Bring It On is my guilty pleasure film, and not just because it features Eliza Dushku and Clare Kramer in cheerleader outfits.
Quite simply, this is fun. I might hammer this point home over the coming weeks and months, but American comedies shoot themselves in the foot by dumping emotional weight – usually to do with a shoehorned-in love interest – in the latter half of a film in a vain attempt to make us care about the characters. This is why the majority of them are uneven, sappy, and false.
Bring It On, however, doesn’t go into great detail of the blossoming relationship between bland head cheerleader Torrance (Kirsten Dunst) and slightly poser-ish punk fan Cliff (Jesse Bradford). It concentrates on delivering surprisingly consistent comedy instead. It’s not the most sophisticated humour ever – the biggest laughs come from cheerleader pratfalls, puking, and a crazed pill-popping dance instructor showing what spirit fingers are – but Bring It On gels together in a way I can’t put into words.
The film is by no means perfect. For example, there’s a pointless subplot where the East Compton Clovers are only able to go to the Cheerleading National Finals because an Oprah-esque chat show host funds them. But in terms of brainless entertainment, Bring It On is a pleasure to watch.
Does this mean I’m going to check out one of the four direct-to-video sequels to this film? No. I still have a modicum of respect for myself.
RATING: 7/10
When the Oscar nominations were announced on Monday, I was sure just by looking at the trailer that Invictus would be on the Best Picture shortlist. It had everything the Academy loves: a film based off a book, dense social issues, sentimentality up the wazoo, and Morgan Freeman. Then again I thought The Road was a shoo-in too, so what do I know?
While the exclusion of Gran Torino and Changeling last year was a baffling decision, I can see why this one was snubbed too. Clint Eastwood is a director that can produce great work without trying. When he’s on autopilot like for Invictus, Clint is still far better at his job than anyone else. What sets him apart is the subtle things. The Academy doesn’t ‘do’ subtle though. That’s why Renee Zellweger won the Best Supporting Actress award for Cold Mountain.
Take the World Cup final between New Zealand and South Africa. Even if you aren’t familiar with real life events, you know South Africa from a narrative standpoint must win to bring the country back together. But Clint is able to capture the tension sports fans get when we witness a game with high stakes; from the shots of people too stunned to react, to slow motion that goes on too long to make us doubt the inevitable.
And how about the subtlety of Morgan Freeman’s long awaited role as Nelson Mandela? He is overwhelmingly convincing, capturing the understated drive and charisma to the extent where you believe the man himself is on-screen. If Invictus hadn’t largely gone under the radar in America – because rugby has a tiny following over there – Freeman’s performance would’ve been deemed as iconic.
Invictus is far from perfect, however. Its comfortableness is on the level of Eastwood’s 2000 comedy film Space Cowboys. There’s no sense of drama, which is quite astounding considering South Africa’s political tensions. If only the newspaper delivery van and plane scenes weren’t just red herrings.
There are also several narrative strands that are forgotten about as soon as they’re introduced. Nelson Mandela collapses before going on his usual morning run. He’s told to rest, yet he’s back to work quickly with no consequences. Mandela’s rocky relationship with his family is mentioned but not developed. And in the World Cup team, Chester – the single black player, and link to the poorer communities in South Africa – falls victim to a hamstring injury only to return for the team’s second game.
Sure, Invictus is restricted by its biographical nature, but I wonder why these points are brought up when they have no relevance to the overall plot. If we’re going to include EVERYTHING that happened, where’s the bit where the New Zealand team’s water is deliberately poisoned right before the final?
FILM RATING: B
Avatar screwed everything up. The 3D gimmick was supposed to do what it did in the 50’s and 80’s: turn a few unremarkable films into fun fair rides, then disappear into the sunset. It was going so well this time too with My Bloody Valentine and Journey to the Centre of the Earth. That was until Avatar became a critical and commercial juggernaut. Now we’re forever destined to wear novelty glasses as objects are thrusted towards us.
While the studios plan to turn their new films into something resembling more a magic eye illusion than art, Pixar has foreseen the trend by converting the two Toy Story films into 3D and re-releasing them in the cinema to hype the upcoming third installment of the series. Like Grindhouse, they were a double-feature in the United States, yet released separately in the United Kingdom. It seems strange they’ve decided to milk double the money out of the smaller market.
Toy Story 2 is a magnificent picture, a rarity in that it betters the original. Its success is through Disney’s rule of cinematic storytelling, equalling the amount of sadness with happiness. There are plenty of moments where we laugh – such as the copy of Buzz Lightyear and Emperor Zurg’s homage to Star Wars – but we care most about the characters’ emotions. Particularly touching is Jessie the Cowgirl’s emotional backstory/song about falling out of favour with her owner.
It’s no coincidence that Up is nominated for the Best Picture Award at this year’s Oscars. Pixar specialise in making their films actually mean something to adults and children alike. While Toy Story 2 is a fun rescue mission to children, adults will see this as a tale about the inevitable and unwanted changes that happen as we grow older, with the moral that we should treasure what we have now. Compare that to a Dreamworks film. Do their films contain an existential subtext? No, just Mike Myers rehashing his Fat Bastard impression.
Like everything I’ve seen bar Avatar (Coraline, Monsters vs. Aliens…), the 3D aspect is pointless. Granted, Pixar has done a good job tweaking the depth of field, but as the original film was made long before a 3D resurgence was even muttered about, there’s no pointing or poking to make us notice the technology. If anything, it’s just a high-definition upgrade. I recommend waiting until the two Toy Story films come out on Blu-Ray in March and revisit them then.
FINAL RATING: B+
