The Canadian Cinephile’s Reviews and News

Furthering the idea that Americans are turning out some of the dumbest morons in the educational world is American Pie Presents Beta House, a straight-to-DVD piece of crap that feeds one idiotic stereotype after another. This 2007 “comedy” was directed by Andrew Waller – not the cricket player - and apparently picks up where The Naked Mile left off. Having not seen that masterpiece, I was decidedly lost upon entry with American Pie Presents: Beta House. Needless to say, I think I got the gist of things pretty quickly.

Okay, sure. This movie’s fine if you like stuff you don’t have to think about too much. If your idea of higher education is that of rich white kids and rare token black people dancing around with girls in schoolgirl uniforms – I wonder what Freud would say about the male obsession with those things, by the way – drinking a lot and getting into all sorts of horny shenanigans, this movie is going to be right up your alley. Just don’t blame me when the real world comes calling and you realize that spending eight years in college and bagging a list of girls that fills up both sides of yellow notepaper is actually not all that cool.

The movie begins with Mr. Stifler (Christopher McDonald) dropping his son Erik (John White) and his friend Cooze (Jake Siegel) off at college. During the drop, Mr. Stifler tries to get a pair of young girls to bang his son and promptly tells the boys that college is the time to basically treat as many girls like animals as possible. The young misogynists lap it up and head off to their college experience, meeting up with Dwight Stifler (Steve Talley) and pledging the “legendary” Beta House fraternity. Now it may be that I’m a Canadian and that we don’t consider college to be the “best years of our lives” before the grind of reality sets in, but I don’t get nor care to get the fascination with fraternities and sororities.

It isn’t long before we meet the enemies. Another fraternity called Epsilon Sigma Kappa (GΕΣΚ, get it?) is set up as the rivals to Beta House. Why are they rivals? Well, you see, those other frat boys are “geeks.” They like learning things and feel that college is supposed to be an educational experience, while the other goons feel that college is about frittering away thousands of dollars of rich daddy’s money and getting laid and wasted as much as possible. Nevermind the fact that tens of thousands of inner city kids would kill for an opportunity to use education as a better path to something greater, we’ve got a party to throw! (You’ll have to excuse my vitriol, but this American movie trend of turning college into some party zone is really idiotic and insulting to large portions of the population who can’t afford a higher education).

This insulting and insipid war between the frats inhabits this movie like a cancer. I couldn’t help cheering for the “geeks,” but the stereotypes were downright disturbing (how many Asians were in the “cool” frat?). Oh, and Gene Levy appears in this stinker because he’s in good need of a paycheque. Bravo, Gene. One of the finest performers in Canadian comedic history and it’s down to this shit.

So this misogynistic, racist, idiotic piece of crap does contain enough breasts and stereotypically loose women to satisfy fans of porn not old enough to properly rent or buy an “adult DVD,” but for purposes other than a bit of self-handling, this movie is just tripe. The girls are treated like buffoons and discarded pieces of meat or bottle openers, while the guys we’re supposed to like are so stupid I’d like to punch all of them in the balls repeatedly. The setups are so stupid that I felt like I was getting dumber for just having watched the thing and the humour is as hard to spot as an Asian in Beta House.

This movie is terrible in just about every way possible and makes Old School look like Hamlet.

0/10

Trailer:

Yeah, so it’s a shameless excuse to show pictures of an attractive young woman, but it’s my site so ptui!

The Weekly Hathaway will be a, say, weekly feature on Anne Hathaway. And when I say feature, I mean a picture and a blurb like this one that tells you absolutely nothing unique or interesting.

For the time being, you can catch The Hot One in Get Smart, which also stars some other people. I haven’t seen it yet, for shame, but I’m on it. I promise.

Yeah yeah, I’ve been slacking. Little to no updates here recently has really gotten me down, but I just haven’t been watching that many movies. In fact, I haven’t watched anything of significance since The Happening. Never fear, though!

