This film is just over two hours of tense military action with Bradley Cooper at the wheel. Based on Chris Kyle's autobiography, American Sniper follows the life of Kyle as he struggles to maintain his role as a father and husband whilst on tour of duty in Iraq. He becomes notorious for his sniping skills and throws himself into his military life, leaving his growing family to fend for themselves. The film takes an interesting look at the effect of military life on those left at home and resonates deeper than many war films because the story and characters are rooted in truth. The journey is touching at parts and is a seemingly honest interpretation of patriotism. And although I've never been completely comfortable with the idea of war and military invasions of middle eastern countries, I find these sorts of films fascinating to watch.
Bradley Cooper was a fantastic choice to play the lead and carried the film from the outset. There were no small surprise cameos which allowed for the films focus to be purely on the plot rather than big names to draw in audiences. Cooper and Sienna Miller, who plays his wife, were big enough themselves and I'm sure many people will flock to the cinema to see Cooper's new bulkier physique. Other notable names who made an appearance were Kyle Gallner, Eric Close and Jonathan Groff. It's rare these days that a cast works so fluidly together but that is certainly the case with American Sniper. In a strange way, the actors never distracted from the action on screen, which can so often happen in large blockbuster films. One thing I did notice was how different Sienna Miller looks in this film. I've never payed much attention to her but I'm pretty sure her face has changed. It could just as easily be age as anything else but I couldn't help but notice something was off. Needless to say, she's still beautiful.
Directed by Clint Eastwood, I think American Sniper will be a popular war films for years to come. It's heartbreaking at times but displays bold attempts of bravery and sheer determination from the American military. The most interesting choice on behalf of the film makers was the length of the scenes involving Kyle's family as the film progressed. I felt this showed how his priorities were changing and was a visual representation of how consuming war can be both mentally and physically. That's not to say that Kyle didn't love his family but instead I'm implying that as he spent more time involved in the military it started to play a larger role in his life and was no longer limited to the 6 months, 12 months or 24 months spent in the enemy's backyard. But the most heartbreaking moment of the film was the closing statement before the credits followed by actual footage and photographs of the real Chris Kyle. Kyle was killed by a veteran he was trying to help. It must have been devastating for his family and the film pays tribute in these closing scenes, showing how much of a hero the real Kyle was.
The last war film I enjoyed as much as American Sniper was Zero Dark Thirty in 2013 and I highly recommend both to anyone with a fascination with modern adaptation of true events. My next step now will likely be to research the real Chris Kyle to see how accurate the film truly is. There is no denying that the character is interesting, I'm just hoping the real deal had just as much to offer.
Wednesday, 4 February 2015
Sunday, 18 January 2015
The Theory of Everything
The Theory of Everything was as captivating and intriguing as the critics and audiences had boasted it was. The film focuses on the relationship between Jane Wilde Hawking and Stephen Hawking, Stephen's diagnosis and his work in physics. Premièring last September at the Toronto Film Festival, the film has continued to garner attention from the masses and from award boards. With it's UK release earlier this month, many have flocked to the cinema to learn more about the infamous Hawking and to understand more about a man who has taught us so much about the world we live in.
The film is heartbreaking from the outset. We all know the condition Hawking is in now, so when our first encounter of him in the film is of a happy and mobile young man, it can be difficult to watch knowing the eventual outcome. Watching a disease completely envelope someone is tough but thankfully, the film had some well timed moments of comic relief. Even once the marriage between Hawking and his wife dissolves, the film remains uplifting. Trying simply to mirror the strength and determination of Hawking to not let his disease over come him. One interesting element was the involvement of Hawking himself in the film. In order to achieve a more realistic electronic voice for actor Eddie Redmayne, Hawking's own electronic voice is used. This was a nice touch and showed the support the film had from its subject but was also likely a relief for Redmayne as it was one thing he wouldn't have to worry about perfecting.
The acting could not have been easy. Whilst it's always difficult trying to embody the character of someone real, it's arguably much harder to portray someone as famous and respected as Stephen Hawking. Redmayne did, however, do a wonderful job of showing his characters struggle with movement and speech without looking gimmicky or exaggerated. Whilst Redmayne is certainly growing in popularity, I think it was important not to clog this film with famous actors and actresses. The story needed a cast that were humble and down to earth otherwise the characters, who themselves seem 'real' and homely would have been lost in a sea of Hollywood egos.
What was interesting to me was the way the film depicts extramarital affairs. Both Hawking and his wife experience romance, lust and desire out-with their relationship with each other. Perhaps it was because the film completely engaged with me and I was lost in their world and their struggles, but I didn't feel like either affair was deplorable. I completely empathised with Jane and how hard her life must have been taking care of the man she loved as he deteriorated before her. Stephen was understanding of the fact that his wife needed help in more areas than one and once he got to know Jonathan he saw a man that could make her happy. It was bitter sweet to see their relationship end although, it seems that that's what they needed to progress in their lives individually.
