Turning The Page: Robopocalypse by Daniel H. Wilson

Trevor Hogg reviews Robopocalypse by Daniel H. Wilson...

Writing in a breezy and plain manner, Daniel H. Wilson, who obtained a Ph.D. in robotics from Carnegie Mellon, has entered into the realm of science fiction thriller. If Wilson is able to channel his youthful and mischievous enthusiasm into more polished adult yarns he could become the next Michael Crichton. Oscar-winning moviemaker Steven Spielberg certainly believes in Wilson’s literary talent as he acquired the film rights to the latest effort from the Portland, Oregon based novelist before the book even had found a publisher.

Divided into five major sections, Robopocalypse chronicles the rise and fall of a malevolent artificial intelligence which highjacks everyday and military technology, such as smart cars, toys, domestic robots, and tanks, and converts them into lethal predators. The devastating World War III between men and machines is documented through a series of vignettes compiled via a transcript composed by human resistance fighter Cormac “Bright Boy” Wallace; he combines his personal recollections with the material obtained from a black box once belonging to Archos, the robotic nemesis that has a genocidal mission to annihilate humanity in a way that makes Adolf Hitler seem like a schoolyard bully.

Focusing more on the human struggle to survive as opposed to the machines’ is the smart choice, as well as the incorporation of short chapters as the tale becomes more interesting and speeds along to its conclusion. “I intentionally included very little science fiction up front,” stated Daniel H. Wilson in the Doubleday press release. “That’s the scariest part of Robopocalypse – that it’s feasible. There are no glinting robot armies from outer space, just the ordinary technology of our lives turning on us, ripping apart our civilization, and then evolving into something that human beings never intended.”

Cinematically, I will enjoy seeing the eerie city street scene where all the cellphones in the surrounding area ring as a computer hacker is stalked by Archos. The one element I have a hard time getting my mind around is the Japanese storyline where an infatuated computer genius seeks to save his virus-infected robotic pleasure doll. The inclusion of the characters from the Osaga Nation is a nice touch as Native Americas too often serve as a forgotten footnote in American culture. For those who seek light entertainment with a futuristic twist Robopocalypse is a worthwhile read; and for their added enjoyment, Steven Spielberg will be working his movie magic to bring the world created by Daniel H. Wilson to the big screen in 2013.


Order Robopocalypse from Amazon.

Trevor Hogg is a freelance video editor and writer who currently resides in Canada.

365 Days, 100 Films #25 - True Grit (2010)

True Grit, 2010.



Directed by Joel Coen and Ethan Coen.

Starring Jeff Bridges, Matt Damon, Josh Brolin, Hailee Steinfeld, Barry Pepper and Domhnall Gleeson.





SYNOPSIS:



A tough U.S. Marshal and a Texas Ranger help a stubborn young woman track down her father's murderer.





If you’re really good at making films, the audience forgets they’re watching them. Reality dissolves into a dream-like state, only with more clarity and a musical score. You come to just as the credits start to roll. “That was pretty good,” slowly dawns on you as you wake.



Afterwards, you start to appreciate those bits that were so finely crafted that they made you forget the film wasn’t real. There are many of these in True Grit, but by far the most impressive, and poetic, is the script. It’s as bold as Hemmingway and flows just as good. The characters speak in some lost American dialect from the turn of the last century. In another’s hands it would come across forced and clunky. The Coens make it effortlessly naturalistic. An example;



LaBoeuf: You give out very little sugar with your pronouncements. While I sat there watchin' I gave some thought to stealin' a kiss... though you are very young, and sick... and unattractive to boot. But now I have a mind to give you five or six good licks with my belt.



Mattie Ross: One would be just as unpleasant as the other.



It’s as though the script were written out in modern tongue, only for every other word to be replaced by its much grander synonym.



True Grit is about Mattie Ross, a girl no older than fourteen, who seeks revenge on the man who murdered her father. To do so she employs Rooster Cogburn (Jeff Bridges), an old, U.S. marshal. They cross paths with a Texas Ranger by the name of LeBoeuf (Matt Damon) who seeks the same man. Cogburn is a drunk and a murderer. LeBoeuf is dull-witted. But in helping Ross they get to show they are both men of ‘true grit’. Not that fake stuff that’s flooded the market.



True Grit is a long way from the black and white morals of most classical Westerns, but it evokes the same misty-eyed steel that they projected - when people were good and decent and weren’t prone to self-indulged soul-searching like the protagonists of the present day. Though it takes the course of the film to show it, all three characters are built upon their principles. Stubbornly so.



It is Ross who eases out Cogburn and LeBoeuf’s true grit. She’s a remarkable gal. Her superego seems too large for her age, separating everything into either ‘good’/‘bad’, ‘lawful’/‘unlawful’ and ‘godly’/‘godless’. She goes about revenge in the language of bureaucracy and supports her sass with knowledge (often to the embarrassment of the adults with whom she talks). It’s what makes her pairing with Cogburn so parental, like she’s some chip off the ol’ block. There’s always the sense that she’s imitating the talk and actions of those much older than her. It’s kinda cute, if a little brash.



The film’s great strength, alongside and because of the script, is this sincerity. The score doesn’t have an ironic note in it. Being post-modern is the easy way out these days. The Coens don’t allow their characters to sit and agonise over personal pain – they internalise it and proceed with the tasks at hand. Psychoanalysis had yet to take off on those shores. Consequently, True Grit conducts itself in heroic charges against terrible odds. It’s easily the film of the year thus far.

Oli Davis



365 Days, 100 Films



Movie Review Archive

DVD Review - The Halfway House (1944)

The Halfway House, 1944.

Directed by Basil Dearden.
Starring Mervyn Johns, Glynis Johns and Sally Ann Howes.


SYNOPSIS:

A group of strangers take shelter at a remote Welsh Inn during a storm where they are soon brought together by a series of unsettling events.


If you are yet to enter the competition here at Flickering Myth to win a copy of Ealing Studios' production The Halfway House on Digital Versatile Disc, I do suggest that you hurry up and get a move on. This is a film worth seeing for three very good reasons. Pay attention ladies and gentlemen and I shall outline them for you.

Firstly The Halfway House is a fragment of history, a slice of our country’s past, and an especially engaging and vivid one too. For those of you enjoying the developments in three dimensional cinematic viewing or perhaps partial to the high definition of your colour television sets, it might be rather off putting that this is a film presented in mere black and white. I readily admit that I am not an avid viewer of black and white pictures myself.

I can assure you though that the lack of variation in colour is more than made up for by numerous other qualities. In fact, I’d go as far as saying that it added to the charm of the film. In any case, this is top notch black and white, because The Halfway House has been digitally restored to a wonderful standard, so that it is, to all intents and purposes, as good as a modern day release.

This film was originally released in 1944 and judging by references to the date during the plot, filmed in 1943. It is therefore significantly influenced by the context of the ongoing Second World War in Europe. A number of the characters have lost friends, colleagues and relatives during the conflict. Others are affected in other ways.

The Halfway House is somewhat inaccurately and crudely labelled as a horror but in reality it is an interesting infusion of ghost story, fable and propaganda. The propaganda element is particularly fascinating and marks the film out as a genuine historical artefact. It is not overdone to affect the level of satisfaction for a modern audience, but certainly during the conclusion an Irishman’s change of allegiance from neutrality to supporting the Allies is noticeably underlined.

