Mornin’ all. In the absence of anything better to write, here’s my film studies homework. We’re working on a past exam paper – unfortunately, we’re not allowed to answer question 1: “In what ways do you think films influence people’s lives?”. Pity, because I can throw heaps of information at that.
Basically, these exams are testing your movie trivia. OK, they call it revision of facts and case studies, but that’s more or less the same thing.
We’ve got a mini article about Julia Roberts which I am not not not going to type out for you, and the question…drumroll…
4 - “What does the above information tell you about the significance of stars in modern Hollywood? In what ways is this similar, or different from, Hollywood in the time of the Studio System?”
Isn’t that wonderfully open ended. He expects us to get three whole sides out of this!!! Anyway…
In the earliest days of the studio system, actors were never credited for films – only production companies. However, as the audience became familiar with certain performers, their names were used to help sell the movie. Mary Pickford, named “Little Mary” by fans, was an popular early star. Similarly, Julia Roberts’ image is used to promote her films. Though artistically Erin Brockovich might have received good reviews, its financial success rests on Julia Roberts’ presence. The growth of stars helped free the early film industry from constraints placed on it by the MPPC. At the time, to aid competition, all films had to be the same price and length. This was undermined when big name actors started demanding higher paychecks.
Erin Brockovich was made as a collaboration between three different studios. Under the studio system, vertical integration meant the production, exhibition and distribution of a film would all be controlled by one large company such as MGM (this control was eventually broken in 1948 by the Paramount Decrees) Studios would also have very tight control over the actors themselves – Julia Roberts would have worked for only one studio during her career, instead of a variety as shown in the article, though occasionally stars would be loaned from one studio to another.
An studio would carefully manage an actor’s entire image – they controlled where they went, what they wore, and how they were perceived by the audience. Buster Keaton’s contract reputedly [note: reputedly means that it actually didn't according to Snopes, but I needed a good example] held a clause forbidding him from smiling in public. Studios went to even more morally dubious lengths to get exactly the performances they wanted on screen: when Judy Garland appeared in The Wizard of Oz at the age of 16, MGM had her on various drugs to make her alert on set, and when these affected her sleeping patterns, began also drugging her to ensure she slept at night (this early addiction contributed to her death at the age of 47)
Erin Brockovich represents a small departure from Julia Roberts’ usual romantic comedy roles. In the past, a studio would have total control over the projects an artist would be involved in to help regulate their image. For example, when Bette Davis refused to appear in God’s Country and the Woman, Warner Bros. took away her leading role in Gone with the Wind, and served a successful injunction against her when she attempted to make two films in Britain.
Today, actors have much greater artistic freedom. However, many choose to maintain their image through certain roles in much the same way the studios would have done. A star’s roles have a symbiotic relationship with their overall image – Julia Roberts is famous for nice-girl roles in non-challenging films, such as Notting Hill and Runaway Bride. Similarly, while Russell Crowe is notorious for causing fights off screen, he also gets roles based on this audience perception – Romper Stomper, L.A. Confidential and Gladiator are all affected by this image.
Though Erin Brockovich is more of a serious movie, Julia Roberts is still playing an admirable and sympathetic character. Very few actors ever break away from their typical mould. Hugh Grant, for example, has never departed from the genre which made him famous – though his role in Bridget Jones’ Diary is unconventional, it is still a romantic comedy, and even Sense and Sensibility shares traits with the genre. George Clooney is an example of an actors who has successfully escaped his image – moving from early roles, like Out of Sight, which traded on his charm, into more serious, issue based movies such as Three Kings and Syriana.
After conducting an audience survey, I discovered that over ¾ people think the cast is the most important consideration in choosing a film, and Julia Roberts was voted one of the most popular actresses. However, to a certain extent, audiences pay to see actors appear in the same kind of roles. For example, The Mexican – a film Julia Roberts accepted a vastly smaller salary to be in, and a drastic departure from her usual work – was unsuccessful, despite her presence. Actors are discovering, as did the studios in the so-called “Golden Age” of Hollywood, that it is better financially to appear in many similar pictures, than take advantage of their artistic freedom and experiment with different roles.
Well that's what I handed in to my teacher anyway. What I was really thinking is actually, to be fair, Hollywood hasn’t changed that much. It’s still all about the money. Foreign and independent films still rarely stand a chance. And stars haven’t changed either.
Unlike the under the studios, they have artistic freedom – they can pick any film they like. But how many actually do? Can you remember Robert Redford ever playing a bad guy? I mean properly-Michael-Corleone-bad. He was a bandit in BCSK, a con man in The Sting, vaguely disreputable in The Great Gatsby and a tad pervy in Indecent Proposal but his redeemable qualities always outweigh the bad ones. The closest he’s come to being truly naughty is Spy Game, and he wasn’t that convincing. He’s still taking very good care of his image, in exactly the way the studios would have.
My dad claims Steve Buscemi has only ever played the same role. I haven’t seen that many of his films, but it honestly wouldn’t surprise me at all.
In fact, how many actors do break the mould? Off the top of my head:…Robin Williams (comedy genie to creepy creepy in 24 Hour Photo)…Jim Carrey (comedy Mask to sensitive and quiet in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind)…George Clooney (heartthrob to serious issues man, via some weird stuff along the way)…that’s all I can think of. Not counting the shock departures from type – Henry Fonda in Once Upon a Time in the West?! Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. Did anybody believe Russell Crowe in A Beautiful Mind? Almost – he was fantastic after all – but my mental image of him beating Guy Pierce to a pulp kept getting in the way.
There’s this symbiotic relationship – the film changes the perception of the star’s image, which changes the perception of the film etc etc. After all, Robert Redford’s character in Indecent Proposal could have been a total scumbag. Played by anyone else, he’d have been all slime and no charm. But we all know and trust Robert Redford.