As for the films ending... I thought closing such a poignant and thought-provoking film with Hawking and Wilde gazing upon their children was wonderful. It showed how despite having a life seemingly focused purely on science, Stephen was and is able to appreciate his children and the family he created. The scene lingered which allowed it to seep in properly and have the desired effect. I left the cinema in awe of a man who continues to challenge himself and the doctors who originally estimated only 2 years. How wonderful and challenging it must be to have a brain as quick and as inquisitive as his and not be able to use every fibre of your being to explore it.
The film is heartbreaking from the outset. We all know the condition Hawking is in now, so when our first encounter of him in the film is of a happy and mobile young man, it can be difficult to watch knowing the eventual outcome. Watching a disease completely envelope someone is tough but thankfully, the film had some well timed moments of comic relief. Even once the marriage between Hawking and his wife dissolves, the film remains uplifting. Trying simply to mirror the strength and determination of Hawking to not let his disease over come him. One interesting element was the involvement of Hawking himself in the film. In order to achieve a more realistic electronic voice for actor Eddie Redmayne, Hawking's own electronic voice is used. This was a nice touch and showed the support the film had from its subject but was also likely a relief for Redmayne as it was one thing he wouldn't have to worry about perfecting.
The acting could not have been easy. Whilst it's always difficult trying to embody the character of someone real, it's arguably much harder to portray someone as famous and respected as Stephen Hawking. Redmayne did, however, do a wonderful job of showing his characters struggle with movement and speech without looking gimmicky or exaggerated. Whilst Redmayne is certainly growing in popularity, I think it was important not to clog this film with famous actors and actresses. The story needed a cast that were humble and down to earth otherwise the characters, who themselves seem 'real' and homely would have been lost in a sea of Hollywood egos.
What was interesting to me was the way the film depicts extramarital affairs. Both Hawking and his wife experience romance, lust and desire out-with their relationship with each other. Perhaps it was because the film completely engaged with me and I was lost in their world and their struggles, but I didn't feel like either affair was deplorable. I completely empathised with Jane and how hard her life must have been taking care of the man she loved as he deteriorated before her. Stephen was understanding of the fact that his wife needed help in more areas than one and once he got to know Jonathan he saw a man that could make her happy. It was bitter sweet to see their relationship end although, it seems that that's what they needed to progress in their lives individually.
As for the films ending... I thought closing such a poignant and thought-provoking film with Hawking and Wilde gazing upon their children was wonderful. It showed how despite having a life seemingly focused purely on science, Stephen was and is able to appreciate his children and the family he created. The scene lingered which allowed it to seep in properly and have the desired effect. I left the cinema in awe of a man who continues to challenge himself and the doctors who originally estimated only 2 years. How wonderful and challenging it must be to have a brain as quick and as inquisitive as his and not be able to use every fibre of your being to explore it.
Friday, 9 January 2015
The Interview
This widely anticipated film was not on my list of must-sees for 2015. But with the media storm surrounding it, I decided to sit down with a glass of wine and watch from the comfort of my own home as James Franco and Seth Rogen taunt and humiliate one of the worlds most immature yet hostile leaders.
Rogen and Franco have made a name for themselves in contemporary Hollywood comedy films, in particular, by appealing to young teenagers and stoners. Having said that, I know this film will be seen and likely enjoyed by the masses and probably by some critics. So for what seems like the millionth time, I'm writing from my own personal point of view. A view that may not be agreed with but is valid nonetheless. Back to the actors! I've enjoyed their work individually but somehow, when they team up I find myself curling into a ball of cringe and wishing I hadn't started watching in the first place. The comedy is simple at best and franc-ly (see what I did there...) whatever acting skills the two possess separately are flushed down the toilet when they appear together.
The film in question garnered months of publicity following a hack on Sony by what many would believe was the North Korean government - despite several computer hacking specialists claiming that this is unlikely. This then led to an announcement that The Interview would not be shown in traditional theatres but instead would have an online release. Personally, I opted to view the film on youtube. It's hard to believe that this was not an elaborate marketing scheme to release an average and underwhelming film to a blockbuster sized audience. The most surprising element was the inclusion of several celebrities and 'serious' actors, most likely vying to break into the younger audiences and to revive careers in this 'huge hit'. Forgive me but each time a new familiar face popped up, I found myself asking 'aren't you better than this?' - obviously not!
The film is filled to the brim with stereotypes and easy gags produced solely for three minutes of entertainment that will be forgotten by the end of the film. Less than 30 minutes into the film, we are treated to our first drug induced party scene. Admittedly only a short clip, this sort of scene has become a staple in Rogen/Franco films. Everyone loves an alcohol fuelled party set to electronic music, right? Slow-mo walking, raging fight scenes and a little bit of nudity combined with innuendos, crude language and stupidity - that is the essence of The Interview. And the forced love story between Aaron (Seth Rogen) and Sook (Diana Bang) was a prime example of filler content. At nearly two and a half hours, it's a real waste of time.
I haven't even brushed upon the plot of the film yet. James Franco is Dave Skylark, a popular television chat show host and Seth Rogen is Aaron Rapoport his producer. After a series of bizarre scenes including a gay Eminem and a bald Rob Lowe, Skylark discovers an article stating the show is a favourite of North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un. After another series of unnecessary events, producer Aaron flies to China and sets up the interview with Sook, one of Kim Jong-Un's attractive henchwomen. As the rest of the entertainment world comments on the legitimacy of the interview, the CIA contact the pair of idiots, for lack of a better word, and instruct them to kill the leader. Once in Korea, they meet the leader and engage in several comical adventures together.
