The second half of our Videocast Nonsense.
Enjoy!
Tuesday, 10 January 2012
Friday, 6 January 2012
End of 2011 Videocast - Part 1
As some may know, I do a audio podcast named Cinematic Dramatic, which can be found on Geek Planet Online and Itunes. This year myself and co-host Iain Boulton have decided to bring out a Videocast of what we liked and disliked of the last year. This is Part One, which is of our individual picks from our respective top tens. Part two will feature the picks that appear on both of our lists. Forgive our faces, they are clearly much more acceptable on an audio podcast.
Saturday, 31 December 2011
THE YEAR THAT WAS 2011
At the end of last year I moaned about
people’s attitudes to remakes and sequels and unfortunately due to the
abundance of such films that flowed through this year, it seems that once again
I’m bitching about such things once
more. Sorry.
The ever excellent MAMO podcast made the
amusing point this year that all these people whining about remakes of foreign
films are talking about movies that have already been adapted for them. Getting
on your soapbox about the latest remake is one thing but the fact that they
haven’t realised that said foreign film has been adapted to make sense for them
in the way of subtitles anyway, helps make the argument moot.
It
seems that even the makers of the original features are now even above such
talk. To find out that director Tomas Alfredson thought that his reaction
towards American remake Let me in was childish, speaks volumes to a tinterweb
brigade who are quick to yell BOYCOTT and ORIGINAL MOVIES when the next
upcoming remake is announced but a quick to step in line when the next
book/comic/graphic novel to film adaptation launches. It hasn’t escaped me that
despite all this “Hollywood is so unoriginal” talk, the highest ranking film
based on an original idea (Bridesmaids) lies 12 in worldwide box office gross. Closer to home in the U.K. we see that yet
again despite some fine features making appearances and friends not only on
these shores but in the U.S, you’d be hard pressed to find the likes of Attack the Block making even a dent in the top U.K 30, let alone the top ten. This
makes the homegrown antics of The Inbetweeners Movie quite an achievement, whether
based on a T.V program or not.
The final entry of the Harry Potter series
speaks much of the cinematic landscape. Based on a book, brand awareness in
heaps, bankrolled by Warner Bros yet filmed here with British talent. Yes,
lavish praise was once again heaped on the wizard franchise by muggles. And while
I agree that such films like Potter and Bond are around and keep highly skilled
crew in jobs in our world famous studios. The amount of profit made by these
ventures don’t appear to putting as money into our fledging British film
industry as one would like. It does however help allow mediocre films like
Clash of the Titans sequels to get funded.
This brings me to the problematic area of
distribution in which our mainstream cinemas still don’t believe in a fair
fight. When I first worked in a cinema; I remember discovering that two major
studios owned it. Much may have changed since I’ve left but I’m sure that the
major studios still have the biggest stake in our cinemas and the ultimate decisions
in what get shown. I’m constantly frustrated that movies seem to only be slanted
towards an ignorant 15-24 male demographic whose only concerns are Robots
hitting each other but this is something one must grin and bear until I move
closer to London again and allowed to wallow in the glorious glow of the Curzon
Cinema in Soho. As a lover of cinema, I will still try and seek out smaller
gems when I can. The problem is of course, it’s most likely to be a home with
microwave popcorn. Away from cinema screens filled with noisy, iphoning,
dingbats.
Such talk explains why things don’t appear to
be changing. If people are waiting to watch certain types of cinema at home,
online or on blu-ray with massive screens then why would cinemas try and alter
the viewing choices? The major budget films are all about those first three
days (or more depending on those advanced screenings) in as many screens as
possible, and it seems to be working still (despite falling viewership) Smaller
films (particularly overseas markets) seem to be happy with the long game with
the knowledge that it could find the audience it desires on the smaller screen.
It’s all good asking for change, but even when the likes of Jonathan Rosenbaum
have decided to set up shop at home than the cinema then many must be asking
“what’s all the fuss about?”
