Change Your Image
pauljaymes
Reviews
Weekender (2011)
Enjoyable nostalgia for those of us that were there, but some flaws
I had a short stint as a club promoter and DJ in different parts of the UK in the early 1990s, and I enjoyed 'Weekender' - it's clearly been written with some knowledge of the scene back then; the unbridled optimism, the conflicts between DJs, promoters, drug dealers and gangsters, and the associated tensions between different music styles.
But there are some flaws. The boys seem to pick up a massive following immediately and easily by accident - the growth element of their events in terms of size and success feels like it was intended by the writers but doesn't come through in the production. A more realistic portrayal would have shown the earlier events as noticeably smaller, even thrown in one where hardly anyone showed up but everyone still enjoyed it.
This becomes incongruous when they're courted by Gary Mac (Stephen Wright) - Why did Gary suddenly offer them lines of coke and a trip to Ibiza? Presumably because it took time, energy and effort to build a following of massive crowds spending all night dancing, and Gary wanted access to sell his drugs, but this wasn't clear. Was the following all supposed to be down to Captain Acid (Tom Meeten) and his pirate radio show? Why wasn't this character courted by Gary as much as Dylan and Matt? He would be the talent that's drawing the crowds, not them.
The Ibiza sequence fails to explain why Gary has flown them all there. He's having a party, what was the occasion? Why does he have a villa there in the first place? Does he run a club there? What's motivating him? Drug sales? Revenge against John? Why is John at his party? Gary repeatedly says he wants to talk business but none seems to ever be concluded. Are the boys are just supposed to be so out of their depth they're ignoring Gary's offers? We don't get to see enough on-screen to know whats really going on. Weak jokes about Captain Acid getting stuck at the airport seem to take the place of proper narrative.
The historical gaffes are there too - most of it can be overlooked, but the banknotes are such a prominent part of the story that it's unforgivable and pure laziness to not use props with historically accurate designs.
All that said, I'm still glad to have stumbled on this while it was available on Netflix. It was fun and reminded me of what was in many ways a simpler, more hopeful era.
Sex Education (2019)
Funny and engaging but culturally unrealstic for a British setting
"Sex Education" is a witty and engrossing show; the smutty teenage humour is handled well, and it's reminiscent of the in-betweeners in the way it deals with teenage schoolchildren, relationships and sex.
Here's the rub though; the show is clearly meant to be set in Britain, with a British cast and locations, but the cultural context is all wrong. The very grand looking school might pass as a private school in the UK, but some of the pupils don't seem that well-off. Regular British schools just aren't like that. Equally the identities of the characters and the semi-rural setting don't really fit. If this is supposed to be Wales (and it's filmed in Wales) then where are all the Welsh people? Why is the mix of accents and backgrounds seemingly at odds with the location?
One could argue I suppose that it's refreshing to see a British show that's not hamstrung by the contexts of regionalism and class, but on the other hand, I dislike that this is essentially an Amercian high school drama that's been somehow transposed into the Welsh countryside.
None of the above makes this any less funny or engaging as a show, but I do find the large-budget abandonment of British cultural identity somewhat disappointing.
The Giver (2014)
Disappointingly derivative
Perhaps the book has something else, but this film just feels like a derivative mash-up of "Brave New World", "The Village", "Soylent Green" and "The Matrix", with some elements of "Star Trek" added in for good measure. The decision to start the film in Black and White, using colour as part of the later plot (no spoilers!) might have felt like a clever idea in pre-production meetings, but the execution just feels contrived and lame. Very little about the community or the unfolding plot feels either convincing or believable, and as a socio-political metaphor it feels very weak in comparison to "The Matrix" or "Soylent Green". Even the fairly weak 2004 effort "The Village" manages a much more convincing outing along the same lines.
A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)
A very unusual piece of work
Kubrick's films were always controversial; some people hate them, some love them and others are just bored by them. Kubrick always seemed to speak to some people and not to others.
But this isn't strictly a Kubrick film, Kubrick wrote an unfinished script, and Speilberg rewrote and finished it, and it shows. Fans of either director who have expectations will be disappointed - It's a poor Kubrick film because its too "Speilbergian" and its a poor Speilberg film because its too "Kubrickian".
I happen to think that this makes it a very interesting film, it is a profound mix of Kubrick melancholy and Speilberg euphoria, which sometimes sit together in a very disturbing way.
Kubrick probably intended to explore love and relationships from a new angle, questioning the difference between man and machine in the context of emotion and devotion rather than the more usual contexts of learning and creative ability, processing power, or just plain appearance. The title "Artificial Intelligence" is in some ways a misnomer, but perhaps the intention is to consider the definition of intelligence.
In many ways the very idea of machines being programmed with emotion is abhorrent to us; we like to believe that emotion itself cannot be constructed on demand. Whilst other writers have explored the idea of machines able to have an emotional response (Commander Data in Star Trek Generations springs to mind), no one (to my knowledge) has before dared to explore the idea that the nature and focus of that emotion could be pre-programmed. Yet many would argue that children are genetically programmed to love and be loved by their parents.
You can really feel the love emanating from David despite his intellectual and other limitations, which are explored in his relationship with organic "brother" Martin, and which ultimately lead to his rejection. His only purpose is to love a designated mother figure and he is clearly unable to do much else.
I found the scene where Monica abandoned David particularly disturbing - you know he's a machine but you really do question whether that makes it any more acceptable. The darker side of the film is the depiction of future man's utter disregard for machines he created in his own image to feel pain, fear and love. When does the imitation become a facsimile? Is love less meaningful when programmed by electronics rather than by genetics?
Most of the film is refreshingly unpredictable although you shouldn't expect to be on the edge of your seat. Some parts are undoubtedly slow but perhaps the film's most Kubrickian element is it's potential to bore mainstream audiences. Speilberg seems to have attempted to make a kind of fairy tale out of it but to me it doesn't work on that level at all.
I feel Kubrick would ultimately have created a better film had he finished the job he started, but then I guess that's an easy thing to say. Speilberg's ending can only be described as weak but he has done very well overall considering the difficulty in completing anyone else's project, let alone Kubrick's.
This is a must for Kubrick fans who will tut at the Speilberg gloss but hopefully still find some Kubrick magic. Anyone looking for standard Speilberg fare or traditional action/sci-fi should probably look elsewhere.
There are some amazing ideas in this film, some inspiring production and superb acting, and it's worth seeing just to appreciate those elements. But the whole does not really exceed the sum of its parts.