Spoilers coming up...
Kim Jong-Un charms Dave (Franco) and as a result, the TV host gets rid of one of the important strips of poison that would be used to kill the leader and even stops his partner Aaron (Rogen) from completing the assassinating with the final strip. But of course, this problem is resolved in true Hollywood style with the best friends reuniting, with the help of the attractive female side kick Sook, to kill the leader with a tank.
This films only redeeming quality is it's power to potentially humiliate an awful dictator. But other than that, The Interview was too long for what it was and contributes nothing to society. Some people who are uneducated on the situation in North Korea will watch this film and not quite understand the extremity of the cause and plight of the people living there. I certainly hope that this film, if anything, makes audiences google North Korea and find out what is actually happening.
Rogen and Franco have made a name for themselves in contemporary Hollywood comedy films, in particular, by appealing to young teenagers and stoners. Having said that, I know this film will be seen and likely enjoyed by the masses and probably by some critics. So for what seems like the millionth time, I'm writing from my own personal point of view. A view that may not be agreed with but is valid nonetheless. Back to the actors! I've enjoyed their work individually but somehow, when they team up I find myself curling into a ball of cringe and wishing I hadn't started watching in the first place. The comedy is simple at best and franc-ly (see what I did there...) whatever acting skills the two possess separately are flushed down the toilet when they appear together.
The film in question garnered months of publicity following a hack on Sony by what many would believe was the North Korean government - despite several computer hacking specialists claiming that this is unlikely. This then led to an announcement that The Interview would not be shown in traditional theatres but instead would have an online release. Personally, I opted to view the film on youtube. It's hard to believe that this was not an elaborate marketing scheme to release an average and underwhelming film to a blockbuster sized audience. The most surprising element was the inclusion of several celebrities and 'serious' actors, most likely vying to break into the younger audiences and to revive careers in this 'huge hit'. Forgive me but each time a new familiar face popped up, I found myself asking 'aren't you better than this?' - obviously not!
The film is filled to the brim with stereotypes and easy gags produced solely for three minutes of entertainment that will be forgotten by the end of the film. Less than 30 minutes into the film, we are treated to our first drug induced party scene. Admittedly only a short clip, this sort of scene has become a staple in Rogen/Franco films. Everyone loves an alcohol fuelled party set to electronic music, right? Slow-mo walking, raging fight scenes and a little bit of nudity combined with innuendos, crude language and stupidity - that is the essence of The Interview. And the forced love story between Aaron (Seth Rogen) and Sook (Diana Bang) was a prime example of filler content. At nearly two and a half hours, it's a real waste of time.
I haven't even brushed upon the plot of the film yet. James Franco is Dave Skylark, a popular television chat show host and Seth Rogen is Aaron Rapoport his producer. After a series of bizarre scenes including a gay Eminem and a bald Rob Lowe, Skylark discovers an article stating the show is a favourite of North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un. After another series of unnecessary events, producer Aaron flies to China and sets up the interview with Sook, one of Kim Jong-Un's attractive henchwomen. As the rest of the entertainment world comments on the legitimacy of the interview, the CIA contact the pair of idiots, for lack of a better word, and instruct them to kill the leader. Once in Korea, they meet the leader and engage in several comical adventures together.
Spoilers coming up...
Kim Jong-Un charms Dave (Franco) and as a result, the TV host gets rid of one of the important strips of poison that would be used to kill the leader and even stops his partner Aaron (Rogen) from completing the assassinating with the final strip. But of course, this problem is resolved in true Hollywood style with the best friends reuniting, with the help of the attractive female side kick Sook, to kill the leader with a tank.
This films only redeeming quality is it's power to potentially humiliate an awful dictator. But other than that, The Interview was too long for what it was and contributes nothing to society. Some people who are uneducated on the situation in North Korea will watch this film and not quite understand the extremity of the cause and plight of the people living there. I certainly hope that this film, if anything, makes audiences google North Korea and find out what is actually happening.
Saturday, 20 December 2014
Annie
It's been a very long time since I have watched or read the story of Annie. I've also never shown much particular interest in it or it's characters. Having said that, tonight I sat down and watched Will Gluck's 2014 adaptation. An updated and culturally diversified version of the classic.
Obviously the biggest change is the replacement of the white, ginger child with a black child instead. Although it's still sometimes misunderstood, a comment on race is appropriate in this case. Although I felt making the protagonist black was a cheap way of modernising the classic and giving it more 'edge', I did love Quvenzhané's interpretation of the spirited child. The change in race of key players in the film was, like I said, an attempt to add diversity to the story's vast history, yet it felt contrived at moments with characters playing into stereotypes and over exaggerating the race change. Having said that, Jamie Foxx is always entertaining to watch and makes a surprisingly appropriate Benjamin Stacks. I'm deliberately ignoring the topic of Miss Hannigan. Diaz was awful. Moving on.
