feel it’s more to do with the Amercian company targeting its core audience, much of which would be au fait with the scenario from school. Episode recaps at least would have helped to follow the basics of story and context. As it stands, you’re on your own when it comes to the bigger picture. For example, one of the most famous events of the conflict, the crossing of the Delaware, is bafflingly handled, as Tallmadge blacks out and hears about it vaguely in retrospect. Its strategic significance sadly got lost here. I watched the season with a relative who taught American history at a high level and even she was confused! Some meaty documentary material could have provided the perfect complement to the action, but instead we have a couple of somewhat scant featurettes. At least The History of Turn gives an insight into Rose’s truly exhaustive labours in compiling the source material.

I’m pleased to say the show hits its stride around the halfway mark as everything dovetails around Setauket and showrunner Craig Silverstein draws the elements in for a tense showdown between red coats and blue. The spies and their associates all grew up together, which naturally forms a strong centre to the human drama. Perhaps the greatest strength of TURN is its use of little details, culled from Rose’s tome. Hard-boiled eggs carry secret messages and squirrel brains are stuffed into gunshot wounds. These aspects really sustain the interest when the mind becomes too boggled.
 
Out of the performances, Bell and Lind make quite an aggravating couple, fierce in their beliefs but also stubborn and self-righteous. McNally is a solid presence as he navigates the role of father, facilitator of the British and placater of the local community – his dilemma in Eternity How Long as he is charged with selecting local gravestones for use as shielding against enemy fire is typical of the unusual and rewarding narratives the show offers up. I liked Samuel Roukin as Simcoe, though I’m not sure like is the right word for this truly hissable redcoat villain. With his hawk-like features and ethereal voice he makes an impression early on and his rivalry with Bell is one of the standout features of the run. It’s always a pleasure to see Boardwalk Empire‘s Stephen Root, this time as Washington’s master tactician and I’m happy to see his role has been bumped up considerably for the second season.

On the flipside, Burn Gorman hams it up slightly as Major Hewlett, the uptight and reviled military commander who blows in the wind like a white flag. And Angus Macfadyen has fun with Robert Rogers, the rambunctious but steely boss of the Queen’s Trackers (a group of mercenaries who lurk in the woods hunting down patriots), even though he’s like something out of Rab C Nesbitt. The fringe characters who are caught between the two sides, of which Rogers is one, illustrate how fragmented the war was, with supposedly loyal fighters turning on their uniformed “superiors” to protect their own self interest.

With its odd, growly theme music and Lemony Snicket-esque title sequence, TURN is a difficult show to love. But if you stick with it, and allow yourself to get caught up in a fascinating and turbulent part of the chronicle of the Land of the Free, you’ll find your patience rewarded. At the satisfying climax of ten frequently head-scratching episodes, I felt ready to go back to the field for more.

This review appeared on The Hollywood News.

Veep - Interview With Matt Walsh (The Hollywood News)

Veep: The Complete Third Season has landed in the UK, somewhat appropriately in the midst of our General Election. Adapted from Armando Iannucci’s Westminster comedy The Thick Of It, the HBO series stars Julia Louis-Dreyfus as Vice President Selina Meyer and follows her transition from calamity-stricken has-been to premier power player.

Who better to chew the fat with over the political carcasses than Matt Walsh, who plays Selina’s long term ally and downtrodden Director of Communications Mike McLintock. Matt kindly gave us his time this week to field some questions about the show, his character and the state of our nations…

If Mike was to meet current PM David Cameron, how would he introduce himself?

I think Mike would try and fist bump the Prime Minister.

What does Season 3 hold in store for him?

I think it’s the beginning of Mike’s aspiration to be happy. I think Wendy (his wife, played by Kathy Najimy) captures his heart, and he more than anyone has a happy personal life, more than anyone on our show. So Mike has discovered happiness, and it challenges what he’s believed in for the past fifteen years, being around Selina. It’s an upbeat season for Mike, but challenging because his job doesn’t give him the happiness his personal life does, so it raises questions about where he’s headed.

Tell us a bit about how you make the show, as like The Thick Of It there seems to be a lot of improvisation.

We do most of the improvising in rehearsal. They write sixty or seventy page scripts for a thirty minute show, so there’s really no time on the day for exploration and discovery. We do a ton in the rehearsals and they take notes. Sometimes whole scenes are thrown away because they don’t work on their feet, or brand new scenes are discovered, then the next draft of the script reflects a lot of those discoveries.

So by the time you get in front of the camera it’s a well-oiled machine?

It’s pretty locked down. I mean, they’re not precious about the work. There’s also room for moments if there’s a funny bit you want to do or a prop you want to use. There’s always room for that stuff but in general you’re trying to capture what’s on the page.

Who would you rather see in the White House, Selina Meyer or Julia Louis-Dreyfus?

I’d never want Selina Meyer to get near the White House. I would be very happy if Julia got it. She would probably age instantly, because it’s such a stressful job! I’m sure she’d never want to do it, but she’s as good as anyone. She’s definitely smart and has charisma and I happen to agree with her politics, so yeah I would love her.

That answer was very nicely-handled.

It was very Mike of me.

As a spin doctor, what advice do you think Mike would have for the leaders trying to win our General Election?

I think Mike sees the value in interaction with the common people. Anything from kissing a baby to downing a pint of beer has real value at the polls.

Or both at the same time.

