Filmic ISSUE 06 / spring 2011
PLUS ALL NEW
TOP TEN FILMS OF THE YEAR & CHALLENGE 250
the
SPRING ISSUE
BLACK SWAN – PAUL – TANGLED THOR – PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN
1
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 2
CONTENTS
FEATURES BLACK SWAN
Dualism in the extreme with Natalie Portman in Aronofski’s Swan Lake adaptation but will she survive? …10
PAUL
Alien antics with our favourite nerds, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost …14
TANGLED
Disney’s newest offering - does mother really know best?…18
THOR
Great start for the Avengers franchise or just beardy blokes?…24
PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: ON STRANGER TIDES
Have they tagged on a needless sequel?…30
3
REGULARS EDITOR’S NOTE
A commentary on how late this issue is!…7
UPCOMING FILMS WE WANT TO SEE
Plan your cinema trips here!…36
TOP TEN FILMS OF THE YEAR
Brand spanking new top ten of 2011…37
CHALLENGE 250
New feature! Having taken on the imdb challenge, will he ever get to no.1?…39
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 4
5
SCORING GUIDE 1/10 – Absolutely and agonisingly terrible. Consider suicide rather than watch this film. Don't worry, you will never see me give out this score unless they do a limited re-release of Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me in cinemas and Phil forces me to go and see it because he's a sadistic little git at times. 2/10 – Really, really bad with no redeeming features other than the fact that it's not as terrible as Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me. Rest assured, if that film didn't exist a film scoring 2/10 would actually score 1/10. Think yourselves lucky 2/10'ers!!! 3/10 – Seriously not worth your time. There might be a tiny glimmer of hope in there somewhere but it's hidden under so many piles of shit that it's really not worth digging for. Avoid. 4/10 – Might be worth seeing with your mates if only to have laugh at. This is the point were a film is bad but almost enjoyable for various reasons. Terrible reasons, but still. Don't watch it on your own as you probably won't get a lot out of it (if anything) but rag it with your mates and you'll have a good enough time. 5/10 – Meh. It's watch-able but you won't want to see it again. Some good things about it but unfortunately too many flaws to really be anything too decent. Shame. See it if you want but don't expect a lot. 6/10 – Good. If you have an interest in this particular type of film you'll probably get enough out of it to make a viewing fairly worthwhile. It's not going to change your life but it won't exactly be a waste of your life either. Worth considering. 7/10 – Now this is more like it. The official point at which a film would be worth seeing again at some point and could maybe even earn itself a place in your DVD collection if it plays its cards right. An enjoyable film spoilt by a few things which let it down a bit but which ultimately is a satisfying viewing. If you have any interest in this type of film you should definitely go to see it. 8/10 – Pretty much a 7/10 but with less flaws, resulting in a better overall package. Thoroughly recommended! 9/10 - You need to see this film. Very little to complain about and the only things I can really think of are pretty minor niggles. Almost perfection. 10/10 – Heaven. Reserved only for the likes of Pulp Fiction, Fight Club, Toy Story 3 and a few others. I will only award this score if I feel something really is a true classic! Additionally I will clarify that you will never see me
CONTRIBUTORS Adam Musgrave
– Film Critic wannabe who is single-handed keeping Orange Wednesdays going. http://thegroovyguidetofilms.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/Muzzy88
giving '.5' marks. That would basically be scoring out of 20 which is absolutely ridiculous. The scope is far too wide to really mean anything. I mean, how would you clarify the tiny little difference between a 15/20 and a 16/20? It's seriously not worth it. The only time '.5' should ever be used is when scoring out of 5. But if your giving half marks in that situation your scoring out of 10 anyway so you may as well just use a 1-10 scale you idiots.
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 6
Hayley Moore – Graphic designer extraordinaire http://hayleymoore.blogspot.com/ http://twitter.com/design_dream
TANGLED Disney’s newest offering - does mother really know best? - page 20
7
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 8
A WORD FROM THE EDITOR Hello there! Do you remember us? It's Filmic, yeah? Hopefully you do remember us from our last issue FIVE months ago. In that time I've been hard at work finishing up at university, writing dissertations and all that nonsense. Tough times. Thankfully that's finished with now and you're going to get to have me all to yourselves again! Meanwhile Hayley has gone and got herself a proper full time design job so any future delays are totally down to her and not me! Anyway for our first issue back we're having a bit of a catch-up, giving you some reviews that date back to February and slowly working our way to the present with a brand spanking new review of Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides. Basically we're trying to pass this of as a Sping Special rather than a delayed issue... With the return of Filmic comes the return of our Top 10 Films of the Year feature, something that is already proving difficult for me to judge despite not being half way through 2011 yet. We also have a brief rundown of the major June releases in Films We Want to See and there's plenty on there to get excited about. And lastly I have started a challenge to watch and review all of the films on the imdb.com Top 250 list, the first section of which you will find at the end of the issue. This is gonna be slow going folks so expect to see this feature run and run, but hopefully I'll get there eventually. If all goes well we should actually be back again next month (promise!) rather than having the ridiculous type of gap that came between our last couple of issues. I'm in a perpetual state of laying about at the moment until I find myself a job so that could result in some pretty productive Filmic writing. There's a lot of good films out over the next month too so I'm sure we're gonna have some reviews that will be well worth reading next issue. Make sure to come back then and find out for yourselves! It's good to back.