It's difficult these days for musicals. Outside of broadway, spur of the moment singing comes across incredibly contrived and forced. There was very little flow between acting and singing and it seemed like with some numbers they didn't even attempt to hide the fact that the signing is not recorded live. 'I Think I'm Gonna Like It Here' sounded auto-tuned and distant which only added to the uncomfortable separation between audience and film. It's been a while since a musical (out-with the obvious animated Disney hits) has done spectacularly well in the Box Office and perhaps this movie will see that change. And for clarification, there is a clear difference between a musical and a film with music in it. For example, Rent and Pitch Perfect are not and should not both be referred to as musicals. Back to the film in question! One of Annie's most popular songs is of course 'Hard Knock Life' yet it starts in the same way as 90% of the other songs within the film. With characters or objects making noises that slowly combine to create a tune before the actors start singing. And of course, the scene is wonderfully choreographed as the young orphans dance and clean ahead of the orphanage's inspection. The singing in the film is fantastic, I have no doubt that this was considered carefully during the casting process, as it should be! But the film lacked believability and it was difficult to feel affected by the ballads designed to make my heart swell. Coming from someone who can cry at a clever and emotional advert, this is not a good sign. In fact, during the films entirety I sat rather unaffected by the whole affair.
Considering how long it's been since I've seen any adaptation of Annie, I can't contest to how much the story has changed this time around. Aspects of the film that I did enjoy are hard to recall after the fact. Nothing stood out above the rest however I particularly enjoyed scenes involving Annie's friend at the store and moments of Benjamin Stacks phobia of germs. One moment that I remember for all of the wrong reasons was just after Stacks and Annie's first encounter on the street. It's not a huge spoiler so fear not but Stacks saves Annie from an oncoming car. After this scene, an advisor shows Stacks and his PA a video that an eyewitness had captured. It was the footage that we had just seen INCLUDING the camera angle change... This is one of the biggest pet peeves of mine. It seems lazy especially when the video is shown so clearly. All it takes is someone with a phone on set filming two seconds of action. No additional camera needed considering the size of the video being played back on screen. I could rant forever about this aspect as it occurs far too often in films with giant budgets but I'll resist the temptation and continue with my review. There were a few nice moments of social commentary which focused on mobile phones, popular pre-teen movie franchises and twitter.
With a cast full of recognisable names, I'm sure this film will do well. I also have no doubt that the story alone will attract audiences who loved the previous adaptations. However, my honest opinion is that Annie is worth skipping. With songs that everyone's heard before and a rather lacklustre performance from one of the biggest actors in the film, the film is a little underwhelming. The most interesting part of the film was Stack's tech savy penthouse. If you're looking for something to see this Christmas season, do yourself a favour and see the final Hobbit film or better yet... stay at home and watch The Grinch!
Obviously the biggest change is the replacement of the white, ginger child with a black child instead. Although it's still sometimes misunderstood, a comment on race is appropriate in this case. Although I felt making the protagonist black was a cheap way of modernising the classic and giving it more 'edge', I did love Quvenzhané's interpretation of the spirited child. The change in race of key players in the film was, like I said, an attempt to add diversity to the story's vast history, yet it felt contrived at moments with characters playing into stereotypes and over exaggerating the race change. Having said that, Jamie Foxx is always entertaining to watch and makes a surprisingly appropriate Benjamin Stacks. I'm deliberately ignoring the topic of Miss Hannigan. Diaz was awful. Moving on.
It's difficult these days for musicals. Outside of broadway, spur of the moment singing comes across incredibly contrived and forced. There was very little flow between acting and singing and it seemed like with some numbers they didn't even attempt to hide the fact that the signing is not recorded live. 'I Think I'm Gonna Like It Here' sounded auto-tuned and distant which only added to the uncomfortable separation between audience and film. It's been a while since a musical (out-with the obvious animated Disney hits) has done spectacularly well in the Box Office and perhaps this movie will see that change. And for clarification, there is a clear difference between a musical and a film with music in it. For example, Rent and Pitch Perfect are not and should not both be referred to as musicals. Back to the film in question! One of Annie's most popular songs is of course 'Hard Knock Life' yet it starts in the same way as 90% of the other songs within the film. With characters or objects making noises that slowly combine to create a tune before the actors start singing. And of course, the scene is wonderfully choreographed as the young orphans dance and clean ahead of the orphanage's inspection. The singing in the film is fantastic, I have no doubt that this was considered carefully during the casting process, as it should be! But the film lacked believability and it was difficult to feel affected by the ballads designed to make my heart swell. Coming from someone who can cry at a clever and emotional advert, this is not a good sign. In fact, during the films entirety I sat rather unaffected by the whole affair.