With all this said I still watch as many
movies as I can. It’s easy to bemoan many aspects of modern viewing (and I do
at length), but the love of sitting in a dark room watching a movie still
bewitches me. My only ask is that film should be viewed more importantly, as an
art form and as a way we shape our culture. With the ability to capture motion
being so easy for us these days, we take for granted how powerful the medium
can be. Yes, entertainment does and will always be a factor when I pick up
something to watch but one of the things that makes warm is when a film as the
ability to teach, spark thought or debate, and of course move you. This year
has been one in which such aspects have made that mark.
My favourite ten of the year (as always in no
order):
Grubby crime cinema from Australia. More in line with
Greek Tragedy than Goodfellas. Michôd's feature debut is may have a low key
feel, but the tension is ratcheted to its highest. It’s opening scene hooked
me. It’s final moments left me on the ropes.
Melancholia is at times just as visually arresting as Von Trier's Antichrist, but is a far more precise being. Von Trier is far more accurate here and one of the reasons seems to be that the subject matter is closer to his heart. The dark clouds of depression loom large over both Antichrist and Melancholia but the latter shows a director whose far more in the mood to tackle (and even embrace) his demons then letting them run amok. Self absorption and pomp are still abound from the "best director in the world" but this is far more focused, far more at peace.
It slips from action to drama without difficulty, it
shrugs off its unoriginality and sketchy plot with well drawn out
themes, strong lead character
and visual flair. The music is immediate and kept me in the moment
and I adored the films quiet loud quiet rhythm. Hanna doesn't say
much different, but it has the ability to be more articulate when it's shouting
it's message from the hills.
Unrepentant to the end, provocative and just as relevant for now as it
is for the era it’s set in. Like it’s lead character it’s tough to watch at
times but compelling throughout.
Malick’s film is a celebration of life, a joy in contemplation of us
merely existing and how this fact alone can provide resonance in others. That
our simply being here can provide happiness to those we touch. This simple
and yet deeply profound and affecting ideal is why I loved the film.
I thought it would be the weakest blockbuster of the year. Turns out was
the most exhilarating one and one of the only summer flicks that actually
wanted to tell a story. The film also featured one of the most fist pumping,
barnstorming set pieces of the year, set on the San Francisco Bridge.
If I
wanted to act clever; when talking about Drive, I'd say something along the
lines of: A brutal symphony, tinged with flecks of 80's nostalgia
and machismo. But I’m better off in stating that Drive is a highly entertaining, stylish piece of trash. A classically tragic anti-hero, a soundtrack that once
heard you can’t shake off and a beautifully shot L.A. I was in heaven watching
this.
Alfredson's film works so well because it take time over showing how
deeply isolated the spy game is. Close relationships are broken, belittled
and bargained for, information is called gold dust for good
reason and moral compasses are as murky as the films cold, drab colour scheme
that Alfredson utilises to enhance the tone of the film. The film
is literally as grey as the the shades these characters dwell in.
The GuardIn yet another year in which I found most of the Hollywood comedies
waning somewhat, it’s was wonderful to stumble upon this low-fi Irish indie
gem. A film I hope find its audience on DVD like it’s kissing cousin In Burges.
Ramsay’s direction as never been so precise, while Swinton simply
dominates the screen in this psychological battle of wits. The films draining
central relationship (with Ezar Miller giving a particularly
malicious performance) manages to keep it’s ambiguity and tension to the end.
Honourable Mentions: Beats, Rhymes & Life:The Travels Of A Tribe Called Quest, Archipelago, Senna,
Essential Killing, Red State, Warrior, Kill List
Other
Film highlights: Meeting directors Duncan Jones (Moon, Source Code) and Joe Cornish
(Attack the Block). The biggest thing for me this year however was meeting one of my idols; Mark Kermode, in Oxford and talking to him about The Ninth Configuration,
Thelma Schoonmaker and Shutter Island
Saturday, 24 December 2011
Review: Crazy, Stupid, Love
Year: 2011
Director: Glenn Ficarra, John Requa
Screenplay: Dan Fogelman
Starring: Steve Carell, Ryan Gosling, Emma Stone, Julianne Moore
Synopsis is here
It's a film that has date movie stamped all over it and I'm sure most twenty something males wouldn't even bother catching this flick, even if they are die hard Carell fans. But whether I'm right or wrong with my gross generalisation I have to say that Crazy, Stupid Love is a very warm and fun loving feature that's enjoyable because it feels like the makers of the movie actually watch similar movies and tried to find out what works and what doesn't.