The second principal reason you should see The Halfway House is the impressive and rounded characterisation, forming part of a touching and timeless narrative. Whilst the historical background to the plot is crucial to setting it apart from modern releases, the quality and nature of the storytelling is also no longer replicated by studios today.

The first half of the film introduces a wide range of characters across Britain (showcasing unusual scope and variety of outdoor locations for Ealing Studios), each with their own problems, from terminal illness to divorce and criminality. The second half then brings all of these characters together at The Halfway House, a Welsh inn that may or may not have been destroyed by fire. The kindly and wise owners of the inn, who speak almost poetically at points, help the guests to help each other. Gradually they all gain perspective on their issues and worries by taking time out from the everyday grind. Such an intricately woven moral is still just as relevant today.

The Halfway House is superbly acted, even by modern day standards. It has a marvellous script that seems to transfer something from the original play by Denis Ogden. Primarily that something is dialogue which allows characters to breathe and grow convincingly, as they would on stage. Somehow The Halfway House is full of excellently fleshed out characters, despite the ensemble cast.

The third key reason for seeing The Halfway House is that it is tremendously amusing. Part of that humour arises inadvertently from the old fashioned and outdated formal register of the dialogue, which I have tried unsuccessfully to mirror regularly throughout this review. In certain situations the tone and accent of 1940s British speech, along with that persistent formality, is unavoidably hilarious.

However most of the comedic moments are intentional, with a mixture of fabulous and average one liners on show, alongside character humour enabled by their believability. One moment in the opening segment, in which we meet a dodgy dealing crook, is amusing due to role reversal; our criminal dismisses an employee for NOT having a criminal record and lying about it. This is also an example of one of many moments where the war has turned things upside down.

As if those three major reasons alone weren’t enough to at least have a go at the competition, there are also too many minor points of interest to mention. Director Basil Dearden has been underrated for years, only to be steadily recognised more and more recently as a groundbreaking filmmaker, with films like Victim starring Dirk Bogarde challenging taboos long before that was easy to get away with and just an arty saying. His direction here is simple for the most part, with the exception of one smartly edited action sequence which could fit into a modern film, but effective and professional. It’s remarkable enough they were making films as entertaining as this with the war raging on.

Good luck in the competition! But basically make sure you see The Halfway House when it’s released on the 20th of June. It’s an unseen and unappreciated classic of British cinema.

Liam Trim (follow me on Twitter)

Movie Review Archive

Movie Review - Super 8 (2011)

Super 8, 2011.



Written and Directed by J.J. Abrams.

Starring Kyle Chandler, Joel Courtney, Elle Fanning, Riley Griffiths, Noah Emmerich and Glynn Turman.





SYNOPSIS:



A group of kids making a film on their ‘Super 8’ camera witness a freight train crash that releases ‘something’, causing the military to shut down their town and setting a series of mysterious disappearances and weird occurrences in motion.





There are always going to be comparisons between the films that influenced Super 8 and the film itself. And its success is really going to be measured on that. Just prior to the release director J.J. Abrams, distributor Paramount, cinema Alamo Drafthouse and AintitCoolNews.com hosted an event screening the following films that were said to have heavily informed and influenced Super 8. They included: Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind, The Thing, and Scanners. Now if you’re going to aim for a the kind of film that you want to make when you’re heading down the sci-fi road - aiming to harness the youthful exuberance and bravery of three Hollywood masters Spielberg, Carpenter and Cronenberg, working at the peak of their powers, is commendably ambitious. To come remotely close to affecting your viewers with an experience like watching The Thing or Close Encounters is quite simply – super.



The production design and cinematography aesthetically align themselves with iconic Hollywood films like The Goonies, E.T. and Poltergeist and from the moment the film begins I found myself slipping into an uncontrollable nostalgia. The summer, the bikes, the great detached naïve perspective of youth. Abrams creates an authentic portrait of small-town-working class America of a somewhat broken American family in the late 70s. Joe Lamb (Joel Courtney) and his father Jackson (Kyle Chandler) are in a traumatic state in the wake of an accident at the town steel mill that killed Mrs Lamb, mother and wife of the family. This trauma heightens the contrast between Jackson, one of the town deputy’s and Joe the young artist whose relationship is left in the void made by the death in the family. Joel Courtney’s performance as Joe is soulful and heartbreaking but terrifically sweet. His look infuses the baby face of Sean Astin in The Goonies and the great wisdom conveyed in the eyes of Henry Thomas as Elliot in E.T. Since the passing of his mother Joe carries her locket around and he turns to holding it as the only form of comfort in the varying extreme situations that he and the group face. Joel’s acting in the scene after the wreck was so affective that it nearly had me weeping. Kyle Chandler who plays Joe’s dad Jackson is probably best known for his role as Coach Eric Taylor in the great Friday Night Lights television series. Jackson’s tough exterior is immediately examined and given a fragile dimension by Abrams that distances him from the stoicism of his most famous role. I loved the father son dynamic here that’s without (the necessary) maternal figure – and that the two starkly different characters are having to deal with the warmth being out of their lives.



Abrams made all the right choices with casting - filling out the cast with a group of character actors most people will go "oh yeah he was in that movie with um... yeah I've seen him before in that TV show". And the adult characters, while being believable and authentic really take a back seat to a great little bunch of child actors. Normally the golden rule for a director is to NEVER work with animals or children. Abrams must be commended for extracting such deep and multi dimensional performances from the core group of kids. They are the focus of the films and they carry it. Cary (Ryan Lee) the firebug, Preston (Zach Mills), lead actor Martin (Gabriel Basso) and tyrannical amateur director Charles (Riley Griffiths) form an eclectic little group that represent the burgeoning generation of filmmakers influenced by the explosion of B-Grade monster centric films of the period that the film is set. They are all authentic and quirky and in contrast to their adventurous Goonies brethren; yearn to create an adventurous scenario on their friend’s ‘Super 8’ instead of participating in a grand adventure. Some of the best moments in the film for me were watching the kids filming. Watching Charles hilariously utilise his counterparts to realise his vision and use their ingenuity for ‘production value’ was a source of many laughs; I especially enjoyed the last minute rewrites for Martin. And when Charles needed a wife for Martin’s character so we can ‘care’ more about him we’re introduced to the wonderful Alice (Elle Fanning); whose moments acting in the film within Super 8 are the most stunning for Joe, the boys and the audience in alarmingly legitimizing something that is the source for most of the comedy in the film.



Now this great chemistry and authenticity of the characters provide a great foil for the films other dimension - a suspenseful alien/monster thriller. I really don’t want to say too much, as to not spoil the plot but the kids witness the crash of the freight train, what caused it, and that something escaped the wreckage – and have course to investigate. Now saying that, despite the great deal of secrecy that the filmmakers and distributor have been making to conceal the catalyst for the film’s mysterious event and strange goings on, I found that there wasn’t the traditional emphasis on incremental glimpses of the films alien/monster. I wouldn’t say that it is quite as overt as the stunning South Korean Host in terms of showing the monster right up front but I felt that we (the audience) had enough glimpses of the alien visitor that it quenched anyone usually gearing himself or herself for the big reveal.



