30 Day Movie Meme: Day 7

Day 7: THE MOST SURPRISING PLOT TWIST/ENDING

Inglourious Basterds (2009)
Written and Directed By: Quentin Tarantino

There aren't too many movies out there that have had endings that surprised me. I knew the outcome of The Usual Suspects before ever having seen the film. It was the same case with both Se7en and The Shawshank Redemption. While I do remember being surprised by the ending of The Sixth Sense, I don't necessarily consider it a favourite twist. The same goes with Fight Club, which is one of my favourite films of the 1990s, but the ending doesn't stand alone as particularly awesome. It's more cool than shocking.

The most recent surprise twist that came to mind was Quentin Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds. As one of my favourite directors, I always trust Tarantino to bring the goods. When I first heard he was finally bringing this much-delayed script to the silver screen I had never imagined he'd literally change the outcome of the Second World War. Tarantino took revisionist history to a whole new level.

Set aside for a moment the already-surprising double-death face-off between the films heroine, Shoshanna (Melanie Laurent) and Nazi superstar, Frederick Zoller (Daniel Bruhl). I honestly never anticipated that Tarantino would kill off Joseph Goebbels and Adolf Hitler in a hail of bullets and flames in a movie theatre in France. Shoshanna's final act of vengeance against the Nazis coincided with the elaborate Operation Kino, which was under the control of Lt. Aldo Raines (Brad Pitt) and his Basterds. The end result was explosions and raining bullets, killing every person in the theatre (who had gathered to watch Nation's Pride, featuring Frederick's Nazi victory over a troop of Russians), while the image of Shoshanna laughs on the movie screen.

I was already surprised by the fact that Shoshanna died at the hands of her admirer, Frederick. It definitely was a bittersweet moment and I had never anticipated that Shoshanna and Frederick would wind up killing one another, let alone before they could both witness the destruction of the Nazi party. However, it's just like Tarantino to keep his audience on its toes when it comes to the fates of his characters, both good and bad. As it turns out, even historical figures have to watch their backs in a Tarantino feature.

Just when I thought it couldn't get any more outrageous, both plans by Shoshanna and Operation Kino take full effect and kill everyone trapped in the theatre, effectively changing the outcome of the Second World War and ending it well before 1945. In Tarantino's world, we have a young French woman and group of angry Jewish soldiers to thank for the end of the war.

Taking the Fun Out of Robin Hood

I finally got around to seeing Ridley Scott's Robin Hood last month. Despite the critical lashing it got from critics and audiences alike, I still wanted to see the film and judge for myself. Before the film's release, I was really excited by the idea of another take on Robin Hood. Since film adaptations of Robin of Loxley have always been light-hearted or straight-out comedies, I thought a more realistic take was long overdue. I love the mythology behind Robin Hood and whether he was real or not has had little impact on his enduring popularity as an English folk hero.

I suppose it was inevitable that it would fail with audiences. The script was plagued from the start. I remember reading that, initially, the Hollywood bigwigs were in talks of taking a more unique angle on the medieval tale, by focusing on the Sheriff of Nottingham, Robin Hood's greatest foe, instead. Russell Crowe was attached to play the Sheriff and, as of the article's publication date, no Robin had been announced as of yet, however, the hero's role would have been reduced significantly in favour of his arch nemesis. I thought this sounded like a really cool idea; I was curious to see if they'd make the Sheriff an out and out villain or a more sympathetic figure. The story of how Nottingham became Robin Hood can be found here. Supposedly, the screenwriters for Nottingham were (understandably) upset that their script was thrown to the wind. Then, Scott's team supposedly lied and told actors vying for the role of Nottingham that the role would be bigger than it actually was (which allegedly didn't impress Matthew Macfadyen, the actor who wound up taking over the role from Crowe).

When Ridley Scott jumped onboard to direct, Crowe agreed to play Robin instead of Nottingham. This is where I think the problems began. They had to re-write the entire script and, as a result, it became a big, jumbled mess with far too many separate subplots and not enough time spent on the stories we wanted to see. On paper, the idea of a film about the origins of Robin Hood seemed like an easy sell to audiences. You take a beloved folk hero and give his tale a new spin by giving him a prequel. And, since very little is known about the actual Robin Hood (if he was indeed real), screenwriters were free to do with his character as they pleased without upsetting purists.