Let’s put it this way. You’re stranded in a dark forest, and suddenly two cars draw up to offer you a lift home. One of them has Robert Redford in. The other one has Jack Nicholson. Which one are you going to get into the car with? Which one is less likely to chase you about with an axe? Or...say you needed a bodyguard: would you prefer Hugh Grant or Samuel L. Jackson?
What about the deliberately canny casting in Memento? The basic premise is that as Lenny has a five minute memory, he can’t ever really trust anyone fully. Teddy is this guy he meets along the way, who claims to be a friend. The cleverness is in the casting – Joey Pantalionio (pardon for spelling this wrong, not time to check imdb) has played a lot of baddies, and the moment we see him, we immediately distrust him. ‘Cos naturally, he’s gonna be a bad guy again, right?
The thing is, artistic integrity is one thing, financial security is another. All the most successful actors are the ones you can immediately claim cliché on. Paul Newman will be remembered for the blue-eyed-twinkle – never mind Road to Perdition. Clint Eastwood’s the cowboy guy. You don’t go to see Halle Berry in a hard-hitting-social-commentary. Some people might be interested in the film itself, but the Halle Berry fans will give it a miss and wait for her to get back into a bikini [end broad generalisation]. You will always inevitably earn more by sticking to “what you do best”. Perhaps it’s not entirely the actor’s fault – if you’re in a successful rom com, naturally you’ll be offered heaps more.
Our film studies class have taken part in a shoot-an-advert competition. Pretty cool - Ridley Scott says adverts are the best practice you can have for The Real Thing. We developed a story board, and today we went and shot it. Proper camera...proper camera man...proper moniter and boom. The only problem was there was five of us, and directing is not a team job. Now in our group, there were definitely two egos - mine, and this other lad who I honestly don't grudge at all. I actually made a conscious decision that, for the good of the project, we didn't really need more than one of the egos at work. So I took a back seat and spent the day watching someone else do my dream job. I know I did the right thing, but I still went home and cried. Probably not really cut out for this industry, eh XD
This fantastic day of fun was evened out by accidentally winning an unfairly flash new toy. It's got 40GB of room for music, photos or *drumroll* movies. My prayers have been answered!
PS - Saturday, Friends 3 and 4 have invited themselves around to watch RDogs. Honest they did! Well, I might have encouraged them a little...but basically, they actually want to come. Naturally I'm looking forward to this very much...it's gonna be total torment. I'm going to spend the entire time worrying whether they're enjoying it (they've heard great things about it after all) or getting overly unpleasanted out by the blood and swearing. Especially as they've no idea what they're letting themselves in for (i.e. most people can tell you at least one fact about most famous films, even if they haven't seen it...but they don't) I can tell you quite candidly that Friend 3 is the one of the nicest person you'll ever meet and certainly not a natural Mr Blonde fan, and Friend 4 has about the same terror threshold as I do: not high. It will be eventful...
At this point, me and Friend 3 are going to go to the cinema (nothing against Friend 4, she just doesn't want to come) to see Blood Diamond. Why? Well, partly bcos Friend 3 wants to see it. And partly to live by my own rules. I am a great believer that everybody should try things they don't know they're gonna like. By which I mean trying quirky and offbeat movies instead of blockbuster tat.
Of course, as I already like quirky and offbeat films, I don't need to bother. Hypocritical. Now I don't like real-lifey movies, I don't like issues movies and I especially don't like things set in Africa. Not that I've anything against Africa mind, just the moment I hear it's about Africa I get bored instantly. Very hypocritical - I do love Zulu. Anyway, I figure Blood Diamond's meant to be good, and I should be more adventurous with my watching.
Showing posts with label ReservoirDogs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ReservoirDogs. Show all posts
In defence of my top 12 - part 7, you guessed it...
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
In the absence of anything better to write about (haven't seen anything for...oh, too long) I thought I'd tidy up the next in my series of favourite films. As if you haven't heard enough about this one in the last few weeks...sorry...
In other news, I got summat published in the local paper! Well, mostly. I reviewed Inconvenient Truth because it suggested I do so in the credits, and I'm not in a position to buy a more energy efficient car or plant a tree. They've accepted it, and hopefully it'll be published before the local cinema club shows it in a few weeks time.
And finally, I'm doing a talk on conspiracy theories at the end of the week, which means I should really be revising my speech instead of typing. But my three most highly recommended conspiracy movies are:
JFK - the conspiracy that started conspiracies. Realistic, but very exciting. And stunningly edited.
Capricorn 1 - The 60's created the spy movie and the paranoid thriller. I think. Mostly. Anyway, this is a genu-ine 60's film about faking the Mars landings. Serious and almost tense.
Wag the Dog - the administration creates a fictional war to cover up the president's mishap days before the election. Expect lines like "the CIA cancelled our war!" and a hilariously familiar song entitled "The American Dream". It's such an amusing song, I can still remember the tune, since howevermany years. A wonderful satire on the media...
And now, here are even more of my unwanted opinions on...
7 Reservoir Dogs
A set of total strangers team up to rob a jewellry store. It goes horribly wrong. This is the story of what happens next...(and also before, due to the peverse chronology)
If I said the words “genuinely touching”, RD probably wouldn’t be the first film to come to mind. Yet…it actually is. Famous for its violence (which actually is nowhere near as bad as you’ve been lead to believe), the beautiful and affecting moments are almost universally overlooked. No one warned me about the pure humanity sneaking around between the swearing and bloodshed. But before I shatter the world with this shocking opinion, lets take a look at the obvious comments.
This is one of the easiest films I’ve ever watched. Scenes move seamlessly from one to another (take the beginning sequence – the breakfast conversation, broken up by a DJ who introduces the tune for the cheery credit sequence, interrupted by screams under the black screen. Absolutely mesmerising.) The whole thing is constructed with a throwaway care, which feels perfectly natural.
