Ok, so Joseph Gordon Levitt plays a hired assassin who kills other hired assassins sent back from the future when they are no longer useful to the criminal overlords of thirty years hence. Then Bruce Willis appears - Joseph Gordon Levitt's future self and part of his job as a looper is to kill his future self and what? WHAT? How does that even work?
As with any plot that involves time travel, a more than healthy dose of suspension of disbelief is required to fully enjoy the ride. Nonetheless, it is a highly enjoyable one that initially takes us on a tour of the dystopic, morally bankrupt Kansas City of 2044.
During this tour, we are presented with a rather depressing summary of the fractured, lonely existence of the average 'looper'. Joe (Levitt) is a drug addled wreck of a man blocking out the emptiness of his past with fast cars and call girls. He drifts between assignments, staying sober only long enough to perform his next execution.
His closest friend and colleague Seth (Paul Dano) shares these values until he is unfortunate enough to have to face up to 'closing his loop' - i.e. killing his future self. Upon arrival in the present, Seth's future self tells him of an even darker world in 2074 in which a criminal known as 'The Rainmaker' is bending humanity to his will and as a consequence Seth refuses to kill him. Unfortunately for Seth, letting his future self escape into the present carries a rather harsh penalty.
The following day, Bruce Willis' arrival signals that it is time for Joe to also 'close his loop'. Joe arrives prepared to deliver the fatal blow but his older self has made other plans and escapes. His reason for doing so quickly becomes apparent as he sets out to kill 'The Rainmaker' before he has a chance to grow up.
The older Joe's motives are not purely altruistic - he is also looking to preserve a future for Levitt that involves meeting the woman who will lift him out of his seedy existence. A chase ensues as the older Joe sets out to kill the three possible children who may be 'The Rainmaker', a consequence of which is that the younger Joe finds himself on a farm protecting one of these children.
This child is under the care of Sara (Emily Blunt), another victim of the supreme hedonistic culture of the city who has retreated from it to bring up her son. It soon becomes apparent that there is something different about this boy. Cid, played with tremendous energy by Pierce Gagnon, has an exceptional intellect and a precocious nature. He challenges many of Joe's long held beliefs about the world he lives in.
Sara and Cid are the only characters in the film who share any form of loving human relationship and it is interesting to note that this seems to separate them from the madness that abounds. The only other exception to this rule is the older Joe, whose selfish desire to return to his wife leads him to madness.
So, despite its brain fryingly complex subject matter, Looper has managed an interesting take on the importance of human relationships in an increasingly status driven society. It is not only a well constructed action film but a dystopic science fiction that ranks alongside the best in the genre.
Sunday, 30 September 2012
Sunday, 16 September 2012
'The Sweeney' dir. Nick Love
'Hold up, I haven't been an 'ard man in a gritty British action film in a couple of years,' I can imagine Ray Winstone saying on the set of his latest betting advert.
A few well placed calls later and here we have it. Let's face it, if they were ever going to remake 'The Sweeney' - a vaguely chauvenistic 70's TV police series with John Thaw and Dennis Waterman then Ray was always going to be the likeliest man to play the guv'na Jack Regan.
And the opening scenes are promising as Regan and his flying squad take out various armed gangs in a series of absurdly violent operations. Add to that a hard pressed commander Frank Haskins (Damian Lewis) being pushed by straight laced internal investigator Ivan Lewis (played with relish by Steven Mackintosh) and we have a recipe for a very respectable evening of entertainment.
Unfortunately, there are some elements of the plot that seem a little beyond belief such as the ongoing affair between Regan and Nancy (Hayley Attwell). Perhaps this is just a nagging doubt but it does seem that she could do a bit better than an alcoholic used up old cop in his late fifties.
Nor does it seem likely that she would be married to the aforementioned Ivan Lewis - surely the dullest police character ever created and strongly reminiscent of Dwayne T. Robinson from the original Die Hard film.
The rest of the flying squad are given little screen time with the exception of George Carter (Ben Drew) who is a converted teenage miscreant with a ridiculously expensive flat. Beyond the occasional meditation on how his new life is not so very different to his old one he is really not given that much to do.
That is, until the final act, when the plot slightly goes AWOL and Regan is put in a nasty situation by the straight laced internal investigator Ivan. At this point the usual message of these films kicks in 'he may not play by the rules but, by God, he gets results' and it plays out accordingly.