Scott's Robin Hood is bloated, with too many characters and too many stories to tell. Considering this is the story of one of the most exciting of folk heroes, no one seems to be having any fun. I love Russell Crowe. I think he's a wonderful actor who has been robbed of nominations and awards on more than one occasion. That being said, I couldn't help but feel disappointed with how he played Robin Hood. He was far too serious and didn't seem to have an ounce of fun or charm in him. It was, essentially, like watching Medieval Maximus. What happened to Robin Hood and his ever-so-Merry Men? You can still make a gritty, realistic and exciting historical epic while having a bit of fun at the same time. But this Robin Hood strives so hard to be everything that the other film versions are not that it loses itself along the way.

One of the biggest flaws in this revisionist take on Robin Hood is its decision to give our hero a brand new nemesis. His name is Godfrey (played by Mark Strong) and he's very bald and very angry. Why is he angry? Well, there's a variety of reasons, mainly that he wants to be king and he doesn't like Robin all that much. Godfrey is not interesting. He tries to be, but he's not. He's not frightening, he's not diabolically evil and he's not witty. It's unfortunate it took the entire film's running time before he was killed off.

I think introducing Godfrey was a major error on the part of the screenwriters. In introducing yet another  character to the already bloated cast only serves to take away from what I presume most audiences came to see in the first place: Robin of Loxley vs. the Sheriff of Nottingham. Where is this Sheriff? Well, if you blink you may miss him. He's the grubby grump with about five minutes of screen time. The scripts went from having Nottingham as the main character to barely giving him a moment to string more than two sentences together. Everyone loves a good villain and the Sheriff is a great villain. When you talk about Robin Hood, be it another film version or the historical mythology behind him, you always have to mention the Sheriff. However, in Robin Hood he's nothing more than a footnote. Granted, it's likely this will be made into a franchise and Nottingham will get more screen time in future films, however, it just left me thinking, what's the point? Why diminish the role of this character? Why not take advantage of it and show the early stages of his rivalry with Robin? I can't even judge whether or not Matthew Macfadyen gave a good performance as Nottingham or not because you barely have time to register his character's existence.

I guess I just prefer Kevin Costner's Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves. That's right. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. Prince of Thieves knew how to take the myth of Robin Hood and make it pure entertainment. Despite Costner's limited acting abilities, American accent and 1990s hair, I thought he made a great and passionate Robin. He's charming and has great chemistry with his costars. He, and the movie itself, never took itself seriously. It didn't pretend to be something it wasn't, unlike Scott's Robin Hood. Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio was a lovely Maid Marion in Prince of Thieves. She was feisty on the homefront without having to charge into battle to prove it (I cringed when Cate Blanchett took up the cause in Robin Hood, in full armour, no less!). Robin's Merry Men were all amusing in Prince of Thieves, especially the ever-shitty and craptastic Christian Slater. If his "brother-from-another-mother" speech as Robin's step-sib Will Scarlett doesn't make you smile, I don't know what will ("I was the son of the woman who replaced your dead mother for a time! You ruined my life!"). And, of course, the main reason most people aren't ashamed to admit their love for Prince of Thieves is because of the incomparable Alan Rickman as Sheriff George of Nottingham (pictured right). He's so outrageously over-the-top and clearly having the time of his life, that you can't help but love him.

Ridley Scott and his bevy of script writers did a rush job. They could have done so much with their revisionist telling of an old tale. Instead, they went the dull and bland route. No new dimension was added to any of the characters. In fact, I left the theatre annoyed with the portrayal of some of my favourites, especially Marion. The only two standouts were Danny Huston as King Richard (although his role was too small, but that's no surprise in this version) and newcomer Oscar Isaac as evil King John. I thought those two were wonderful and could have done some great things with their characters if given more time. In the end, you leaving the theatre thinking, what was the point? Robin Hood is supposed to be fun and the plot should be in constant motion. No one wants an emo Robin who spends the first half of the film discovering his uninteresting family history. It's not what we as an audience signed up for.

Should there be a sequel, here's hoping it's a revisionist take on an aspect of Robin's life we all want to see: his rivalry with the Sheriff of Nottingham. Robin Hood wasn't all terrible. It was visually appealing and had some solid battle scenes. I just know there's a great film in there somewhere, waiting to come out. Here's hoping the sequel corrects all of its flaws.

In the meantime, I'd recommend swallowing your Kevin Costner hatred (for those of you who have it) and revisit Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves instead (pictured above).