The chronology leaps from the messy aftermath to the meticulous planning, never quite dropping in on the robbery that went so badly wrong. This serves a double purpose. It blends the action and vibrancy 0f the pre-heist scenes with the talking and tension of the stuff in the warehouse. But a cleverer consideration: it keeps us on the level of the characters. Consider when Messrs White and Pink are discussing what went wrong. They disagree about the order of the alarm, the shooting and the police arriving. Their confusion is infectious, because as we weren’t shown the truth, we can’t correct them. They think there’s a rat in the house. Eddie doesn’t. Is there? And if so, who? We don’t know! We only learn details as they see fit to discuss them (Where’s Mr Blue?), and if they don’t bring things up we’re left without answers (Mr Orange’s ring?!). And on the odd occasion we do know more than the characters, it seriously enhances our interpretation of the scene – you can’t help but wince at the upsetting irony ladled under lines like “you’re not going to get hurt” when delivered in flashback, once you already know that...
Hardly what I’d call a tidy film (c.f. Signs), but the fact it’s fraying at the edges is part of its charm. The atmosphere is so raw – you feel literally, anything can happen. Not that I want to compare it, but you can tell PF has had buckets of thought behind it its construction – RD is so casual it could spiral out of control at any time.
And out of control means violence. “Gratuitous” and “unnecessary” are two words often applied to the bloodshed, presumably by people who’ve never seen Kill Bill (makes RDs look more like Clifford the Big Red Dog). I disagree with both descriptions. Especially as gratuitous kinda means the same thing as unnecessary anyway. A better description would be “realistic”. These are nasty people, they do nasty things and nasty things happen to them. It just wouldn’t be the same with a 12A certificate. For one thing, they’d have to chop the swearing, which is constant, but forgivable, with a rhythm of its own.
Everyone always raves about the music, and it’s worth a mention. The tunes are certainly catchy, and transform what could have just been a gritty and unpleasant crime drama into…a gritty, unpleasant and FUN crime romp. It reminds you it’s ok to laugh. Lots of films forget that real life is actually very funny; this one has stacks of amusing lines. The film is even narrated by the radio DJ, breaking up the action to introduce the next track. Usually, this is dubbed over for the audience's ears only - and it's a great moment when you finally hear his voice enter the movie world, introducing the little-known-not-at-all-infamous ditty Stuck in the Middle with You.
What have I forgotten? The acting. They’re all great. I love them all. Nuff said.
At the end of the day, this is that rarest of things: a brilliantly well made film which is brilliant fun to watch. Except from babysitting toddlers and entertaining mature relations, there are very few occasions when it can’t be enjoyed. If you’re sad it’ll cheer you up, if you’re angry you can get vicious satisfaction from the murderin’ and if you’re feeling sentimental…well, remember the “genuinely touching” thing?
Because at the end of the day, it all comes crumbling down because none of them know each other. It’s suspicion and distrust that causes the trouble (you mark my words!), and out of the middle of all of that comes a genuine split second friendship which just changes everything...
(Incidentally 1, I’m gonna sound like the biggest hypocrite in the universe here, but I can only think of a single plot detail which would significantly spoil your enjoyment of this film. I was pretty clued up on what was gonna happen and when, and it made very little difference whatsoever.)
(Incidentally 2, as goes City on Fire, I haven’t seen it and I don’t care. The fab-ness cast alone should justify forgetting this whole mess, even if you don’t forgive the plot pilferage. It’s them, and the audacious editing I like as much as the plot…and plus, no Little Green Bag!)
(Incidentally 3, as a girl it's a great film to have up my sleeve, just to suprise/impress/alarm people. It's percieved as such a male thing...)
Sum up the film in a moment: yeh, it does have to be the whole Stuck in the Middle with You thing. Arbitrary violence, coupled with a great tune and some very misplaced and bad taste humour. "Did you ever listen to K-Billy's Super Sounds of the 70s...?" The great (well, disturbing but clever) thing about the use of the catchy music is, just for a moment, you forget whose side you're meant to be on.
Best scene: Agh, three or four faves, but ten minutes and one character in common…I’ll go for Mr O leaving the house, to the encouraging coos of “he’s a foo-ool” from the radio. Not much talking (it is, after all, just one guy in a room) but the silence makes the scene. Doesn’t matter how many times I sit through it, I’m always willing him to pussy out…
Best line: Ye gods…er, this is pretty tricky. I could probably get it down to a shortlist of about…30, give or take about…30. My fave at the moment is Mr White’s delivery of “ha-di-f*ing-ha”, but it’s bound to change. Actually, it's probably "I told you I ain't talked to him! All I know is he's pissed!".
Favourite character: Mr Orange...by a total whisker, followed by whoever's talking. Seriously, very few films have characters with a 8-way tie on my affections. Serenity, perhaps. I love the Firefly crew equally. I know Mr O is pretty unpopular, but my heart breaks for him every time. Plus, he has better taste in films ("I'm trying to watch The Lost Boys!") than most of my friends...that particular film will feature in a later edition...
Special mention: The on-set paramedic charged with keeping one of cinema's lengthiest deaths on the right side of realistic.
Nerdy observation: we never learn "the professional" Mr Pink's real name; The only civillian killed on screen gets killed by the police. And she's pregnant; an aquaintance on the imdb board thinks the duration of the sequence in the warehouse can only be about an hour real time, but I think it's much nearer 45 minutes; in the opening scene, Mr W flicks a sweet wrapper at Mr Pink with his spoon. I just think that's cute
Best watched: for the second time.
Finally: a thought on the auteur theory. Perhaps you've reached auteurdom when it's physically impossible to discuss one film without referencing one of your others?
PS, well done Rob for getting the movie...
In other news, I got summat published in the local paper! Well, mostly. I reviewed Inconvenient Truth because it suggested I do so in the credits, and I'm not in a position to buy a more energy efficient car or plant a tree. They've accepted it, and hopefully it'll be published before the local cinema club shows it in a few weeks time.
