Flick of The Day: The Shawshank Redemption

In August 1982, Stephen King released his new book. It was something of a portmanteau novel combining four separate novellas under the title Different Seasons, linking each with reference to the changing seasons.  One of the novellas was a little fable called “Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption”. So was born a tale of hope and its redemptive power. In 1987, an aspiring young film-maker and screenwriter named Frank Darabont optioned the rights to make the story into a feature film for the princely sum of $1. He had impressed the novelist with a previous adaptation and the pair had maintained a pen pal relationship over the years.  This was to say the least something of a coup for Darabont. The director Rob Reiner has been desperate to acquire the rights to Shawshank having offered $2.5m in the hope of writing and directing his own adaptation to have starred Tom Cruise as the main protagonist Andy Dufresne and Harrison Ford as his friend Red. However Darabont had his own vision for the film and saw it as his opportunity to make something special. Thankfully for all of us, he got to realise his vision.

In Portland, Maine in 1947, a wealthy young banker named Andy Dufresne, played with a Scarecrow in The Wizard of Oz like charm by Tim Robbins, is accused of murdering his adulterous wife. She had left him for a local golf pro and the pair of lovers had been found murdered the next morning. Andy protests his innocence; he went to the house on the night in question and sat in his car drinking with a loaded weapon which he later claims to have thrown in the river.  He is found guilty and sentenced to two consecutive life sentences to be served at Shawshank State Penitentiary. We soon learn that Shawshank is a violent and brutal place overseen by the corrupt religious ideologue Warden Norton, a fantastic career best performance from Bob Gunton, and the thoroughly evil Captain Byron Hadley, played by Clancy Brown. Andy’s quiet and aloof manner is taken by his fellow prisoners as an indication that he sees himself as a cut above. It is not until a couple of months of passed that he speaks a word to anyone.  The man he chooses is Red, a prisoner who knows how to get things. Whatever you require, Red will provide. Morgan Freeman delivers perhaps his greatest performance as Red imbuing the character with wit and charm while retaining a hard edged outlook on prison life borne of his own life sentence.  Andy asks Red to procure a rock hammer; he was a collector of rocks in his former life and wishes to do so again. He later asks Red to procure him a poster of Rita Hayworth. As the year pass by, the pair develop a friendship, something to hold onto against the bleak landscape of the prison. Andy is targeted by a gang of rapists, the Sisters, led by the malevolent Boggs. He is repeatedly attacked, sometimes fighting them off, sometimes not. 

Eventually Andy manages to find himself useful in aiding the corruption at the heart of Shawshank and in particular Warden Norton. Years pass and we find ourselves moving through the 1950s and 60s. Andy is put in charge of the prison library and freed once and for all from the attentions of the Sisters. Throughout the decades of drudgery and setbacks, Andy maintains the hope of eventual freedom. Red on the other hand comes to accept that he may never leave the prison. As we reach a thrilling and life affirming ending, we are left in n doubt that hope can overcome all and bring redemption to those who have long given up on it.

I am determined to keep as much of the plot under wraps as I can for those unlikely few who have yet to see the film as it is such a joy to behold. Andy overcomes so much and yet maintains a lifelong friendship with Red. It would destroy lesser men and indeed the film certainly hints that Andy has taken all that he can take.

There are too many superlatives which could be applied to the film so I will only offer up a few small thoughts. The nuance and exactitude of Darabont’s storytelling is something to behold. There are no moments of fat on the script, it is tight, well thought out and leads to the finest of denouement. In terms of performances, the film is replete with some really fine turns. Tim Robbins perfectly captures a vulnerable and quiet man who is thrust into hell but hopes to retain his human dignity. He seeks only peace where others might need revenge. Morgan Freeman is equally adept as Red or Ellis Redding to give him his full name. He manages to bring a sense of loss to the character. A man who knows that but for one stupid mistake as a young man he could have lived his life. It is this sense of loss which drives him to survive and not rely on superfluous (in his mind) things like hope.