So, this ending was comforting in its familiarity but slightly frustrating for all that. If it had gone for something a little different - perhaps playing a little more strongly on the police corruption angle then it may have made a greater impact. Nonetheless, it was a solid Saturday night of entertainment and I am almost certain that I will be reviewing the sequel at some point in the not too distant future.
A few well placed calls later and here we have it. Let's face it, if they were ever going to remake 'The Sweeney' - a vaguely chauvenistic 70's TV police series with John Thaw and Dennis Waterman then Ray was always going to be the likeliest man to play the guv'na Jack Regan.
And the opening scenes are promising as Regan and his flying squad take out various armed gangs in a series of absurdly violent operations. Add to that a hard pressed commander Frank Haskins (Damian Lewis) being pushed by straight laced internal investigator Ivan Lewis (played with relish by Steven Mackintosh) and we have a recipe for a very respectable evening of entertainment.
Unfortunately, there are some elements of the plot that seem a little beyond belief such as the ongoing affair between Regan and Nancy (Hayley Attwell). Perhaps this is just a nagging doubt but it does seem that she could do a bit better than an alcoholic used up old cop in his late fifties.
Nor does it seem likely that she would be married to the aforementioned Ivan Lewis - surely the dullest police character ever created and strongly reminiscent of Dwayne T. Robinson from the original Die Hard film.
The rest of the flying squad are given little screen time with the exception of George Carter (Ben Drew) who is a converted teenage miscreant with a ridiculously expensive flat. Beyond the occasional meditation on how his new life is not so very different to his old one he is really not given that much to do.
That is, until the final act, when the plot slightly goes AWOL and Regan is put in a nasty situation by the straight laced internal investigator Ivan. At this point the usual message of these films kicks in 'he may not play by the rules but, by God, he gets results' and it plays out accordingly.
So, this ending was comforting in its familiarity but slightly frustrating for all that. If it had gone for something a little different - perhaps playing a little more strongly on the police corruption angle then it may have made a greater impact. Nonetheless, it was a solid Saturday night of entertainment and I am almost certain that I will be reviewing the sequel at some point in the not too distant future.
Thursday, 23 August 2012
'Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell' by Susanna Clarke
This weighty tome - coming in at just over 1000 pages is, needless to say, a bit of a slow burner. Unlike other recent tales of the fantastic, it does not rely on creating a new world or on political allegory to get its message across. It is instead set in a credible version of Napoleonic Britain, which has long since given up on its 'magicians' achieving anything useful against the threat across the English Channel.
That is until the arrival of Gilbert Norrell in London, a reclusive individual who believes that he is the only man with the right to practice magic on behalf of the British Government. When this unchallenged position is threatened by the appearance of a young man by the name of Jonathan Strange, Norrell, acting against his usual instincts, takes him on as an apprentice.
Strange proves to be a refreshing change to Norrell. He has a young wife and seems to fit in effortlessly with the graces of London Society. Eventually, he is invited to Spain to serve under the Duke of Wellington, where he succeeds in proving the value of his magic to an awkward and uncharitable commander.
It is at this point that the vast scope of the novel seems to catch up with it and, for around the last four hundred pages, it was exceptionally difficult to follow the journeys that these characters took. The body count rose with alarming rapidity as they were disposed of for reasons that did not seem well established.
Despite being well researched and having interesting elements to it, I could not help but feel that this novel would have benefitted greatly from fewer characters and a more stringent editor. Susanna Clarke is a talented writer but this was an exhausting read which left a slight sense of disappointment on its conclusion.
Well written but hard work.
That is until the arrival of Gilbert Norrell in London, a reclusive individual who believes that he is the only man with the right to practice magic on behalf of the British Government. When this unchallenged position is threatened by the appearance of a young man by the name of Jonathan Strange, Norrell, acting against his usual instincts, takes him on as an apprentice.
Strange proves to be a refreshing change to Norrell. He has a young wife and seems to fit in effortlessly with the graces of London Society. Eventually, he is invited to Spain to serve under the Duke of Wellington, where he succeeds in proving the value of his magic to an awkward and uncharitable commander.
It is at this point that the vast scope of the novel seems to catch up with it and, for around the last four hundred pages, it was exceptionally difficult to follow the journeys that these characters took. The body count rose with alarming rapidity as they were disposed of for reasons that did not seem well established.
