Foreign Film 12: Loose Cannons (Italy, 2010)

Plot Intro

The wealthy Cantone family of rural southern Italy have gathered together when the youngest son, Tommaso (Riccardo Scamarcio) is home from his studies in Rome. Tommaso reveals to his elder brother, Antonio (Alessandro Preziosi) that not only does he not want to follow in the family business of making pasta, but he is also gay and has a boyfriend in Rome. Tommaso intends to tell the family at dinner, and fully expects his brutish, homophobic father, Vincenzo (Ennio Fantastichini) to disown him then and there. But when dinner arrives, another family secret suddenly comes to light which throws Tommaso’s plans right out of the window…

Paul says...

Since we began our monthly delves into the world of foreign-language films, we’ve found that the biggest hits over the years also happen to be the most portentous, cerebral, and, unfortunately, the hardest to watch on a Sunday afternoon when you may well be nursing a hangover. See our reviews of The Seventh Seal, La Dolce Vita and that art-house Czechoslovakian film I can’t remember the name of for evidence of this [Editor: It was Daisies]. So this time, we thought “Screw it!”, let’s dispense with the haughty esotericism of world cinema, let’s ignore the predictable recommendations of Time Out or Empire magazine. Instead, let’s watch something lighter and more accessible, that audiences genuinely enjoy. 

Our last Italian film, La Dolce Vita, was very much a film about Italy, its social and political position at the time of the film’s production, and it expressed all this in the sort of long-winded “fringe theatre” manner that you’d expect from a film so worshipped by the critics. Loose Cannons (“Mine Vaganti” in Italian), covers more universal themes of family unity, parenthood, ambition and the conflict between doing what’s right for others and doing what’s right for oneself. 

For the most part, its a pretty lovely little comedy-drama. The various characters within the family are varied and well-drawn, even if it took a while for us to work out how they’re related. The domineering patriarch, his wise sees-all-knows-all mother, his dutiful wife, his often-drunk sister, his sardonic eldest daughter and her sycophantic husband, as well as the more traditional elder son and the more thoughtful, ponderous younger son. There’s even a couple of sassy maids and an ambitious but rather reckless consultant for the family firm. It’s a slighter less dark version of Gosford Park, with various interrelated characters all revealing their insecurities and, in some cases, long-hidden secrets as the story progresses. 

The stand-out performance for me came from Ilaria Occhini as the typical Italian Grandmother - full of strong-willed kindness, who knows a lot more than her son who desperately tries to maintain control of his business and his family. She may not be head of the family in name, but she certainly is in nature, and her eventual outcome blurs the line between comedy and tragedy very unexpectedly.

Less impressive was Fantastichini as the homophobic father, Vincenzo. He plays him for laughs, and we’re supposed to find his disgust at a photo of his son with another man, and his belief that everyone in town is laughing at him, amusing. Not only is this unrealistic, it doesn’t gel with the lines he is being given. It’s almost as if the actor didn’t want to play a villain when really he should have made his character quite hateful to begin with but soften him as the film goes on to gain eventual redemption and perhaps even forgiveness from the family members he upsets. 

Indeed, his acting is just one example of where jokes fall flat. I don’t know whether some of the comedy got lost in translation, or if some scenes just needed a bit more work, but occasionally our reactions weren’t so much laughter, but more like “eh?”. This lets the film down slightly, as being able to laugh at or with characters can help us to empathise with them. But all in all, Loose Cannons is a delightful little film. Okay, it’s not exactly going to win the Palm D’Or at Cannes, and it’s not going to enter Empire’s top 100 international films (and, in all fairness, I’d agree with that decision). But if you like a bit of camp(ish) comedy and sweet-natured family drama, this is right up your street.

Highlight

Tommaso’s group of gay friends who come to visit are a delight. They’re horrendous stereotypes (they wear tight clothing, they love to sing diva songs in the shower, they sass each other, and they fail miserably at trying to come across as heterosexual) but they inject a huge amount of life at a point when the film is starting to lose pace, and quite frankly I’ve seen guys like this out in The Two Brewers many a time.