Super 8 engages your sense memory. There are certain songs, smells of nature in the breeze, the taste of home cooking and films from your childhood that when you’re re-exposed to them – instantly transport you to that moment. I think that the biggest compliment I can give this film is that it elicits the same feelings I get when I watch E.T. Ricky Gervais was onto something when once described Abrams as the next Spielberg – and I think that a late seventies summer where kids are making zombie movies with their friends is indicative of a hat tipping to say thank you for your influence. This is a great Hollywood MOVIE. Go and see it to feel like a kid again, if you love sci-fi and want to see Spielberg’s successor working under the supervision of his mentor and affirming Mr Gervais’ claim.

Blake Howard is a writer/site director/podcaster at the castleco-op.com.



Movie Review Archive

365 Days, 100 Films #24 - My Neighbor Totoro (1988)

My Neighbor Totoro, 1988.

Directed by Hayao Miyazaki.
Featuring the voice talents of Dakota Fanning, Elle Fanning, Tim Daly, Lea Salonga, Frank Welker, Pat Carroll and Paul Butcher.


SYNOPSIS:

In post-war Japan two young sisters move to the countryside and discover a forest inhabited by magical spirits known as Totoros.


Remember when you were a kid and everything was massive? Cynicism barely existed back then. You could genuinely believe that a ‘People’s Elbow’ was the most devastating move in all of sports entertainment when really it was just The Rock doing an elbow drop. You could sit for hours in your bedroom plotting out mass, universe-wide battles pitting a Boba Fett action figure against an evil army of Lego drones. Some stories would span across many planets from under the stairs to the back of the garden. Christmas was great not just for the presents, but also because there was a rare military base that appeared only once a year in that assembled tree.

Suspending disbelief is easy when you’re young. There’s no doubting or second-guessing the realities you create with friends or toys. I’ve never seen a film that commits this unquestioning belief to film more than My Neighbour Totoro. It’s about two sisters who move to a new house with their father. Their mother is in hospital, but with nothing serious. It isn’t that sort of film.

Nothing much happens besides three brief scenes. The two sisters, Satsuki and Mei, about ten and four years old respectively, play in the garden and explore their new surroundings for most of the film. Satsuki eventually starts attending school, leaving Mei at home with her father. Mei’s the sort who could entertain herself for hours with only a toy bucket. On one of these play sessions, about half an hour into the film, she sees a tiny, faint blob hopping across the ground in her garden. Its ears are two small triangles on the top of its head. Mei startles the creature and chases it through the bushes at the garden’s edge. She comes to the base of an enormous tree, one that stands about twice the size of the rest of the forest. The faint blob jumps down into a gap between the roots. Mei jumps in after it.

Here she discovers two more of these blob-like creatures, only one is a little bigger and furry, and the other is much bigger and furrier. They are ‘Totoro’, which is Japanese for ‘forest spirits’. Satsuki compares them later on in the film to some drawings in Mei’s picture book. A lesser film might have used this to reveal the Totoro as figments of Mei’s imagination. That’s the easy interpretation – the sisters have created a fantasy to deal with their mother’s extended stay in hospital. If you wish to reduce the film with such redundant psychoanalysis, you’re missing its point. My Neighbour Totoro isn’t about the power of a child’s imagination. It’s about an entire realm of fantasy of which only children are conscious.

My Neighbour Totoro wisely never addresses this explanation, rather opting for a world where such fantasy is real for the children but only warmly humoured by their parents. It suggests that these Totoro are real, but because we’re a little older now, we just can’t see them.

Toy Story does this more obviously. After first watching that film, who didn’t believe that their toys would jump to life as soon as they saw you close the door? See it when you’re a little older though. You’ll appreciate the technique and some of the humour more, but you’ll loose that sense of wonder – that Toy Story was actually revealing something a lot bigger, a grand conspiracy where toys are actually sentient beings. My Neighbour Totoro addresses how a child’s imagination experiences the world more subtly. In doing so, it merges together this fantasy with reality. It makes you want to not only believe like a kid again, but for that lost perspective when you could see where the Totoro existed.

That the Totoro are used so sparingly is another of the film’s great strengths. You’re left wanting far more than you’re given and you start to dream yourself about what they might be up to when they aren’t on screen. Are they nocturnal? Are they the last of their kind? Do they take trips into space on the Cat Bus? Oh, right, the Cat Bus…

The Cat Bus is arguably the greatest animal form of transport ever conceived. It has five legs on either side and two mice on its roof for illumination. Its face owes a great debt to Lewis Carroll’s Cheshire Cat and its eyes beam out strong headlights.

Its first appearance comes in the rain, whilst Satsuki and Mei are waiting for their father at the bus stop. He forgot his umbrella and they’ve brought one to give to him when he arrives. That’s how nice they both are, and how superbly simple this film is. King Totoro (the biggest of the three) has joined them, but he’s has only a leaf to cover his head from the rain. Satsuki offers him her father’s umbrella. He doesn’t know what to do with such a contraption, so he plays with it in Chaplin-esque naivety. He’s delighted when it opens above him. This is the first time Satsuki has encountered a Totoro, yet she batters not a single eyelid.

After standing in the rain for a while, King Totoro lets out an enormous roar to summon the Cat Bus, who gallops down the road and takes him away. You’re as unfazed as Satsuki because you share her child’s perspective, accepting the bizarre with a merry shrug. It’s only when the camera cuts to a witness frog across the street, mouth agape, that you realise the how absurd it all is – two girls and King Totoro underneath an umbrella that’s hardly half his width. Oh, right, and the Cat Bus. Taken out of context, it’s as trippy as balls.

So many movies are hard going. Lead characters often have some form of parent trouble or bereavement; others require parts of intense conflict for the conclusion to mean anything. Some, however, like My Neighbour Totoro, are just charming. It’s easy to read “a child’s perspective” as condescending, like it’s inferior to our wiser, aged view. William Blake’s Songs of Innocence and Experience addresses the differences between the two outlooks. He also spoke of a higher innocence, an enlightened stage that follows experience. My Neighbour Totoro helps you get there.

Oli Davis

365 Days, 100 Films

Movie Review Archive

Hayao Miyazaki: Drawn to Anime

Movie Review - X-Men: First Class (2011)

X-Men: First Class, 2011.



Directed by Matthew Vaughn.

Starring James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Kevin Bacon, January Jones, Rose Byrne, Jennifer Lawrence, Nicholas Hoult, Lucas Till, Zoë Kravitz, Álex González, Caleb Landry Jones, Jason Flemyng, Oliver Platt and Ray Wise.





SYNOPSIS:



In their efforts to prevent Armageddon, a grave rift emerges between close friends Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and Erik Lensherr (Michael Fassbender) that will ultimately pave the way for war between the X-Men and the Brotherhood of Mutants.





Matthew Vaughn made quite an impression last year with the hugely entertaining Kick-Ass and now he looks to breathe new life into the X-Men franchise with X-Men: First Class, a 1960s-set prequel that arrives in cinemas on the back of a sea of glowing reviews. Now it’s fair to say that the publicity campaign for First Class didn’t get off to the best of starts but Fox seemed to pull things round with some pretty impressive trailers, and with all the hype the film has been generating this past week I was full of anticipation for something extra special. Sadly, that’s not quite what I ended up with and if I'm being brutally honest, I can't see what all the fuss is about.



