Chase reviews IN THE LOOP

In the Loop *****

It is surprising that this is Armando Iannucci’s first foray into feature film making. As the genius behind pretty much all of the best UK comedy since Blackadder, including The Day Today, Alan Partridge, and The Thick of It; you would have thought that highly paid Hollywood would snap him up to add gags to the latest Renee Zellwegger vehicle.

It is fortunate then, that his first cinematic outing has been all his own work. In The Loop is a big screen companion piece to the critically acclaimed The Thick of It, which was a sort of cross between Yes Minister and The Office. Hapless Simon Foster (Tom Hollander) the (fictional) Secretary of State for International Development accidentally declares the likelihood of war in the middle east as “unforeseeable”. This slight slip up, sees Foster becoming a political piggy in the middle between war mongers and peacenicks in London and Washington, and gives us an excuse for some excellent set pieces, and hilarious one liners.

Peter Capaldi once again steals the show as Malcolm Tucker, the foul mouthed spin doctor and manipulator of souls employed by the Prime Minister. His insults and digs at his opponents are so wince inducing cruel that it is of no surprise to see a ‘swearing consultant’ credited. Chris Addison excels as the everyman caught up in the whirlwind of political spin, and there are some standout cameos – no name actors stealing the cameo show from Steve Coogan, clearly doing a favour for his mate.

I doubt this will play well in the states, and the 2009 release seems a little like shutting the gate after the horse has bolted, hoever, this film will be battling it out with Sasha Baron Cohens Bruno for most quoted of the summer.

Seriously, see this film.

Chase reviews YES MAN

Yes Man ***

The concept is simple – if you are open minded, and say ‘yes’ to every opportunity that comes your way, the universe will make sure good things happen to you. That was the premise of Danny Wallace’s book, and it seems to have worked out well for him – his premise has granted him a bestselling novel and a major Hollywood movie, starring none other than Jim Carrey himself. But is it something you should say yes to?

Well it is a charming film, but it also has some major flaws. The main one being that it is a Hollywood movie. Wallace’s book was (reportedly) non-fiction, so there was interest in finding out whether this London layabout’s life would be changed. In Hollywoodland, however, things are different. Were we really expecting Jim Carrey not to end up with the girl and become a better person by the end of the film?

Carrey plays Carl, a bank worker who is stuck in a rut. He doesn’t do much except sit in and watch DVD’s (and we all know how bad that is, right) and can’t even be bothered to get off his ass to go to his best friend’s engagement party. A chance meeting (is there any other kind?) ends up with him at a self help seminar which encourages him to make the most of life and say yes more often. Carl reluctantly agrees to try this new outlook on life.

This new outlook on life allows Carl to meet the kooky Allison (Zooey Deschanel’s Allison is the definition of Hollywood kooky. She rides a moped. She sings in a prog rock band. She’s got crazy hair! Look up ‘kooky’ in the Hollywood dictionary, and Zooeys picture will be right there.), go bungy jumping, get really drunk, and learn Japanese. However, when Allison finds out about his experiment, she gets angry and doesn’t answer her phone. Not exactly the high stakes of an international thriller.

However, this isn’t actually the point of the movie. The point of the movie is so that Jim Carrey can convince the world that at 47, he is still the rubberfaced pratfaller we fell in love with in Dumb and Dumber. Some of his falls are terrific, but the sight of a 47 year old Carrey with his 20-something contemporaries, is a little disconcerting. Also the minute you see him in a hospital smock, you know there’s going to be a middle aged ass on your screen within ten minutes. But with no one on the scene to usurp him as clown in chief, he is still the person you want slipping on that banana peel.

Chase reviews KNOWING

Knowing is the new film starring Nicholas Cage, so you know the formula. Nic has to save the world from BLANK by running around with a flashlight and using BLANK to BLANK. In this case the missing words are The Sun, Maths and SPOILER.