Considering how long it's been since I've seen any adaptation of Annie, I can't contest to how much the story has changed this time around. Aspects of the film that I did enjoy are hard to recall after the fact. Nothing stood out above the rest however I particularly enjoyed scenes involving Annie's friend at the store and moments of Benjamin Stacks phobia of germs. One moment that I remember for all of the wrong reasons was just after Stacks and Annie's first encounter on the street. It's not a huge spoiler so fear not but Stacks saves Annie from an oncoming car. After this scene, an advisor shows Stacks and his PA a video that an eyewitness had captured. It was the footage that we had just seen INCLUDING the camera angle change... This is one of the biggest pet peeves of mine. It seems lazy especially when the video is shown so clearly. All it takes is someone with a phone on set filming two seconds of action. No additional camera needed considering the size of the video being played back on screen. I could rant forever about this aspect as it occurs far too often in films with giant budgets but I'll resist the temptation and continue with my review. There were a few nice moments of social commentary which focused on mobile phones, popular pre-teen movie franchises and twitter.
With a cast full of recognisable names, I'm sure this film will do well. I also have no doubt that the story alone will attract audiences who loved the previous adaptations. However, my honest opinion is that Annie is worth skipping. With songs that everyone's heard before and a rather lacklustre performance from one of the biggest actors in the film, the film is a little underwhelming. The most interesting part of the film was Stack's tech savy penthouse. If you're looking for something to see this Christmas season, do yourself a favour and see the final Hobbit film or better yet... stay at home and watch The Grinch!
Wednesday, 26 November 2014
The Single Mom's Club
Tyler Perry's Spring 2014 hit The Single Moms Club was a surprisingly good film. I've never been Perry's biggest fan, so I was shocked when I found the film funny and even up-lifting. The film explores the lives of five single mothers brought together because of their children's misbehaviour in school. As a result, they are asked to help with the organisation of a school event. The women, being from several different backgrounds, obviously clash in the beginning.
As the film develops we get a deeper understanding of each woman's situation and the reasons why they might need each other in their lives. I particularly enjoyed Wendi McLendon-Covey as Jan. She was cold and callous in her portrayal providing fodder for some hilarious scenes. The character is sassy and intelligent with the ultimate 'I don't need a man' attitude. Within a movie that focuses on women without a man, it's so important to emphasise that being a single mother doesn't make their lives worse or lower their status in society. The women end up as equals at the end of the film because of this fact and the understanding that no one woman is above another because of their financial situation. The film also explores the importance of new relationships when you have a child and an ex-husband. Zulay Henao as Esperanza Luego is central to this topic. After dating a man for a year, she is still hesitant to introduce him to her daughter. It's wonderful to see an accurate representation of a single mother's dating life. And I mean accurate in comparison to films that reject single mothers from the dating world and reserve them to a world of loneliness.
The theme of girl power is obviously present in heavy doses. A film with five female protagonist's is of course going to explore the female friendship in detail. And thankfully, race didn't play as big a part as I thought it would. With Tyler Perry films and a mixed race cast, it's always likely that there will be a few race jokes thrown back and forth. Thankfully, The Single Mom's Club limited this and focused instead on partnership, motherhood and friendships. There was a slight hint of PSA about the film as if Perry was trying to raise awareness for a cause but the relaxed nature and smart story quickly made me reconsider this analysis. Whilst it does showcase some of the struggles faced by single mothers, it's also entertaining, heartbreaking and up-lifting. A perfect recipe for a great film. Considering the film jumps back and forth from the different women and their lives, it was smooth to watch and easy to follow. Perry surprised me and has converted me to a fan. It might now be interesting to go back and re-watch some of his other popular films.
I'm always interested when a director decides to put themselves into their own movie. Perry is seen as TK in the film, love interest of May Miller (Nia Long). He's a caring character but I'm confused as to why Perry felt compelled to play the character himself. Normally when we see a director in his own film, it's a cameo or a passing glimpse, not a somewhat central role. Having said that, he does the character justice and doesn't take away from the female characters. And considering the film still turned out to be entertaining and purposeful it's clear that taking on a dual role did not hinder his work.
At the end of the day, I thoroughly enjoyed this film. It was something different to what I normally watch and did not disappoint. I'll be interested in watching similar titles and work by Perry. Although the story was a little heavy at times, the outcome was up-lifting. If I could have changed anything it would have been the fact that each woman's story was so enveloping. It was sometimes hard to take it all in at once. Perhaps reducing the number of characters with dramatic or depressing storylines could have improved the film.
As the film develops we get a deeper understanding of each woman's situation and the reasons why they might need each other in their lives. I particularly enjoyed Wendi McLendon-Covey as Jan. She was cold and callous in her portrayal providing fodder for some hilarious scenes. The character is sassy and intelligent with the ultimate 'I don't need a man' attitude. Within a movie that focuses on women without a man, it's so important to emphasise that being a single mother doesn't make their lives worse or lower their status in society. The women end up as equals at the end of the film because of this fact and the understanding that no one woman is above another because of their financial situation. The film also explores the importance of new relationships when you have a child and an ex-husband. Zulay Henao as Esperanza Luego is central to this topic. After dating a man for a year, she is still hesitant to introduce him to her daughter. It's wonderful to see an accurate representation of a single mother's dating life. And I mean accurate in comparison to films that reject single mothers from the dating world and reserve them to a world of loneliness.
