Joker

Joker (2019) 

Starring Joaquin Phoenix and Robert De Niro
Directed by Todd Phillips 

To say that Joker was highly anticipated is something of an understatement.  The idea of an origin story for DC's most iconic villain, eschewing the convention of having him square off against his archenemy but focusing on how he came to be, was an enticing one.  It was always particularly intriguing because those origins as previously depicted in print and film have varied considerably.  It provided an opportunity to create something genuinely original, within a familiar environment.  Casting Joaquin Phoenix in the central role seemed a masterstroke, even if the choice of writer-director Todd Phillips, who gave us the basely comedic and frankly somewhat distasteful Hangover movies, seemed a unconventional. Initial buzz was positive but mostly measured; but then came La Biennale Di Venezia - the Venice Film Festival - from which the film walked away with the top prize, The Golden Lion, for Best Film.  Word was out that this wasn't really a Comic Book Movie (CBM) in any real (ie crash! bang! explosions! cgi!) sense, but a much more interesting and incisive picture about a man trying to deal with psychological issues (I hate to use the now somehow cheapened buzzwords 'mental health') and descending into paranoia, introversion, and then obsession to the point at which he could become a violent maniac, and criminal.  A Clown Prince of Crime, if you will.

After that reception, there was a predictable backlash, with many commentators accusing it - often without actually having seen the thing - of glorifying violence, and predicting that it would incite killing, not unlike the sad incident in the US in 2012.  So by the time the film arrived in UK cinemas in October there was a genuinely uncertain feeling about what the film was, how it would be assessed (or reassessed, in many cases) by the critics, and most importantly, how it would be received by cinemagoers in general.  Some months on, the answers to those questions have turned out to be remarkable.  Joker took £12.6m on its UK opening, and went on to top the box office for five weeks.  Internationally, it has grossed over $1bn worldwide, making it not only the first R-rated film to do so, but also, cent for cent, technically more profitable than even Avengers: Endgame.  Critics were predictably divided, but overall positive.  One thing was certain, though: this was one of those films which everyone was talking about, and so one you had to see, even just to talk about.  And now that Awards Season has arrived, early signs are that it will be recognised on its merit rather than ignored for its commercial success, as has been the case with some films in the past. Phoenix won the Best Actor award at the Golden Globes. BAFTA and Oscars ahoy.

So what of the film itself?  We are taken back to Gotham City in the early 80s, where poverty is prevalent and the masses are disaffected.  The film opens with the old Warner logo of the 1980s, to alleviate doubt.  This is very clearly NYC, but unlike previous filmic iterations of Gotham, there is little attempt to mask this; but it's clear that this is the arena from which these characters would come.  We meet Arthur Fleck, a clinically diagnosed depressive, on seven different forms of medication, working as a party clown and part time human signpost.  He is affected by a rare disorder which causes him to laugh uncontrollably as an emotional response, and he carries a card to inform others when it happens. Arthur aspires to be a stand up comedian, and idolises tv host Murray Franklin (Robert De Niro).  Following a confrontation with some vile Wall Street types on a Metro train, Arthur unleashes his frustration, kills them - even pursuing one down the platform to finish the job - and the Joker is born, set to go on to dig up his past and eventually explode into the future.  This leads, eventually, to an encounter with Gotham mayoral candidate Thomas Wayne (father of Bruce, the future Batman), an appearance on Franklin's show, and another shocking killing.  The Joker identity is adopted by the mask-wearing masses, who rise up and riot; the film ends on an amiguous note.  Is this Joker-inspired action of the crowd real, or just something in Arthur's twisted mind?

 

Joker mimmics the comic book aesthetic, despite its obviously grittier tone.  In a section in which Arthur breaks into a charity event, for example, rather than showing the whole process, it progresses quickly from outside to inside in a few shots.  It's as if skimming from one pane on a comic's page to the next.  It's subtle but apt.  And as comics so often take existing notions but alter them slightly to tell their stories, this film leans heavily on a pair of films already made.  Arthur's lonely obsession is clearly influenced by that of Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver, and his desire to appear on Franklin's show directly parallells that of Rupert Pupkin in King of Comedy.   Both films were directed by Martin Scorsese, so the gritty New York setting is intended and appropriate. And both were led by Robert DeNiro.  Here the roles are reversed.  DeNiro, playing Murray Franklin, is the glib showbiz host rather than the unstable wannabe, but the link can't be ignored.  Things are very much up-and-down too, reflecting the character's mental state; Arthur has to climb one side of a hill and descend the other when he goes to his home.  Always climbing and descending, level on the ground or kicked to the floor. In one of the most memorable scenes, immediately following a killing, he dances his way down a long flight of steps to the soundtrack of Rock and Roll Part 2 (arguably the biggest of tasteless missteps, but that's a different matter).  Phillips shows this playing out simultaneously at regular speed and in slow motion.  Both are showing different states of mind.  Stylistically, it's perfect.  Phoenix's performance is simply incredible, and deserving of all and any plaudits.  The Joker is perhaps the hardest role for an actor to take on in this kind of film.  After Jack Nicholson's over the top, top-billing-stealing turn in 1989, Heath Ledger's posthumous Oscar winning twitchy, head-messing show in 2008, and Jared Leto's brave (and unfairly maligned) re-imagining in 2016 one might have thought that this was a no-win position from the start, but the character's depiction here as a regular guy going extremely bad is such that the role can be approached in a new way.

This is, without doubt, a dirty, nasty experience.  It doesn't shy away from unpleasantness and doesn't play it for laughs.  Arthur's opression eventually errupts into exhuberance, for which the viewer could or should perhaps feel guilty and shouldn't emerge from the cinema exhilarated, but rather thoughtful.  If it confounds us, so much the better.  But it seeks to raise the artistic and stylistic stakes within the CBM world, messing with the formula and expectations, and because of it attracted a huge audience to a film which is essentially a character piece about a mentally unwell loner.  It presses enough of the DC buttons with sly nods to that sphere to bring that audience in, and Warners deserve credit for taking the risk.  Joker isn't a perfect movie, but what will be debated for years to come, regardless of its box office taking and any awards it might pick up, is whether the Comic Book movie will ever be taken as seriously as an art form as any other film genre.  I would say that it should.

