RETURN TO MAIN SITE

Archive for the ‘Reviews’ Category

I Love Audiences.

Monday, February 8th, 2010

So on Friday I was in an actual cinema with an actual audience of other people. It was the late afternoon and we were an odd bunch but never the less an interesting cross section of the ticket buying public and this trailer was one of the many to crash off the screen at us…

And with perfect timing, just as it comes to the quiet bit at the end, the unnervingly loud voices of two middle-aged women broke through the theatrical gloom:

“Oh that’s that book isn’t it? Have you read it?”
“No. I started it but in the end I couldn’t be bothered.”

Coming so balloon burstingly soon after the bombast of the trailer with its heaviest of heavy bread voice overs, this brief conversation gave me an oddly giddy sensation of pure joy. Though actually I think I was just reacting against the increasingly naggy pre-movie sequence of commercials and trailers.

Preparing to watch a film in the cinema used to be a relatively painless process of being sold at, something that generally acted as a helpful way of tuning out reality in preparation for the movie. Like milling around in the departure lounge before a flight, the ads and trailers were at worst bland but at best felt like the start of a holiday, the commonplace commercialism made strangely exotic.

However, rather like trying to get onboard an aeroplane, the lead up to a film is now bogged down with dire warnings and security checks. I was ordered three times to turn off my mobile – once by Nanny McPhee and once by yet another iteration of the Orange advert, plumbing new depths of tedium in what seems to have strayed even from their grim determination to kill a once funny joke and now seems to be a one brand campaign to make me pull out my own teeth in bitter irritation.

I was then given a brief, uplifting lecture on how watching a film anywhere other than a cinema was a rubbish thing that only an idiot would do. It was then further pointed out to me that this particular cinema chain was probably the best and that, in case I hadn’t noticed, going to the cinema was, by the way, the best thing I could ever do and much better than watching stinky old tv.

I was warned that if I was found to filming this movie I’d be fined or jailed or both (and please would I turn off my damn phone so I don’t use it for this purpose) and then to cap it all, someone actually came on and begged for the lives and jobs of the entire British Film Industry, like we’re all inmates in asylum and these are the baskets we’ve spent the past month weaving. As I left I half expected to stumble over Tim Bevan slumped in the doorway rattling coins in a cup.

As you can imagine I’m a fan of the cinema. I like going. I like watching films with other people. Hell – I was even in this movie on my own because I enjoy the experience so much I have no shame or dignity. But rather than celebrating Cinema, these ads feel like they’re all telling me off. As if Cinema were a grumpy wife furious with me because I’d spent all my time down the pub with my mates the laptop and iTunes. “Where the hell have you been?” She shouts, angrily slamming the door much louder and in 3D. “And the least you could do is turn your bloody phone off now you’re here!”

Firstly what is the point of advertising the concept of cinema to people who have already paid to come and sit in a cinema? It’s like buying a pint and having the barman shout in your ear as your drink it “Wow – a pint of beer, have you forgotten how good a pint of beer tastes? I hope you’re not one of those idiots who sit at home drinking tea and then having to urinate in a normal household toilet. Why are you doing that when you could be sat here on this stool like you are doing drinking beer exactly like you are doing and then you can go and piss next to a whole load of other people who understand the great taste of actual beer in a pub! Wow, I bet you wish you were drinking beer in this pub right now just like you are.”

But actually what annoys me is the idea that we have to “thank everyone who helps make this possible” (other than by paying them a wage) tacitly creates the idea that cinema is basically already dying and needs to be protected. Worse these adverts perpetuate the myth that cinema is merely “a great experience”, as if all it offers is spectacle and 3D specs. Sure a cinema can deliver the kinds of bangs and crashes that only a lunatic would wish to have access to in their own home but that’s a pretty hollow trick. If that really is all the reason for watching a film in a theatre then they might as well turn the lot of them into bingo halls right away.