Now before anyone jumps on my back, I’m not saying that First Class is a bad film. Far from it. It’s a vast improvement over the utterly lacklustre X-Men Origins: Wolverine and any fears I’d had over the casting choices (James McAvoy, I’m talking to you) were completely misplaced. In fact, the whole cast are solid, there’s plenty of exciting action set-pieces, just the right amount of humour and a decent enough story. And, given the insane turnaround time, Matthew Vaughn and company have pulled off a remarkable achievement. But man, there's been so much Kleenex shed over First Class this week that I guess all those masturbatory reviews really had me hoping for that little bit more.



First Class begins in exactly the same fashion as Bryan Singer’s opening installment did, with a young Erik Lensherr discovering his powers of magnetism in the horrific confines of a Nazi concentration camp. After witnessing the brutal murder of his mother at the hands of Klaus Schmidt, a.k.a. Sebastian Shaw (Kevin Bacon), the adult Erik (Michael Fassbender) devotes his life to avenging her death. This brings him into contact with Charles Xavier (James McAvoy), a telepathic mutant working with C.I.A. agent Moira MacTaggart to prevent Shaw from conspiring to start a nuclear war between the United States and Russia. The pair soon spark up a friendship as they work together to create a team capable of combating the energy-absorbing Shaw and his villainous crew of super-powered mutants, only for their conflicting ideologies to ultimately put them at odds with one another.



The main problem for me with X-Men: First Class is that, much like Brett Ratner’s X-Men: The Last Stand, the filmmakers have tried to cram as much as possible into the script and not only does this cause the film to skip from one place to the next for much of its running time, but it also leaves quite a few of the characters sorely underdeveloped. Apart from Professor X, Magneto, Shaw, Emma Frost (January Jones) and Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence), the remaining mutants don’t get too much of a look in. While it’s Magneto’s story that drives the film (with Fassbender delivering a fine performance), it is a shame that we didn’t get to see more of the eponymous ‘first class’, especially with characters such as Hank McCoy (Nicholas Hoult) having so much potential to explore.



As I said earlier, X-Men: First Class is infinitely better than Gavin Hood’s previous effort and a worthy installment in the X-Men franchise, but it’s not as good as X2: X-Men United (or Kick-Ass, for that matter) and I can’t say I enjoyed it any more than I did Thor. Matthew Vaughn has been peddling the ‘Batman Begins’ line as to his inspiration for the film, and he’s probably right in that the sequel could be so much better. I’ll certainly be back for it, although next time I won’t bother reading any of the early reviews.

Gary Collinson



Movie Review Archive

Michael Mann Retrospective - Collateral (2004)

Collateral, 2004.

Directed by Michael Mann.
Starring Tom Cruise, Jamie Foxx, Mark Ruffalo, Jada Pinkett Smith, Javier Bardem, Bruce McGill, Irma P. Hall, Peter Berg and Jason Statham.


SYNOPSIS:

A Los Angeles cab driver unwittingly becomes the chauffer for a hired assassin.


To improve upon the depth and detail of the nighttime images for his 2004 thriller Collateral, director Michael Mann shot the exterior footage with high definition digital cameras giving the movie a gritty documentary feel. Initially it was jarring to see the usually glamorous Tom Cruise playing the grey-haired assassin Vincent; however, the shock quickly disappears as he effortlessly dissolves into his psychotically-charming character. The pivotal role is given to Jamie Foxx who plays the unfortunate cabbie, Max. The transformation from being the victim to the victor is so believable that the performance provided Foxx with one of his two Oscar nominations that year.

The Chicago filmmaker impressed Tom Cruise with his vision for the motion picture. “When Michael sent the script he sent different stills,” explained the box office megastar, “almost an art motif of things he was thinking about, and what he wanted to explore. It was just something else because his vision of L.A. and what he sees has real emotion, has real poetry. I knew it was going to be a lot of fun and it was.”

In regards to the nondescript attire Cruise wears doing the course of the film, Mann stated: “It's not really a disguise, but it's anonymous. If somebody actually witnesses him and police ask for a description, what are people going to say? A middle-aged, middle-height guy wearing a middle grey suit and white shirt. It describes anybody and nobody.”

When it came to portraying Vincent convincingly, Cruise stated, “It was kind of an anti-social character. It was months of talking with Michael and finding that point of fracture. Where does it all go wrong for Vincent and where does it start? You know. We just kept creating layers. Normally, I always do a lot of research for a character, particularly something like this. That back story has to inform every scene. With Michael, he had pictures of where I came from. We discussed a lot of different aspects of where I live and how I became the way I became as Vincent. So it will emotionally inform the movie and start to look at where does this fracture happen. Vincent is impinging on Max. I'm driving that car from the back seat and then bring my attention to the things I have to do to get my job done. When you're making a movie, it's not like oh, it's going to happen here. It evolves out of this creative process, which Michael is excellent at.”

Michael Mann was drawn to the script written by Stuart Beattie because the story unfolds during such a short time frame. As for the original New York City setting being replaced by the City of Angels, the director remarked, “The idea of shooting an intense film like this in L.A. at night precedes the Collateral screenplay. It's something I wanted to do after the last two films that I made that were both historically accurate - extraordinarily real subjects and characters. So I had an appetite for doing a film like this before I got the Collateral script.”

The majority of the film takes place in a taxi cab with occasional flashes of gunfire. “We don't see it as an action film,” said Mann. “We see it as a drama. It's as extreme as it can be. In this one night, where these guys have been, whatever their expectations and dreams are for the future, everything is going to change. They are not going to be the same people after tonight. That's an idea, that's a dramatic idea. Then we worked very hard to build the characters and make them as real and three-dimensional as possible, just the way you are in your own lives, with as much specificity as we could build in. Then we do the dramatic scenario and that's really it.”

With the taxi having such a key role in the movie, Mann revealed, “We built 17 cabs. Some had no fronts, some had no sides. Some we didn't use at all. What actually worked out was that sequence where they're supposed to be in a real cab with someone, either myself or Gary Jay, with the camera on his shoulder, was in one of the seats. But the interesting thing about a cab is that you have to view it as an opportunity because if you have two people, they're both facing the camera, but whenever we elect to, the man in the backseat can have his own thoughts coming across his face because the other guy is not necessarily seeing him.”

The H.D. technology has found a convert in the veteran moviemaker. “For this movie, it was great shooting in digital.” However, there were complications that needed to be worked out. Mann stated, “It required a lot. It was like having a camera that's attached on an umbilical to your refrigerator at home. So it wasn't portable. But it enabled me to be very painterly with building the scene. It's counterintuitive to photograph in every conceivable way. Throw a light meter away, you don't need it. It's right there on a high def monitor. But it requires knowing exactly what you want because what's available is a much broader spectrum than a motion picture film.”

Tom Cruise had nothing but praise for his director: “It was exciting. And I could feel it. And as an actor, I love movies. I have seen all of Mann's movies. It's something you want to look at and study because he designs his pictures from the ground up and he really has a tremendous command of the medium and the storytelling.”