"When I said I was going to be a comedian they all laughed.  Well they're not laughing now, are they?"

 (Bob Monkhouse)

Batman

Batman (1989)

Starring Michael Keaton and Jack Nicholson
Directed by Tim Burton 

1989 was a big year for films, particularly summer season blockbusters.  Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, the last of that trilogy (...) was the worldwide box office champion, taking over $474 million worldwide, but the cinema was awash with 'big' films, arguably more so than any year previously.  Alongside Lethal Weapon 2, Ghostbusters 2, and later in the year, Back to the Future Part 2, the one which generated the most hype was Batman.  It was directed by Tim Burton, the former Disney animator and concept artist, then best known for directing Pee-wee's Big Adventure, and the supernatural horror comedy Beetlejuice.  A strange choice, perhaps, to take charge of a $30 million undertaking, Burton nonetheless overcame  production difficulties, which saw the budget rise to almost $50m, and casting controversies, over which fans reacted with hostility to the primarily comedic actor Michael Keaton taking the dual roles of millionaire Bruce Wayne and his eponymous vigilante alter ego, to deliver a modern motion picture milestone.  It is rich with his now famous 'darkness', reclaiming the character and brand from the overwhelmingly camp tone of the popular 1960s television series, and rightly veering away from the All American goodness of the successful Superman adventures of the late 1970s and early 80s.  It led to four 'proper' sequels, Burton's own Batman Returns in 1992, and Joel Schumacher's Batman Forever and Batman and Robin in 1995 and 1998 respectively.  The latter is said to have "killed the franchise", but the character was brought back in director Christopher Nolan's commercially and critically successful Dark Knight trilogy, and lives on as part of Warner Brothers' DCEU, with a standalone film Joker due for release later in 2019.  Despite Batman not being a superhero per se, Buton's Batman could easily be said to be the film that gave rise to the current proliferation of Superhero films in cinemas.

From the outset the film is distinctive and stylized.  Gotham City is shown in wide as a place of towering skyscrapers, distant wailing sirens, and wall to wall traffic, but at street level things are bustling, litter-strewn and noisy, a  melting pot of styles and sounds.  Men dress in what seem to be outfits from the 1940s, snappy suits, fedoras and raincoats, but the song The Future plays on a stereo by the side of the road.  The architecture and inhabitants of this environment seem somewhat modern, but strangely lost in time, and the design recalls previous cinematic visions from Fritz Lang's Metropolis to Ridley Scott's Blade Runner to Terry Gilliam's Brazil.  In a parallel to the childhood murder of Bruce Wayne's own parents, which would give rise to the thorn in his psyche that would become the Batman, a smartly dressed couple and their young son get lost in the maze of Gotham's backstreets, and are set upon, robbed and killed by two hoodlums.  Enter "the bat" not to kill, but to tell them to spread the word and create fear among the criminals.  Hearing that word is Alexander Knox (Robert Wuhl) a dogged reporter for the Gotham Globe newspaper, whom nobody believes before the entrance of freelance photographer Vicki Vale (Kim Basinger).  Together they attend a fundraiser for the city's 200th Anniversary celebrations at Wayne's mansion, where their host comes across as carefree, bumbling and absent minded, seemingly saved at every turn from disaster by his trusty butler Alfred (Michael Gough).  Across town, narcissistic gangster Jack Napier (a snarling, arrogant Jack Nicholson) is set up by his boss, crime lord Carl Grissom (Jack Palance), to take the fall for a burglary at a chemical factory.  Acting on a tip off to Police Commissioner Gordon (Pat Hingle), captured by Wayne's surveillance, Batman springs into action to foil the raid, and in the ensuing chaos, accidentally drops Napier  into a vat of chemicals.  The gangster emerges transformed into the Joker.  Thus the plot settles on a straightforward struggle for control of the city between Batman and the Joker, and three strands of investigation; each attempts to uncover their adversary's true identity, as does Vale, albeit whilst pursuing a romance with Wayne.

The much-mooted darkness seems tame by today's standards, despite being hitherto unseen in this type of film.  It is certainly present; Bruce Wayne is clearly a tortured individual and Batman shows little conscience, save for a desire to protect the innocent, whilst the Joker is a full-on crazy, casually shooting underlings and electrocuting a rival to death with a gruesomely comic hand buzzer, among other methods.  The dark atmosphere of the city, vividly brought to life by Anton Furst and Peter Young's Oscar winning production design and Roger Pratt's cinematography, envelops every aspect of the frame.  The few scenes of daylight are far from sun-drenched; there's no greenery in sight, and grey clouds fill the sky.  But the violence is largely implicit rather than gory.  The death of the family in the opening scene occurs off screen, and the murder of Wayne's parents is shown moodily, in slow motion, as he recalls the memory.  Elsewhere, the Joker's goons are kicked and punched but slump away inconsequentially, only one is shown grimly plummeting to his death from the top of Gotham's cathedral.  And, unsurprisingly, with the Joker on board, much is played for laughs.  "As my plastic surgeon always said," he quips, "If you gotta go, go with a smile!".  Knox and Alfred provide comic relief too.  "He must have been king of the wicker people!" observes the former, inspecting an exotic suit of armour on display in Wayne's House. And, standing in front of a floor to ceiling mirror in the same room, "Maybe it should be Bruce Vain".  As menacing as things are when the Joker vandalizes the Flugelheim art museum or sets upon the citizens of Gotham with poison gas, it's offset by his goofy gas masks, the garish purples and greens of his costumes, and Prince's funk-driven pop music which provides his themes.  The adversaries are presented as two sides of the same coin.  "You idiot!" says the Joker while fighting Batman, "You made me. You dropped me into that vat of  chemicals".  "I made you" comes the retort, "You made me first", after Wayne realises it was the younger hood who murdered his parents, given away by his words "You ever dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?".  But whereas the Batsuit weighs heavily on its wearer, Joker seems to liberate and enliven Napier, instilling in him a manic, cackling, if sadistic glee.  To that effect Keaton and Nicholson play off each other impressively.  Nicholson gets top billing and does his utmost to walk away with the film, but the film is named for Keaton's character.  He'll be back for the sequel (but only one of them).

