Search

joshuaandrewcarver

Some Kind of Vertigo

A Chris Marker double-bill – I have seen Marker’s famous photo-film La Jetée many times, but not for years. The first time I was 17, in college, recommended by my photography tutor. I’d never seen anything like it. A year or two later at I saw it at the cinema, part of the Aurora Festival, I was amazed again. It’s a few more years down the line and I’m concerned it might not be as great as I remember. That’s always the way with favourites – what if it doesn’t live up to my memories. Terrifyingly, to begin with it didn’t. I just wasn’t getting into it at first, a sinking feeling. But give it a chance and it delivers, reaching a high peak at it’s famous motion sequence that’s still powerful even when you know it’s coming. It’s not just the use of motion here but the sequence as a whole, how it slows everything down to focus on these subtle changing images of this girl in bed. From there on Chris Marker had me riveted. Even without the haunting sound design each composition is great in its own right. A film of gritty, high contrast stills – but it works. It’s dirty and ramshackle and wouldn’t work half as well if it wasn’t. Marker may use tell his story through stills but they’re not motionless – each one shudders and flows, we see the movement of film passing through the projector, we see the grain shimmer, injecting life. To put together stills digitally as we do now would feel sterile in comparison.LJ_6_large.jpg

Then on to Sans Soleil, that big gap in my film history. I had been waiting to get my hands on this double-bill Criterion Blu Ray, at an agreeable price. Ebay paid off eventually. It certainly shows off the wonderful imagery – it may be grainy, but on blu ray you can see each grain. Well almost. Another reason I had held out this long is because I wanted to see it with the original french voice-over instead of the English, but after comparing the French and English on La Jetée I realised that the English version is actually pretty good. For this type of essay film the superiority of subtitles over dubbing is not so clear cut, and they obviously put a lot of effort in to the english voiceovers here. I’m glad I did end up watching Sans Soleil with the English voice over, it’s done extremely well. A great voice. A great film. It’s not as iconic or memorable as La Jetée but in many ways it’s smarter and more affecting. It’s an odd film. There isn’t a clear theme, other than Marker’s own travels, subjects are discussed and changed seemingly at random. A train of thought. One of the stops explores Hitchcock’s Vertigo, his inspiration for La Jetée (“Here I was born and there I died. It was only a moment for you, you took no notice.”) He also has obsessions with cats, and owls. Marker’s diaristic writing is simply amazing, and the images no less so. The African woman’s 24th of a second glance to camera joins La Jetee’s feminine glance as one of the great moments in cinema. You can see the influence Marker has had on cine-essayists since; Mark Cousins clearly owes a debt. But one very smart move differentiates Sans Soleil from his imitators, in that he doesn’t voice it himself, rather the voiceover is given by a woman who supposedly quotes letters sent from his travels. Marker’s absence as such adds poignancy and mystery. It’s as if he cannot voice the film himself because he is still out there filming in some distant land.Event_2568.jpg

Something about Chris Marker’s globe-trotting and a time-spanning romance makes me think of Linklater’s Before Trilogy. I came to these fairly late, watching the first two a year or so ago and loving them despite – or maybe because of – some contrived dialogue. Maybe because it feels like the characters’ contrivances rather than the films’. Without much fanfare surrounding this release, I came into Before Midnight expecting this to be their Godfather: Part 3, but I was delighted to find that it’s just as good as ever. Like the other two it’s occasionally a little clunky and cliched, and like the other two it’s great anyway. The simplicity is impressive. To be absorbed in simple conversation – Linklater is surely the true inheritor of Eric Rohmer. The characters’ arguments may be nothing new but that’s always been Linklater’s strength – he doesn’t break new ground where subject matter is concerned, he just does it better than most other filmmakers, rendering the familiar truthful and heartbreaking. My life is nothing like Celine and Jesse’s but I still saw my life in every scene, and that’s Linklater’s genius. It’s a film of self reflection that left me blissfully melancholic, and above all, romantic. That’s pretty impressive considering that this part of the trilogy adopts a more resigned and realistic tone to reflect the characters’ middle age. The romance is gone, and yet it isn’t.giphy-2.gif

Something about Chris Marker’s cinephilia makes me think of Guy Maddin. Until recently I’d read a lot about Guy Maddin and seen a short or two, but not much else. I thought there was some pretty good stuff but couldn’t quite get past the pastiche, the thick layers of irony. The other day I watched an extra from the Journey To Italy disk, featuring Isabella Rossellini in a film about her dad called My Dad is 100 Years Old. It was surprisingly excellent. Surreal, touching and funny. One for cinephiles only perhaps, but still. It’s an oneiric film where Isabella bizarrely plays not only her father, but also his contemporaries – Fellini, Hitchcock, etc. The imagery is wonderful: her childhood memories of her father are visualised with her lying on a giant belly. I’ve never seen anything quite like it. The end credits reveal that it was directed by Guy Maddin, so I thought it was probably time to watch a DVD a friend had lent to me a few months ago, The Saddest Music in the World a film by Guy Maddin starring Isabella Rossellini. MDI100YO was odd, but I was not prepared for this. It’s a difficult film to explain – stylistically it’s certainly a pastiche, repurposing techniques from other eras of cinema. And yet it’s a pastiche of what, exactly? Even in a single scene, there is no fidelity to one era or one genre or even one tone. It’s a mismatch hodgepodge of everything, from all of cinema. It’s got a classic film noir protagonist like Walter Neff (Mark McKinney, making an excellent heel), or is he more of a 30’s screwball Clark Gable? The plot is insane yet coherent – to give you a sample, it features beer magnate Isabella Rossellini with glorious glass beer-filled prosthetic legs after losing both, one totally needlessly when the doctor (who she was seeing, but cheating on with his son) drunkenly amputates the wrong leg – after an accident that he caused. An air of frantic invention recalls the best of the late silent heyday, not only mimicking these techniques but improving on them, inventing new ones. Maddin doesn’t steal so much as embody, and he embodies everything at once. Against all odds, it works! It’s brilliant, it’s joyful, it’s exhilarating. The self-conscious and ironic techniques, the bizarre plot and dialogue, somehow none of this interferes with the drama, creating a dizzying amalgamation of everything that is great about cinema.My-Dad-is-100-Years-Old-1.png

Barfly

Micky Rourke playing famous author/poet/drunk Charles Bukowski is an immediately tantalising prospect, especially when joined by Faye Dunaway and a script by Bukowski himself. Yet Barbet Schroeder’s 1987 Barfly has remained under-seen and under-praised, particularly in the UK (it seems it was never given a disk release here, though there are imports available). I may not have heard of Barfly myself if it wasn’t for a college media teacher with particularly outré taste in films.

The characters that inhabit this world of seedy bars and ramshackle apartments feel distinctly Lynchian, so it makes perfect sense when Jack Nance pops up, a Lynch regular since Eraserhead. His appearance is morbidly appropriate for a film bookended with vicious bar fights, considering that Nance died 9 years later from injuries following a drunken brawl. Mickey Rourke is ideally suited to the subject matter himself (the boxing, the reputation) and despite his really quite mannered portrayal we feel we are seeing something genuine. It has the unmistakable stink of authenticity, the sense that the whole cast belongs in this world.