The theme of girl power is obviously present in heavy doses. A film with five female protagonist's is of course going to explore the female friendship in detail. And thankfully, race didn't play as big a part as I thought it would. With Tyler Perry films and a mixed race cast, it's always likely that there will be a few race jokes thrown back and forth. Thankfully, The Single Mom's Club limited this and focused instead on partnership, motherhood and friendships. There was a slight hint of PSA about the film as if Perry was trying to raise awareness for a cause but the relaxed nature and smart story quickly made me reconsider this analysis. Whilst it does showcase some of the struggles faced by single mothers, it's also entertaining, heartbreaking and up-lifting. A perfect recipe for a great film. Considering the film jumps back and forth from the different women and their lives, it was smooth to watch and easy to follow. Perry surprised me and has converted me to a fan. It might now be interesting to go back and re-watch some of his other popular films.I'm always interested when a director decides to put themselves into their own movie. Perry is seen as TK in the film, love interest of May Miller (Nia Long). He's a caring character but I'm confused as to why Perry felt compelled to play the character himself. Normally when we see a director in his own film, it's a cameo or a passing glimpse, not a somewhat central role. Having said that, he does the character justice and doesn't take away from the female characters. And considering the film still turned out to be entertaining and purposeful it's clear that taking on a dual role did not hinder his work.
At the end of the day, I thoroughly enjoyed this film. It was something different to what I normally watch and did not disappoint. I'll be interested in watching similar titles and work by Perry. Although the story was a little heavy at times, the outcome was up-lifting. If I could have changed anything it would have been the fact that each woman's story was so enveloping. It was sometimes hard to take it all in at once. Perhaps reducing the number of characters with dramatic or depressing storylines could have improved the film.
Friday, 7 November 2014
Interstellar
Christopher Nolan has a cavernous brain of fantastic and intricate ideas. His latest, Interstellar, is no different from his other wonderful work.
The film opens on Matthew McConaughey, his father, played by John Lithgow, and his two young children. We soon learn of the dust and how it's slowly covering their land. The crops are failing and it seems like planet earth is in a slow demise. McConaughey plays former pilot and now farmer Cooper: A single dad with a love for space and science. The film is just under three hours long, so as you can imagine, we're given a real insight to their family life before venturing out into space. We follow along as Cooper visits his kids school, as he downplays the existence of the supernatural to his ghost visited daughter and as he brings down a military drone whilst driving through a corn field. Just your normal day! But soon, things escalate with the weather and Cooper, with daughter in tow, discovers a secret government run base. I wont go into much more detail about the plot because it's fantastically constructed and my words wont do it justice.
Firstly, the film is available in both 2D and 3D. I saw the film in 2D and still had brief moments of motion sickness. There are several moments within Interstellar that involve constant spinning and wormhole light contortions. As you can imagine, this will be heightened in 3D and could leave audiences feeling nauseous by the closing titles! Even in 2D the film is beautiful with sharp colours, wide angle views and beautiful other-worldly landscapes. Even the scenes that were created using advanced CGI technology looked incredibly realistic and were familiar enough to be understood as real. With so many people choosing to watch films at home on smaller screens and on laptops, this film would be wasted anywhere but the wide screen of a cinema.
Undoubtably, like most of Nolan's films, Interstellar has more than a few plot twists and turns! Once in space, the team encounter difficulties with gravity, relativity, fuel and with a particularly suspicious astronaut from a previous expedition. However, I think one of the biggest surprises was the emotional depths that the film explores. I found myself on the brink of tears not once or twice but five times. The film is intense and builds as the minutes tick by. Even in the moments of silence in space, there is an uncertainty that haunts each action on screen. Anne Hathaway, as Amelia Brand, and Jessica Chastain, as Murph(ey) Cooper, provide tender but powerful feminine touches to an otherwise entirely masculine cast. They are both strong characters, one more than the other, who are a representation of the smart and strong willed girls in our society who still have typically 'feminine' emotions that sometimes take control.
The film deals with so many fascinating questions, most notably: Is earth the only planet we can live on? This film will likely spark thought provoking conversations amongst audiences world wide. Are we alone? Can we travel through time and space? It's important for films to open this discussion because it's not only interesting but it could potentially spark a light under a passionate individual who could one day answer these questions for us. Nolan's ability to create such captivating characters and dialogue, opens doors for Science Fiction to further infiltrate mainstream cinema more than ever before.
This film is a must see and will likely win big during award season next year. If the film wasn't three hours long, I'd head back to the cinema now to watch it again!
The film opens on Matthew McConaughey, his father, played by John Lithgow, and his two young children. We soon learn of the dust and how it's slowly covering their land. The crops are failing and it seems like planet earth is in a slow demise. McConaughey plays former pilot and now farmer Cooper: A single dad with a love for space and science. The film is just under three hours long, so as you can imagine, we're given a real insight to their family life before venturing out into space. We follow along as Cooper visits his kids school, as he downplays the existence of the supernatural to his ghost visited daughter and as he brings down a military drone whilst driving through a corn field. Just your normal day! But soon, things escalate with the weather and Cooper, with daughter in tow, discovers a secret government run base. I wont go into much more detail about the plot because it's fantastically constructed and my words wont do it justice.
