Killing Them Softly

Set in 2008, the year of the US presidential elections, Killing Them Softly goes beneath the fantasy of the 'American Dream' and delves into the underbelly of organised crime and contractural killings, a world far removed from all the political spin and talk. Two petty criminals are given the job of hitting a card game, run by Ray Liotta, which they do and this sets in motion a chain of events that leads to inevitable outbursts of bloodshed. Ray Liotta is the prime suspect of robbing his own game and the circles of organised crime decide something must be done to restore credibility and fear on the streets. Brad Pitt stars as the hitman brought in to sort out this messy situation. The acting is consistently brilliant throughout, from Pitt's casual, almost easy going brutality to James Gandolfini's edgy portrayal of a washed up hitman. Richard Jenkins, Ray Liotta and Scoot McNairy add some weighty support. The direction and screenplay are sharp and intelligent, adding a chilling sense of realism to the lives of hitmen and the underworld. The political commentary interpersed throughout the film, via the medium of tv or radio, is very clever and used to great effect. There is a cynicism to many of the characters, most notably Pitt's, that grates visibly with the illusion of hope and prosperity built up by politicans such as Bush and Obama. There is good out there in the world for sure, of the kind Bush and Obama speak about, but they are not to take credit for it. They and others like them have let down generation after generation and the viewer can almost find himself or herself nodding in agreement to Pitt's character as he tears apart a Obama speech in the very last scene of the film. Brutal and brilliant. 8/10        

NEDS

 

The multi-talented Peter Mullan writes, directs and stars in this gritty, violent and powerful piece of film making. Mullan takes a Ken Loach approach, both in style and substance, but manages to stamp his own authority on the film. Set in early/mid 1970's urban Glasgow young John McGill has a promising academic career ahead of him despite having a drunk as a father and a NED (Non-Educated Delinquent) as an older brother. Somewhat predictably John gets sucked into the violent and profane culture of NEDS and the battle for his mind and soul ensues. The change in John from a decent young man with much potential and promise to a violent, foul-mouthed NED is performed very convincingly by Conor McCarron. Much of NEDS is based on Mullan's own upbringing in 1970's Glasgow and he manages to capture their talk and behaviour very well. The film drags on towards the end and loses a bit of direction. Will John make it or not? The ending is ambivalent, which in some films I like, but I would have prefered some closure on the fate of John. NEDS is a very well made and relevant film, but, unlike The Angel's Share, I had a heavy spirit after watching it. Maybe that is what Mullen wants the viewer to feel - the lack of hope that many NEDS must experience themselves. Perhaps sometimes it's better to stick your head in the sand and just watch Teenwolf instead. 7/10    

Brief Encounter

Brief Encounter is British director David Lean before he turned his masterful hands to epics like Doctor Zhivago and Lawrence Of Arabia. Brief Encounter might lack the scale and ambition of his later films but it's a beautifully directed piece of cinema. Based on the Noel Coward play, Brief Encounter stars Celia Johnson as a seemingly happily married housewife whose normal Thursday routine of shopping in a nearby town is blown to pieces when she meets and falls in love with a doctor, played by Trevor Howard. In fact her whole life is turned upside down and this experience of passionate, unexpected love grates with her conscience and the reality of her married life. Even though both characters are married the viewer comes to sympathise with their situation. Adultery can never be condoned but the characters are so believable and their relationship is so natural that part of you wants them to have the freedom to express their love. Did they marry the wrong person, or marry for the wrong reasons? Ulitmately their brief encounter is too late. Noel Coward's screenplay and David Lean's direction are a dynamite combination. Add some measured performances, great cinematography and Rachmaninov's Piano Concerto No.2, and you get a classic of British cinema. Challenging, intelligent and relevant. 9/10           

Forget Dan Brown - what is Opus Dei really like?

I haven't seen or read Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code but by all accounts it is such poor literature that Stephen Fry once described it as "complete loose stool-water. It is arse gravy of the worst kind." (I have been waiting ages to use that quote) Moreover this 'arse gravy' has sold millions of copies throughout the world and possibly formed an particular image of Catholicism and Opus Dei in the minds of the general public. In short people might be stupid enough to think that the book is based on fact. And there is a plentitude of stupidity out there. Rather than go down the whole 'was Jesus married to Mary Magdelene' road, I am better qualifed through experience to write about what Opus Dei is really like. To the best of my knowledge, and probably much to the disappointment of many people, they are not Catholic assassins protecting the integrity of the Church at any costs, even to the extent of murder. Having read an response by a member of Opus Dei on the internet it seems that there is much fabrication in the book regarding this Catholic organisation. One example is that Dan Brown portrays Opus Dei members as monks who indulge in corporal mortification. Opus Dei are made up of lay men and women and diocesan priests who live and work in the secular world. Some take a vow of celibacy and live in community together but they don't wear robes or pray all day or withdraw from the world. But that's about the extent of my defense of Opus Dei. When in my late teens I visited the men's house in Glasgow and started to get involved in some of their organised activities. I was attracted to Opus Dei at first, being at a stage in my life when I was trying to find my place within the Catholic Church. But over time I started to feel uneasy and unhappy about certain aspects of Opus Dei and finally decided to stop all contact with them. One of the main reasons behind this decision was their elitism. They are very selective about who they welcome into their folds. They want to recruit middle-class men and women who have professional jobs, like doctors and lawyers for example, and people of a good intellect who are very conservative in the practise and belief of their Catholic faith. This behaviour flies in the face of what Opus Dei is supposed to be. The founder, Jose Maria Escriva, wanted Opus Dei to help men and women OF ALL jobs and social status and intellect to be witnesses of God's love in their workplace and daily lives. At some point along the road Opus Dei has lost sight of this and become an elitist, ultra-conservative Catholic instution mainly for the middle class and professionals. They might welcome a working class person like myself but as long as they are reasonably smart. Whenever I met a member or associate of Opus Dei one of the first things they would ask me is what grades I got at school. This happened to me on a number of occasions. Another thing I was not happy about was the intensity of their spirituality and the value placed on being intellectual. I felt under pressure to be a certain person and talk in a certain way and hold certain views. In short I couldn't be myself. I even felt I had to dress in a certain way to fit in. Recently I was at mass and afterwards I chatted to a couple of friends outside the church. A smartly dressed man wearing a tie and blazer joined our group but right away I knew that he was a member of Opus Dei, just from the way he dressed, and I was right. He was a nice guy, that is the thing. With a couple of exceptions all the members and associates of Opus Dei I have met have been really nice and sincere. It is only fair to mention this and I don't want people to thing this blog is a bitter rant against Opus Dei, it's simply my point of view based on my experiences. The idea of Escriva was fantastic and Opus Dei could be a great Catholic organisation but unfortunately it is not. To quote from the Prelature of Opus Dei in the USA "Opus Dei is for people who have a vocation to live their Christian faith in the middle of secular society." That should read ALL people, regardless of job, social standing and intellect.