I'm not surprised that as a rom-com it works, as directors Glenn Ficarra and John Requa have tried their hand at such endeavours before. Their début feature; I love you Phillip Morris was a film I wasn't completely in love with, but had a decent core relationship at it's core. Crazy, Stupid, Love is equally as smart with it's heart and does well to show these characters as flawed, yet relatable. Where I found Phillip Morris to be pretty bland in terms of how the story plays out, Crazy, Stupid, Love takes a well known track but does well to change the scenery. Where I predicted the end of Phillip Morris from a mile off, with this I still had a good time wondering where these people where going to take me.
It helps that the film spends a fair amount of time with most of it's characters and gives them a certain amount of grounding. As the film switches and swoops between characters with sub-plots at times interconnecting and colliding, we never feel too short changed about someone else, even when the films twists are at their most convoluted. It's unfortunate that twice in the movie however, we get two sequences involving Emma Stone and Julianne Moore that sat awkwardly to me for all the wrong reasons. I won't lie and say that part of this is possibly because I'm a slightly selfish twenty something male who doesn't believe that certain characters honesty at that point shouldn't have amounted to the reactions given. In fact both felt like a screenplay bait and switch in order to forcibly manipulate character affections to the audience. The scene with Stone is particularly cumbersome as the other character involved isn't written as well as he could have been.
However the characters (that matter) are not only well constructed, but also well cast. Carell whom I feel has had a patchy film career, carries the film well and his relationship with Julienne Moore is one you can get behind. You could say Moore is slumming it here considering some of the high class work she is usually known for (I always feel more people have to see Far from Heaven), but she is more than effective here. The film does well to try and make sure that you don't hate either character, although you may finding yourself being less than subjective (very dependant on what I mentioned in the above paragraph). Emma Stone once again shows how much of a likable and charming presence she is one screen while Gosling has a lot of fun as this Hitch-lite character who goes though a slighter more predictable arc than everyone else but still manages to hold his own against Carell at the best of times. The banter between the two (and a great Marisa Tomei in support) bring about the best comic moments.
It is also worth noting that Crazy, Stupid, Love is a film that looks as sharp as one of RyGos' suits. Something which you don't expect from many rom-coms is the filmmakers to really take note at what your taking in visually. The film's not has simple but effective visual motifs to illustrate the distance between characters but it also has a rich colour palette and uses soft focus in a wonderfully dreamy way. Strangely it's use of such a technique, particularly in relation to the sub-plot it appears with, reminds me of a John Hughes feature. I don't even think Hughes ever even used such elements, but the strange mix of the cinematography, the "normal" characters, and the good natured feel of it all for whatever reason invoked such memories.
Much like Extract; Crazy, Stupid, Love works well as a film about communication (or lack there of) and also reminds us that relationships are about not only utilising said communication with the other person, but also allowing ones self to be open to conversation. Simple scenes such as Gosling and Stone staying up all night talking, or the small heartfelt moment involving Carell and Moore outside their sons classroom during parents night are the type of scenes that can sink or swim romantic comedies (some don't even bother with such moments.) but when used well, they make the difference between a screenplay going though the motions, and something worthwhile. Crazy, Stupid, Love feels like a film that spent time revising what went well before to make sure it doesn't get pulled up for lack of interest. Because of this, I invested interest.
Director: Glenn Ficarra, John Requa
Screenplay: Dan Fogelman
Starring: Steve Carell, Ryan Gosling, Emma Stone, Julianne Moore
Synopsis is here
It's a film that has date movie stamped all over it and I'm sure most twenty something males wouldn't even bother catching this flick, even if they are die hard Carell fans. But whether I'm right or wrong with my gross generalisation I have to say that Crazy, Stupid Love is a very warm and fun loving feature that's enjoyable because it feels like the makers of the movie actually watch similar movies and tried to find out what works and what doesn't.