I was surprised to see this turn up on UK Netflix. For all my complaints about film selection, they do make up for it with rare gems like this, a film that’s imperfect but full of barmy energy. The cinematography is rough and ready, bold but beautiful, no surprise coming from Wim Wenders’ regular collaborator Robby Muller. Rourke tends to steal any show he’s in, but Dunaway equals his performance here. They create characters that are at once grotesque and sympathetic. Violent, pathetic and charming. In one extraordinary scene, Dunaway’s Wanda brings Bukowski’s alter ego Henry Chinaski back to her disgusting apartment. She breaks down in a drunken stupor after cooking unripe corncobs (stolen from a crop patch on their way home) when Henry points out that they are, obviously, inedible. They sit and talk. The atmosphere is electric. “Just one thing”, she warns. “I don’t ever want to fall in love. I don’t want to go through that again.” “Don’t worry, Rourke wearily reassures her. “Nobody’s ever loved me yet.”

large_qzGLU0z7NsdykwiiwO69OlShIvk.jpg

Violently Cinematic

If you watch a lot of films (and I don’t watch as many as I’d like these days, what with having to be a ’grownup’. Well, sort of), it’s easy to become jaded with the whole medium. It’s easy to be struck by the melancholy that’s it’s just not the same as it was when I was a teenager discovering the delights of cinema. Then Film4 shows Shogun Assassin and I fall in love all over again. To many it’s a title that’ll be familiar only as B.B.’s bedtime movie in Kill Bill: Vol. 2, and the influence on Tarantino is immediately apparent. Much of his visual style and thematic fixations seem to be taken directly from Shogun Assassin, and to watch it more fully contextualised Tarantino for me. It’s also totally majestic. I was expecting fun trash, not great cinema. I found both. That it took me by surprise only enhanced things (sorry, now I’m sending you in with the expectations I didn’t have). For a start, it’s not even an original. This is an American dubbed re-edit of not one, but two Japanese films in the Lone Wolf and Cub Series. I very much want to see the originals, and excitingly Criterion are releasing their blu ray boxset of the whole lot – including Shogun Assassin – over here in the UK later in March. It’s hard to imagine the original films being better though. What could be improved? Well alright, the plot could certainly use some work, but then it’s not the kind of film that relies on perfect narrative cohesion. In most cases I’m opposed to english dubbing of foreign language films, subtitles are nearly always preferable. This is a special case though, a new creation rather than a straight translation, and a rare brilliant example of creative use of dubbing. The material itself is so odd that the dubbing enhances the seductive dreamlike (nightmare-like?) atmosphere. The violence is wonderfully disjointed and expressionistic, not uncommon in Asian films of this period, but this is perhaps the best I’ve ever seen it done. Chinese film Come Drink With Me does rival in it in terms of wonderfully bizarre and creative violence, but the narrative here is even worse, clumsy to the point of incomprehension. I didn’t know what was going on, and I didn’t really care. Early on, the lead character (apparently) tries to rescue her brother by pretending to be a man but it took a while to figure out that this was what was supposed to be happening – she’s so obviously a woman that the whole concept feels ridiculous. I suppose it doesn’t help that traditional Chinese male dress looks more like female attire to westerners, things are getting lost in translation here. None of this ruins the film entirely, but I can’t help feeling that with a better plot it could have been a masterpiece. The pleasure of Come Drink With Me is the fighting. The beautiful, abstract fighting. It is far from realistic, but something much better: it is cinematic. It is poetic. The elliptical distortions of time and space, the subtly surreal atmosphere astonishes. But as a whole, Shogun Assassin is the better film by far, kept alive by its tender heart, the father/son relationship. The little boy is sublime and his voiceover is used brilliantly (he’s incredibly cute when counting the foes slain by his father). It’s also a handsome film and although it’s not as gorgeous as some of its Chinese peers with their wonderful colours, it does make great use of light and shadow, like the slitted hats the Masters of Death wear. My only criticism is the weak ending, which renders the plot somewhat confusing. Something was likely lost in reworking it, stitching two films into one. No matter. Shogun Assassin has bounties of tactile pleasures to indulge in. I can’t wait for Criterion’s Boxset to discover the whole series of originals.shoguns-blodige-svc3a6rd.jpg

I saw Come Drink With Me on Film4 as part of their Martial Arts Gold program. This also included Five Fingers of Death, AKA King Boxer. As with Shogun Assassin this is a favourite of Tarantino, and again, it’s obvious, but to Tarantino’s credit he steals from the best. From King Boxer he’s lifted several moments and techniques verbatim for Kill Bill, including the eye-plucking and a memorable sound cue. Whereas Shogun Assassin is luridly brilliant from the start, King Boxer takes a while to get going, but once it does it’s exhilarating. It starts out as your typical martial arts film, slightly bizarre, with some solid yet surreal violence and a much more coherent plot than most in Film4’s Martial Arts season. It’s a little tame, a little dull, but gradually builds up steam to culminate in an ecstatic, lurid and brilliant final act. Words can’t really explain why it’s brilliant. At least mine can’t. So you’ll just have to watch it.

The-King-Boxer-Five-Fingers-of-Death-thumb-1600x900-c-default.jpg
Five Fingers of Death

A quick aside: another unexpected favourite of mine last year was Breathless – not Godard’s new wave classic but the trashy American remake with Richard Gere, AKA A bout de souffle Made in USA. I wish I had made notes about it at the time so that I had more to say, but I can say that I enjoyed it hugely and that it’s another big influence on Tarantino. The scenes between Butch and Fabienne in Pulp Fiction are almost ripped directly from this film, but more than that there’s a general pop-culture-infused tone of irreverence that has shaped Tarantino’s work more than anything else I’ve seen. It’s hugely underrated in my opinion, in fact, Tarantino is the only person I’ve ever heard recommending it. It’s currently on UK Netflix, so find out for yourself.

Back to the main subject. Those Asian films from the 60s and 70s may be gory, but by the late 80s films like Tetsuo: The Iron Man took things to new extremes. Tetsuo is completely mad but surprisingly engaging considering how disconnected its narrative is, that is if you could describe it as having one. I admit my interest began to wane towards the end but there’s so much stunning surreal imagery to be able to enthusiastically recommend it. It’s what you might get if you crossed Akira with Cronenberg’s body horror, Sam Raimi’s energetic technique and Jan Svankmajer’s surreal stop-motion creations, and it’s as good as that sounds. My main criticism is simply that the lack of coherence did begin to fatigue me. A longer film might not have worked as well, but at just over an hour long, director Shinya Tsukamoto could afford to be as madly experimental as this, with extraordinary results. With Tetsuo II: Body Hammer, the filmmakers are smart in making a more narrative film whilst keeping the surrealism front and centre. Where the first film is a black and white steampunk horror poem, the sequel takes the somewhat more traditional structure of the 80s action movie, but still appropriates much of the imagery, ideas and abstract techniques of the original. It makes for a vastly different film, but again, brutal and satisfying. They had gone as far as they could with the material in its original form, so this reimagining makes for a great sequel. Aside from the narrative, what’s most striking is the vibrant colour cinematography, opening up new directions visually – and these films are above all else visual experiences.

tetsuo-2.jpg
Body Hammer

Speaking of 80s action movies, I want to take a moment to talk about Commando. Silly American Arnie action movie Commando. I can’t believe I’d never seen Commando. Defying all my expectations of tone-deaf over-serious Hollywood dumbness, this is in fact a piece of brilliant camp action comedy from the start, beginning with a ridiculous montage of Arnie and his daughter living in perfect bliss (he playfully gets an ice cream in the face, obviously.) Of course, this bliss doesn’t last long and he finds himself in a race against time to save his daughter’s life. I don’t think I’d be exaggerating to call this one of the best comedies I’ve ever seen, though it’s difficult to tell how much of this the filmmakers intended. Some, certainly. I posed this question to a friend. He said “They must know. They’re adults.” It’s a very fine line, but then it’s a very difficult thing to make a good-bad film on purpose – you cannot be seen to be trying too hard – so this confusion is probably key to its success. On occasion the knowingness is clearer, such as the running commentary of a ridiculous (but nonetheless punchy and effective) fight scene: “These guys eat too much red meat!” Whatever the intention, I enjoyed this film immensely. There are rarely great western equivalents to the transcendently bizarre martial arts films of the east, and this still lacks the grace and poetry in the violence for that, but it’s one of the closest I’ve seen. With added bad puns.