After all the begging and lecturing was over I watched “Up In The Air” a well crafted and compassionate film that is absolutely at its best when dealing with the minutiae of American corporate life. I can’t believe I’m even bothering to write this down but the obvious fact is that on the big screen the tiny takes on a power and importance that it lacks when watched on your phone. George Clooney – and even more so Vera Farmiga – build their performances around tiny delicious details and half glances that help to raise this above some pretty obvious stuff about the importance of family life.

You don’t need 3D glasses to see it and you probably don’t need to see it in a cinema – but if you do you will appreciate it more and find it easier to enjoy it. You don’t need to beg for cinema – cinema rocks. And you shouldn’t beg for it either because it just makes people question why you’re bothering. Like selling a film by saying the book it’s based on is “an international publishing phenomenon” when everyone can see it’s just another airport novel…

Good Film Blog.

Saturday, September 26th, 2009

In case my irregular ramblings don’t sate your appetite, something more considered and cinephile can be found at http://matineeidle.wordpress.com/

Death To The Tinman

Friday, September 25th, 2009

My friend the wonderful Claire Wilson pointed me towards this film and a more intoxicating 12 minutes of Americana romance you’ll be hard pushed to find. Watch it…


Watch Death to the Tinman in Entertainment  |  View More Free Videos Online at Veoh.com

Please Fasten Your Seat Belts And Bite Down Hard On The Leather Strap Provided.

Tuesday, September 1st, 2009

I have recently returned from Japan. Flight is a pleasure only for the unimaginative or those who actively enjoy thinking about their own messy death. I am neither of those but I coped with my 22 hours in the air by watching all the films that I had previously either missed or avoided that were offered by the in-flight entertainment system. This strategy had the twin benefits of either distracting me from the prospect of plunging screaming to my death against the Russian mountains thousands of feet below me, or enabling me to see this nightmarish end to my life as at least preferable to spending more time with Vin Diesel.

The real high point was “The Departed”, a cracking thriller which is only a couple of shades overblown and only a few twists too convoluted. Though I did also surprise myself by enjoying the first half of “Star Trek”. Until I realised that the battering space battles only felt quite so bone shakingly realistic and engaging because we’d hit some heavy turbulence and everything really was rattling. In the end “Star Trek” lost my sympathy for having the sheer gaul of ending with Leonard Nimoy doing the famous original voice over… you cannot give me a remake of a forty year-old tv series and claim to be “boldly going where no man has gone before”. Clearly JJ Abrahams is not going where no man has gone before, he is very obviously retreading ground that is now so well worn as to be a positive traffic hazard. In fact his task with “Star Trek” seems to be nothing bolder than to repave the old ground to make it a bit easier for everyone to keep using. This film is motorway maintenance.

Which at least is a blandly constructive job, unlike “X-Men: Origins – Wolverine”, a film so numbingly pointless and destructive of whatever value there might have been left in the X-Men franchise that it makes Disney’s recent purchase of Marvel look like a crazily bad move. Obviously I expected it to be just one long computer simulated fight sequence, stuck on a plane that’s sort of what I wanted. But cinema is only full of violence because violence is inherently dramatic. When men fight there is an implicit drama because one or other could get either badly hurt or killed. Except Wolverine doesn’t feel pain and can’t die. So why am I watching him fight lots of guys who also can’t feel pain and can’t die? If Hugh Jackman’s hairy invulnerability wasn’t tension sappingly dull enough, then the final revelation that he doesn’t remember any of these events anyway would have infuriated me had I been paying enough attention to remember them myself. I’d presumed that somewhere in the mess was some sort of mildly diverting back-story that would explain the character a bit, but since he remembers less of it than I do we could surely all have been spared. As it was I was left rather like Wolverine, a bit tired, a bit confused and not sure what had just happened but knowing that I needed to get away from it.