Muz 9
BLACK SWAN
So how could Darren Aronofski follow the multi-award winning The Wrestler in which a legendary aging wrestler pushes himself to the limits to compete in one last match? Why, he makes Black Swan in which an up and coming ballerina pushes herself to the limits to get the starring role in Swan Lake. The themes of the two films definitely have a lot of crossover and both can be perceived as showing an ‘insight’ into the world of their respective careers. At least, The Wrestler did go some way to giving a reliable account of the pain and struggles many wrestlers go through to compete every night. Black Swan on the other hand wants to be more psychological-thriller than action-drama, and therefore seems rather more unbelievable in its representation of ballet as a highly sexual and jealousy fuelled profession. I know a lot more about wrestling than I do ballet but I’m fairly certain this isn’t how ballet works. The ballet director tells Nina (Natalie Portman) to go home and masturbate to get in touch with the evil Black Swan character and she slowly gets more and more paranoid and crazy as she loses herself in the role. She also seems to have a lesbian encounter with one of her co-stars. Now if I’m wrong and ballet does work like this - well lets just say I’d want to meet plenty of ballerinas. Nina is a girl in her late 20s, coming towards the age that if she doesn’t make it as a ballerina soon she never will. She lives with her overbearing mother Erica (Barbara Hershey), a failed dancer herself who clearly pushes Nina hard and doesn’t let her do much else other than dance. When it is announced the dance studio will be putting on a performance of Swan Lake, in which the lead roles of innocent and beautiful White Swan and evil, lustful Black Swan shall be played by the same dancer, Nina is told she is perfect for the White Swan but doesn’t have the edge to play Black Swan. Following some convincing the director agrees to give her a chance and what follows is a fall into a pretty dark place full of paranoia, jealousy, sex and drugs as Nina attempts to become the Black Swan.
BLACK SWAN Released: 21ST JAN Director: DARREN ARONOFSKI Running time: 107MINS In short: Psychological thriller at the ballet. Natalie Portman is great and although the plot gets pretty outlandish it is engrossing stuff and an excellent watch.
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 10
As I said then, the events of this film do get increasingly bizarre the further you get into it. However, although we’re never explicitly aware of it, many of the things that happen are simply in Nina’s head. And that is the crux of the films focus. Many dancers who saw the film seemed to get a bit worked up that it isn’t true to real life, but the point of the film is that most of it is indeed psychological. Nina doesn’t really grow feathers. She isn’t being constantly stabbed in the back by her ‘rival’ dancer Lily (Mila Kunis). In trying to get into the head of the Black Swan and understand its motivations and desires, the Black Swan actually ends up getting into Nina’s head. It’s method acting taken to a whole new extreme and aptly enough the same could probably be said with regards to Natalie Portman herself. Portman (and Kunis) worked out for up to six hours a day and started training a full six months before the shoot began, learning the choreography of the film and partaking in exercises such as swimming. This isn’t fake. Both women worked hard to look like ballerinas and learn new skills and it absolutely pays off. As well as this Portman’s downfall into sheer lunacy is compelling to watch, theoretically unbelievable events being played with a contradictory and impressive believability. She thoroughly deserves everything she gets for her performance in this role. Despite the ‘thriller’ tag and the dark themes that pervade through the film, there are few classically engineered horror moments to make you jump out of your seat. There’s the odd person appearing suddenly in the dark and the like, but it’s more focused towards subtly poking your mind rather than screaming at you at the top of its lungs. In the first half of the film you may notice a few odd things, but there’s nothing that really suggests what is to come. As such the first 45 minutes or so is simply the story of a dancer who is a bit down on her luck but then gets the shot of a lifetime. It’s fairly enjoyable but pretty run-of-the-mill. Once the wilder things do start to happen though the film grabs you and doesn’t let go. The build-up is average but in the end is worth it and necessary due to what happens once Nina gets the Black Swan role. Nina’s spiral into madness is completed come the night of the performance thanks to some terrific make-up work which makes her look truly breathtaking - odd and inhuman yet strangely beautiful at the
same time. And it’s surprising how a pair of orange contact lenses can do a lot in the way of making someone that little more odd looking. Portman’s mannerisms and behaviour changes drastically whilst on stage as the Black Swan and you’d be forgiven at times for thinking it wasn’t actually her. Unfortunately the CGI feathers the Black Swan ultimately sprouts are not massively convincing, but you can forgive the film this considering everything else that is happening in that moment. The shocking revelation of just how far Nina will go to get into the mindset of the Black Swan leads to an ambiguous ending, which is again reminiscent of the ending of The Wrestler. Regrettably because of this the end doesn’t quite have the same impact on you if you have seen the earlier film. The parallels between the two are striking and the main characters of both show a great deal of passion for the one thing that ultimately defines their lives. Nevertheless the ending is fulfilling, which so often isn’t the case when the climax of a story is left open to interpretation. This is in no small part due to the final shot of the film being stunning. Though it may be treading some of the same water as Aranofski’s previous success, Black Swan is enough its own beast to stand out and have an impact. This really isn’t just some nice frilly story about a ballerina, it’s the precise opposite of that much more gloomy Black Swan than girly White Swan. The clue is in the name.
/
8 10
11
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 12
PAUL Pegg and Frost are back together at last and now they’ve found a new friend, Paul. Just like E.T. he’s ready to go home, but it’s just never that simple is it? Does his quest entertain? Turn the page to find out! 13
AFTER
the successes of Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz, Simon Pegg has rather extraordinarily gone on to become a genuine Hollywood star, featuring in all kinds of big-budget blockbusters from Star Trek to Ice Age 3: Dawn of the Dinosaurs. If you’d told this to anyone watching his cult British sitcom Spaced in 1999, they would have had a hard time believing you. And he admits repeatedly in his recent autobiography that even he would have had a hard time believing you. Spaced could barely pull in a couple of million viewers at the time so how could anyone expect its stars (Frost featured in it also) to appeal to audiences around the world? Fortunately in this case it turned out that you just can’t keep a talented guy down and Pegg has become hot property. Now he returns to his roots, teaming up with his best friend Nick Frost once again, moving on from the horror of Shaun and the all out action of Fuzz, to the more appropriately nerdy topic of sci-fi. Appropriate indeed because, as you may well realise whilst watching Paul, Pegg and Frost are both very nerdy individuals with a vast knowledge of the many great and influential scifi films from years passed. Paul is basically their homage to a genre that they love. The story of Paul (voiced by Seth Rogen), an abandoned alien on Earth trying to make his way home, makes it somewhat close to a contemporary E.T. Minus the kids and the family friendly approach that is. There’s even a few great E.T references in the film, including a scene in which Paul requests some Reese’s Pieces, the popular American candy that E.T. seemed so much to love the taste of. And it is these references to iconic sci-fi movies that provides much of the humour in Paul. If you know your Star Wars, Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Alien films, you’ll notice a lot of call-backs to them in the form of lines of dialogue, unmistakable imagery and even, in one grin inducing moment, memorable music. If you’re not a cult movie nut like the writers though, don’t worry. There’s plenty of much more approachable humour in the film. No doubt there’s a second layer of laughs to be had by those who know their films, but knowing your stuff certainly isn’t a necessity for enjoying what’s on offer. Besides how funny it is, one of the most impressive things about Paul is the way in which the character himself is brought to life in a truly believable way. Even in the year 2011, when the decision is made to create a fully CGI character in a film eyebrows are often raised. Movies such as Avatar have shown that credible CGI characters can indeed be integrated convincingly into a live action environment, but Avatar had a $237 million budget behind it and was one of the most expensive films ever made. Paul, on the other hand, had a comparatively miniscule budget of $50 million. Yet, somehow, Paul interacts perfectly with everyone and everything around him. This is important. If you didn’t believe that Paul was a true physical being that could hug Graeme (Pegg) or feel pain, you just wouldn’t become as involved in the story. It’s pleasing to say that an important part of the stunning accomplishment that is Paul is down to Seth Rogen. I’m not usually a huge Rogen fan, but here his characterisation of the alien is perfect. He’s funny and silly, sad and lonely, and always likeable. It could very easily have been the case that despite Paul being the title character he would simply become the third wheel in the now
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 14
PAUL Released: FEBRUARY 14TH Director: GREG MOTTOLA Running time: 104MINS In short: The latest buddy film to feature Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, and this time Frost has had a hand in the writing too. Edgar Wright is missed but if you’re a fan of their previous work you’ll love this.