Positive Print

On to the new additions to my Favourites list over the course of last year:

I wrote about The Pawnbroker last January when I was keeping up with the blogging – this didn’t last long. It’s still on Netflix UK, so what are you waiting for? Other favourites that I covered are The Fireman’s Ball (one of the best and most memorable of the year, looking back), Keaton’s The Boat and One Week, Don Hertzfeldt’s latest animated short World of Tomorrow (brilliant as always), Bottle Rocket, and of course The Revenant and The Hateful Eight, which I went into in detail here. Later, my Halloween night Netflix pick The Skull surprised and delighted me enough to break a long blogging silence with a post all to itself.

Let’s start with some razzle-dazzle: All That Jazz had been a while coming. I love Fosse’s Cabaret (though it took a three viewings to sufficiently grow on me) so I was looking forward to this, although wondering how it could possibly live up to its predecessor. This is basically Bob Fosse’s 8 ½, his autobiographical musings on a life, and a death. As you’d imagine it all gets quite meta and Fosse structures the film brilliantly, cutting between reality, fantasy and somewhere in-between. It made me want to be less linear in my own work, but I can never quite figure out how, my brain doesn’t work that way. I shouldn’t force it, I should work with what comes naturally to me just as Fosse developed a distinctive, hunched dancing style to suit his own body. But at least for a couple of hours I felt inspired and/or jealous. I preferred the first half, the ‘life’, to the second half, the ‘death’, where it sometimes feels too derivative of 8 ½ and other autobiographical works to do with show business (Chaplin’s Limelight?). Before it gets to all that it has a lot more in common with Cabaret – the bad living, the sex, the adultery, the cynicism. It’s beautiful and horrible and terribly enjoyable. It’s got that debauched energy, the sexy/weird musical numbers. The editing is fantastic too, lots of exhilarating elliptical cuts between scenes, and if it wasn’t already meta enough, the character is editing a film as well as putting on a show. He thinks he’s doing a terrible job at both but we come to realise he’s actually a big name, critically acclaimed. Even success doesn’t bring satisfaction with the work. There’s something oddly comforting in that.

6776213224_6d36b899b2_b.jpgI’m usually pretty lazy in structuring these blogs, listing films in irrelevant chronology of watching. This time I wanted to do better, to segue between films in clever or, at least, coherent ways. Not having watched any Fellini lately, I seem to have painted myself into a corner with All That Jazz. How about going from a choreographer to a court jester? It’ll have to do. I hadn’t heard of The Court Jester before it popped up on Netflix. Apparently it’s considered something of a minor classic, although I must say that the oversaturated image of a grinning Danny Kaye in medieval jester garb didn’t exactly fill me with enthusiasm. But I was impressed with Kaye in the original adaptation of The Secret Life of Walter Mitty, so I thought I’d give it a go. A banal song by Kaye accompanying the opening credits did little to encourage my expectations. A toothless children’s film? Thankfully not. Things improve rapidly as we leap in to find not a damp family musical but a sharp Robin Hood parody. Essentially this is a vehicle for Danny Kaye’s comedic, musical and dramatic talents, but it’s one that he drives remarkably well. He’s a broad and traditional performer, but he’s quick, charismatic and very funny. The excellent supporting cast (including a game Angela Lansbury) mean it’s not a one-man-show, and remarkably for a half-forgotten musical comedy, the songs aren’t bad either. Even some of the most famous musicals of this period fill an inordinate amount of screen time with weak songs between the showstoppers. The Court Jester may not have any real showstoppers, but once we’re past the cringeworthy opening, the tunes are solid and entertaining. There’s also an alarming amount of sexual innuendo for a 50s family film. Towards the beginning, Kaye and his female captain Glynis Johns shelter from the rain in a leaky shed. Lying down to sleep in the straw together, the sexual tension is palpable. ’Wet’, he observes in the awkward silence.’ “Very”, comes her casual reply. The subtext is crystal clear, but it’s judged perfectly: something for the adults to enjoy that’ll go straight over kid’s heads. Even in its bawdiness, the humour is imbued with something familiar and warm, the sort of jokes that Shakespeare made. If I was feeling picky I’d complain about the low resolution of this presentation, but this isn’t Netflix’s fault – Paramount needs to make a shiny new remaster. Still, they’ve done a decent job considering, and the Technicolors pop. I may have been sceptical going in, but I found a real joyful film, in that rare way that the best of classical Hollywood cinema achieves. The Court Jester deserves to be better remembered.

Now I might as well stick to the comedy vibe. In my last post I mentioned Christopher Guest’s new film for Netflix, Mascots, and how it tries hard to recreate the success of Best in Show, without quite managing. That’s only because Best in Show is very good indeed, especially considering that it doesn’t have the same kind of reputation as This is Spinal Tap, but it would deserve itThere’s some extremely funny stuff here, especially the competition commentators, and Eugene Levy’s two left feet. And Christopher Guest attempting ventriloquism. If that wasn’t enough, the competition segments are genuinely suspenseful. I was actually emotionally involved in who was going to win, which is no mean feat for a very silly mocumentary. And he can name all the nuts.

anomalisa1280ajpg-0d6f64_1280w.jpg

Anomalisa

Anomalisa is a somewhat different type of comedy. Because its short running time flies by, I wasn’t expecting it to end where it did, thinking something ‘more’ was going to happen. In retrospect it was a great place to end it, I just needed to recalibrate my expectations. This is not the kind of film where things happen; it’s about the details. For a stop-motion puppet film it’s ironic how realistic it is. That’s the point really. It’s odd to call it realistic, when there are so many surreal stylistic touches, like the brilliantly inventive/lazy voice-work than underpins the whole film. The stylistic flourishes are there to better reveal truthful things, the surreal touches to throw real life into sharp focus. It’s definitely a comedy, though some might call it a bleak one, but it’s as touching as it is funny, a combination that peaks in one brilliant hotel-bedroom scene. I won’t say too much, but if you’re struggling to imagine how a film can be surreal and realistic at the same time, you’ll understand what I’m on about after this scene. Anomalisa is esentially about the simultaneous anxiety and monotony of real life, something that underpins most of Kaufman’s films, including his debut as director of his own script Synecdoche, New York, which was sort of a horror film where the horror stems from daily life – illness, ageing, interacting with other people, creative dissatisfaction. Does Anomalisa feel kind of lightweight next to that sprawling magnum opus about a sprawling magnum opus? Maybe. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, he probably felt a need to simplify after all that, and with puppet animation he has found his perfect medium. He and co-director Duke Johnson (he did the stop-motion episode of Community) understand how to make the medium work for the story. The cracks in the puppets’ faces are not hidden, becoming cracks in the characters. Sometimes like wrinkles or scars, sometimes more abstract and metaphorical. Most vitally, by using animation Kaufman can pursue his realism of details without it becoming boring. Real life in animation is a novelty, still. Too much, of course, and the charm would fade, so 90 minutes is about right, to prevent us from becoming as disillusioned as the character. Speaking of which, I watched this on Netflix but was pretty disappointed by the streaming quality, especially for a recent release. Its a subtle film of dimly lit rooms, and the image doesn’t really hold up to Netflix’s compression. If you’re the kind of person who is going to be bothered by image artefacts and general mush (you’re probably not, there don’t seem to be many of us left in the wild) then I’d recommend getting hold of the blu ray instead. Or sitting further away from your TV than I do.