The impressive visuals and ambience can't quite compensate for a script and plot which seem almost like an afterthought or a necessary evil.  The 153 day strike of 1988 by the Writers Guild of America impacted the making of the film.  Sam Hamm, the writer of the initial screenplay based on a treatment by Burton and his then girlfriend Julie Hickson was unable to complete the work, so Warren Skaaren (writer of Beetlejuice) was brought in to continue.  This is evident in the film's climax, which evinces an uncertainty about how it would end.  Indeed the film noticeably splutters in its final act.  In an attempt to counter the Joker's scheme to poison the city's cosmetics, Batman drives his armoured Batmobile into the Axis Chemicals factory and although he has already determined the deadly combinations - he is meant to be the "world's greatest detective", after all - rather than working to counteract them, he simply blows the factory up.  This acts as a cue for an extended explosive finale in which Batman mounts his Batwing plane in an attempt to sell more toys thwart Joker's destructive plans for the Anniversary Parade and bring him to heel.  Aside from one lovely shot where the Batwing rises above the clouds and is silhouetted against the full moon, this sequence is utterly redundant.  An array of machine guns and rockets line up and zero in on their target, but the Joker stands unharmed as they rain down around him.  He then pulls out an unfeasibly long-barreled  revolver and shoots the plane down.  The Joker then flees to the bell tower of the abandoned, decaying cathedral with a captive Vicki Vale in tow; Batman pursues him to the top, they struggle, and the villain falls to his death.  Later, Vale meets Alfred to return to Wayne's home, while Batman surveys the night sky, illuminated by a searchlight bearing the Bat symbol, a newly inaugurated call to arms for future emergencies.  There are some great gothic touches in this climax, as Batman battles Joker's henchmen, crashing one into a giant bell with a plangent clang, and the Joker engaging in a face-off with a stone gargoyle.  Ultimately, though, it's a rushed and perfunctory conclusion to what had been an engaging rivalry.

There are many fascinating aspects of the story which were, understandably, dropped from the final screenplay or changed.  One version of the script, which was storyboarded and recently surfaced as a dvd extra, showed the introduction of sidekick Robin, the Boy Wonder.  It was dropped from this film, although eventually used in the third, Batman Forever.  One change to the mythos to which some fans of the comics objected was making Jack Napier responsible for the death of Wayne's  parents.  Any die hard Bat-fan will tell you it was mugger Joe Chill; this was restored (righted?) in Batman Begins (2005).  In this instance it doesn't matter to the casual viewer, and it serves the duality theme of the story well.  Despite these details, and its fizzling denouement notwithstanding, the film is a fairly satisfying entertainment.  The narrative shortcomings are largely compensated for by the performances, stunning visuals, twisted sense of humour, and Danny Elfman's magnificent score.  Characterisation isn't overly complex, and whether that could be expected from a comic book source is a different question, however it holds the viewer's interest.  Keaton's rendering of Bruce Wayne is of "a pleasingly comic fellow", noted Pauline Kael, and his Batman has "a sort of menace that is disturbingly close to psychotic, wrote Mark Hughes.  Nicholson's Napier / Joker, meanwhile, is credited with being the electric performance from a big name star which gave legitimacy to a lightweight proposition.

Watching Batman a scarcely believable 30 years on, many of the traits which marked it out as daring and original are now de rigeur.   In part, viewing it outside the context of its own time diminishes its effectiveness; it's no longer challenging.  Where it was once seen as too dark for a mere PG certificate in the UK (the 12 certificate was introduced specifically for it) it is now widely regarded as "camp" (*), the very quality it was meant to supersede.   But really the fact that its qualities have overtaken the genre is a testament to its great / dubious (delete as applicable) achievement.  Ultimately, this is a very-well-made not-very-good film.  But whether it's good or not is irrelevant, something which is certainly true of today's blockbusters.  Superman may have opened the door back in 1978, with an Oscar winning actors Marlon Brando and Gene Hackman on the marquee and a screenplay partly credited to Mario Puzo adding a semblance of respectability, but Batman kicked it wide open 11 years later.  Now the packaging of this type of film, from words on the page to full page ads, has almost entirely supplanted content.  Of course there are exceptions, but by large these thigs are run off the assembly line with a density that makes them difficult to consume properly.  Once there were just a handful of truly massive movies a season, and they became "event movies".  Bonanza openings were prized, but longevity was important too, and the space between them allowed other films to make their mark as well; Driving Miss Daisy, Parenthood, and Dead Poets Society were among the ten highest grossing pictures of 1989, the year Last Crusade and Batman were released, something unthinkable in the modern marketplace.  But today the releases come so thick and fast, two or three a week sometimes, that a big opening is crucial, because in all probability the film will have dropped out of the Box Office Top Ten within a few weeks to make its home entertainment debut just a few weeks further down the track.  Their density makes them less memorable.  Warner Bros had to work hard to convince Nicholson to act in this film, but now every actor seems to want to have one like it  on their resumé, and it's not perceived as slumming it to do so.  Could this have been predicted by the makers of Batman?  Probably not, although it might have been their wildest dream.  When all is said and done, Batman is still an entertaining movie.  It contains great things without itself  being great.  Most importantly though it's fun, and despite everything which has changed since it was made, it has so far stood the test of time, lost in time, like the suits and buildings of the city it depicts.

