Hanna

Hanna

Year: 2011

Director: Joe Wright

Cast: Saoirse Ronan, Cate Blanchett, Eric Bana

In My Own Words

                Hands up those in Australia who remember Full Frontal? If you do, you know exactly what I will be talking about in this In My Own Words.

                I am, of course, going to be talking about the Eric Bana which we Australians knew back in the 1990’s. The Eric Bana who was on our television screens each Thursday night at 8:30pm. No, Full Frontal wasn’t an incredibly dramatic and intense drama series, it was Australia’s answer to Saturday Night Live with its collection of send up skits. Unfortunately, the series which I so loved came to an end in 1996, but the memories of Eric Bana as the comedian lives on.

                If someone had told me then that Bana was going to be one of the leading drama and action stars in Hollywood not even 10 years after the show finished, I would have been extremely confused of how anyone could take him seriously. He has definitely proved himself as a fantastic actor and I am very proud of how far our fellow Aussie has come. Yet, sometimes when I watch him in a movie, I am still expecting him to open his mouth and crack a joke or start up on of his famous impersonations as the Aussie bogan, Peter (pronounced “Poiter”), Australian television personality Ray Martin or his very funny portrayal of Tom Cruise. So Bana has gone from imitating the Hollywood heavy weights for a living, to being one of them. Ironic the way the world works out, isn’t it?

                These are my own words and here is my review.

Review

                What comes to mind when you think about a film about a child assassin? Violence, confrontation, uneasiness? Most likely words of this nature and nobody could blame you for thinking this. How about if the movie starts when the “child” in question is in the latter half of her teenage years which doesn’t really make the film about a child assassin, but about a young lady who has been trained as an assassin? Therefore, Hanna is a misunderstood film and rather than creating the controversy which one thinks it would, it is quite amazing really.

                Saoirse Ronan is Hanna, the sixteen year old who has been raised in the Finnish wild by her father, Erik (Eric Bana). As an ex- CIA agent, Erik has trained his daughter as soldier trained to kill. Hanna is sent into the world for the first time to travel across Europe and meet her father in Berlin. As soon as her presence is known in the outside world, she has agents on her tail wanting her dead and she comes face to face with the agent who killed her mother, Marissa (Cate Blanchett). Hanna learns what it is like to be a typical sixteen year old in the outside world and also learns who she really is.

                The story of Hanna may seem disturbing to some people, but it hardly seems disturbing on screen. Sure there is violence, which is to be expected in a film about an assassin, yet the story is really played out as a piece of art. The storyline and script itself is good, but the techniques used to bring the story to the screen are far more impressive than the writing.

The cinematography is just beautiful. There are some amazing panoramic landscape shots and the editing during Hanna’s escape from the agents is brilliant. Director Joe Wright chooses some great locations for the film. The filming locations are very interesting and in the final scenes with playground equipment and the swans and wolf mouth keep everything fresh even at the end of the film. If you really want to get in depth, these images which are part of the landscape could also be seen as symbolic of the childlike innocence which has been destroyed.

In the scene when Hanna is escaping for the first time from the agents, the thrilling images are accompanied by a fantastic soundtrack by The Chemical Brothers. The best thing about this soundtrack is that it isn’t techno or electronic music pumping constantly throughout the film, but the sounds are mixed up depending on what is happening in the film at that point in time. One would think that the film was choreographed around the music by how well it matches up and not the other way around.

Saoirse Ronan, this young woman loves the roles that push her boundaries, and why not? She pulls them all off. As Hanna, she physically suits the role as the young girl brought up in the wild. She doesn’t really give a great deal of emotion in the scenes where it is needed, yet she is great as the girl who has never got to experience anything that a typical sixteen year old has. She also doesn’t show a tremendous amount of aggression, which one would normally expect in an assassin. There is aggression there, just not enough.

Eric Bana seems to glide through this role. Like Ronan, he doesn’t show a great amount of emotion. Yet, it is great to see him in another action role. He is a natural in this type of role and looks right at home in the action fighting sequences. Cate Blanchett is very good as the role of the evil agent. She really is quite terrifying and becomes the role with every ounce of her being.

Hanna is truly a work of art. It is visually beautiful and everything is pieced together with the greatest accuracy and care. It is always a great joy to see a film know that it is a piece of art and live up to it.