Moving swiftly on to another brilliant stop-motion animation means I must be getting better at these segues. It probably doesn’t need saying, but Aardman’s original Creature Comforts is short but very sweet. I grew up with with rebooted series, but this original is sort of perfect. The real interviews are fantastic, the claymation is superb – put together some sort of magic happens.

See, I told you this would be a nice, happy, positive blog. The next one might be gorier.

The Negative

Before the year was out I intended to write up my favourites of the films I saw in 2016. It’s almost March. The moment has passed. So I’ll write a looser series of posts around those same films – no one cares when I watched them, the important thing is that they’re good.

Most people would list the best films released theatrically that year, and being in the middle of awards season makes that pretty relevant. I can’t do this myself, for one important reason: I only saw three new releases in 2016, and none of the current awards slate. So-called cinephile. It’s too expensive and I’m poor, but even if I wasn’t the screening conditions are not nearly good enough to justify the price. Digital projection is still lacking, though granted we are still in a transitional period and this will improve (the technology is all but there, just too expensive for anyone but the big hitters). Worse are marks on the screen, crooked or cropped projection and distractingly placed lights, which is even more of a problem if it flares in your 3D glasses, not that the 3D experience is usually up to scratch anyway. Granted there are personal aspects too – not having perfect hearing, I’d often rather watch at home with subtitles and not miss anything. Cinema visits are usually saved for social occasions and opportunities to see older films on the big screen – me and mine enjoyed Pepe Le Moko and Lift to the Scaffold last year. Even this is often marred by poor quality, as demonstrated by our first cinema visit of 2017, Jaques Demy’s Lola, a good film but clearly just played off a DVD. I could have done that at home. They really shouldn’t be allowed to do that without telling you. The big cine-event of 2016 was the re-release of Napoleon on the big screen but, for the price they were asking (£19!) they could have at least put it on their actual big screen, not one of the smaller ones, particularly given that the ultra-wide ‘triptych’ section is one of the big selling points. I gave it a miss and I suspect I’ll get a better experience from the blu ray disk. Size is overrated. At least the image will be framed correctly without cropping any of the picture out. I am still baffled that cinemas can’t seem to get this right, when the room is surely designed for it. This isn’t a dig at my local Picturehouse, but a lamentation about cinema projection in general. If they want people who care to keep going then they’ve got to improve things or make it much cheaper. Probably both. I suspect things are better in London, but I don’t live there.66a51c60ee22a4eeb93572da856f0954.jpg

Am I being harsh, picky? Certainly working with video myself has made me a lot more attentive to these issues, especially when I have to go through the ordeal of watching my own films projected. To be fair, the best screening I’ve had by far was at a Picturehouse cinema, but even then there were problems in representing colour and contrast. When it comes to sound Mark Cousins recently lamented that cinemas are too quiet, that they should be as loud as a rock concert where appropriate – I have to agree. The whole point of cinemas, surely, is to offer what you can’t get at home. Multiplexes do seem better in this respect, (and in many others – I suppose they can afford it) but there is still a sense that they’re holding back. I’m sometimes told that certain technical aspects ‘don’t matter’ in a dismissive attitude that people wouldn’t dream of applying to serious art. That’s the diminished standing of cinema as an art form. It’s fine not to have developed an eye or ear for such things (I certainly don’t have the ear) but can we not all agree that ideally, we’d want the best perceptual fidelity as possible? Especially if we’re paying so much for them. And if we can’t agree on that, why not? People wouldn’t take that attitude towards paintings. I’ve only ever seen digital reproductions of Girl With A Pearl Earring – I like it a lot and feel I can get a decent sense of it without seeing the original. It’s not exactly cheap or convenient to go to Holland whenever you wanted, after all. But if I was going to pay to go and see it, of course I would want to see the original. And if not, it would be better to see a more detailed representation of greater fidelity than a little discoloured postcard print, though this too may well do in a pinch. The more accurate representation is clearly better when it comes to paintings. To deny this of film is to deny its status as a visual art, instead just a conduit for narrative information. Cinema is lots of things, and they’re all important. Of course films don’t really have ‘originals’, especially in our digital age. Reproduction always was integral to cinema – that’s part of what makes it great, and what makes it the medium of the masses. It’s fidelity that’s important, to experience the thing as close to how its creators have intended as possible. This becomes very clear in screening my own work – I want people to see it the way I made it. Of course we all make necessary sacrifices in fidelity based on cost and accessibility. The vast majority of us can’t access film prints in our own private cinemas. We make trade-offs because we know that we’re not losing too much. But for me, cinemas are supposed to be the professionals. The film galleries, the protectors of fidelity in our convenience age. We need to know that when we go, we are seeing the film at its best. Failing that, they need to be cheap and accessible.

Unknown.jpeg
Girl With a Pearl Earring, low-res. Just to make a point.

I did see 3 new releases in the cinema last year:  Hail Casear, The Revenant and The Hateful Eight. These were released towards the beginning of the year when all worthwhile films seem to be released (or maybe I’m still in celebratory mode – with Christmas and Birthday, I am freer with my money). But alas, no new Tarantino or Coen films this winter. That’s no visits to see new films at the cinema since March. That pattern has started repeating this year with a few cinema visits already, though again, these are mainly older or foreign films (including Toni Erdmann – one of the best films I’ve ever seen – though I’ll talk about that some other time). 2017 is shaping up to be an even worse year for the Hollywood mainstream than 2016 was, but perhaps that’s no great loss. The talent is pooling in other areas, definitions of film are blurring. It says something that one of the few 2016 releases I watched was Mascots, on Netflix. Which is very enjoyable but not up to the standards of Best in Show, which it is obviously trying to replicate (and the photography is ugly). I did catch up with several 2015 releases, without being very impressed – Mockingjay pt. 2 (the worst in a good series), Bridge of Spies (promisingly low-key, the ending ruins it), Steve Jobs (fine, but up itself), Macbeth (great when it’s simple but keeps complicating things), The Martian (good premise but ultimately not successful), The Good Dinosaur (dull and simplistic by Pixar’s standards), Ant-Man (Edgar Wright’s version could have been great, this isn’t.), Straight Outta Compton (disappointingly cliched), Spectre (some crunchy fights but lacks what made Skyfall great), Trainwreck (some great jokes and performances – Tilda! – but poor narrative), Jurassic World (why did I watch this?) and Avengers: Age of Ultron (A mess, the chaos doesn’t seem to have consequences, but Paul Bettany’s big perfect purple person is bizarrely great). To be fair, I didn’t expect much from many of these titles in the first place. Peer pressure more than anything. Remember kids: Just Say No. It’s proof at least that I’m willing to watch mediocre films in order to stay part of the cinema conversation. I’m just not often willing to pay cinema prices to do it.