For the time being, you’ll have to settle with being satisfied with a glimpse at the new 007 feature Quantum of Solace. Due out in November of 2008, as the poster says, this next Bond film stars Daniel Craig and is directed by Marc Forster of The Kite Runner, Finding Neverland, and Monster’s Ball. It should be interesting to see his take on our favourite spy. After the trailer, you’ll find a hot shot of Olga Kurylenko, the next Bond girl. You probably remember her from Hitman, but I remember her from my dreams. Wow.

Trailer:

Olga:

I hear she’s a big fan of the Canadian Cinephile!

M. Night Shyamalan gets apocalyptic with his latest film, The Happening. The journey to get the film made began in January of 2007 when Shyamalan came up with a spec script called The Green Effect. After no studios expressed interest in the script, he rewrote it with a few changes and 20th Century Fox came on board to make the film.

The Happening is akin to The Birds and other similar nature-turns-against-man ideas from 1950s and 1960s horror films. It works as a slight homage to the genre, as Shyamalan sets his threat up well and works from a decent system to keep audiences guessing and pondering as to what is really occurring. In a society with a heavy interest in a solid ending that answers all questions (hence America’s obsession with religion, ha ha), The Happening is likely not going to please too many people. I’m happy to say that I’m in the minority of people who actually found it enjoyable.

Mark Wahlberg starts off suspending belief as a high school science teacher. He is teaching class on a day when an “event” begins to occur in New York’s famed Central Park. People are dropping like flies, falling into trances and committing suicide in a variety of ways. This mass suicide gets the notice of major media outlets and people begin to panic, believing there to be a sort of terrorist threat underway.

Elliot Moore (Wahlberg) gets his shit together and heads for the hills with his wife, Alma (Zooey Deschanel), and his friend, Julian (John Leguizamo). Julian’s daughter Jess (Ashlyn Sanchez) is also along for the ride. The group packs on to a train and heads out of town, believing the threat to be somehow related to New York City. With a group of others, the people eventually begin to panic and look desperately for ways out of the situation. All the while, news of the “event” keeps pouring in. It is interesting to see how Shyamalan depicts this mass exodus, as the people proceed with relative calm underlined by a sense of quiet worry. This is perhaps how people would flee an unknown threat.

The remainder of the film follows Elliot and his wife as they try to find safety, try to wait this “event” out, and try to figure out just what the hell is going on as people drop dead all around them from self-inflicted wounds. Moments of legitimate threats are few and far between, mainly because the threat itself is considered to be The Great Unknown. There are a few theories, of course, but nothing really holds water as the plot bears out. Perhaps the greatest disappointment for fans of conventional thrillers is that there is no actual explanation of The Happening. There are only theories.

One of the theories floating around in the film is that of the earth growing tired of our insults and our abuse. This idea, backed by modern science, adds a legitimate sense of dread to the film. Other theories, such as that of government involvement, are also given airtime. Without giving away the ending, there is one theory that does have primacy in the world of The Happening, but even that rumbles with uncertainty as the raw implications are left open for audiences to digest.

It is truly a genre piece and functions well as a nod to the frightful end-is-nigh scenarios of some of horror’s finest. It is not surprising that many of the movie’s most significant threats come from other scared and clueless human beings, as the exploration of the natural reaction of people is as much as part of the film’s framework as any actual external source or threat.

Overall, The Happening is quite intriguing. The scenario is compelling enough, but the way it plays out leaves a lot to be desired. The climax or lack of climax will likely leave many standard filmgoers groaning, but I found the ideas presented by Shyamalan to be timely and interesting. The performances, however, left a lot to be desired and many of them (Deschanel in particular) were actually quite terrible. The injections of humour in some scenes (Elliot talking to a plastic plant, etc.) show that the director is “on the take”, adding to the overall homage feel of the film. The Happening is a parable that is well worth a look if you can deal with a strange “plot” and eerie events that are, quite likely, blowin’ in the wind.