Despite being well researched and having interesting elements to it, I could not help but feel that this novel would have benefitted greatly from fewer characters and a more stringent editor. Susanna Clarke is a talented writer but this was an exhausting read which left a slight sense of disappointment on its conclusion.
Well written but hard work.
Sunday, 29 April 2012
'Avengers Assemble' dir. Joss Whedon
It is not too difficult to imagine the reception Joss Whedon received when he pitched this film:-
Execs: Six of them, Joss?
Whedon: Yeah, six, why not?
Why not indeed? Well, given the seemingly limitless supply of superhero films, a more pressing question might be why?
Well, beyond the current trends of more is more and bigger is better and the financial motives that lie behind those sentiments, 'Avengers Assemble' does not do too bad a job of answering why it has been made. The first third of the film is somewhat confused as the each of the heroes get given perhaps one or two scenes in which to characterise themselves. It is unsurpising that as a consequence most of the film's best lines come from Robert Downey Jr's Ironman, the most interesting and well rounded of any of them.
The plot is, well, almost beyond comprehension, making occasional comments on renewable energy and allegories to a 'Terminator'-esque relationship with high technology. This technology unleashes Loki, played with glorious malevolence by Tom Hiddleston, who decides to unleash an army of aliens against Earth. His motive is a long-running brotherly disagreement with Thor (Chris Hemsworth), who when not hitting objects with a hammer, delivers grave speeches about what is coming next.
Trying to anticipate what's coming next are an organization called SHIELD, led by Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) who gets Captain America (Chris Evans), Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) and Ironman together for the coming fight. An unstable element is introduced to the group more for his brains than his potential brawn, Mark Ruffalo's The Hulk otherwise known as mild mannered scientist Bruce Banner. No prizes for guessing how long the 'mild mannered' section lasts.
Once the heroes get together, the inevitable massive fight scene shortly follows. Their version of the cloudbase from 'Captain Scarlet' finds itself in some serious difficulties, plagued as it is by Jeremy Renner's brainwashed Hawkeye. When Johannson makes the mistake of making The Hulk angry, defeat seems close. Fortunately, Captain America saves the day, a sequence stemming out of the conflict between Evans' simple heroism and Downey Jr's neat line in modern cynicism.
After a little more characterisation for Johannson and Renner and the inevitable 'we're having a crisis' scene in which Samuel L. Jackson gets angry, it is on to New York for the final confrontation. What follows is a fun if preposterous turn of events, the highlight of which is a duel between Loki and The Hulk. The ending, whilst equally absurd, fits into the spirit of the rest of the film neatly.
As with all ensemble hero films, this does seem to suffer from having too many main characters. Black Widow and Hawkeye seem particularly underdeveloped and some of the continuity seems a little inconsistent. How can a human character get a bloody nose in one sequence and be perfectly fine when thrown against a wall minutes later? 'Avengers Assemble' does not attempt to answer this question but perhaps it is best if it does not try. It is, after all, nothing more and nothing less than a fine example of popcorn cinema.
Execs: Six of them, Joss?
Whedon: Yeah, six, why not?
Why not indeed? Well, given the seemingly limitless supply of superhero films, a more pressing question might be why?
Well, beyond the current trends of more is more and bigger is better and the financial motives that lie behind those sentiments, 'Avengers Assemble' does not do too bad a job of answering why it has been made. The first third of the film is somewhat confused as the each of the heroes get given perhaps one or two scenes in which to characterise themselves. It is unsurpising that as a consequence most of the film's best lines come from Robert Downey Jr's Ironman, the most interesting and well rounded of any of them.
The plot is, well, almost beyond comprehension, making occasional comments on renewable energy and allegories to a 'Terminator'-esque relationship with high technology. This technology unleashes Loki, played with glorious malevolence by Tom Hiddleston, who decides to unleash an army of aliens against Earth. His motive is a long-running brotherly disagreement with Thor (Chris Hemsworth), who when not hitting objects with a hammer, delivers grave speeches about what is coming next.
Trying to anticipate what's coming next are an organization called SHIELD, led by Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) who gets Captain America (Chris Evans), Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) and Ironman together for the coming fight. An unstable element is introduced to the group more for his brains than his potential brawn, Mark Ruffalo's The Hulk otherwise known as mild mannered scientist Bruce Banner. No prizes for guessing how long the 'mild mannered' section lasts.