15
famous Pegg and Frost relationship. Thanks to the enormous amount of work that has gone into realising him though, Paul is both the title character and the star of the film. Another interesting aspect of Paul is the character of Ruth Buggs (Kristen Wiig), a staunch Christian and therefore a believer of intelligent design - the idea that it is too much of a coincidence for the universe to have just ‘turned out’ this way so somebody must have made it happen; in Ruth’s case that person is of course God. Graeme and Clyde (Frost) meet Ruth on their travels and, after Paul overhears Ruth’s adamant statements that man was created in God’s own image, he can’t resist revealing his existence to her. The revelation that aliens are out there totally destroys all of Ruth’s beliefs. But, after 15 minutes or so to get over the shock, Ruth is suddenly a different woman, almost immediately accepting what has happened and changing her values in an instant. This is slightly disappointing. There’s an appealing thought in my head that Ruth not acknowledge what she saw and instead fight against it, maybe until the climax of the film when she must choose whose side she is ultimately on and what she really believes in. This sort of happens in that Ruth’s equally religious father chases the gang down and she has to tell him they’ve been wrong in their beliefs all this time and that she now has an alien for a friend, but there actually ends up being very little personal conflict for Ruth. As it is, she is put in place to pull off the religion vs. science gag and then provide a nicely nonintrusive romantic subplot for Pegg’s character. That’s fine, but there could have been more to it. Inevitably Paul was always going to get compared to the previous Pegg and Frost buddy films on its release and, let’s make no mistake here, it can’t quite live up to the standards of Shaun and Fuzz. That’s not really much of a slight on Paul though; both of the aforementioned films are of stupendously high quality. To not be as good as them is only to say that Paul is not an instant classic. It is still a great and often hilarious film. I’m not reviewing Shaun and Fuzz here so I won’t go too much into why I think they are better films but what I will say is that they seem to be sharper and more free flowing. I put this solely down to the sublime editing style of Edgar Wright. I’ll take nothing away from the director of Paul, Greg Mottola - his work is good. But Wright’s style worked so well with Pegg and Frost that you do miss a little it here. It makes you yearn ever more eagerly for the long promised third collaboration between the three of them. One day that film will come, but in the meantime we have Paul, and that’s certainly good enough for me.
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 16
/
8 10
17
TANGLED Released: 28TH JANUARY Director: NATHAN GRENO Running time: 100MINS In short: The Disney of yesteryear is on its way back. The story of Rapunzel is modernised and given a new twist, giving us a lot to enjoy and only a little to moan about.
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 18
Tangled AFTER YEARS OF NOT GETTING A ‘TRADITIONAL’ Disney film, we have now had two in the last couple of years. The traditional Disney film being, of course, a girl (probably a princess) finding herself in some perilous situation or another and acquiring the help of a handsome man (usually a prince) to foil the enforcer of evil (likely an ageing/old woman). They don’t always follow those guidelines exactly but that is the kind of tale you associate with Disney, largely thanks to early classics such as Snow White and the Seven Dwarves, Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty. Plenty of later Disney films of the 80s and 90s are riffs on that kind of theme - Beauty and the Beast, The Little Mermaid or even Mulan. In the last decade or so though Disney much preferred to focus on more contemporary fare (talking CGI animals anyone?) rather than traditional fairytales, and also moved away from hand-drawn animation in favour of computer animation, even going so far as to announce in 2004 that Home on the Range would be their last traditionally animated movie. It wasn’t long until that decision was reversed, mainly due to the influence of Pixar legend John Lasseter becoming chief creative officer of Disney Animation Studios, and in 2009 the hand-drawn The Princess and the Frog was released to the relief of many Disney fans. Tangled isn’t traditionally animated but it does have a princess and it does follow that classic Disney narrative. Like with The Princess and the Frog, it’s great to see Disney returning to its roots here. Tangled loosely retells the classic tale of Rapunzel, the girl with unfathomably long hair. Here, Rapunzel’s hair has magical healing properties due to an enchanted flower that was once used to heal her mother. In order to prevent herself from ageing, an old woman named Gothel kidnaps the newly born princess and keeps her locked up in a tower. This is unknown to Rapunzel who believes Gothel to be her mother. Already this is differing massively from the original story, but putting a new twist on a classic tale can often be a very good thing and it’s something Disney has done well in the past. Originally the film
19
was slated to be released with the title ‘Rapunzel’ but this was changed due to the male protagonist of the film, Flynn Rider, getting equal billing with Rapunzel on posters and so on, supposedly in an attempt to appeal more to young boys who may not have otherwise wanted to see a film about a princess. Flynn is a roguish character, a wanted thief who happens across Rapunzel in her tower whilst trying to find a place to hide. Rapunzel blackmails him into taking her to see a massive display of Chinese lanterns that the King and Queen let loose on Rapunzel’s birthday every year in order to remember her. It being Rapunzel’s first time outside she feels elated yet massively guilty about disobeying Gothel’s orders not to leave, leading to a humorous sequence in which Rapunzel excitedly runs around being gleeful about everything she see’s, interspersed with sudden cuts to her bawling her eyes out or looking unbelievably anxious. The extremes between Rapunzels expressions here raise a good few laughs and shows the talent of the animators in making the girl display mountains of conflicting emotions in just a minute or so. Flynn’s face as he watches on in absolute bemusement is also priceless.