Collateral trailer:


Mann Handled: A Michael Mann Profile

Trevor Hogg is a freelance video editor and writer who currently resides in Canada.

DVD Review - Seconds Apart (2011)

Seconds Apart, 2011.

Directed by Antonio Negret.
Starring Orlando Jones, Edmund Entin and Gary Entin.


SYNOPSIS:

Damned from the moments of their births, two brothers possess a gruesome talent for telekinesis - a power they use in the most horrific ways imaginable.


If cinema history has taught us anything, it’s that twins are scary as hell and not to be trusted. Case in point is Seconds Apart, a chiller/thriller from Colombian director Antonio Negret and first-time feature writer George Richards.

The twins in question are played by real life twins Gary and Edmund Entin who are quite simply excellent in their roles. They are genuinely creepy and feel like a cross between Ricky Fitts from American Beauty and the Grady Daughters from The Shining. While their dialogue feels fairly forced and clichéd, the Entin twins do a very good job of making the content fit the bill.

The Entins are supported by a relatively unknown cast including Samantha Droke in the “love interest” role and Morgana Shaw and Louis Herthum as the equally creepy parents of the films main characters. The only real “star” of the film per say is comedian Orlando Jones who plays Detective Lampkin. It feels particularly odd to watch Jones in such a serious role but he actually holds the screen quite well.

However, Lampkin is a major part of the biggest deterrent for the film. There is a horribly contrived sub plot about the detective’s dead wife that has been shoehorned in for no real reason. It’s terribly written, woefully put together and is a huge distraction from the main plot. Not only is it incredibly boring, but it almost ruins the flow of the movie.

When you’re watching a chiller/thriller, you will undoubtedly be waiting for the twist that will either make or break the movie. Luckily for Seconds Apart, the film’s twist falls into the former category. It’s very well written and incredibly creative. However, I would argue that the final moments of the film are not enough to satisfy an audience.

While Seconds Apart does have its moments, it is by no means a great film. The set pieces of the film are very well executed and Negret does create a great feeling of unease, but Richards’ script doesn’t hold enough water to carry it through the 86 minutes. Perhaps diehard fans of the genre will enjoy it for what it is, everyday movie viewers may find the piece to be hokey and ineffectual.

Luke Owen

Movie Review Archive

365 Days, 100 Films #23 - Grave of the Fireflies (1988)

Grave of the Fireflies, 1988.

Directed by Isao Takahata.
Featuring the voice talents of J. Robert Spencer, Rhoda Chrosite, Amy Jones and Veronica Taylor.


SYNOPSIS:

A boy and his younger sister struggle to survive in war-torn Japan during World War II.


"Yes, it's a cartoon, and the kids have eyes like saucers, but it belongs on any list of the greatest war films ever made." -Roger Ebert

Seita is a pre-teenager in Japan who has just lived through World War Two. The film opens on him as he slowly passes away, homeless and starving in a train station. His war is over as he utters “Setsuko” with his last breath. He whispers it in the same way Kane spoke ‘Rosebud’. The camera tracks back as two janitors start to tidy him away. The shot’s increased scope reveals many more like him, supported by the station’s numerous pillars. Commuters consider them a nuisance.

Seita takes a ghostly red form and begins to wonder through his life during the war. Grave of the Fireflies is animated, so these moments aren’t ruined by warped special effects. Those at Studio Ghibli imbue more humanity in their subjects than most live action films can muster with their claims to truth. Seita boards a train that will proceed to call at events in his past. It’s so he can understand what has happened and how he ended the way he did. Only then can he finally be free of his guilt.

These flashbacks start at Seita’s home with his mother and young sister. The latter is his ‘rosebud’ – five-year-old Setsuko. The comforts of home and family are in stark contrast to the previous opening scene of Seita’s death. American planes are dropping napalm canisters over their city. Most of the homes are built from wood. They never stood a chance.

Seita and Setsuko become separated from their mother during the air raid. They take cover away from the city and are unharmed, but their mother sat like a duck in the local shelter. They reunite at a makeshift hospital in a levelled city that doesn’t have enough medicine or staff. Seita’s mother is so badly injured, it wouldn’t make a difference if they did. She looks as though her eyes have been seared clean off. Her lips are two swollen sausages and her skin is replaced with blood-soaked bandages. Seita doesn’t let Setsuko see. He tells her that mother’s quite ill so they’re off to stay with their aunt. Seita has decided to shoulder the pain exclusively, and he continues this way until his death. His protectiveness appears noble now, but will become selfish and harmful soon. As they leave we see mother’s body being lifted upon a bonfire. Maggots and flies already feast away.

Their aunt holds a grudge against the orphans. Seita and Setsuko come from a military family, living with more generous rations than their relatives. That Seita and Setsuko do nothing but play like children all day also frustrates the aunt. Her husband and daughter work constantly to support the war effort. But what can the brother and sister do? Their mother has just died and are without a home. Their father is a Navy man from who they haven’t heard in so long. Go to school, their aunt insensitively suggests. It burnt down, replies Setsuko.

By default, Seita is now the head of the family. A very small family, but at least he still has that. Exhausted by the pestering aunt, he pawns his mother’s clothes and withdraws the family savings so he can support Setsuko alone. They find an abandoned air raid shelter near a lake and, like children playing ‘house’, plan the rooms of their new home.

Money, however, quickly becomes worthless as the Japanese currency falters. It’s all about trading needed item for needed item now. As they live outside the system, in their cave by a river, Seita and Setsuko aren’t entitled to food rations. Setsuko begins to show signs of illness. She scratches a lot and has sores on her back. Sometimes she faints. Dependent child characters often become tiresome or annoying. Not Setsuko. It’s the way she’s drawn clutching her doll and wearing her hat. She’s so endearing and helpless you want to rescue her yourself. It’s why Seita’s relationship with her is so heartbreaking.

She becomes delirious from hunger, chewing marbles and making rice cakes out of mud. Seita does all he can to save her. He takes food from people’s empty houses during air raids and steals fruit from farmer’s fields. But he never considers going back to his aunt, even when their situation becomes increasingly desperate. She’s a horrible woman, but she could have saved them.

It’s almost as though it’s because of a hidden selfishness. Seita has invested all his loss, of his home, mother and father, into caring for Setsuko. If he lets someone else take over, or even merely share, he would have failed her and his deceased family. His love is smothering, but he does everything for that girl. He’s only a kid – how’s he supposed to know any better?

The film itself is based on a semi-autobiographical novel. The author lost his sister to malnutrition at the end of the war too, but unlike Seita, he survived. He blamed himself for his sister’s death and wrote the book to make amends.

This is the one Studio Ghibli film for which Disney does not hold the distribution rights. The book’s publishers do. It’s fitting, in a way. Grave of the Fireflies should to be separate from the rest of Ghibli’s canon.

There’s no overt anti-war agenda because the story is such a human one. These aren’t soldiers or politicians, they’re civilians. But in focusing on and attempting to deal with such a personal tragedy, Grave of the Fireflies becomes as powerful a statement against war as Wilfred Owen’s Anthem for Doomed Youth or Roberto Rossellini’s Germany, Year Zero.

