A Little Chaos Review

Set in France in 1682, Kate Winslet plays a talented landscape designer, who is tasked with building a garden at Versailles for King Louis XIV. Struggling to overcome a great loss in her life, Winslet’s Sabine is closed off to the ideas of chaos in the world, even as those around the king believe that inviting a woman of low birth into the gardens is madness and destined for disaster.

Sabine is given the royal assignment by the handsome Andre Le Notre, played by Matthias Schoenaerts, a man who is trapped in a thankless marriage to a woman who believes he is beneath her. Sabine is thrust into the midst of the court of the king but jealousy threatens her standing, her ability to complete the garden, and a burgeoning romance with Andre.

Despite playing the king, Alan Rickman directs but does not step in front of the camera quite as much as you would expect, instead letting Winslet and Schoenaerts take centre stage in this period romance. It’s a shame as the love story barely simmers while Winslet and Rickman’s few scenes together actually start to sizzle with something a little more exciting.

The romance feels as though it has been played out a thousand times before and the less said about Sabine’s tragic back story, the better. However, A Little Chaos comes to life, particularly towards the end in a pair of scenes, one delivering some heart warming female bonding and the other offering a rousing climax.

In amongst all this though, is a lot of talk of gardening. There is little danger and far too little conflict. Winslet seems subdued, leaving it up to Stanley Tucci to steal his too-few scenes and Rickman to swan in and save the film from becoming utterly boring. It’s a stately, occasionally quite beautiful film but unless you are a fan of gardening or mostly chaste romances, you will yearn for something more.

Overall, A Little Chaos could have done with a lot more conflict, danger, excitement and yes... chaos.

Watch the trailer:

Recent reviews from I Love That Film:

John Wick

Lost River

Wild Card

Still Alice

White God

Wild Tales

Does the Divergent trailer know its place?

Divergent is another adaptation of a trilogy of young adult novels that sees a dystopian future and a female heroine who will fight the system she finds herself in. Like Katniss Everdeen and The Hunger Games, the novels have an empowering young female lead and in Divergent it is the turn of Shailene Woodley to fight the power. Best known for her role in The Descendants alongside George Clooney, Divergent could be the role that sends her stratospheric in a similar way to the impact The Hunger Games had on Jennifer Lawrence's career.

Kate Winslet also stars as the villainous head of one of the factions in this new and 'improved' future society and will undoubtedly be a potential threat to Woodley's heroine. Winslet looks a bit like she is channeling Jodie Foster being a hard bastard in Elysium but will hopefully bring something interesting to what could be a potentially one note role.

If The Hunger Games isn't enough dystopian future teen rebellion for you, then Divergent is likely to be the way to go when it is released in March. Based on the debut novel of Veronica Roth, Shailene Woodley is Beatrice Prior, a girl who does not fit easily into any of the five strictly defined factions that populate future Chicago. She is what the powers that be call 'divergent' and the system does not take kindly to those who do not fit in to their factions.  It wouldn't be a contemporary YA Adaptation without a love interest and hunk with a heart duties fall on Theo James' numerically named Four, who may be able to help Tris keep her divergence a secret. If this does well and makes a healthy profit, expect sequels based on Roth's two remaining books in the series (Insurgent and Allegiant).

Check out the trailer below:

What do you think?

More trailers from I Love That Film:

Noah Begins: First Trailer for Biblical Epic with Russell Crowe

The Return of Ron Burgundy and Mick Taylor

Hunger Games: Catching Fire

Need for Speed

The LEGO Movie

The Wolf of Wall Street

Man of Steel and The Desolation of Smaug

Why I Love Titanic: Part 2

Happy Easter everybody!  I know it should be all about The Ten Commandments or The Passion of the Christ today but there's still only one movie on my mind at the moment.  Aaah Titanic!   I'm not finished with you yet.  I get some very strange looks when I tell people my favourite films include Fight Club, City of God and Titanic.  So this is the second part of my attempting to justify my love for this big, grand, epic love story.

 

Before I start though, I must point out that I am aware Cameron has played with the facts and obviously added in two completely fictional characters to juice up the story of the sinking.  There's even a great moment on one of the special features documentaries where a Titanic historian tries to tell Cameron that the lifeboats weren't being lowered right on top of each other and Cameron dismisses the historian saying something like 'I'm making a movie here!'  Terrible arrogance or a director who knows how to make a thrilling film?  Anyway here's some more reasons for my undying love for James Cameron's Titanic.