If
there weren’t enough Disney trademarks in the presence of a princess and a fairytale narrative, we also have animals with seemingly human levels of intelligence (but who thankfully cannot talk!) and a few musical numbers. Maximus the horse and Pascal the chameleon are actually the funniest characters in the film, especially Maiximus’ rivalry with Flynn. Unfortunately the same praise cannot be directed towards the songs - whilst they are largely pretty jolly and foot-tapping
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 20
affairs they are completely forgettable and don’t really stand up to some of the timeless songs from Disney films gone by. They certainly have a place in the movie and are never too tiresome but they could have been stronger. Now, I’d be stupid not to mention Rapunzel as a female role model here as the representation of women in Disney films is what I’m doing for my university dissertation. Looking back on classic Disney you’ll see the girls are very much passive characters. They are hard done by but do little to help themselves out of their situation, instead hoping to one day meet their true love who will save them and whisk them away. Snow White actually has very little personality at all. Rapunzel is a bit different. She’s ambitious and smart, turns out to be pretty savvy after just a few hours in the real world and has plenty of confidence once she escapes her prison. However if you consider that she needs Flynn to turn up before she acquires that confidence she needs to simply lower herself from the tower it still kind of comes across as Flynn rescuing her. That’s not exactly what happens per se but it may as well be the case. Plus she ends up falling in love with Flynn and having a happy ever after ending, promoting the idea, as in all these kinds of Disney film, that once Rapunzel has a man in her life all of her problems are solved. There’s definitely development in the presentation of the woman as being strong and independent
21
but ultimately it's hard to say she conclusively is. Of course, I’ve been singing the praises of Disney returning to this type of narrative so I can’t really complain about it. The best thing I can think of to really promote female empowerment in a Disney film is to do this kind of thing with a lesbian princess. But that really isn’t going to happen is it? The CGI look is fine and does present some stunning scenes; when Rapunzel and Flynn do eventually make it to see the lanterns, sat on a rowing boat in the middle of a lake surrounded by hundreds of little lights, it’s a real wow moment. Apparently it is even more impressive in 3D but due to my ever-growing fatigue of the device I saw Tangled in 2D. I do need to see the film again for my dissertation though so maybe I’ll give it a shot next time and see if I’m pleasantly surprised. I still think it’s a shame the film hasn’t been handdrawn but it is great to know that Disney are really putting their weight behind making some good old fashioned animated films again. In a few months time we’ll see the release of the traditionally animated Winnie the Pooh and it looks super. I'm hoping that this is the start of Disney returning to its former glory after a decade of not really getting things completely right. The 90s period that produced such top quality animations as The Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, Pocahontas and Mulan was referred to as the ‘Disney Renaissance’. By the looks of their last two films, Disney seem to be working on the sequel.
/
7 10
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 22
23
THOR Released: 29TH APRIL Director: KENNETH BRANAGH Running time: 114MINS In short: The first big-hitter in a long line of superhero films coming our way over the Summer, Thor is, much like the man himself, big and bold. Barring a couple of problems forced onto it by the bigger picture Marvel has for its film universe, this is an excellent way to kick-start blockbuster season.
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 24
THOR
OF THE ‘MAIN’ Marvel line-up, those first-tier superheroes who are recognisable to anyone with even the smallest knowledge of comic books, those who have appeared in Marvel movies over the past few years, and those who will come together for next years ensemble film The Avengers, Thor was always going to be the biggest challenge to translate into film. Not because he himself is a particularly inaccessible character, but because you first have to get past the unique world he lives in and the mythology that surrounds his corner of the Marvel Universe. Thor is not an average guy who suddenly finds himself with powers; this is a genuine, all seeing, watching over the universe God. What’s more he is based on the Norse Gods, complete with winged hat and funny named hammer, and he lives in space. That’s quite a difference when compared to the charming superstar, Tony Stark. Thor could well have looked ludicrous if not treated appropriately, just a load of beardy Viking men flying around, but the interpretation of the Thor character that we get and the superb production values mean that, actually, it is easy to buy into what we are seeing. With the more than capable Kenneth Branagh on board, Thor is handled amazingly well. Branagh is well known for writing, directing and starring in his fair share of Shakespearean adaptations, and that experience in producing high quality epic drama certainly translates well in his direction of Thor. Sweeping long shots give us our first glimpses of the mystical realm of Asgard where we are introduced to Thor (Chris Hemsworth), his brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) and his father, King of Asgard, Odin (Anthony Hopkins). Soon we move on to the moody and dark planet of the Frost Giants, Jotunheim. The two environments are polar opposites, one a grand, gleaming, majestic city, an obvious home for the Gods, and the other an icy and barren wasteland. Both, however, look absolutely stunning, and basing the first real piece of action, an ill-advised fight between Thor and his friends and the Frost Giants, in the snowy atmosphere of Jotunheim,
25
makes it immediately stand out as something special. This first fight is one of the highlights of the film in fact, a fully powered set of Gods taking on huge beings that can create ice at will, and the inability for later set-pieces to quite live up to this first one is one of the few problems I will touch upon later. The brawl is very well placed in making you sit up and pay attention though, after a lengthy twenty minutes of introduction to the unfamiliar world that Thor lives in this comes at just the right moment to show the audience that the film isn’t all going to be character based, mythological drama - it has cool, super-powered combat too. Thor, first in line to the throne, is subsequently stripped of his powers and banished to Earth for starting a war between Asgard and Jotunheim, and then the real story begins.