7/10

Trailer:

You wouldn’t like him when he’s…hungry? Edward Norton stars in this 2008 update/redo/remake/reboot of the Marvel superhero franchise. After Ang Lee’s 2003 Hulk, Marvel reacquired the rights to the character and Zak Penn started to drum up a screenplay for a sequel that would be closer to the television series and to the comic book. Penn’s screenplay was met with revisions and touch-ups by Norton, who worked the movie into a reboot of the original concept by adding a prologue and fiddling with some of the elements. The result is The Incredible Hulk, of course.

Directed by Louis Leterrier, the director behind The Transporter and its sequel, The Incredible Hulk captures the original TV series with glee and mines the comic books for material. It is a funnier version of the character and it contains a lighter, quicker pace than Ang Lee’s version. It’s also not as good as Hulk and lacks the internal conflict and the focus on the psychology of Bruce Banner as a central character. While Norton does an admirable job as Banner, he’s simply not engaging enough and doesn’t drum up anywhere near the turmoil that Eric Bana was able to.

Norton is, of course, Bruce Banner. The film jets us through the origins of Hulk through a quick prologue, introducing us to a framework of central characters that includes Betty Ross (Liv Tyler) and General Ross (William Hurt). We then catch up with Banner in Brazil as he works at a soft drink bottling factory and is trying to get a handle on his anger, which causes him to turn into the Hulk. General Ross is, of course, still tracking Banner and eventually tracks his location to Brazil. He dispatches a team and the chase is on.

General Ross uses special operations expert Emil Blonsky (Tim Roth) to try to track down Banner. Blonsky gets caught up in the madness and longs for the power he experiences when coming face to face with the Hulk for the first time. This desire guides Blonsky to not only chase down the Hulk but also to gather some of the Hulk’s power for himself. Banner, meanwhile, heads back home and meets up with Betty again to try to find a cure for what ails him. He is continually chased by both General Ross and Blonsky.

At its heart, The Incredible Hulk is a chase movie. Banner is consistently running from his pursuers and the film takes on a Bourne-esque quality at times. The chase sequence through Brazil is fun, for instance, and Norton plays the “man on the run” prototype quite well. It’s when he has to become the Hulk or when he encounters emotional diversity that he begins to falter in the role.

The CGI is uneven, as some scenes play out looking as though they were entirely animated. The employment of some of the worst-looking helicopters in film history doesn’t help the realism that Norton and Leterrier were aiming for, either. Battle sequences suffer from a certain lack of legitimate crunch, as when Hulk smashes a police car to make a pair of improvised boxing gloves. Instead of actually feeling significant impact from all of the Hulk-smashing, the action feels overly animated. Nowhere is this truer than with the closing fight between Hulk and Abomination.

With inconsistent CGI and unremarkable action sequences (I have to say that I actually enjoyed the action in Ang Lee’s version more), there was still enough fun in The Incredible Hulk. It was an enjoyable experience, I have to admit. The inside jokes that fans of the comic book and TV series will get were nice touches, especially with the appearance of Lou Ferrigno as both a security guard and as the voice of Hulk. The Stan Lee cameo was funny, too. Tim Blake Nelson had the best role in the film as Samuel Sterns and his moments are truly energetic and fun.

Overall, I’m giving The Incredible Hulk a slight recommendation. It does contain some smashingly good moments and, although the bulk of the action looks animated and inconsistent, it’s fun to see Hulk bash and crash his way around. Plus, the cameo at the end of the film is worth getting excited for.

5.5/10

Trailer:

With all apologies to Dane Cook and everyone else behind Good Luck Chuck, there’s a new candidate for Worst Movie of 2007 rising like a phoenix from the crappy ashes. Lindsay Lohan is culpable in I Know Who Killed Me, a steaming turd of a movie that earns every bit of awful it manages to drum up. With pretentious direction, awful acting, a convoluted and idiotic plot, and a twist that makes no sense at all and generates belly laughs from even the most ignorant critics of film, I Know Who Killed Me may well be one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen.