That last paragraph sounds harsh and snobbish, reading it back. Well it is. I’m just sick of watching bland films when there is so much genuinely interesting stuff out there. We only have so much time.

hail1
Hail Caesar!

Fairing a bit better were Me, Earl and The Dying Girl, Inside Out, The Big Short, Shaun the Sheep and Hitchcock/Truffaut, but only 2 that I watched from 2015 made my favourites: Ex Machina and Wild Tales. I wrote briefly about Ex Machina at the beginning of the year, January being the only time I can muster the motivation to write these things (hello again – taken a bit longer this time), at New-Year’s insistence on me being a proper person who writes things. It’s a borderline favourite for me, I liked it a lot yet something didn’t quite sit right. I’ve forgotten much of it a year later. Oscar Issac dancing. Some impressive effects. The faint whiff of Black Mirror. Wild Tales was a real find though – brutal, unforgiving, the blackest of humour. It always keeps one foot in the land of movies – the surreal, the unreal, the constructed – so we don’t make the mistake of taking it too seriously, so we can enjoy it’s movieness without too much guilt. After all, what’s more cinematic than a revenge story? Six of them, apparently. Strong concepts are executed expertly, building vital empathy along with the suspense. I suppose this one feels a bit like Black Mirror too, in all the best ways. The pace starts to wane a little in the last two segments and almost drags the film down with it, but just as it was losing me it reels me back in again with a great reversal, that rarest of things, a perfectly judged ending.

Sorry for the largely negative post. I always want to retain the integrity to speak my mind, but in doing so I have almost certainly offended many people by dismissing films they like. Of course ‘many’ is not an accurate description of the number of people who will read this, so you’ll have to take that last sentence hypothetically. Anyway, I thought I’d get the whining out of the way. The next one will be more aligned with the spirit of that Wild Tales review at the end: full of pure love for brilliant films.

wild-tales2.jpg
Wild Tales

I’m not a gamer, but…

I’m not much of a gamer at all these days, but I do get the occasional Steam game when there’s a good offer (the christmas sales), and play them when I take some time off my usual schedule. I’ve been a bit under the weather this past week, which I’ve used as a flimsy excuse to play a few games I got in the Humble Freedom Bundle. I say a few.
I mean 62 games.
For about £25.
Including some of the best indie games of recent years.
And %100 of the money goes to charities – ones that are proving vital in battling the rising fascism, inhumanity and stupidity that we are currently experiencing.
This is an important move from the gaming community, who hold much responsibility for the rise of the ‘alt-right’, which was foreshadowed by gamergate and perpetuated by many of the same losers. I mean people, sorry. Insults probably do more harm than good, but it’s hard to avoid the assessment that most of these people’s insane right-wing views are are fuelled by a bitterness that has twisted their perception of the world (coupled of course, with very poor sources of information). So to call them losers is probably to throw more fuel on the fire. But that’s not to say it’s not accurate. They won’t read this anyway… Nevertheless, it’s clear that in recent years they have done much to take the Gamers’ hard won acceptance into the mainstream and drag it back into the swamp. That’s one reason why this act of mass charity seems so important. This sense of collective responsibility from the best indie developers for the worst parts of their community is surely why this unprecedented deal exists. That so many of them are donating their games to help causes that specifically oppose the aims of the ‘alt-right’ sends a strong and necessary message. And they’ve raised over 6 million dollars already – clearly they are being heard. So if you use Steam at all it’s kind of a no-brainer (and if you don’t, I recommend it and this is a very affordable way to get started), but with less than 20 hours left to get this deal as I’m writing, you’d better hurry. My words here will be irrelevant very soon, but what else is new.
I’ve tried out around 20 of the games in the bundle, and that’s still less than ⅓ of them. But that still feels like more than enough to last me for several years. There is undoubtably some very good stuff here – so far I recommend these:
Super Hexagon – Brilliantly simple and addictive, played in very short bursts but you just have to restart as quickly as possible just to keep that music going. Seriously, that music. It’s leaking into my dreams.unnamed.jpg
The Stanley Parable – More of an experience than a game, but a great one. A meta-game. I won’t say too much, you have to find out for yourself.
Robot Roller-Derby Disco Dodgeball – Old-school style FPS reimagined as dodgeball. Roller disco dodgeball. With robots. Lots of fun with a controller.
Potatoman Seeks the Troof – Seemingly simplistic sidescroller that messes about with all the rules. Breathtakingly innovative at times, and funny too.troof-screenshot-forest-owl.png
Super Meat Boy – The only game in this massive package that I already owned, it’s good though. You play as a bit of meat.
World of Goo – Innocent and charming tower building with blobs of good. Not very far into it but promising so far.
Nuclear Throne – Only had a quick go but the gameplay is very satisfying.
The Swapper – Brilliantly atmospheric. You have to keep cloning yourself to progress, which is proving to be as great and as troubling as it sounds.3.jpg
Stardew Valley – This is one of those games where you wander around a village, talk to people, grow crops on your farm, etc. I’m not sure if I’m into that sort of thing. Seems a little long-winded – then again the original Pokemon games are not dissimilar and among my favourites so I’ll give this one a chance. It’s wittier than most and the sound design is amazing – the problem is I probably just don’t have the time to put into it.
Ninja Pizza Girl – Fun so far, free-running platformer. Though I’m not that good at it yet.
VVVVVV – Only played the first level, but this seems like another simple, brilliantly innovative game with great music. How is it that music is often the best thing in most games and the worst thing in most films? Maybe an exaggeration, maybe not. Retro games and electronic music are a sort of perfect combination. There’s too much sway towards the orchestral in film, music that is already beautiful and complete, and so clashes with the images, emotional overload. I think films need to use ‘uglier’ music more. I’ve gotten a bit off track here. It’s something I think about a lot and no one agrees with me. vvvvvv_screenshot_9.jpg
Invisible Inc. – Very well reviewed, this seems promising from the first go. Turn-based play gives it the tactical appeal of a board game. I think the cutscenes are a bit naff but that’s probably because this is one of the more mainstream games in this package and cutscenes in mainstream games are invariably atrocious. They should just stop doing them. They’re trying to be films and doing them badly. Stop it. Be games instead.
That’s just a handful of them, not even mentioning The Witness, the most hyped and expensive of the lot – full price it would cost £30, more than this whole bundle. I’m very eager to play this. It’s from the makers of Braid, which is one of the most fiendishly brilliant games I’ve played. The small problem for me is that, along with a few other titles in this bundle, it’s only currently available for Windows, and I don’t have a computer running Windows at the moment. Which is a shame, But it’s likely just because it’s still quite a recently released and hasn’t been ported to Mac yet. Apparently it’s coming soon, and now that I own it on Steam I’ll be able to access it then. There is plenty to keep me occupied til then, especially seeing as I’m not a gamer at all really. Really, I’m not. I shouldn’t even be writing this, I’m not qualified. I suppose I could just play it on somebody else’s PC if I run out of patience…
Make a donation and get a lot back out of it:

Frighteningly Fun

Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee, and a Skull. The appropriately named The Skull might be a little baggy at each end but there’s a stretch in the middle where it’s one of the most brilliant things I’ve ever seen. Apparently the delirious atmosphere is partly accidental – the script was only 40 pages and required heavy visual padding. This explains the poor pacing at times, but it’s ultimately what makes the film great. Long, wordless passages and diversions into dream logic makes it genuinely unsettling, but also gleefully camp.