Sucker for punishment that I am, I also watched “Taken” in a which a clearly deranged Liam Neeson stalks his daughter only to see her kidnapped by the most overtly racist criminal gang that I’ve seen in a film for a decades. Unlike Wolverine, Neeson’s character has not been given superhuman powers or a metal skeleton, however he seems to be completely invulnerable anyway. This again underlined quite how dull an action movie can be when the peril is removed and sadly also proved beyond that doubt that Luc Besson, who really did write this shit, is not coming back to us…

As if trying to push myself to the brink of collapse I then watched “Fast And Furious”. Now, I’ve not seen any of the previous films in this petrol headed franchise and I can’t imagine that I need to. Considering what I’d just watched though, this seemed to be surprisingly good. Vin Desiel has also been touched with the brush of boring invulnerability however the other guy, whose name I can’t even be bothered to look up on IMDB, was allowed to fail and find things a bit hard and suddenly there was a tinge of actual tension. And a character dies! One of the goodies! Amazing. Also, whilst able to peform magic in his car, outside of it Vin stalks around with a look of dim-witted confusion that is strangely moving. He’s like one of the PG tips chimps trying to hold down a normal job. I’m not sure if this an intentional weakness but never the less it worked for me. However the plane landed during the middle of this so I’ll never find out “what happened” in “the end” because I don’t care enough to make any effort to find out. Please don’t try and tell me, I’ll just stare at you in confusion like I don’t know what you’re talking about.

Kids ehy?

Thursday, April 23rd, 2009

Wow the finger really is on the pulse of the youth culture here isn’t it? Having spent all week arguing the moral toss about that most modern of ethical dilemmas, I then spent most of yesterday kicking ideas about for a bit of paid work Chris and I have which is also aimed at angst ridden teenagers.

The project involves working with teenagers and getting a lot of feedback and ideas from them. It’s interesting to see how angry they are about the way they get treated and represented. Not surprising because I remember feeling exactly the same, but I was once again struck loud and clear by the irony of how teenagers spend a lot of time wishing they weren’t whilst the rest of spend a lot of time wishing we were… or at least acting like we still are.

Anyway to complete my week of angst and acne I find that Film of the Month is also a raging mess of hormones…

I urge you, if you haven’t already, to watch all four of these films as all have at least a touch of brilliance. Tom Harper gives you some clues as to why he’s already signed up for his second feature with “Cherries” and I imagine David Schofield won’t be far behind him in making that jump if his impressive film “Ryan” is anything to go by.

Perhaps its the sunshine though but I’m currently more in the mood for things that make me laugh. “Ruby” is Alex Jacob’s witty update of Little Red Riding Hood and it stars the immaculate Ellie Paskell. I was lucky enough to meet the pair of them when the film screened at Branchage last year and both are massive talents for you to watch and work with.

However, not that it counts for anything much, but my personal favourite was James Cooper’s “Speechless” which is more than worth the next seven minutes of your attention…

Personal Violence.

Friday, February 27th, 2009

Among the other new films that are in the running for “Film Of The Month” there are these three little oddities about personal violence. Nothing as graphic or cartoonish as yesterday’s horror selection but perhaps all the more disturbing for that…

“Slip” is a Lynchian nightmare which also continues the 1980’s retro vibe of “Neon Killer”. It’s stylish, well crafted and delightfully short.



“Cake” is a fantastically well made short film which continually refuses to do what you expect. Quite how much of a good thing this narrative intransigence is I’m not so sure; but it shares with “Slip” a genuinely unsettling refusal to explain which certainly leaves both films stuck between your teeth. (metaphorically).

Lastly “Joy More Joy” which is certainly the oddest even if takes a more metaphysical approach to personal violence… On the whole this sort of self indulgent collaging leaves me cold in short films, however I found something genuinely effecting and beautiful in this heartfelt little cinematic shout.

Again, here are links for those not logged on and watching at www.shootingpeople.org/bensblog

SLIP: http://shootingpeople.org/watch/film.php?film_id=71246#
CAKE: http://shootingpeople.org/watch/film.php?film_id=71244
JOY: http://shootingpeople.org/watch/film.php?film_id=71154

Bloody Hell.

