*NEW* INDIGNATION REVIEW *NEW*

A stellar turn from Lerman and good chemistry makes this uneven coming of age drama one to watch.

In 1951, Marcus (Logan Lerman), a working-class Jewish student from New Jersey, attends a small Ohio college, where he struggles with sexual repression and cultural disaffection, amid the ongoing Korean War.

I’m not familiar with Philip Roth’s works so I can’t make comparisons on the film’s adaptation of his 29th novel BUT it was a well acted, if tragically patchy affair.

This was a perfect transition for the Percy Jackson star. Proving that he will be one to watch in the future. I know some of you will be more familiar with Lerman in The Perks of Being a Wallflower (A film I have yet to watch) BUT I felt his character was too passive to make an impression in Fury.

However, he was a charismatic lead that carried the story when the pace tragically dragged. Context is crucial when approaching this piece. The backdrop of the Korean War became a tipping point for a clash in values and (most importantly) beliefs.

We follow Marcus as he escapes the call to war and the overbearing shadow of his overanxious father (Danny Burstein – Boardwalk Empire). A man troubled by the turn in tide and loss of life.

I did find myself fidgeting a little through all the intellectual academia anecdotes as Marcus tries to shy away from his heritage. BUT by doing so; he is soon under the watchful eye of a prospective Jewish fraternity and designated to a dorm with the only Jews on campus. Well, according to his high strung room mate Bertram Flusser anyway.

Ben Rosenfield (Irrational Man) was highly entertaining as Flusser. Outspoken and he doesn’t care who knows. Blaring classical music to the masses and sharing his views whether you want to hear them or NOT.

“There were no girls like Olivia Hutton back in Newark”.

BUT beneath all the (endless) Bertrand Russell (A renowned social critic. Yeah. I had to do some research after viewing) quotations and heated societal debates, there was still a boy meets girl love story at its core.

The lovely Sarah Gadon (Stephen King’s 11.22.63) delivered an engaging performance as the mysterious Olivia. The girl that would trigger Marcus’ sexual awakening in an age of repression. A much needed presence.

The pair had great chemistry and I was happy to persevere as their romance blossomed. Her upfront approach in sex was a complete culture shock for the timid Marcus. Putting it down to her parents’ divorce.

However as we got to watch their relationship grow, the pair soon opened up and we got a better insight into Olivia’s past. Punished with a “reputation” for her promiscuity. A reputation that threatened to cause a rift between Marcus’ friends and family.

Tracey Letts (Homeland) was excellent as the scrupulous Dean Caudwell. His casual conversations nothing more than preaching. Enforcing his values on Marcus. Believing the boy to have “lost his way”. Interrogating him on the exact details of his familiarity with Olivia and even his own beliefs.

Right down to why he didn’t put down on his application that his father was a kosher butcher? A ploy to hide his religion? Every question suggesting an ulterior motive. Making assumptions about the headstrong protagonist. The heated exchanges were quite riveting to watch and really showed Lerman’s potential with James Schamus’ dialogue coming to life.

Indignation certainly made an interesting contrast to the present day. Religion, divorce and sexual expression are still rife BUT have thankfully shown a lot more progression and acceptance compared to the fifties.

BUT it was all a little too “talky talky” for my liking. The premise felt like something more suitable for a TV movie or (even better) as a theatrical performance.

It didn’t help that when things seemed to reach boiling point with Marcus having to make a decision, it ended so abruptly and on such a bleak note that I was left feeling a little disappointed.

Despite some great performances from some underrated actors, I fear this arduous affair may get lost in the ranks.

2.5/5

NOAH REVIEW

Woah . . . what the hell did I just watch? This shit just got BIBLICAL. Stupid one liners aside, a rather strange viewing experience. One that I’m not sure whether I enjoyed. Arguably Hollywood taking on the Bible is always going to get mixed results. However, that is not always the case. Examples such as Ben Hur, The Ten Commandments, The Prince of Egypt (what? Don’t judge me) are exceptions to the rule. Now credits where it’s due. The film excels with its special effects and the cast do their best with the material at hand. Now understandably that material is the Bible. Now I’ll be looking at this primarily as a film text. I’m not an atheist nor am I a believer as such. To be honest, I thought both the idea of a world created by a “Creator” and an entire universe created by a “big bang” because a thing called science said it was so, equally ridiculous. But hey everyone’s entitled to their opinion.