WAKING ON EARTH, THOR, literally, bumps into budding scientist Jane Foster (Natalie Portman). Not accustomed to human ways Thor acts strangely, and this intrigues Jane, who wishes to help a man she believes is seriously confused and suffering from a concussion. Thor makes it his mission to return home but the only lead he has is a strange comet that fell not far from the place he awoke. He reasons that this must be Mjolnir, his hammer and the source of his power, and sets off to regain it, with Jane accompanying him. Meanwhile on Asgard, Thor’s brother Loki assumes the position of King when Odin falls ill. A selfish God of mischief, Loki does not have the best interests of Asgard at heart, and even jealously goes so far as to do everything in his power to stop Thor from returning home. Of interest in the Thor universe is that Loki is not your traditional super-villain. He is somewhat cowardly and weak, pulling strings and controlling things from behind the scenes rather than getting stuck in himself. Hiddleston plays the role well, coming across as resentful and bitter whilst retaining the modicum of vulnerability and desperation that makes him easier for us to empathise with and results in an extremely high forgiveness level in Thor. As Thor, Hemsworth looks like a beast, a huge man who can easily pass for a God. His character arc is very appealing, initially presented as brash and arrogant due to his power and position in Asgard, but upon having to work his way back from nothing he becomes the good man a hero should be. Hemsworth plays both sides of the coin convincingly, so much so that I did at first really dislike the character, only to see him transform into somebody much more likeable. Portman, meanwhile, clearly isn’t in a role that requires the level of investment seen from her in Black Swan, but does a passable job as a relatively bland romantic interest. Her character is unfortunately suddenly disposed of, and the relationship between herself and Thor is not fully
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 26
“Branagh is well known for writing, directing and starring in his fair share of Shakespearean adaptations, and that experience in producing high quality epic drama� 27
concluded, so I expect she will turn up again in future films. It would have been nice to have had a better resolution of this plot thread here though, rather than abruptly dropping it just before going into the final conflict.
FOR ME, IT IS PLEASING TO see the introduction of Thor into the Marvel film universe. As mentioned, the mythology and fantasy ingrained in his story serve as something strikingly different to other superhero films and sit as a nice compliment to the more scientific approach of something like Iron Man or The Incredible Hulk. Unfortunately, the (admittedly infinitely exciting) determination on Marvel’s part to tie together all of their film properties does mean that Thor gets a somewhat anticlimactic ending which cannot match that initial frosty battle. Due in part both to Thor’s forgiving unwillingness to destroy his brother, and the plans for Loki to serve in a leading villain role in The Avengers, the final scenes in which Loki are defeated do not have as much impact as they should or could have done. Indeed, Loki’s immediate return in the now traditional Marvel post-credits sequence lessens the impact of the final confrontation even more, as he obviously lives on, though it does unquestionably heighten the excitement for both The Avengers and the very soon to be released Captain America: The First Avenger. The overall plan Marvel has for its characters dampens the effectiveness of Thor’s conclusion, but it does create great anticipation for their upcoming films. I guess you can’t have it both ways. Don’t let this put you off though, Thor is an impressive translation to the screen of a slightly risky franchise, and will keep you well entertained until the credits roll. It is an excellent way to begin the lead up into the Summer blockbuster season.
/
8 10
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 28
29
PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: ON STRANGER TIDES Released: 20TH MAY Director: ROB MARSHALL Running time: 137MINS In short: It’s typical Pirates of the Caribbean! This instalment has many of the same problems as the other films and yet still manages to provide a decent amount of fun. Not excellent, but nowhere near as bad as it could have been.
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 30
Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides Problems with the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise; the stories are needlessly complex and chaotic, many of the side characters are mindless pawns who no-one really cares about due to their generic dullness, the films are too long and begin to lose steam towards the end, and it’s usually bloody hard to tell who you are supposed to be rooting for. The majority of these problems arose after the first film, The Curse of the Black Pearl, and, with this fourth film being seen as a ‘fresh start’ after the first trilogy, you would hope those involved would have learnt from their previous mistakes. But they haven’t. Frustratingly, all of those problems are still in place with On Stranger Tides. As ever though, a number of equally familiar factors once again come to the rescue and manage to add a lot of fun and entertainment into the mix. Consequently whether you enjoy this film largely depends on how tired you are of seeing the now well-known tropes of the franchise.
31
“The dependence on Rush and Depp to make the films good is something that is seriously wrong with the franchise, and yet their characters are also its biggest asset.� FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 32
In a fashion, the film picks up where At World’s End finished. The fountain of youth is still at the forefront of everybody’s minds and yet a number of years have passed and situations have changed. Captain Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp), with the ever-faithful Gibbs (Kevin McNally) by his side, has lost his ship and crew again, and Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush) has somehow joined the British Navy and appears to have given up piracy. After balancing the status quo at the end of the last film, the script for this one destroys it all again before it even begins. Within fifteen minutes we start to realise that the aim here is basically to get everyone back to where they were when we last saw them. Rather than give Jack some new aims, he still just wants to reclaim the Black Pearl and be its captain. That isn’t all that interesting anymore. New characters are created for this adventure, the most prevalent being Angelica (Penélope Cruz), a former flame of Jack’s, and her father, the famous pirate Blackbeard (Ian McShane). They capture Jack and order him to take them to the fountain of youth so Blackbeard can live forever. Angelica isn’t a bad match for Jack, and Cruz has good chemistry with Depp. She is the ‘long lost’ daughter of Blackbeard, but we never find out enough about her past with her father to really care all that much about their relationship. Blackbeard is the usual, pantomime-inspired Pirates
villain. Angelica has potential, but neither her or her father are fleshed out enough to steal the film from the regulars. Even worse is a romantic sub-plot involving a captive from Blackbeard’s crew and a mermaid. Obviously there to take the place of Keira Knightly and Orlando Bloom, they don’t hold the attention at all and the time would have been better spent giving Angelica and Blackbeard some extra character development. A few less action scenes and a few more character moments would be ideal.