I’ll start by attempting to explain the plot without spoiling anything, as there are some gluttons for punishment out there that may actually want to experience this tripe for themselves. Everything takes place in the quiet suburb of New Salem. Lohan stars as Aubrey, a talented pianist (or so they want us to think after a few seconds of tinkling away on the piano) and a talented writer (yeah, right). All of a sudden Aubrey goes missing and police and the feds start to think she’s the latest victim of a serial killer sort of character.

One night a driver discovers a girl by the side of the road and it turns out to be Aubrey, or so everyone thinks. Aubrey’s distraught parents (Julia Ormond and Neal McDonough) show up at the hospital and try to talk to her, but she winds up telling them her name is Dakota and that they aren’t her parents. Lots of confusion ensues as everyone tries to discover who Dakota is and whether or not she’s telling the truth. Some think she has some sort of memory issues and colour-coded flashbacks serve to tell the story through varying perspectives in an idiotic, pretentious fashion.

Watching this bullshit, it’s no small wonder that Richard Roeper had plopped this wet fart out as his worst movie of 2007 and I am now inclined to do the same. Bear in mind, just to add to the madness of this, that I also watched Norbit over the same period of time and I Know Who Killed Me still rated as worse. Much, much worse. The film also packed in more Razzie nominations than any other movie and currently holds a whopping 8% over at Rotten Tomatoes.

So what is it about I Know Who Killed Me that makes it so damn bad? I’ll start at the bottom and work my way up. The plot is incredibly drawn-out and has all of the intelligence and surprise of a wet bag filled with hair. The real identity of the killer is not only unexceptional in every way, it’s actually worth throwing a soda or perhaps a sack of popcorn at the screen. When the identity of the killer is revealed, it’s shock-inducing in how stupid and pallid the makers of this movie are. The complete lack of rationality is made up for only by its tastelessness.

Then there’s the idiotic colour-coding. Dakota is red and Aubrey is blue, get it? So things that are blue, really blue, represent Aubrey. The beer-soaked lights at the strip club where Dakota works are red, as is everything that surrounds the strange young woman. This helps keep things simple for audiences too stupid to grasp Chris Sivertson’s boneheaded directorial clues and it also distracts from just about everything. The screen actually saturates in blue and/or red at certain moments just to indicate how arty Sivertson can be.

Lohan is terrible, which adds to the madness considerably. She’s playing a high school student in Aubrey and a stripper in Dakota, which is a compelling dichotomy brought to us through the use of the primary colours. Working kind of like a bad sequel to The Parent Trap, Lohan’s pair of roles soon turns ugly and it’s almost as if she forgets who she’s playing in some scenes. It doesn’t help the realism factor that her high-school boyfriend is played by a 33-year-old. Ugh.

The problems mount on top like Lohan mounts on top of Brian Geraghty and the stupidity of this movie is just hard to contain. In the end, it’s much better to avoid I Know Who Killed Me than to subject your brain to it. But if it must be done, pay careful attention to the colour-coding or all will be lost. I am, however, tempted to give this film one point for Lindsay Lohan’s stripping scenes, as the realism of her writhing around ass-first against a shiny pole is certainly appealing.

0 or 1/10

Trailer:

Keeping the smile off of my face during 2007’s glorious Hairspray proved to be an impossible mission. I gave up on it pretty quickly and simply sat back and enjoyed the entertaining songs and the frenetic atmosphere of this musical comedy with a heart of gold. By the time it was all over, I had to see it again. With a core of social justice and civil rights and a whole lot of colourful fun bounding around it, Adam Shankman’s version of the 1988 John Waters comedy and the 2002 Broadway musical is simply terrific.

Hairspray stars the incredibly talented Nikki Blonsky as a high school student from Baltimore, Maryland. Together with her friend Penny Pingleton (Amanda Bynes), Nikki essentially lives for a local area teen dance program called The Corny Collins Show. The teens dancing on the show also attend Nikki’s school, of course, and it isn’t long before Nikki’s dreams of getting on the show become a reality and she learns about show business and prejudice firsthand.