Oli Davis

365 Days, 100 Films

Movie Review Archive

Hayao Miyazaki: Drawn to Anime

Movie Review - Donor Unknown: Adventures in the Sperm Trade (2010)

Donor Unknown: Adventures in the Sperm Trade, 2010.

Directed by Jerry Rothwell.


SYNOPSIS:

A young woman goes in search of the sperm donor father she only knows as donor 150.


Sperm donation is an ethical and emotional minefield. It’s one of those sensitive issues with equally passionate and valid views on both sides of the debate. Even bystanders not directly involved or affected will have a strong opinion on its morality. The consequences and motivations of such anonymous, industrial giving of life can be dissected and analysed again and again, for positives and negatives. Endless reams could be written on the subject without resolving the issue one way or another.

It’s also one of those topics that often only interests people when looked at from monstrous and extreme angles. For example a few years ago a documentary called The Sperminator about a man running a clinic who provided all the samples himself, when he told prospective parents that there was an extensive bank to meet their specific requests and requirements, caused a lot of controversy and generated a lot of interest. People enjoy being shocked by grotesque scandals such as this, simultaneously intrigued and repulsed by the potential for ignorant incest. The human side of this relatively new phenomenon is usually overlooked.

Donor Unknown is almost exclusively about the very human effects of sperm donation. It’s an extremely admirable and accomplished piece of filmmaking. Over the course of its engaging and economical 78 minute runtime, this film gradually and thoroughly explores the sperm trade by maintaining a tight human focus. Hollywood blockbusters lack both the heart and surprising plot twists of Donor Unknown and it deserves a grander home than TV screens. With its editing and pacing and diverse locations across America, this is a film that shows off the art of documentary storytelling at its best.

Much of the film is seen through the lens of JoEllen, a girl on the cusp of pretty womanhood, who has come to terms with her lack of a father throughout childhood. Her mother has always been honest about the way in which she was conceived, with a little help from “donor 150”. But although she’s grown up with the affection of a loving family and lived a privileged, seemingly happy existence, there is always something missing. A great big “what if” is constantly nagging at JoEllen’s wellbeing and sense of identity.

Meanwhile on Venice Beach in LA, Jeffrey lives with his four dogs and the occasional pigeon. He’s quite clearly a hippy, living a simple life in a RV, loving his dogs and being kind to those he meets. With his long hair and tanned, excess wearied face, it’s difficult to imagine he was once a muscular model in Playgirl who once made a living from stripping. He explains that he was asked by a woman he met at the hairdresser’s during those years of his prime, whether or not he’d like to donate sperm so she could have a baby. Obviously he was taken aback but after speaking to a close friend who was a loving mother, he decided to give this relative stranger the opportunity of motherhood and hope that fate rewarded him for his good deed.

Donor Unknown also talks to the staff at the Californian Cryogenic Centre, that aims to have the largest collection of sperm donors in the world. We see the specimens stored in huge vats and we have numbers like 200 billion fired at us. We’re assured that this centre alone could repopulate the world in the event of some disaster making such measures necessary. We’re shown the “masturbatory emporiums” with walls colourfully adorned to aid the donation process, with the more sample provided the better. The chambers increase in eroticism along the corridor, we’re told.

And so we are eased gently into sperm donation, with a balance of real human effects and the technology involved. JoEllen’s hole in her existence is contrasted with the motivation of mothers to turn to donors like Jeffrey, along with his reasons for helping out.

Then we’re hit with the bombshell of JoEllen finding a sibling. Her half sister lives in New York and they meet after discovering each other via an online register, where you simply register your donor number. Her identity issues are even deeper than JoEllen’s because she has been lied to until the age of about 14. She resents her parents for the deception and feels immensely confused and hurt. As a teenager it’s a lot to take onboard and extremely destabilising. Desperate for a link to a missing 50% of her, she finds JoEllen and then gets a story onto the front of the New York Times, without her parents’ knowledge.

At this point Donor Unknown becomes extremely uplifting, as more and more siblings come forward who were fathered by “donor 150”. Via the internet an unconventional patchwork family forms across America’s very different states, bringing absent intimacy, connection and love into the lives of more than a dozen children. JoEllen methodically keeps track of all her lost brothers and sisters, meeting most of them and forming attachments, filling in the missing side of her family tree slightly. The genetic quirks and likenesses are touching and fascinating to behold, as the screen flits rapidly through the faces and mannerisms of all the “150” siblings.

But then Donor Unknown changes gear to look at yet another aspect of the trade. After gently gaining your attention and emotional investment, we finally come to the really dark side of sperm donation. One of the siblings, Rachelle, expresses her constant doubts and worries about dating. She has specifically stuck to foreign guys or people that for other reasons definitely could not be related. An interview with the founder of the online register, a mother of a donor child herself, reveals that there are no limits on the number of children a donor can father, despite the claims of clinics.

The Californian Cryogenic Centre is also at pains to point out their range of choice and the extensive information they offer. But the answers of donor questions can be as misleading as they are informative. Jeffrey for example, said he was a dancer when he was a stripper and said he studied philosophy when he spent little time in college. His spiritual waffle won over scores of prospective parents but he is in reality something of a waster, an idealistic hippy and eccentric weirdo. He believes in worrying conspiracy theories and has an unnatural attachment to animals after a troubled childhood.

Beneath it all though he is a kind man and the ending to Donor Unknown is unquestionably back in the uplifting zone. Whatever the dangers and wrongs of the sperm industry, it has the power to create the amazing gift of life. Without the fakery of actors to bring it down, Donor Unknown soars to interesting and touching heights, telling the modern, interconnecting tales of real people.

Liam Trim (follow me on Twitter)

Movie Review Archive

365 Days, 100 Films #22 - Young Bruce Lee (2010)

Young Bruce Lee (a.k.a. Bruce Lee, My Brother), 2010.

Directed by Manfred Wong and Wai Man Yip.
Starring Aarif Rahman, Tony Leung Ka Fai, Christy Chung and Jin Auyeung.


SYNOPSIS:

A biopic exploring the early years of martial arts legend Bruce Lee.


There’s a great story about how Davey Boy Smith (aka The British Bulldog) got his name. Smith’s mother, still weary from giving birth, accidentally wrote her newborn son’s gender, “Boy”, as the middle name on his birth certificate. Young Bruce Lee opens with a similar mix-up. Bruce Lee has just been born, and his mother, tired and slightly delirious, murmurs the word “push” over and over, echoing her long gone doctor’s words of encouragement. When asked for the child’s name, the American nurse mishears “Push” as “Bruce”. His family and friends knew him as “Phoenix”, but he kept “Bruce” as a stage name. There’s a lot in a name. The Americanised “Bruce” sits snugly alongside the Eastern “Lee”. That juxtaposition was arguably what made him such an international star.

Young Bruce Lee is the story of Bruce Lee before this happened, opening with his birth and ending as he leaves for his first trip to America. Two of his surviving siblings introduce the film in a brief prologue, claiming theirs as the untold Bruce Lee story. One of them is Robert Lee, and it is his book, ‘Bruce Lee, My Brother’, on which the film is based.

