The Master (2012)

After the success that Paul Thomas Anderson enjoyed at the Oscars this year, it seemed like a good enough time to finally check out one of his celebrated movies I had somehow never made the time for before now.

Joaquin Phoenix plays Freddie Quell, a Navy veteran struggling to return to any kind of normal life after his time spent in service during WWII. Dealing with a number of issues, many of which we would nowadays connect to PTSD, Freddie ends up meeting Lancaster Dodd (Philip Seymour Hoffman). Dodd is the leader of a movement known as "The Cause", which seems to focus on interrogating people and psychologically breaking them down before helping them to rebuild into some better version of themselves, apparently. Not that Dodds is medically qualified for whatever he's doing, but he and Freddie seem to make quite the effective team. Until they don't.

Although there are a number of different inspirations for The Master, it's hard to view it as anything other than a thinly-disguised exploration of Scientology. The methodology seems familiar, Dodd also writes a number of books that may fall a bit short of literary greatness, and, well, he generally feels like someone you don't want to end up getting entangled with.

Phoenix is very good in his role, although he's played the confused and tortured individual so often by now that it would arguably be more interesting to watch him play someone simply content and dealing with more everyday problems (like trying to remember which day is bin day, for example). Hoffman is fantastic, giving a performance that ranks up there with his very best, which is really saying something. Amy Adams is excellent in her main supporting role, and the cast also includes Laura Dern, Jesse Plemons, and Rami Malek, as well as Kevin J. O'Connor, Jillian Bell, and a few other familiar faces.

I must say that I was surprised to find I didn't love this though. I was never drawn into it, never completely engrossed while Phoenix was playing another of his twitchy and angry men, and never entirely convinced that the story was being told in the best possible way. Because there is a great story here, but that story revolves around Dodd. A number of scenes work because of him at the heart of them, but there are too many moments that take viewers elsewhere, mainly keeping them alongside the less interesting and less complex character of Freddie.

There's a typically great selection of music from Jonny Greenwood, fantastic cinematography from Mihai Mǎlaimare Jr., and the standard skill and confidence you'd expect from the writing and direction of Anderson, but it never all comes together as it should. Ironically, the 137-minute runtime feels too short, yet certain moments drag when there's no riveting presence of Hoffman onscreen.

Everyone else seems to absolutely love this, rating it as one of Anderson's best, and one of the best films of 2012. I thought it was good, but it wouldn't crack my personal top 5 list of PTA movies.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Eddington (2025)

It's very good to remember that films featuring immoral characters do not make the films themselves, or the film-makers, immoral. We can have stories featuring bad and unpleasant characters, and the best stories can use those characters to explore society and humanity in ways not always possible with bland, "good", heroes. I also have to note, however, that presenting those characters in a way that doesn't do enough with them, isn't good. And, as is the case here, it can sometimes feel quite irresponsible. I get exasperated enough with the news lately mistaking impartiality with equal screentime for opinions that are unequally-informed (or simply incorrect, which means giving equal time to truth and lies). Having to tolerate it for the duration of a 148-minute movie was not a great time for me.

It's 2020. A global pandemic is happening. In Eddington, New Mexico, this creates ongoing friction between a mayor (Ted Garcia, played by Pedro Pascal) who wants to abide by the rules and a sheriff (Joe Cross, played by Joaquin Phoenix) who believes that people should be allowed to maintain their personal freedoms. Everyone is forced to take a side on the issue, and tempers rise, especially when Cross decides to run against Garcia for the chance to be mayor.

There's plenty to laugh at here, and writer-director Ari Aster does enough to justify taking viewers back to the madness of 2020 in the first half of the film. Arguments about what is and isn't permissible, the rabbit holes that people went down when they had too much time on their hands and access to the global asylum that is the internet, and the clarification of the divide between the haves and the have-nots are just a few of the things that Aster explores well enough in the earliest scenes in the film. Sadly, Aster then throws more into the mix (including the ease with which people can try to win arguments by throwing out triggering words that stain others forever, but also looking at protest, counter-protests, false flag operations, agendas and agitation, and domestic terrorism) until it all boils over to create a huge mess that he cannot clean up by the time the end credits roll.