The beauty of Hairspray lies in its colourful imagination and its poignant interpretations of life in Baltimore during the progressive 1960s. Old prejudicial attitudes are held by many of the film’s characters, such as the evil wench of a station manager Velma (Michelle Pfeiffer), while other attitudes are changing, such as those of Nikki’s parents, Edna (John Travolta) and Wilbur (Christopher Walken).

The music of Hairspray is fantastic, of course. The songs are delightful and amusing, building on the story without getting in the way of the narrative. There are no superfluous songs in the film, either, as the addictive melodies swirl around gracefully. A number of songs are oddly touching, such as the poignant “You’re Timeless to Me” which is performed by Walken and Travolta in a strangely romantic scene in the backyard of their home. The legitimate joy on Walken’s face is alone worth the price of seeing this movie.

Hairspray keys in on a number of components to life in the 1960s with rambunctious and unapologetic glee. Take for instance the existence of such a big-time local teen dance show like The Corny Collins Show. Shows like this existed in all sorts of different local markets at the time, giving local talent a place to shine with a sense of heart and hometown pride. Soon, however, Dick Clark’s monstrous American Bandstand would roll over the local shows and the kids down “at the hop” would have to compete for a larger stage. The brightness and naiveté of the local shows would be trampled.

Also compelling about the film is its take on issues of race. Queen Latifah plays the owner of a record shop and the host of “Negro Day” on The Corny Collins Show. While Corny (James Marsden) wants to get rid of “Negro Day” and simply integrate the kids, the heads of the station (and Velma) simply won’t allow such a tragedy to occur. The racial tension drives much of the action of the story and serves as a focal point to Nikki’s character as she finds unity as a cause to believe in and a cause to fight for.

It’s rather difficult not to get caught up in the contagious joy and energy of Hairspray. Having not seen the original 1988 John Waters version of the film, I can’t really do justice to any sort of comparison at this point and time. It is on my list to see, of course, and I’ll be happy to hear from anyone who’s seen both and can provide some insight as to how the two versions compare. Better yet, any fans of the Broadway musical are also more than welcome to chime in.

As it is, Hairspray stands as one of my favourite films of 2007. Its energy, its heart, and its passion make it a delightful spectacle. Nikki Blonsky and the rest of the cast were terrific, with a special nod to Travolta in drag as one of the most poignant and touching characters to hit the screen all of last year. It’s a charming film and should be seen by as many people as possible.

10/10

Trailer:

Hayden Christensen is an obnoxious young man with special abilities in Jumper, the 2008 Doug Liman-directed thriller. Based on the science fiction novel of the same name from 1992 by Steven Gould, this film is a relatively hollow narrative with little emotional investment and bland characters. While the premise is nice and has gobs of potential for great stories, Liman’s final product suffers under the weight of poor acting and sloppy storytelling.

Christensen stars as David, a young man with a genetic anomaly that allows him to teleport like Nightcrawler from X-Men. David even leaves a little trail of dust and smoke, just like the horned blue guy. While exploring his gift, David decides to live the high life and escape his less-than-ideal circumstances back at home. He is a jet-setter, firmly entrenched in a lifestyle of adventure and fun. David can show up anywhere in the world at the drop of a hat, which enables him to eat a sandwich on top of the Sphinx.

David reconnects with his childhood sweetheart, the ridiculously-named Millie (Rachel Bilson) and they head to Rome the old-fashioned way (in a plane). While there, David’s adventurous side clashes with his desire to keep his “jumping” ability secret and it makes for some interesting but bland moments as he tries to sneak into various parts of the Coliseum. While mucking about in Rome, David discovers that he is not alone with his talents and also learns that there are those who want to kill “jumpers” for being abominations. While grappling with religious zealots and his new jumping ability, David learns about what’s really important in life.

With a supporting cast that boasts Jamie Bell, Samuel L. Jackson, Diane Lane, and Michael Rooker, one would think the acting would be a little more on point. As such, the performances are generally all lacking in any substance or punch. Jackson’s turn as Roland, the story’s lead villain, is uninspiring and unintimidating. The chemistry between Bilson and Christensen is laughable, especially during a handful of terrible scenes at the Roman Coliseum.

