Today's Review: I, Daniel Blake

Het was even schrikken toen Ken Loach na Jimmy's Hall in 2014 zijn pensioen aankondigde. Welke regisseur moest het nu voor de hardwerkende, uitgebuite 'man in de straat' opnemen? Twee jaar later is de inmiddels tachtigjarige Loach toch weer terug met een aanklacht tegen sociaal onrecht. Gelukkig maar, want hoewel zijn vorige film een fijn luchtig drama was, is het niet de meest wenselijke laatste aria van de grootmeester. I, Daniel Blake, goed voor een Gouden Palm in Cannes, laat een krachtiger indruk achter. De film toont Loach opnieuw in topvorm als voorvechter voor de genegeerde massa, in een sociaal drama dat uitstekend de balans vindt tussen zwaar drama en zwarte komedie. 

De Daniel Blake uit de titel is een timmerman op leeftijd uit Newcastle, die moest stoppen met werken na een hartaanval. Sindsdien is hij aangewezen op een uitkering, maar het verzilveren hiervan gaat hem niet gemakkelijk af. De grootscheepse bureaucratie rond het Britse bijstandssysteem draait tegenwoordig niet meer om het financieel bijstaan van de zwakkeren in de samenleving, maar om het hen met allerlei Kafkaëske regels zo lastig mogelijk maken om hun geld te krijgen. Al snel gaat zelfs een doorzetter als Daniel kopje onder in het bijstandsdrijfzand, dat hem dwingt de hele dag te zoeken naar werk, dat hij van zijn arts niet mag aannemen omdat het zijn dood zou kunnen betekenen. Zelfs dan is hij nog beter af dan de jonge alleenstaande moeder Katie, die met haar twee kinderen gedwongen moest verhuizen vanuit Londen en eveneens slachtoffer dreigt te worden van de harteloze uitkeringsmachinerie. Onder het motto 'gedeelde smart is halve smart' sluit het tweetal vriendschap, om zich met niets dan wederzijdse hoop te handhaven in hun uitzichtloze situatie.

Het aankaarten van dergelijke wanpraktijken is een doorlopend thema in Loach' lange kruistocht voor sociale rechtvaardigheid. De regisseur brak precies vijftig jaar geleden door met de televisiefilm Cathy Come Home waarin hij eveneens een slachtoffer van het barmhartig geachte bijstandssysteem opvoerde. Die uitzending bracht de nodige publieke afschuw en de roep tot hervorming teweeg. Vijf decennia later lijkt het er niet op dat er veel verbetering heeft plaatsgevonden. Integendeel, meer mensen zijn slechter af dan destijds, terwijl de bureaucratie rond het uitkeringssysteem alleen maar omvangrijker vormen heeft aangenomen. Het is dus prijzenswaardig dat Loach zijn jubileum viert door nogmaals zijn kritische blik te werpen op deze mensonterende praktijken. Hoewel de film het niet moet hebben van nuance - het waarom achter het bizarre overheidsapparaat blijft achterwege - is het prettig dat Loach onze ontgoocheling niet slechts zoekt in tergend drama, maar evenzeer humor aandraagt om de absurditeit van dit systeem bloot te leggen. Dat maakt het geheel voor de toeschouwers wel zo dragelijk.

De troef van I, Daniel Blake is de keuze om de titelfiguur niet door een regulier acteur te laten vertolken, maar door een komediant. Hoofdrolspeler Dave Johns heeft een lange staat van dienst als stand-upcomedian, maar maakt hier zijn speelfilmdebuut. Zijn sublieme komische timing, gepaard met zijn innemende voorkomen, staat garant voor een uitstekende vertolking, een herkenbaar alledaagse verschijning en een oase van gezond verstand in een surrealistische wereld vol verwarrende regeltjes. Er kan en mag gerust gelachen worden dankzij de humor die Johns' personage typeert, maar elke lach wordt desondanks succesvol getemperd door het besef dat dit absurdisme op feiten gebaseerd is. De humor is wrang, want de ernst is nooit ver weg. Tegenover de aimabele Daniel plaatst Loach Katie's tragedie, allesbehalve lachwekkend. Ook actrice Hayley Squires blijkt een schot in de roos in de rol van de jonge moeder die ondanks alle tegenwerking van de staat twee koters moet opvoeden en hen probeert te hoeden voor alle leed. Tranentrekkend is haar bezoek aan een voedselbank, waarbij ze gedreven door honger zich stiekem op een blik groente stort, om vervolgens bevangen te worden door immense schaamte. Hoewel een voorspelbaar lot in haar afdaling in de wanhoop ons niet bespaard blijft, compenseert Squires' overtuigende spel die tekortkoming.