To begin with it’s British horror as usual, aristocrats and books, the pleasant but foreboding atmosphere of M.R. James. In this case, the object that the characters all want to simultaneously get hold of and get rid of is the possessed Skull of the Marquis De Sade. Yes, that’s actually the plot. The Skull exerts a great power, leaving a shell-shocked Christopher Lee shouting unheeded warnings at the all too curious Cushing over billiards. A sharp change in tone turns the film into a breathtaking Kafkaesque nightmare – a term that’s frequently misused but trust me, there really is no better word for what we see. Director Freddie Francis surely took heavy influence from Welles’ The Trial just a few years earlier, and added colour.

It’s not just a theatrical use of colour (and everything else) that foreshadows the Italian Giallo genre. The Skull is full of Dario Argento’s fetishises in particular. There’s a fall from the top floor of an apartment building into a geographically confusing stained-glass ceiling that couldn’t be more Argento if it tried, a full decade before he was making films.

The artificiality, the wild tonal shifts, the awkward repetition to fill time, all just add to the nightmarish tone. That’s not to say it’s a particularly scary film. The horror aspects are quite ridiculous, relying mainly on drawn out shots of a skull sitting on a table or floating through the air. But that’s what makes it so much fun. For me, it perfectly captures the spirit of Halloween: Having fun with things that otherwise frighten us. 8b81e8e56e0934b02068fc6833807b54.jpg

Ketchup on Everything

It’s been a while since I’ve put out any film work. 2 years now since Mary No More debuted at my MA show, then I spent a while submitting it to things. Got into a couple of festivals too. The first time I’ve done the whole festival thing, so I was pleased about that, at least.

Screenshot 2016-06-22 12.19.17.png

I’ve had other video projects on the go since then, but nothing that has actually been finished. An original fiction short is still on the go. Blood and Stones. I like the idea, and the script, and the actors, and the crew, and the location. But it’s been slow going. Turns out, without the structure of a higher-education environment or any sort of funding, motivation can be hard to come by. Nevertheless, I am hoping to get back to filming soon. Impossible self-expectations don’t help. I’m too close to the whole thing. It’s only a tiny little minimalist short, how hard could it be!?

Screenshot 2016-05-15 18.13.01.png
Shooting Blood and Stones

A project with photographer Ellen Rogers has been steadily rolling along over the last year or so, going to photoshoots for BTS shots. We’ve got some beautiful footage and we’re hoping to finish editing that together pretty soon. Essentially a documentary project, it’s a little different to the kind of films I usually make, yet it feels so familiar. The process has been more akin to my photography work, following people around with a camera like some sort of creep. I like doing that.

Screenshot 2016-07-19 23.37.23.png
Ellen Rogers in the darkroom

In June, a short film by Ele Overvoorde presented the opportunity to finally work with Tom Martin, who I collared to collaborate with on the visuals. A very long 3 days but a good experience, I learned a lot. I’m editing Bear right now (my first time working with 4K files, from Tom’s lovely C300 mkII) and it’ll hopefully be passed over for sound work soon.

Screenshot 2016-07-01 17.14.08.png
Making mistakes at 3AM shooting Bear

Back in November I was invited to the Sickroom to shoot an impromptu music video for Emma Cooper’s band. I ended up getting quite a bit more footage than I had planned, and one rather long and complicated edit later, we have a music video. It’s not quite ready for human consumption yet, so you’ll have to wait until everyone is ready to release the song.

Screenshot 2016-08-06 23.25.11.png

July, back at the Sickroom again, with The Garrets. As a fan of the music, I just sort of like to hang about and take photos. It’s a great setting for that sort of thing, very cinematic. Getting a little worried that I haven’t completed any films for a while. “We should do a music video one of these days”, we’ve been saying for years. We all agree it’s a great idea. To date it hasn’t happened. A few days before the Sickroom, I’d been working on old projects, re-grading the colour, making them look a little better with new tools and experience gained since I made them. A vague idea of a showreel (which I’m currently editing to an old song from the same guys, when they were under their “Gore Vidals” moniker.) My grading software can behave a bit funny sometimes. Sometimes it’ll max out my GPU memory, and strange things happen. It’s annoying, but the patterns that it creates can actually be quite hypnotic. Working on Siren Tears from way back when, this happens. Beautiful swirls of blue and green, organic and yet confined to a grid. I thought it was a nice abstract thing, so I recorded some of it. I tried it against a few songs. The rhythm seemed a perfect fit for Ketchup on Everything, one of my favourites. Why not make a sort of glitchy music video? It’s not the sort of thing I’ve done before, but why not?

I’d recently discovered another way to create glitchy footage. For the last 2 years I’ve been primarily shooting on my 5d mkIII, using the Magic Lantern raw hack. While very unofficial, it’s usually very stable, but things go a little bit crazy if I try to extent to framerate further than it wants to go. So that was my plan for the Sickroom. I was limited to short bursts of a few seconds before the recordings failed, but it was enough.

Screenshot 2016-08-06 13.16.49.png
This happened in-camera. I don’t know why.

It seemed like if the whole this was made of barely decipherable glitches, it might get a little monotonous. Perhaps I should have had the guts to just go for it, but I’m not much of an abstract artist. However, a footage hoarder I am, and I have amassed a fair amount of footage of The Garrets’ Will and Dave over the years. They both worked on Siren Tears with me – I have footage of them, standing out in the cold for me to shoot lighting tests. Dave was even the lead in one of my BA films. 5 years ago or so, Will and I worked on a short film he had written, about eggs. Unfortunately we encountered difficulties during filming and never completed it, but I kept the footage we did shoot. (I nicked the egg theme for a scene in Mary No More, which I wrote with Will). It’s really quite interesting footage. It would be a shame to waste it.I found that all this worked best with the music, with the tone and rhythm of the music if I sped it up. reducing meaning to focus on the movements, the rhythms. Some of the image/music matches even ended up being quite appropriate, funny even, sort of by accident.

Screenshot 2016-08-06 13.16.32.png

The result works quite well, I think. Not bad for a couple of week’s editing anyway. Appropriate for the track, at the very least. Whether it’ll be of interest to those who don’t know the band remains to be seen. But then, you should get to know the band, if you know what’s good for you. The main reason I wanted to make the video in the first place was really to get people to listen to their music. They’re properly excellent, and Ketchup on Everything is one of my favourite tracks. People are more likely to listen to a song if it’s got a video, right?

Well, whether people watch or not, I’d like to make some more videos with them. Maybe it’ll be for one of the great new tracks that have just gone up on their soundcloud:

 

 

 

Thoughts on Films (and other things I watched in January)

So far in making my thoughts about film public I’ve been sticking to my favourites. Nice and safe and friendly. Now I’m going to broaden things out by including some not-so-favourites too. I’m sure I’ll offend lots of people (particularly fans of The Avengers). Reading back through it, there does seem to be a definite pattern emerging as to how I feel about the mainstream. Anyway, without further ado here are the things that I watched in January that I had something to say about:

Kingsman has its tongue in cheek throughout but still somehow suffers from thinking it’s cooler than it is, trying to be James Bond just as often as it parodies it. It was all very watchable but I can’t really say I like all this CG-enhanced ultraviolence (I like good old fashioned ultraviolence) and it didn’t really get the silliness balance right. It sits somewhere uncomfortably between Lock Stock and Austin Powers, but it’s still not silly enough allay my annoyance at Eggsy’s sudden development of almost super-human powers towards the end.