Once the heroes get together, the inevitable massive fight scene shortly follows. Their version of the cloudbase from 'Captain Scarlet' finds itself in some serious difficulties, plagued as it is by Jeremy Renner's brainwashed Hawkeye. When Johannson makes the mistake of making The Hulk angry, defeat seems close. Fortunately, Captain America saves the day, a sequence stemming out of the conflict between Evans' simple heroism and Downey Jr's neat line in modern cynicism.
After a little more characterisation for Johannson and Renner and the inevitable 'we're having a crisis' scene in which Samuel L. Jackson gets angry, it is on to New York for the final confrontation. What follows is a fun if preposterous turn of events, the highlight of which is a duel between Loki and The Hulk. The ending, whilst equally absurd, fits into the spirit of the rest of the film neatly.
As with all ensemble hero films, this does seem to suffer from having too many main characters. Black Widow and Hawkeye seem particularly underdeveloped and some of the continuity seems a little inconsistent. How can a human character get a bloody nose in one sequence and be perfectly fine when thrown against a wall minutes later? 'Avengers Assemble' does not attempt to answer this question but perhaps it is best if it does not try. It is, after all, nothing more and nothing less than a fine example of popcorn cinema.
Friday, 1 April 2011
'The Eagle' dir. Kevin Macdonald
This film works on the long held premise that the Roman Empire was almost entirely reliant on the Master-Slave relationship. It has a clear debt to Gladiator as well as more recent written fiction about Rome that tends to concentrate on this theme.
Channing Tatum's character Marcus Aquila starts the film as a man very much in command of his own destiny. He has chosen a posting in Britain, at the very edge of the Roman world. The reason for this is that he is attempting to restore his father's honour by trying to regain a golden eagle lost by the ninth legion in Scotland many years previously.
A severe injury shortly renders him incapable of completing this task with the cohort he commands. Instead, he is left to recover from his wounds away from the front line. The battle that leads to this injury is rendered in a close-up documentary style that is typical of the director Kevin Macdonald. There is a grim, almost visceral authenticity that runs through both this scene and the film as a whole. Every shield covered in muck and gore seems as close as if you were standing in front of it. Aquila's fate after this battle is to lose his command.
After his injury, he is sent to the care of his uncle (Donald Sutherland) who informs him that he has been forced into an honourable discharge. This reversal leaves Aquila without hope that he can regain the lost eagle. However, this hopelessness is short lived after he sees a brave performance from a Gladiator named Esca. At a moment of intense pressure, Aquila finds that he has a chance to save Esca's life. He does so and as a consequence Esca (Jamie Bell) is bound to serve him.
Unsurprisingly, this leads to Aquila rekindling his interest in finding the lost eagle as the two of them build a reluctant friendship. As they head north over the Scottish border, the relationship between the two becomes more blurred as Esca begins to enjoy the obvious advantages of being able to speak the native language.
Eventually, the tension this creates between them leads to their capture at the hands of some ruthless natives. It is at this point that the two leads really come into their own. Channing Tatum is an actor who has made some pretty awful films but in this he is well cast and very believable in this role. Likewise, Jamie Bell really lends a brooding, resentful presence to Esca.
Yet, perhaps their most intriguing encounter is with Mark Strong, who plays a former comrade of Aquila's father known as Guern. He speaks in a cod-American accent and delivers a line which almost sinks the film - 'No, you weren't there'. He was referring the battle at which the legion lost their eagle but it sounded as if it could belong in any 'Nam flick.
Despite this, his role in the film is an intriguing one as a man who had almost lost himself. Indeed, he shares this in common with Aquila, whose one aim leads him to repeated acts of violence that often seem to have no function. Given this level of violence, the certificate was really something of a surprise at a 12A but it certainly provides a couple of hours of classic, boys own adventure.
The film does have weak points such as Guern's slightly unreal motivations towards the finale but it is a story that reinforces the importance of honour and friendship. Well worth a watch, but not for the squeamish.
Channing Tatum's character Marcus Aquila starts the film as a man very much in command of his own destiny. He has chosen a posting in Britain, at the very edge of the Roman world. The reason for this is that he is attempting to restore his father's honour by trying to regain a golden eagle lost by the ninth legion in Scotland many years previously.
