Review: A Field in England

Year: 2013

Director: Ben Wheatley

Screenplay: Amy Jump

Starring:  Reece Shearsmith, Michael Smiley, Julian Barratt, Peter Ferdinando, Richard Glover, Ryan Pope

Synopsis is here

Ben Wheatley is a British director I really admire. A confident filmmaker who enjoys bending genres and challenging the typical ideals that British film often stumbles into. A Field in England; his fourth feature was one of the 2013’s entries I had a large investment in, purely based on the strength of his previous works. Even the idea behind it had me hooked. A black and white, psychedelic nightmare set during the 17^th Century is the type of English period drama I’ll happily get behind (do I look like I watch Downton?).

Much of A Field in England’s buzz stemmed more from its multi-platform release structure. The films makers decided upon releasing the film not only in cinemas, but on video on demand and DVD all on the same day. An idea that we’re slowly seeing more of (albeit in alternative forms: see Sodenbergh’s Bubble as an example) but never to this extent with a U.K release.  Questions were raised on whether this had to do with the niche aspect of the film, or if the film industry can really spark a trend towards such releases. Particularly as many have become more drawn to the idea of home viewing since the quality of their film going experience has been on the decline.  

I viewed the film coming back from work; I popped into my local supermarket and gained some credit on the stores very popular point system. For me it was easier for me to view it this way as the cinemas just due to time and travel. I love going to the cinema but I see the benefits.

However, A Field in England’s release structure seems more to be about casting its range as far as possible due to film’s obtrusiveness than starting a trend. The film’s black and white aesthetic is not the only thing that will put more casual viewers off. A Field in England clearly shows maturation of craft and boldness which British cinema needs, but at the expense of losing the connection carefully built from previous films.

The film feels reminiscent of the works of Ingmar Bergman, as well as the likes of Blood on Satan’s Claw (1970) and Witchfinder’s General (1968). The look of Michael Smiley’s O’Neill has shades of Vincent Price’s Matthew Hopkins written all over it. While the unsettling imagery of characters bound by thick rope against their will, is deeply rooted in folk horror. A sense of dread begins to form within the film. Something that the British horror of the 70’s and Wheatley’s own Kill List were much quicker at bring about. The first act often feels more of an exercise of form, than anything else. There is a sense of irony throughout the film as it uses its period setting and cast to cut into very seemingly modern question class and male bonding but none of it feels truly substantial, although Amy Jump does not get enough credit for an often witty script with some wry exchanges placed within it.

Some nice moments are scattered throughout (the tableau style poses, Shearsmith’s phenomenal body language) while more of the outlandish visions begin to seep during the second half with a more unsettling mood coming with it. Yet it all seems a tad too late. The sense of lost futility these men face can be felt by the time the film steps up a gear, but nothing hits as hard as the wedding sequence with Witchfinder General, in which the unfortunate couple of the piece make their own vows within a vandalised church, highlighting the conservative conflict that lies within the folk horror movement (see also The Wicker Man).

So I held my breath embraced the fear and let the Devil in and yet I came out relatively unscathed. Some of A Field in England still tickles me, and there’s good chance I’ll let more of it consume me on a second viewing. I'm not sure however, on whether this is because I brought it on DVD or not.

Review: Pacific Rim

Year: 2013

Director: Guillermo del Toro 

Screenplay: Travis Beacham, Guillermo del Toro 

Starring: Charlie Hunnam, Idris Elba, Rinko Kikuchi, Charlie Day

Synopsis is here:

For me Pacific Rim works because its director,Guillermo del Toro, knows how to economise storytelling. The film rattles along at great speed, but we never lose sight of anything. We feel more to be done to fill in the gaps, and yet throughout, the dynamics between characters are solid, the set pieces never feel extraneous (in fact the detail is often gorgeous) and the absurd story still manages to stay intact. Tropes and iffy dialogue are a plenty, yet the execution of it all side-swipes such issues like an elbow rocket.

For a film that is effectively Robots (Jaegers) smashing the scales off Monsters (Kaiju) it sweats out reference out of every orifice. Anime fans may mention Evangelion, Sci-fi fans can spy Godzilla. Gamers could smile at the Shadow of the Colossus feel, while guys like me may very well find themselves transported back when they first watched (and fell in love with) Independence Day (aged 12). The wealth of pop culture that seeps through scene after scene I found astonishing.

But its how all these references are stitched together which I found so appealing. The template is telling. Yet the beauty of the visuals, the spunk and energy of the performances and the boisterous thuds and clunks of mecha on flesh held my interest. Del Toro’s strength here is in taking a platter of well known aspects and rearranging them to feel fun again. The action loses the hyper active editing; we can see what’s happening. The length of the film is much shorter than some of the more hyped movies released besides it. It simply says what it needs to and doesn’t push for time to give the pretence of “epic” storytelling. The film feels big on its own regard, because of the films eye meltingly gorgeous design.

But while I found the look of the film often breath-taking (it ranks with Avatar for me as some of the best CGI), the actors that helped me suck up some air and kept me fighting the good fight. Charlie Hunnam gives an earnest display as Relight Beckett. Idris Elba channels Richard Crenna in First Blood and chomps at scenery.  Rinko Kikuchi bypasses some of the issues that have kept some of the other female characters from being anything interesting (thank god for the screenplay giving a damn). Meanwhile Charlie Day’s performance is not only welcomed by the fact that I’ve been binging on It’s always Sunny in Philadelphia, but by giving a performance that strangely reminds me of Rick Morris in Ghostbusters. That can only be a pleasant thing.