Phoenix is absolutely brilliant in the main role, as expected (considering his usual level of talent, as well as the fact that Aster seems to have placed a lot of faith in him for the two movies that have allowed them to collaborate). He's cowardly, smart enough to make him a dangerous idiot, and constantly pushing back against more powerful people without ever considering just how he is being manipulated by so many others. Pascal is also very good, although he isn't given enough to really sink his teeth into before the film moves beyond him to start reminding viewers of a bigger picture.  Emma Stone feels wasted, as does Austin Butler, but there's a turn from Deirdre O'Connell that makes up for that disappointment. Others caught up in the madness are Luke Grimes, Micheal Ward, Matt Gomez Hidaka, Cameron Mann, Amélie Hoeferle, and William Belleau, and none of them drop the ball.

The one dropping the ball is Aster. What could have been an effective skewering of a situation that turned so many people into temporary lunatics (and I count myself in that demographic, considering there's a big reason why I have now been sober since May 2020) becomes sadly neutered and defanged with each subsequent story beat. Cinematically, there are moments that work when viewed out of context. But none of this should be viewed out of context. The context is key, and the context should have been the target that Aster kept in his sights for the duration. He doesn't. Which means that viewers can, metaphorically, examine the target once the movie has finished to see that it retains the marks of only one or two lucky strikes.

5/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Prime Time: Gladiator (2000)

It all seems so obviously destined for success now. An action epic directed by Ridley Scott. A lead role for Russell Crowe. Joaquin Phoenix as the second main character. Support from the likes of Connie Nielsen, Djimon Hounsou, Oliver Reed, Richard Harris, and Derek Jacobi, as well as numerous other familiar faces. Fantastic practical effects enhanced by some top-notch CGI. Gladiator was a huge success when it was released, but it's worth remembering that it was actually considered quite a gamble, especially because the "sword and sandals" movie seemed to be a thing of the past (or, more accurately, a thing now just used to fill up the schedule on the SyFy Channel).

But it's hard to find people who hate it, and, while it may not be a film that many have rushed to revisit in recent years, it's been able to retain a place in our collective consciousness thanks to some memorable lines of dialogue and a rich and full-bodied Hans Zimmer score.

Crowe is Maximus, a successful military man who does his best in the service of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius (Richard Harris), but his situation changes drastically when the Emperor dies, to be succeeded by his son, Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix). His life ruined, although somehow not ended, Maximus ends up enslaved, which leads him to be pitted against others in fighting competitions. Showing a knack for combat tactics, as well as self-preservation, Maximus is soon on his way to becoming a bit of a celebrity on the gladiator world, a violent system that could lead to his freedom. Maybe he doesn't need his freedom though. Maybe he just wants another chance to be within sword-slashing distance of Commodus.

Starting with a grand battle scene before moving into a series of more personal fights, Gladiator is a genuine crowd-pleaser that works all the better for having no trace of concern about the whole thing being a mish-mash of familiar elements and top-quality ham. The fact is that everyone commits to their roles, as well as to the tone of the material, and they enjoy the ham with such lip-smacking relish that it becomes absolutely glorious. The script, written by David Franzoni, John Logan, and William Nicholson, helps with a good selection of great lines of dialogue, and Scott does all he can to ensure that the 155-minute runtime practically passes by like a light breeze through the fields of Elysium.

Crowe has rarely been better, giving a performance that puts his character in strong contention for a place in the cinematic heroes hall of fame, and I would say something similar about Phoenix, especially when we all know that a good hero needs a good villain to make the whole thing worthwhile. Harris is effective in his brief supporting turn, Oliver Reed livens up a character, a trader/gladiator trainer named Proximo, that could easily have been left to fade into the background, and Djimon Hounsou is one of two other main gladiators onscreen that we get to stay invested in throughout. Connie Nielsen has to repeat lines about living in fear a bit too often, but she also does well enough to be memorable in her role (Lucilla, sister of Commodus), and Derek Jacobi, David Schofield, John Shrapnel, Tomas Arana, David Hemmings, and Tommy Flanagan are all uniformly excellent in their respective roles.

Brilliantly bombastic, full of spectacle without feeling overstuffed or overdone, and reworking the essence of classic epics into something that somehow feels both comfortingly old-fashioned and enjoyably updated, Gladiator is superior blockbuster fare. And if you are watching it with anyone who hasn't seen it before then you get the added pleasure of jumping up while the end credits roll and shouting "are you not entertained?"