FINAL GRADE: C+

30 Day Movie Meme: Day 6

Day 6: FAVOURITE ACTOR/ACTRESS

MARLON BRANDO
Best Actor: On the Waterfront (1954), The Godfather (1972)
Nominated: 8 times (2 wins)

First Became A Fan: After watching The Godfather in 2005. I spent the next few months catching up on as many of his films that I could get my hands on. There are still a few obscure ones I haven't seen; however, I have since caught up on all the essentials and some underrated classics.
Favourite Brando Films: The Godfather, A Streetcar Named Desire, On the Waterfront
Favourite Brando Performances: Don Vito Corleone in The Godfather, Terry Malloy in On the Waterfront, Stanley Kowalski in A Streetcar Named Desire, Paul in Last Tango in Paris, Mark Antony in Julius Caesar
Check Out These Lesser-Known Films I'd Recommend: One-Eyed Jacks (the only film he ever directed), The Fugitive Kind, Viva Zapata!, The Men (although this is currently unavailable on DVD), The Ugly American, The Young Lions.

Marlon Brando's famous ad-libbed scene from Last Tango in Paris. Brando created a childhood for his character, Paul, and Bernardo Bertollucci leaves the camera on his face for the majority of the scene.


BETTE DAVIS
Best Actress: Dangerous (1935), Jezebel (1938)
Nominated: 10 times (2 wins)

First Became A Fan: At the age of 12 when I saw Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? for the first time. Although I didn't actually start following her career until I was older, I've since caught up on some of her most memorable films.
Favourite Davis Films: All About Eve, Now Voyager, Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte, Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?, Dark Victory.
Favourite Davis Performances: Jane Hudson in Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?, Margo Channing in All About Eve, Julie Marsden in Jezebel, Charlotte in Now Voyager, Charlotte Hollis in Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte.
Check Out These Lesser-Known Films I'd Recommend: Dark Victory, Now Voyager, Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte.


Bette Davis in Jezebel with a really young Henry Fonda. I love their chemistry and Davis is so natural and beautiful in this scene.

Movie Review: Inception (2010)

INCEPTION (2010)
Written and Directed by: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Ellen Page, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ken Watanabe, Tom Hardy, Cillian Murphy and Marion Cotillard

British director Christopher Nolan is on a hot streak. With his 2000 indie cult hit Memento still gaining new fans each year, he's had a string of monstrous hits, from The Prestige to The Dark Knight.

Nolan can now boast to having rebooted a once-tired comic book franchise and having one of the best films of 2010.

Domenic Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) is gifted in the art of extraction. The technology exists where a man may enter a person's subconscious while they are in a dream state to uncover deeply buried secrets. Cobb and his team are hired out by rich businessmen or international associates for a high fee. However, after the recent death of his wife, Mal (Marion Cotillard), Cobb is ready to retire and lead a quiet life with his two young children. Before he gets the chance to leave for good, Cobb is drawn back into one last challenge; the complex process of inception. A Japanese businessman, Saito (Ken Watanabe) hires Cobb and his team to implant an idea into the head of his young business rival, Robert Fischer (Cillian Murphy), whose father is on his deathbed and will likely pass his entire fortune onto his son. Saito's plan: to convince Fischer, while in his subconscious, to dissolve his father's empire. Cobb's challenge is to make sure the inception of the idea is convincing enough that when Fischer wakes, the dissolution of his father's company will feel like a natural thought to him.

Visually, the film is stunning. Everything has a blue, washed out feel while the CGI never feels overdone. One scene, in particular, is a standout. Watch for a hallway battle between Joseph Gordon Levitt-s character, Arthur, and one of the "military men" that represent the hostile subconscious of Cillian Murphy's character, Robert Fischer. The slanted, air-bourne battle is visually overwhelming.

That being said, Nolan never relies too heavily on the technological aspect, preferring instead to create a deeply complex film with great characters and twisted revelations. Unlike most action thriller's that depend on CGI explosions to earn them money at the box office, Nolan has no such qualms about making the visuals secondary to the plot development, which is a rare treat and something that any film fan will openly welcome. Whether you see this in IMAX or on a regular movie screen, this film needs to be viewed in theatres. The visual spectacle of it all, combined with Hans Zimmer's ominous score, can only really be fully appreciated on a giant screen in surround sound.

Nolan, as usual, makes excellent casting choices. Like Quentin Tarantino, he tends to turn to the familiar faces and prefers great actors, in general.

