Film Review - Stalker

Director Mark O’Connor arrived at the Galway Film Fleadh with a bang in 2012. Armed with a manifesto and two films under his arm he wanted to shake up the Irish film industry a little bit. The two films were King of the Travellers (released in cinemas this year) and his latest film Stalker which is yet to be released. The manifesto got quite a bit of press and Stalker was second in the best Irish feature award (no shame in being second to the excellent Good Vibrations) and was widely praised at the time. So why hasn’t the film arrived on our screens? Irish films need publicity to stand a chance of being seen at the cinemas and considering the marketing budgets are miniscule surely festival goodwill is an opportunity to help with the marketing a little bit. This is an argument that will run and run about why we do not see Irish films at the cinema and it is one I am sure I will be returning to. But coming back to Stalker, what does Mark O’Connor have in store for us? Well for me Stalker is as fascinating an Irish film as I have seen in quite some time.

Stalker tells the story of Oliver (John Connors), a homeless man wandering the streets who befriends a young boy called Tommy (Barry Keoghan) who he helps fight off bullies. Tommy’s life is in a bad way with a drug addicted mother and a crazy drug dealing uncle Rudyard (Peter Coonan). Oliver vows to help Tommy but his intensity scares Tommy a little. Plot wise that is about it but this is a film less inclined towards plot and more towards tone and feeling.

In my reviews of O’Connor’s previous films Between the Canals and King of the Travellers I mentioned that his films feel a little rough around the edges. That may have sounded like a criticism and in some ways it was. But it is also a compliment in that it gives his films a particular feel and tone that not all Irish filmmakers have. In Stalker he is aided by some beautiful camera work by Eoin Macken which initially brings a touch of the fairytale to an otherwise dark film. In the final third the camera work is used in a heightened fashion which also serves the ending well. So the look of the film is excellent - what about the rest of it?

John Connors is superb as Oliver; completely convincing as someone with some serious mental health problems. He is also co-writer here and he is a real talent. He commands the screen in a very naturalistic way and it looks effortless. Barry Keoghan is also very good and is an actor to watch. The two share some scenes that are intense and emotional. Peter Coonan is his usual manic self and his character Rudyard is an odious one. But Coonan plays it a little too broad and over the top at times and I would like to have seen a little more control in the performance.

The film does have some issues. There is a scene set in a cinema that is a little unconvincing. While I liked the idea of the scene, the way it plays out doesn’t really ring true. I don’t want to give away any more details that would spoil it but it comes across as a little too on the nose in relation to the state of modern Irish filmmaking. Perhaps it is the script that is at fault here as it gives Oliver too much information to impart. It is the only time in the film that Oliver sounds like he is explicitly delivering the words and viewpoint of the writer rather than just talking. There is also a bit of a problem towards the climax when the plot and narrative take over. Stalker (and indeed O’Connor) is at its best when it is freewheeling along without any real narrative concern. The utterly strange feeling is more than enough to sustain real interest. But the film rallies to deliver a really intense and feverish climax that works very well indeed.

There is a real feeling here that with Stalker, Mark O’Connor has finally found his cinematic voice. Stalker has a more experimental feel and this benefits O’Connor hugely. This approach may well produce a masterpiece in the future. And with the wonderful John Connors writing and starring with him he may well have found his muse. I for one look forward to the next two films arriving in Galway.  

Film Review - Charlie Casanova (2012)

When discussing Irish films it can be informative to look at the era in which the films are released and the state of the nation at that particular time. During the Celtic Tiger era for example there was a run of frothy films (When Brendan Met Trudy, About Adam, Goldfish Memory) that showed a Dublin alive with charming rich people, sipping espressos without a care in the world. These films seemed to say that we have finally made it - we have a highly desirable capital city to live in. We had fancy coffee, Michelin star restaurants, even sunshine. It was all there on the screen so it had to be true.

In reality it was not. I grew up in Coolock in the 1980s and 1990s and I can say with some certainty that the Celtic Tiger passed us by. There should have been more anger then from the disenfranchised but there was not. The working class stood idly by and watched successive governments have ‘giveaway’ budgets, cynical cash-ins to ensure another term. We got to press our faces against real estate windows and look at houses we could never afford to buy. It was Dublin in the rare old times only for the ruling class and we had the films to match. These were films for ‘them’.

So years later, in the midst of the worst economic conditions for at least a generation, where are the films to reflect our anger at the downturn? We have had very little in this regard. One Hundred Mornings (probably correctly) seemed to be saying that the collapse of society will happen in a very quiet way without the usual associated film hysterics. But Charlie Casanova is coming at us from the aggressive end of the spectrum. This is an angry film with an angry central character from a very angry writer and director. There is something admirable in an uncompromising film as a concept. But all the anger in the world is worthless if you don’t have a film to sell and the question is thus: does Charlie Casanova stand up on its own terms?

The answer to this is a resounding yes, but it is a film not without problems. Charlie Casanova tells the story of Charlie Barnham who after hitting a woman in a working class neighbourhood with his car, lets a deck of cards decide her fate. Emboldened by the way he has seemingly got away with it, Charlie bullies his wife and friends into letting the cards make decisions for them, with some strange and tragic circumstances. Charlie takes these kinds of risks with increasing dangers for all involved as his life starts to spiral out of control. In plot terms, that is about it. The story is punctuated with some extraordinary set pieces including two darkly funny scenes involving an improv comedy set and an interview in a Garda station. In between the gallows humour are lengthy diatribes about men not being men and the ruling classes taking back the streets from the despised working class.

The film works best in the first hour. The use of a fractured narrative serves it well here. There is some wonderful cinematography by Eoin Macken, capturing everything in wonderfully grubby and intense close ups. There is simply nowhere else to look as the intimate events unfold. There is a brutally sad but quietly tender scene in a bath that is captured beautifully by Macken. The hotel that they stay in is has a soulless empty feeling, echoing empty businesses around the country. The building of tension in the first hour is expertly done and it does implode after the comedy improv. It is here that the film goes off the rails. Pacing becomes an issue here as the film slows down and the seams start to show. Thankfully the film rebounds with a chilling last 10 minutes. There is a wonderful final shot that is held for quite a long time that destroys any notion of a traditional sense of closure.

Emmet Scanlon is terrific in the title role. He is in virtually every scene and carries the film all the way. There has been criticism of his rantings as some sort of cod philosophy but surely that is the point. Charlie is an educated fool, a half baked car salesman whose opinions should be dismissed as such. Scanlon gets into his character to show the heartless monster beneath the confident exterior. The supporting cast are good and do quite a bit with somewhat underwritten roles.

Charlie Casanova is not a film for everyone. It is a tough watch - in your face from the first moment. There is plenty of room for a confrontational film in our film history and is a refreshing departure from the standard. With the reported miniscule budget it should also be inspirational to the next generation of filmmakers, letting them know that personal films, can be made, advertised and released regardless of budget. This has not really happened before with much success. Even if you don’t like the film this is surely a good thing for our industry. This is a film whose message on class and politics will become more important in the years to come as Ireland continues to devour itself and the working classes bear the brunt stoically as ever. That is a pretty good legacy for an Irish film to have.