A severe injury shortly renders him incapable of completing this task with the cohort he commands. Instead, he is left to recover from his wounds away from the front line. The battle that leads to this injury is rendered in a close-up documentary style that is typical of the director Kevin Macdonald. There is a grim, almost visceral authenticity that runs through both this scene and the film as a whole. Every shield covered in muck and gore seems as close as if you were standing in front of it. Aquila's fate after this battle is to lose his command.
After his injury, he is sent to the care of his uncle (Donald Sutherland) who informs him that he has been forced into an honourable discharge. This reversal leaves Aquila without hope that he can regain the lost eagle. However, this hopelessness is short lived after he sees a brave performance from a Gladiator named Esca. At a moment of intense pressure, Aquila finds that he has a chance to save Esca's life. He does so and as a consequence Esca (Jamie Bell) is bound to serve him.
Unsurprisingly, this leads to Aquila rekindling his interest in finding the lost eagle as the two of them build a reluctant friendship. As they head north over the Scottish border, the relationship between the two becomes more blurred as Esca begins to enjoy the obvious advantages of being able to speak the native language.
Eventually, the tension this creates between them leads to their capture at the hands of some ruthless natives. It is at this point that the two leads really come into their own. Channing Tatum is an actor who has made some pretty awful films but in this he is well cast and very believable in this role. Likewise, Jamie Bell really lends a brooding, resentful presence to Esca.
Yet, perhaps their most intriguing encounter is with Mark Strong, who plays a former comrade of Aquila's father known as Guern. He speaks in a cod-American accent and delivers a line which almost sinks the film - 'No, you weren't there'. He was referring the battle at which the legion lost their eagle but it sounded as if it could belong in any 'Nam flick.
Despite this, his role in the film is an intriguing one as a man who had almost lost himself. Indeed, he shares this in common with Aquila, whose one aim leads him to repeated acts of violence that often seem to have no function. Given this level of violence, the certificate was really something of a surprise at a 12A but it certainly provides a couple of hours of classic, boys own adventure.
The film does have weak points such as Guern's slightly unreal motivations towards the finale but it is a story that reinforces the importance of honour and friendship. Well worth a watch, but not for the squeamish.
Thursday, 21 October 2010
'The girl who kicked the hornets' nest' by Stieg Larsson
One of the many reasons Stieg Larsson's books have captivated such a vast number of readers is the central character of the trilogy, Lisbeth Salander. She dominates this volume to an even greater extent than the previous two. The plot is a largely improbable conspiracy at the centre of the Swedish government which is complex beyond description.
Indeed, at many points throughout the book it seems as though so many Swedish names or terms are thrown out that it becomes difficult to follow. Nonetheless, Larsson's grasp of character and what makes humans tick is second to almost no other author. His dialogue is exceptional and even in a translated work tension is retained throughout.
As ever, we largely follow the intrepid reporter Mikael Blomqvist on his pursuit of the truth concerning Salander. Both of them shortly find themselves in mortal danger which persists to even greater degree than in the previous books. However, this time it is not just limited to them as everyone with any connection to them becomes a potential target.
That sense of peril is well done, it never seems that any of the central characters are safe or uninvolved. To an even greater extent than in the previous two books, Larsson has placed his characters in a web of lies that they struggle to escape from. Even the previously occasional character of Blomqvist's editor, Erika Berger, finds herself involved with the case. She is the victim of a particularly nasty hate campaign.
Despite the references to distinct places in Stockholm and Goteborg that will leave non-Swedes slightly dumbfounded, Larsson creates a distinct sense of place and time. At no point does it feel that the narrative cannot be followed. As with all the best thrillers, the place is something of an incidental feature when compared to the action. All the action sequences are well-rendered even if some of them are frankly unimaginable. Certainly, towards the end of the book, there are a few sections that feel a little over the top.
Nonetheless, this is an excellent read and the trilogy as a whole can be highly recommended. This is especially the case for anyone who has not read for a while or is in need of some diversion.
Indeed, at many points throughout the book it seems as though so many Swedish names or terms are thrown out that it becomes difficult to follow. Nonetheless, Larsson's grasp of character and what makes humans tick is second to almost no other author. His dialogue is exceptional and even in a translated work tension is retained throughout.
As ever, we largely follow the intrepid reporter Mikael Blomqvist on his pursuit of the truth concerning Salander. Both of them shortly find themselves in mortal danger which persists to even greater degree than in the previous books. However, this time it is not just limited to them as everyone with any connection to them becomes a potential target.
