RGeoffBaker
Lifetime Total
1+
IMDb Member
12 years
Reviews
Sleeping Giant (2015)
A familiar trope, a refreshing take
This is not the first 'coming of age' film, nor will it be the last. It is however a refreshing take on this familiar theme.
The film is a slow build, that covers a summer in what is Canada's 'cottage country' but could be anywhere in North America, but for some minor nationalisms. Cinematography nicely celebrates the wilderness, while the editing nicely mimics the YouTube aesthetic that informs much of today's youth media.
This is a particularly, almost entirely, male vision of coming of age. The three young male leads are credible and familiar -- struggling to present themselves as adult, unsure of how to assert their masculinity, the role models they observe are flawed or absent. One of the three has a father; he reveals himself to be cad. Another has been abandoned to his grandmother by parents who are absent emotionally and physically. The third is revealed to have lost his father to suicide. They turn to a local man, himself trapped in adolescence despite his age -- but though his routine of video games, pot smoking and petty crime amuses, even the boys recognize the essential hollowness of his life.
Women in this story are thinly drawn: the mother that still sees her son as a child; the grandmother that can but dote; the 'girlfriend' whose own budding sexuality has her as confused as the boys; the mistress ... Ultimately and interestingly, the story is often summarized as of the struggle between two of the boys for the attention of the girl. But this is only partially, and not entirely, true.
There are many struggles at work in this film. Two of the boys are 'from away' -- and anyone with cottage country experience understands immediately that dynamic. The one boy who lives full time in the region knows himself to be an outsider to the modern world, which is revealed to him only through the internet and movies, often porn. There is a material class conflict at play, with those that enjoy beach front summer homes and those that support this industry. There is the struggle of success at education -- ultimately the trigger that begins the final tragic act begins with a snub of one boy's 'school smarts' or lack there-of. And there is the struggle for sexual satisfaction.
Interestingly, the sexual angle is not a simple triangle. Or better put, it is, but not the one expected. The competition for the girl is actually much more sophisticated in the filmmakers execution, and is never fully revealed as some reviewers simplify. In fact, there is as much suggestion that there is a sexual struggle between the boys for one another. The 'girl' is well positioned to be a barrier to the homoerotic yearnings of the star as she is to be the reward. The protagonist is struggling with his friend's attachment to the girl -- but is it because he's losing the boy, or the girl? Smartly, the film leaves the question unresolved. And hints that the character himself is undecided ...
The film is well acted by amateurs, or better put the director pulls very convincing performances from inexperienced talent. The narrative is informed by a believable view of the dynamics at work between young-old, wealthy-poor, city-country, male-female. A promising first effort, I'll keep my eye open for more from this director.
The film is a slow build, that covers a summer in what is Canada's 'cottage country' but could be anywhere in North America, but for some minor nationalisms. Cinematography nicely celebrates the wilderness, while the editing nicely mimics the YouTube aesthetic that informs much of today's youth media.
This is a particularly, almost entirely, male vision of coming of age. The three young male leads are credible and familiar -- struggling to present themselves as adult, unsure of how to assert their masculinity, the role models they observe are flawed or absent. One of the three has a father; he reveals himself to be cad. Another has been abandoned to his grandmother by parents who are absent emotionally and physically. The third is revealed to have lost his father to suicide. They turn to a local man, himself trapped in adolescence despite his age -- but though his routine of video games, pot smoking and petty crime amuses, even the boys recognize the essential hollowness of his life.
Women in this story are thinly drawn: the mother that still sees her son as a child; the grandmother that can but dote; the 'girlfriend' whose own budding sexuality has her as confused as the boys; the mistress ... Ultimately and interestingly, the story is often summarized as of the struggle between two of the boys for the attention of the girl. But this is only partially, and not entirely, true.