(*) See, for example, Emily Rome, Hitfix, 2nd August 2016

Pauline Kael "The movie's darkness is essential to its hold on us."

The Current War

The Current War (2017) 

Starring Benedict Cumberbatch and Michael Shannon
Directed by Alfonso Gomez-Rejon  

A man dressed in black stands alone in a scene of blinding white.  A snowstorm, possibly.  Elsewhere, a field at night in Menlo Park, New Jersey, is illuminated by a sea of electric lightbulbs, as Thomas Edison (Benedict Cumberbatch) proclaims his vision of the future; a move away from a world lit by gas and powered by steam, to one of electricity.  The film, set in the 1890s, tells the story of Edison's extended feud with George Westinghouse (Michael Shannon), a successful entrepreneur and engineer based in Philadelphia, in what came to be known as the "war of the currents".  Edison, himself a prolific inventor of said lightbulb amongst many devices in the fields of communication, sound and motion pictures, favoured direct current (DC), whilst Westinghouse preferred alternating current (AC).  Each of the methods had their own merits in terms of application, cost, and risk.  The science itself is largely irrelevant.  It underpins the story but the film is about not just science or ambition, but many other things.  It's the brightest of McGuffins.

From the outset, this is a tough sell.  The principal draw is ostensibly the fine cast of actors, which includes Nicholas Hoult, Tom Holland, Katherine Waterston, Tuppence Middleton and Matthew Macfadyen, but the subject matter is extremely dry, apparently only set to appeal to electrical engineers or science nerds; why not a story about the battle between HD DVD and Blu-Ray or VHS and Betamax?  Production was troubled, originating as a Weinstein Company venture, a cut was prematurely rushed out to premier at the Toronto International Film Festival in 2017, perhaps under the impression that it could be an awards contender.  When the Weinstein scandal broke, its release was delayed and distribution rights were eventually sold to 101 Studios.  The version released this year is one that has been tweaked by its director, with five additional scenes included and a running time reduced by ten minutes.  Whilst hardly a radical overhaul by some standards, many have nevertheless identified this bumpy road to the screen as a contributing factor for any perceived faults in the resulting product, but mistakenly so.

In many ways, this is a very old fashioned type of film, the sort of biopic made in the 1950s and 60s.  But the sensibility is decidedly modern.  The cinematography by Chung-hoon Chung (Oldboy, Stoker) employs a wealth of tricks, angles, light, and split-screen.  Overhead shots of the factory work recall the intricate patterns of a circuit board, whilst the darkness, brightness, red, and gold emphasize differing aspects of a scene.  Danny Bensi and Saunder Juriaans' score works to similar effect, at one point stirring but ironic as celebratory of scenes of the 1983 Chicago Worlds Fair are transposed with those of the first man to be executed by electric chair being led to his death.  Gomez-Rejon, working from a script by Michael Mitnick, pulls off a tricky juggling act, treading the fine line between overload of exposition and making an emotional and dramatic point.  The two protagonists are ostensibly presented as opposites.  Edison, played by Cumberbatch with a familiar bubbly genius-at-work manner, is a showy populist, and committed family man - his relationships with his wife Mary (Middleton) and son, with whom he playfully exchanges clandestine messages in Morse code, underpin his determination.  Westinghouse, depicted with typically powerful broodiness and restraint by Shannon, sporting a magnificent display of facial hair, is by contrast gruff and surly, though no less driven.  His wife Marguerite (Waterston) is supportive and even more decisive than he at times.  As things unfold the viewer is led to conclude that these men are really two sides of the same coin.  This isn't about competition as such.  If there was an obvious winner in this duel it was AC, but most people think of electricity as AC/DC without really understanding or caring about the difference.  It's about momentum and innovation, and eventually the sharing of ideas and ideals. There's a scene late on where the two meet at the Worlds Fair where they seem gradually to come to understand this. When a field is divided by a fence, the film says, knock down the fence and you get a bigger field. 

Electricity is the spark of life, evidently, and the film leans heavily on this metaphor, but death runs just as deeply too.  Two supporting characters die relatively early, each haunting  and inspiring the men.  A key theme is the purpose to which science should be used. Edison is courted by the powerful banking magnate J. P. Morgan (Macfadyen) who dangles lucrative contracts for him to make armaments for the government, but he declines, refusing to be responsible for anything which will cause loss of life. AC is inherently more dangerous, a point Edison unironically demonstrates to the press, as the publicity battle escalates, by electrucuting a horse to death.  Both parties sought to distance themselves from the new new idea of 'humane' capital punishment in the form of an electric chair, whilst foisting blame on the other (*). Edison secretly funded the project, although thanks to his public pronouncements, to be "Westinghoused" became a byword for death by electrocution.  When the moment arrives, the death is grizzly, painful and sickening, despite the declaration that "we live in a higher civilization today." The question lingers; what sort of society deems this sort - any sort - of state sponsored killing 'civilized'? 

The characterizations are subtly inverted. Westinghouse is as curt with the Worlds Fair officials to whom he pitches his system as he was with party guests he was supposed to be glad-handing. He's not rude, it's just his way. Edison may be charming but clearly has a nasty streak, casting aside the young Serbian immigrant genius Nikola Tesla (Hoult), refusing to honour the financial pledges made for his work, and inadvertently driving him to Westinghouse. Tesla is the lynchpin, and arguably the most significant contributor to the greater story for what he achieved in the field and for which he is known today, notably wireless transmission and hydroelectric power generation. When, at its conclusion, the film returns to its opening scene of a black figure against a wall of white it's revealed not to be snow, but spray. It's the realisation of Tesla's long held dream to turn water into electricity, at Niagara Falls. Water, electricity, life... the imagery resurfaces. 

