 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Hi everyone. I'm something of a budding critic and have written a review of several reviews on IMDB. I was going to add a link to the site so everyone could have a look and tell me what they think but it has my full name on it before the review so i'll just paste and post it on here. Hope peeps like it and please if there's any criticisms, try and be constructive. I'd appreciate any feedback, bad or good.
A morally dubious yet fascinating account of one of Australia's crooked legends, 11 September 2009
Author: Cockmaster
Since the fairly recent release of "Bronson," a bio-pic.,chronicling the life of one of Britain 's most notorious criminals. It would be easy to have forgotten that it was a mere nine years ago at the turn of the century that the similarly themed "Chopper" hit cinema screens. A character study of one of Australia's most notorious and consequently, revered thugs. The dubious legend that is, Mark Brandon "Chopper" Read. The film helm-ed and penned by native Australian film director Andrew Dominik. It also had the distinction of being the cinematic work that initially brought actor Eric Bana to a wider world wide consciousness inevitably bringing him to Hollywood. And with his jaw dropping magnetic, metamorphic performance in "Chopper" It's not hard to see why. Opening with a grim, cold exterior view of Pentridge prison to the strains of Frankie Lane's melancholy rendering of "Don't Fence me in", presenting immediately an indication of Dominik's, subversive technique which is partially utilised within the film. It's from there on that the writer/director is pretty expedient in establishing the complex walking contradiction that the man is. An unpredictably, violent, reprehensible show boat. As well as openly conveying a bemusing remorse or apologetic nature for his actions.
It's with this in mind that with brief shots of newspaper articles as well as the recognition that the man receives. As well as the eventual testament of his notoriety and fandom, through "fan" mail that the unlikely celebrity, inwardly validates his flagrant self promotion. Having, no other motive, for his mind-less, actions other than to make a name for him self. As well as a shallow, pathetic need for adulation or love. Which is hinted at upon the release of the older although arguably not so much wiser Read, which affords us to view his prickly relationship with his, at time's verbally acidic, morally reprehensible father(Kenny Graham). A man with which Read seems to have a pseudo loving, relationship with, mirroring slightly the unconventional affiliations and relationships he has with the supporting antagonists/protagonists. His prostitute girlfriend Tanya (Kate Beahan) with whom the Aussie crook has a more, prickly and verbally abusive co-existence with. Small time drug baron, Neville Bartos (Vince Colisimo) and his cronies as well as two members of the local constabulary, (Bill Young, Peter Hardy) who Read is covertly recruited and employed by as an informant. While not forgetting the roguish sociopaths visit to former prison cell-mate and "recruit" turned turncoat and now junkie Jimmy Loughnan (Simon Lyndon). Now married to the heavily pregnant and obnoxious, loud mouth spouse Mandy (Skye Wansey). All characters and actors effortlessly bounce of Bana/Read, their reactions to the man reflecting the audience's bemusement.
But how much is fact and how much is fiction is something to some extent isn't of too great importance. As Read quite knowing points out early on. "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story". And it's something that Dominik most likely adheres to. Conceding that with the man,(who himself wrote several auto-biographies)you never quite knew how much truth behind the myth there was, which lends a nice, ambiguous touch and contrast to the man. The duplicity which is the man that is Mark Brandon Read, and his dubiously, legendary personae. With the inevitable conclusion that Reads unpredictable nature eventually makes him public enemy number one (look out for a wickedly sublime moment where "Chopper" attempts to extort money from Bartos in his luxury home). It also cement's the bizarreness of Reads contradictory personality in a sublime moment of eccentricity, the rouge aids in spiriting the drug baron to seek medical attention at hospital. True or false it is part and parcel of the folkloric image behind the villain.
Shot in mainly dark, dim lighting which beautifully evokes the mood of the movie as well as the murky morality of the man as is the media attention he receives. And It's to some extent that the movie in It's self is not above scrutiny. After all, although not necessarily attempting to glorify Read there is something questionable about basing a movie around a person who is for the most part without any real ethics or moral code other than to bathe in the light of his permissible celebrity. Not to mention that several light hearted moments, namely a scene where a subversive moment where in the events of a shooting are retold. Recited as a black nursery rhyme by three cast members, to the strains of "Old Lang Sine". It's professionally orchestrated and yet with some of the black laced humour of the movie. It is in danger of being misinterpreted as flippantly playing down the severity of Reads actions. An error which it can be argued can be easily made in other cult movies which chronicle the actions of protagonists with questionable scruples. I.e. "Trainspotting", "The Krays".
The end result is a film that is both at turns a fascinating insight, all be it a flawed one in to the mythological as well factual account of one man. One who arguably should be exempt from any attention or interest he may receive. But in a world where the media and the skewered perception of certain people hold's sway. Sinners can quite easily be turned in to saints and vice versa. In this respect Dominks film is quite apt and in some small way as in Oliver Stone's "Natural Born Killer's". Is something that the writer/director is striving to highlight.
|
Wossy is less pretentious.