Parties and social gatherings are fertile ground for drama. When you get a group of people with differing views and opinions together in a room and give them alcohol, anything could happen. Who's going to say something inappropriate that'll offend? Who'll get drunk and divulge a juicy secret? This scenario is the set-up to The Party, written and directed by Sally Potter (Orlando, Yes)
When Janet (Kristin Scott Thomas) is promoted to Shadow Minister for Health, she organises a dinner party to celebrate. What starts out as a joyous occasion spirals into chaos as announcements of pregnancy, relationship break-ups, terminal illness, and infidelity fill the air. The evening starts with champagne and ends with blood on the carpet as the guests deal with their unravelling relationships.
What a wasted opportunity The Party is. A stellar cast- Scott Thomas, Timothy Spall, Patricia Clarkson, Bruno Ganz, Cherry Jones, Emily Mortimer, and Cillian Murphy- do the best with what they've got but what they've got is, in places, not worth having. And that fault lies squarely with Potter's script.
Clarkson gets the best lines as the acerbic cynical April, about to dump her life coach boyfriend Gottfried (Ganz, sadly lumbered with an irritatingly pretentious character) and slinging out zingers with every sentence. The rest don't fare so well, dealing less with characters than stereotypes: Tom the banker (Murphy) snorts coke in the bathroom because of course he does (because that's what all bankers do).
Mortimer gets hamstrung as the pregnant Masterchef winner whose older partner (Jones) is having second thoughts about the children. There could have been some real drama, some real pathos, in this strand but it's diluted down to posturing with no substance behind. Spall looks like he's stoned, with a wide-eyed far-off gaze and barely given much to do but be a punching bag (literally and metaphorically) whilst Scott Thomas- usually such a reliable and decent actress- is stymied with an unsympathetic role.
I found it difficult to care about any of the characters or their dilemmas and, as more and more secrets come out and the list of issues gets longer, it lost my attention. Which, considering the running length of the film, is not a good sign. The film is a mere 71 minutes long (which, given the price of cinema tickets these days is a bit of an insult), and it could easily have been edited to be around an hour to be shown on TV instead. It's filmed in black and white for no other reason that I can fathom other than it looks nice. It also ends with no real resolution which is frustrating in the extreme.
There should be a perverse joy in watching the evening unravel. A room full of liberals looking to tear one another apart could have been a real delight. Instead, it's come out a half-baked recipe for disaster. This is one party that you'd be well advised to avoid.
Rating: 1.5 out of 5
Tez
Released in the UK on International Holocaust Remembrance Day, Denial seems a scarily prescient film (especially given our current political era of post-truth and alternative facts).
It is the story of the libel action taken by British historian and Holocaust denier David Irving (Timothy Spall) in 2000 against American professor Deborah Lipstadt (Rachel Weisz) and her publisher, claiming that Lipstadt's assertion that Irving had deliberately manipulated historical fact to prove the Holocaust didn't happen has defamed him. Irving brings the action at the High Court in London and, under the vagaries of the British judicial system, it is down to Lipstadt's legal team to prove their case.
It's an undeniably powerful film, incredibly well made, well written (by playwright David Hare) and well acted across the board.
Weisz is great as the fiery Lipstadt, her brash Americanisms rubbing up against the more genteel British legal team. Initially furious that neither she nor any survivors of Auschwitz are being called to testify, she soon realises that she has to, in her words, hand her conscience over and trust they will do the right thing. Timothy Spall's performance as Irving is similarly remarkable, making an abhorrent character almost charming. There's something oddly reptilian about his performance as Irving conducts his own legal case, trying to trip up the experts. I very much doubt the real Irving is as oddly likeable.
Tom Wilkinson gives an air of dignified gravitas to his role as Richard Rampton QC (presenting Lipstadt's case to the court). The scene where he gets to cross-examine Irving is a particular highpoint. There's also a lovely turn by Andrew Scott as the charismatic solicitor Anthony Julius who helps to prepare Lipstadt's case.
Hare used the verbatim court transcripts for the trial scenes, so whatever is said by the characters in court was actually said during the real trial. It gives a sense of real authenticity. There's also a short but very moving section of the film which takes place at Auschwitz (and was actually filmed there too) where the legal team go to undertake research and there's a clash between Rampton and Lipstadt which Wilkinson and Weisz play to the absolute hilt.
I found the film fascinating, occasionally infuriating, incredibly moving and just superb. I wanted more of it. It's the kind of story that could do well as a TV mini-series. As it is, though, a tremendous piece of British filmmaking.
Rating: 4 out of 5
Tez
A biopic of famed English painter J.M.W. Turner might not, at first glance, seem like the most likely subject for director Mike Leigh to take on. Leigh is known for his improvisational films dealing with contemporary issues, but- as films like Topsy-Turvy and Vera Drake show- he is comfortable in a period setting.
Mr. Turner follows the last quarter century of Turner's life, from his life in London with his beloved father, William Sr, (Paul Jesson) and housekeeper Hannah Danby (Dorothy Atkinson), to his relationship later in life with Sophia Booth, a widowed Margate landlady (Marion Bailey). It's episodic in nature but held together by a remarkable central performance by Timothy Spall as the titular Turner.
Spall won the Best Actor award at this year's Cannes Film Festival and it's not difficult to see why. He totally inhabits the role and yet gives such a grounded and unshowy performance. Turner is undeniably a brilliant painter but quite a rough character, concerned with his art and little else. He barely acknowledges his illegitimate daughters, giving them little more than the most perfunctory of attentions (in one of the funniest scenes of the film). He uses Hannah for his own gratification but doesn't seem to care much for her. However, there are moments of levity- his relationship with his father is nicely done (the interplay between Spall and Jesson is great and their relationship is believable), he seems the life and soul of the Royal Academy of Arts and there is a lovely understated nature to his relationship with Sophia. There's also a tremendous scene toward the end of the film where he rebuffs the offer of a private seller which is just a brilliant moment. Is Spall's performance worthy of an Oscar nomination? I'm not sure, but it is certainly one of the best given by one of Britain's most underrated actors.
Other performances are similarly strong: Jesson, Atkinson and Bailey all give great performances as the most important people in Turner's life. Lesley Manville is great in a cameo role as natural scientist Mary Somerville (who Turner helps with an experiment on light refraction) whilst David Horovitch gives a good turn as Turner's doctor.
Leigh's script is absolutely loquacious with long, intricate sentences for even the most basic of social greetings. It's initially quite tough to cope with but you soon get into the flow of speech. The film is a real feast for the eyes. Dick Pope's cinematography is just spectacular, with luscious shots of landscapes, seas and towns that is just sublime. All the costumes are similarly exquisite.
It occasionally veers into the indulgent and there are some scenes that feel a little extraneous, padding up the running time to two-and-a-half hours. I feel a ittle judicious cutting would not have gone amiss- for example, a scene where Turner sits through an excruciating conversation about gooseberries could easily go- and the impact of the film would not be lost. That said, it's a handsome film and a great performance by Spall so it's definitely worth your time.
Rating: 4 out of 5
Tez