Drinking a baby and kissing a beer, maybe that would be a winner. (Laughs) So he believes in that old school “pressing the flesh”. And don’t go into a discussion where you can’t win… when in doubt, deny. There’s nothing wrong with sticking to silence.

Satire has fallen out of favour here in the UK. There’s a view our politicians are a bit boring and all the same, whereas in the States you have a healthy culture of satire via things like Veep and The Daily Show. Why do you think that is?

I have to say I admire British politics because it should be boring! It shouldn’t be celebrity-driven, it shouldn’t be sexy or on television all the time. The people I trust, the public administrators and the Presidents, were a little dull and normal. That’s what I want in a politician. I don’t need a movie star running my country, so it’s unfortunate that people are losing interest in satire but I sort of admire that about your politics.

So you think we’ve got the right idea keeping satire in the background?

Well I think you’ve been poisoned by the American media circus! If there’s not enough distraction and insanity in the race, it’s become boring… is that what you’re saying?

To be honest I think I’m causing an international incident, inadvertently. (Laughs) Going by the recent TV debates here we do seem to be headed in more of an American-type direction. You’d say that’s a bad way to go?

It’s wishing for a more innocent time, which of course isn’t going to happen. But I’m a big fan of accidental Presidents like Harry Truman. He was a back-room politician, not a charmer, but he did a very good job. The skill of getting elected has become more important than being a good politician.


This interview appeared on The Hollywood News.

Rollerball Blu-Ray Review (The Hollywood News)

Sport is often described as the opium of the masses. If one movie took that idea to its logical extent it was ROLLERBALL, bringing audiences an unusual blend of rough-housing and corporate satire in the turbulent mid-Seventies. European viewers lapped up the social commentary while Americans craved the thrills of the invented sport itself. Now this sinister tale of the future arrives on Blu-ray – where every studded fist and bloodied face is presented with crystal clarity – and people can judge the result all over again.

James Caan stars as Jonathan E, the world’s most famous player of the game. Rollerball, part-hockey, part-football, part-motorcyle rally, has brought him a life of comfort and the occasional cracked rib. But when corporate sponsor John Houseman urges him to retire and the spectacle becomes increasingly brutal, Jonathan is forced to question his existence outside the arena, and at that point his life changes forever.

It’s one of those films, like THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE of the same period, that’s remembered as obscenely violent, whereas actually not much is shown. The blood is heavy in the atmosphere. That impending sense of dread as Jonathan asks awkward questions of his detached paymasters. When the nasty stuff does happen it’s isolated and shocking, such as the moment Caan turns on his courtesan. Everything leads up to the infamous team clash in Tokyo before a baying crowd, after which events spiral out of control.

ROLLERBALL is a pretty decent sports movie. As revealed in accompanying documentary Return To The Arena, director and dramatic heavyweight Norman Jewison spent a lot of time working out the basics and it shows. It’s a game that truly lives and breathes. The excitement and danger exude even forty years on. Jewison and writer William Harrison sought to draw comparisons with Circus Maximus in Ancient Rome and to this end a timeless classical musical backdrop was employed. Taking a cue from Stanley Kubrick’s 2001, the archaic quality generates a chill. There’s an interesting remark by Jewison about his use of Bach’s Toccata and Fugue in D Minor for the opening. It was a piece little-known outside cultural circles. Post-ROLLERBALL, the media have put it everywhere.

Caan’s central performance conveys the balance between everyman and tragic figure that Jonathan embodies, and Jewison contrasts the athlete with the fusty presences of Houseman and Sir Ralph Richardson (playing the “World’s Librarian”, who has his own moment of madness kicking a supercomputer). Frequently mumbling, Caan is the gifted child at the centre of this clean, creepy hierarchy of hookers and head honchos, where the populace is expected to accept every decision from the parent administration without comment.

The issues the film examines are relevant today, perhaps more than ever, from the use of entertainment as social control through to the dissolving of books onto a hard drive – here powered by water, but not a million miles from the nebulousness of a cloud. The message is laid on a bit thick at times, and maybe some things would have been better not spelled out in big letters. Overall however the production has things to say in spades.

Special features-wise, you don’t get much that wasn’t on the DVD release, though important new sections include Blood Sports With James Caan, a fresh interview with the actor. The commentaries are imported from previous releases – one from Jewison (talkative) and one from Harrison (less so).

Arguably the standout moment in ROLLERBALL occurs after Jonathan’s friend is critically injured during the game. Instead of tending to his pal, the star player ties his skates on and gets right back out on the track. The energy from the subjugated crowd is everything. In this case it’s the difference between the saving of humanity or its profit-fuelled doom.


This review appeared on The Hollywood News.

Batman V Superman V Doctor Who: 10 Heroic Connections (WhatCulture)

It goes without saying that Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice represents one of the hottest dates on the calendar in the next couple of years. It puts the event in event movie, and finally faces two of comic books’ most legendary figures against each other.

This hero from another world and moody tackler of bad guys already make a great team, but what do they have in common with a man who combines their heroism, their alien-ness and their ability to kick ass? Or in other words, what do they share with the Doctor?

It’s hard to tell how they’d all get on in the same room, but when you take into account the vast array of talent that’s gone into sustaining these mighty franchises over the decades, you’ll find interesting and sometimes surprising connections between the universe of the Time Lords and the cityscapes of Gotham and Metropolis…

Read more...