Fair Game

[big_bad_wolf]

Saw this at a full Bournemouth Odeon which still had problems with the air con,so hot and stuffy we were all stripping off during the film. . The film itself was slow to start with but got better as it went on,so overall an ok film.

[jojob76]

I thought this film was a bit slow in places and at times failed to keep me engaged. More like a documentary than a film. Naomi Watts and Sean Penn acted their parts well.

2.5/5

[marjoreemarjora]

Agree with the others. Interesting story, do like films with true story but although thought Naomi Watts played part well did not really think chemistry there to make me believe they were a couple. Tho this is now third film they have been in together.

So different too Hall Pass tho while very crude in parts kept my attention more

So Sadly 5.5/10 from disappointed me.

[funthing29]

Tonight was my first experience of new Curzon Millbank cinema with a free screening of Fair Game and I will certainly not hurry back. One assumes a brand new cinema will be comfortable … but no. There is not much of an incline so a tall person can easily ruin your view of the screen, insufficient leg room, drinks holders are at the back of the chairs (whose stupid idea was that?) so you keep banging your knees and the seats are uncomfortable (made me feel like I was on an aeroplane). My biggest complaint was that the air conditioning was on full blast so I was freezing!

The cinema was just over 50% full and I was with sitting amongst p*ying customers (I felt like an intruder ) and had to endure trailers before the film.

There was a Q&A after the film with the screenwriters which was interesting but one of them held the microphone too far from his mouth and kept mumbling so I missed loads of what he said. Some insightful questions from the audience and I was surprised to learn it was a struggle to make this film with the extensive research required and the financial difficulties when they lost studio backing.

As for the film itself, it was OK but not brilliant. I was not aware of the story and it was well told with a good mixture of drama and thought provoking material. It was a bit slow to get going and the hand held camera movements become irksome after a while. I particularly enjoyed the use of news footage and original recordings which added authenticity. Penn's performance was excellent and Watts did well but I don’t think the movie explored her character enough. I’m not sure if it was intentional or not but she felt a bit robotic. The supporting case felt underused.

A shocking story successfully translated from script to screen with some astonishing revelations about US policy making. 7/10.

[ejwrank]

Agree with you funthing29, what an awful cinema the Curzon Millbank is. And to think the whole thing is brand new -- who messed up? We thought the seats were so uncomfortable as there was such slight sloping on the rows that you had to look through other people's heads in front and the idiotic design feature of putting hard plastic drinks holders so that you hit them with your knees was so stupid. Who designs these places and do they ever go to the cinema?

We thought the film had a great story to tell but didn't do it particularly well. The hand held camera was annoying and the sound was often muffled (maybe the sound system was just rubbish or maybe I'm going deaf). And there seemed so little drama and suspense when there should have been lots. We were very disappointed with the film and the 'Curzon cinema experience' which felt very poor indeed. We were so unimpressed with the film and so uncomfortable that we didn't hang around for the Q & A with the scriptwriters.

High point was finding we were sitting with funthing29 before the film began and it was very good to meet
properly and have a chat.

[soonforgotten]

I'll add to the poor reviews for the Millbank Curzon. Those seats are truly dreadful. No leg space at all. I was contorted in a variety of ways throughout the film and Q&A in order to try to get the feeling back in my arse and legs. Those seats are stupidy rigid. I'd love to know who thought that was a good idea and why. Probably the same person who doesn't understand why the walls of screening rooms are typically black or some other dark colour. I couldn't believe the walls were white. What an assbackwards decision.

I enjoyed the film itself. I thought Naomi Watts was incredibly good, playing such a strong, alpha female. I forget how talented she actually is. Sean Penn was solid as always, though I can personally never see beyond Sean Penn in a role. I think it's what some people feel about Russell Crowe, for example. It has nothing to do with his abilities, it's just something with me. I too was annoyed with the handheld camera work, especially the scene in the backyard with her father. That thing was all over the place. It made a bit more sense when I found out what the budget and production for this film was like. Strange that a project with some big names in front of and behind the camera can end up an independent film. I agree that it felt like a documentary, which is good. I was worried that it would have been sensationalised having seen the poster and that the film was "inspired by true events". It made sense when the screenwriters explained that it was the lawyers who added that. I suppose that way, if someone represented in the film tried to sue for what they would claim was an inaccuracy, the argument could be made that they never claimed it was all based on real events, just inspired by them.

The film definitely won't be for everyone and it has an odd pacing, but it worked for me. It took me back to a time where I was very angry and this event was part of the reasons why so it was kind of cathertic to see this story. It still pisses me off that they all basically got away with it. War criminals, the lot of them. Anyway, not a perfect film, but quite good nonetheless. 8/10

Also, I was really surprised the turn-out was so low. It was maybe 60%. I had figured they released a few tickets for SFF to fill in the gaps, so they would get a good crowd for the screenwriters, but I was wrong and I do wonder why SFF wasn't allocated at least another 10 pairs of tickets. That was quite silly, indeed.

[Ms Thrifty]

All the points made above about the cinema itself (i.e. poorly-sited drink-holders, aircon way too high, poor sightlines) chime with those in my Archipelago review. Of course there's nothing to stop any of us offering Curzon unsolicited comments, but what a shame they didn't use the opportunity of these screenings to ask for feedback on the cinema itself. I'll just avoid it in future unless the screening is free and there's no alternative!

[ejwrank]

Oh yes I forgot to mention that the air con was on full blast in Curzon Millbank making it that much more
uncomfortable. As soon as I sat down and had that blasted rigid plastic drinks holder jammed in my knee I remembered the post (must have been yours Ms Thrifty) that had mentioned how poorly designed the screening room was. Won't be a venue I rush back to quickly either. And to think some people pa*d for the 'privilege' last night!

[a_person]

And to think some people pa*d for the 'privilege' last night!

lol.

[valda]

I'm dreading the summer and the fact that you have to bring a jacket to the cinema because of the aircon. sure its nice and refreshing when you first enter, but then you get colder and colder. I will start bringing my blankie with me

Anyway I saw this at Wimbledon, caught up with Tilly and kaybeelon before hand which was a nice surprise.
I didn't really gel with the film, the acting was solid enough but it didn't engage me, which it should of, give the subject matter. 6/10