Snow White and the Huntsman

Rating: ***

Obviously, this ain’t your mama’s Snow White. Not just because the titular princess is played by vampire bait emo-queen Kristen Stewart, and not just because Charlize Theron paints the evil queen as one of her recurrent sexpot roles, but because the film revels in the style implied by the name of the original Snow White authors: Grimm.

Under the supervision of commercial director Rupert Sanders, Snow White becomes a Tolkien-like epic across a sprawling fantasy landscape to battle improbable evil forces to save the kingdom from evil. And because of that, it’s less a damsel in distress-y tale where the limp and weak princess needs constant saving. Well it kind of is, but at least there’s a feeling that although Snow White may need occasionally (frequent) rescues, she’s not waiting for rescuers, be they drunken hunters, or seven little dwarves.

In this Snow White, trouble comes when the grief stricken king rescues the beautiful captive Ravenna (Theron) from an evil army. But Ravenna has her own dark agenda, and after seducing the king, she murders him on their wedding night, seizes his kingdom and locks up his daughter Snow White (Stewart) high up in the castle tower. Years later, Ravenna is told by her magic mirror that she’s not the fairest anymore, but if she wants the title forever she’ll have to literally take the heart of Snow White.

Here’s where the fairy tale goes off its traditional course for a more post-modern turn: Snow White uses a rusty nail to strike Ravenna’s brother (Sam Spruell) when he comes to collect her for dinner. She runs through the castle, evades the guards, escapes through the sewer, steals a horse and rides through the dark forest before the bad guys are able to catch up with her. Like Robert Munsch’s Paper Bag Princess, this royal knows how to handle herself.

In this movie, Snow White even has a “Prince Ronald.” Not that Snow’s long-lost childhood love William (Sam Claflin) is superficial and self-absorbed, but William as the story’s prince, doesn’t serve a tremendous function. Indeed, the Huntsman (played by Thor himself, Chris Hemsworth) is probably closer to being Snow White’s love interest here, although I don’t think that’s the point. Whether a matter of function or a matter of chemistry, it only helps the story’s new narrative, Snow White is not (just) the object of romantic desire, but a symbol of freedom from the evil, youth sucking claws of Ravenna. Sure, there’s still a poison apple and a kiss, but the tone and intention of those scenes is changed I think.

But while the screenplay does some interesting things with the story and its inherent archetypes, it is a letdown in some regards. It feels like the story wants to do so many things, but its running time is an issue and thus it all seems rather crammed. In the end it seems as if Ravenna’s forces go down so pitifully that you’re wondering what took the cowering masses of the kingdom so long to take her down. The time between Snow’s escape and climactic showdown seems like a series of checkpoints, and though it comes across as a Lord of the Rings-style epic journey, Snow White lacks Rings’ leisurely indulgence.

But the joy of Snow White is how it plays against expectations. Theron as the evil queen never ceases to be mesmerizing, and the actress throws herself into the part and all the assorted goo that comes with it. It’s actually surprising how much Theron gets away with, from some not so subtly implied incest between Ravenna and her brother, to the fact that Ravenna practically orgasms after she kills the king.

Against Theron, it’s hard for Stewart to keep up in the much blander role of the movie’s heroine, but unlike the majority of movie fandom, I find Stewart perfectly lovely and talented, and she’s at least believable as a butt-kicking princess in shining armour. She struggles in the giving of inspirational and commanding speeches, but she doesn’t come across as wholly out of place in the fairy tale world of the film.

Hemsworth is perfectly fine as the Huntsman, but really that’s all you can say about the character. It’s said that he had a wife, and after her death succumbed to despair and alcoholism, thus making him the type of brigand that I compare favourably to Harrison Ford’s portrayal of Han Solo in Star Wars. What’s missing though is what it is about Snow White that changes the Huntsman’s mind about turning her over to the queen, and the reason why he sticks around after he turns on the queen’s lackeys.