9/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Joker: Folie à Deux (2024)

I was one of many people who ended up enjoying Joker when it was released back in 2019. It was a divisive movie though, and many hated it. Surprising as it may seem, one of the people who seems to have hated it more than most is . . . director Todd Phillips. Well, to be more accurate, he seems to hate the character, and seems to hate how he has been held up as some icon of cool. And the people who use images of Joker and Harley Quinn to state "couple goals"? Yeah, Phillips hates you just as much, if not more so.

It's time for Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix reprising the role) to be put on trial. Having been imprisoned since the events of the last movie, Fleck has become a lightning rod for an uneasy population thinking they may have an anarchic hero to support and push forward like a giant wrecking ball. Arthur gets the attention of Lee Quinzel (Lady Gaga), the two sharing a love of daydreaming their way through some song and dance numbers, but this doesn't sit well with his lawyer, Maryanne Stewart (Catherine Keener). None of this growing unrest, nor the celebrity prisoner's growing popularity, sits well with prison officer Jackie Sullivan (Brendan Gleeson), which essentially paints a large target on Arthur's back.

EVERYTHING that was good about Joker is destroyed here. Everything. And when I say destroyed I mean fully torn apart, shredded, pulped, shredded again, set on fire, and the ashes packed into a small rocket that is fired directly into the sun. Did you like the visual style? It's here again, but somehow feels like the lazy choice this time around, especially when it invaded even the scenes that should make use of some colour and light. Did you like the nihilism and misanthropy? It's here, but it's so constantly in your face that it feels like an angry toddler pulling on your ears as it screams Nietzsche quotes at you. Did you like the central character? You shouldn't, not according to Phillips anyway. Joker is a weak and pathetic victim, unexpectedly elevated to a position of power that he is absolutely unprepared for.

I'm not exaggerating when I say that Phillips tries hard to make his disdain palpable in every scene. There are very few moments here that actually work in movie terms, and one of those atypical treats happens at the very beginning of the film (a bit of animation that hints at an anarchy and energy the rest of the film stubbornly refuses to revisit), and even the much-discussed musical numbers fall flat because a) Phillips refuses to commit to them, and b) they feel as if they're just present to deliberately repel anyone who enjoyed the first film. There's something slightly admirable about Phillips making use of the money and resources available to create such a huge Joker-topped pyre, but it also feels, well, just a bit rude.

At least there's a decent cast, and I don't really have any complaints about Gaga, Gleeson, Keener, Zazie Beetz, Steve Coogan, Harry Lawtey (as a rather bland Harvey Dent), and Leigh Gill. I do have complaints about Phoenix though, and the fact that he is still the main star means that his awful performance helps to damage the film in a way that I am sure Phillips actively encouraged. Phoenix is limp and lifeless throughout, except for the moments in which he deliberately chooses to overact and fool around. Everything he did so well in the first movie is alchemically transformed from gold to lead this time around.

Phillips, co-writing the screenplay once again with Scott Silver, does everything to ensure that this second film puts a handful of nails in the coffin of the main character. Both he and his leading man should be embarrassed by how bad this is, but I suspect they're already on to other projects without giving this a second thought. It's just fans who will be affected by it, fans of the Joker and/or fans of cinema. And Phillips couldn't be clearer about what he thinks of those people. Remember that the next time he works on something that he actually cares about.

3/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Beau Is Afraid (2023)

It is easy to see why some would despise Beau Is Afraid. Not only is it an indulgent and very odd film, it also has a vein of humour running throughout that many people won’t find funny.

Written and directed by Ari Aster, what you have here is essentially an anxiety nightmare that shows us the journey of the titular Beau (mainly played by Joaquin Phoenix) as he leaves his home to visit his mother. Whether that visit is a good idea or not . . . well, it’s nothing compared to the trip that Beau is taking through his own psyche. And you could easily argue that what we see is entirely within Beau’s psyche. Basically, feel free to read this review as coming from someone who is trying to keep all interpretations available to other people who have yet to experience the film.