Of course every hero needs an enemy and in Bob Gunton’s Warden Norton, Andy has one for the ages.  From the first moment we meet him, he is a steely eyed zealot determined to enforce absolute rule on the prisoners. Much like Jesuit missionaries or the crusaders of old, he cannot be reasoned with and has a quote from the scriptures to justify all eventualities. Yet he is a deeply immoral man, through the use of Andy’s skills he creates a vast network of corruption with ill-gotten money flowing toward him.

Ultimately the central theme of the film is justice or the lack thereof. Andy may find redemption but he never gets justice. Neither his wife nor her lover could be said to have received it either, their true murderer remaining unaccounted for.  Warden Norton uses his own method to avoid the long reach of justice. I suppose the heart of the film is that you can’t rely on outside forces to deliver you safely; it is only true personal determination that we can hope to survive.

Having watched the film again for the purposes of this, it is strange to think that it was a commercial failure on its initial release, earning a grand total of $16m before it left cinemas.  It was however well received by critics and went on to garner seven nominations at the Academy Awards, including Best Picture. It was only when it reached the home video market that it truly began to be seen by cineastes as the triumph it is. In the years since, the legend has grown to the stage where it is now Number 1 on the IMDB 250 and appears unlikely to be toppled any time soon. It has become something of a Western cultural touch stone which everyone sees at some point. For that alone, I think Stephen King got his $1 worth.

Flick of the Day: The King of Marvin Gardens

The rise and fall of Bob Rafelson's BBS Productions is the story of 1970's American cinema. At the vanguard of the movement to bring smart, literate cinema to the American mainstream, it quickly flamed out but in it short life, it left some genuinely ground breaking work such as Five Easy Pieces, The Last Picture Show and today's flick of the day The King of Marvin Gardens. The story of BBS is documented in Peter Biskind's excellent account of 70's cinema Easy Riders & Raging Bulls however it was the failure of Marvin Gardens which dragged BBS down and marked a creative limit for how far mainstream audiences were prepared to follow a new generation of film-makers that were to blossom later in the decade.

The King of Marvin Gardens

A relentlessly downbeat look at the disillusionment with society of those on the margins, the film opens with a depressive radio DJ, David Staebler played by a reserved Jack Nicholson, who spends his days monologuing philosophy on his show in Philadelphia while looking after his aged grandfather. One day out of the blue, he gets a call from his estranged brother Jason, a manic con-man played by Bruce Dern who urges David to come to Atlantic City for his latest get rich quick scheme. Arriving to a wintry and decaying city that is long past its heyday and long before its rebirth as the town that gambling owns, he meets Jason's two accomplices, an ageing beauty queen named Sally played by Ellen Burstyn and her stepdaughter Jessica. David quickly realizes that Jason's plans are pie in the sky and tries to talk some sense into him but neither he nor the women in his life are listening leading to a tragic outcome for all.

Coming off a series of failures, BBS Productions was desperate for Marvin Gardens to be a hit and on paper it seemed a sure thing. It re-teamed the star and director of 1970's surprise hit Five Easy Pieces and had a fine cast including Ellen Burstyn fresh from an Oscar nomination the previous year. However, this dark and at times bizarre tale of urban alienation was too much for even the enlightened audience it was aimed at. In retrospect it is not a bad film and despite an initial feeling that the two male leads Nicholson and Dern should switch roles, they do deliver strong performances with Dern excelling as the extrovert con-man and Nicholson showing his range as the permanently depressed DJ. The gritty realism of Laszlo Kovacs cinematography gives the off-season Atlantic City a dark beauty and highlights both the decay of the city and the isolation of the characters.

The real emotional heart of the film is that each of these characters apart from David places money and fame above personal relationships and each are damaged individuals because of it.