Lowlight

The presentation of Vincenzo is a pretty pathetic attempt to make homophobia comical. I’m not saying this is not possible, I’m just saying that Ennio Fantastichini is not very good at it.

Mark

7/10

Doug says...

I found this film lurking on some shelves and thought ‘this looks light and approachable’ and so nominated it for a Foreign Film focus, gathering some respite from the often turgid and spirit-dampening ‘greats’ that people usually put forward. 

Why is it that in order to be received as truly great, most forms of art insist on utter seriousness? Is it that comedy dates faster than the universal, much mulled over tragic arcs that we see repeated constantly, or is it that all critics are ginormous snobs? Whoopi Goldberg winning the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress in Ghost was such a momentous moment, because her genius comic instincts are often lumped in with the ‘enjoyable but not award-worthy’ lot. Anyway, I’m fed up with it. The Best Picture films so often become portentous, overly worthy films that bore one rigid. 

I picked this therefore, because it’s a comedy. An Italian piece set in a countryside town, we see multiple members of the same family struggle with coming out as gay in an uber-traditional place, a homophobic father (who Paul rightly sums up as badly acted and badly written, so I shan’t spend any more time on him) and some cracking side characters who pop in and liven up the piece from time to time. 

Storywise I wasn’t enamoured - there’s so many stories about men struggling to come out as gay and I just get annoyed. The drama should have moved on by now, we have progressed as a culture and the issues we face are different. I’m bored of seeing people struggling with being gay. I want something more uplifting and more relevan 

However where this film does gain some points is in the characters of the grandmother, the mother and the gay friends who are - as Paul says - utter caricatures, but also are - in my opinion - entirely accurate to most homosexuals who live in Clapham. Say what you like, sometimes the caricature isn’t actually wrong. 

There’s one terrific scene when the mother and aunt (who has a weird storyline about a lover who visits her at night which I didn’t understand at all) go into town after her son has come out as gay and run away. Following them into a shop is the local busybody who makes some pointed remarks about her own daughter getting married to a man. The mother - who does a good job of struggling between her love for her son and her having to recalibrate who he is in her mind - snaps back with some sassy quips about the daughter being ‘the village bike’. Not particularly PC, but it’s cheering to see someone fight for the innocent gay son. 

The best lines are reserved for the grandmother who berates her homophobic son and clearly sees things for what they are. At one point she snaps at him something along the lines of ‘you’re outdated in your own head’, and I couldn’t help but cheer. It’s a lovely, heartening performance and as Paul says, her final scene is one of the few moments the comic-tragic blend works. 

Overall, I didn’t rate it very highly, but with the grandma and friends, there were a few laughs and it was still a welcome respite from whatever misery-porn piece the Academy decided was best this year. 

Highlight

Any scenes where the gay friends are bitching in their own room is a highlight. They could all be easily found in Soho any night of the week.  

Lowlight

A dull story and bad writing means this isn’t particularly noteworthy. 

Mark
4/10

83. The King's Speech (2010)

Plot Intro

England, 1936. Prince Albert aka “Bertie” (Colin Firth) and his wife Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter) get an unexpected promotion when Albert’s father, King George V (Michael Gambon) dies, and his elder brother, King Edward VIII (Guy Pierce) abdicates from the throne. But pubic speaking is Albert’s ultimate fear, because he suffers from a pronounced stammer. So he and Elizabeth employ an Australian, unconventional speech therapist called Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush) to help him out, as war approaches and the UK desperately cries out for a leader…

Doug says...

This is a beautifully subtle film, which is saying a lot more than one might originally think. On first glance it’s a fairly simple story about a man who unexpectedly became king and had to deal with public speaking while having a bad stammer. 

If this was it, then this would be an undeserving winner. But actually there’s a great deal more going on. Bertie is a cripplingly shy man, bullied by his nurses, beaten out of his natural left-handedness, and always in the shadow of his wittier, more handsome, more dashing older brother. Colin Firth captures him in a fantastic performance; handling the contradictions within the man with ease. There’s an entitlement to the way he walks into the room, moving without pause - but then when offered a seat he sits at the end of the sofa, tucking himself into the corner. The camera often pictures him at the edge of the frame, or uncomfortably close up. He flaps around being a penguin with his daughters, and then expects formality from everyone around him, even chastising his brother for crying when their father dies. 