As Dom Cobb, Leonardo DiCaprio gives one of his finest performances. I usually find him to be a wildly uneven actor. When he's good, he's great (see What's Eating Gilbert Grape?, Romeo + Juliet and The Aviator) and when he's bad, he's pretty lousy (see The Man in the Iron Mask, Titanic and anything that requires him to have an accent of any sort). The role of Cobb seems tailor-made for his talent. DiCaprio instills Cobb with a hardened exterior that masks the heartbroken torment of the man inside. DiCaprio's Cobb can be both a violent man prone to random bouts of irrational anger and a softer, more sensitive man who is mourning the loss of his beloved wife.

Nolan surrounds DiCaprio with a fantastic supporting cast. The always wonderful Ken Watanabe, as Saito, is a standout. Despite his evil scheme of implanting the idea in Fischer's head, he's a highly sympathetic character. This is both a combination of Nolan's excellent script and Watanabe and the rest of the casts performances: all the characters are flawed human beings, yet all remain likeable and real, which is a testament to all the talent involved. As Cobb's young cohort, Arthur, Joseph Gordon-Levitt is solid in his role as the aspiring leader of the group once Cobb retires. Although still learning the ropes, he is the calm, cool and collected counterpart to DiCaprio's often-irrational and emotionally fragile Cobb.

Cillian Murphy is his usual solidly reliable self as young businessman, Robert Fischer. He manages to make Fischer into more than just some spoiled rich boy who hopes to inherit daddy's money one day. He's confused as to what his future may hold and is, almost heartbreakingly, trusting and naive when within his own subconscious (even though, as a wealthy businessman, he was trained for the possibility of extraction or inception being done on his mind). He's got daddy issues galore, which give his character a sense of vulnerability not usually found in stock characters of his type. As British shapeshifter, Eames, Tom Hardy is a welcome newcomer (at least to Hollywood). His character is both a violent tactician and a master of disguise, effortlessly weaving in an out of Fischer's subconscious with both a cocky arrogance that comes from experience and a sense of humour. As Cobb's deceased wife, Mal, Marion Cotillard is beautiful, unstable and emotionally fragile. She exists now only as Cobb's fragmented memories, yet Cotillard plays the part perfectly.

Finally, we come to Ellen Page. Initially, at the start of the film, I thought she was miscast. She felt dozens of years younger than the rest of her co-stars. Her diminutive size and youthful appearance made it seem as though DiCaprio were working alongside a twelve year old. Although she's only a few years younger than Gordon-Levitt and Murphy, it felt like there was a larger age gap between them. That being said, she does an excellent job with her role as the new "architect", Ariadne. Thanks to her talent as an actress she makes Ariadne a strong-willed and wise character who acts as both Cobb's conscious and the audience's voice (she asks Cobb all the questions we, as an audience, want answered).

Inception is one of those rare summer treats that come along every once and awhile: a film that is too good and too clever to get caught up in the summer blockbusters. It's also a film that will not be to everyone's taste and will likely require repeated viewings in order to fully grasp all of its complexities  and philosophical ponderings. However, for anyone who appreciates a flawless script, stunning visuals and a great cast will, no doubt, love every wonderfully overwhelming minute of Nolan's new masterpiece.

FINAL GRADE: A

Classic Film Review: Cabaret (1972)

CABARET (1972)
Directed By: Bob Fosse
Starring: Liza Minnelli, Michael York, Helmut Griem and Joel Grey

I've been a fan of big, bold musicals since I was first introduced, as a young child, to Rodgers and Hammerstein's The King and I (1956) with Yul Brynner and Deborah Kerr. Since then, I've loved musicals with vibrant colour, powerful voices and a side order of melodrama and sentimentality. That being said, Cabaret is no Rodgers and Hammerstein musical. 


American cabaret star, Sally Bowles (Liza Minnelli), is living in Berlin in 1931, right in the middle of the growing prominence and popularity of the Nazi Party. Completely oblivious of the social and political ramifications of the rise of Nazism, Sally engages in romances with two men, Englishman Brian Roberts (Michael York) and German millionaire Maximilian von Heune (Helmut Griem). 


There are no hills that come alive, no flight from Nazis in the cover of darkness, nor any singing nuns to portray the social upheavals of Nazism. Cabaret is a much darker musical than The Sound of Music: although both are set during the Weimar Republic era, that is where the similarities end. The former film never lets you forget the dire situation of mankind under Nazism while the latter has the tendency to move away from issues when they get too heavy, instead focusing on a governess and her large brood of children.