I digress. However, the film is full of questionable plot holes that intentionally and unintentionally pokes holes at the Old Testament itself. Now be warned there will be SPOILERS! Not the Bible bits, certain film sequences. I will try and be as cryptic as possible and as objective. Now obviously the premise we all know, in a world ravaged of sin, Noah is given a divine mission: to build an Ark to save creation from the coming flood. The opening sets up the background of the origin story of . . . us, really. Most of it, I knew. Other parts I had forgotten. Russell Crowe is a powerhouse actor and he provides a stellar performance. My main quip is his representation. Now Darren Aronofsky’s previous works have always been . . . out there. Pi, Requiem for a Dream, The (mind numbing) Fountain, and the more mainstream but surprisingly entertaining Black Swan. Aronofsky has pretty much made Noah as mainstream as possible. However, he transforms a man torn between fulfilling his duty to his Creator and the livelihood of his own family, into a demented maniac hell bent on achieving all means regardless.

Even more bizarrely, while the world is ravaged with sin, yadda yadda, a group of fallen angels are left to roam the rocky desolate landscapes. Now this part I was not aware of. The fallen angels are brilliantly designed, even if they look like Sloth from the Goonies had mated with one of the rock things from the Never Ending Story. And I couldn’t believe the talented voice cast behind them; Nick Nolte, Mark “Breaking Bad Tio Salamanca” Margolis and Kevin Durand (Real Steel and LOST). The crazy fight sequences between them and the monstrous human race desperate to board the Ark was entertaining if completely ridiculous. Aronofsky managed to convey more emotion and sympathy out of them than a number of the cast. Sir Anthony Hopkins manages to make a memorable impression in the limited screen time of the minor role of Methusaleh. It did have me pondering if Noah was allowed to save his family, why not his grandfather? Punishment for not being able to get the human race to conform and follow the righteous path? However, he was bonkers and wondered off a lot. To be honest, the supporting cast were strangely passive until the hour mark. The film was very much on the shoulders of Crowe. It was only when the humans in the area finally caught wind (come on, we’re better than that) of the Ark that things pick up, making for a tense, racy, riotous sequence. The visual CGI with the animals and the infamous flood are fantastic.

Douglas Booth (Romeo and Juliet) was highly unmemorable and passive as Shem. Logan Lerman (Perks of a Wallflower) and fellow co-star the beautiful Hermione, I mean, Emma Watson played their parts well and when given the time to shine, delivered solid performances. Jennifer Connolly (Labyrinth, always) reunites with Crowe (A Beautiful Mind) and manages to make a nothingy character stand out, especially in one tense if undeniably bizarre sequence that understandably might be where the controversy is coming from. The pair work well but fail to reignite that Beautiful Mind spark. Ray Winstone, I thought, was wonderfully gritty and gruesome as self proclaimed King Tubal-cain. Now it’s all down to how much of a Winstone fan you are. But I was pleasantly surprised and he stole the scene every time. For once, his grizzly growling was used to his strength. If you want to show the humans as nasty pieces of work, Winstone san. Once the Ark ascends, it all gets a little slow and drawn out. A slow burning if entertaining hour does not a good film make. And after two hours this film does test your resolve, if not for a tense finale.

NOW SPOILER TIME! AVOID IF YOU ARE CONSIDERING WATCHING THIS MOVIE! FOR THOSE WHO AREN’T FUSSED OR HAVE SEEN IT. CONTINUE READING THIS PARAGRAPH. Noah does everything to the letter for the Lord. He saves the animals and his family have the unexpected blessing that their son’s (well I would have assumed) wife is pregnant. Fantastic. Oh no, no. no. The human race must be no more. Which means the baby can be no more. If it is a boy, no probs. Can’t reproduce. If a girl, watch out. A compassionate hero becomes a demented mad man with one click of a finger. Unexpected? Yup. Watchable. Strangely so. Necessary? Ah, there’s the rub. Cue the time on the Ark as we wait nine months for the child to be born. Ray Winstone’s sneaky stowaway king plotting revenge for nine months? How did no one know he was on there? Also they made a herb that could knock out animals, how come it didn’t knock them out? A herb that would make them sleep for nine months? Without food or water? I mean, it’s a film but surely they could have had another trippy dream sequence in which the Lord told Noah to use said herb. I don’t know.

Visually ambitious, brilliantly acted, if drawn out, OTT, and questionably full of holes. However, this ark should manages to stay afloat, just. 3/5

Currently ranks #65 out of 161