Firstly, the film is available in both 2D and 3D. I saw the film in 2D and still had brief moments of motion sickness. There are several moments within Interstellar that involve constant spinning and wormhole light contortions. As you can imagine, this will be heightened in 3D and could leave audiences feeling nauseous by the closing titles! Even in 2D the film is beautiful with sharp colours, wide angle views and beautiful other-worldly landscapes. Even the scenes that were created using advanced CGI technology looked incredibly realistic and were familiar enough to be understood as real. With so many people choosing to watch films at home on smaller screens and on laptops, this film would be wasted anywhere but the wide screen of a cinema.
Undoubtably, like most of Nolan's films, Interstellar has more than a few plot twists and turns! Once in space, the team encounter difficulties with gravity, relativity, fuel and with a particularly suspicious astronaut from a previous expedition. However, I think one of the biggest surprises was the emotional depths that the film explores. I found myself on the brink of tears not once or twice but five times. The film is intense and builds as the minutes tick by. Even in the moments of silence in space, there is an uncertainty that haunts each action on screen. Anne Hathaway, as Amelia Brand, and Jessica Chastain, as Murph(ey) Cooper, provide tender but powerful feminine touches to an otherwise entirely masculine cast. They are both strong characters, one more than the other, who are a representation of the smart and strong willed girls in our society who still have typically 'feminine' emotions that sometimes take control.
The film deals with so many fascinating questions, most notably: Is earth the only planet we can live on? This film will likely spark thought provoking conversations amongst audiences world wide. Are we alone? Can we travel through time and space? It's important for films to open this discussion because it's not only interesting but it could potentially spark a light under a passionate individual who could one day answer these questions for us. Nolan's ability to create such captivating characters and dialogue, opens doors for Science Fiction to further infiltrate mainstream cinema more than ever before.
This film is a must see and will likely win big during award season next year. If the film wasn't three hours long, I'd head back to the cinema now to watch it again!
Wednesday, 22 October 2014
Prometheus
Genre hybridity is a long running tradition in Hollywood cinema. Directors and writers alike, have been combining different styles and aesthetics in an attempt to make new types of film that would eventually form its own genre. Ridley Scott's 2012 film, Prometheus, is one that adopts this way of thinking and portrays elements of both the Science Fiction and Horror genres.[1] The film had been in development since the early 2000s and had been rewritten and reworked right up until 2010 when the film began production. Prometheus contains themes and plot staples that are seen in both genres and shows characters that develop similarly to those in Horror or Sci-Fi films. This film is a prime example of clever and effective genre hybridity that was successful in the box office and will likely serve as an example of combination work that film makers will draw inspiration from.
The story follows a group of individuals from selected professions as they travel to and explore a new planet. As the film progresses the audience learns with the characters that the planet is not as safe as they had thought. As alien beings begin to cause havoc and David, the android, begins to act more and more suspicious, our protagonist and heroine Elizabeth Shaw makes life threatening decisions and is ultimately left seeking revenge. The name of the movie is interesting considering that ‘Prometheus is called upon to help us think about what it means to be human.’[2] It seems the film reflects heavily upon the God after which it was named. The title itself suggests that the film is centred on consideration of morality, and as the plot is driven by the search for our makers, it is evident that humanity is also a central theme. Humanity can be seen thriving through the protagonist as she defeats her own mutant foetus. Yet humanity can also be interpreted as flawed, primarily through the character of Peter Weyland, who is searching for any way of staying alive possibly because he fears his own death. Both Horror and Science Fiction genres tend to explore the human mind being pushed to its limits either physically or theoretically.
One of the key reasons why Prometheus was a successful film by itself but also as an example of combination cinema, was because Horror films have often contained Science Fiction elements. This meant that the eventual combination of the two genres was relatively seamless as many of the plot points and themes fit within both categories. Horror films were created and produced with the aim ‘to shock, scare, revolt or otherwise horrify the viewer.’[3] And these films are often subdivided into seven categories. Brigid Cherry explains this in her 2009 book titled Horror.[4] This is similar to Science Fiction films, as they too can be divided into any number of specified categories. One type of Horror film is explained as supernatural and involves interventions of other worldly beings into our reality. The supernatural is key to this film as the premise surrounds other worldly ‘engineers’ that created mankind and is now seeking to destroy it. Naturally, Science Fiction, the supernatural and Horror cinema blend together effortlessly.