Geoffrey Rush is here to ensure it’s not the Firth show however. Rush matches Firth in power, skill and poise throughout. When Lionel says ‘he hasn’t seen me,’ in response to the Queen’s despair - we feel his assuredness. And thanks to the awful doctors we’ve already seen (stuffing your mouth full of marbles and trying not to choke?!), his sensible, now-widespread methods are wonderful to watch. Not to mention he’s an unpredictable, exciting force encouraging the King to shout ‘fuck’ and roll around on the floor while yelling nursery rhymes. No wonder Derek Jacobi’s unpleasant Archbishop is wary. 

And here’s why the film - for me - is exceptional. Recently I saw a play about mental health, where the main character felt suicidal, attempted suicide, and then eventually committed suicide. It was obvious and oddly irresponsible, and I left wishing that the writer had actually shown us someone trying to survive. Oddly, this film satisfies that desire for me. This is a film of a man in an impossible situation, forced to do public speaking despite not being able to speak publicly. It would be easy for him to just turn away, and abdicate as his brother did before him. But these sessions - as well as being real vocal techniques (hello breathing exercises) - are a form of therapy. 

This is a film about therapy. It is a film about how embracing new techniques can help people conquer things they previously thought would never be defeated. Director Tom Hooper uses framing and angles that really highlight this - some of the odd shots weirdly echo 2018’s The Favourite (albeit less bizarre), and every member of the cast is really pulling their weight. A little shout out to Helena Bonham Carter too who gives one of her more restrained performances and shines for it. I’m personally excited to see her in The Crown as Princess Margaret, in a post-Burton era for her. 

It’s beautiful to look at, with foggy London scenes, great empty palaces, and a terrifying Mary of Teck. Also there’s loads of corgis. Win. 

Highlight 

The script is a gorgeously understated and truthful work. My favourite scene comes near the beginning when one of Lionel’s students - a small boy - comes out to greet the Royals. Firth’s reaction to seeing the boy dealing with his own stammer and Bonham Carter’s concern for both of them is just beautifully done. 

Lowlight

I’m not a massive fan of Lionel and Bertie’s falling out scene in the park. It makes sense structurally but it feels like an unnecessary tension point. 

Mark 

10/10

Paul says...

A major, patriotic hit in 2010, The King’s Speech defeated, amongst others, 127 Hours, Black Swan, Inception, The Social Network and Toy Story 3 to the crown. Another strong year indeed, but with a very worthy winner, The King’s Speech is a brilliant start to our final decade.

Firth, Rush and Bonham-Carter do carry the film. Firth is peak-Firth in his adorably vulnerable social-awkwardness but with an outstanding impersonation of King George VI’s voice. Rush’s comic timing makes him incredibly likeable, and Bonham-Carter’s having a whale of a time with her various one-liners and understated strength. But the side characters also add to this. Guy Pierce’s insecure King Edward, Michael Gambon’s cantankerous King George V, Derek Jacobi’s snobbish Archbishop of Canterbury, and even Eve Best who barely gets ten lines as try-hard Wallis Simpson makes the most of her limited time on screen. 

But what I thoroughly enjoyed were the many, minuscule directorial touches. Tom Hooper’s award-winning camera work is frenetic and suffocating during Bertie’s excruciating speech that starts the film, then slowly becomes steadier and more serene as he makes peace with his psychological issues and gains more control of his stammer. Images and models of war planes in Logan’s office foreshadow the trials that Bertie has to come, and make his speech therapy all the more imperative. And the use of Beethoven’s Allegretto from his 7th Symphony, which employs a “musical stammer”, during Bertie’s 1939 speech to the nation, provides a perfect beat to Bertie’s speech rhythm, as well as symbolising the nation’s slow and ponderous march into warfare. An extremely powerful and unconventional finale, unlike The Darkest Hour’s clumsy attempts at inspirational patriotism. 