There are many struggles at work in this film. Two of the boys are 'from away' -- and anyone with cottage country experience understands immediately that dynamic. The one boy who lives full time in the region knows himself to be an outsider to the modern world, which is revealed to him only through the internet and movies, often porn. There is a material class conflict at play, with those that enjoy beach front summer homes and those that support this industry. There is the struggle of success at education -- ultimately the trigger that begins the final tragic act begins with a snub of one boy's 'school smarts' or lack there-of. And there is the struggle for sexual satisfaction.
Interestingly, the sexual angle is not a simple triangle. Or better put, it is, but not the one expected. The competition for the girl is actually much more sophisticated in the filmmakers execution, and is never fully revealed as some reviewers simplify. In fact, there is as much suggestion that there is a sexual struggle between the boys for one another. The 'girl' is well positioned to be a barrier to the homoerotic yearnings of the star as she is to be the reward. The protagonist is struggling with his friend's attachment to the girl -- but is it because he's losing the boy, or the girl? Smartly, the film leaves the question unresolved. And hints that the character himself is undecided ...
The film is well acted by amateurs, or better put the director pulls very convincing performances from inexperienced talent. The narrative is informed by a believable view of the dynamics at work between young-old, wealthy-poor, city-country, male-female. A promising first effort, I'll keep my eye open for more from this director.
Act of Valor (2012)
Well crafted but vapid and not nearly as action-packed as suggested
This is movie crafted by skilled technicians -- the shots are well framed, well lit and accomplished with minimal equipment (some sequences are filmed with Canon HDSLR cameras). The script is trite and juvenile to the point of embarrassing -- the weak acting probably benefits here, as the narrative is comic book simple. Let's just say nothing unexpected happens, the shades of gray are closer to black and white -- rest assured you won't leave the theatre in any doubt of who the heroes are, the purity of both their mission and their souls ... despite having just watched summary executions of bad guys, bad guys wives and probably bad guys children. Lots of stuff blows up real good, in the words of Second City, and we don't linger on the collateral or intentional damage.
But judged as a thrill ride -- and surely that's the intent, despite a marketing effort built around 'like this movie or you are a poor human being' -- the film wanders from very good to disappointing. Some of the action sequences manage suspense and excitement, others are but a check list of killings and explosions. The much vaunted 'live fire' scenario is likely (but I'm just guessing) a single extended shot filmed from a helicopter over a swamp -- it is unreasonable to suggest any other is but Hollywood F/X. In the end, the action is a tad disappointing, mainly because that's all this movie has, and frankly it doesn't have enough of it. Ultimately this is a low budget picture that benefits from a supporting 'cast' of billion dollar hardware supplied by US tax dollars -- absent a nuclear sub, an aircraft carrier and a couple of chain-gun equipped fast boats, and you're left with not much at all.
So 4/10 from me -- not because I'm a hater of patriots, or vague on notions of good against evil ... but because it delivers a just OK thrill ride. The filmmakers preface the film with some on-camera apologies for the wooden acting, and that has pointed many here in the direction of 'bad acting = realistic' ... sorry, even allowing for the performances this film still fails muster.
But judged as a thrill ride -- and surely that's the intent, despite a marketing effort built around 'like this movie or you are a poor human being' -- the film wanders from very good to disappointing. Some of the action sequences manage suspense and excitement, others are but a check list of killings and explosions. The much vaunted 'live fire' scenario is likely (but I'm just guessing) a single extended shot filmed from a helicopter over a swamp -- it is unreasonable to suggest any other is but Hollywood F/X. In the end, the action is a tad disappointing, mainly because that's all this movie has, and frankly it doesn't have enough of it. Ultimately this is a low budget picture that benefits from a supporting 'cast' of billion dollar hardware supplied by US tax dollars -- absent a nuclear sub, an aircraft carrier and a couple of chain-gun equipped fast boats, and you're left with not much at all.
So 4/10 from me -- not because I'm a hater of patriots, or vague on notions of good against evil ... but because it delivers a just OK thrill ride. The filmmakers preface the film with some on-camera apologies for the wooden acting, and that has pointed many here in the direction of 'bad acting = realistic' ... sorry, even allowing for the performances this film still fails muster.