Although I wasn’t as immediately impressed with Aster’s earlier works as many others were, he is impossible to dismiss due to his commitment to a particular brand of stylish visuals bolted to a sense of growing dread, helped along once again by a score from Bobby Klric AKA The Haxan Cloak. I loved Midsommar (despite it so unabashedly riffing on a legendary horror genre title) and I went into this with cautious optimism. Although very different from his previous film, this is a dark comedy that fits perfectly in his filmography. No surprise really, especially when you consider that it is an expansion of a short film he made years ago.

Phoenix is as superb as you would expect in the central role, always taking his anxiety and awkwardness as far as he can, and the film easily rests on his shoulders for most of the runtime. It’s not a solo show though, and he’s given great support from Nathan Lane, Amy Ryan, Kylie Rogers, Patti LuPone and Zoe Lister-Jones (playing two incarnations of one character), Parker Posey, and, as a younger Beau, Armen Nahapetian. Picking out one highlight is impossible, and there are other notable names here that I am failing to mention, but everyone is pitch-perfect and in line with Aster’s vision, even as it stumbles from sharp humour to outright horror, and from the sublime to the ridiculous.

The best thing about the film, however, is the truth at the heart of it. There are laughs and scares here that many of us have experienced at least once in life, pulsating cysts that grew from unattended childhood wounds, and Aster successfully grounds those identifiable elements in a moving collage of guilt, remorse, and extreme self-loathing, the kind that makes you see your own reflection as a grotesque puppet hung from the strings of every one of your perceived inadequacies.

Much like the central character, this is hard to love. But much like a parent of a child I have irreparably damaged with my own projected angst and insecurities, I still managed to love it anyway. 

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Joker (2019)

Director Todd Phillips, who also co-wrote the screenplay for Joker with Scott Silver, isn't really someone you might associate with gritty and compelling psychological dramas. He sets out to change that here, and many people view it as an absolute success. I really like Joker, but there are two main points (maybe three) that drag it down slightly, which I will get to in due course.

Joaquin Phoenix plays Arthur Fleck, a man with some serious mental health issues, and a pretty poor quality of life. He wants to be a comedian, but he's not good at making people laugh. He may, however, be good at laughing while he plans to get revenge on people around him. But his fortunes may change if he gets the chance to appear on the chat show hosted by Murray Franklin (Robert De Niro).

Okay, first of all, a lot of people have criticised Joker for being little more than a diluted mash-up/reworking of Taxi Driver and The King Of Comedy. I'm not going to wield those reference points as weapons in any criticism of the film, because I feel that other great films can come from directors hewing close to past classics. This does go VERY close to both of those films, but there are so many worse films that Phillips could have had in his sights.

What works here, and works so well, is the performance from Phoenix. His portrayal of a man pushed further and further into the black pit of a complete mental breakdown is absolutely compelling. He's a superb Arthur Fleck. What he isn't, to me, is a superb Joker. I just don't see enough of that character in this interpretation, which is entirely to do with my own experience of the character through the years, from the comics to the TV show to the various movies. I am all for all of the praise being heaped upon Phoenix for his performance here. I just can't agree with anyone who labels him as the new gold standard for interpretations of the Joker (although nobody will ever be worse than Leto, I think that low point is safe).

There's also a good world created onscreen, a Gotham that is teeming with people who are struggling to get through their everyday lives. This is a pre-Batman Gotham. Not so much dark and full of convenient shadows, it's more like an interconnected set of glass cubes, each one oppressive and reeking of nicotine and potentially-contagious diseases.

The rest of the cast also do a great job. I'd be tempted to call them flawless if the casting of De Niro in his pivotal role didn't seem so much like an obvious stunt. He is good though, and has fun in his small amount of screentime, as is Zazie Beetz, the third point in the central triangle that the film creates. Frances Conroy, Brett Cullen, Shea Whigham, Marc Maron, and Douglas Hodge are on par with one another, portraying a mix of new characters and some you may be familiar with, albeit in a different guise.

These positives are enough to make this a very good movie, and it remains a very good movie, despite my three main problems with it. So bear that in mind, and let's move on to the negatives.

First up is the script. It's not terrible, by any means, but Phillips and Silver rely on the cast to elevate their words. Which the cast manage to do, seriously limiting the damage that could have been caused here.