But Pacific Rim is full of such pleasant things and I don’t need my blockbusters to reinvent wheels when released (say that three times). But I do want that sense of fun that can be found. Pacific Rim doesn’t feature the comic book anxieties and origin stories that have almost become a mainstay during the summer period. It also doesn’t rely on name brand nostalgia to make an appearance of being decent. There’s none of the grubby “humour” that litters the likes of Transformers and thank goodness. Del Toro’s ability to see his blockbuster ideas through the prism of a small kid is important here. Pacific Rim manages to capture some of that imaginative feeling before cynicism set in. All Transformers seemed willing to give you is Megan Fox giving you a blank stare and a humping Robot.

Podcast: Cinematic Dramatic 5x03 - Chap of Steel

The Dramatics finally take to the sky with Superman in Man of Steel, find out how bad World War Z could possibly be and debate aftershave adverts. Don't ask why. But stay after the end for more Man of Steel discussions (or frustrations).



via GeekPlanetOnline: Cinematic Dramatic http://www.geekplanetonline.com/hosting/originals/dramatic/?p=episode&name=2013-07-10_cinematic_dramatic_5x03__chap_of_steel.mp3 Unfortunately, you will have to copy and paste the link to listen or use the handy links on the side!

Review: The East

Year: 2013

Director:  Zal Batmanglij

Screenplay: Brit Marling

Starring: Brit Marling, Patricia Clarkson, Ellen Page, Alexander Skarsgard

Synopsis is here:

A plethora of movies appeared over this weekend; with many either enjoyed the sunshine, the sport or went to one of the more major players. I found myself instead, slinking away to catch the one Friday performance of “small-time” thriller; The East, playing at my local Cineplex. This eco-thriller is the latest project from the combination of writer/actress Brit Marling and director Zal Batmanglij and it shows a distinct maturity from their last feature The Sound of my Voice.

Where The Sound of My Voice, only really grasped me with Marlings sensual performance, The East is a little stronger with its secondary character’s dynamics. With Marling as lead and stronger actors such as the likes of Ellen Page and Alexander Skarsgard; the conflicts despite their slightness, still strike harder than the scenes that took place in Batmanglij’s previous cult thriller. In fact here, while not perfect, the film indeed feels more rounded.  

Much like The Sound of My voice, The East deals with another individual going undercover to spy on a marginalised societal group, only to find themselves slowly softening to the plight. Marling may not give Donnie Brasco nightmares but as the undercover operative set in; I admired her Clarice Starling-lite resourcefulness. Marling’s range is impressive, with her straight-laced depiction of Sarah Moss being a 180 from the enigmatic Maggie from when we saw her previously. However she has stronger performances surrounding her here, that she can take from, even though the characters may not be as developed as one may like.

The East is much about the journey than the characters. Its politics important, yet idealistic. The female characters in it are motivated by their own plights than by male attraction.  Batmanglij and Marling are good at capturing the small details. As well as the cast clean up for their “jams” there are lived in moments feel quite true, even when things around them may not.  People have their Airport books, but The East is an airplane movie; doing enough to get you through an uninteresting or tough flight and give you and whoever you’re sitting next to a throwaway apple amount of food for thought. 

Review: I Give It a Year

Year: 2013

Director: Dan Mazer

Screenplay: Dan Mazer

Starring: Rafe Spall, Stephen Merchant, Rose Byrne, Anna Farris, Simon Baker

Synopsis is here

Within fifteen minutes of screentime; the romantic comedy I give it a year had shown its hand.  The worst thing is that it only took 2 shots for the movies narrative to fall into place. Guessing the plot so easily doesn't make me a genius. With the amount of movies most of us watch, we all know the narrative beats subconsciously. However the freshness is always in the way a director arranges his scenes and moments that will disarms us. A shot that runs a bit too long could signify a moment of perfect pitch, or give the game away. Before the end of the first act, I knew that the third would lose its fizzle.

The film doesn’t rest on its laurels. As perfunctory as things occur, the film’s climax gives us a nice spin on a romantic comedy convention that even the most well versed fans may be slightly tired of. The cast give it their all, with the likes of Stephen Merchant and Rafe Spall bring a bit of charm to their well worn archetypes. Rose Byrne does exceedingly well in playing a portraying a character I never wanted to see happy, while Anna Faris becomes near unrecognisable as the slightly drippy U.S friend who decided to go away because...well I shouldn’t say more. Not that I need to, Dan Mazer’s screenplay and direction has humorous moments, but never really steps up to hit the home run need to be anything more than a late night rental.

I don't expect to go into rom-coms expecting the filmmakers to reinvent the wheel. There is a reason why we watch these things and I give it a year does ok with most of them, I guess. But when you’re more interested in the geographical anomalies that occur in the films London Soho setting. Then clearly there's a disconnect.

My girlfriend who brought the film round, reprimanded me as I guessed correctly which way the film was heading. "Why can't you just watch it" she exclaimed. She's right, but it’s not my fault. She claims the film is underrated, I felt it was undercooked. Go figure.