That sense of peril is well done, it never seems that any of the central characters are safe or uninvolved. To an even greater extent than in the previous two books, Larsson has placed his characters in a web of lies that they struggle to escape from. Even the previously occasional character of Blomqvist's editor, Erika Berger, finds herself involved with the case. She is the victim of a particularly nasty hate campaign.
Despite the references to distinct places in Stockholm and Goteborg that will leave non-Swedes slightly dumbfounded, Larsson creates a distinct sense of place and time. At no point does it feel that the narrative cannot be followed. As with all the best thrillers, the place is something of an incidental feature when compared to the action. All the action sequences are well-rendered even if some of them are frankly unimaginable. Certainly, towards the end of the book, there are a few sections that feel a little over the top.
Nonetheless, this is an excellent read and the trilogy as a whole can be highly recommended. This is especially the case for anyone who has not read for a while or is in need of some diversion.
Monday, 4 October 2010
'Harold Larwood' by Duncan Hamilton
It is a rare thing for a cricket player to be at the centre of a diplomatic crisis. It is rarer still for English cricket to produce a truly great fast bowler. Both statements can be truly said of Harold Larwood, the quickest of his age. He performed in an era before protective equipment, when there was a very real chance that Larwood could shatter bone and break skin with each delivery. He was said to induce terror amongst those going out to face him.
Yet, for all that great aggression on the field, Duncan Hamilton portrays a decent man who was shabbily treated by the the establishment off it. The great turning point of his life was the 'Bodyline' tour of Australia during 1932/33 when he bowled to an aggressive leg-side field. It was both his finest hour and his last appearance in an England cap. The ructions that this series created can still be felt today in the relationship between the two countries.
When compared to the tumultuous Pakistan tour that has just finished, the 1932/33 Ashes series was even more divisive with even greater consequences for its participants. Hamilton shows us how Larwood went from being a hero for the Marylebone Cricket Club (then administrators of the England team) to its principal villain as the Australian complaints became more vocal. The consequences stretched as far as central government, which demanded through its friends at Lords that Larwood be made to apologise.
In keeping with his modest background, the unpretentious Harold Larwood refused to do so, thus ending his international career. Hamilton shows us how this ultimately led to disillusion with the game, taking Larwood into a long period of exile from cricket. Yet, when reading the opening pages of the book, it seems difficult to believe that a young lad who lived for nothing else would decide to end his career so early.
His start at his county, Nottinghamshire, was only earned after a long spell of working in nearby mines. The determination to stay away from the pits is what led Larwood to practise bowling so intensely. It was clear early on to those that faced him that he was destined for England duty. He soon struck up a partnership with his friend Bill Voce, who joined him on the international stage.
After an inauspicious start, Larwood was worried that his career was over before it had begun. Yet, his captain with both Nottinghamshire and England, Arthur Carr, persuaded him that he was good enough. Gradually, his confidence grew to such a point that he scared batsmen (sometimes literally) to the point of immobility. After a narrow victory over the Australians in his first series, Larwood continued his international success over the next five seasons.
This period was also his greatest domestically as Nottinghamshire won the 1929 county championship. Larwood took hundreds of wickets at absurdely low averages of between 12 and 18. As he approached 1932, he was in the best form he had ever been in. Before the Orontes set sail to take him to Australia, Douglas Jardine, his new international captain called him to a meeting that would change the direction of his life.
Leg-theory or 'Bodyline' had been in widespread use in domestic tournaments during the early 1930's. It was a tactic that involved aiming a fast, short pitched ball at the batsman to induce a catching chance. Jardine proposed to his bowlers that they should use this tactic with the intention of disrupting the Australian batting. He also felt that one member of that line-up merited special attention, a man by the name of Donald Bradman.
To those of you less familiar with cricket, Donald Bradman is widely accepted as the greatest player to have ever held a bat. He was the principal danger to England's chances of success on the tour. Larwood's duels with Bradman became the stuff of legend as England, largely thanks to Larwood, won the series 4-1.
This victory came at a heavy cost. Larwood struck Bert Oldfield, the Australian wicket-keeper on the head as well as many other members of the team. Hamilton shows us how he had not intended to deliberately hurt them but this is not the way the Australian public interpreted it. They called for Larwood's head and as a result of the MCC's acquiescence, they got it.