It seems to be a familiar criticism of the film that Tesla is relegated to the role of mere bit part player. So is Tom Holland as Edison's assistant / associate Samuel Insull, and as are both the main female characters. Hoult is superb as Tesla, quietly energetic, bursting with ideas and frustrated that he doesn't have the means to create. Given his accomplishments there's a strong argument for a film dedicated solely to his story. But this is not that film, nor is it a sprawling piece for television with enough time to explore every aspect of the historical events. It seems churlish to mark a film down for not being what one expects, particularly when it doesn't try to be anything else. It is, for sure, unfortunately episodic, notably in the early stages. It also shifts focus a bit too much, which could prove unsatisfying for some. And the conclusion, when it comes, is not overly hammered home.  It is noted that Westinghouse was awarded the Edison Medal in 1911. This could be intended to be taken as a bitter irony, or an indication of commonality. Many subjects are tangentially broached. Love, passion, ambition, progress, discovery, fame, light, darkness, morality, mortality and vitality. The very title is a play on words; current alludes primarily to electric power, but perhaps also to current times. The Current War is certainly not for everyone, many will and have found it to be slow and unengaging. But for those willing to to invest it can be fascinating, beautiful, and richly rewarding. 

  

(*) The ordinator of this idea, Alfred P. Southwick, was a dentist. Make of that what you will. 

Shazam!

Shazam! (2019)

Starring Zachary Levi and Mark Strong
Directed by David F. Sandberg 

Created in 1939, appearing in Fawcett Comics under a different name (we'll come to that), the same year as Batman, and one year after Superman, for modern audieces Shazam is perhaps one of the lesser known comic book characters to make it to the big screen, despite appearing in several film serials and television programs, both live action and animated, over the years.  It is widely considered to be the best-selling comic book title for several years during the 1940s.  This film version has been over 10 years in development, and now becomes the seventh installment in the DC Extended Universe.  Rated 12A, it is notably lighter in tone and more humourous than previous movies in the series.  It tells the story of foster child Billy Batson, (Asher Angel), who,after a chance encounter with the eponymous wizard, is given the ability to turn into an adult superhero (played by Zachary Levy, star of TV's action-comedy Chuck) just by saying the wizard's name.  Whilst coming to terms with his new-found powers (super strength, speed, flight... the usual) he becomes drawn into a battle with Sivana (the great Mark Strong); it's something to do with the Seven Deadly Sins, the Rock of Eternity, and infinite power. 

There is much comedy to be found in Billy's learning his powers.  As an adult, he accompanies his best friend and foster brother Freddy (Jack Dylan Grazer) to a convenience store to do what every teenage kid thinks they want to do, buy beer; but discovering that they hate the taste, Billy and Freddie settle for soda, candy and chips.  In the process, Billy foils an attempted hold up; Freddie, himself a comic book nerd, sets about documenting his friend's abilities on video and posting them on YouTube, where they go viral.  Billy exploits this to the full, skipping school, entertaining crowds on the street for money, and posing for selfies.  His anonymity is seemingly assured, since he can always revert to his younger form, which he does at one point to evade danger, but also to use the bathroom, because he can't pee in his all-in-one red bodysuit.  At a Mall, he "helps" people by shooting lightning into their cell phones as he passes, cheerily calling out "your phone's  charged" whilst doing so. When Shazam, after an argument with Freddy, shoots off some lightning, he accidentally hits a school bus passing over a bridge, causing it to teeter perilously, and then fall.  He of course saves it using his super-strength, which further annoys Freddy.  In the ensuing chaos, Sivana shows up, keen to steal Shazam's powers.  Although Billy escapes, Freddy is taken hostage and back to the family.  

There is very much something of the accidental hero about Shazam.  He creates mayhem through not knowing what he can do, at the film's climax he accidentally bestows powers on his foster siblings, creating a team of heroes, which paves the way temptingly for any future sequels.  But he does come to act responsibly.  He comes to love those he initially rejected, having been determined to track down his mother, and they welcome him into the clan.  So whilst the emphasis is on levity, it is eventually clear that he can join the ranks of noble DC heroes.  The film is peppered with visual and spoken references to those characters, from the Batman logos seen on kids' backpacks at school, to Freddy's claim that he owns a bullet once fired at Superman himself.  There's no post-modern implication that this universe is real whilst the comic book world is fake.  This is the same club.  Shazam even asks his friend Superman to visit his school during lunch break, and the post credits scene pokes fun at Aquaman, and particularly the recent film version. 

Apparently clocking in at 132 minutes, some have felt the film to be too long, but it rattles along briskly nonetheless.  This is an origin story, after all, and ample time is taken to establish the character's history and circumstances.  The initial scene in which the young Thaddeus Sivana discovers and fails to gain control of the rock of Eternity, being deemed unworthy, is a little stretched, but is done in a very creepy and atmospheric way.  It's also crucial to the ensuing plot.  There is a subplot in which the teenage Billy tries to track down his Mother, from whom he was separated as a child whilst at a funfair.  It has been his drive up to this point, and the reason for his consistently running away from foster care.  He eventually succeeds, with the help of his new family, and although his Mother ultimately rejects him, saying she could not care for him as a 17 year old and that he would be better cared for by others, this serves to strengthen his bond with his foster-siblings, which itself leads to a satisfying moment during the climax when Billy's powers are bestowed on them too, creating a proto Team Shazam, which will hopefully be explored in any future installments if this does become a franchise.  Family is a central theme throughout; Billy finds his, Sivana turns on his.