I’m not sure why I watched Avengers: Age of Ultron, I wasn’t a big fan of the first one. Peer pressure I guess. This one is worse. Not bad exactly, just overstuffed. Dull. It’s interesting that so much carnage can be dull. But then it’s all just pixels. There’s no blood. No one dies except when the filmmakers want to squeeze a few tears from you. Surely tens of thousands of people would have been killed in collateral damage? We don’t see any of that. I must admit, these films are still among the best coming out of Hollywood. That isn’t exactly promising. The cynical wit brought by Tony Stark et al does elevate it a little, but at the same time it’s all so juvenile. There’s no real filmmaking vision here, that’s what makes it bland. Ultron slots perfectly into that recent tradition of forgettable CG monster/villians (I am Legend? Cloverfield? Everything else released in the last few years?) It’s also extremely disconcerting seeing The Avengers in Norwich. Especially when they stand in almost the exact same spot as I’ve filmed in myself – it kind of breaks the illusion. But not to be completely negative – I did love Paul Bettany’s weird perfect purple thing. It’s really fucking weird.  I’ll probably watch the next one and complain that it’s not very good.

Over the last several months I’ve slow-dripped Band of Brothers. I admit I was skeptical of the hype. I was expecting Hollywood gloss and Hollywood sentiment. And indeed it is that glossy, sentimental show every now and again but it’s so good in all other areas that I didn’t really care. The opening interviews are great touch, grounding it in the real people and events. The whole thing feels genuine, authentic. All the awful aspects of war, the fighting, the dying, is done so convincingly that it took me on the journey with Easy Company. So I didn’t mind the occasional cliched voiceover and a bit of soppy underscoring. Instead I got the sense that what I was seeing was not far off what actually happened.

I’ll give the next season of Doctor Who a miss. I meant to do it with the last one but the the season started off well again. At least I’m glad I did watch, just for that one great episode Heaven Sent. But otherwise, it doesn’t really seem like a good use of my time, the shows aren’t strong enough. Which is sad in a way because Capaldi is great. That’s probably why Heaven Sent was so good – it was a Capaldi one man show.

Watching Master of None on Netflix was the opposite experience. When I saw it advertised it didn’t appeal to me at all but I have been so pleasantly surprised by this series, it’s one of the best things in ages. The idea of Parks&Rec’s Tom having his own show sounded kind of exhausting. He is still a little Tom-like in Master of None, but toned down, more realistic. And that sums up the whole show. It’s just about life, and it’s hugely relatable. It’s the kind of material that could be completely mediocre but they pull it off with such an easy charm that makes it quite lovely to watch. That’s one of the few ways in which it is similar to Parks&Rec, it creates a world that is just pleasant to spend time in. It’s also got a cheeky creative streak that’s obviously inspired by Louie. Louis C.K. has really paved the way to a more creative, experimental kind of comedy series. Having just finished Master of None I can say I loved every episode, but I’m not sure why. It somehow perfectly evokes various feelings and situations that life throws at you. But it never quite goes so far as to be too sentimental or preachy. A fantastically catchy soundtrack doesn’t hurt either.

The Pawnbroker is an excellent film in that classic Lumet way, illuminated by great acting from Rod Steiger as well as many memorable character actors. The shop’s customer’s are heartbreaking, vulnerable and delusional. The quick-cut flashbacks are stylistically bold and extremely effective. The only issue is the consistency of the acting, which often swings the other way, pushing the film further and further into melodrama as it progresses. Despite its problems it remains an intense and affecting film. My first favourite of the year.

The Fireman’s Ball is less a dark comedy and more a dark absurdity. In this respect it couldn’t feel more Czech. As in A Blonde in Love, Milos Forman displays a fascination with drunken behaviour and squeezes a lot of humour out of it too. It also evokes Jan Svankmajer and early Roman Polanski. That mischievous, transgressive streak, the compulsion for the surreal, the consolation of humour to tackle the darkest aspects of human nature. A ramshackle beauty contest becomes uncomfortably creepy, finally bursting this tension with a descent into all-out farce, before switching gears again, and again. The attention to detail is a joy – a firefighter back from fighting a fire, in the changing room taking off his clothes, skin indentations from sock elastic, scratching the back of his ankle with the other foot. I should also take a moment to acknowledge the Masters of Cinema Blu Ray, which just full justice to some utterly ravishing cinematography. It is a film about bumbling, incompetent old men, and all that’s awful about that.

Screenshot 2016-03-21 15.56.03.png

An early D.W. Griffith short A Corner in Wheat was fine but I can’t say I particularly enjoyed it. It’s more of a message than a film (Greed = bad things for poor people). But it’s a worthy enough message and we do get to see a rich man drown in wheat. Small pleasures, etc.

 

The Boat isn’t one of Keaton’s best but it’s still hugely enjoyable, a testament to just how great his best work is. Some of the earlier jokes fall flat by his standards but many are as funny and inventive as ever. If for no other reason it deserves watching just for the bath-plug joke, which made me hoot. It ends with a fantastically corny punchline – most filmmakers would have ruined this with a title card but Keaton was smart enough to know that it’s only genuinely funny without. We know exactly what he’s saying.

If you’ve ever wanted to see Buster Keaton in drag, blackface or dressed as a monkey, Play House is the film for you. The opening dream sequence is a lot of fun, playing out something like Alec Guinness’s multi-role fun in Kind Hearts and Coronets crossed with that scene from Being John Malkovich. In the 1920s this must have been all the more impressive. In fact I’m still impressed – the effects are seamless. Keaton rarely varied his on-screen persona, so it’s fascinating to see him doing some ‘acting’. The rest of the film is Keaton as usual, working in a theatre, with plenty of good gags.

Keaton is well remembered for his insane stunt-work but another common motif is the inventive and outlandish use of sets. One Week has plenty of both, to an extent that is still impressive today. Keaton plays with his trademark mix of spectacle and silliness á la The General with a simple but effective train gag. And there’s a cheeky little shot where the cameraman puts his hand over the lens just as Keaton’s wife leans out of the bath to pick up the soap…

“I no longer fall in love with rocks.” World of Tomorrow caught in my throat. It’s a lovely film that understands the complexity of simplicity. Don Hertzfeldt dominates the short film form and almost makes me feel like there’s no point trying to make them myself because they will never be as good as his. Luckily I’m not an animator; if i was I’d probably just give up. On the other hand he makes me want to be an animator, because it’s such a good medium for the kind of work that I want to do – something precisely like this. Something funny and simple and affecting, without showing off.

“Keep off the dirigible plums”. This was the highlight of Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part 1. Oddly I had seen Part 2 without having seen Part 1, so thought I’d fix that. This one wasn’t received particularly well so I didn’t bother at the time. Having now seen them both, the reception was accurate – Part 2 is easily the best in the series. Part 1 is middling, fine but forgettable. I don’t know what magic makes Part 2 as electric as I remember it being but I’m going to watch it again soon to try to find out. Admittedly I should have watched them in the proper order, but I was aware of the main plot points. I already knew about Dobby’s death, but this wasn’t much of a spoiler – frankly it’s just annoying. Because Dobby is annoying. Because CG characters in live action films are nearly always annoying. Because they’re not convincing enough. Is being away from the school for the whole film a problem? Perhaps, but then the rigid school-year structure got quite monotonous in the previous films. Part 2 successfully stays away for much of it, so there’s something else going on here. I think it’s just down to the filmmaking. Both parts were directed by David Yates, so the massive difference between them is interesting. I’ll have to comment further once I’ve watched Part 2 again.