Despite that bitter end to his career, Larwood is remembered universally as a truly magnificent bowler whose action is a thing of beauty to behold. It is a credit to Duncan Hamilton that he shows us the man behind the bowler. He reveals that Larwood was no thug or bully as some Australians have suggested but a kind man with a rich and varied life.
The book is best summed up by the quote it uses early on from the Australian leg-spinner Bill O'Reilly when talking about facing Larwood:
'He came steaming in and I moved right across behind my bat, held perfectly straight in defence of my centre stump. Just before he delivered the ball something hit the middle of my bat with such force that it was almost dashed from my hands. It was the ball.'
It is a fitting testament to one of the greatest bowlers to have graced the game. Just as this book is a fine account of his life.
Yet, for all that great aggression on the field, Duncan Hamilton portrays a decent man who was shabbily treated by the the establishment off it. The great turning point of his life was the 'Bodyline' tour of Australia during 1932/33 when he bowled to an aggressive leg-side field. It was both his finest hour and his last appearance in an England cap. The ructions that this series created can still be felt today in the relationship between the two countries.
When compared to the tumultuous Pakistan tour that has just finished, the 1932/33 Ashes series was even more divisive with even greater consequences for its participants. Hamilton shows us how Larwood went from being a hero for the Marylebone Cricket Club (then administrators of the England team) to its principal villain as the Australian complaints became more vocal. The consequences stretched as far as central government, which demanded through its friends at Lords that Larwood be made to apologise.
In keeping with his modest background, the unpretentious Harold Larwood refused to do so, thus ending his international career. Hamilton shows us how this ultimately led to disillusion with the game, taking Larwood into a long period of exile from cricket. Yet, when reading the opening pages of the book, it seems difficult to believe that a young lad who lived for nothing else would decide to end his career so early.
His start at his county, Nottinghamshire, was only earned after a long spell of working in nearby mines. The determination to stay away from the pits is what led Larwood to practise bowling so intensely. It was clear early on to those that faced him that he was destined for England duty. He soon struck up a partnership with his friend Bill Voce, who joined him on the international stage.
After an inauspicious start, Larwood was worried that his career was over before it had begun. Yet, his captain with both Nottinghamshire and England, Arthur Carr, persuaded him that he was good enough. Gradually, his confidence grew to such a point that he scared batsmen (sometimes literally) to the point of immobility. After a narrow victory over the Australians in his first series, Larwood continued his international success over the next five seasons.
This period was also his greatest domestically as Nottinghamshire won the 1929 county championship. Larwood took hundreds of wickets at absurdely low averages of between 12 and 18. As he approached 1932, he was in the best form he had ever been in. Before the Orontes set sail to take him to Australia, Douglas Jardine, his new international captain called him to a meeting that would change the direction of his life.
Leg-theory or 'Bodyline' had been in widespread use in domestic tournaments during the early 1930's. It was a tactic that involved aiming a fast, short pitched ball at the batsman to induce a catching chance. Jardine proposed to his bowlers that they should use this tactic with the intention of disrupting the Australian batting. He also felt that one member of that line-up merited special attention, a man by the name of Donald Bradman.
To those of you less familiar with cricket, Donald Bradman is widely accepted as the greatest player to have ever held a bat. He was the principal danger to England's chances of success on the tour. Larwood's duels with Bradman became the stuff of legend as England, largely thanks to Larwood, won the series 4-1.
This victory came at a heavy cost. Larwood struck Bert Oldfield, the Australian wicket-keeper on the head as well as many other members of the team. Hamilton shows us how he had not intended to deliberately hurt them but this is not the way the Australian public interpreted it. They called for Larwood's head and as a result of the MCC's acquiescence, they got it.
Despite that bitter end to his career, Larwood is remembered universally as a truly magnificent bowler whose action is a thing of beauty to behold. It is a credit to Duncan Hamilton that he shows us the man behind the bowler. He reveals that Larwood was no thug or bully as some Australians have suggested but a kind man with a rich and varied life.
The book is best summed up by the quote it uses early on from the Australian leg-spinner Bill O'Reilly when talking about facing Larwood:
'He came steaming in and I moved right across behind my bat, held perfectly straight in defence of my centre stump. Just before he delivered the ball something hit the middle of my bat with such force that it was almost dashed from my hands. It was the ball.'
It is a fitting testament to one of the greatest bowlers to have graced the game. Just as this book is a fine account of his life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)