A Cure for Wellness

Dir: Gore Verbinski

2017

****

Justin Haythe’s A cure for wellness is an altogether familiar-feeling thriller brought to life thanks to the brilliance of director Gore Berbinski. There are plenty of problems with the film, its narrative and structure being far from perfect, but personally neither distracted me from really enjoying the visual wonder and the over the top ridiculousness of the whole thing. It plays on many people’s common fears and is a colour-by-number psychological thriller, the sort you’d expect from most such films set in a sanatorium (although technically a rehabilitation centre/spa the building itself was once a sanatorium) but there is still something rather individual about it. The plot itself is a fantastical mix of detective story and horror mystery, a haunted house film but with all the lights on as it were. There aren’t any jump scenes which I found a relief, indeed, there’s not one cheap shot throughout the entire film. That’s not to say that aspects weren’t predictable but I was still glad not to have seen head-shaking monsters, ghostly characters appearing from nowhere or a man with a pig’s head. The locations are the uncredited character of the whole film, Hohenzollern Castle and an abandoned hospital in Beelitz-Heilstatten, Germany being key to the overall look and style of the film. I would suggest that without the bold visuals the film isn’t that remarkable, although the script is strong and I loved how the tone suddenly switched to fantasy towards the end. The story ticks all the usual boxes when it comes to ‘psycological’ thriller and explores madness, claustrophobia, entrapment, aquaphobia, mysophobia (fear of germs), parasitophobia (fear of parasites) and throws in anguillophobia (the fear of eels) for good measure. The bad guys are well spoken and kind and their ‘henchmen’ are a cross between Nazis in disguise and how Scandinavian villains are usually portrayed in James Bond films. It’s a bit sci-fi and a little supernatural. Their motive is refreshingly over-the-top and ridiculous and our protagonist is an odd but intriguing anti-hero who is a cross between Philip Marlowe and Gordon Gekko. I have never been much of a fan of Dane DeHaan but he has gone from strength to strength in recent years and while the films he’s been in haven’t been that successful, he himself has brought nothing but magnificence to his roles. I thought he was perfect in the role and added so much to the story. Jason Isaacs was also on top form as the film’s polite but cunning villain and while the sceptic in me thinks that Mia Goth was cast for her quirky looks, she is also perfect in her role and puts in a very impressive performance. The film does tread water for an awful long time, the plot creeps forward at a rather tiresome pace and at times it feels it really isn’t going anywhere, especially when all conclusions could be guessed correct after the first hour, but I believe the conclusion goes a long way in making up for it. I loved the way the story was left, although different, I almost felt the same way I used to after watching one of Tim Burton’s classics. I don’t think the film takes itself too seriously, and that is one thing I really liked about it. Fans of Lovecraft, which I am, will probably be torn into two ways of thinking, on one side it is nice to see the great man’s ideas brought to life but on the other you could say his ideas have been shamelessly ripped off. However, the fact that one of the characters is seen reading Thomas Mann’s The Magic Mountain, a clear influence on the film’s story, I would suggest it to be in tribute, rather than total plagiarism. If the story, strong script and good performances don’t impress though, you still can’t deny the stunning visuals. I like Verbinski’s films, there is a quirkiness to them that has always appealed to me. It is a shame then that 20th Century Fox pretty much ruined the film before it even came out by releasing what has to be one of the most ill-thought out viral marketing campaign in the history of viral marketing campaigns.

Rango
Dir: Gore Verbinski
2011
****
I don't know why but at first I was unsure whether I was going to enjoy Rango, such was all the hype. I have to say I was pleasantly surprised, the CGI animation industry doesn't half churn out some absolute garbage but Rango maybe the one to change all that. It's very inventive, very odd in places and quite brave in the commercial world. I think it's safe to say this is for adults though, not that it's unsuitable for kids in the usual sense, I just don't think they'd understand or enjoy it but then why can't we have one for ourselves for a change. It's a heartfelt homage to the classic western and unless you're a fan, you might miss many nods to various favourites of the genres but it won't spoil it if you haven't. The animation is also far superior to anything else I've seen and the surreal fantasy scenes are brilliant. A very pleasant surprise.

The Lone Ranger
Dir: Gore Verbinski
***
2013
I don't rate films based on commercial success. If I did I'd be telling you that Citizen Kane, It's a Wonderful Life, Harold and Maude, Fight Club, Blade Runner and The Shawshank Redemption were all terrible films. The Lone Ranger was being slated by people before anyone had even seen it and apart from not making as many billions as the studio had hoped, I can't see what is so bad about it. It does ramble on a bit but quite frankly show me a Western that doesn't. They're supposed to! Most 'blockbusters' do too these days. It could have been shorter and it was a little self-indulgent by Gore Verbinski but then this is what he does best. Johnny Depp and Armie Hammer were both great in the lead roles and William Fichtner and Tom Wilkinson were perfect baddies. It had action, comedy, Adventure, great visual effects and a little bit of romance to boot. It is everything you could want from a summer blockbuster and an example of a remake/reboot done well. The fact that the Razzies gave it an award this year just shows you what little credibility they have.

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End
Dir: Gore Berinski
2007
****
I think At World's End remains my favorite of the Pirates of the Caribbean films because it was too long and a little self indulgent. Not things you'd generally consider to be qualities in a film but this is Gore Verbinski and Pirates is his baby. He goes full throttle and to hell with the producers, at least that's how it seemed. It's certainly not as 'Disney' as the first two, story-wise Verbinski takes a huge risk and that's why it gets Cinephile Crocodile's seal of approval. You've got to love it for that Keith Richards alone.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest
Dir: Gore Verbinski
2006
****
After the success of Curse of the Black Pearl, the film makers and actors seem far more comfortable in their roles, making this a far more enjoyable film. The story gets much more interesting the more they include famous nautical myth and legend. The inclusion of both Bill Nighy's Davy Jones and Stellan Skarsgard's Bootstrap Bill was a work of good writing as both characters added an extra dimension. The decision to keep Geoffrey Rush's Captain Hector Barbossa instead of getting rid of him was inspired. Imagine if they hadn't! Unfortunately they were also stuck with Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightley, easily the two weakest components to the franchise.

Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl
Dir: Gore Verbinski
2003
***
Making a film based on an amusement ride was an odd idea but you have to congratulate them on original peculiarity. Congratulations also due for a fairly decent film. The franchise has done well and like with most franchises, the first film somewhat suffers from having to set the story so that the following films can really excel. It doesn't suffer greatly, the introduction of each character is very well handled but the sequels are where the story really takes off. Captain Jack Sparrow is a modern film character that has already entered the realms of cinemas finest and quite rightly too.