Historical accuracy

It's not just the sets and the costumes that are filled with historically accurate detail.  Cameron also wrote many real life characters into the script.  Most famously, Cameron depicts the band that played presumably until the tilt of the ship made it impossible to continue. Their bravery in the face of disaster becomes just one more heartbreaking story of those that did not survive the sinking.

Other real life victims that appear in the film are Benjamin Guggenheim who did allegedly say the line "We've dressed up in our best and are prepared to go down like gentlemen", John Jacob Astor, the richest man on the ship and the famous Molly Brown (played by Kathy Bates) who insisted that her lifeboat return to the sinking to search for survivors.  There’s also the moment the chairman of the White Star Line Bruce Ismay slinks on board one of the lifeboats despite the remaining women and children who were left to die.  Thomas Andrews did really speak with the Captain after the collision and made it very clear that the ship would sink.  He was even last seen staring at a painting over the fireplace as seen in the film. 

Sources have stated that the Captain was last seen in the wheelhouse and the baker who stands right next to the fictional Jack and Rose as Titanic finally sinks below the water was actually there and was one of the few who survived!  

The incredible story of Chief Baker Charles Joughin was told in the book A Night to Remember.  These were his final moments on the ship as he (and Jack and Rose) are the last into the water:

“The deck was now listing too steeply to stand on, and Joughin slipped over the starboard rail and stood on the actual side of the ship.

He worked his way up the side, still holding onto the rail--but from the outside--until he reached the white-painted steel plates of the poop deck.  He now stood on the rounded stern end of the ship, which had swung high in the air some 150 feet above the water.

Joughin casually tightened his lifebelt.  Then he glanced at his watch--it said 2:15.  As an afterthought, he took it off and stuck it into his hip pocket.  He was beginning to puzzle over his position when he felt the stern beginning to drop under his feet--it was like taking an elevator.  As the sea closed over the stern, Joughin stepped off into the water.  He didn't even get his head wet.” http://dunner99.50webs.com/titanic/joughin.html

These are just a few of the characters and Cameron wonderfully weaves his fictional characters into this real life tragedy and takes the audience on a memorable trip through a terrifying night of chaos and confusion.  He even has time to sneak in a reference to this famous photo taken aboard the ship in happier times.

The message

Titanic is entertainment first and foremost.  It’s a thrilling, tragic love story.  But it’s also a memorial to the 1514 people who lost their lives on 15^th April 1912.  It’s a film about class, about the arrogance of mankind and surprise, surprise, about never letting go. It's themes may not be subtle but they are relevant and powerful.

Cameron relishes the class divide of the ship juxtaposing the stuffy first class dinner and men retiring to the brandy and cigar lounge with the boisterous dancing, drinking and partying of the steerage quarters.  When the ship sinks, the heartbreaking plight of the steerage passengers is again contrasted with the arrogance, nonchalance and selfishness of some of the first class passengers and even some of the crew that are determined to maintain social order in the face of disaster.

It’s also a film about arrogance with so many men being convinced of the invincibility of the ship, that it was released with only enough lifeboats for 1,178 people, only one-third of Titanic's total capacity.  And these were not even filled properly as depicted in the film.  This is a lesson that we can still learn from.  Did you know… “a change in the New York City building code in 1968 reduced the number of stairwells required in tall buildings.  The World Trade Center, completed in 1970, had fewer escape routes than the Empire State Building, completed in 1931.”  (102 Minutes, Jim Dwyer and Kevin Flynn) I wonder how many more lives could have been saved on 9/11 if safety was more of a concern to building designers/owners than profit.

Anyway Titanic is also just a love story.  Cameron could have made it more of a docudrama but he adds in the fictional characters to make it a more mass appealing story of love conquering class divide, disaster, and finally death.  Roses’ life changes after she meets Jack.  Even though he doesn’t get to enjoy her new life with her, he has become the catalyst for her escape and freedom.  She never lets go of her promise to him and never looks back.

Cashing in?

But after all that love, I have to ask is this re-release really necessary?  I realized the other day that not once had I really thought about the victims of the disaster when discussing the upcoming 3D release of the film in cinemas.  It’s supposed to commemorate the centenary of the disaster but really isn’t it just celebrating the film?  Then again, anyone who goes and watches the film will be hard pushed to not walk out of the cinema and think of all the real life lost souls that were involved in the tragedy.