With
the near complete failure of the new characters, then, we have to rely on Johnny Depp and Geoffrey Rush to step up to the plate once more and carry the film on their shoulders. It is a huge credit to the characters and the respective performances of the actors that they manage to pull this off yet again. Despite Barbossa being nowhere near the sinister, un-dead figure he was in the first film, having all but switched sides since then, he is still an enduringly appealing character and his position within the Navy in this film throws up a few unique chances to have further fun with him and produce some very funny moments. Of course, the antics of Jack Sparrow are the thing that everyone really wants to see from a Pirates film, and Depp slips back into the character effortlessly. Jack takes centre stage in this film, after having to play alongside Elizabeth and Will for
33
‘main character’ status in the previous instalments, but even with all the extra time in the limelight and very little character development over four films, he still hasn’t become a bore. The dependence on Rush and Depp to make the films good is something that is seriously wrong with the franchise, and yet their characters are also its biggest asset. A balance needs to be found, and some more interesting characters and stories should be produced to complement them. At the moment they are keeping the films from being tedious. With a good script and some more equally strong characters, the Pirates franchise could be great again.
I
realise I’m being pretty negative here, which is a shame as I did enjoy On Stranger Tides. It has a lot of problems but overall it is quite a bit of fun. There’s a great action sequence in the middle with a group of savage mermaids attacking the pirate crew. I would guess that the portrayal of mermaids as vicious underwater succubus’s is nothing new but it wasn’t something I’d seen before and they looked superb. The script is as funny as you’d expect, even if it is still deeply formulaic and similar to the other films, but there were a good deal of laugh out loud moments to be found. The fantasy world of pirating is also still a refreshing change from countless other fantasy stories about elves or fairies or trolls or what have you. What I’m trying to say is that it’s very hard to score On Stranger Tides because, despite all the bad things I’ve said about the film and the franchise, I just can’t help loving Pirates of the Caribbean. If you had an issue with the rest of the series, this isn’t going to make you think any differently about it and you can knock a couple of points off of my final score. But if, like me, you can see past the problems and just enjoy all the good bits and the bits you can make sense of, then you’ll be happy with this film. There needs to be a big overhaul of the series, and judging by the box office takings for this film so far I have no doubt that Jack will be back again, but somehow On Stranger Tides just about works.
/
7 10
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 34
35
1st June - X-Men: First Class.
Because of the muted reaction X-Men 3 got, Fox seem a bit reluctant to just go ahead with an X-Men 4. Apparently it is still a possibility at some point, but in the meantime they’ve hired the makers of Kick-Ass to take this look back at the early days of Professor X, Magneto and some of the other mutants we love. That’s absolutely fine by me as it looks like this could actually end up being even better than the main series was. Anticipation Rating: 5
10th June - Kung Fu Panda 2. When a friend and I originally
stumbled across the synopsis for Kung Fu Panda, about 2 years before it was released, we marked it down as something we had to see. In an excellent twist of good fortune the film turned out great. The sequel brilliantly adds Jean-Claude Van Damme to an already excellent voice cast which includes Jack Black, Jackie Chan, Dustin Hoffman and Angelina Jolie. I am slightly worried this can’t deliver like the first one did, but it’s not long now until we find out. Anticipation Rating: 3
17th June - The Green Lantern.
Green Lantern is one of my favourite comic franchises, largely because of the huge cast of endlessly interesting characters within the Green Lantern Corps and the rest of the universe. Something about the film doesn’t look quite right though, and I can’t really put my finger on it. There’s heavy use of CGI to create many members of the cast of characters, the planet Oa, and lots of other things, and that could end up being a burden if it doesn’t look convincing enough. I want this to be good, and I am a Ryan Reynolds fan, but I’m not convinced by the trailers. Anticipation Rating: 4
17th June - The Beaver.
Mel Gibson returns after his tumultuous, character damaging breakdowns to bring us a film which aptly follows a broken man who starts to speak through the hand puppet of a beaver to try to better communicate with the people around him. The concept is intriguing, though the outcome is inevitable, so if I have the finances I may go to see this at some point. Anticipation Rating: 2
1st July - Transformers: Dark of the Moon.
After what I thought was a great first film, the second was a bit of a disaster. All parties involved seem to have acknowledged that and vowed to sort it out for Dark of the Moon. I haven’t really being following what this is going to be about but I would guess it’s something to do with Decepticons on the moon, which sounds quite cool. Space battles is something we haven’t seen in the films yet and some space action from Michael Bay might work out quite well. Hopefully that’s what we’ll get. If not I’ll be very disappointed! Anticipation Rating: 3
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 36
UPCOMING
films
WE WANT TO SEE In this ongoing feature I highlight the films coming out in the next month or so that I’m interested in seeing. As I try to go to the cinema most weeks the films won’t always necessarily be good, but I’ll list them anyway. I’ll provide brief comment on the films and also give an anticipation rating out of 5. Hopefully it’ll help you plan your cinema trips too!
TOP 10
FILMS OF THE
YEAR
Here is my top 10 of 2011 so far. My opinions are always changing depending on what mood I’m in so much of the bottom half of the list is somewhat interchangeable, but I would say the top 5 are definitely, for me, the best 5 films of the year so far. We’ll be updating this every month of course, so keep checking back to see whether or not you agree!
1. THE KING’S SPEECH
I highly doubt this will be replaced as my number one this year. It tells the moving tale of King George VI as he tackles his speech problems and Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush and Helena Bonham-Carter all ensure we become very invested in watching events unfold. Great performances all round and the speech scene itself had me hanging onto every word. Perfect.
2. TRUE GRIT
I really wish I had reviewed this (and I might do for a future issue if I get the DVD), True Grit evokes the atmosphere of the Wild West with style and makes the genre seem mighty appealing even though I’ve never been a big fan of it. The young Hailee Steinfeld impresses hugely in her first feature film role and Jeff Bridges is great as always. Worth seeing just for the accents.
3. THOR
The only superhero film on the list this month, I’m sure by the next issue of Filmic it will be joined by at least two more. Though superhero films could well have become stale by now, and a few definitely have, Thor keeps things exciting both on its own terms and for the future of Marvel films. A great success.
4. SOURCE CODE Directed by Duncan Jones (son of David Bowie and director of critically acclaimed Moon), this is another great, thought provoking sci-fi film. Jake
Gyllenhaal again proves he has what it takes to be a convincing and likeable leading man and the ending has mind-boggling implications.
5. PAUL
Simon Pegg and Nick Frost reunite for another buddy genre film and Paul the alien joins them in an attempt to get home. The CGI Paul is a huge success and the star of the show, and movie buffs will have a lot of fun spotting all of the references. Easily the best comedy of the year so far.
