Mubi Monday: The General (1998)

Directed by the great John Boorman (who has also given us a number of not so great movies, but his wins far exceed his losses), The General tells the story of the life of Martin Cahill, an Irish criminal who spent a long time avoiding and frustrating the Garda throughout the 1980s and early 1990s. The fact that he is played here by Brendan Gleeson ensures that viewers are unlikely to hate him.

Things start off well enough. After being in and out of trouble from a young age, Cahill is shown steadfastly refusing to move from a site that has been scheduled for demolition. His reasoning? He wants a better choice of alternative accommodation, and he gets it. Good for him. But we soon see the other side of Cahill, the man happy to rob, threaten, and beat anyone he views as a target. He will depositing thousands of pounds into a bank account and then visit a local police station to have an alibi while his cronies rob the bank and get his money right back to him. He will wave guns under the noses of people, he will plant bombs to potentially kill professional witnesses, and he will even nail someone to a snooker table if he thinks they have been skimming profit from him. Meanwhile, his home life is a non-traditional, but happy, set-up with Frances (Maria Doyle Kennedy) and her sister, Tina (Angeline Ball), as well as the children he has fathered with each of them.

Although black and white when it was shown in cinemas, I saw it presented a visual palette so muted that it often seemed as if it was in black and white anyway, but the occasional patches of colour managed to catch the eye (particularly the aforementioned snooker table). Not being utilised for any big “wow” moments, the cinematography and colour (or lack of colour) simply keep viewers more easily in the time and place alongside the characters.

Boorman, adapting the book by Paul Williams, as well as including a reference to the time he himself was robbed by Cahill (a gold record stolen from his home), does a decent enough job at showing the criminal operation, as well as showing the continuing efforts of the police trying to get their man. Where he falls down is in the tone of the film, making Cahill a loveable rogue for most of the runtime, instead of the callous and opportunistic criminal that he was. I am all for any kind of “Robin Hood” character, but that’s not what we see here, although maybe those romanticising his life want to see him that way.

Gleeson surely relished this role, a perfect fit for him and one of his best lead roles (which is saying something). Whatever problems I may have with the material, Gleeson is faultless. He’s given great support from Kennedy and Ball, who are both allowed to feel like more than just “daft wee wimmen”, and there are good performances from Adrian Dunbar and Sean McCginley, as crooks, and Jon Voight, as the main cop butting heads with Cahill. Yes, Voight’s accent is far from perfect, but it’s surprisingly not all that bad for most of his scenes. Not bad at all.

It’s really hard to rate this. There were so many moments I really enjoyed, partly BECAUSE Boorman and Gleeson work hard to keep Cahill such a cheeky charmer, but the moments that troubled me, moments of violence and nastiness that were moved past all too quickly, helped to build up a bitter taste that I couldn’t rinse away, even hours after the film had finished. Maybe many people view Cahill the way that Boorman depicts him, and maybe I would be feeling different if this was some Scottish criminal I had grown up knowing, and viewed as a bad person who also did some good things, but the film errs in maintaining an apparent lack of judgement.

As a film, it works brilliantly. As a film about Cahill, it doesn’t do so well.

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

Byzantium (2012)

Director Neil Jordan is no stranger to the vampire movie. He did, quite famously, bring Interview With The Vampire to the big screen, somehow managing to craft a brilliant film despite the death of one of the original cast members (River Phoenix), criticism from author Anne Rice (who eventually recanted when she saw the final result), and ridicule from everyone who thought Tom Cruise incapable of effectively portraying the vampire Lestat. Well, Byzantium may not be quite the achievement that Interview With The Vampire is/was, but it's another very good film from a director who provides viewers with consistently interesting works, barring one or two mis-steps.

Gemma Arterton and Saoirse Ronan are the two young women being a bit vampiric. They seem to be able to walk about in daylight, and don't sleep in coffins or anything, but when it comes time to label their characters . . . . . . . . . vampire is the most suitable title. Struggling to make ends meet and avoid scrutiny from the authorities, the two seem stuck in a vicious cycle, with Arterton's character using sex to make money and help her look after the youngster. But things are complicated by a young man (Caleb Landry Jones) who takes more than a passing interest in Ronan's character. As things build up to a climax, viewers are also told more and more of the main backstory to the characters, a tale that allows Jordan to once again refresh and play with the mythology of vampirism.

Not quite as interesting or thought-provoking as it could be, Byzantium is nevertheless a solid entry into the vampire movie subgenre. Written by Moira Buffini, adapting from her own play (and, admirably, the film never feels stagey at any time), there are some very interesting ideas toyed with, including a theory about vampirism being quite a "men only" club, but not enough time given to any of them.

Jordan does his usual great work as director, but his work here is often downplaying anything that would make the story too pretty or evocative of past horror work. This is the life of a vampire shown in all of its mundanity. Sitting between the fangs-out fun of films such as The Lost Boys, and Vamp, and the grimy, downbeat likes of Martin and The Addiction, Byzantium shows just how boring eternal life can be when it means always having to move along every few years and never being able to get close to anyone.

Arterton and Ronan are both fantastic in the lead roles, with the former really making it easy to believe how men could be won over by her, and the latter doing a great job of being an old head on young shoulders. Caleb Landry Jones overdoes the strangeness of his character, and his accent/mumbling doesn't help, but there are better supporting turns from Daniel Mays, as a very sweet man who becomes smitten, Sam Riley, Uri Gavriel, Tom Hollander, Maria Doyle Kennedy, and Jonny Lee Miller, having great fun as a complete bastard.

Although this is the weakest of the recent crop of vampire movies from the past few years (fans of fangs will most certainly want to check out We Are The Night and Kiss Of The Damned), it's still well worth a watch thanks to most of the main performances, a few great visual moments, and a thoughtful script.

7/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Byzantium-Blu-ray-Gemma-Arterton/dp/B00BJ0RLMK/ref=sr_1_1?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1390686045&sr=1-1&keywords=byzantium+blu