It's impossible to talk about Shazam without talking about Captain Marvel, his original name.  At first he was not a property of DC (National Comics Publications); DC had brought a long-running legal action against publisher Fawcett Comics claiming copyright infringement against Superman. The case was settled out of court in 1953, and the Captain Marvel name acquired by DC, who revived the property in 1972.  By this time, Marvel Comics had launched their own Captain Marvel, initially Mar-Vell, in 1967, hence Shazam was used as the new moniker for the original character.  2019 happens to see two Captain Marvel films, DC's Shazam and Marvel's Captain Marvel, coincidentally both featuring the Beninese actor Djimon Hounsou, in unconnected roles.  In the world of film today, Marvel Studios leads the field by some distance with their Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), a series of initially standalone films introducing different characters, Iron Man, Thor, Captain America and so on, which have gradually become fully integrated.  The MCU film Avengers: Endgame, featuring well over 30 charactes from the comics, recently became the highest grossing film of all time at the box office.  For a long time DC kept their heroes separated, bar the odd sly reference, and found success with the Superman films of the 1970s and 80s starring Christopher Reeve, the Tim Burton incarnation of Batman and its sequels, culminating in the huge critical, commercial and Oscar winning accomplishments of director Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy.  Seeing the rampant benefit of the MCU approach, DC came to the party late, attempting to imitate their rivals, starting with Man of Steel, a Superman origin story in 2013, and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice three years later, among others.  Noticeably darker in atmosphere and content, results have been mixed. Despite some high points - in 2017 Wonder Woman, the first Superhero film to be directed by a woman and feature a female lead, took over $820m worldwide - it is generally acknowledged that for whatever reason it hasn't quite worked out to the same extent, and it seems the future will predominantly see a return to independent ventures such as the impending Joker.  To add to the mix, both Marvel and DC have developed small screen offerings on Network and streaming television platforms.  Arguably in this case, DC have the edge, but the issue will run and run.

On its own terms, regardless of the grand scheme, Shazam is a pleasing adventure.  It's funny, exciting, scary and rousing in all the right places.  It has proved a modest success, taking over $360m worldwide - if that can be considered modest - and a sequel is more or less guaranteed.  A spin off based around Black Adam, Shazam's antagonist, is also bubbling under and could begin filming in 2020 with Dwayne Johnson attached, perhaps followed by an inevitable crossover. Has Shazam saved the DCEU? Of course not. But it does at least show that as the comic book movie juggernaut rolls on there are still a few interesting and enjoyable places for it to go. 

________

For those interested, Shazam is made up of the initials of famous mythical figures (and one historical).

S - Wisdom of Solomon

H - Strength of Hercules

A - Stamina of Atlas

Z - Power of Zeus

A - Courage of Achilles

M - Speed of Mercury

Yesterday

Yesterday (2019) 

Starring Himesh Patel and Lily James
Directed by Danny Boyle 

Danny Boyle is one of the UK's most successful directors, of theatre, television (including episodes of Inspector Morse) and film (of titles including Trainspotting, 28 Days Later, and Slumdog Millionaire, for which he won a Best Director Oscar).  Most famously, perhaps, he is known for the spectacular opening ceremony of the London 2012 Olympic Games (Isles of Wonder).  His latest film Yesterday is written by Richard Curtis (Blackadder, Notting Hill et al), from a story by Curtis and Jack Barth.  It tells the tale of Jack Malik (Himesh Patel), a struggling young musician in the East of England who, just as he has given up on music, is injured in a freak bus accident during an unexplained global-wide blackout, and awakes to find himself in "a really really really complicated situation", because he seems to be the only person on Earth who remembers the music, and indeed the very existence of The Beatles.  Disbelieving at first, he eventually starts playing some of those songs, which prove understandably popular, leading to acclaim, success, and stardom.  As this unfolds, he struggles to come to terms with his feelings for his long time best friend, manager, and loyal supporter Ellie (Lily James).  He loves her, she loves him, but neither will come out and say it.  Where could this all be leading?  It's a simple but tantalizing premise, albeit one borrowed from the BBC sitcom Goodnight Sweetheart,  which gives rise to a part gentle romantic comedy, part comment on the nature of fame, commercialism, loyalty and honesty, and part feelgood film filled with familiar, brilliant songs.

Most of the humour is front-loaded.  Jack's frustrated attempts to get the songs heard, particularly by his parents (the always brilliant Meera Syal and Sanjeev Bhaskar) who are particularly amusing ("What's this one called?" "Leave It Be"), the bemused reaction of his friends, including Carol (Sophia Di Martino), who reacts to his tentative rendition of the title track ("it's one of the greatest songs ever written"), with "It's not Coldplay.  It's not Fix You".  He struggles to remember some of them, the words to Eleanor Rigby proving especially problematic; and there's a brilliant running gag in which he tries to find evidence of the Fab Four on the internet, turning up only links to beetles and Pope John Paul II.  Later, he discovers similarly that Oasis, cigarettes and Coca Cola never existed.  There's an amusing satirical moment when a team of marketing executives challenge his intention to release a record named The White Album, due to his ethnicity.  The altered reality mood of the set-up is heightened by the plausible reaction of those in the business.  It's played for a laugh though, when it could have tackled the issue of how rock and roll has been populated by examples of white people stealing, or at least appropriating black musical traditions; here's a person of colour doing the same in reverse, but it comes to naught.

There's a an amusing supporting role - more than just a cameo - by Ed Sheeran , unfairly criticised everywhere he goes these days, but who does a better job playing himself than many others have done.  Sheeran takes Jack under his wing, and despite some questionable suggestions ("Let me just give you this advice.  Song title. Hey Dude") mentors him to the very top.  Patel, hitherto best known from Eastenders, does a solid job both singing and acting, expertly capturing the conflict and insecurity of someone who knows the plaudits he's receiving stem from a falsehood.  James is good too, loving and enthusiastic without being gushing.  Kate McKinnon plays a gloriously insensitive record company executive in one of the film's less subtle characterisations ("We pay, and you write songs, and then we make a ton of money.  And we take most of it").  Very funny  also, filling the comedy sidekick role (think Rhys Ifans in Notting Hill), is Joel Fry, of television's guilty pleasure Plebs.  Boyle directs with a steady hand, showing less of the visual innovation he sometimes does, but imbuing what is essentially a Richard Curtis film with a reliably overriding love of music, and how to use it to complement the story and images on screen.  But when contrasted with the wild innovation and experimental nature of the band's own excursions into cinema, it comes across as all the more flat.

