lloydhammett715

"If you lose the last game of the season, nobody gives a sh*t." – Billy Beane

The tried and tested method to creating a winning team in baseball was simple; whoever spent the most would eventually come out on top. This was the pitfall of modern baseball and the inevitable cycle that Billy Beane (Brad Pitt), the General Manager of the Oakland A's found himself in. It was the attempt of Billy Beane to change all of this by creating a team on a computer- generated analysis of stats rather than the players themselves.

In essence this is a sports movie, it follows a team through its highs and lows and watches the underdog try to beat the system. These are components of a good sports movie and it is generally conceived that it is the actual sport that creates the feelings of tension. The interesting thing about Moneyball is that it does not follow the players within the sport as much as a regular movie in its genre. The bulk of it follows the back room grind of Billy Beane and Peter Brand (Jonah Hill), the young economist student that brings the new way of player picking to Beane's attention. With a general lack of sport, or sport being the secondary aspect, it may seem that there will be a lack of thrills for its genre. However, this is ultimately not the case, as the boardroom meetings and telephone calls for trades create true excitement.

It is a film that looks to break one simple fact, that money is not the only thing that can bring success. It is unchartered territory for Billy Beane who throws all caution to the wind at the start receiving hostility from those around him. A film that centres on numbers and graphs perhaps should not hold such electricity around every decision, but it does. You do not have to follow baseball to understand the goings on, as most is explained clearly and is created through the interaction between Pitt and Hill.

There is a lot on the shoulders of Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill to carry this film that, as acknowledged, does not have a huge amount of sport within it. Pitt plays a more brash up front and in charge character that could easily overwhelm the quieter, geekier Hill as Brand. However, as the film develops you begin to see the real relationship between the two, as partners in this audacious attempt to change baseball. The dialogue is written to perfection to keep the action shooting along, even off the diamond of the baseball pitch. Pitt has stuck with the role through several directors (Steven Soderbergh and David Frankel) and is really allowed to shine under the eventual direction of Bennett Miller.

The film is gripping to the end as the authenticity of the story holds true over the year that Billy Beane worked on his lean budget in an attempt to show up the world of baseball.

4 Stars.

While veteran astronaut Matt Kowalski (George Clooney) and medical engineer Dr. Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock) are on a routine space walk their shuttle is destroyed leaving them alone to survive the emptiness of space.

The comparisons will be made, and rightly so, to Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey, due to the meticulous attempts of realism within the absoluteness of space. In Gravity there is a film so technically brilliant that Kubrick could only begin to comprehend the leaps that Alfonso Cuarón has taken since 1968. Cuarón has developed from what Kubrick began showing space in its realism, not only in its vastness but its emptiness and its ferocity.

The film opens with a spectacular shot highlighting the nothingness of space and the insignificance we hold within it as the blackness envelopes our earth. The chaos of space is also to be marvelled at early in the film as the camera movement sends us on an unreadable journey as the space shuttle collapses and our characters are flung tumbling out of control into the blackness. There is nothing for us to hold onto and the disorientation of space only grows throughout the film. The commitment of Cuarón and his team in depicting space is shown in the exquisite sequences, whether at a merciless speed or a near stand still. It is a technical masterpiece that immerses you within its world often filming from a first person point of view to show the perplexity of outer space. It is a testament to modern technology that such an experience can be created, and the way that it is harnessed is sure to be inspirational to future filmmakers.

Alfonso Cuarón's use of 3D shows how exceptional the technology can be when employed in the right circumstances. It is the depth of the picture that really contributes to the understanding of the limitlessness of space in what is a visually mesmerising work. The 3D of Gravity is essential to the film, as you need to be engulfed by the surroundings; the flat screen is not enough to create the illusion of never ending space. There is also no obstruction of the 3D to the cinematography of the film with the tantalising beauty of Earth constantly radiating in the background as a constant reminder of home. This is not a film to be experienced anywhere other than at the cinema, as the beauty and magnitude can only be transcribed across the big screen.