There are three stages: baby Bruce (1941), youngster Bruce (1947) and teenager Bruce (1957). You need gaps about that size in biographical films. It lets you change the actors without too much fuss. Throughout he lives with his huge family in Hong Kong and maintains a group of close friends. It’s their exploits that the film follows, including a love triangle between Lee, his friend Kong and Kong’s girlfriend. He can get away with a lot, because he’s been a local film star since an early age, but he values his friendships more than anything else.

It’s remarkable how Americanised their lives were. They listen to Elvis, dance the ‘Cha-Cha’, watch Rebel Without a Cause and dress accordingly. It’s American Graffiti with a Chinese cast. Hong Kong was a portal to the West in these times, but their domestic film product had not yet broken through to the international market. This is what Lee wishes to achieve.

You wouldn’t really know it, though. People wonder through the narrative with no definitive goals, and thus few obstacles that could create dramatic tension. There are flashes in the love triangle, and in Lee’s feud with an American boxing champion, but they phase in and out with little or no build. Apart from the ending scenes, there isn’t anything particularly special about the film’s story. If Lee weren’t its subject, Young Bruce Lee could be accused of being about very ordinary affairs.

Thankfully, there’s a lot of joy to be had with Lee. It shows what an enduring pop culture figure he is. The yelps! I could listen to them all day. The film occasionally treats you to one with a zoom-in close-up. Shit’s old school. It has a lot of heart, too. There’s a big emphasis on Lee’s family, and their warmth to each other comes across very well.

It does have an odd, recurring stylistic device though, where there will be slow motion close-ups of quite mundane actions (a foot stepping forward, a hand being placed on a chair). It’s not like they’re contextually meaningless actions, just that slow motion should be used sparingly. It makes it all a bit melodramatic. The film could have probably shaved off about 10 minutes if they played them at normal speed.

For a film that introduces itself as the “untold Bruce Lee story”, by his brother and sister, you wouldn’t expect it to be so stylised. There’s the aforementioned flogging of the slow-mo close-up, a barely believable ‘Cha-Cha’ competition and quite a few stagey fight scenes. It makes you want to take the film like a Tequila slammer (with a pinch of salt and lots of alcohol). But then, just before the end credits, a series of actual photographs are shown alongside stills from the film. There’s Bruce Lee dressed in a dapper black suit and tie, triumphant with his younger brother after winning a ‘Cha-Cha’ competition. It’s a bit of a slap in the face, but it isn’t your fault for harbouring such cynicism – it’s the film’s. Why should it feel the need for melodrama and exaggeration when its source text is so rich? All it needs is a bit of toning down.

Rating: **

Oli Davis

365 Days, 100 Films

Movie Review Archive

Movie Review - The Hangover Part II (2011)

The Hangover Part II, 2011.



Directed by Todd Phillips.

Starring Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis, Justin Bartha, Ken Jeong, Jeffrey Tambor, Jamie Chung, Mason Lee, Paul Giamatti, Mike Tyson and Nick Cassavetes.





SYNOPSIS:



Phil, Alan and Doug jet to Thailand for Stu's wedding where his plan for a subdued pre-wedding brunch goes seriously awry.





A new location. A few new characters. Same old jokes.



I wasn’t one of the millions that rushed to cinemas to watch The Hangover as it looked a little too cheap and cheerful for me. I expected the same old same old in terms of story and thought the gags would be poor. However, on eventually watching it I was pleasantly surprised, enjoyed and admired it and have watched it several times since. This time around I decided to get to the cinema and see the follow up – The Hangover Part II.



The jist of the story isn’t too different from the original – someone is getting married, Stu (Ed Helms), Phil (Bradley Cooper), Alan (Zack Galifianakis), Doug (Justin Bartha) and; new to the Wolf pack, Teddy (Mason Lee) decide on a beer to celebrate this special occasion. Next they all wake up with no recollection of the night before and someone is missing! This time Stu is getting married, it’s set in Thailand and Teddy, Stu’s fiancés little brother, is the one missing. Having gone to bed early, Doug is the only one not to wake up in Bangkok with no memory of the night before. Cue a mad dash around Bangkok looking for the 16 year old prodigal genius and colliding with Russian gangsters, a smoking monkey and a lady boy with a nice cock. There’s also the hilarious emergence of super camp international gangster Chow (Ken Jeong).



As their search leads them down the dirty back streets of Bangkok and the previous nights antics are relived as well as the consequences of their actions coming back to bite them on the arse the race against time hots up. One liners, gags, random madness and anarchy follow them on their travels and they all learn a little more than they really wanted to. Especially Stu. Alan once again is a comedy gem with every line of dialogue, every little shuffle of his porky body and even his t-shirt having me in stitches.



Bangkok oozes its dirty and enigmatic energy into the film also and is such a great city to shoot a film in. Rich with cinematic backdrops, interesting places and people the film lends a certain seedy element from its gracious host. Elephants walking down the middle of a main road, streets lined with neon girly bars and the most beautiful view from the rooftop restaurant of Lebau at State Tower. With so much colour and life filling the streets of Bangkok it makes for great viewing alone.



The setting is totally different and more exotic, some new characters are introduced and the twists and turns are a little different. But… on the whole it followed the same formula as the first. Almost identically. Stu is disfigured. Tick. A stolen animal. Tick. A standoff and exchange with a mobster type. Tick. They think all is lost and call the girls, but then someone has an idea. Tick. And then they find Teddy in the last place they would think to look. Where they started. Tick. Someone finds a camera full of photos at the end and they vow to look at them once and then delete them forever. Tick. And as with the first the majority of the comedy comes from Alan’s idiotic comments, childlike mentality and generally stumbling around. Although this time out it was the main and sometimes only source of comedy. It all felt a little too familiar. And this time it isn’t new, different and bucking the trend.



It all did feel the same, but different. The Hangover Part II is The Hangover’s identical, but Asian, twin. And that was a shame. It had the potential to be very funny and at times was, but the sheer amount of similarities or plot points stolen from the first film cheapened Part II. If not for Alan the film would have been poor.



The Hangover Part II is average with a few good gags. And that is a pity.

D.J. Haza



Follow my blog at http://djhaza.blogspot.com/

Follow me at http://www.facebook.com/djhaza



Movie Review Archive

Movie Review - Snowtown (2011)

Snowtown, 2011.

Directed by Justin Kurzel.
Starring Daniel Henshall, Lucas Pittaway and Craig Coyne.


SYNOPSIS:

A drama about the Australian serial killer John Bunting.


For those of you out there sick of the raft of Australian true crime T.V interpretations with poor production value, generic formal style and that perhaps 'glamorize' society's 'underbelly'; Snowtown feels like the necessary headlong plunge into an ice bath that you need to jolt you back to reality.

Snowtown recounts the story of the young, disenfranchised Jamie (Lucas Pittaway) whose introduced to a defensive, protective, charismatic, father figure John Bunting (Daniel Henshall) after a serious trauma. As their relationship grows Jamie suspects that there is something more sinister beneath John's 'good' nature. Jamie's worst fears are confirmed when his impressionable vulnerability and loyalty to John sees him seamlessly become accomplice to one of Australia's most notorious serial killers.