And finally, I'm doing a talk on conspiracy theories at the end of the week, which means I should really be revising my speech instead of typing. But my three most highly recommended conspiracy movies are:
JFK - the conspiracy that started conspiracies. Realistic, but very exciting. And stunningly edited.
Capricorn 1 - The 60's created the spy movie and the paranoid thriller. I think. Mostly. Anyway, this is a genu-ine 60's film about faking the Mars landings. Serious and almost tense.
Wag the Dog - the administration creates a fictional war to cover up the president's mishap days before the election. Expect lines like "the CIA cancelled our war!" and a hilariously familiar song entitled "The American Dream". It's such an amusing song, I can still remember the tune, since howevermany years. A wonderful satire on the media...
And now, here are even more of my unwanted opinions on...
7 Reservoir Dogs
A set of total strangers team up to rob a jewellry store. It goes horribly wrong. This is the story of what happens next...(and also before, due to the peverse chronology)
If I said the words “genuinely touching”, RD probably wouldn’t be the first film to come to mind. Yet…it actually is. Famous for its violence (which actually is nowhere near as bad as you’ve been lead to believe), the beautiful and affecting moments are almost universally overlooked. No one warned me about the pure humanity sneaking around between the swearing and bloodshed. But before I shatter the world with this shocking opinion, lets take a look at the obvious comments.
This is one of the easiest films I’ve ever watched. Scenes move seamlessly from one to another (take the beginning sequence – the breakfast conversation, broken up by a DJ who introduces the tune for the cheery credit sequence, interrupted by screams under the black screen. Absolutely mesmerising.) The whole thing is constructed with a throwaway care, which feels perfectly natural.The chronology leaps from the messy aftermath to the meticulous planning, never quite dropping in on the robbery that went so badly wrong. This serves a double purpose. It blends the action and vibrancy 0f the pre-heist scenes with the talking and tension of the stuff in the warehouse. But a cleverer consideration: it keeps us on the level of the characters. Consider when Messrs White and Pink are discussing what went wrong. They disagree about the order of the alarm, the shooting and the police arriving. Their confusion is infectious, because as we weren’t shown the truth, we can’t correct them. They think there’s a rat in the house. Eddie doesn’t. Is there? And if so, who? We don’t know! We only learn details as they see fit to discuss them (Where’s Mr Blue?), and if they don’t bring things up we’re left without answers (Mr Orange’s ring?!). And on the odd occasion we do know more than the characters, it seriously enhances our interpretation of the scene – you can’t help but wince at the upsetting irony ladled under lines like “you’re not going to get hurt” when delivered in flashback, once you already know that...
Hardly what I’d call a tidy film (c.f. Signs), but the fact it’s fraying at the edges is part of its charm. The atmosphere is so raw – you feel literally, anything can happen. Not that I want to compare it, but you can tell PF has had buckets of thought behind it its construction – RD is so casual it could spiral out of control at any time.
And out of control means violence. “Gratuitous” and “unnecessary” are two words often applied to the bloodshed, presumably by people who’ve never seen Kill Bill (makes RDs look more like Clifford the Big Red Dog). I disagree with both descriptions. Especially as gratuitous kinda means the same thing as unnecessary anyway. A better description would be “realistic”. These are nasty people, they do nasty things and nasty things happen to them. It just wouldn’t be the same with a 12A certificate. For one thing, they’d have to chop the swearing, which is constant, but forgivable, with a rhythm of its own.
Everyone always raves about the music, and it’s worth a mention. The tunes are certainly catchy, and transform what could have just been a gritty and unpleasant crime drama into…a gritty, unpleasant and FUN crime romp. It reminds you it’s ok to laugh. Lots of films forget that real life is actually very funny; this one has stacks of amusing lines. The film is even narrated by the radio DJ, breaking up the action to introduce the next track. Usually, this is dubbed over for the audience's ears only - and it's a great moment when you finally hear his voice enter the movie world, introducing the little-known-not-at-all-infamous ditty Stuck in the Middle with You.
What have I forgotten? The acting. They’re all great. I love them all. Nuff said.
At the end of the day, this is that rarest of things: a brilliantly well made film which is brilliant fun to watch. Except from babysitting toddlers and entertaining mature relations, there are very few occasions when it can’t be enjoyed. If you’re sad it’ll cheer you up, if you’re angry you can get vicious satisfaction from the murderin’ and if you’re feeling sentimental…well, remember the “genuinely touching” thing?
Because at the end of the day, it all comes crumbling down because none of them know each other. It’s suspicion and distrust that causes the trouble (you mark my words!), and out of the middle of all of that comes a genuine split second friendship which just changes everything...
(Incidentally 1, I’m gonna sound like the biggest hypocrite in the universe here, but I can only think of a single plot detail which would significantly spoil your enjoyment of this film. I was pretty clued up on what was gonna happen and when, and it made very little difference whatsoever.)
(Incidentally 2, as goes City on Fire, I haven’t seen it and I don’t care. The fab-ness cast alone should justify forgetting this whole mess, even if you don’t forgive the plot pilferage. It’s them, and the audacious editing I like as much as the plot…and plus, no Little Green Bag!)
(Incidentally 3, as a girl it's a great film to have up my sleeve, just to suprise/impress/alarm people. It's percieved as such a male thing...)
Sum up the film in a moment: yeh, it does have to be the whole Stuck in the Middle with You thing. Arbitrary violence, coupled with a great tune and some very misplaced and bad taste humour. "Did you ever listen to K-Billy's Super Sounds of the 70s...?" The great (well, disturbing but clever) thing about the use of the catchy music is, just for a moment, you forget whose side you're meant to be on.
Best scene: Agh, three or four faves, but ten minutes and one character in common…I’ll go for Mr O leaving the house, to the encouraging coos of “he’s a foo-ool” from the radio. Not much talking (it is, after all, just one guy in a room) but the silence makes the scene. Doesn’t matter how many times I sit through it, I’m always willing him to pussy out…
Best line: Ye gods…er, this is pretty tricky. I could probably get it down to a shortlist of about…30, give or take about…30. My fave at the moment is Mr White’s delivery of “ha-di-f*ing-ha”, but it’s bound to change. Actually, it's probably "I told you I ain't talked to him! All I know is he's pissed!".