The narrative is linear without the need to go off course, as there is enough within the immediate fear of the impossibility of surviving in space to create continuous tension. The need within Hollywood to create action and overly complicated plots is often detrimental to any character development, ending in largely soulless films. By stripping the plot down to its believable minimum in this way Cuarón creates a much more intimate character led sci-fi. There is cohesion between the technical brilliance ever present in a sci-fi film, alongside the basics of character understanding in a drama that has become all but extinct in recent years.

George Clooney practically plays himself in this film as the charming veteran whose smooth and calming voice is there to bring Sandra Bullock's up tight and nervy amateur to her survival senses. Sandra Bullock is outstanding throughout the film as Dr. Stone, and is toned down to the bare bones of the helplessness of this character. The tenderness that she plays the role is what makes the performance and constantly pangs at you for her survival, especially as her character grows. Sandra Bullock manages to embody the isolation and loneliness of space that is pivotal to the way Cuarón wants to display it. With a film so heavily based on CGI (although you could not tell) the physical and emotional performance of both Clooney and Bullock is something to marvel at.

In Gravity Alfonso Cuarón has shown true genius, unfolding a film that spectacularly breaks technical boundaries, as well as holding together the purity of its ideals.

"This is the f*ckin' American dream. This is my f*ckin' dream, y'all!" – Alien

There is a grand tradition of spring break in America and the way that young students can finally break away from their regular routine. It is a privilege that most cannot live without, and the four girls in Spring Breakers will do anything to go. The exploration of sex, drugs and notoriety follow the girls into Florida, as the lack of boundaries spins out of control.

What really stands out is the technical brilliance of the film with the exotic lighting to show the seduction of spring break. The aura that director Harmony Korine creates is something special as the dream like sequences intoxicate you in a very real way. It is clear to see that Korine's vision for the film is in developing this haze across what could happen in this outside world of spring break when willing to push everything to the limit. The booming soundtrack that rackets along with the film is also a large part of creating the dizziness you feel.

It is a shame that a film that holds such technical quality is also let down by this some trait. The fixation on creating the notorious aura leads to a lack of any form of narrative with the dream like sequences dominating and losing control. This narrative jumps rather than floats as the escalation and radicalisation lack any real control. The constant slow-mos employed to show the orgasmic trance of spring break create an atmosphere but become too familiar by the end and eventually nauseating rather than enjoyable.

Much has been put on the 'Disney' girls to break away from what they are known for in a blitz of suspicious actions and sexual fronts. It is Rachel Korine's character Cotty that really engages with the most believable of performances not completely losing her religious background. The other girls annoy rather than trance as their radicalisation in Florida seems loose to say the least. James Franco's gangster Alien is spectacular matching what Korine has created in atmosphere perfectly.

The film will drag you in and leave you dizzy through the electrical lightning and brilliant thumping soundtrack. It leaves you in a daze, as Harmony Korine aims, with a bad taste in your mouth through the dark and noir like themes. Ultimately, however it is the lack of depth and hollowness of the film that really lingers.

"The opera of my life" – Paul Potts

The first year of 'Britain's Got Talent' brought a watershed of hopefuls who believed they had what it took to become a superstar. This real life story of Paul Potts (James Corden) shows how he went from being just an average shop assistant to a country phenomenon in winning the show as an opera singer.

It is a film racked around the symbol of hope and how if you continue to believe you will finally reach your goal. Sadly, it never manages to portray this with any sincerity, mainly because it tries to swing the audience with nothing but pity. The lack of sincerity comes from scenes that feel so aware that a line or a close up can get an 'aw' from the audience without any real substance put into them. There is no development of the characters or rapport between them because the only two emotions they display are sympathy and hope. The director David Frankel seems to have decided that these are in fact the only two emotions available and is relentless with it to the point it is comical. It is ironically the lack of realism depicted in any of the people or changing points in Paul Potts' life that leave this supposedly real life tale wanting. The film is supposed to be light-hearted but the attempt to display it in such vulnerability lacks for any comedic value. The narrative and dialogue is bumpy and uneven causing for overwhelming awkwardness rather than the heart string puller it was aiming for.