The film is purposefully titled - the context gives this scenario its uniquity. And like a scientific experiment, it creates/portrays the conditions that a serial killing troupe can exist. This adequately contextualises the group without justifying their actions. The filmmakers have skilfully tread the fine line of empathy, sympathy, and total revulsion and disgust. This is helped by exceptionally tangible and subtle performances that make this film a participatory exercise. You at times feel yourself boiling over ready to be a vigilante, then seamlessly flowing into denouncing those feelings because of how they mutate in the film. This film makes the fictional nightmare commentary of smalltown incestuous human impulse and ignorance that Lars von Trier's stunning Dogville illustrates and gives it a real world context.

Snowtown is simultaneously exquisitely shot and exceptionally gritty. Director Justin Kurzel benefits greatly from the decision to shoot on location and using actors predominantly from the region. The opening stanza of the film draws you into the depressing, painfully pale portrait of life in Snowtown suburbia. The devil is in the details; and the real locations, oppressive overcast grey weather, hopeless shop fronts and look of the predominantly local cast allows you to totally immerse yourself into the events that are to unfold. Kurzel, working from Shaun Grant's overwhelmingly necessary script, sculpts utterly virtuosic performances that indelibly tattoo your memory.

Onto the normally totally under-rated sound design of Frank Lipson. Oscar winning director Danny Boyle (whose Shallow Grave gave us some of the most spine tingling sound design in a film)once said "cinema is 70% sound," and the affect of a aural trigger like the sound of a poker machine, or the sounds of a cricket commentary to transport the audience into the moment are amazing and unquantifiable. The minimalist soundtrack is ominous and understated but the opening spartan drumbeat is instantly iconic - even thinking about it as I write this review transports you into the almost trance like receptive mode.

Snowtown is exquisitely performed by everyone involved especially the blank-faced protagonist Jamie (Lucas Pittaway) who was cast after being spotted in the local shopping centre. The director had Pittaway rehearse pretty intensely prior to the shoot - because of the emotional weight the role carries - and it pays off; he delivers a great performance. But for better or worse the performance that will be remembered in this film is Daniel Henshall's virtuosic portrayal of John Bunting. Quite simply he is one of the most fully formed characters (especially under the broad 'antagonist' banner) that I've seen in any film. In a recent and great interview that Kevin Smith had with Red State star, Michael Parks on the Red State of the Union Podcast: Parks speaks of the best bit of direction Smith gave him in the production. Parks says that Smith advised him to "be even sweeter." When I think about Henshall's performance - his sweetness (in true socio 'psycho'pathic form) towards those he cares about contrasted with the clinical artistry of his brutality is memorable to say the least. This film is a fairly harrowing viewing experience (to the credit of all involved) but I would watch it again and again to appreciate Henshall's advertisement for what should be a prolific and fruitful career on the horizon.

This was a great film. Go and put some 'deniro' or 'sheckles' down for this one people - you may be shocked, confronted, and disgusted: but you will NOT be disappointed.

Blake Howard is a writer/site director/podcaster at the castleco-op.com.

Movie Review Archive

DVD Review - Zombie Undead (2010)

Zombie Undead, 2010.

Directed by Rhys Davies.
Starring Ruth King, Kris Tearse, Barry Thomas and Christopher J. Herbert.


SYNOPSIS:

A small group of survivors attempt to escape the confines of a medical evacuation building after a zombie outbreak.


This is one of those films with a Ronseal title. There are lots of zombies and zombies are dead, but also sort of lively in a sleepwalking sort of way, hence the “un”. The marketing material continues the no nonsense approach, showcasing a tag line of “RUN.HIDE.DIE!”. Tellingly a footnote informs me that “this disc contains no extra features”. I say tellingly because you really don’t get anything more than a bunch of shirts smothered in red paint and lips sticky with jam.

Sarah has survived a “massive explosion”. She is rather distraught though that the blast has peppered her Dad with all manner of fatal wounds, from bites to paper cuts. Desperately she tries to stop him from bleeding to death in the back of paramedic Steve’s small car, ideal for students or the elderly. Steve tries to calm Sarah as they drive away from the city to an “evacuation centre”. When they get there, Sarah passes out after the doctor plunges a needle full of adrenalin into poor old Dad from a great height.

Sarah comes round to find no one about, apart from a wheelchair parked shoddily and at a skewed angle in the middle of a typical hospital corridor. Perfectly logically she starts to warily shout “hello” at no one in particular. Finally some bloke turns up, tottering towards her, but Sarah can’t quite make him out because of some lingering concussion and a random cut that’s appeared on her forehead halfway through the scene. Her vision clears up just as he’s right in front of her. Unfortunately for Sarah this fella is in a right state; he hasn’t moisturized for weeks and he’s horny as hell.

Thankfully the first of a few fat men in Zombie Undead picks precisely this moment to turn up with a randomly acquired blade (other conveniently placed objects will star later such as torches and a bottle of pills). He swiftly slices the sex pest’s skull like a melon. Then Sarah’s female failings kick in. Instead of showering her rescuer with gratitude she wails and whines, inching herself away from our chubby chopper. It takes him ages to explain that there are a load of “things” like the sex pest, with awful skin and serious body odour issues, staggering about the corridors leaking goo and munching flesh. Sarah slowly accepts the situation, a bit, and vows to help Jay (for that is our hero’s name) find his little brother if he helps her find her Dad.

Sadly for Jay, Sarah never quite embraces the survival instinct, always trying to save the zombies and people they encounter when they are beyond redemption. What are women like hey? Jay also isn’t helped by fellow porker Steve, who was the paramedic with the little car from earlier. Weirdly he is the slowest to come to terms with the blood billowing monsters. They find him cowering in a toilet cubicle, in an awfully amateurish immensely suspenseful scene with Jay crashing open the doors one by one, and despite his medical training he’s prone to chucking his guts up at the sight of other’s guts.

There are an awful lot of innards on show. If our fat protagonists could man up a little and acquire a taste for it there are feasts to be had, indeed zombies are regularly shown gobbling up intestines with grunting delight. One scene in yet another toilet (either funds were tight or the director loved the aesthetics of Condom machines and urinals) has what looks like a shrine to Lidl’s chipolatas, drizzled in organically sourced tomato ketchup and served on a bed of recently devoured homo sapien.

Even the gore lacks any variation or quality, despite unhealthy splutterings of it. The direction and editing is clunky, predictable and poor, but its imitation of handheld horror is competent compared to the script. The dialogue essentially has two levels, sounding either like cliché regurgitations of previous films or as if the shockingly bad and evidently inexperienced actors are improvising in a beginner’s drama class. As for the plotting a half hearted attempt is made to make things modern, with vague and contradictory allusions to a biological terrorist attack. It was obviously decided that to leave everything unexplained would be classier, thus depriving the audience of any satisfaction whatsoever from Zombie Undead’s 86 minutes.

Some answers surface from the pools of irritating disappointment as soon as the credits roll however. Why the unusual and implausible fat hero, with the weird undertaker/security guard costume? The film’s writer, Kris Tearse, was also its male star. The primary location was Leicester’s De Montfort University, which explains the extremely low budget feel. So a bunch of students are living the dream with this film it seems, no matter what its failings, some will be ecstatically excited when the DVD is released on the 30th of May. It has nothing new or engaging at all to recommend it. But to help justify the dream I will admit I flinched like a child at one point, and was genuinely surprised, although after the zombies had gone.

Liam Trim (follow me on Twitter)

Movie Review Archive