:00:00. > :00:00.fastest one-day international century by an investment and can
:00:00. > :00:08.Andy Murray make the semifinals at the O2 Arena inland? Now it is time
:00:09. > :00:20.for programme across. Hello and welcome to The Film Reviw
:00:21. > :00:24.on BBC News. To take us through this week's cinema releases is Mark
:00:25. > :00:38.Kermode. So Mark, what do we have I am sure that you know that we have
:00:39. > :00:44.The Hunger Games Mocking Che part two, the conclusion of the
:00:45. > :00:50.long-running Hunger Games series, we have Love 3-D, the controversial new
:00:51. > :00:56.film from Gaspar Noe, and The Dressmaker, Kate Winslet in an
:00:57. > :01:01.Australian melodrama. Let's conclude The Hunger Games. Are you a fan of
:01:02. > :01:06.these films? What do you reckon? I think that looks means No. No point
:01:07. > :01:11.in doing the plot because you are either to speed with it a lot. It is
:01:12. > :01:14.the third book, divided into two hops, and this is the second half.
:01:15. > :01:18.Pigs and exactly where the previous film left off. We are building
:01:19. > :01:22.towards the final confrontation in this young adult dystopian fiction,
:01:23. > :01:27.the confrontation with the president. Katniss Everdene, played
:01:28. > :01:34.by Jennifer Lawrence, is fed up of being a symbol and wants to be a
:01:35. > :01:43.worry. Her co-star is shaping up like an ice queen, and Peeta is
:01:44. > :01:53.wrestling with his Demons. They would show me pictures from my life.
:01:54. > :02:01.Now I can sort them out a little. The ones that they change. They have
:02:02. > :02:09.these coins that are there, they are shiny, they have been glossed over.
:02:10. > :02:16.You should get some rest. You are still trying to protect me? Real or
:02:17. > :02:25.not real? Real. That is what you and I do. We keep each other alive. What
:02:26. > :02:29.you can see from that is that the tone of the film is dark. To some
:02:30. > :02:34.extent that's the problem, one thing the series must be admired for is
:02:35. > :02:39.that it has not bottled out of following through. It has got darker
:02:40. > :02:43.as it has gone on. It deals with convex ideas and does not run from
:02:44. > :02:47.them and it has not sold out its heroin and that is to be admired.
:02:48. > :02:52.The problem is that they have divided the third book into two.
:02:53. > :02:57.This is the weakest. If the first one was battle royale and the second
:02:58. > :02:59.rollerball and the third broadcast news, this goes a bit quantum of
:03:00. > :03:03.solace. And the third broadcast news, this goes a bit quantum of
:03:04. > :03:04.solace. An uneasy balance between the discursive elements and the a
:03:05. > :03:06.film that was trying to make a film that was trying to make a
:03:07. > :03:09.literary source work and not succeeding. I have
:03:10. > :03:16.first time I was watching a film that was trying to
:03:17. > :03:16.have disabled of all the of the Hunger Games like me
:03:17. > :03:22.to see it through to its conclusion. The good news is that they have not
:03:23. > :03:28.done some Hollywood job in which they run away from that darker
:03:29. > :03:32.things, about power, about corruption, about taking the heroin
:03:33. > :03:38.seriously and not imagining that her central role as part of a love
:03:39. > :03:41.triangle. This is really much a post Twilight story. Yet the love story
:03:42. > :03:44.has always been in the background. It is dealing with competitive
:03:45. > :03:51.ideas. I do not think the film quite gets to grips with them but if it is
:03:52. > :03:53.a partial disappointment, I would rather be slightly disappointed yet
:03:54. > :04:01.have them try to do it properly than anything else. Not great but it does
:04:02. > :04:07.not run away from its core themes. Jennifer Lawrence? Terrific,
:04:08. > :04:14.absolutely terrific. Let's talk about Love. The latest from Gaspar
:04:15. > :04:20.Noe. Very much a maker of cause celeb films. He said he wanted to
:04:21. > :04:24.make a film that confronted the organic dimension of being in love.
:04:25. > :04:27.He said he did not want to be shackled by the convention that no
:04:28. > :04:31.film can contain overly erotic things. So you get a 3-way love
:04:32. > :04:35.story with a young man who is a father and very disconsolate, going
:04:36. > :04:39.back to memories of the previous lost love, and remembering his
:04:40. > :04:45.relationships past and present in a very physical way. It is done in
:04:46. > :04:47.3-D. Gaspar Noe says he has done this because he wanted to make a
:04:48. > :04:54.very explicit movie and liked the idea that 3-D was immersive. I don't
:04:55. > :04:58.buy that. It is much more like a 1969 expedition film called the
:04:59. > :05:02.Stewardesses. The tag line was, these leggy lovelies leap from the
:05:03. > :05:07.screen onto your lap! This is what Gaspar Noe is playing with. There
:05:08. > :05:12.are things that are like a carnival, with the film, it has come quality
:05:13. > :05:15.and enough shock factor to get it an audience. The problem is the three
:05:16. > :05:22.central characters and not interesting. If you compare this to
:05:23. > :05:26.a film like short bus which looks at a very explicit vision of the bulls
:05:27. > :05:30.intimate lives and yet they were rounded, interesting, likeable
:05:31. > :05:36.characters. That film had more to say on the subject of love than this
:05:37. > :05:40.film does. It is not boring, it is an interesting experiment, but
:05:41. > :05:43.fatally flawed by the fact that its three central characters are far
:05:44. > :05:49.less interesting than they need to be to get us any further than a
:05:50. > :05:54.sensational service. Given what I have read, I imagine we had to pick
:05:55. > :05:59.that clip cleverly! I am glad we succeeded in that. That's talk about
:06:00. > :06:05.The Dressmaker and Kate Winslet. A very peculiar film, from a novel,
:06:06. > :06:11.the story is that in the 1950s Kate Winslet is a dressmaker who returns
:06:12. > :06:13.to the, she was taken as a small child amid rumours of a dark
:06:14. > :06:17.playground happening. Now she's back only with a gap next Max Singer
:06:18. > :06:22.sewing machine to clean up the town and set right some old wrongs. She
:06:23. > :06:25.starts by redressing the entire town including the very handsome Liam
:06:26. > :06:33.Hemsworth. And starting to reconnect with her mother. This is a clip. She
:06:34. > :06:36.tells them if they want it done properly got to step and be measured
:06:37. > :06:41.because it's a work of art made special for them. You see, Tilly, I
:06:42. > :06:46.do listen. She tells them they are all different even though they are
:06:47. > :06:51.all the same, too fat, too skinny, you would be a sight for sore eyes!
