The World According to Who?

“Coriolanus “is a film adaptation of a Shakespeare play, which I confess I had never heard of. But we decided a bit of culture for a change would do us no harm

The line up includes: Ralph Fiennes as Coriolanus, Gerard Butler as Tullus Aufidius, Vanessa Redgrave as Volumnia, Brian Cox as Menenius, Jessica Chastain as Virgilia, John Kani as General Cominius[3], James Nesbitt as Sicinius[4] and Paul Jesson as Brutus. With a surprise appearance of Jon Snow as a TV newsman!

The film begins with riots being held in Rome because grain is being withheld from the people. Caius Martius (Coriolanus), a Roman General is being blamed for this by the citizens. He says the plebians are not worthy of the grain because of their lack of military service. Meanwhile Brutus and Sicinius are working in the background to denounce Martius.

Martius leave Rome shortly after to fight his enemy, the commander of the Volscian army, Tullus Aufidius. The two meet face to face and agree to fight one to one. However, war is raging around them and they reach a stalemate when both are knocked unconscious. However, Martius has led his men well in the war, and gets the better of the enemy. On his return to Rome, this is recognised, and he is given the cognomen Coriolanus.

Coriolanus’ ambitious mother, Volumnia, wants him to run for Consul now. He’s unwilling at first, but then agrees to do as his mother wishes. He appears to have the support of the Senate and the people initially, but in the background Brutus and Sicinius are still scheming and manage to get everyone not only to oppose him, but have him banished from Rome as well.

He wanders through Italy until he reaches his enemy Tullus Aufidius, asking him to put a knife through him. Instead, Aufidius asks him to join his army and lead them to Rome. Coriolanus agrees and the army advances. Various people are sent from Rome to talk to Coriolanus but he won’t listen. Eventually his mother, his wife and his son arrive to talk to him. Initially he won’t hear them. But his mother is eventually successful in getting him to agree to a peace treaty.

Once the treaty has been signed in Rome, Coriolanus is seen returning to Aufidius, but is killed for his betrayal to the Volscians.

I was expecting this film to be pretty hard going. It was at times, but for the most of it, I was caught up in the story. The actors were all credible, and fitted their characters well. Really enjoyed this film. Thumbs up from me.

It was another double bill this week and the first film we saw was “Haywire” with Gina Carano [Mallory], Antonio Banderas [Rodrigo], Michael Douglas [Coblenz], Ewan McGregor [Kenneth], Channing Tatum [Aaron] and Michael Fassbender [Paul].

The film starts with Mallory, an agent for a contractor of private covert operations firm run by Kenneth, being approached by Aaron who wished to bring her back to Kenneth. She refuses and they fight, pretty brutally I may say, with Mallory getting the better of Aaron and managing to escape in a young chap’s car [Scott]. She takes Scott with her and tells him what has happened to her in the last week. They have a very exciting road trip!

It transpires that Mallory had a relationship with her employer, Kenneth, but was leaving him and the firm. However, he persuaded her to carry out a job in Barcelona to rescue someone who was being held hostage. She was accompanied on that mission with Aaron and Rodrigo. She was then asked to carry out another job in Dublin posing as Paul’s wife (another agent). She is told it’s an easy job and will be just like a holiday. However it transpires that Paul’s mission is to kill her.

Well, Mallory is no pushover! She suspects something is up when she discovers the hostage she had just rescued from Barcelona, dead in a barn, with her brooch in his hand. After Mallory finishes off Paul, his phone rings. She answers but doesn’t say anything – Kenneth asks if Paul has “divorced” Mallory.

Realising Kenneth is behind trying to dispose of her, she is now on a mission.

It’s all very fast paced, and I do confess to being confused at times. There’s lots of violence, but it’s not badly done. Quite a good film in my opinion.

The second film I saw this week was “War Horse“, the story of a young boy who trained a young colt to work on a farm, only to see him taken by the Army for service in World War 1.

Jeremy Irvine is Albert Narracott, the young boy who saw the colt being born, then followed it as it grew up. His father Ted [Peter Mullan] went to market to buy a work horse for the farm. They were struggling to keep the farm going and pay their rent. He ended up buying the colt in a battle of wills with his landlord. His wife Rose, [Emily Watson] is dismayed when he brings the horse home, but Albert is determined to train the horse and prove his worth.

Albert works with the horse, now named Joey, and eventually has him pulling the plough, to the entertainment of the whole village and dismay of the land owner. However, World War 1 has started and his father sells Joey to the army in a desperate effort to raise the money for his rent.

The army officer promises to take good care of Joey, and they go to battle in France. The story follows the horse from the battle, to a little French girl who finds him and another horse who has been left with him. It’s not long before the Germans find them and take the horses away.

This was quite a good story, but a very long film. I think it could have been shorter, and made a bit less like one of Lassie’s adventures!

Haven’t been to the pics since the “Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” so managed two this week. The first, “The Iron Lady” is about Maggie Thatcher with Meryl Streep playing the leading lady and Jim Broadbent as her hubbie, Denis.

There’s been some controversy, with folk saying it should have been left until Maggie had actually departed this world, but it’s a good film none the less. Meryl Streep does her credit, playing the older Maggie, while Alexandra Roach plays the younger Maggie.

It demonstrates her political ambition from a young age, and how she was willing to put across her views, despite being seen as just a young girl, and a grocer’s daughter. She was in the male dominated Tory party, but didn’t let anyone stand in her way.

She married Denis and had children but made it clear from the start where her ambitions lay. She achieved much in her political career, but in the end was more interested in what she thought should be done rather than listening to her colleagues. Which led to her downfall.

She was one tough woman, making very tough choices at the time, and not afraid to stand up to her opponents. I doubt we’ll see another such strong leader for a while, if ever.

The film was well done, and well cast, with many characters portraying the political figures very well. Thumbs up.

I’ve read the books and seen the Swedish film so I wasn’t sure if I should go and see this. I suspected they wouldn’t do it justice.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is set in Sweden [even the English version], and stars Daniel Craig as Mikael Blomkvist and Rooney Mara as Lisbeth Salander.

This film moves at quite a fast pace – there is a lot to pack in. And though there are some deviations from the book, I can understand why. It is slightly different from the Swedish film too.

There is a mix of Swedish, English and American actors [and other nationalities], and after the film one of my fellow cinema-goers, who hasn’t read the book, asked who was supposed to be Swedish and who was supposed to be English or American. Well, they are all supposed to be Swedish. But I supposed I didn’t notice, or wasn’t perturbed about it because I knew that. But may be off-putting for someone who doesn’t know the story.

I felt that Rooney Mara played the part of Lisbeth very well. Daniel Craig was also very convincing.

There is more of a lead up in the book to the conclusion, so there may appear to be a bit of a jump in the film. The court case involving Blomkvist and Wennerström wasn’t very clear, and I think if you hadn’t read the book it may have been harder to understand what Lisbeth was doing with his accounts in the end. Definitely recommend reading the book for anyone who has seen the film and left a wee bit confused.

In my opinion, this film was well done, though there were a few gaps, and exceeded my expectations. My fellow cinema-goers all enjoyed it too, both those who had and who had not read the book. Thumbs up.