6. BLACK SWAN
Natalie Portman gives a career best performance to tap into the dark, manic character of the Black Swan. This may catch you off-guard if you are simply expecting a run-of-the-mill story about the rise of a ballet dancer, but that is when the hysteria of the film will be at its most effective.
7. PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: ON STRANGER TIDES Maybe not fully deserving of a place above a film like The Fighter, but my fondness of the franchise means I like this film more than I probably should have done. Captain Jack returns for the usual hectic fun of Pirates of the Caribbean. A guilty pleasure.
8. THE FIGHTER
Christian Bale won Best Supporting Actor at the Oscars for his performance in this film and quite rightly so. He joins Mark Wahlberg as they portray the real life Ward brothers, Irish-American boxers with a tumultuous family background. This mixes re-staged action with actual footage of the fights to produce some great sequences.
9. NEVER LET ME GO
This British made film is based on a novel by Kazuo Ishiguro and features future SpiderMan Andrew Garfield, Carey Mulligan and Keira Knightly. It paints a rather depressing future of clones and sacrifice and the three leads convey the emotion of the situation excellently. A big win for British filmmaking.
10. TANGLED
This years big Disney release just makes it into the top 10 for now, but its position is looking very shakey with a lot of big releases still to come. Their Princess films need a bigger shake-up than this offers to remain relevant in today’s society.
37
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 38
CHALLENGE 250 watching the 250 best films according to IMBD : 250 - 247
This is it.I’m now officially starting my IMDB Top 250 challenge. I already watched Toy Story as a tester, but now I’m starting from the bottom and working my way up to #1. I have a print out of the list from January 5th so that’s what I’ll be counting as ‘my’ 250. I won’t stick rigidly to the order because it might take a while for me to get hold of some of the films, so if I get stuck on one I’ll move onto the next one and watch it later. Clear? Good. Let’s go! Film #250: Talk To Her (2002) 112mins
We start with the first of an impressive amount of foreign language films on the list - Talk To Her is a Spanish film focusing on two men whose lives are hugely affected by the women they love being in comas. One of the men, Benigno (Javier Camara), is a nurse at the hospital and has looked after Alicia (Leonor Watling) for four years, talking to her every day and gradually falling in love with her, though obviously the feelings are one-way only and Benigno daren't tell anyone what has happened for fear of losing his job. The other man, Marco (Dario Grandinetti), was in a relationship with bullfighter Lydia (Rosario Flores) when she was gored by one of the bulls. Marco's love was returned, though unbeknownst to him Lydia was preparing to leave him. The two men meet in the hospital and become great friends due to their somewhat similar circumstances. As they grow closer Benigno reveals his secret to his new friend just as a remarkable, and criminal, discovery is made concerning Alicia. The film explores some pretty dark themes such as loss and loneliness, though it never lets the audience forget that there is also hope and love in the world. Benigno is an interesting character. There is no doubt he loves and cares for Alicia but you cannot deny that it's all a bit strange and he does at times come off as a bit of a pervert, especially when 'massaging' and 'washing' a bare breasted Alicia. You sense from the start that something a bit funny is going on, and when Benigno eventually reveals to Marco that he wants to marry Alicia it's hardly a shock. Marco's relationship is much less complex, but when he finds out about Lydia's plans to leave him he must suddenly come to terms with splitting up with a coma patient. It's crushing to think how that must feel - being at the side of the woman you love for nights and days on end, praying for them to wake up, only to find out they were about to leave you. For whatever reason though Marco never actually seems too upset by it. Weirdo. The direction by Pedro Almodovar is inspired. At one point it is revealed that Alicia is a big fan of silent cinema and Benigno goes to the cinema every week to see a silent film 'for her'. As he sits and describes to her
what this weeks film was about, the picture changes and we see the film for ourselves, silent and in black and white, with title cards and everything you would associate with the era of silent cinema. It's a bold thing to do but it works, especially as what happens in the silent film becomes more important later on and is somewhat revealing as to the overall story of Talk To Her. Seeing the images of the silent film provides answers to some of the questions later on in the film, without us initially being aware of it. Very clever.
Film #249: Rope (1948) 80mins Here we have an ingenious
experimentation with the art of filmmaking from the master of cinema himself, Alfred Hitchcock. The whole film takes place on a single set, the apartment of young intellectuals Brandon Shaw (John Dall) and Phillip Morgan (Farley Granger), and is made up entirely by a number of long, unbroken scenes with few edits. The film begins as Brandon and Phillip murder their friend David, strangling him with a piece of rope. They hide him in an old chest and go ahead with a dinner party which they hold in the very same room, with David’s father invited, Brandon revelling in the fact that they are deceiving so many people and are so close to being caught out. Phillip is less thrilled by the idea and proceeds to get more and more anxious and drunk as the night goes on. One of their guests is their old schoolmaster Rupert Cadell (James Stewart) and as the party guests grow increasingly worried as to the whereabouts of David, Rupert begins to piece together what has happened. Each shot in the film runs continuously for up to ten minutes and there are only nine cuts throughout, necessary because of limitations on the amount of film that could fit into the camera. Hitchcock masks half of these cuts by having, for example, someone walking past the camera so the picture goes black and he can switch to the next shot fluidly. This means that in the end there are only four visible cuts to a new camera setup, something which may be hard to comprehend for anyone used to watching modern action films in which
39
you could see four cuts in less than four seconds. The way the film is shot really draws the audience in as you spend all of your time with the same characters, watching as Phillip slowly has a breakdown and Brandon’s plans fall to pieces. Both are superb and Dall portrays Brandon’s strange pleasure with the situation with rather disturbing authenticity. The shining star though is James Stewart as Rupert, in his first of four Hitchcock-directed films. Stewart plays Rupert’s discovery of the murder clues very subtly and, though you can always see his mind whirring away and his suspicions rise, the audience is for a time left wondering if Rupert really has figured things out. The intensity of the scenes is only heightened by not cutting away from the tense atmosphere, always confined exclusively to being inside the walls of the apartment. To make matters worse the murder weapon of the film’s title persists in constantly showing up during the party, always serving as a reminder to the audience and Phillip in particular as to what has happened. The focus of the camera often coming to rest on the old chest with the body in it, and the party guests proximity to it, raises the tension further still. The direction, as you would expect from Hitchcock, is fantastic and the style of filming has been borrowed and payed homage to many times since, most enjoyably in an episode of the BBC’s comedy series Psychoville. That the film is still so fondly remembered today is a sure sign it deserves its place on the list, though I might have placed it a little higher myself. It is one film, as I suspect many on this list will be, that I think everybody should see.