But where the film falls flat repeatedly is the hints at story threads that never get played up (or might get played up in a sequel). There’s hints that Ravenna is quite mad, as we see a scene where she talks to the golden cloaked figure that comes out of her mirror, but she seems to be the only one that sees him. The assembled dwarves have a beef with the queen, but it’s never explained what that is. It’s also never explained how Snow White can seemingly commune with the giant stag, or why the bridge troll retreats when she looks in his eyes. And it’s also never made clear why the land actually withers as Ravenna rules, and comes back to life when Snow White takes back her throne (a meme borrowed from The Chronicles of Narnia).

Snow White and the Huntsman is a middle of the road fantasy epic that has some interesting things in it, and has an interesting spin on a classic. It’s a cover tune, and a decent one at that. It’s a cover that feels like there’s reason and idea for it to exist although no one, least of all the filmmakers, seem to know what that is. Naturally, a sequel is already in the works, and I’d be interested to see what the filmmakers can make of the story now that Snow White’s “origins” have been established.

Either way, the film should make feminist critics of the Twilight films happy, for at least this time Kristen Stewart plays a princess that can save herself.

The Twilight Saga: Eclipse

Rating: ***1/2

Who would have guessed that one of the most divisive films of our age would be a tawdry, but chaste, tale of a love triangle between a high school aged human, vampire and werewolf? The sheer vitriol against these movies, and the books from whence they came, boggles the mind considering the content. Is Twilight cheesy? Yes. A bit old fashioned? Sure. Do its young actors sometimes confuse making a frowny face with actual emoting? Most definitely yes.

But for so-called Twi-hards, the haters don’t matter and even they realize that the movie they’re so invested in isn’t exactly melodrama par excellence like, let’s say, Gone with the Wind. There were more than a few chuckles at some of the cheesier bits of New Moon at the press screening, which had a healthy mix of hardcore fans in there with the press. So how do you tell that Eclipse is a marked improvement over its predecessors? Fewer laughs.

So far as Twilight movies go, Eclipse is sharper, tighter and just all around better than the first two films in the franchise, but this could be for a number of reasons. First and foremost is the source material. Stephanie Meyer’s third novel set in the Twilight universe saw grand improvements in terms of character development and building rising action.

Then there’s the film’s director, David Slade. The filmmaker’s last tango with vampires, the bloody good comic adaptation 30 Days of Night, couldn’t have been further from the “Parents Don’t Just Understand” vampires’ world of Twilight. You know there’s a change a-coming when the opening scene in Eclipse takes place on a rain soaked street in Seattle where a boy is tormented, mawed and left to die in agony on a pier. Anyone walking in unfamiliar with the novel may think for a minute that some one got chocolate in their peanut butter.

But soon things settle down to what you’d expect from Twilight. Bella (Kristen Stewart), being a modern young woman struggles with the notion of marrying her vampire beau Edward (Robert Pattinson) as condition of him turning her into a vampire. At the same time she’s struggling to keep her friendship with werewolf pal Jacob (Taylor Lautner), which isn’t easy for the boy considering that his crush’s boyfriend is one of his tribe’s sworn enemies.

But much of the hate is put aside when Bella comes under threat from an army of new born vampires under the sway of the vengeful Victoria (Bryce Dallas Howard effectively, but not convincingly replacing Rachelle Lefevre). Twi-haters may actually like this aspect of the film, seeing what they would consider more “real” vampires in this VINO (Vampire In Name Only) movie. The story culminates in what’s actually a pretty decently executed fight scene between the new born vamps and the werewolves/good vampires super-team.

Also stronger is some of the acting and dialogue. Edward’s self-referential pondering as to whether or not Jacob owned a shirt got a few (in context) laughs, but not as many as this uncomfortable version of “The Talk” between Bella and her normally stoic dad Charlie (Billy Burke). The three main actors – Stewart, Pattinson and Lautner – continue to show improvement and comfort in their parts, but there may still be an irritant factor for those who show up to the film under less voluntary circumstances. Instead, focus on the impish charm of Ashley Greene’s Alice and the cool dignity of Jackson Rathbone’s Jasper, who I believe gets more lines in Eclipse than in the first two movies combined.