I'm not surprised that as a rom-com it works, as directors Glenn Ficarra and John Requa have tried their hand at such endeavours before. Their début feature; I love you Phillip Morris was a film I wasn't completely in love with, but had a decent core relationship at it's core. Crazy, Stupid, Love is equally as smart with it's heart and does well to show these characters as flawed, yet relatable. Where I found Phillip Morris to be pretty bland in terms of how the story plays out, Crazy, Stupid, Love takes a well known track but does well to change the scenery. Where I predicted the end of Phillip Morris from a mile off, with this I still had a good time wondering where these people where going to take me.
It helps that the film spends a fair amount of time with most of it's characters and gives them a certain amount of grounding. As the film switches and swoops between characters with sub-plots at times interconnecting and colliding, we never feel too short changed about someone else, even when the films twists are at their most convoluted. It's unfortunate that twice in the movie however, we get two sequences involving Emma Stone and Julianne Moore that sat awkwardly to me for all the wrong reasons. I won't lie and say that part of this is possibly because I'm a slightly selfish twenty something male who doesn't believe that certain characters honesty at that point shouldn't have amounted to the reactions given. In fact both felt like a screenplay bait and switch in order to forcibly manipulate character affections to the audience. The scene with Stone is particularly cumbersome as the other character involved isn't written as well as he could have been.
However the characters (that matter) are not only well constructed, but also well cast. Carell whom I feel has had a patchy film career, carries the film well and his relationship with Julienne Moore is one you can get behind. You could say Moore is slumming it here considering some of the high class work she is usually known for (I always feel more people have to see Far from Heaven), but she is more than effective here. The film does well to try and make sure that you don't hate either character, although you may finding yourself being less than subjective (very dependant on what I mentioned in the above paragraph). Emma Stone once again shows how much of a likable and charming presence she is one screen while Gosling has a lot of fun as this Hitch-lite character who goes though a slighter more predictable arc than everyone else but still manages to hold his own against Carell at the best of times. The banter between the two (and a great Marisa Tomei in support) bring about the best comic moments.
It is also worth noting that Crazy, Stupid, Love is a film that looks as sharp as one of RyGos' suits. Something which you don't expect from many rom-coms is the filmmakers to really take note at what your taking in visually. The film's not has simple but effective visual motifs to illustrate the distance between characters but it also has a rich colour palette and uses soft focus in a wonderfully dreamy way. Strangely it's use of such a technique, particularly in relation to the sub-plot it appears with, reminds me of a John Hughes feature. I don't even think Hughes ever even used such elements, but the strange mix of the cinematography, the "normal" characters, and the good natured feel of it all for whatever reason invoked such memories.
Much like Extract; Crazy, Stupid, Love works well as a film about communication (or lack there of) and also reminds us that relationships are about not only utilising said communication with the other person, but also allowing ones self to be open to conversation. Simple scenes such as Gosling and Stone staying up all night talking, or the small heartfelt moment involving Carell and Moore outside their sons classroom during parents night are the type of scenes that can sink or swim romantic comedies (some don't even bother with such moments.) but when used well, they make the difference between a screenplay going though the motions, and something worthwhile. Crazy, Stupid, Love feels like a film that spent time revising what went well before to make sure it doesn't get pulled up for lack of interest. Because of this, I invested interest.
Thursday, 22 December 2011
Review: Bad Teacher
Year: 2011
Director: Jake Kasdan
Screenplay: Gene Stupnitsky, Lee Eisenberg
Starring: Cameron Diaz, Justin Timberlake, Jason Segal, Lucy Punch
Synopsis is here
I'm sure that there's a few people, who drop by this site, and read my negative reviews on comedies and probably think I have a humoroscopy. My last review on the quite lacklustre Horrible Bosses will probably have way more people disagreeing than agreeing with me but in the blogosphere it's expected. I won't be surprised that the same people who rated Horrible Bosses a high ranking 7.1 (as I write this) on the IMDB, took offence at the Cameron Diaz vehicle Bad Teacher and gave it the 5.7 it has to settle with.