But does it really need to be in 3D?  Cameron’s hyping of Avatar lead to a bit of disappointment as we all know that 3D isn’t the game changer that the director suggested it would be.  I’m all up for seeing Titanic again on the big screen where it belongs but I’m not convinced the 3D will add anything to the experience.  However if Robbie Collin of the Telegraph is right we should be in for a treat:

“In the film’s audacious 25-minute prologue, in which Bill Paxton’s treasure hunter introduces us to the barnacle-encrusted wreck of the Titanic, a third dimension makes the silty lifelessness of the ship that bit more tangible. When we slip back to 1912 and join Rose and Jack on the Southampton quayside, the riot of background detail and foreground drama feels richer and more vibrant than ever.” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/filmreviews/9185820/Titanic-3D-review.html

So will you be going to see Titanic on the big screen this time around?  Why do you love/hate this film?  Has anyone seen the 3D version yet?  What are your thoughts?

Why I Love Titanic: Part 1

I think I love Titanic more than many (especially men maybe?) but isn’t this new release a bit pointless?

Let me get a couple of things straight.  Firstly, I was always slightly fascinated with the sinking of the legendary ship on its maiden voyage.  Before James Cameron’s film existed, I had read A Night to Remember, a highly detailed and well-researched book about the events that took place that night.  Secondly, I loved the work of director James Cameron.  Terminator 1 and 2 are still two of my favourite films of all time, Aliens is easily the best of that franchise and True Lies is a really fun action movie.  

But on the other hand, in 1997, I was 16 years old and put off by the soppy, romantic look of the film, not to mention Celine Dion hogging the number one spot in the charts.  I was intrigued by stories of the amazing production design and the escalating budget but not enough to make a trip to the cinema.  But then a friend raved about it.  He told me the entire plot and although I didn’t get why an old woman would throw away a priceless necklace at the end, my friend emphasized the fact that pretty much the whole last hour was an action film.

So I went along to see it with the friend who had told me the whole story.  He said he would be happy to see it for a second time which also made me optimistic.  I was blown away.  I loved every moment of it: from the romance to the tragedy to the brilliant special effects, music, sets and costumes, even Dion warbling over the credits.  Here’s why:

The music

Ok forget My Heart Will Go On for a minute and look beyond to James Horner’s masterful score.  From the haunting sadness of Never an Absolution and Hymn to the Sea to the awe-inspiring Southampton and Take Her to Sea Mr Murdoch that perfectly capture the magic and majesty of the ship, it is one of my favourite soundtracks.  And then there is the perfect blend of horror, sadness and wonder created by tracks like A Building Panic, The Sinking and Death of Titanic.  Yes it all might sound a little too Enya inspired at times and Celine Dion’s vocals spell it all out rather pointlessly by the end but nevertheless this is a grand and epic score that has an undeniably HUGE part to play in creating the emotional response of the viewer. 

The cast

Kate Winslet shines as the trapped rich girl Rose, promised to a man she doesn’t love and desperate for adventure and escape.  Her character is the best written and carries the film from forbidden love to horrific tragedy to quiet optimism.  Leo is slightly short-changed as Jack Dawson, saddled with some cheesy lines and a fairly two-dimensional character in comparison.  But he does get stand-out moments like when he teaches the rich folk he has been invited to dinner with a thing or two about living life to the fullest. 

Rounding out the love triangle that puts Twilight to shame is Billy Zane as Cal, Rose’s fiancé and a bit of a pantomime villain bastard.  Zane gets a bit of flack for his eyebrow acting in this film; all that’s missing is a moustache to twirl and crazy maniac laughing but actually his final moments in the film reveal that he isn’t quite the total bastard he appears to be for the rest of the film.  And his delivery of the line ‘not the better half’ when Rose tells him ‘half the people on this ship are going to die’ is a deeply chilling moment of cinematic villainy. 

The love story

Somebody once told me Titanic was Romeo and Juliet on a boat.  With Leo just coming off Baz Luhrmann’s take on that Shakespearean tragedy, it was easy to believe.  But unlike R&J, we have a surviving member of the doomed couple to relate the story to us.  Yes it’s a tragic love story and Rose is promised to a man she does not love, while her family disapproves of her new found bit of rough Jack but the class dimension adds a lot more to this tale of forbidden romance.  Her mother wants what is ‘best’ for Rose (and herself) and Cal might actually truly love her.  But her desire for more from her life leads her into a collision with the free spirited Jack and it’s a romance we can root for.

It also has one of the sexiest scenes in cinema history.  No, not the couple copping off in the back of a car (“Put your hands on me Jack”) but the moment Jack draws Rose ‘like one of his French girls’.  The sparkle in Winslet’s eyes as she disrobes for the blushing Jack is irresistible.