Doug is right that this is a film about therapy, but I also saw it as a film about massive social change and how to deal with it. The first scene between King George V and his son Bertie shows the King alluding to his upbringing and values, and there is also a fascinating scene in which Bertie explains to Logan his difficult childhood and lack of contact with the real world. We must remember that both of these kings are the ones that took us through World Wars, and therefore saw sweeping political, social and economic change across their country and others. Another similarity is that neither of them were raised to be king from birth. Bertie’s elder brother was heir until he abdicated, while King George V had an elder brother, Prince Albert Victor, who died suddenly at the age of 28, a decade before even Queen Victoria passed away. 

So both kings were thrown into their roles with less preparation than they should have had. Add to that, their upbringing was designed to emulate the ultra-perfect, regal values of Queen Victoria, but with the wars and global rise in pro-republican sentiment, they have struggled to marry their lifestyle with the world’s. While George V descended into unpleasantness and frustration, Bertie manages to find a status quo through unconventional speech therapy. If any film advocates the way in which the British royal family have kept themselves relevant, this is it. 

Yes, this is a stirring film, and a superb addition to the Best Pictures canon. I remember not fully appreciating it on its first release, but Netflix’s The Crown has managed to harbour a greater appreciation for 20th century history. I’m looking forward to the new series even more than I was before!

Highlight

The way in which Helena Bonham Carter pronounces “controversial” (“controver-sssssseal”) 

Lowlight

Like Doug, I felt the subplot in which Bertie and Logan have a falling out during Bertie’s first few months as king to slow the film’s pace, and it felt very contrived.

Mark

9/10

Fun Fact!
The King's Speech actually has a few links to the seminal 1995 BBC Pride and Prejudice. Colin Firth obviously played Darcy, but eagle-eyed viewers will spot David Bamber as a snooty theatre director - who played the odious Mr Collins. And of course, Logan's wife is played by none other than Jennifer 'Lizzie Bennett' Ehle. Fans of the Jane Austen adaptation will have been delighted to see Firth and Ehle in the same scene, albeit for a few seconds! 

The PAD Awards: 2000s

Sadly this was one of the least-well attended PAD Award ceremonies. Some speculated that it was because of the dull films this decade, while others said it was because Meryl only clicked 'interested' and then 'grammed herself at a different party altogether. Anyway, here's the winners of this year's eminent PAD Awards. 

Least favourite film

Paul says: Gladiator

It’s been a relatively lacklustre decade as far as Oscar Best Picture winners go, which is strange considering that we are closer and closer to modern-day film-making. It is, in fact, Doug’s second least favourite decade so far (statistically speaking), and my third least favourite. Although I was spoilt for choice, I am happy to choose Gladiator as my turkey of the noughties, mostly because of how disappointingly it has aged. I have fond memories of being completely gripped and moved by the entire story when I was 13 but I’ve obviously grown discerning and cynical as I hit 30, because Gladiator was slow, stodgy, and no where near worthy of its 2.5 hours. Unless, of course, you like Russell Crowe’s gravel-voiced monologues, or one pathetic female character in the whole of Ancient Rome. But then, I’d severely question your artistic tastes. Admittedly, Crash had a lower mark from me, but Gladiator was too much of a let-down.

Doug says: Crash

Ugh what a dull decade. Apart from a couple of films, I’ve found this decade to be nothing more than a snooze-fest. Once again the Men have wrestled their way on top and filled it with the usual machismo-drenched dullities. Not since the ‘70s have I wished so fervently for ‘new balls please’. That’s a tennis reference but the euphemism works too. This one is easy. Crash was a shocker of a film. Much like 2019’s winner Green Book, it was a bunch of white men saying ‘gosh, did you know that racism isn’t a good thing?’ Outdated, obvious and oddly offensive, it’s not aged well at all. One to erase from the memory bank. 

Favourite Male Performance

Andy Serkis, The Return of the King

An easy one, and a performance that stuck with me since my first viewing of this trilogy in the cinema. Andy Serkis’ Golem is a tour-de-force, made more so by the fact that the computerised animation doesn’t prevent his complex character work from becoming obscured. You can see that Serkis has thought long and hard about every style of movement and vocal pitch, especially when he is subtly jumping between the psychopathic Golem and his softer-hearted alter ago, Smeagol (they have a Jekyll-and-Hyde relationship). When you bear in mind how much time and energy Serkis and Director Jackson have put into Golem, one could almost argue that the entire saga, including The Hobbit, is really about Golem’s character arc alone. Frodo who? Runner-up shout outs should go to Clint Eastwood in Million Dollar Baby, Javier Bardem in No Country for Old Men, and Dev Patel in Slumdog Millionaire.