After watching the two pretty much back to back, I've gotta say that at least Bad Teacher doesn't pull it's punches. The subject matter may not be as dark but the subversiveness is there. I laughed and tittered as Diaz revelled in a role she loved playing. I will not try and defend the fact the film is not one note, but there is enough in the performances (particularly Lucy Punch and Justin Timberlake) to keep me watching. The film has just enough brazen energy to keep things ticking.
Most of the energy comes from Diaz who comes across as an evil Dewey Finn. I liked her timing; as I have in the past, and there are small moments throughout the film involving her character I just enjoyed throughout. At one point we see that her also unsavoury flatmate would rather go out elsewhere than sit in and get "shitfaced" with her. The films car wash set piece is something one could see a mile off but still brings a silly giggle. It all seems to be down with how much you dig Diaz in the role. I've seen actresses that could perhaps do more, I know a ton that could do a lot less. However, Diaz did enough to make me want to see what will happen next in the next scene. I liked her interaction with the kids, as well as her drab banter with Jason Segal.
I guess Bad Teacher got me due to low expectations. Maybe I should watch films so late at night. Maybe I should have watched it separately from Horrible Bosses The arcs are predictable but they function well enough for say, people looking for a throwaway 90 minutes pizza movie. It's mean, but I saw a glint of the characters redemption early enough in the film to plough on ahead. It's a feminist nightmare but in all honesty, unlike some other movies, its clearly in jest and winking at the camera. I can't lie, I didn't think it was as bad as many others said. Maybe I did have a humoroscopy.
Director: Jake Kasdan
Screenplay: Gene Stupnitsky, Lee Eisenberg
Starring: Cameron Diaz, Justin Timberlake, Jason Segal, Lucy Punch
Synopsis is here
I'm sure that there's a few people, who drop by this site, and read my negative reviews on comedies and probably think I have a humoroscopy. My last review on the quite lacklustre Horrible Bosses will probably have way more people disagreeing than agreeing with me but in the blogosphere it's expected. I won't be surprised that the same people who rated Horrible Bosses a high ranking 7.1 (as I write this) on the IMDB, took offence at the Cameron Diaz vehicle Bad Teacher and gave it the 5.7 it has to settle with.
After watching the two pretty much back to back, I've gotta say that at least Bad Teacher doesn't pull it's punches. The subject matter may not be as dark but the subversiveness is there. I laughed and tittered as Diaz revelled in a role she loved playing. I will not try and defend the fact the film is not one note, but there is enough in the performances (particularly Lucy Punch and Justin Timberlake) to keep me watching. The film has just enough brazen energy to keep things ticking.
Most of the energy comes from Diaz who comes across as an evil Dewey Finn. I liked her timing; as I have in the past, and there are small moments throughout the film involving her character I just enjoyed throughout. At one point we see that her also unsavoury flatmate would rather go out elsewhere than sit in and get "shitfaced" with her. The films car wash set piece is something one could see a mile off but still brings a silly giggle. It all seems to be down with how much you dig Diaz in the role. I've seen actresses that could perhaps do more, I know a ton that could do a lot less. However, Diaz did enough to make me want to see what will happen next in the next scene. I liked her interaction with the kids, as well as her drab banter with Jason Segal.
I guess Bad Teacher got me due to low expectations. Maybe I should watch films so late at night. Maybe I should have watched it separately from Horrible Bosses The arcs are predictable but they function well enough for say, people looking for a throwaway 90 minutes pizza movie. It's mean, but I saw a glint of the characters redemption early enough in the film to plough on ahead. It's a feminist nightmare but in all honesty, unlike some other movies, its clearly in jest and winking at the camera. I can't lie, I didn't think it was as bad as many others said. Maybe I did have a humoroscopy.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)