8/10

Robin Hood

Robin Hood
Year: 2010
Director: Ridley Scott
Cast: Russell Crowe, Cate Blanchett, William Hurt, Mark Strong

In My Own Words
There have been so many Robin Hood adaptations over the years. Robin Hood is actually quite a complex topic, a lot more complex than what I ever thought the story or the person actually was. Until I saw Ridley Scott’s latest adaptation of the folk story, I had always assumed that Robin Hood was a fictional, but now I find that this may not be the case. Well, it is a mystery as to whether Robin Hood did actually exist or not. Many people have speculated over the years as to whether he is just folk lore and was made up to cheer on the underdog or if there was a real person. According to research done over the years, there are several figures in history whom Robin Hood could have been based on. In my curiosity, I came across a fantastic site by the name of “Robin Hood Bold Outlaw of Barnsdale and Sherwood” (http://www.boldoutlaw.com/realrob/realrob2.html) . Allen W. Wright, the owner and writer of this site, has done some fantastic research of who the real Robin Hood was. According to Wright, there are a number of people whom the story of Robin Hood could be based on, such as Robyn Hood who worked in the kings court in the 1300’s, or Robert Hood who was from just outside Barnsdale and who’s wife was Matilda, which is what Maid Marian was also known by in some versions. Nobody has yet made a conclusion as to whether the legend of Robin Hood was based on a single individual, or if he is the result of the combination of many different historical figures. Whether the legend of the man himself is true or not, there is no denying that he has not only inspired many books, films and stage plays over the years, but he has been a representation of how the good hearted underdog can always triumph over the oppressor.

Unfortunately, I don’t think the 2010 Robin Hood will triumph as anyone’s favourite Robin Hood adaptation. Not as heartfelt as 1991’s “Robin Hood: Prince Of Thieves”, even though that still isn’t my favourite Robin Hood adaptation. You can’t go past Disney’s 1973 animated version. Who can go outdo the brilliance of Robin being a crafty fox and Prince John and King Richard being lions? The fox Robin Hood is my perfect Robin Hood, although Kevin Costner and Errol Flynn are not far behind. Even though Russell Crowe is the oldest actor thus far to play the hero, he still fits the role and is the perfect choice out of today’s actors to do the job.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
Ridley Scott’s 2010 version of ‘Robin Hood’, which opened the Cannes Film Festival yesterday, is unlike other Robin Hood tales. This latest version is the prequel to traditional Robin Hood legends where Robin conquers over the Sheriff of Nottingham and sides with King Richard. Robin Longstride (Russell Crowe) is an archer in King Richards army when he is entrusted to deliver the kings crown back to London when he has been killed in battle, as the initial carrier, Robert Loxley(Douglas Hodge) is killed by Sir Godfrey (Mark Strong). Upon returning to Loxley’s hometown of Nottingham, he encounters Loxley’s widow, Lady Marian (Cate Blanchett) and finds out more about where he himself has come from. During this time, he is treated as a hero in Nottingham and wins the affections of Lady Marian. Upon discovering who he really is, Robin and his group of men set off to defend their country and rise up against higher powers in society.

The main disappointment about this film is that it starts off so strong. The beginning is so promising, with action and perfect character development. However, it does not maintain its excellence throughout the course of the film. When each of the characters are introduced, they are in such a way that the audience forms an emotional opinion about each one of them. For example, Prince John is in his very first scene obnoxious, immature and crude, exactly the way you would expect and want Prince John to be. Although he is so vulgar, it is almost exciting to see such a strong first impression of a character. Unfortunately, the film isn’t constructed in its entirety to maintain this strong opinion. This is no fault of the actors, but more of the scriptwriters and Scott as more effort should have been put into ensuring that the audience maintains an emotional connection to the characters. The actors definitely do all they can with the roles they are given. Russell Crowe is a perfect Robin Hood. He is an unlikely hero who is rough around the edges, but still shows his vulnerability and soft side. Cate Blanchett is also beautiful as Lady Marian and is also a lady, but definitely rough around the edges just like Crowe. Therefore, these two have a great on screen chemistry, but again, there is not enough to show how these two fell so deeply in love. It feels like it happened quite suddenly. Mark Strong is great as Sir Godfrey and Oscar Isaac is also very good as Prince John.

However, there is no denying that “Robin Hood” is a well made film. Medieval England and France are recreated so beautifully. The scenery is breathtaking and the way in which it is captured on film is commendable. Scott’s choice of settings for each scene is perfect, especially for the battle scenes. The editing is also very well done and the score is perfectly suited to every scene that it accompanies. It should also be mentioned that Scott does not fall into the trap that many other films about this era do, he does not cave into the idea that medieval England was glamorous. The wilderness is still a rugged place and only the king and queen have costumes which could be considered fashionable. It is definitely not the way the film is made that is the let down, but rather the way the story is carried out. Despite the majority of the audience knowing what the outcome will be, there is still no suspense or tension. Although the film is 2 ½ hours long, it does not feel that long and it is actually confusing why so little is accomplished in this time.

This latest adaptation of the Robin Hood legend is nowhere near as powerful as what it should be. It could be so much more, but instead is just very soft and dry. It is still a good watch, as there is some impeccable acting and cinematography. Adventure lovers will enjoy seeing this film, as will fans of Crowe’s work.
6.5/10