My second and third main issues stem from the same thing so I'll just bundle them together here. This film has been hailed as an interesting departure from standard comic-book movies, it has been described as a scathing commentary on some major problems in the current climate in America. It's not. It's neither of those things, and that stems from Phillips giving himself an easier option when the opportunities arose. He made much of the fact that this was a standalone film, this Joker was different from what you'd seen before, and it didn't necessarily have to tie in to any DC movie universe. So why, WHY, even bring in the characters who make up the Wayne household? Those scenes feel like fan-service, they feel out of place, and they feel totally unearned (I know that doesn't seem like the right word, but it is, somehow). And as for the scathing commentary, I don't deny that Phillips works some very good points into the movie, and even has them at the heart of the whole thing, but he gives himself an "out" by setting it in the early 1980s. That allows him to shrug, it gives him plausible deniability, it really dulls what could have been a sharp, relevant message for people who may squirm when forced to look at the mirror being held up to modern society. Phillips decides not to commit to holding up the mirror, instead settling for a kaleidoscope. And everything looks a little better through a kaleidoscope.

There's plenty to like here, even plenty to admire, and it does feel like a more interesting film from Phillips than anything else he has done, to date. It's far from perfect though, and I think people have forgiven some mis-steps because they were impressed by the kaleidoscope.

8/10

You can buy the movie here.
Americans can buy the movie here.

Mubi Monday: The Sisters Brothers (2018)

A bit of a change of pace for director Jacques Audiard, The Sisters Brothers is an enjoyable dark comedy Western that benefits immensely from two central performances from Joaquin Phoenix and John C. Reilly.

The two play the titular brothers, men who end up on a quest to chase down two men (played by Riz Ahmed and Jake Gyllenhaal) who may be on to a winning formula for gold prospecting. They encounter difficulties along the way, of course, caused by people who want to end their lives, and the excessive drinking of Charlie.

Although featuring all of the usual things you expect to see in a Western, this is atypical in the way the characters are shown and the situations developed. Our two leads are not on some honourable quest, for example. They are being sent after men by a figure known as The Commodore (Rutger Hauer). Loyalties change, character flaws are not fixed in any major moment of redemption, and you never expect anyone to ride off into the sunset.

Reilly and Phoenix may not be two actors you would think of pairing up as brothers but both work really well in their roles, with the former being slightly in the shadow of the latter, although both can step up to the mark when guns need drawn and the bullets start flying. Ahmed is very good as the young man out to make his fortune with brains over toil, and Gyllenhaal is equally good as the man who does his best to stick close to him. You also get a good selection of supporting players, with enjoyable turns from Rebecca Root, Allison Tolman, and the smallest of roles for Carol Kane.

The script, co-written by Audiard and his frequent collaborator Thomas Bidegain (based on the novel of the same name by Patrick DeWitt), is strong. Characters are fleshed out very quickly, with more being added to them as the plot winds from beat to beat, and there are some cracking lines of dialogue (a favourite of mine being Phoenix talking to the citizens of a town named Mayfield).

The direction is also strong, as you may expect if you've seen anything else from Audiard. He keeps everything feeling firmly rooted in the genre while giving most scenes enough of a little twist to make it all feel slightly different from the norm and fresh. There's also some typically wonderful music throughout from Alexandre Desplat (another favourite collaborator of Audiard) and some nice cinematography throughout from Benoît Debie, making a lot of the more unpleasant moments seem more palatable.

8/10

Here's a disc.
And Americans can get it here.

You Were Never Really Here (2017)

There are a lot of familiar elements in You Were Never Really Here and if I simply listed them without further explanation then you could be forgiven for thinking that this was just another retread of overheated tropes and cliches. Its a film about a man you pay to get jobs done without needing the police. There's a little girl needing saved, although she may be a lot tougher and smarter than she looks. There's betrayal. And, of course, a job goes horribly wrong. Thankfully, there's a lot more to this film than just those elements. Writer-director Lynne Ramsay, adapating a novella by Jonathan Ames, uses this storyline to explore the psychology of the main character and to show the drip drip drip of the violence and bloodshed eroding his core. But is it his mind going? His heart and soul? His humanity? Or is it possible to repair the damage?