Right from the start, we are introduced to the Master of Ceremonies (Joel Grey, who deservedly won Best Supporting Actor for his performance). The opening number, "Willkomen", is dark and grimy, with a Lynchian nightmare quality to it (a la Blue Velvet and the famous "In Dreams" musical interlude). The diminutive Master of Ceremonies sets up the tone and overall atmosphere of Bob Fosse's film; introducing the zombie-like cabaret girls individually and prancing around the stage like a madman. His message? Inside, life is a cabaret.


This was my first Fosse film. I'd heard the name, however, I never really associated it with anything in particular. His vision for Cabaret is appropriately bleak, with a strange circus-like quality that parallels the dark, frantic upward mobility of Nazism. The choreography is amongst some of the best I've seen in a musical adaptation. Adding to the excellence of the dance routines and musical numbers is the camera-work. It gets right in the middle of it all, as though a part of the dance sequences. Great choices are made in terms of interspersing the songs being performed at the Kit Kat cabaret with scenes of violence on the streets of Berlin. 


Society is in a state of flux. Inappropriate behaviour is found in political, social and sexual spheres, all of which is appealing to young Sally and her desire for fame and the breaking down of sexual barriers. Her instant attraction to Brian is doomed from the start, despite many valiant attempts on her part, as Brian prefers the company of men. In a twisted effort to make Brian jealous, while satisfying her own sexual cravings and desire for fame, Sally brings in Maximilian. Both Sally and Brian are drawn to the German millionaire, and he to both of them in turn, resulting in an inevitably doomed love triangle. Consumed by her own selfish desire for success, Sally will do what she has to do in order to ensure her wealth and fame. 


As all this drama surrounding Sally plays out, it is all mirrored in the performances at the Kit Kat cabaret, led by the Master of Ceremonies: the love triangle is reflected in the song, "Two Ladies" and the romance between two secondary Jewish characters, Natalia and Fritz, is portrayed in the medley, "If You Could See Her Through My Eyes", among others. 


Liza Minnelli is a powerhouse of a performer and it's hard to imagine anyone else filling her  (Oscar-winning) shoes. She contrasts Sally's naivety with confident and sensual cabaret performances. My personal favourite was "Maybe This Time ", an anthem for that feeling of excitement when someone new enters your life. Minnelli owns the stage with both her presence and her vocal work. Minnelli manages to make what could have been an otherwise selfish heroine into a flawed, but likeable, human being.


Michael York (who was impossibly beautiful in his younger days) makes Brian a vulnerable man the audience can root for, whether you feel sympathy over his guilt for not doing his part in stopping the rise of Nazism or his confusion over his sexual orientation. 

However, both Minnelli and York are in danger of being completely overshadowed by the incomparable Joel Grey, who pretty much steals the film right out from under the two main stars. His Master of Ceremonies (pictured above) is hilarious, creepy and playful, all at once. He even manages to inject pathos into his characterization, which is a testament to the talent of Grey. The man can sing, dance and doesn't look all that bad dressed in drag. The man is naturally gifted performer.


The themes of decadence and unrealized dreams are at the core of Cabaret. The misunderstood threat of Nazism at the time is well-portrayed, illustrating what can ultimately happen when good man stand by and do nothing when something evil is on the rise. The tension and changing attitudes of the time is perfectly captured. 


Cabaret is unique and dark film. It deserves its place on the list of classic Hollywood musicals.


FINAL GRADE: A

30 Day Movie Meme: Day 5

Day 5: FAVOURITE LOVE STORY IN A FILM

The Princess Bride (1987)

Directed by: Rob Reiner

Starring: Robin Wright-Penn, Cary Elwes, Mandy Patinkin, Wallace Shawn, Andre the Giant and Chris Sarandon

THE PLOT

Based on the novel by William Goldman, it chronicles the love story between Princess Buttercup (Robing Wright-Penn) and her "farm boy", Wesley (Cary Elwes). Set in a fantasy world that is narrated by Grandpa (Peter Falk), who is trying to distract his sick grandson by reading him The Princess Bride, Buttercup and Wesley must overcome "three poor circus freaks", a vile prince, a six-fingered man and the R.O.U.S. (Rodents of Unusual Size).

WHY I LOVE IT
I didn't even have to stop and think about what film couple would make the cut. I could have chosen something more dramatic or obvious, but none of them compared to this ultimate fantasy couple. This is one of those films from my childhood that gets better with age. I was only 6-years-old when my parents first introduced me to this comic fantasy and I've seen it so many times since that I could probably recite it word for word.

Despite its tone, the love story between Buttercup and Wesley is something I think we all yearn to experience ourselves at some point in our lives, even the most cynical of us.