Jumper will be a dream movie for some, as the idea of jetting off out of a bad situation and into a good one in another part of the world is sure to be exciting. It’s just too bad that Liman’s efforts with the premise fall so darn flat. For starters, there are no rules to the jumping. It is implied, somewhat, that a jumper has to have visited the place he is going to jump to. The film plays by these rules sometimes, but for the most part it appears to just make things up as it goes. The screenplay meanders around, correcting things where convenient and leaving huge gaps in logic. Why would a jumper need a car for any reason other than stylish purposes?

There’s also a lot here that isn’t touched, which makes the idea that Jumper serves as an introduction to this whole scene a laughable one. There is a war going on, don’t you know? Jumpers have been fighting with Paladins for centuries, although we wouldn’t know there was anything less than a slight skirmish taking place. There is no history given to the conflict, except a few lines that Jackson’s Roland utters when he’s about to stab someone. Nobody knows or cares why Paladins are named after ancient Roman guards and officials of the Catholic Church, which makes the name “jumper” even sillier for those who are able to teleport and defy “God.”

Overall, Jumper is just uninteresting. For all of its special effects and CGI backdrops, there’s not a lot of exciting stuff here. A fight sequence between David and Jamie Bell’s Griffin character is a highlight, but the potential of using the jumping mythology is simply shot by poor direction decisions and a bad screenplay. For much better “jumping” action, I prefer the electrifying opening sequence of X2: X-Men United. For acting, I prefer dinner theatre.

2/10

Trailer:

Yet another Stephen King novella heads to the screen with 2007’s 1408, an oddly balanced film about what goes on inside a creepy hotel room and what happens when a writer heads inside to check it out. 1408 was directed by Mikael Håfström, the Swedish director who was behind 2005’s Derailed, and starts out well enough but degenerates towards its last act into tepid and bland material.

John Cusack stars as writer Mike Enslin, who is obviously modelled after King himself as many of his characters are. Enslin investigates allegedly haunted houses and hotels for a living and writes about the results of his adventures, making him a mild attraction in the paranormal genre of books. Enslin is pessimistic and has no faith in the supernatural, especially elements of God. He has rejected faith because of the death of his daughter, which has also caused him to separate from his wife (Mary McCormack).

One day, Enslin learns of a mysterious hotel in New York City called the Dolphin. The Dolphin has a room, 1408, which has become infamous for strange activity. Upon arriving at the Dolphin, Enslin meets the hotel manager (Samuel L. Jackson). The manager pleads with Enslin not to stay in the room, but ultimately Enslin heads in anyway. The rest of the film follows Enslin’s experiences in 1408 as his life begins to unravel before his very eyes.

1408 is effective in many ways, but it also prematurely shoots its wad (so to speak) and the climax is less than enticing. Cusack is good as Enslin, portraying Stephen King’s writer prototype as well as most actors taking on the similar role. It is, again, akin to the role Johnny Depp took on in Secret Window and, again, the character grapples with similar issues. As such, Enslin has some depth and the fear he faces in the room certainly becomes real. Without the character build, 1408 would have been an utter stinker.

The problem with 1408 lies in the setup and in the delivery of the tension. Håfström plays with anxiety early on, establishing a solid groundwork and actually developing tension as Enslin makes the long walk to the room through the hallway. The build-up for the room itself is solid and we actually feel a sense of fear and dread as he closes the door behind him. A sort of “So this is the place?” feeling takes over and the director has done a nice job setting us up for what could be a hell of a ride.

There are some nice moments within the structure of the story, however, like when Enslin has an argument with his mini-fridge and with a miniature Samuel L. Jackson inside. Unfortunately, this nice moment is more funny than scary and the overabundance of stylish “effects” does the place in much too soon. We flop around back to Enslin’s regular life, or so it seems, for a few minutes before heading right back into the lion’s den. The pacing is slippery and, sadly, the story struggles to maintain the tension previously built by the director.