Still, no matter what a critic has to say, members of Team Edward and Team Jacob will swoon for their respective namesakes, while Team Death-to-Bella will just come out to throw salt in people’s good time. Perhaps endurance when it comes to dealing with all things Twilight depends on one’s own ability to put themselves in the mind of a 13-year-old girl. If nothing else, Eclipse is entertaining whether you genuinely enjoy it, or genuinely enjoy ragging on it.

But for those interested in the movie itself, Eclipse is answer and antidote to typical male-driven summer blockbusters. Perhaps that’s the ultimate conundrum of Twilight. Without robots, wizards or superheroes it’s captured the imagination (and money) of so many. Much like the story’s vampire protagonist, who point blank refuses to have sex with his girlfriend until they’re married, there’s something old-fashioned in Twilight, and that seems to be okay to the female demographic that made this franchise a billion dollars.

So to all the haters out there, do yourself a favour and save that hate for things that matter, like British Petroleum or Soccer World Cup. And to Twi-hards everywhere, enjoy what is the best Twilight yet with aplomb. As if you haven’t already.

The Runaways

Rating: ***

It’s easy to forget while watching her get all damsel in distressy as TWILIGHT heroine Bella Swan, but Kristen Stewart can act. Dakota Fanning, meanwhile, I used to think can act, but it seems like she’s forgotten how somewhere between CHARLOTTE’S WEB and THE TWILIGHT SAGA. Together they’re the vaguely lesbian jail bait – I mean quintessential and groundbreaking founders of the all-girl band The Runaways in the new bio-pic of the same name.

Stewart plays Joan Jett and Fanning plays Cherie Currie, who through an act of fate come together to form their breakthrough act. Currie, a disenfranchised suburban high school student with delusions of David Bowie, finds herself on the radar of famous manager Kim Fowley (Michael Shannon) shortly after he’s approached by Jett with an idea for a band that’s made up 100 per cent of musicians of the female persuasion. Contracts are signed, hits are made, and tours in Japan incite riot amongst the local fans. All of which is pretty typical of these sorts of movies.

In case the history escapes you, Currie went into a spiral of booze, drugs and sexual experimentation. You’re supposed to be concerned, but you could honestly care less if Currie flames out or fades away. Fanning doesn’t do much to make Currie likeable, and as a result the character comes off as cold, unlikable and thoroughly unengaging. Stewart is much cooler, probably because we know there’s a brighter future for Jett than Currie. Stewart also doesn’t seem to be drawing attention to herself, and whether that’s due to the nature of the character, or the coolness of the actress’ performance, I don’t know.

Regardless, the real star of the film is Shannon as Fowley. Every minute this guy’s on screen you’re engaged, you’re fascinated and you’re enthralled. Such an absolutely magnetic performance comes dangerously close to outshining the rest of the cast, which is sort of problematic when you consider that the focus of the film is supposed to be the all-girl band he’s representing. I hope that Shannon is remembered at awards’ time, as this is incredibly compelling work.

Also on the plus side is director Floria Sigismondi’s treatment of the time period. Things have a very genuine 70s feel from set design to wardrobe. And it goes without saying that the music’s incredible. I’m not sure if the real life Jett actually heard Stewart’s voice and for a minute thought it was her’s – as reported in a New York Times article – but it’s easy to see, given the way that Stewart seems to channel all aspects of Jett. Indeed, the film is steeped in the rock ‘n’ roll vibe of the period, a throwback to days when becoming a rock star that packs stadiums was still in the realm of possibilities and when people had to buy your music.

Where THE RUNAWAYS slides though is that the band’s story didn’t feel particularly worthy of its own movie, at least the way it was presented. There are a lot of typical band movie clichés including over-indulgence, temper tantrums, fallings out and reconciliations, but overall, aside from the real life aspect of the story, I’m not sure what recommends THE RUNAWAYS over other movies about bands. The film is still compelling though thanks to Michael Shannon and Floria Sigismondi’s team who brought the rockin’ 70s back to life with such wicked clarity. For this, THE RUNAWAYS is perfectly enjoyable so long as you don’t expect anything too deep besides good music.