Pet Semetary – The big surprise is the actually-quite-decent acting. It’s a proper corny horror, except that everything is slightly higher quality than you would expect. But then it’s also very silly and doesn’t make a lot of sense. Not quite in the glorious way of something like Re-animator, but it’s fun nevertheless.

It took me a while to figure out what I thought of Ex Machina. Eventually I added it to my favourites list but it took a lot of umming and ahhing. Oscar Isaac is great, especially when he’s dancing. The other performances are strong, and there are interesting questions explored relating to AI. At times it does feel like it thinks it’s cleverer than it is, but actually it’s a smarter film that I expected. It’s let down slightly by the ending, but it’s hard to put my finger on why. I simply can’t shake the feeling of deja vu, of having seen these things before in various episodes of Black Mirror. Perhaps they cast Domhnall because of his role on the other side of the equation in Be Right Back. The boundaries between mediums are blurring. Ex-machina would be an amazing episode of Black Mirror, but what do I think of it as a film? I’m still deciding. Either way, I’ll watch anything with Oscar Isaac.

Creepshow is trashy portmanteau horror. A mediocre opening, but it gets progressively better with each story. Ted Danson buried up to his neck on a beach by a psychotic Leslie Nielson is a highlight. Nice Tom Savini cameo at the end to accompany his fun effects. Not amazing, but decent enough.

Intouchables is not a film that appealed to me at all based on the marketing but it quickly made it’s way onto lots of lists, and being a listwhore I thought I’d give it a go. All my concerns – that it would be sentimental, clichéd, unoriginal, formulaic – turned out to be completely justified. It was also actually quite enjoyable. I was never going to love it, but the performances did invest me against my will. I wanted to hate it but I just couldn’t, it has too much charm. It’s also pretty funny at times. Specifically the interactions between the rich white quadriplegic and the poor black reluctant carer (sound awful doesn’t it, but the chemistry is great). A very funny scene where they get high and talk about the erogenous zone of the ears: “Sometimes I wake up in the morning and they’re hard”. I reluctantly like it.

Sherlock Holmes was entertaining at the same time as being not-very-good. The action is more than serviceable and is buoyed by Holmes’ intelligence, but that intelligence only ever seems to manifest itself through action set-pieces. Which isn’t necessarily a problem, this is a Hollywood Blockbuster after all. Robert Downey Jr’s Holmes is what makes it entertaining and what makes it unconvincing. I can’t quite decide if his accent is bad or if it just doesn’t suit his face but I do not buy him as an Englishman, let alone an intelligent one. Perhaps I have just been spoiled by Bucket Crunderdunder’s* effortless embodiment of the role on TV. The BBC series also beats this version in most other departments. Downey Jr and Law might have the action down, but is that really what Sherlock should be about? As a result, the fact that this is a Sherlock Holmes film feels kind of redundant, a brand to boost box office. That said, it’s not half bad as blockbusters go. Accent aside, RDJ is seldom not entertaining.

I am a fan of Aardman so I was looking forward to Shaun the Sheep. It’s amusing, but it’s not amazing. As with the series it does seem to have a younger target audience and maybe because of that it’s just not as sharp, clever or funny as the early Aardman – Wallace and Gromit, Creature Comfits, the earlier features. I liked Pirates/Scientists a lot, but their decline started long before then. It’s nice that they are still making me laugh but I can’t help but mourn missed opportunities. The silent comedy approach could have been a masterstroke but they only really made the most of in a few scenes – the restaurant is good, but it had the potential to be better. It’s a pleasant film to watch and I’m sure I’ll see it again but it doesn’t match up to Shaun’s debut. Wallace and Gromit are a hard act to follow.

And Then There Were None – I had half a mind to skip this 3-parter altogether as I’ve got far too much to watch right now and BBC drama hasn’t been particularly promising in recent years. But on Jenny’s recommendation I didn’t let it slip through iPlayer’s 30 days and I’m glad of it. While it’s not the most revelatory or original drama, it kept me watching and got stronger as it went, resulting in a rather satisfying conclusion. I’m pleased that I had forgotten the ending from the old 40s adaptation Ten Little Indians (understandbley neither takes the original title of the book…) because it still took me unawares despite half-memories and suspicions. Crucially, unlike many ‘twist’ films the storytelling itself never lies to us, the characters simply lie to each other. The clues to figure it out are all there for the taking, I suppose I just wasn’t smart enough to take them. In retrospect, its the only conclusion that would make any sense, which is why it works. The storytelling is often effective, if frequently over-manipulated. Part of me hankers for a more simplistic telling without all the flashbacks, but then I suppose we’ve got the old film for that, and besides the flashbacks are handled pretty well considering. My usual gripes about contemporary filmmaking aside, it’s a surprising effective adaptation and I’m glad I watched it.

The Dante Quartet – One of the better shorts I’ve watched recently, it’s typical Brackhage. Individually painted frames of film flashing past, vivid colours, the imagery is often ravishing. I imagine it would be great to see on celluloid but less so on a compressed youtube stream (so I won’t bother to link to it).

 

Beautiful birthday breakfast-in-bed with Bottle Rocket. Wes’s first film was the only one I hadn’t seen but I was expecting something lesser than his later films, reasoning that he needed some time to find his feet. His style may have grown more exacting over the years but this is as fun and as funny as any of them. Indeed much of his style and obsessions are already present, in looser ways, and personally I like his looser work as much as his pretty-perfect-pristine work. The Darjeeling Limited is loose and location-based but it’s perhaps his best. For The Grand Budapest Hotel he was in control freak mode, but it’s great for reasons both the same and different. As with any of them, it’s hard to sum up what’s great about Bottle Rocket. It is very funny but that’s mostly down to execution, not the jokes themselves. Which sums up Wes’s entire career – it shouldn’t work but it does. What should end up as annoying, over-produced, hipsterish self-indulgence somehow works beautifully. Because he executes it all so well and doesn’t take himself too seriously.

In PTA’s debut Hard Eight, John C Reilly is perhaps the best I’ve seen him, a great dopey Everyman lead. The old fella (Phillip Baker Hall, after a google search) is the perfect washed up noir protagonist, like he could have been the young lead in some 50s heist movie (he wasn’t, but should have been). As PTA goes, this is probably his least complex film, but as usual it’s more about character than the plot. In this respect it works well, but on a more thoughtful, contemplative level it’s a little glib compared to his later work. Nevertheless it’s strong, accomplished and enjoyable. If  it’s ultimately slightly shallow by PTA’s standards, it’s actually pretty smart as crime films go.

I don’t normally write about music videos (I don’t normally watch many) but I thought Bowie’s last two are worth mentioning. Before his death I wasn’t quite sure what to think of Blackstar. Lots of potent imagery but some of it felt arbitrary and it didn’t quite gel for me, I preferred the song to the video. Watching it after his death, it makes much more sense, and the reference to his son’s first film at the beginning is appropriate and touching, as well as echoing his own beginnings and endings (the death of Major Tom?). Lazarus is the best music video I have seen in a long time, and possibly my favourite song from an album of great songs. Continuing the narrative and imagery from the first video, but more contained, more direct, as Lazarus is to Blackstar’s sprawling ambition. Ominous imagery against ominous sound, marinated in cinema. Brilliant use of a coffin-like square ratio (of course, widescreen is technically more coffin-shaped but the square format looks more narrow to us than it is, and it’s boxy unfamiliarity lends a certain unease). Lazarus is simple and honest and heartbreaking. With a killer bass.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