I can’t reveal what the last blank stands for, as it would not only be a huge spoiler, but it would also deprive you of one of the most unintentionally hilarious plot twists in recent memory. I’ll give you a hint – its right up there in the obvious plot twist directory, and its not ‘its all a dream.’

Having said that, it’s a Nic Cage movie, so we know exactly what obvious character traits and plot twists to expect. Nic is a single father with an alcohol problem, emotionally distant parents, and most shockingly of all he doesn’t believe in God. If you have no idea whether or not he reunites with his parents, ends up believing in God, or spends the whole film shouting “Where is my son?” then you clearly have never seen a Nic Cage film.

The premise is an interesting one. In the fifties, a spooky little girl; scribbles a string of numbers on a piece of paper and puts it in a time capsule, along with her classmates drawings of spacemen and hover cars. In the present day, the numbers fall into the hands of Astrophysicist Nic Cage who uses his astrophysicist training to put the numbers into google. He realises that the numbers predict major disasters across the world (although we are only really concerned with the ones on American soil.)

So far, so Shyamalan, but unfortunately the film descends into a sort of sub-par Twilight Zone as we move from (impressive) set piece to set piece, following Cage and his trusty flashlight.

All in all it’s a ridiculous Nicholas Cage film, so if you enjoyed national treasure, Bangkok Dangerous or the unintentional comedy of the Wicker Man, then it isn’t a bad way to pass a couple of hours. Think about it for more than fifteen seconds though, and plot holes and inconsistencies start to poke holes in Nic Cageworld.

Chase reviews SPRING AWAKENING

Spring Awakening, Novello Theatre, London

SPRING AWAKENING *****

Spring Awakening is a vulgar, stylish, odd and affecting musical that I was just not expecting. And I loved it.

As an adaptation of a banned 19th century German play of the same name, Spring Awakenings roots were always going to be in the taboo. Telling the story of a group of teenaged school children, it deals with masturbation, sex, abortion and existentialism. Although this is not what the piece is truly about. What Spring Awakening manages to masterfully convey is exactly what it is like to be a teenager. As High School Musical has outsold every DVD in history painting a picture of what teenaged life should be, Spring Awakening shows us how it actually felt to be a moody teenager. The popular rebel doesn’t get the girl and save the day; he is expelled and sent to borstal. The frumpy leading lady isn’t transformed into a stunning beauty when she removes her glasses; she struggles with her feeling of sexuality and ends up pregnant.

It has always been the number one rule of musical theatre that the songs should move the plot forward, and drive the narrative. Spring Awakening however ditches this formula, and lets us into the characters’ thoughts and feelings at that exact moment; feelings that are instantly recognisable to the audience. I recognised myself in the headmasters office, about to get my comeuppance for a prank or pratfall I had visited on my teachers. How much would I have loved to pull out a microphone and lead my friends in an in-your-face rock song entitled ‘You’re F*cked’?

And that is the huge strength of the show. It invites us to relive those moments of youth, and articulates those feelings and emotions with an energy and creativity that I can remember the teenaged taste of. It may not have been be up there with the microphone, but it was certainly how I wanted to think of myself.

Performances from the impossibly young cast are superb, with the programme noting that most are enjoying their professional debuts. Aneurin Barnard as the hero Melchior has a confidence and swagger that could front any indie band and Iwan Rheon’s portrayal of a twitchy and mixed up Moritz brings to mind a cross between Morrisey and Ian Curtis.

Not everyone will like Spring Awakening. It is brash and cool and young and jagged. But if nothing else, it is original, and that should be applauded.

Chase reviews ZACH AND MIRI MAKE A PORNO

Semi Serious Movie Review - Zach and Miri Make A Porno

Between two stools.

Poop jokes and nob gags are funny and let no one tell you otherwise. Kevin Smith has made a career of taking those poop and nob gags and showing them on the big screen to the delight of adolescents everywhere.