Chiefly, this is a celebration of the everlasting brilliance of the Beatles' music.  Patel doesn't exactly master these songs, which are undeniably an integral part of popular culture in Britain and the world, but pays them due service.  They are not only hugely influential for countless musicians who have followed them, they are also incredibly diverse.  From the rock and roll tinged tracks of the early days (I Want to Hold Your Hand, I Saw Her Standing There), the tender (Something, Here Comes the Sun), the epic (Hey Jude, Let It Be - and nice to hear Carry That Weight make it in), to the goofy (Ob-La-Di, Ob-la-Da, which Lennon hated, and described as "Paul's granny shit").  For the most part they are appropriately handled, such as when Jack knocks out a storming version of Back in the U.S.S.R for a crowd in Moscow while supporting Sheeran on tour.  There is only one truly sour note, when All You Need is Love is unsubtly trotted out, Curtis pulling off the implausible feat of utterly soiling that tune twice after his dismal efforts in Love Awfully  But this tries hard not to be a simple Beatles karaoke exercise with songs crowbarred in as they were for Abba with Mama Mia, nor even used to tell an emotional story, as with Elton John's works in Rocketman; it's not a musical as such, just gentle, generally pleasing film which just happens to be full of timeless songs.   

It's at its most interesting when it poses the central moral dilemma; what is Jack's motivation?  Is it personal gain, self-fulfillment, is he doing it just to win Ellie's love, or is there a genuine altruism at play, an urge to spread happiness by bringing this wonderful music (back) to the people?  A much-debated appearance by Robert Carlyle in the film's final third seems to underline this question and posit an answer.  Some have really taken against this, but I found it to be quite poignant and effective.  A curve-ball is thrown when it appears that some people actually do remember, and there's an ominous threat that Jack could be exposed as a fraud at any time.  A silent, mysterious pair (Sarah Lancashire and Justin Edwards, as Liverpool Stranger Liz and Moscow Stranger Leo respectively) are shown shadowing Jack's movements, at one point observing him visit Penny Lane in search of inspiration.  Ultimately the resolution is benign, which sums up the problem.  Yesterday seems to want to have its cake and eat it.  It hints at being challenging, but by its very nature and intention can't allow things to go badly.  When Jack admits that he didn't write these songs, in front of a full house at Sheeran's Wembley Stadium concert, the crowd boos.  But when he declares his love for Ellie moments later (regardless of the effect it might have on her current boyfriend) they cheer.  Fleetingly rousing, it's ultimately a little unpleasant.

Yesterday doesn't address what it is that The Beatles contributed.  Some of their recording methods, particularly in the latter stages of their time together, after famously abandoning the exhausting world tours which had solidified their reputation, under the tutelage of genius producer George Martin revolutionised the way music was presented.  But, nor does it really attempt to.  Great tunes are ironed out for the Pop Idol generation.  It rests on the assumption that the Beatles' success wasn't simply a result of the age in which they played, a happy conjunction of right place right time.  In today's world of rent-a-rapper on every virtually identical auto-tuned pop hit, would the same affect have been achieved?  Would Jack really lose an on-the-spot songwriting contest with Sheeran (who sportingly admits "You're Mozart, man. I'm definitely Salieri" when he loses to Jack)?  Things could have been a bit more challenging and interesting if he had.

Its speculative premise is whimsical, charming even, but its style somewhat drab.  Boyle's expected flair is mired in the restraining conventions of the genre; it feels like wading through a river of treacle, primarily of Curtis' making.  If one person leaves the cinema with a smile on their face - and there have been many - or if another goes away to listen to Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band in its entirety, the film has done its job.  It aims to be an inoffensive  fairytale sitting on a towering songbook. It wants to hold your hand, not too tightly, and ultimately  ends up feeling like a cynical missed opportunity.

On a spaceship

The grand daddy of space mission films, 2001 changed the way spaceflight was depicted on camera.  It's a world away from the rockets of the 50s and 60s films, which were little more than glorified aeroplanes.  It bravely dared to show something a little more realistic - although the beehive hairstyles of the stewardesses on the Pan-Am flight don't quite make the cut - by slowing things down.  Its languid pace might test the patience of a younger audience today but on first viewing it's frankly spell binding.  It shows weightlessness as a necessary condition of space travel.  There are two main flight sequences, the first on the trip up to Clavius base and the shuttle to the moon, in which Kubrick has a little fun with the concept of zero gravity - Floyd's floating pen, the processed in flight meal, the zero G toilet, and so on.  The second, taking up the bulk of the film, is the main Discovery mission to Jupiter to investigate signals emanating from a mysterious black monolith discovered on the moon.  There's the incredible shot of Frank Poole jogging round the artificial gravity wheel, and a scene of the astronauts communicating with earth, 80 million miles away, complete with excruciating time delay, edited for convenience.  The film genuinely feels authentic in that respect.  It also throws Artificial Intelligence into the mix, years before Kubrick worked on, and almost directed the film AI, which eventually fell to Steven Spielberg to complete. As the Discovery approaches its destination, Jupiter, the ship's computer, HAL9000, fearing that the humans are jeopardising the mission, which "he" is programmed to protect, murders one of the astronauts outside the ship, and terminates the life support systems of the crewmembers aboard and in cryogenic suspension, leaving the commander, Dave Bowman to enter the "stargate".  What follows is a truly stunning psychedelic experience, which appears to convey the complete cycle of human life and evolution.  Truly ground-breaking.