Favourite character: Mr Orange...by a total whisker, followed by whoever's talking. Seriously, very few films have characters with a 8-way tie on my affections. Serenity, perhaps. I love the Firefly crew equally. I know Mr O is pretty unpopular, but my heart breaks for him every time. Plus, he has better taste in films ("I'm trying to watch The Lost Boys!") than most of my friends...that particular film will feature in a later edition...
Special mention: The on-set paramedic charged with keeping one of cinema's lengthiest deaths on the right side of realistic.
Nerdy observation: we never learn "the professional" Mr Pink's real name; The only civillian killed on screen gets killed by the police. And she's pregnant; an aquaintance on the imdb board thinks the duration of the sequence in the warehouse can only be about an hour real time, but I think it's much nearer 45 minutes; in the opening scene, Mr W flicks a sweet wrapper at Mr Pink with his spoon. I just think that's cute
Best watched: for the second time.
Finally: a thought on the auteur theory. Perhaps you've reached auteurdom when it's physically impossible to discuss one film without referencing one of your others?
PS, well done Rob for getting the movie...
Cult Movie Rants 3 - the Inevitable Return
Friday, November 10, 2006
We're currently watching From Russia with Love in Film Studies. It's the first Bond I've ever really really enjoyed. I've seen it before, but this time just seemed better. Interesting fact you probably didn't want to know: Colonel Klebb's a lesbian, presumably because that's somehow wrong, she's ugly and she wants to kill him instead of sleep with him. It's just like how all baddies in Bond have foreign accents. This is why old Bond films are better than the new ones - they can get away with being outrageously non-PC, chauvanist, Brits-are-bestist and steriotypical in a way the modern ones can't. This makes the early ones fun while the later ones are far more sedate, giving the baddies human sides et al...
So today, my views on violence in movies and under that, yet another addition to the cult movie debate.
Yesterday I tried York Film Notes from the film studies library - for Pulp Fiction, if it matters, but it doesn't really as it really was awful. It just didn't think of anything interesting to say at all. In fact, it was guilty of just retelling the story which they always tell us to avoid.
So today I borrowed "Shocking Entertainment:Viewer Response to Violent Movies", an overly expensive look (£12.95 for a slim volume) at why people enjoy 'em. It was a pretty good read, though it was totally textbook all the way through - basically it was the analysis at the end of a piece of research. And there was a very nice picture of Mr Blonde, halfway through what was
basically his own chapter. They had arranged a few groups made up of over-18 adults of both genders who had seen three or more from a list of 9 vicious flicks, asked questions and studied the response. They also watched the "eye-slicing" from Henry:Portrait of a Serial Killer, and the "ear-slicing" from Reservoir Dogs and had a little chat about them.
(very slightly spoileryness if you haven't seen the latter for the next five paragraphs)
You know, reading some of the transcribed responses about it upset me far more than actually seeing the film did. I really did not see what all the fuss was about - perhaps I just have a very very strong stomach (highly unlikely, I'm one hell of a wuss), or perhaps I was expecting it to be so much worse it seemed tame, I don't know. I'd always assumed the outcry was not because it was particularly yucky, but because of the music: it's catchy, you're tapping your foot and all of a sudden you think "jeez I'm meant to be on Marv's side here...", and that was what made people feel uncomfortable about it - you want to dance like Mr Blonde, and you really probably shouldn't. Even the notoriety contributes to the wrong-ness of the scene -it's like when you see a comedy you've seen a thousand times before, and you start to grin before the jokes because you know what's coming next. Am I the only person who always smiles when he says "Have you ever listened to K-Billy's Super Sounds of the 70s?", even the first time? Apparently so - I just read a whole book of people saying how intense and disturbing it was.
The chapter really did make me feel pretty bad, so bad that I chickened out of buying the soundtrack when I finally got a chance to this afternoon after wanting it for weeks. And this is mainly because I told Friend 4 (who isn't much braver than me) that it wasn't too violent, she's since said she'd quite like to see it and I've a niggling feeling that possibly my evaluation was...a tad on the optimistic side...Yeh, I felt pretty sorry for Marv but I wasn't covering my eyes and squeaming, though after reading all that I felt like perhaps I should have. I did feel pretty alarmed when he got the petrol out - I felt it had gone too far at that point, and as much as I like Mr B, I love Mr O for rescuing Marv- but before that it was more like a little harmless fun.
The first time I saw this film, I compared it to Waiting for Godot, and I stand by that. It is a sort of absurdist stage comedy - in a place of no importance, talking a lot but doing nothing, very funny in places despite being pretty sad. It was raw, but not real. I think because it was so unreal I had no problem with it - it's a totally artificial situation a million miles away from me. Selfish but true. I'm not a gangster or a cop, I'm not even American. I'm safe from all that. I found, for example, the first death in Scream a lot harder to watch, because it's a defenceless teenage girl in her own home. The same logical cowardice goes for scary movies - I don't mind Alien because it's set on a spaceship, but Sixth Sense (set in public and often during daylight) really had me freaked.
A lot of people in the book said similar things about not minding it if it was removed from their own personal situation. Though the most interesting chapter was when they disussed violence in the news vs film - there was an interesting spread of people saying it was more real in one over the other. All in all, it was an interesting book, if a bit scientific. The one downside that eight chapters of very interesting discoveries and responses from the participants boils down to ten pretty obvious conclusions such as "fictional violence is entertaining" (duh, why else do people watch them?) and "real violence is raw and brutal and not entertaining" (total geniuswork!)