Students of the late 90's had Clerks posters on their walls, right next to The Godfather, and the one of the tennis player scratching her ass. And that’s where Kevin Smith seems to fit, between the artistic and the scatological.

His latest film, Zach and Miri makes a porno comes 15 years after Clerks debuted, and Smiths audience has grown up. We were all there with the corpse shagging of Clerks, the Finger cuffs of Chasing Amy, and we all tolerated Ben Affleck in Mallrats. But then we passed the gross out baton onto the kids, who lapped up American Pie and, well American Pie 2. We moved onto the weirder Zoolander, and briefly South Park, before Judd Apatow came into our lives.

The Apatow era, as this period will undoubtedly be known, is the logical progression from Smiths work of the late 90's. The characters in these movies (nearly 15 films over the last 2 years) often start out as characters from a Kevin Smith movie, but end up more grown up than Smith’s characters ever did.

So what of the Kevin Smith film in the Apatow era? Well Zach and Miri Make a Porno is one of those sold three star films. It's okay. It’s not brilliant, but I didn't regret watching it. The synopsis is there in the title. Seth Rogen and Elizabeth banks play the titular Zach and Miri, who, when finding themselves skint and without electricity, water or heating, decide to make a porno movie to raise some cash. And during the making of this skin flick, they realise their true feelings for each other.

But this feels like Kevin Smith, half way there. There are some really touching scenes, and some excellent performances (especially by Banks), but ever present are the nob and poop gags, which feel out of place in this story. It’s like having an interesting adult conversation with someone, who then asks you to pull their finger. The 'laughs' jar, and Smith hasn’t worked out (as Apatow did with Knocked Up) how to tone the scatological humour along with a truthful and resonant story.

Although Smith deals with some of the dramatic scenes well, it sometimes comes across as mawkish, and often right on the nose. Smith seems to revert to nob-gag type all too often, which now seems out of context within this new ‘grown up’ style of filmmaking. Nearly there, Kev.

Less Serious Movie Review - What you need to know

Zach and Miri Make a Porno

The film is pretty good, but you don't get to see Elizabeth Banks' tits.

Chase reviews ALFIE

Alfie - By Imperial Productions Barons Court Theatre "What's it actually about, Alfie?" by Dan Chasemore for remotegoat on 20/03/09

What's it all about?

As Jude Law discovered, there is an inherent risk in resurrecting a somewhat iconic character from our past and presenting it to a modern audience. Alfie Elkins is a product of and a reflection of his time, he's what people think of when they refer to 'the sixties', along with The Beatles, Carnaby Street and the Mini Skirt. So upon taking my seat in the atmospheric and intimate Barons Court Theatre, I was wondering, was Alfie coming to visit us, or were we about to visit him?

Unfortunately, I'm still none the wiser after this quirky, and highly uneven play.

The play follows our hero, Alfie Elkins (Adam Mendlesohn) through various episodes in his life, as he dallies with various women with sublime amorality. His outlook is selfish with a refreshingly honest philosophy about exactly what (thinks) he wants out of life. Alfie is a rakish cad, a charmer with an eye for the ladies, a cheeky chappie and a solid mate. 

Mendlesohn tackles this role willfully, however, unfortunately he doesn't display the innate charisma needed to reel the audience into his misogynistic world of birds, shagging and light ale. His asides to the audience, whilst sometimes hitting the spot, often fell flat. Perhaps as a modern audience, we were wary of associating ourselves with such an un-PC protagonist - and as such Mendlesohn seemed to find it difficult to keep us engaged in his story. Without any real depth to the character it was hard to sympathise with Alfie, leaving him a simple, boorish, cockney thug - albeit a well dressed one.

As different women come into and out of Alfies life, we are treated to a number of vignettes of differing levels of quality and style. In his dalliances with Gilda (Kelly Woodgate), and Lily (Elyse Marks) both actresses prove more than a match for Alfie, with excellent performances. Elyse Marks in particular is excellent, as she presents Alfie with the harsh consequences of his actions after a harrowing backstreet abortion. If the rest of the play had contained half as much power and subtlety as these few tense moments, we were in for a treat.