Jason Staebler: You notice how it's Monopoly out there? Remember Boardwalk, Park Place, Marvin Gardens? 
David Staebler: Go directly to jail? 
Jason Staebler: Well, that's me. Don't pass go, don't collect $200. 

While not one of the all time greats, it is still an affecting and hard hitting drama of human relationships. Nicholson's David is as emotionally reserved as Dern's Jason is out there and the various bizarre scenarios they find themselves in merely highlight this emotional emptiness in their lives due to the focus on money.

All in all, this is a dark and downbeat film with an ending that will leave you feeling ill at ease. That said, there are some fine performances from the leads and the cinematography makes the most of the wintry setting of a depressed Atlantic City. Nicholson's career would go on to bigger and better pictures but he shows real range as the dour David while Bruce Dern makes the most of one of his better roles in the 70's. A touchstone for where the decade went in terms of cinema and a historically important film.

Flick of The Day: La Haine / Hate

Bursting onto the scene in 1995 with today's flick of the day, La Haine, Mathieu Kassovitz was the next big thing in French cinema compared perhaps stupidly in hindsight to Spike Lee. La Haine was a controversial film on it's release dealing as it does with issues of race, violence and the class divide in modern France  and went on to win the Best Director prize at Cannes. This early promise has yielded mixed results at best with the risible Halle Berry vehicle Gothika and the perhaps best forgotten Vin Diesel starring Babylon A.D being the highlights.

La Haine 

La Haine documents a day in the life of three disaffected youths from differing backgrounds in the grim Paris banlieues. Vinz, played by Vincent Cassel perhaps the best French actor of his generation, is Jewish and a hot head spoiling for a fight with the police. Hubert, played by Hubert Kounde is black and a promising boxer who is the opposite of Vinz and tries to preach the path of least resistance. In the middle of these is Said, played by Said Taghmaoui, who spends his time keeping them apart. Jobless and penniless and without prospects of either, they spend their days hanging around the housing estate while at night engaging in skirmishes with the local police. As the film opens, another youth has been seriously injured by police in a riot. With tensions high on the estate and the police at breaking point, a cop loses his weapon in the chaos and it falls into the hands of one of our three  friends. As the day turns into night, we seem set for tragedy on the streets.

Shot in a stark black and white, this is a worryingly relevant film even today. The terminal decline of the Paris banlieues has if anything accelerated and the problems of race and the class system are as divisive as ever. As I write this, the French police are currently attempting to capture a man accused of murdering 6 people of ethnic origins in a hate crime and in the upcoming French elections, immigration will be a focus of attention in a country where the national front routinely wins a quarter of the vote. The use of black and white photography by Kassovitz highlights that the divide is not so much on ethnic grounds as it between the haves and have nots. Vinz, Hubert and Said are a Jew, an African and a Muslim. Not obvious friends if society is to be believed and yet they are joined by their struggles to escape the Paris slums.

Hubert: Heard about the guy who fell off a skyscraper? On his way down past each floor, he kept saying to reassure himself: So far so good... so far so good... so far so good. How you fall doesn't matter. It's how you land!

Kassovitz shows a side of Paris that is not on any tourist trail. The Eiffel tower is glimpsed only in the distance and any interaction with the cultural centre only reinforces the fact that these guys are outsiders.

At the time, La Haine was compared to the early work of Spike Lee in terms of its angry social conscience. Perhaps a better comparison would be to some of the New York films of Martin Scorsese in terms of capturing a Zeitgeist such as Taxi Driver and Bringing out the Dead. While perhaps inspired by these films, it is a work of true originality and at times brutal truth. It avoids the clichés of "honour in the hood" seen in American films such as John Singleton's Boyz N The Hood.

An important film that still has the power to shock even 17 years after its release, La Haine is a must see. It is as Paris as you haven't seen it and is as relevant a portrait of the city today as it was on release. It introduced the world to Vincent Cassel who would go on to be perhaps the biggest star in French cinema today while Hubert Kounde and Said Taghmaoui would build strong careers. Well worth a viewing.

Flick of The Day: A Dangerous Method

Canadian director David Cronenberg has long been a filmmaker who has challenged his audience with a body of work that spans the bizarre (The Fly), the violent (A History of Violence, Eastern Promises) and the controversial (Crash). Adapting a play which details the relationship between the father and son of psychoanalysis then would seem long an odd choice for him. However continuing his fruitful relationship with Viggo Mortensen proves to be a wise move. Today's flick of the day is A Dangerous Method.

A Dangerous Method

Michael Fassbender stars as the brilliant but deeply self involved Carl Jung and gives another quality performance  in a year full of them. The film opens in 1904 as Jung is developing the theories of his colleague Sigmund Freud into a new method for treating patients by practising on the damaged and obsessive Sabina, a career best performance from Keira Knightley. As he begins to cure Sabina of her psychosis, their relationship deepens to the detriment of his friendship with his mentor Freud played by the always excellent Viggo Mortensen. Crossing the line between close care and taking advantage of his patient, Jung loses focus on what he is supposed to be doing for his own ends. Into this maelstrom of emotion steps the equally troubled Otto Gross played by Vincent Cassel in a measure performance..

As noted at first glance this does not seem an obvious project for Cronenberg's talents however once viewed it becomes apparent it is a perfect match. Concentrating on the dawn of sexual dysfunction diagnosis, he is on familiar territory as he documents its effect on the relationships of those involved. All of the leads giver excellent performances with Knightley and Fassbender a particular highlight. Fassbender manages to make an engaging character out of Jung who initially appears too self absorbed to be interesting.

Carl Jung: Sometimes you have to do something unforgivable... just to be able to go on living.

Knightley shows hitherto unknown depth as Sabina, engaging her whole body in a performance which is terrifyingly good and captures the bizarre sexual impulses perfectly. The sex scenes are not filmed for gratuity but are rather dark joyless affairs which tell more about the characters then you might imagine.

Cronenberg has actually created quite a beautiful movie, the sun dappled shots of Vienna and Geneva are a joy to behold while the turn of the century style and architecture are captured with aplomb. This allegiance to the details of what was a very interesting period in time help to keep the viewer interested while this cast of inward looking characters play out their neuroses. It becomes apparent that Jung and Freud have as many hangups as their patients.

This is period drama of the highest order combined with an interesting examination of sexual dysfunction and a n another fine film from Cronenberg. An entertaining script is given full voice by a superb cast. All in all a fine literate drama worthy of your interest.

Flick of The Day: Revolutionary Road

Today's flick of the day is Sam Mendes adaptation of Richard Yates novel of suburban isolation and marital discord in 1950's America, Revolutionary Road. Tracing through many of the same themes as Mendes earlier work American Beauty, this is a beautiful and tragic tale with strong performances from Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet and an impressive turn from Michael Shannon.

Revolutionary Road

Opening in the late 1940's, Frank played by DiCaprio in perhaps his most mature and studied performance to date meets April, played by the always reliable Kate Winslet. Frank is a drifting longshoreman while April is an aspiring actress. They fall in love, each attracted to their own belief that they will do something special with their lives. After their initial meeting, we fast forward to find them living in the idyllic surroundings of Revolutionary Road. This whitewashed paradise of suburbia hides the quiet isolation of its inhabitants. All is not well with Wheeler family. Frank is trapped in a career he detests, afraid he is becoming more like his father, working for an office equipment company. April is equally dissatisfied with life, finding the cloying life of a suburban housewife too much to bare. Where once they imagined themselves as free spirits, they are gradually coming to the conclusion that they are just the same as the other denizens of their bedroom community. As their marriage begins to disintegrate, they lash out at each other in increasingly vicious arguments while each begins joyless extramarital affairs. Into this maelstrom arrives the mentally unstable son of a neighbour John, played with a brilliant mordancy by Michael Shannon that leaves your with the belief that he is the only really sane character. As the film moves towards its shocking and affecting conclusion, the tension becomes almost too much to take and the frustration of Frank and April boils over with disastrous consequences.

Mendes uses all of his skill as a director to create the glossy and clean image of suburban America in all its 1950's glory. It is a very beautifully shot film, with vibrant colours that capture the era. No less of an achievement is the manner in which this surface sheen is shown to be deeply flawed beneath the surface. To the outside, Frank and April are the perfect couple but underneath they are dying. Winslet and DiCaprio have a natural chemistry and this makes the viciousness of their arguments all the more compelling. If there is one criticism of Mendes storytelling it is that after the brief scene were they meet, we never really see how they got together. As an audience, we don't know what they have invested in the relationship and thus can easily find yourself wondering why they try and stay together?

Frank and April have built up this public façade as they perfect couple that are above the fray and feel the need perhaps to keep it up. This façade is quickly taken apart by the character of John played by a brilliant Michael Shannon. A mentally troubled mathematician who has undergone electroshock therapy, he cuts to the very core of what is wrong with them as people, their deep dysfunction. As he is scorned by those around him, we see that perhaps John is nowhere near as crazy as he looks.

John Givings: The hopeless emptiness? Now, you've said it. Plenty of people are on to the emptiness, but it takes real guts to see the hopelessness...

John is judged to be mentally unstable because his emotions are out front for the world to see. He never seems to have an unspoken thought and is in stark contrast to the buttoned down nature of those around him. He brings truth to a house of lies and is scorned for it. It is a terrific performance much like his recent turn in Take Shelter as another unstable outsider.

At times the cloying atmosphere of despair can make this film tough going. It is dark and there is no happy ending but that does not make it any less relevant of extremely well made. Between Mendes direction and the performances he draws from a very fine cast, this is drama of the highest order.

Flick of The Day: Glengarry Glen Ross

David Mamet was one of the great voices in American theatre in the late 70's and early 80's. As a playwright, he was a founding member of the legendary Atlantic Theatre Company, winning acclaim for his 1984 play Glengarry Glen Ross, which he adapted for the screen in this 1992 drama which is today's flick of the day. Mamet's writing is heavy in dialogue which is itself fast paced and peppered with scatological language, and it reeks of the stage. However it is the kind of rich language that draws the best out of actors. Apart from his theatrical work, he has a rich body of film work with particular highlights being his Oscar winning script for The Verdict and The Untouchables.

Glengarry Glen Ross

A simple tale of the goings on behind the scenes at a real estate office in Chicago, this film has an ensemble cast of some of the best acting talent in recent memory. Al Pacino is cocky top salesman Ricky Roma, Jack Lemmon is the ageing salesman living on past glories, Alan Arkin and Ed Harris are disgruntled and desperate while Kevin Spacey is the much put upon office manager. In a role created for the film, Alec Baldwin steals the film as a hard nosed motivational speaker. Times are hard at Premiere Properties with the pressure on the salesmen to deliver land sales in a downturn. They bitch and moan about the leads they are given and generally fail to sell apart from the big swinging dick Ricky Roma. The plot centres around a theft at the office but ultimately this is a character study of men under pressure, with a tense atmosphere reminiscent of something like 12 Angry Men.

Perhaps the strength of James Foley's direction is to keep the camera moving around the theatre like sets, to make this feel less like a play. It is not fully successful however as you can't really escape the origins of the tale. Mamet's dialogue is his greatest strength but it often feel over the top and almost unrealistic here. That said, it is terribly enjoyable to see greats like Pacino and Lemmon and Spacey chew through the scenery in capital lettered verbiage. 

Blake: You got leads. Mitch & Murray paid good money. Get their names to sell them. You can't close the leads you're given, you can't close shit, *you are* shit, hit the bricks pal, and beat it, 'cause you are going *out*. 

Shelley Levene: The leads are weak. 

Blake: "The leads are weak." The fucking leads are weak? You're weak. I've been in this business fifteen years... 

Dave Moss: What's your name? 

Blake: Fuck you. That's my name. 

[Moss laughs] 

Blake: You know why, mister? 'Cause you drove a Hyundai to get here tonight, I drove an eighty thousand dollar BMW. *That's* my name.

A tour de force then, but also a dark look at the harsh realities of the working world and the lengths people will go to, to survive. Lemmon's salesman is a loser but at heart a good family man while Pacino's Roma is a slimy charlatan yet one is a failure and the other prospers. There is a morality tale in there somewhere. 

Very much a character study, this is worth seeing if only for Mamet's dialogue and the excellent performances from the ensemble cast. It couldn't be called a compelling drama for very little happens but for sharp dialogue and tense well acted scenes, this is hard to beat. 

Flick of The Day: Angel

Neil Jordan has for many years been regarded as one of Ireland's most talented directors, with a diverse body of work to back this up. Always seeming to follow his own path, he has created work as different as  the dark journey into the London underworld of Mona Lisa to the historical epic sweep of Michael Collins and the downright oddity of Breakfast on Pluto. Of course this path started somewhere and in Jordan's case it was this  little drama set in the dark days of the Troubles. Today's flick of the day is Angel.

Angel

An impossibly young looking Stephen Rea stars as Danny, a dreamer saxophone player in a travelling show band. One night after another gig in a small ballroom in a border town, Danny encounters a young mute girl and whiles away the evening with her. That night, the local loyalist paramilitaries murder Danny's manager as part of a protection racket. The young girl inadvertently witnesses the killing and is gunned down while Danny hides in the shadows. Riddled with guilt and determined to get revenge, Danny sets out to track down the killers one by one. As this murderous revenge takes hold of him, Danny finds himself becoming as obsessive and dangerous as the man he is tracking.

There is perhaps no darker period in Ireland's troubled history then the 1980's. The armed conflict in Northern Ireland raged on seemingly without end and an economic malaise forced its best and brightest to emigrate. It is this setting in which Jordan creates perhaps his darkest film. The opening scenes at the rural film are shot with a particular naturalism and are perhaps the strongest section of the film. The events of that night define the rest of the film as they define Danny. The violence of the Northern Irish troubles is hinted at but this really isn't a political film. The bad guys could be from either side, it makes no difference. Effectively, this is an insight into the deadening effect violence can have on people. Danny starts out as a happy go lucky musician and ends the film as a homicidal psychotic every bit as dangerous as the man he tracks. 

In this complex role, Rea gives the best performance of his career. In Danny, he creates a character who undergoes a metamorphosis as striking as anything seen on Irish screens to date, unravelling over the course of the film. Rea is joined in a fine cast by some great Irish acting names like Ray McAnally and Gerard McSorley. While not a film that is an enjoyable watch, it is a taut and twisting drama that makes no bones about being a bleak portrayal of an Ireland that has thankfully long since disappeared into the mists. 

Both Neil Jordan and Stephen Rea would see their careers blossom from this movie with Jordan managing to strike a balance between independent work of artistic merit and the Hollywood ethic of making money. Rea, meanwhile has forged a career as a strong character actor who is always in demand and it is amazing to think he was 36 when this film was shot in 1982. All in all, this is a classic of Irish cinema and cultural touchstone of a time and place.

Flick of The Day: 12 Angry Men

It is difficult sometimes to understand the popularity of some films. I'm sure you can think of at least one film that is near universally popular and adored but that you just can't bring yourself to enjoy. Then again, popularity has rarely been an indicator of greatness. If it were then Titanic would be the greatest film of all time, rather then an over-long teen romance punctuated by explosions. That said, to every rule there is an exception and if there is one film that is both well liked and acclaimed then it is today's flick of the day, 12 Angry Men, director Sidney Lumet's classic psychological drama of a deliberating jury.

12 Angry Men

On a sweltering Summer day in a Manhattan courthouse, 12 white males deliberate on a teenage Puerto Rican boy accused of murdering his father. A fantastic ensemble cast of some of the best character actors of the day each bringing their own views, backgrounds, suspicions and prejudices to the table. Martin Balsam, Lee J Cobb, Ed Begley and Jack Warden each give stunning performances as the various jurors. After the first ballot, the vote is 11 to 1 to convict with the sole dissenter being Henry Fonda, Juror Number 8 and the film's conscience. As Fonda persuades the others to re-examine the evidence piece by piece, cracks begin to appear in the case and we learn more about the backgrounds of each of the men. Cobb's Juror Number 3 is a bully with an estranged son, Warden's Juror Number 7 wants to get to a ball game and has a natural mistrust of foreigners. Others are loath to make a wave, some want to blend in but to a man they have not examined the case in their own minds. As Fonda chips away at the case, he brings more jurors to his side as the temperature rises throughout the day until each man draws his final conclusion and a decision is reached.

A landmark film on its release, it has withstood the test of time because it asks fundamental questions of the jury trial system and does so in an entertaining and persuasive manner. Fonda has never been better in his role as the doubting Samaritan but it is a real ensemble piece and some of the best performances come from the lesser known talents. The cross section of society in the characters is well balanced, though this being the 1950's all are white males. 

Juror #3: Everything... every single thing that took place in that courtroom, but I mean everything... says he's guilty. What d'ya think? I'm an idiot or somethin'? Why don't cha take that stuff about the old man; the old man who lived there and heard every thing? Or this business about the knife! What, 'cause we found one exactly like it? The old man SAW him. Right there on the stairs. What's the difference how many seconds it was? Every single thing. The knife falling through a hole in his pocket... you can't PROVE he didn't get to the door! Sure, you can take all the time hobblin' around the room, but you can't PROVE it! And what about this business with the El? And the movies! There's a phony deal if I ever heard one. I betcha five thousand dollars I'd remember the movies I saw! I'm tellin' ya: every thing that's gone on has been twisted... and turned. This business with the glasses. How do you know she didn't have 'em on? This woman testified in open court! And what about hearin' the kid yell... huh? I'm tellin' ya, I've got all the facts here... 

Juror #3: [He struggles with his notebook, throws it on the table. The photo of him with his son is on top] Here... Ah. Well, that's it - that's the whole case! 

[He turns towards the window as the other jurors stare at him] 

Juror #3: Well... say something! You lousy bunch of bleedin' hearts. You're not goin' to intimidate me - I'm entitled to my opinion! 

[He sees the picture of his son on the table] 

Juror #3: Rotten kids... you work your life out! 

[He grabs the picture and tears it to pieces. He suddenly realizes what he's doing] 

Juror #3: [Breaks down] No. Not guilty. Not guilty.

Lumet's real genius as a director here, is how the tension ratchets up as the day progresses. The film opens as a reserved almost up tight piece but as the claustrophobic jury room closes in on the men and the tension begins to mount it opens up into something very special. The camera seems to take a tighter view of the men's faces and oppressive heat takes it toll. Ultimately the tensions reach their natural conclusion and the jurors are forced to confront their own prejudices in the search for the truth. There are some fine set pieces along the way and each actor is given their chance to shine for really this is an actors piece.

Currently sitting at Number 6 on the IMDB Top 250, a position apparently owed to the fact that it is one of the few black and white films that American schoolchildren are exposed to though it is a fine film and worthy of its position. That said, it is a product of its time. As noted, the jury is all white and all male and the cigarette smoke hangs in the humid jury room. 

[last lines] 

Juror #9: Hey... what's your name? 

Juror #8: Davis. 

Juror #9: My name's McCardle. 

[pause] 

Juror #9: Well, so long. 

Juror #8: So long.

12 Angry Men is a interesting compelling film even today and well worth a look. Directed by the legendary Sidney Lumet who passed away earlier this year, it is a fine example of his work which includes such diverse work as The Pawnbroker, The Verdict and Dog Day Afternoon.

Flick of The Day: The Paper

One of the real travesties of the information age has been the decline and fall of the daily newspaper. For so long, It was the source of news. Television news always had the sheen and soft focus of something in a daily battle for ratings but for genuine journalism, you couldn't beat print media in the eyes of most people. However with the rise of new media, the daily newspaper has struggled to identify its raison d'etre. Is it news or commentary? If the news in a daily paper is 24 hours old by the time it hits the news stands, what is the point of it? Today's film is an examination of a day in the life of a New York tabloid editor right at the end of the glory days in early '90s, right before the internet came and changed the game forever, The Paper.

The Paper

Michael Keaton leads an all star cast as Henry Hackett, the metro editor of the perennially struggling New York Sun. The film follows 24 hours in Henry's life and the life of the newspaper. The film flys along at a terrific pace in what turns out to be a momentous day for all involved. Henry has a big decision to make. He has an interview for a job at a much more upmarket paper, while trying to placate his heavily pregnant wife, the ever lovely Marisa Tomei. He is also locked in a battle with the upwardly mobile shrew Alicia, played with  a bitchy menace by Glenn Close over the direction of the paper and their coverage of a supposedly racially motivated killing in Brooklyn. Their boss, the editor, a chain smoking Robert Duvall gets some bad health news and attempts a reconciliation with his daughter. The paper's star columnist, played with a portentous lunacy by Randy Quaid spends most of the film hiding out in Henry's office for fear somebody is trying to kill him. If that wasn't enough star power, Jason Robards pops up as the paper's publisher. 

If the film has a failure, it is that there is often too much going on during the day however I suppose that is a reality of your average newsroom. The film lurches from one disaster to another but it makes for entertaining viewing and is at times genuinely funny. Some of the best one liners are left to Duvall's ageing editor, Bernie.

Phil: Aw, Jesus, Bernie. Come on with the smoke. You know the doctor found nicotine in my urine again. 

Bernie: Then keep your dick out of my ashtray.

The central fixation of the film is the dichotomy of chasing paper sales while also trying to tell the truth. After the murder of two white businessmen, two minority youths are arrested. Hackett learns that they didn't do it but can't get a source to prove it. Alicia feels they should go with a headline indicating guilt as they can't prove innocence. It plays out entertainingly and the acerbic back biting between the two is a joy to watch. The ending when it comes is thrilling and funny in equal measures.

The ensemble cast give some great performances, particularly Keaton as the intelligent and witty Editor capable of working anywhere but drawn to the madcap world of tabloid journalism, giving some wonderfully profane speeches.

Paul Bladden, New York Sentinel: Well, I hope you're satisfied, asshole! You just blew your chance to cover the world! 

Henry: Really? Well guess fucking what? I don't really fucking care. You wanna know fucking why? Because I don't fucking live in the fucking world! I live in fucking New York City! So go fuck yourself! 

[Henry slams down telephone back on the receiver]

All of the stock characters you might expect to find in a newsroom are there, the power hungry bitch, the ageing legend, the drunken columnist. This might irk some people but I found it oddly reassuring, giving the film a base in reality. Cliché's always a kernel of truth a their centre. 

Ultimately, this is a very enjoyable trip of a movie, ending where it begins with the ticking of a bedside clock radio and a radio news announcer signing off:

"Because your whole world can change in 24 hours"

Backed by a strong script and some fine performances, director Ron Howard has put together a little gem of a film that chronicles the ups and downs of an atypical news day married with the everyday difficulties of human life. It's funny and touching but always entertaining. A very enjoyable watch.