The Wrestler

Went to see The Wrestler last night. For those of you not in the know, it is a film about, well, a Wrestler (see what they did with the title? Clever!) More than that, though, it is a film about a washed up wrestler. A past his sell by date Wrestler. As a subject for a film, well, it hardly screams “must-watch” to me.

The director of the piece, though, is one of the most interesting filmmakers out there at the moment. That said, his films tend to be, shall we say, intense. I’ve seen two of them. π is an odd, migraine inducing film that manages to present a scenario where the protagonist drilling a hole in his own head is actually the best thing he can do. And Requiem For A Dream presents the other side to addiction, rather than the faux glamorous idea presented in films such as Trainspotting. Addiction in that film is a world of limb amputations, brutal prison farms, nightmarish hallucinations, ECT and double headed dildos. So a Darren Aronofsky film about a washed up wrestler had the potential to be harrowing to say the least.

And don’t get me wrong, there are some brutal scenes. If you are squeamish, then the wrestling match involving the staple gun, the barbed wire and the glass will have cringing in your chair. Like wise, the wrestler’s meltdown on the Deli counter will also have you wincing and looking away from the screen.

Also, if you are expecting a clear cut resolution for the main characters, then you are watching the wrong film. Our wrestler friend doesn’t find redemption – in fact, it is strongly implied that the end of the film sees him facing his ultimate destruction. But despite the violence and despite the lack of a Hollywood ending, the piece is actually restrained and very sensitive. The world of the wrestler is neither glamorous nor awful. On so many levels the wrestler is content with his roles, and never seems happier than when he is talking to other would-be and washed up wrestlers, who all look to him both as a good man and as something of an icon.

The film also has some extraordinary performances within it, none more so than the central performance of Mickey Rourke. I suspect that Rourke was able to put some of his own experiences into playing a character past his prime and fighting to stay on top in a world that seems to have passed him by. Whatever Rourke’s methods, he produces a truly exceptional performance, that is striking, affecting and compelling all at the same time. He takes a character who could easily be turned into a villain or a comedic role, and instead makes him into a real person who is both likeable but deeply flawed. The wrestler is someone who wants to do what is right but is incapable of doing anything other than living in the moment.

The Wrestler is an exceptional film, and comes heartily recommended from me.

Rec

Saw Rec last night. To be honest with you, I wasn't expecting a great deal. I've already seen one great Spanish horror movie this year. To see a second struck me as unlikely.

Oh, how wrong I was.

Horror movies don't really make me jump anymore. I've seen so many masked killers jump out of the shadows that I spend half the time in any horror movie thinking "come on, get on with it." Likewise, I don't feel a lot of tension when watching these sort of movies anymore. I know people are going to get turned into zombies. I know people are going to get eaten. It would almost be more surprising if they didn't.

However Rec completely ripped the (sticky, faintly distasteful, really glad I can't see it) cinema carpet from under my feet. Filmed and presented at a break neck pace, even the scenes of exposition are mercifully short and the focus is on action and scares. At times the pace is absolutely breathless, and towards the end of the film you almost want everyone to suffer the zombie plague death because it will relieve some of the tension of the film and give you, the viewer, a chance to calm down. Then the film changes gear, and starts suggesting there is another cause for the zombie plague. And, after a moment in the attic, everything switches to night vision and you have some of the most nightmarish images I have ever seen in a film played out across the screen.

Rec made me feel like I had been hit by a train. But in a good way*. It was the film Diary of the Dead should have been. So go see it. Go see it now.

Except, the vast majority of people probably won't go see it. Because it is in Spanish. And there are subtitles. Fuck it, let me reverse that. It is in Spanish, but there are sub titles. And a lot of the dialogue is "Pablo, are you filming this?", "Holy Fucking Shit" and "What the fuck is happening?" The fact that it is in Spanish shouldn't put anyone off the film. Except it will. Particularly since it is already being remade in the US. In fact, the rights to the Spanish version were bought before that version was even released in the cinemas!

At best, the remake will be like the US remake of Funny Games - a pointless shot for shot remake that only packs a punch if you haven't seen the original.** At worst, it will be just plain shit - people will go see it, hate it, and wonder what all the fuss was about. So see the original. Really, it is worth it.

*In other words, not actually hit by a train and therefore dead.
**Probably the biggest difference between the European and US versions of Funny Games - aside from the language - is the title. The American version is called Funny Games U.S. Presumably Funny Games Inferior Version didn't make it past the marketing guys.