Thursday, February 26th, 2009

Blimey there’s something blood thirsty happening in Film Of The Month.

A quick glance over the recently uploaded films brought these two B-Movie gems to my attention and since I am, at heart, quite a sensitive soul, I rather wish it hadn’t. However you can’t fault either the Brother’s Peretti or Ben Robinson for the gleeful enthusiasm they bring to their task of making me look away.

“Nightshifters” is one of the best examples of comic book CGI I’ve seen in a short film for ages. The performances are broad and there’s some stuff in the plot I don’t quite see the need for and suggests this might be a trailer for a much longer idea… but it’s fun, violent and definitely accomplished.

“Neon Killer” is a loving pastiche of 1980s video nasties. Once again, though the performances are off the wall and the story is barely coherent you have to be impressed by Ben Robinson’s attention to detail. This film is a brilliantly observed parody with great effects and a very dark sense of humour. It is also extremely violent and I’d urge you not to watch it if you’re in anyway likely to be offended or disturbed by continual bloody gore which is often more realistic than it is cartoonish. (you may need to let this film load for a short while before playing it because it’s quite high res)

Neither film is quite my personal taste but you can’t deny that both are impressive pieces of work. “Neon Killers” does make me wonder though about censorship. I’m sure it’s all part of the joke but I can’t help but be mildly bewildered at a film which’ll happily show a woman have her legs cut off but not show her breasts. Somewhere in the part of my mind that reads the Guardian I found the censorship here almost more objectifying and dehumanising than the graphic violence.

Oh and for those of you not reading this directly on my blog at www.shootingpeople.org/bensblog then here are links to both those:

Nightshifters: http://shootingpeople.org/watch/film.php?film_id=71283
Neon Killer: http://shootingpeople.org/watch/film.php?film_id=71167#

After Tomorrow

Friday, February 6th, 2009

Not a reference to the apocalyptic weather but the title of a new short film I saw before a mixture of snow and alcohol saw me drop into a brief week of hibernation.

Produced by Screen East through their Digital Shorts programme “After Tomorrow” is written and directed by Emma Sullivan and produced by Annalise Davis and try as I might I can’t find it online anywhere yet so I can’t provide a link but I’m sure I will in due course.

It starts with actor Joseph Mawle waking up apparently amnesiac in what he presumes is a bed and breakfast. Mawle’s performance, big and bearded yet confused and vulnerable shares the engaging little boy lost effect that worked so well for Clive Owen in Children of Men.

“After Tomorrow” appears to take a similar low key science-fiction approach, which isn’t always the best thing for a short film. Indeed as the mystery of the characters seeming imprisonment deepens things start to get irritating. Some of the other performances seem odd, out of place and I’m all too used to watching sci-fi shorts that hold back an obvious idea in the futile attempt to create “mystery”. It all looks beautiful, the pacing gives it a tension and the stylish edit keeps it feeling energetic. But is that enough if no one knows what’s going on?

However, just when I was starting to think that my worst fears were to be confirmed and the whole thing would just be a picturesque study in moody confusion, Emma pulls a heart breaking change of gear which in a stroke justifies everything. A rare treat, topped off by a superb cameo performance by (I think) Anthony Taylor. There are few short films that put such a weight of narrative and emotional importance on a silent character, and fewer still that do so with such success. His single held look toward the end of the film not only explained the entire plot but it broke my heart and if that’s not a shining example of the power of cinema, then I don’t know what is.

LifeSpam

Thursday, January 22nd, 2009

Alice Lowe is one of the most gifted comic actresses currently working and one of her more interesting collaborations has been with filmmaker Jacqueline Wright. Their short films include the straight8 films “Stiffy” and “Sticks and Balls” which combine sex and death and sex and golf respectively and the longer, stranger and more unsettlingly beautiful “Out Of The Water”.