The ship

“From the outset, Cameron was determined to spare no expense when it came to technical realism. That was why he built three massive sets in huge, man-made, concrete-lined "lakes" for the movie's shooting. It was also why he rented a submersible to dive down to the real Titanic wreck and photograph it. And it was why he demanded that the set designs--from the style of the carpeting to the patterns on the wood moldings--faithfully re-create the original.


Given those demands, giant scale models were the only viable option. Unlike most sea-based films, which make heavy use of models measuring a mere 10 or 15 feet long, Titanic would come as close as possible to the real article. Engineers on the project ultimately built a scale model measuring 775 feet long--about 90% of the size of the original” http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=226839

How cool is that?

The sets had to tilt and be capable of being flooded in order to recreate the legendary and terrifying sinking.  “In terms of cost and practicality, the only solution was hydraulics. To raise and lower it 15 times a night, there was no other way."  It is this that gives the climax its breathtaking and horrific power.  The practical effects and scale of the sets used is phenomenal.  Watching the special features shows Cameron orchestrating organized chaos on the huge, mesmerizing replica sets and every frame that features the interiors of the ship is a testament to production designer Peter Lamont.

Tomorrow I will post part 2 where I will consider the historically accurate details Cameron included in the film, the messages that can be taken from the story, and whether this new 3D release is cashing in or commemorating.

Films on a Plane, I can't complain

Travelling to New York on Virgin Atlantic has made me realise what I'm missing out on every time I've taken a Ryanair or Easyjet flight.  Endless Pepsi's and a huge list of films to choose from on demand to be watched on a little screen embedded in the chair in front of me.  Good times!  Never has seven hours on a plane flown (haha) by so quickly.  And that's coming from the world's most (understandably) nervous flyer. 


I had the choice of Drive, Tintin, The Ides of March, The Inbetweeners, The Skin I Live In, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy and many many others.  Some I'd already seen and many more I was desperate to see.  Having waited this long to see Drive, there was no way I was going to have it spoiled by interruptions from the pilot, a crappy small screen or one of the 31 students on board freaking out and requiring assistance.  Instead I went for films that I hadn't hyped out of all proportion and that would hopefully not lose much of their impact on a very small screen.  So on the way way to New York, here's what I watched and a short review:

Contagion (Steven Soderbergh, 2011)

Killing Oscar winning actresses left, right and centre is one way to make a story unpredictable and Soderbergh does his fair share here.  When a deadly virus sweeps the world, an ensemble of acting talent deal with the threat of infection in different ways.  Winslet tackles it head on, Paltrow just dies, Damon protects his daughter by locking her indoors and Law blogs about the possibilities of a cure.  Realistically creating the near-apocalypse and the government response but also finding time for quieter, sweeter moments as ordinary people struggle to survive, Soderbergh makes a pretty conventional movie that is both entertaining and engaging.

Martha Marcy May Marlene (Sean Durkin, 2012)

Another indie with a bit of a non-ending (see also Like Crazy), this demands to be seen for Elizabeth Olsen’s brave and committed performance as a young girl, Martha, who is struggling to come to terms with her former life in a cult.  With a wonderfully non-linear narrative that flashes back and forth in time between Martha’s life in the cult and the time she spends later with her sister, it never feels confusing and finds consistently excellent ways to cross the time gap.  Olsen is perfect and the script is ambiguous in its portrayal of the leader and members of the cult and the more ‘normal’ characters that Martha ends up with.  Haunting and beautiful with great performances, the final scene might annoy even the most devoted indie fans of open endings.

Tower Heist (Brett Ratner, 2011)

Deeply average caper about the service workers in a tower block who are scammed out of their pensions by the rich bastard who lives at the top of the tower.  Rarely funny enough to warrant belly-laughs and not emotional enough to make you really care for the characters, it is predictable and mildly entertaining.  However it is a total waste of the talent (Stiller, Affleck, Alda, Sidibe) and a disappointing ‘come-back’ for Murphy.  At least while in New York we got to see the Trump tower which was used for the exterior shots of the building where the heist takes place.  So that was nice.

Then on the flight home I was too knackered to watch anything except Moneyball.  Great film but what a shame I wasted free access to all the other films I wanted to watch.  Overall what I have learnt is that if you are a nervous flyer, go with Virgin and enjoy all the cinematic fruits that they have to offer!

And is it me or do they not cut films for planes anymore? I thought they all had to be PG rated when shown on planes but this seems to no longer be the case or I just made that up in my head.  You decide...