Their love is flawless, unconditional and, sadly, complete fantasy. However, despite its satirical tones and laugh-out-loud moments, neither Goldman's book nor Reiner's film can disguise the fact that, in both mediums, they've created one of the most ridiculously perfect relationships in literature and film.

The movie is excellent for so many different reasons, yet, despite being nearly overshadowed by larger-than-life secondary characters (like Andre the Giant as Fezzik or the wonderful Mandy Patinkin as one of my favourite film heroes, Inigo Montoya), Robin Wright-Penn and Cary Elwes always manage to turn the audience's attention back to their central love story.

As Mark Knopfler sings in the closing credits, it's a "Storybook Love."

Movie Review: Joyeux Noel (2005)

JOYEUX NOEL (2005)
Written and Directed By: Christian Carion
Starring: Guillaume Canet, Diane Kruger, Daniel Bruhl, Benno Furmann and Gary Lewis

I purchased this film on a whim last year and only just got around to watching it. Originally, I planned to watch it during its limited theatrical release but it passed me by.

For those of you who know me, you are aware that I'm an absolute sap for Christmas and the winter holidays, in general. I literally melt into a puddle of sentimental goop around Christmas. I figured this film, combined with the fact that it's based on an actual historical event, seemed tailor-made for my tastes.

The film chronicles the Christmas Eve and Christmas Day ceasefire between the Germans, French and Scottish on the Western Front during the early days of the First World War in 1914, when soldiers still thought they would be home by the following year at the latest. It came to be known as The Christmas Truce and is still celebrated today as an example of human decency and kindness, in the face of violence and death. These three groups of men, from three different countries and speaking three different languages, overcame all barriers and spent the holidays together in their trenches, sharing meals and stories about their homes and families. They become fast friends, causing a scandal within their higher ranks who were far away from the fighting. When word gets out that the three nations have stopped shooting at one another, against orders, all the men involved are punished by their respective nations.

Carion and his casting directors made some wonderful choices in the acting department. There's nothing better, when watching a film, than coming across an actor you've never seen before and are pleasantly surprised by how great they are. I'd never seen Guillaume Canet in anything before but this wonderful French actor is pretty much the centrepiece of the film as French commander, Audebert (pictured above). He's a young man in charge of a vast troop and his kindness towards his men, his nervousness in agreeing to the truce and his blossoming friendship with the timid and awkward Ponchel (Dany Boon) holds the film together. You almost wish the cast wasn't such a huge ensemble because his character deserves his own film.

The rest of the cast is just as stellar. As the lone female in the film, Diane Kruger (who I always find to be a much stronger actress when speaking in her native German), plays Dutch opera singer, Anna Sorensen, who is brought to the troops on Christmas Eve to sing to them with her boyfriend, German soprano Nikolaus Sprink (played by Benno Furmann, also great in his role). Rounding out the cast is Gary Lewis as Scottish piper, Palmer (most will recognize him as the father from Billy Elliot), who is such an excellent actor and is really fantastic in the scene where he plays the bagpipes to accompany the German soprano, Sprink. Without any dialogue, he conveys all the emotions of a man exhausted with war and seeking a moment of peace and relief. Daniel Bruhl (another great actor that most will recognize from Inglourious Basterds but was also excellent in the German films Love in Thoughts, Goodbye Lenin! and The Edukators) plays German commander, Horstmayer, a Jewish man who admits Christmas means next to nothing to him but, after some initial reluctance, readily embraces the truce.

This film is by no means perfect. The pacing is a little off. For a war film with a focus on peace, love and understanding between three nations at war, its slow to start. I suspect it was a struggle for the writers and director to balance such a large cast and the struggle to find a main voice. Most films benefit from the focus on one or two main protagonists, however, that would have been impossible to do in a film/historical event that has so many different sides. Initially, the main character appears to be Anna, which is odd considering the film is based on an actual historical truce. The fact that it doesn't begin with an emphasis on that point gets the film off on the wrong foot. However, after the "Silent Night" scene that bonds all three troops, the film evens out and hits its stride, focusing on the men and their shared excitement of being able to put down there guns and be young men again, if only for a little while. I still wish more emphasis had been placed on the men and less time spent with the opera singers. However, the powerful message that war is senseless and that even our enemies are just like us, is still relevant to this day. Moments like the real Christmas Truce deserve to be captured on film, if only to remind us of that fact.

FINAL GRADE: B+

On a final note, here's the scene where German soprano, Sprink, sings "Silent Night" when he is joined by Scottish bagpiper, Palmer.