:06:52. > :06:54.Anywhere, low and behold, a la genius here does make them look
:06:55. > :07:00.different. Less like themselves and more like they want to be, don't
:07:01. > :07:10.you? You just called me Tilly! Just then! I never! You did, and this
:07:11. > :07:11.morning, twice. Sounds like this is the most important piece of clothing
:07:12. > :07:18.I will ever own. You can see what I mean about the
:07:19. > :07:22.tone, on one level a bawdy comedy with terrific performances by Cape
:07:23. > :07:25.insert and Judi Dench, the film begins like a Western with her
:07:26. > :07:30.coming into town with a sewing the sheen like the Sheriff, then it
:07:31. > :07:35.becomes this weird 1950s soap opera pastiche and then the tapes by an
:07:36. > :07:39.unexpected tragedy into a John Waters Shakespearean revenge movie.
:07:40. > :07:43.It has unbelievable tonal shifts, many of which are unexpected and
:07:44. > :07:47.therefore enjoyable, some seem to be the film taking a left turn as if it
:07:48. > :07:53.doesn't know where it is going. The key to it is, if you go with it, and
:07:54. > :07:57.decide that it has an anarchic energy and you don't know which way
:07:58. > :08:04.it will go, you can enjoy it. I sat at the screening with many people
:08:05. > :08:07.who were flummoxed by it. I read reviews of some people saying it is
:08:08. > :08:09.all over the place. I think that is the point! It has an anarchic
:08:10. > :08:18.scattershot blackly comic tone. And I rather liked it. It is messy but
:08:19. > :08:22.that is one of its strengths. No harm in being occasionally
:08:23. > :08:25.flummoxed! I think you are more than occasionally perplexed by it but in
:08:26. > :08:32.a good way. There were moments in the film, short of science fiction,
:08:33. > :08:37.that was the only genre it did not go into! Riding into town with a
:08:38. > :08:42.Singer sewing machine is a strange premise. Blood and worked for you.
:08:43. > :08:48.The best thing out there is still Brooklyn. The leading actress soars
:08:49. > :08:50.in the role of a young woman going to America leaving her heart
:08:51. > :08:56.somewhere across the Atlantic. Beautifully played, if film of small
:08:57. > :08:59.moments, a stark comparison with The Dressmaker, it has a beautiful sense
:09:00. > :09:03.of tone all to do with understatement. I loved it and what
:09:04. > :09:08.I loved most about it is that people who have seen it have sent messages
:09:09. > :09:12.saying how they loved it, for some, their favourite film of the year.
:09:13. > :09:16.Yet understated, the poster not shedding its virtues, really worth
:09:17. > :09:23.seeing, Brooklyn, if you get a chance, do see it. Blount one to
:09:24. > :09:37.look at home? Inside And finally coming to DVD. It goes on inside the
:09:38. > :09:39.head of its young protagonist. Pixar work magic, children will find one
:09:40. > :09:44.thing in it and adults another, I want this to be a best picture
:09:45. > :09:47.contender and although it has got an outside shot I think it could well
:09:48. > :09:51.be the first animated feature ever to win the Oscar for Best film, an
:09:52. > :09:57.outside shot but wouldn't it be great if that actually happened.
:09:58. > :10:00.What do you think the resistance would become a user it is not about
:10:01. > :10:04.quality and those who have seen it would agree. The Oscars are backward
:10:05. > :10:07.looking and it takes them a long time to change and they have never
:10:08. > :10:11.done it before. I still think the voters have a problem with taking
:10:12. > :10:14.animation as seriously as they should do, perhaps this is beginning
:10:15. > :10:21.to change. This would be a lovely indication that has changed. Blount
:10:22. > :10:26.starting to change. We have a long way to go. Where might they have
:10:27. > :10:31.looked before this one? In the last couple of years in the best animated
:10:32. > :10:35.feature category we have had extraordinary work. Wonderful stuff.
:10:36. > :10:39.It has been a hotly contested category but I think this is a best
:10:40. > :10:45.picture contender. We shall see. Mark, thank you. A quick reminder
:10:46. > :10:48.before we go that you will find more film news and reviews from across
:10:49. > :10:56.the BBC online. Including all our previous shows.
:10:57. > :10:58.at bbc.co.uk/ mark kermode.
:10:59. > :11:07.That's it for this week though. Thanks for watching. Goodbye.