Unfortunately this was not the case, as the play lacked any specific direction as to what it wanted to be. Music choices were clumsily on the nose ('Baby Love' for the pregnancy, 'She's Not There', when Annie leaves) and the pace and atmosphere of each scene seemed to wildly fluctuate, from the 'comedy' doctor with the Harry Potter glasses, to the sitcom double takes from love rival lofty, to the 'Carry on Doctor' hospital scene, I never got a sense of what this play was actually trying to be. 

Or as Alfie might say - "What's it all about?"

Chase reviews RENT

RENT - by Mayhem Musical Theatre Company The Arthur Cotterell Theatre "Will I lose my dignity?" by Dan Chasemore for remotegoat on 09/04/09 There are three versions of this review. The first is for people who loathe the Musical Rent - there is nothing here that will change your mind. The second is for all the Rent-heads who adore the musical - you will probably get a kick out of seeing the show staged live. The third is for those people who just like Rent, who have never seen it, or just plain old love musical theatre. Jonathan Larson's 'rock opera', based on Puccini's La Boehme became a phenomenon on Broadway. From humble beginnings in the New York Theatre Workshop, it ran on Broadway for 12 years, touring the globe and becoming one of the biggest selling soundtracks of all time. It tells the story of a group of artists and musicians living in New York's Alphabet City during the AIDS epidemic of the early 90's. The show follows the lives of this group as they deal with the threat of an indiscriminate disease, as well as the pressures of simply trying to live without rent. Although in the programme notes, the director (Will Howard) states that his staging of the show is simply a response to the score and the book and that he hasn't tried to copy the original production, fans of the musical will notice lots of elements lifted from the original, not least the set and staging from the New York theatre Workshop version. Not a bad thing in itself, but it did leave the impression that we were watching a group of kids doing an imitation of the iconic Broadway show, rather than trying anything fresh or new. This was a shame, because when the director did depart from the familiar (as he did in the excellent Contact sequence) it brought a freshness and a life to the show. The performances were mixed. As soon as the excellent band cranked it up to eleven for the opening few bars of Rent (Mark Aspinall, the MD is definitely one to watch out for), it became obvious that the song was going to be too big for Mark (Kevin Sherwin), a fact that he made all too apparent by seeming terrified throughout the whole production. It was only in the duets with Roger (a strong Jon Wade) that Sherwin seemed to relax and almost enjoy himself. This fear, and lack of energy was what plagued the show throughout. Even in the encore of Seasons of Love, the audience's rhythmic clapping was soon silenced by the eighteen listless eyes staring back at us. It was if the cast were banning us from enjoying ourselves with them or without them. And this problem pervaded the show as lots of the performers tackled big songs with fear in their eyes. Arron Cuthbertson was a cumbersome and flat Angel, and while Maureen (Elinor Morgan Jones) attempted to tackle some big notes in a lacklustre 'Over the Moon' she seemed to shy away from doing anything out of the ordinary. One of the better voices in the show belonged to Mimi Marquez (Christina Quinn) and indeed her duet with Roger ('Will I') was the highlight of the show. However, she played Mimi incredibly angrily throughout, and even though I know the story inside out, I was surprised in the Life Cafe scene when she suddenly held Rogers hand, rather than smacking him in the mouth. Ben Z Fuiava as Tom Collins, however, was excellent and brought a maturity and confidence to the stage whenever he was on it. Santa Fe was delivered with confidence and charm, and he seemed to have a relationship with the other characters that seemed absent in the rest of the cast. In the programme notes, the director speaks of feeling "slightly more pressure resting on getting this production right". It was perhaps this pressure that led to such a lack of energy from the cast, as if they were so frightened of getting it wrong, that they weren't enjoying the experience at all; and as a result, neither would we. I hope they enjoy the rest of the run more than they seemed to last night.