Personally, I do like a bit of violence, but only because I like tense situations and prefer my heroes dead. And only when it's neat and beautiful - you'd have to pay a decent sum (or, alternitively, confiscate my boxed set and threaten to eat it) to make me watch Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer. And before you mention Mr O, yes I know it's not nice and it's certainly not dignified, but the situation between himself and Mr W, and his freefall into total moral quagmire, do have a certain strange poetry to it.
Today also, more thoughts on cult movies. Because I found three more ideas for measuring cultyness, and I need to comment where Friend 4 can see it (if you've only just come in, Friend 4 thinks Star Wars counts as cult, and as a fan of the RHPS and many an other, I have yet to prove that she is very very wrong. Parts one and two of this rant are located under the cult movie's tag)
Number one, can't remember where I found it but it's nice:
"A mainstream film 10,000 people see 1o times
A cult film, 10 people see 10,000 times."
Which I liked! Especially as yesterday I technically held my 10th viewing of R+GaD (technically, because I've seen it 9 times all the way through, and then the first half twice.) I don't have anything more intellectual to say than that...
Even better has to be the Mutant Reviewers site. They rank cult films out of five under five catagories which describe them perfectly. They are...
CULT
QUOTES
OFFENSIVENESS
BIZZARE
REWATCHABILITY
A few months ago me and my sparring partner made a venn diagram to approximate cultyness.
We placed Blade Runner, the Rocky Horror Picture Show, R+GaD, Withail+I and Donnie Darko in the middle as having all three qualities we found important. Under this new measure (according to me, not the site by the by), RHPS would still be fine scoring, like, five in everything, R+G, Withnail and Donnie would still be pretty ok, but Blade Runner is at a serious disadvantage. It's one of the original cult movies, and yet not really any of those catagories- the flaw in the system is not accounting for the revived-on-video brand of movie.
Aside from that, I agree with most of their choices, but it's a bit of a strain to describe LA Confidential as cult...they also list the LOTR films as cult; me and Friend 4 decided against this as the culty cultiest fans are either book-purists or screaming girlfans. They also list Star Wars as cult. Hmmm. I let them off on account of the rest of it being so good. And their reviews of R+G are awesome - especially Rich's. I lift huge chunks from that review whenever I try pursuading others to see it.
But third and finally, most of all, I liked the idea that a cult film is..."a film loved by some people for precicely the reason other people found it offputting." It means Pulp Fiction counts, as I've always sneakily supposed it does, because some people loved the mesh of bad taste humour and blood, and the rest thought it was just bad taste. It encapsulates Dirty Dancing and Lost Boys, which while not particularly odd certainly have that culty whiff. It certainly has space for all the old faves (though as per usual, I'm having difficulty with Blade Runner. I just can't see anything obvious about it one could hate...)
And most importantly, if that's the case, Star Wars can't possibly count because I can't really think of anything in them to dislike. That's the thing Friend 4 is missing. A film's got to have a small dedicated fanbase, but it's also got to be routinely despised by almost everyone else.
Cult movies are like in-jokes. Either you "get it", you latch onto whatever madcap genius everyone else is missing, or you don't. And I'm willing to defend Lost Boys to the death against anyone who thinks it's awful...
In other news...two nights ago, my sister refused to let me have a snack when I came home from school starving as we were going out to eat. Four hours and twenty minutes later, we arrived at the restaurant and were presented with menus. In revenge, I spent the evening quoting portions of famous scenes from diners, coffee shops and Italian spaghetteers at my dad, all purposfully taken from films she hadn't seen. The highlight settling on the tip, although my dad attempting to call the waitress "garcon" was pretty good in a thank-goodness-she-was-out-of-earshot sortofa way...and kudos to that same waitress for bringing my meal while I was in the loo so I could conveniently quote Mia as soon as I came back. Although my sister did lash back with some well placed Wayne's World here and there.
After seeing the start of Murder with Mirrors, I'm desperate to know whodunnit (we hadn't even got to the murder yet, though I had my suspicions...full dull story here) . After briefly scouring the internet, searching for the dvd and asking two Marple-obsessessed friends, neither of which could remember, I have finally resorted to getting the book out of the library. It's tedious, but oh well...
And finally, this evening I had something of a resort of my pictures collection; specifically my screenshots. Perhaps the memory would be less clogged if I parted with one or two of my collection of R+G screenshots. After all, I do have 412 of them (I got a new program and clipped half the movie; I'm gonna do the second half sometime), and when taken along with my collection of 408 icons...it probably takes up a fair bit of space overall.
So today, my views on violence in movies and under that, yet another addition to the cult movie debate.
Yesterday I tried York Film Notes from the film studies library - for Pulp Fiction, if it matters, but it doesn't really as it really was awful. It just didn't think of anything interesting to say at all. In fact, it was guilty of just retelling the story which they always tell us to avoid.
So today I borrowed "Shocking Entertainment:Viewer Response to Violent Movies", an overly expensive look (£12.95 for a slim volume) at why people enjoy 'em. It was a pretty good read, though it was totally textbook all the way through - basically it was the analysis at the end of a piece of research. And there was a very nice picture of Mr Blonde, halfway through what was
basically his own chapter. They had arranged a few groups made up of over-18 adults of both genders who had seen three or more from a list of 9 vicious flicks, asked questions and studied the response. They also watched the "eye-slicing" from Henry:Portrait of a Serial Killer, and the "ear-slicing" from Reservoir Dogs and had a little chat about them.
(very slightly spoileryness if you haven't seen the latter for the next five paragraphs)
You know, reading some of the transcribed responses about it upset me far more than actually seeing the film did. I really did not see what all the fuss was about - perhaps I just have a very very strong stomach (highly unlikely, I'm one hell of a wuss), or perhaps I was expecting it to be so much worse it seemed tame, I don't know. I'd always assumed the outcry was not because it was particularly yucky, but because of the music: it's catchy, you're tapping your foot and all of a sudden you think "jeez I'm meant to be on Marv's side here...", and that was what made people feel uncomfortable about it - you want to dance like Mr Blonde, and you really probably shouldn't. Even the notoriety contributes to the wrong-ness of the scene -it's like when you see a comedy you've seen a thousand times before, and you start to grin before the jokes because you know what's coming next. Am I the only person who always smiles when he says "Have you ever listened to K-Billy's Super Sounds of the 70s?", even the first time? Apparently so - I just read a whole book of people saying how intense and disturbing it was.