It almost seems over the last few years that James Corden has suffered from Gavin and Stacey being too good. His attempts to break away from his character 'Smithy' have probably not quite gone to plan with regrettable films like Vampire Killers (2009) and Gulliver's Travels (2010). For a biopic to work there has to be a feeling of sincerity and realness within the character, but Corden never manages to portray this. Everything is overplayed, his bumbling, his awkwardness and even his dream of opera, to a point where the film and performance feel dishonest. Paul Potts himself may well have been all these, but it was too forced and overworked to display anything that amounted to lifelike. There seems to be genuine anguish for Corden in trying to master the Welsh accent, and he probably amounts to around fifty-percent of his lines in it.

The best moment by far in the film (and it is hard to find one) comes in the twenty-seconds Potts sings in a pub for the first time. It is the only moment where the nature of what he is doing radiates through, due to the simplicity and naturalness of the shot. For a film reliant on opera singing to show its message the other instances where Potts sings feel unbelievably orchestrated and wooden.

The poster for the film has ridiculously labelled it as the 'new' Billy Elliot (2000) but completely lacks in the socio-cultural backdrop displayed in this. What makes you route for Billy Elliot is that he is a beacon of hope within a community that is crumbling around him. The comedy comes off so well because it juxtaposes the grit, whereas with One Chance there is nothing but light- hearted sympathy for the good times and the bad. The adversity may not be as great but there is a lack of desire to show it with any realism, as cheap 'aw moments' are ultimately easier

The real life of Paul Potts may be one of wonder, but across the big screen it lacks any real conviction.

The Age of Innocence

"You gave me my first glimpse of a real life. Then you asked me to go on with a false one"- Newland Archer

Newland Archer (Daniel Day-Lewis) is a well-respected lawyer who begins to fall for Ellen Olenska (Michelle Pfeiffer) whilst he is engaged to her cousin Mary Welland (Winona Ryder). There is much more depth to the film than just an internal love story as it expresses the lives of the upper class in New York. The exclusivity and distinction of the elite is beautifully shown in this film of passion and loss as the masquerade of the period politics slowly fall apart in the eyes of Newland Archer.

The film Age of Innocence takes us into a new realm of skill shown by Martin Scorsese with this brilliant period piece set on the novel by Edith Wharton written in 1920. Scorsese's repertoire has largely held the grit of films such as Taxi Driver, Mean Streets and Goodfellas, but with Age of Innocence there is a more delicate touch to the way the plot unfolds. The novel was introduced to Scorsese by Jay Cocks, who then co wrote the script with him in is his first attempt at converting English literary into a film. What makes this a magnificent piece is Scorsese's understanding of creating an atmosphere that constantly intrigues despite the fact little may seemingly be going on.

It is the lighting of the sets that really captures the period of the film, as the candles and fires flicker on the screen. The whole mood of the film stirs within the use of the shadows Scorsese spreads over those whose unorthodox nature could not fit into the mold of the strict high family politics. The beautiful set designs and Academy Award winning costumes brings real sincerity to the exclusion of the high society. The three central performances from Daniel-Day Lewis, Michelle Pfeiffer and Winona Ryder hold the whole social orchestration of the time perfectly. Winona Ryder puts in the performance of her career portraying a delicate and indifferent fabrication to the political tide around her that she rose to with covert ease. A long period of time is covered in the film as we follow their lives and it is the interaction between the central three that stops the film stable as they create the subtle changes with age.

The run time is fairly long, standing at two hours twenty minutes, with a long period of the characters lives being covered. There are often jumps of years at a time, which could make for a very messy narrative, however, Joanne Woodward pieces, this together with some elegant narration. It is perfectly condensed into longer sequences and will often include traits of the time during lingering camera work on specifics of the time.

It is a film of utter splendour, as we watch the elite play their own little game of beauty, which will no doubt put many off. It is worth seeing to witness a masterful paintbrush by Martin Scorsese who shows a new range of skills that continues to put him in the running as one of the greatest directors of all time.