One of our biggest social fears is the basis of many Science Fiction films: technology that develops a sinister and superior advancement over humans. This is widely explored within the film and it is clear that the film contains technology far advanced from the types that we are used to today. Science Fiction and Horror are both popular for expressing cultural and social anxieties. Horror garners negative emotions as opposed to more straightforward pleasures of the romantic comedy or western whilst Science Fiction tends to explore technological advancements that would result in our downfall. The largest technological advancement seen in Prometheus is through, Michael Fassbender’s character, David. Throughout the movie it is unclear whether David is morally good or bad, as he both poisoned Elizabeth’s love interest and offered to help her escape the planet in the end. He certainly acts suspiciously throughout, which doesn't help the audience warm to the android. Since the early beginnings of technology there has always been those who worry that eventually robots, like David, that we create will work against us rather than for us. ‘Science fiction films concerning fears of machines or of technology usually negatively affirm such social values as freedom, individualism and the family.’[5]
With space exploration developing dramatically in recent years, humankind is more in fear of the universe than we have ever been. But probably the fear that resonates most is the fear of disease and infection. We see the character Charlie Holloway slowly get infected and turn into a monster himself. We can often judge what our anxieties are by looking at the films that we watch. ‘All popular films reflect social attitudes. How do we know what the social attitudes are? Just look at the films!’[6] Because disease is something that can spread quickly, people often fear epidemics which was evident over the last ten years when the public responded to the Swine Flu. Many nations increased their intake of vitamins and some even began wearing masks in an attempt to avoid the dreaded Flu that resulted in the death of hundreds.[7] As long as audiences have social anxieties, they will go to the cinema to see films that explore that topic out of pure curiosity and, typically, Horror and Science Fiction are genres that investigate these the most.
When two genres combine, so do the fan bases of each. Typically Horror films and Science Fiction films have the same target audiences that the films appeal to most – men aged between 16 and 24. Genre hybridity increases audiences as the film appeals to more people, therefore the film will likely gain more profit. This then allows for more films to be created following its success. Prometheus was a film that appealed to several different audience groups; fans of Ridley Scott and the Alien franchise, Horror movie buffs, Science Fiction ‘nerds’ and lastly, those who were attracted by the advertising campaign and advertisements.[8] The film made roughly $403 million at the box office after being made on a budget of nearly a third of that, $130 million. Whilst it is nearly always the aim of film makers to make as much of a profit as possible, Scott was able to cash in on his pre-existing fans by tying the film to the popular Alien franchise that he had made years before. Fans play a large part in the success of any film and can really help to either make or break a crossover film. By giving Prometheus a ‘horrifying’ edge, Scott was challenging his fans to see his film, a loose prequel for Alien, as being aesthetically different to others that he had done which were more Sci-Fi than Horror.
Horror and Sci-Fi are two genres that maximise the use of prosthetics and special effects. The combination of these two genres can result in a boom of creative designs that will spur artists to create more. The film was a great combination of CGI and prosthetics which was nice to see considering ‘the concern for many people trained in the techniques of makeup and prosthetics, model making and animatronics was that the demand for this type of workmanship would simply disappear altogether should CGI ever prove capable of stimulating the materiality of physical effects effectively enough to meet with audiences’ approval.’[9] The prosthetics were mainly used to show disfigurement and age on characters but the most notable use was on the Engineers themselves. The artist was challenged to make a human-like face that was also completely alien. The characters had squared off jaws and head that made the characters look dominating and superior. Compared to the Alien franchise, the film had a much smoother image with animatronics and CGI working together. Prometheus was an example of how, when technology has been improved the quality of the film will likely improve also. This will result in sophisticated special effects and an improved cinema experience because the on-screen image will be closer to reality than it was before. Prometheus was nominated for several special effects awards because of its achievements visually, creating a world that was believable but still completely new and unknown.
The combination of two genres that already contain many of the same features is likely to be successful. Not only is the film more likely to make a profit because of the widened target audience but it also provides Hollywood with a new interpretation of film and suggests that sticking rigidly to one genre may be outdated. With the advances in technology in the past decade these hybrid movies contain higher quality special effects and are able to utilise the conventions normally associated with each individual genre. Resulting in advancements in special effects artistry and effects, hybrid films are some of the most realistic films visually. The combination of Horror cinema and Science Fiction film is successful as the two fit together well and often aim to reach the same goal through their films. With common themes these two particular genres are the easiest to merge and have the most cohesive end result. There will always be a demand for films that explore our deepest fears and shock us in the process. Prometheus was able to appeal to both Science Fiction and Horror fans alike, whilst also attracting mainstream audiences which shows the far reaching abilities of the hybrid film.
[1] Prometheus, Dir. by Ridley Scott (20th
Century Fox, 2012)
[2]
Carol Dougherty, Prometheus: Gods and
Heroes of the Ancient World (Routledge, Oxon, 2006) p. 3
[3] Bigid
Cherry, Horror (Routledge, Oxon, 2009)
p. 5
[4]
Bigid Cherry, Horror (Routledge,
Oxon, 2009)
[5]
Michael Ryan and Douglas Kellner, ‘Technophobia’ in Alien Zone: Cultural Theory and Contemporary Science Fiction Cinema,
ed. by Anette Kuhn (Verso, New York, 1990) p. 58
[6]
David Bordwell, Poetics of Cinema
(Routledge, New York, 2008) p. 30
[7]
Richard Alleyne, ‘Swine Flu Killed 475 People and Cost £1.24 Billion, Official
Figures Show’, The Telegraph, 1 July
2010 <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/swine-flu/7865796/Swine-flu-killed-457-people-and-cost-1.24-billion-official-figures-show.html>
[8] Alien, Dir. by Ridley Scott (20th
Century Fox, 1979)
[9]
Stephen Prince, Digital Visual Effects in
Cinema: The Seduction of Reality (Rutgers University Press, New Jersey,
2012) p. 26
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