The chapter really did make me feel pretty bad, so bad that I chickened out of buying the soundtrack when I finally got a chance to this afternoon after wanting it for weeks. And this is mainly because I told Friend 4 (who isn't much braver than me) that it wasn't too violent, she's since said she'd quite like to see it and I've a niggling feeling that possibly my evaluation was...a tad on the optimistic side...Yeh, I felt pretty sorry for Marv but I wasn't covering my eyes and squeaming, though after reading all that I felt like perhaps I should have. I did feel pretty alarmed when he got the petrol out - I felt it had gone too far at that point, and as much as I like Mr B, I love Mr O for rescuing Marv- but before that it was more like a little harmless fun.
The first time I saw this film, I compared it to Waiting for Godot, and I stand by that. It is a sort of absurdist stage comedy - in a place of no importance, talking a lot but doing nothing, very funny in places despite being pretty sad. It was raw, but not real. I think because it was so unreal I had no problem with it - it's a totally artificial situation a million miles away from me. Selfish but true. I'm not a gangster or a cop, I'm not even American. I'm safe from all that. I found, for example, the first death in Scream a lot harder to watch, because it's a defenceless teenage girl in her own home. The same logical cowardice goes for scary movies - I don't mind Alien because it's set on a spaceship, but Sixth Sense (set in public and often during daylight) really had me freaked.
A lot of people in the book said similar things about not minding it if it was removed from their own personal situation. Though the most interesting chapter was when they disussed violence in the news vs film - there was an interesting spread of people saying it was more real in one over the other. All in all, it was an interesting book, if a bit scientific. The one downside that eight chapters of very interesting discoveries and responses from the participants boils down to ten pretty obvious conclusions such as "fictional violence is entertaining" (duh, why else do people watch them?) and "real violence is raw and brutal and not entertaining" (total geniuswork!)
Personally, I do like a bit of violence, but only because I like tense situations and prefer my heroes dead. And only when it's neat and beautiful - you'd have to pay a decent sum (or, alternitively, confiscate my boxed set and threaten to eat it) to make me watch Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer. And before you mention Mr O, yes I know it's not nice and it's certainly not dignified, but the situation between himself and Mr W, and his freefall into total moral quagmire, do have a certain strange poetry to it.
Today also, more thoughts on cult movies. Because I found three more ideas for measuring cultyness, and I need to comment where Friend 4 can see it (if you've only just come in, Friend 4 thinks Star Wars counts as cult, and as a fan of the RHPS and many an other, I have yet to prove that she is very very wrong. Parts one and two of this rant are located under the cult movie's tag)
Number one, can't remember where I found it but it's nice:
"A mainstream film 10,000 people see 1o times
A cult film, 10 people see 10,000 times."
Which I liked! Especially as yesterday I technically held my 10th viewing of R+GaD (technically, because I've seen it 9 times all the way through, and then the first half twice.) I don't have anything more intellectual to say than that...
Even better has to be the Mutant Reviewers site. They rank cult films out of five under five catagories which describe them perfectly. They are...
CULT
QUOTES
OFFENSIVENESS
BIZZARE
REWATCHABILITY
A few months ago me and my sparring partner made a venn diagram to approximate cultyness.
We placed Blade Runner, the Rocky Horror Picture Show, R+GaD, Withail+I and Donnie Darko in the middle as having all three qualities we found important. Under this new measure (according to me, not the site by the by), RHPS would still be fine scoring, like, five in everything, R+G, Withnail and Donnie would still be pretty ok, but Blade Runner is at a serious disadvantage. It's one of the original cult movies, and yet not really any of those catagories- the flaw in the system is not accounting for the revived-on-video brand of movie.
Aside from that, I agree with most of their choices, but it's a bit of a strain to describe LA Confidential as cult...they also list the LOTR films as cult; me and Friend 4 decided against this as the culty cultiest fans are either book-purists or screaming girlfans. They also list Star Wars as cult. Hmmm. I let them off on account of the rest of it being so good. And their reviews of R+G are awesome - especially Rich's. I lift huge chunks from that review whenever I try pursuading others to see it.
But third and finally, most of all, I liked the idea that a cult film is..."a film loved by some people for precicely the reason other people found it offputting." It means Pulp Fiction counts, as I've always sneakily supposed it does, because some people loved the mesh of bad taste humour and blood, and the rest thought it was just bad taste. It encapsulates Dirty Dancing and Lost Boys, which while not particularly odd certainly have that culty whiff. It certainly has space for all the old faves (though as per usual, I'm having difficulty with Blade Runner. I just can't see anything obvious about it one could hate...)
And most importantly, if that's the case, Star Wars can't possibly count because I can't really think of anything in them to dislike. That's the thing Friend 4 is missing. A film's got to have a small dedicated fanbase, but it's also got to be routinely despised by almost everyone else.
Cult movies are like in-jokes. Either you "get it", you latch onto whatever madcap genius everyone else is missing, or you don't. And I'm willing to defend Lost Boys to the death against anyone who thinks it's awful...
In other news...two nights ago, my sister refused to let me have a snack when I came home from school starving as we were going out to eat. Four hours and twenty minutes later, we arrived at the restaurant and were presented with menus. In revenge, I spent the evening quoting portions of famous scenes from diners, coffee shops and Italian spaghetteers at my dad, all purposfully taken from films she hadn't seen. The highlight settling on the tip, although my dad attempting to call the waitress "garcon" was pretty good in a thank-goodness-she-was-out-of-earshot sortofa way...and kudos to that same waitress for bringing my meal while I was in the loo so I could conveniently quote Mia as soon as I came back. Although my sister did lash back with some well placed Wayne's World here and there.