Part horror film, part science fiction, Alien was a game changer in more ways than one.  It marked an obvious departure from the bright, shiny Star Wars type science fiction (more correctly fantasy rather than science fiction, but who's arguing with popular perception), it depicted a grungy, grimy, and dark environment.  The Nostromo, on which the action takes place (barring a brief sojurn on Acheron / LV426 to pick up the latest passenger) is a working long haul cargo ship.  The drama is mainly confined to the dank, steamy corridors of the ship, as the alien guest grows rapidly and picks off the crew one by one, leaving only Warrant Officer Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) to save herself.  One gets a distinct sense of claustrophobia, but at the same time the film hints at the hugeness of the ship itself, as evinced when the alien first bleeds and its acid blood eats through floor after floor.  It also reminds us of the vast distances involved and the time taken to cross space.  When the crew are first woken from hypersleep - a trope without which long haul space travel in films would not be possible - they find that they are in the middle of nowhere, a long long way from home.  As with 2001 AI throws a spanner into the works, when the ship's computer Mother develops murderous intentions, in this case having been programmed to bring back the organism - a perfect killing machine - at all costs; "crew expendable" her instructions read.  This leads to a nail biting climax.  Alien may not be about the specifics of being guys on a spaceship, focusing more on the tension and oppression, but does make for a novel and absorbing  film.  It's another landmark of the oeuvre.

This is a space mission movie with something of a difference.  Directed by Special Effects maestro Douglas Trumbull (indeed he of 2001 vfx fame), instead of marauding aliens or demonic forces, it tells the story of a crew of four men, adrift in deep space on board the American Airlines - nice touch -  freighter Valley Forge, tasked with guarding "bio-domes" (massive greenhouses, essentially) containing the last flora and fauna from a dying planet earth, where such life has become extinct.  Orders have come through that the domes are to be jettisoned and destroyed so the freighters can be redeployed for commercial use.  For three of the crew this is no big deal, but for the hero Freeman Lowell (Bruce Dern) it is a horror, which he will go to any lengths to stop - even killing his crewmates.  There are some charming interactions between Lowell and the ship's three drone robots; Huey, Dewey and Louie, he teaches them to play poker at one point, and they perform maintenance duties on the ship.  These are more human than his dealings with the other humans on board, and the viewer cares more about the robots, two of whom are lost in the course of trying to save the domes.  The films ends with Lowell steering this ship off course towards Saturn, and ultimately sacrificing himself to preserve the last remaining dome.  It's an unusual but distinctly memorable film, not least due to the very of-the-time Joan Baez songs on the soundtrack, but because it although it drips of natural decline, and ends on a downer it nonetheless feels positive about the future.

Directed by Danny Boyle, more commonly known for down to Earth fare, Sunshine tells the story of a crew of astronauts onboard the spaceship Icarus II (Icarus I having disappeared seven years previously), on a mission to launch an atomic bomb into the heart of the Sun, which is failing.  If this sounds far-fetched, it is, although the film's Science Adviser was none other than Dr. Brian Cox, who reassures us that the sun is not "dying" in the typical sense, but refers to a theoretical particle called a Q-Ball, which could interact with the star in a negative way.  Theoretically.  The bomb, the size of Manhattan, is supposed to clear the infection and restore the sun.  In any event it's best not to focus on the science, or its inaccuracies but enjoy it for what it is - a gripping, desperate, do or die mission in space.  The cast is fantastic, including Cillian Murphy, Chris Evans, Rose Byrne Cliff Curtis and Mark Strong.  Towards the climax, as the ship approaches the sun - the giver of like (metaphorically God) - things veer towards the realm of fantasy, horror and madness, as the crew encounter Icarus I's commander, Pinbacker, or possibly his ghost.  Having succumbed to madness, Pinbacker attempts to stop the mission.  The payload is eventually launched, and a short coda shows the sun seen shining more brightly from Earth, meaning that the mission was successful.  The final act certainly marks a change in tone, but somehow works well in the overall context.  The visuals, by cinematographer Alwin Kuchler, and the score, by John Murphy and (partially) Underworld, is creepy and atmospheric.  This is certainly an atypical entry into the "on a spaceship" genre, but a memorable and effective entry to it.

Definitely one to file in the drawer marked "guilty pleasure", Event Horizon also adds copious quantities of horror, and gore into the mix; alternatively one could convincingly argue it's a horror film wrapped in some space stuff.  More dodgy science ahoy; an Event Horizon is a boundary in spacetime at which the gravitational pull of an object renders it impossible for objects outside cannot escape, including light.  It is most commonly associated with black holes. (*)  In the film, the Event Horizon is a vessel, equipped with a gravity drive which creates artificial black holes, used to bridge two distant points in space time (think folding space using the spice, in Dune).  The ship appears near Neptune after a disappearance seven years previously (what is it with spaceships and seven year absences?).  Sent to investigate is the rescue ship Lewis and Clark, captained by Miller (Laurence Fishburne) and carrying the drives designer, Dr William Weir (Sam Neill).  When the crew boards the Event Horizon they find the scene of a massacre, the drive reactivates itself, and hallucinations among them abound.  It's a haunted house movie in space.  Despite being severely edited (cut from 130 minutes down to 97, due to the graphic violence of the original version) the film is still one for those with a strong stomach.  It's an effective, gory, scary journey to hell mixing jump-scares and an unsettling, gothic atmosphere, with a fine cast, also including Kathleen Quinlan (Apollo 13) and (Hello to) Jason Isaacs.  Unfairly dismissed on its release, it has become something of a favourite, and it's a shame it was made in the pre-dvd days so the planned restoration could not be completed as the footage was lost.  A largely unrecognised gem.

____

Although nowhere near the quality of the above films, it's worth giving an honourable (?) mention to the 2017 movie Life, which stars Jake Gyllenhaal, Rebecca Ferguson and Ryan Reynolds.  It's an Alien knock-off so blatant that it's almost admirable.  The plot is virtually identical to the 1979 masterpiece - crew picks up an alien organism, which grows rapidly and begins to pick off the crew.  There's barely an original scene in it, although the design of the jellyfish-like creature is effective, and the entire film takes place in zero gravity (on the International Space Station) so there is a lot off very effective wire work of the astronauts floating around. Not good then, exactly, but rather enjoyable, and one almost has to admire the brazenness with which it feeds off its superior.

(*) 

See also - the discovery of a Black Hole.