Het is die wisselwerking tussen Katies tenenkrommende drama en Daniels zwarte komedie die I, Daniel Blake tot een memorabele film maakt. Loach slaat ons niet murw met overdadig serieus opgediende onmenselijkheden, maar weet ondanks de rijkelijk vertegenwoordigde humor toch onze verontwaardiging op te wekken. Het is een hachelijke balans die alleen een vakman als hij gedegen weet aan te brengen. Cynisme sluit hij bovendien uit, want volgens hem is er altijd ruimte voor hoop zolang gewone mensen anderen in nood bijspringen. I, Daniel Blake maakt duidelijk dat pensioen voor sociale kruisridders als Loach niet weggelegd is. Want zelfs na vijftig jaar strijd blijft er nog genoeg onrecht over om de goede man nog vele films bezig te houden. Het heeft er alle schijn van dat Loach zal sterven in het harnas. Hij zou het niet anders willen.

Today's Review: RoboCop

RoboCop: ***/*****, or 5/10

If there's one thing the 2012 remake of Total Recall taught us, it's that Paul Verhoeven's movies are not easily redone. Nevertheless, studio MGM felt like trying with Verhoeven's first Sci-Fi spectacle, by reimagining the genre classic RoboCop (1987) for the audience of today. Brazilian director José Padilha, known for his action thriller hit film Tropa de Elite, scored this thankless job and he gets credit for trying, but the fact can't be changed the Total Recall curse is adhered to, as this new RoboCop proves yet another remake that is inferior to its predecessor.

Nevertheless, the movie opens on a strong note, when it tries to embrace the satirical touch of the original and apply it to the modern state of affairs. Set in 2028, rightwing political TV commentator Pat Novak (Samuel L. Jackson playing the part just right with apparent delight) publicly laments not deploying robots at the homefront for keeping America safe, while such products are otherwise keeping the peace the world over. Cut to Tehran, where the local population is intimidated into submission by robosoldiers patrolling every street. When suicide bombers protesting their presence attack the automatons, their ruthless efficiency is made clear, as is their lack of human calculation and reasoning when they gun down a boy armed with only a small knife. Novak calls it a success because no American personnel of flesh and blood died, but for the public it is clear these robots still leave something to be desired. And so the OmniCorp multinational decides to combine the organic with the mechanic to construct a more acceptable, friendlier product for keeping the American streets clean. And this is where the promising political comments on today's affairs, ever a welcome food for thought in science fiction flicks, also sadly end.

Enter police officer and family man Alex Murphy (Joel Kinnaman), who is caught up in undercover operations and suspects his colleagues' corruption. When his car explodes and he is on the brink of death, OmniCorp sees the perfect test subject in him for their 'RoboCop' programme. Saving only the most essential of body parts, sympathetic scientist Norton (the always reliable Gary Oldman) sticks him in a high tech body armour. Controlling his body is one thing, but keeping his mind in check is another matter entirely. The corporation swiftly finds out it's not so easy to confine a man to the status of a product that bows down to its manufacturer's every whim. Eventually they opt to basically brainwash him so the software controls his behavior, rendering him every bit the robot, much to the chagrin of his wife who wants her husband back (as if that's possible when all that's left of him is his head, heart and lungs). Fortunately for her, Murphy's psyche is still alive inside, and it's determined to break out to get his revenge on those that killed him before and return to his loving wife and son.

The main problem this remake suffers from is finding the right balance between action and intelligence that characterized Verhoeven's film. Hellbent on not simply being a mindless remake, the movie spends much of its time exploring the dichotomy between man and machine. Where does the man end and the machine begin? Can the mind truly be mechanized? Such questions the film attempts to answer in more detail than feels obliged, without drawing sufficient conclusions either, as it's clear from the get-go where this RoboCop is mentally going. All the talk of the complications of mind versus matter fail to hit a chord due to the predictable progression of the plot which is devoid of surprises to make the film's philosophy reach any narrative fruition. The overabundance of talk is also the cause of the movie feeling overly light on the action which the title by association with the original film promises. Though the occasional crime fighting delivers what we hoped for, though in portions too small to satisfy, the bland battles between the 'tin man' and his fully machine counterparts just prove less than entertaining. And unlike the original it's all PG-13 stuff, only decreasing the emotional impact.