Film #248: Spring, Summer, Autumn, Winter...and Spring (2003) 103mins. Spring, Summer, Autumn, Winter...and Spring focuses on the life
of a Buddhist monk by showing us five seasons taken from different points in his life. We begin one Spring, seeing him as a young child who lives with his master on a small wooden hut floating in the middle of a tranquil lake. The lake is surrounded by countless old and majestic trees, the sound of birdsong and running water mildly punctures the peaceful silence, and a pair of painted wooden doors sit at the end of a path leading down to the water. We get a shot of these doors opening to introduce the beginning of each new season. The master wakes the young boy and kneels before a buddha statue, hitting a wooden block with a stick. It is clear that he leads a very structured life - not a lot changes here but the old man is content. Soon we see the young boy chuckling away as he ties small rocks to a fish, a frog and a snake. The master watches, unobserved by the child. When the boy awakens the next day he finds himself encumbered with a large rock tied to his back. When he complains the master asks him what he thinks happened to the animals and tells him to find them. Both the fish and the snake are dead. The boy cries his eyes out as he learns the repercussions of his actions. I will not spoil the events of the proceeding seasons, but with that outline I hope you can get an idea of the atmosphere in the film. We watch the boy grow into a teen, a man in his 30s, a middle-aged man, and then an old master himself. To think that someone could spend their life in one small area simply praying, reflecting and surviving may seem very strange to us and also probably sounds like a painfully uneventful film. The boy does go through a rebellious phase though which provides the main focus of the narrative, only later in life redeeming himself for the actions he takes as a young man. But this isn’t to say the film ever enters a period of frantic action; we always remain at the lake, the old
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 40
master ruling with a calm authority even as the boy grows older. Yet the serene fascination one has in watching life unfold on this floating hut is enough to keep you hooked. What’s more, there is comparatively little dialogue in the film. It is completely happy to let the images do the talking instead - the picturesque settings and the expressions of the characters are often more than enough for us to fully appreciate the power of a scene. And there are plenty of powerful moments. Love, hate, cruelty and redemption all feature prominantly in the film. This isn’t a particularly shocking or intense piece, but it certainly has the ability to stir the emotions of its audience. The most powerful moment of all though may well be the ending which suggests that, despite everything that might happen along the way, the circle of life continues undisturbed. It isn’t immediately gratifying, but it is the kind of thing that will stick in your mind and stay with you for a long time afterwards. Highly recommended.
Film #247: Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (1984) 116mins If we
do have any Miyazaki fans here, I’m sure you’ll be pleased to know this is just the first of five films he has on the list. Two of them in particular are in very respectable spots as well. For now though we’ll concentrate on Nausicaä, a film of Miyazaki’s which I have to admit I hadn’t seen until yesterday (though out of the other four on the list, I have already seen three of them. So not too bad, yes?) Anyway, for anyone not familiar with Miyazaki he’s a Japanese director/animator who has created some of the most memorable and revered animation films of all time, such as Spirited Away and My Neighbour Totoro. Whereas I would usually choose to watch films like this in the original Japanese with subtitles, I did on this occassion opt for the dubbed English soundtrack. Why? Because it featured such great voice talents as Patrick Stewart, Mark Hamill, Edward James Olmos and...SHIA LABEOUF!! I just couldn’t resist. I admit it probably took me out of the film a little, but it certainly didn’t hamper my enjoyment. Nausicaä is set in a post-apocalyptic world, 1000 years after war destroyed civilisation and the majority of the worlds ecosystem. Now human colonies live apart and are isolated from one another by patches of ‘toxic jungle’, areas where the air is unbreathable and huge insects and plants attack those
who approach. The Princess of one of these colonies, Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind, has an uncanny ability to communicate with the creatures of the jungle and seeks to find answers regarding the origins of it. When the embryo of a Giant Warrior (a powerful creature that could be used to destroy the jungle) is found by humans, Nausicaä embarks on a journey which results in startling discoveries about the jungle and the effect that destroying it will have on the world. I will start off by saying the film is visually stunning. The various creatures that appear throughout are both amazing to look at and yet often quite grotesque. The air battles that take place are hugely dynamic and enthralling to watch, and the sight of Nausicaä flying around on her futuristic jet glider is a truly iconic picture. Somehow the animators get it just right and the large, swirling movements of the glider seem completely realistic and almost hypnotising. The climax of the film, featuring a stampede of infuriated jungle creatures, is massive in scale and surely alone took months of work to complete. Forget the story for a second, this film is a must-see simply on the basis that it is a thing of absolute beauty. The story itself, as with pretty much all of Miyazaki’s films, is wonderfully absurd, but from the offset you can see that the narrative is inspired by real-world predictions of humanity slowly killing the environment. The WWF logo (the panda guys, not the wrestlers) even flashes up before the film starts. Despite the ideas of global war taking place between humans in command of giant legendary warrior creatures, there are moments that modern humanity can relate to and you can see parallels between the film and what is happening around us today. Politics also rears its ugly head, as the leaders and armies of many of the human tribes decide they want the Giant Warrior for themselves, even at the expense of the rest of humanity. Meanwhile a lot of the every-day folk see the dangers that are presenting themelves and seek to help Nausicaä rather than lock her up as a rebel. Whilst these kind of serious themes are present though, the film is never too preachy about them and can of course just be watched as an enjoyable futuristic fantasy film. Though I would personally prefer to see, say, Akira on the list in its place (it has a few similar themes. Ish.), Nausicaä is a fantastic achievement and deserves to be recognized as such. It seems strange to me though that the prevailing animation films on the list are Miyazaki films and Pixar films. There isn’t a single classic Disney film to be seen. Odd.
41
FILMIC 06 / spring 2011 / 42