Doug says: Jeremy Renner, The Hurt Locker 

Well it’s certainly not going to be Russell Crowe. An entirely disappointing set of films means that I didn’t notice much in the way of acting. However I’m going to award this one - slightly surprisingly - to Jeremy Renner who plays Sergeant First Class William James in Katherine Bigelow’s war epic. While I didn’t adore the film, Renner does exceptional work quickly and without much dialogue, creating a damaged gung-ho soldier who relishes the thrill of his work and the adrenaline rush, without understanding how he is undermining his own sanity. It’s an admirable, believable performance. Honorary shout outs go to Clint Eastwood and Dev Patel. 

Favourite Female Performance 

Paul says: Hilary Swank, Million Dollar Baby 

A tricky one in a male-dominated decade, so I’m going to go for the obvious choice. Hilary Swank is the most recent Best Actress winner who was also in the Best Picture winner- and it was her second win at just 30 years old. It’s a well-deserved accolade, as her performance is a stunner. She’s dances over the line between vulnerability and fortitude expertly, and she’s as likeable as Rocky was in her downtrodden determination. She should also get a special mention for acting very well with just her face after Horribly Tragic Events occur during the film. Hilary Swank? How about Hilary Tank-ful of Talent?! 

Doug says: Catherine Zeta Jones, Chicago, & Margo Martindale, Million Dollar Baby

It’s a tie! I couldn’t choose between these performances and here’s why. CZJ in Chicago is the epitome of ‘barnstorming’. It’s a performance that has to vie with Renee Zellwegger doing some cracking acting and Queen Latifah queen-latifahing the House Down. And yet she utterly triumphs, with the nastiness and glamour fore-front at all times. The show opens with her tremendous ‘All that Jazz’ and it sets the tone for an energetic, mesmerising performance. On the other end of the scale we have the relatively small role of (the also wonderful) Hilary Swank’s mother in Million Dollar Baby. Martindale - a recognisable face from the small screen - gets a small amount of time to show you how disgustingly horrific this small-town woman is. It’s a subtle, parasitic performance and Martindale’s ease with which she reveals this unpleasant bitch is masterful. There are no small parts…

Favourite Film 

Paul says: Million Dollar Baby

Another easy choice - Million Dollar Baby is further evidence that Clint Eastwood has had one of the most consistently effervescent careers since Cher made her seventeenth comeback. It’s a nuanced, tender examination of age, morality and redemption, dispensing with the showiness and complacency that can often plague actors and directors who are resting on their laurels. Eastwood is doing no such thing. He obviously thinks carefully about his scripts, character work and themes, suggesting a deep intellectualism that translates well to the screen. In simpler terms, Million Dollar Baby is one of the saddest, most cathartic Best Picture winners, rivalling Marty, How Green Was My Valley and the last few minutes of Schindler’s List for its sweetness and heart. Slumdog Millionaire was a very close second, and The Lord of the Rings and The Hurt Locker are other noughties winners that come highly recommended from me. 

Doug says: Million Dollar Baby

We agree! Million Dollar Baby is the only film that’s truly stuck with me (except Chicago and that’s mainly because of the excessive glitter). Clint Eastwood has proven my conceptions about him wrong time and time again, and this gorgeously subtle rumination on success, pain and hope is just mind-bendingly good. While this decade has been mostly shit, here is one of the diamonds glinting through. Swank is exceptional too, but this film belongs to Eastwood in both acting and directing. The last image has stayed with me - is he really there? Is it heaven? Is it even him in the cafe at all? Beautiful, intelligent work and worthy of the coveted PAD award. Go Clint! 

Average Film Scores 

Paul: 6.3/10 (Paul’s third-lowest decade)

Doug: 5.6/10 (Doug's second-lowest rated decade)