Another issue working against this film as opposed to the original is the lack of gravitas Kinnaman displays as the titular character. As a regular human being he feels emotionless already – never making you believe husband and wife care that much for each other as the movie would have us think later on – while in his later automatic shape he doesn't strike us as effectively intimidating or commanding. Though it must be said there's little to hold against the new RoboCop armor, or Kinnaman's look when he wears it, it's his performance that simply fails to deliver the right note. At least the movie fares better in terms of acting thanks to veterans like Oldman and Jackson, while decent character actors Michael K. Williams, Jackie Earle Haley and Michael Keaton also do their best to make things work, but miscasting the main character is an error not so easily remedied. At least the movie proves more convincing in the art department, the various environments and robots, including RoboCop's famous antagonist ED-209, making up a little for Kinnaman's human flaws.

The new RoboCop is a watered down version of the original that isn't as smart as it thinks it is, nor provides the amount of action it should. Most vexing is it never gets near the witty, sardonic levels of Verhoeven's satirical approach to the original, despite definitely giving it a decent try at first, too quickly abandoning such thoughts for more conventional action fare for the rest of the film, except there's just not that much notable action to speak of. It goes too far to say it's totally boring, especially for those who never bothered to see the original (which they still should do regardless). Nevertheless, it would have done well to feature less talk, more action; an argument not often heard for this type of movie. At the same time, it becomes painfully clear there's only ever going to be one RoboCop, and his name is not Joel Kinnaman.

Brüno

Rating: ***/*****, or 6/10

Sacha Baron Cohen mindlessly repeats his success of Borat by appropriating the same type of narrative set-up to his other infamous character, the excessively explicitly gay German fashion designer Brüno. First introducing Brüno in his natural environment at a fashion show turned awry, he's taken out of his element when banned from the fashion industry, after which his lover leaves him and he travels to America to become famous once more, insulting most conceivable minorities in the process in a series of loosely attached sketches. Whereas this approach led to great results in Borat, in the case of Brüno it leads to a distinct feeling of 'been there, done that'. What's more, the cheap gay jokes simply are not as original or as outrageous as Borat's repertoire and many miss their mark. However, there's still plenty to enjoy for at least one decent watch, including Brüno adopting a coloured baby he names O.J., visiting a swinger club to take advise on how to become straight and interviewing parents all too eager to let their child break through in show business about a role for their kids in a scene involving heavy antiquated machinery and Nazi uniforms. Filled with every thinkable cliché involving homosexuals, a lot of them simply cringy worthy, gay people had best ignore this flick.

Starring: Sacha Baron Cohen, Gustaf Hammarsten, Clifford Baňagale

Directed by Larry Charles

USA: Universal Pictures, 2009

Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan

Rating: ****/*****, or 8/10

Hilarious, subversive and playful comedy about a journalist from Kazakhstan, Borat Sagdiyev (undoubtedly Sacha Baron Cohen's most memorable character), who is sent by his government to the 'U, S and A' to make a report on life in its various aspects in the greatest country of the world, together with his short tempered and less than enthusiastic producer Azamat. On a trip across the country, traveling from one great sketch to another, Borat falls in love with Pamela Anderson (after seeing her only once on TV) and aims to track her down and marry her the Kazakh way, whether she likes to or not. Though the scenes in Borat's village in Kazakhstan are quite obviously staged (to great comedic effect), since such a wonderfully silly place just can't exist anywhere, the question remains just how much of the American part of the film is for real, as Borat interviews many different average Americans and manages to get great reactions out of his subjects, most feeling very natural and many of them quite disturbing, but all of them the object of very funny, often completely politically incorrect gags involving every conceivable minority out there (Jews, gypsies, coloured people, women, homosexuals, prostitutes, etc.): if Cohen didn't happen to be Jewish himself, it's likely he wouldn't have gotten away with the stunts he pulls here, though after the success of this film (both in terms of reception and box office) he got into many a lawsuit for his outrageous behavior regardless. The funniest scenes of this film include the 'Running of the Jew' event in Borat's home town, Borat singing the Kazakhstan national anthem on the melody of the American national anthem at a rodeo in front of hundreds of conservative flag waving American citizens, and a fight between Borat and Azamat in the nude in a hotel that goes on for much longer than is comfortable to anyone. Cohen would repeat the formula verbatim in 2009 with the much less impressive and fairly predictable Brüno.

Starring: Sacha Baron Cohen, Ken Davitian, Luenell

Directed by Larry Charles

USA: Four By Two Production, 2006