I’m delighted to say that they’ve now been able to make a pilot comedy show for BBC3 and, being a pilot, there are two reasons why I urge you to stop whatever it is you’re doing at 11pm on Friday and watch it. Firstly and most importantly, it’s funny and I know ‘cos I saw a preview at the Curzon. Secondly though, being a pilot, they need a good response in order to get a chance to make more.

In a world where usually the only way you can help is by giving money it’s nice to find a situation where you can support two of the most talented, creative and silly people currently working by the simple expedient of staying in and watching the telly. Just imagine if the actual act of watching Children In Need was in some way helpful rather than merely a garish and irritating way to be reminded that you should help? Just imagine if you could solve the problems of the Middle East by settling down to watch Newsnight.

Well, tough, stop dreaming, you can’t. For the most part watching TV is an entirely useless waste of your time. Except on Friday night where you can help convince the BBC to give Jacqueline and Alice some money that they’ll otherwise just waste on yet more episodes of Two Pints Of Lager And A Packet Of Crisps. Now that has to be worth the almost no effort that I’m asking of you…

LifeSpam – BBC 3 – 11pm Friday 23rd January.

Blinking Hell

Thursday, January 15th, 2009

I recently saw “The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford” and was disappointed to find that they’d managed to make a film even more indulgently extended than this title.

If, like me, you are a fan of the divinely gifted Roger Deakins then it is worth watching since it is one of the most searingly beautiful things that even he has shot. In an ideal world, rather than wall paper I’d have my walls decorated just with this film. I just don’t want to have to concentrate on it because it really is one of the most meandering pieces of indulgent tosh I’ve seen in ages and I also recently watched “Oh, Lucky Man”.

Generally I think of myself as a fan of Brad Pitt but I realise that actually what I like is a good Brad Pitt cameo. Brad Pitt in “Twelve Monkeys”. Brad Pitt in “Fight Club”. Even, dare I say it, Brad Pitt in the otherwise relentlessly awful “Burn Before Watching”. In all of these Brad is coolest, most deliciously alive thing on the screen. He bursts on, does something brilliant, then disappears leaving you longing more.

In “The Assassinations Of The Jesse Jameses By The Lesser Known Co-Star Casey Afflick” Brad should have been doing just that – popping up to show he is the most compelling thing in the world and then being killed so that we miss him. Instead he hangs around for almost the whole of the two and half hours duration and the entire story has to keep grinding to a stop so he can act at us. Acting in this film takes too forms, being motionless or barking, neither to any real purpose since nothing is actually happening.

However this is not the most irritating thing about the film. The most irritating thing about the film is, admittedly, trivial, but never the less, still causes me a burning sense of frustration and annoyance. The first time we see Brad he is stood looking beautiful in a field and the camera lingers over his body whilst a voice over describes Jesse James at the point of meeting him. He is 32, and though Brad is now in his seventies he could still pass for 25 so no trouble there. Jesse had lost part of his finger, queue close up of Brad’s hand complete with incomplete digits. Lastly we are told that Jesse suffered from a condition known as granulated eyelids which meant he blinked more than average men. At this point Brad blinks. For almost the one and only time in the entire film.

Clearly Brad, as actor, has decided he wants to play Jesse as a silent force of power and natural authority. This is mainly conveyed by sitting at the end of tables and staring at people. Naturally enough he felt that playing the man as constantly blinking would make him look a bit silly, would weaken him. I have no trouble with this because it is, after all, a film, but, since Brad is also the Producer of the film you’d have thought that having made this artistic decision about his performance he’d have asked for the otherwise entirely redundant piece of voice over about the blinking to be taken out. It adds nothing except meaning that I could barely watch the film. For two and half hours I could barely think a single thought besides “WHEN IS HE GOING TO START BLINKING? HE HAS AN EYE CONDITION! WHEN IS HE GOING TO START BLINKING?”