For the most part, 1408 loses its momentum and its sense of the theatrical far too often in order for it to be considered an effective thriller. Perhaps it works better as a sort of comic allegory about horror movies with too much juice in the box and not enough ability to temper it out properly. Håfström’s direction is competent enough, I suppose, but the overall product here is much too average to recommend. For a better King-based thrill, The Shining is an obvious choice with similar themes.

4/10

Trailer:

Tim Burton and Johnny Depp collaborate once again in the dark musical Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street. Based on Stephen Sondheim and Hugh Wheeler’s musical of the same name, this marks the sixth collaboration between Depp and Burton and is arguably the most compelling. Sweeney Todd saw a late 2007 release in North America and landed the award for Best Motion Picture (Comedy or Musical) at the Golden Globes.

Depp stars as Benjamin Barker, a skilled barber who loses his family after being falsely accused of a crime by the evil Judge Turpin (Alan Rickman). We meet Barker as he is returning home fifteen years later under the assumed name Sweeney Todd. He approaches London after escaping prison and makes his way to his old flat, which is now inhabited by Nellie Lovett (Helena Bonham Carter) and her house of terrible pies. Todd sets up shop to gain revenge on those who wronged him, while a sailor, Anthony Hope (Jamie Campbell Bower), discovers Todd’s daughter, Johanna Barker (Jayne Wisener), as the ward of Judge Turpin.

Part of the magic of Sweeney Todd lies in the fact that the performers all sing their own parts. There is no usage of vocal stand-ins. Depp is terrific as Sweeney Todd and suits the role incredibly. Nobody else could have played Todd like Johnny Depp. He worked with a vocal coach to get the tone and the notes right and immersed himself in the material. The results are impeccable, as Depp brings up a sort of Boris Karloff quality to the film and calls upon old-fashioned horror villains in the way his character moves about the screen.

Helena Bonham Carter is also tremendous. As Todd’s partner in crime, she has perhaps the most complicated role of all and has a profound amount of depth to her character. Carter’s command of Lovett is terrific, as she carefully makes her way through Sondheim’s complex lyrics and score with the ease of a professional.

What sets Sweeney Todd apart from other run-of-the-mill musicals is the tone and the bloodiness of the ordeal. Easily the bloodiest musical in stage history, it seemed a natural fit for Tim Burton to transfer this to the screen without losing a step in the intensity of the original material. And so it is. Burton’s touch is felt from the opening scene to the closing moments, adding sweeping touches of darkness and greyness to an already dismal palette of characterizations and musical numbers. Sondheim’s dark revenge tragedy becomes all the darker for Burton’s direction.

Of the most compelling notions of Sweeney Todd is that of the morality. There is none to speak of, in essence, save for perhaps the aptly named character of Anthony Hope who only wishes to rescue Johanna from all of the slaughter and darkness of the dismal London streets. Hope represents just that, while the film’s major characters circle each other in bloody and rancorous pathways, marking their intentions with silver gleams of barber’s tools or hot ovens.

Without much of a moral compass, it may be difficult for the average viewer to find a ground on which to stand. There is so much bloodshed and an almost gleeful representation of revenge that it becomes difficult to find a place for a moral person to stand. One has to find comfort in Hope’s few sequences in order to find a resting place. Burton, however, has no intention of giving his audience a resting place from the discomfort of watching Todd splice open throats and Lovett bake them up. There is simply no room for respite in this and, as it must be, the ending simply follows the line to its bitter, brutal conclusion.

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street delivers on its promise of darkness and ghoulishness. It is an often frightening homage to tales of revenge, to the silent horror movie era, and to the complexities of a musical in which revenge is the key motivation. Sweeney Todd is not our hero, nor is Lovett, and we are not here to find heroic actions or moral tales. We are only here to observe one man’s descent into the monstrous abyss of retribution, bloodshed, and despair. In that respect, Sweeney Todd is a masterpiece.

9/10

Trailer: