The Gift

Joel Edgerton's directorial debut was a decent effort albeit one that was thematically and stylistically inconsistent, but a smarter-than-average pseudo-intelligentsia story with decent performances by Jason Bateman, Rebecca Hall and Edgerton made this film an entertaining enough watch.

The story itself (which was also written by Edgerton) was rather straightforward, but Edgerton managed to slowly tease out the details and secrets such that the audience were more or less constantly guessing. However, there were times when the script was too smart for its own good.

The First Act was excellent, and then someway in the Second Act, Blum House Productions got control and it somehow morphed into a horror/slasher-flick cliche, and in the Third Act, the resolution felt rushed and unearned.

More time and effort should have been spent on developing the characters more fully. Instead, Edgerton spent his energy on moving the plot forward and left the characterisations to his actors.

Bateman did a great job, but his character's progression from the start to the end was the most abrupt. Although there were little hints here and there, they felt more like afterthoughts by the director and/or actor rather than organic to the character.

Hall, on the other hand, was more impressive. She eschewed the typical damsel-in-distress but her character must be one hell of a techno-phobe! The central conflict could have been easily resolved if she actually just used the internet! Or go to the local library for that matter. Or just some good ol'fashion Nancy Drew sleuthing.

Edgerton was creepy enough in a benign sort of way with a hair cut that could almost give Javier Bardem from No Country For Old Men a run for his money. Directing oneself can definitely be challenging, and it shows here. Edgerton's character was more distracting than anything else, and similarly, his character was as flat emotionally as he was internally.

All in all, you could really feel all 108 minutes of its run time and as pseudo-intellectual as Edgerton made the ending to be, it still felt like an emotional cop out because it was not earned.

The Man from U.N.C.L.E.

A fun and uber-stylish crime/spy-caper from Guy Ritchie - expect nothing less! - with a dash of camp and noir. Unfortunately this time round, style beats substance, and the gorgeous men and women, well-directed action sequences, and nifty twists are not enough to cover up the fact that the plot is thin, the characterisations are two-dimensional at best, and the cast really did not have much chemistry.

Ritchie has not really made a great film since the double whammy of Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch. After getting married, and then divorced, to Madonna and getting seduced by Hollywood to do RDJ's vanity Sherlock Holmes project and its eye-rolling sequel, there was hope that he could ignite his creative juices again.

UNCLE showed that Ritchie is a good director with an eye for action and comedy, and that he has a distinctive style. But he has lost that originality. Throughout the whole 116 minutes run time, the film felt like a mash-up of a Quentin Tarantino western (complete with the appropriate accompanying soundtrack) and a Mexican action telenovela (think: Lito's movie scenes in Sense8). There was no sense of the British spy genre - see: Kingsman or Skyfall - which Ritchie seemed to be gunning for in the (excellent) opening sequence, although granted that UNCLE was initially an American series.

Then we have the casting. Nothing against having pretty and gorgeous people on the screen. That is their job. But couldn't we have more authenticity here which would have greatly enhanced the enjoyment if we were not subjected to inconsistent accents? Look, we have Henry Cavil, a British playing an American; Armie Hammer who is an American playing a Russian, the gorgeous - and much wasted - Swedish Alicia Vikander who plays a German; and Elizabeth Debicki who is an Australian playing an Italian. Thankfully we have Hugh Grant playing Hugh Grant!

Cavil, was at least still acceptable. Especially since as Superman he is practically American now. And the English language is not hard to transmute although he sounds a lot better when his original British accent snuck out. So at least that was not a stretch.

Hammer was a conundrum. He played the part well except when he spoke. Look at The Americans, even the Russians there spoke better English than him. Would it have been so hard to cast a Russian or an actor who speaks Russian and English? What does Hammer bring to the table? His last movie, The Lone Ranger, bombed spectacularly. This would not have been the breakout role for him after his much more well-received turns on The Social Network and J. Edgar.

Vikander was wasted. We know, from Ex Machina, that she is capable of so much more. But here, she was merely a prop and plot device. And just in case they get called out for being feminist, she's a mechanic too and drives like a pro (at least only in the first scene). Although guess what? This film definitely fails the Bechdel test.

It was refreshing to have Debicki to be the main villain of the movie. And she deliciously camped it up. But that was all about it. The conversation in the writers' room must have gone something like this:

"We need a villain."
"Let's make it the wife!"
"Brilliant! That's different!"
"And so not feminist!"
"But why her?"
"She must be blond and skinny and sexy..."
"But why her?"
"Uses sex as a weapon..."
"But why her?"
"...and there's bombs! And explosions!"
"But...ooooh explosions!"

At least the cinematography by John Mathieson was gorgeous, and Daniel Pemberton gave us great music to watch the film by. Although the costumes, for such a stylish show, fell short. Budget reasons? Cavill could have a much spiffier wardrobe, and definitely so for the gorgeous Vikander.

Mr Holmes

An intriguing, mysterious, little film led by a phenomenal Sir Ian McKellen with outstanding support by Larua Linney and newcomer Milo Parker. This film was more about exploring the (fictional) man behind the fictional detective rather than a crime-thriller/whodunit, however it is to director's Bill Condon's credit that he managed to structure the narrative as if it was.

Condon, after the successes of the Twilight saga, definitely must have some clout now to explore more indie exploits. And following Benedict Cumberbatch's rather exciting The Fifth Estate, Condon now gives us a more meditative biography of an equally intriguing person.

Together with screenwriter Jeffrey Hatcher, Condon and him adapted Mitch Cullin's novel expertly. Weaving together a tight story about Sherlock Holmes in his twilight years - as a man riddled with a failing body and - most horrifically - a failing memory.

The narrative spanned over 30 years and in three locations, and was tightly framed and neatly paced, such that we never got lost following the story and the crime.

McKellan was brilliant. Suitably curmudgeon and convincingly doddering in his 90s, and bright-eyed and sharp in his 60s, McKellan conveyed the emotions and weighty expectations through subtle changes in his eyes and body language. He could literally conjure up the twinkle in his eyes!

Linney reunites with her Kinsey director and her character was an enigma, but she is one of the few actresses that could really stand her ground opposite the indomitable McKellen.

Parker as the young son of Linney's character, and the supposed protege of Holmes, will be a child-star to watch out for. Just like Tom Holland in The Impossible, hopefully good things will come to him in the future.

Cinematographer Tobias A. Schliessler beautifully captured the English countryside and the white cliffs of Dover, and Carter Burwell score was melancholic rich in brass and horns.

A wonderful film to watch and a well-spent 104 mins.

Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation [IMAX]

Like almost any Tom Cruise movies these days, M:I-RN was an entertaining film and Tom Cruise a reliable entertainer. However, there was nothing really spectacular about director's Christopher McQuarrie entry to the franchise - not in terms of action, set-pieces, dialogue, chemistry or narrative. M:I-RN definitely paled in comparison to Ghost Protocol and failed to build up upon it.

The best parts of film were the rare comedic elements which were mainly courtesy of MVP Simon Pegg, with the occasional one-liners from MUP (most under-used player) Jeremy Renner and the patente wide/bugged-eye looks of Cruise.

Pegg and Cruise worked well together and their chemistry definitely made the First Act the most entertaining, of course also no thanks to Pegg's bantering. Even the big action sequence of Act One was the most exciting and riveting of the whole film.

And speaking of action sequences, the one in the prologue really served no purpose other than for Cruise's ego and marketing purpose. Which can be the same for most of the other action sequences throughout, and was partially the fault of McQuarrie. The way he shot and edited those sequences could have made it better and more exciting.

The run time itself of 131 minutes was too bloated. Some scenes/sequences could have been trimmed and tightened. The problem here was that the audience do not really care about what is happening on screen - we all know Cruise will survive, so there is no real danger per se. Therefore, in many of the action sequences, where there are prolonged dialogue-free periods, we just want things to speed up.

This was also contributed by the lack of chemistry between the cast and the lack of group dynamics. The latter of which was what made Ghost Protocol such a fun film.

Rebecca Ferguson played a strong female character - a rarity in a male-centric action movie - that mostly held her own against Cruise, however they lacked chemistry together and their scenes were equal parts painful to watch and laughably admirable.

Poor Renner was reduced to a bit player after his expanded role in Ghost Protocol. It was like the first Avengers all over again for him. Damn contractual agreements.

Ving Rhames is better in small doses.

Alec Baldwin was just being Alec Baldwin.

Simon McBurney stood out amongst all the others as the Chief of British Intelligence.

Sean Harris looked like a Mason Verger with a plastic surgeon. Terrifying, all-knowing, and singularly boring/one-dimensional.

It was fun to watch in IMAX, but none of the action sequences really made it that much more worth it to splurge on the format.

Looks like there will be sixth and seventh entry to this franchise, and hopefully it can reach the highs of Brad Bird's Ghost Protocol again!

La Tapería

Les Amis' newest mid-range restaurant is a tapas affair and one of the better ones in Singapore. Mind you, that although Les Amis is moving away from the fine-dining scene and trying to establish itself in the mid-range market, it still veered towards the high-end of mid-range.

That being said, the quality of food at La Tapería did impress. In particular if you consider how, in Singapore, tapas are usually over-priced ang moh dim sums. At least here, the price may generally be north of $10 but at least the quantity and quality mostly justifies it. Bearing in mind that you are also paying for ambiance and service.

So, let us talk about the food now.

Off the bat, $4 for 4 slices of baguettes may seem excessive, but it was a worthy investment as the bread could be used to wipe up all the sauces provided.

The prawns in sizzling olive oil and garlic with chili was fresh, (Gambas Al Ajillo) and the oil was delicious to eat with the above-mentioned bread.

The gaelic style octopus (Pulpo a la Gallega) was one of the disappointments. It was soft and tender but did not wow the taste buds. There was a distinct lack of taste that not even the chili powder could compensate. Although, again, the oil was delish!

The fried manchego with Spanish Iberian salami (Crujiente de Manchego y Salchichon) was a children's (and adult's) favourite. The salty tanginess of the salami complemented the aged chewy cheese, and the fried pastry skin added some crunch.

The two squid dishes were a delight. The crispy baby squid cooking in squid ink (Chipirones Fritos en su Tinta) was a well done calamari-dish and frying it with the squid ink gave just the right amount of saltiness to complement the squid (which went well with a dash of lemon and the garlic mayonaise). 

The squid wrapped with jamon iberico (Rollito de Jamon Relleno de Calamar) was one of the best dishes. The squid was fresh and simply boiled and lightly grilled with a thin piece of jamon iberico wrapped around it which infused the seafood with a salty meat crisp.

Then came the meat dishes.

The charcoal grilled iberian pork (Pasa Iberica a la Parrilla) was a piece of ultra-tender pork chop - which I have been told "did not taste like pork!" (which would be good for all those people who have an adversity towards the elusive "taste of pork"). However, having said that, without that "porky taste" there seemed to be something lacking in the overall experience of such a tender piece of meat.

The off-the-menu wagyu beef came in 3 size: 150g, 300g or 500g and was served with a sides of potatoes and greens. The beef was done medium to medium-rare, and was tender and flavourful with a rich smell of charcoal and salt on the outsides. But they were too generous with the sauce which over-powered the natural flavour of the beef (which in all honesty, did not really need to be a wagyu).

The suckling pig (Super-Conchinllo confit) was average. You get to choose which quarter-part of the pig you preferred and I had the belly. It was fatty, the skin was crisp (veering more towards fried rather than roasted), but the meat was on the dry side, and not roasted enough to fall off the bone smoothly. The peach sauce and caramelised onions complemented the pork but was too little.

Lastly, the lobster pallea (Paella de Bogavante). A delicious, albeit slightly expensive, lobster and rice dish. The lobster was generously proportioned but dwarfed the portion of the rice - which in this case, with all the other food we had ordered, was appropriate. The lobster was fresh and succulent, and the rice, fragrant with saffron, was well cooked in lobster-broth and one of the better seafood paellas in Singapore.

The wine list was mainly Spanish, and the dry and mineral, with a hint of sweet, 2013 Laxas, Albariño went very well the dishes after breathing for a bit. 

Desserts was the churros and the crema catalana. Both were adequate although the mango bits in the latter was interesting and made it less boring than just a plain creme brulee.

At just slightly above S$500 for everything above, this was a good children/infant-friendly place that would be great for big group of friends and/or family. Dinner for one, two or three may be slightly less worth it.

La Tapería 
http://www.lataperia.com.sg/

1 Scotts Road #02-10/11 Singapore 228208
Tel: 6737 8336, e-mail: lataperia@lesamis,com.sg

Opening Hours:
Lunch: 12pm to 3pm, Dinner: 6.30pm to 10pm

Southpaw

Antoine Fuqua's newest film was unabashedly cliche but it was more than just another boxing movie, or another hero-to-underdog-back-to-hero again movie, because of the emotionally resonant work of its main cast particularly Jake Gyllenhaal, Oona Laurence, Rachel McAdams and Forest Whitaker.

The narrative by writer Kurt Sutter was typical of many hero-reborn stories over the years, and some parts may be too heavy handed. However, Fuqua wisely kept the focus on Gyllenhaal and did not stray too much into the emotional quagmire that Sutter's script potentially had.

However, the rise and fall of this film rest solely on its cast. And Gyllenhaal was outstanding.

Following his Oscar-snubbed role on Nightcrawler, Gyllenhaal returns with another fully-committed role that, depending on how the year shapes up, may or may not see him in contention again. He really found the character and slipped into him totally. There was no vanity nor ego in his portrayal of the boxer, and as he experienced the losses and wins, the audience was able to connect and empathise.

McAdams played a pivotal role in the story and was the emotional anchor throughout. She and Gyllenhaal had great chemistry and she really showed her depth (together with the Season 2 of True Detective).

Whitaker takes on a supporting role here, but this man, as we know, is capable of so much more! And here, he and Gyllenhaal had a natural chemistry that made their on-screen mentor-student relationship believable.

The other real star of this film was young Oona Laurence. Yes, a child actor that was brilliant and absorbing (and not annoying). Laurence held her own against Gyllenhaal and will be a fine actress to keep an eye out for. If only there were more accomplished stage child actors for the big screen.

Lastly, the music was exceptional. A brilliant juxtapose between John Horner's classical strings and Eminem's heavy rapping, reflecting the story and Gyllenhaal's character's arc.

Irrational Man

Woody Allen's latest sees him using film to explore his own dark philosophies of life, and he does not even try to hide the blatant-ness of it. At least this time round, Emma Stone has better chemistry with Joaquin Phoenix than she had with Colin Firth in the lighter, more romantic Magic in the Moonlight (the irony!).

Using the classic Three Acts structure, Allen used it to explore his own believes in morality and amorality and his own existentialism crisis. However, it lacked grace and subtlety and courage, with Allen just dipping his toes - and occasionally the whole foot - into the subject matter.

The story itself was predictable and borderline indulgent and it really did take its time. There were no unexpected curveballs, so the process of getting to the end had to be interesting and riveting to sustain the (intelligent) audience's attention. Sadly it was not.

Not even the snazzy Jazzy soundtrack could help to distract much.

Phoenix was a great choice to play the lead. He is one of the better actors of his generation and always inhabit his characters with the deepest understanding and dedication. Here he is overweight (gosh, that paunch was distracting!) and slumped over in the First Act, Rougeishly handsome and straight-back in the Second, and a slow crumbling of the facade in the Third.

Stone on the other hand, replayed her wide-eyed Romantic ingenue, for which she does a great job. But opposite Phoenix with such dark material, she paled. She held her own much better in the rom-com with Firth. Her wide-eyes failed to convey the necessary emotions and complexity that her character needed. Perhaps it is time for Allen to look for another muse.

Whereas Parker Posey held her own against Phoenix. Her scenes with Phoenix were the highlights of the movie. Together they both felt natural, and Allen's dialogue felt less self-serving.  Posey was a delight to watch.

Phoenix and Posey would be the reasons to see this 90-odd minutes film that felt like 180.