Joaquin Phoenix plays Joe, a man who spends a lot of his time rescuing snatched children, not averse to also killing people in his way with whatever he thinks will do the job best (like a hammer, for example). He also cares for his mother (Judith Roberts). When he's asked to track down the missing daughter of a politician, he goes about things in his usual, effective manner. All seems to go well . . . until it doesn't. As he realises what he's gotten himself into, Joe becomes more and more determined to rescue the young girl (played by Ekaterina Samsonov). That's not going to end well for the criminals, but it might not end well for Joe either.

I enjoyed You Were Never Really Here while it was on. Ramsay intercuts the main narrative with a number of sequences showing fragments of flashbacks and dreams that continue to upset Joe, showing that he's a man who may never find peace. Yet she also delivers in the standard scenes of vengeance/vigilante justice. The violence is depicted in a messy and brutal way, making it all the more effective as viewers can realise what Joe goes through with every life he takes. Physical struggles that take their toll, sharp things puncturing soft tissue, blood and sweat and, yes, a few tears. It's always brief, often only the after-effects are shown, but the film remains steeped in it for much of the runtime.

The choices made by Ramsay are interesting, mainly because of how she still presents viewers with touchstones from these kinds of movies while also using every action and interaction to delve deeper into the mind of Joe, but it helps her cause immensely that she has Phoenix in the main role. He's an actor often able to give great performances and this ranks up there with one of his very best. By turns scary, vulnerable, confident, suicidal, caring, and cold-hearted, there may be other people who turn up onscreen but I can't recall many of them. Roberts and Samsonov are the others who stand out, not because of other characters being underwritten or expendable but because of how strongly they impact on the life of Joe, and therefore affect his mindset for the majority of the movie.

There's something stopping me from rating this as a perfect film just now, which isn't to say that it won't happen when I revisit it some time in the future. Everything works so beautifully, bookended by acts of violence that shock in different ways. You also get a strange and wonderful Jonny Greenwood score as the icing on the cake.

If you're a fan of Ramsay or Phoenix (and why wouldn't you be?) then you owe it to yourself to see this film. I may even come back to this review soon to round up my rating.

9/10

Buy the blu here.
Americans will be able to get it here.

Parenthood (1989)

Featuring Keanu Reeves before he was best known from Bill and Ted and years before he was Neo, Joaquin Phoenix while he was still known as Leaf and Martha Plimpton . . . . . . when she was known, Parenthood is a fun '80s movie that holds up today just as well as it did when it was first released. It may run slightly overlong, but it's well paced with some big laughs in between all of the wry observations on the joys and perils of parenthood.

Steve Martin and Mary Steenburgen are the main characters, Gil and Karen Buckman, but the narrative also spends plenty of time with Dianne Wiest (playing Helen Buckman, single mother and Gil's sister), Harley Kozak and Rick Moranis (Gil's other sister and her partner), Tom Hulce (Gil's brother) and Jason Robards (Gil's father). The aforementioned Keanu Reeves and Martha Plimpton are a tempestuous, teenage couple (with Plimpton also being Weist's daughter in the film) and Phoenix is Wiest's sullen young son.

Directed by Ron Howard, the film benefits from both the ensemble cast and a fun script written by Lowell Ganz and Babaloo Mandel. The drama and comedy is nicely mixed together in perfect amounts, with a real little bonus for Steve Martin fans as he gets to reference his past live material in a scene that has him creating some balloon animals (yeah, maybe not worth singling out, but I've always loved that sequence more than any other part of the movie).

Everyone gets to have at least one great moment, even the wonderful Helen Shaw (playing the grandma) in the last role of her brief film career. Martin gets to have lots of fun and Steenburgen is superb, but Wiest, Plimpton, Reeves and Phoenix really end up stealing the movie by the time the end credits roll. Moranis and Kozak are both very funny as rather pushy parents, Jason Robards is as good as ever and Tom Hulce does a good job at being a bit of a selfish ass. And then there are the kids, running around and causing problems. I'm not going to say that they all give wonderful, flawless performances but they're all very good at being, well, kids. Job done.

This will definitely appeal more to those who can identify with the many unique situations that come from being a parent, but there's also plenty here to appeal to everyone else. Because we all have some kind of family, which is equally what the film is looking at for most of the runtime.

8/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Steve-Martin-Collection-DVD/dp/B000QJMSFA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1374525282&sr=8-1&keywords=steve+martin