After seeing the start of Murder with Mirrors, I'm desperate to know whodunnit (we hadn't even got to the murder yet, though I had my suspicions...full dull story here) . After briefly scouring the internet, searching for the dvd and asking two Marple-obsessessed friends, neither of which could remember, I have finally resorted to getting the book out of the library. It's tedious, but oh well...
And finally, this evening I had something of a resort of my pictures collection; specifically my screenshots. Perhaps the memory would be less clogged if I parted with one or two of my collection of R+G screenshots. After all, I do have 412 of them (I got a new program and clipped half the movie; I'm gonna do the second half sometime), and when taken along with my collection of 408 icons...it probably takes up a fair bit of space overall.
Where's your neck?!
Monday, October 09, 2006
Recovered from RockyHorrorness now...almost.
It was great! Ok, I was absolutely beat on the costume front. I was most impressed with the Riff Raffs (awesome character!), and with one of my drama teachers who was on stage in suspenders hosting the evening. And the guy who came as Rocky with merely a pair of gold hotpants. That was brave. And cold. I wore a lot of pink - I'll post a pic as soon as we get sent it.
I was one of those irritating people who shouted very loud, sung every word and generally beat everyone else using toast/cards/tooters etc by several minutes because they were all ignorant and useless... It was great, great fun, as fun as being pelted with rice and squirted with water in a public place can be. We got newspaper to shelter under - amusingly enough, mine was a lads mag and, I'm not kidding, it had 1 or more naked girl on every page. Honestly...
I still have rice in my boots, and I wanna go again!
Last night was awful (OK, it takes a few days for me to entirely compose a post so the timescale is pretty squiffy. I have had a bad evening sometime this week) I just got really morose, and it wasn't helped by mum suggesting I watched Reservoir Dogs to cheer myself up because it would have worked great, absolutley great. I told her she shouldn't be encouraging me. After all, three times in two weeks...is an honour reserved for R+G... and also pretty obsessive.
Now what I really need is to bully a friend into seeing it. The rationale is something like this:
a) It's a sub-cult movie. It's no fun at all being a cult of one.
b) It's also no fun quoting, doodling main characters, recasting the film with friends and excitedly pointing out that one of the warehouses near our school is actually an abandoned mortuary if no one else gets the joke.
c) In fact, it's just plain no fun at all watching movies on your own. And this film in particular.
d) I'll be able to actually say all the rants which don't quite work on paper.
e) I'll be able to actually coo "Mr *insert colour* is so sweet", which also doesn't quite work on paper.
f) It'll stop me feeling really, really lonely when, eg, the harvest hymn contains innocent lines like "first the blade and then the ear"
g) It's a jolly good film. I've a duty, surely, to pass my good fortune on?
h) There is only one proven way to recapture the fun of seeing a film for the first time. And that's vicariously - by making someone else see it.
Unfortunately, I have some movie-morals, one of which is to only recommend a film if I think people will like it. And I have absolutely no point of reference here whatsoever. I mean, I didn't mind
Speaking of obsessive, there was a plus side to yesterday. I've finally downloaded a program which lets me screenshot DVDs and have gone into a perfect FRENZY of icon making. One film in particular. *hugs Rosencrantz and Guildenstern* They are so so so sweet. I think I managed about a screenshot a minute, and I've positively clogged up the hard-drive, but I don't care! OK, the R to G ratio is slightly (OK, totally...) skewed in G's favour. Whatever. They are making me exceedingly exceedingly happy.
At school we're doing King Henry IV part 2, and if that sounds involved and awful then you're totally right. It's not too bad, but I'd really really rather be doing Hamlet. No prizes for guessing why that is. On the other hand, it has kinda improved my appreciation of R+GaD. Such as the Players, with their incessant string of bawdy jokes, which I was reminded of at the beginning of act II, or Falstaff's comment that he was born "about three of the clock in the afternoon" i.e. when the play started, i.e. he didn't exist before that etc etc. My favourite moment so far is undoubtedly when Falstaff suggests he pretends to be the king, and Hal pretends to be himself and vice versa. Tom Stoppard evidently knows his Shakespeare very very well.
PS - This week we get our Progress Reviews. My film studies teacher made me laugh. His comment on my progress is, I kid you not, that "I need to have more confidence when expressing my views about film."
.....
O-kay...I think we can do that. After all, I obviously lack courage in my opinions. What does he want me to do, correct him when he gets his facts wrong?!
It was great! Ok, I was absolutely beat on the costume front. I was most impressed with the Riff Raffs (awesome character!), and with one of my drama teachers who was on stage in suspenders hosting the evening. And the guy who came as Rocky with merely a pair of gold hotpants. That was brave. And cold. I wore a lot of pink - I'll post a pic as soon as we get sent it.
I was one of those irritating people who shouted very loud, sung every word and generally beat everyone else using toast/cards/tooters etc by several minutes because they were all ignorant and useless... It was great, great fun, as fun as being pelted with rice and squirted with water in a public place can be. We got newspaper to shelter under - amusingly enough, mine was a lads mag and, I'm not kidding, it had 1 or more naked girl on every page. Honestly...
I still have rice in my boots, and I wanna go again!
Last night was awful (OK, it takes a few days for me to entirely compose a post so the timescale is pretty squiffy. I have had a bad evening sometime this week) I just got really morose, and it wasn't helped by mum suggesting I watched Reservoir Dogs to cheer myself up because it would have worked great, absolutley great. I told her she shouldn't be encouraging me. After all, three times in two weeks...is an honour reserved for R+G... and also pretty obsessive.
Now what I really need is to bully a friend into seeing it. The rationale is something like this:
a) It's a sub-cult movie. It's no fun at all being a cult of one.
b) It's also no fun quoting, doodling main characters, recasting the film with friends and excitedly pointing out that one of the warehouses near our school is actually an abandoned mortuary if no one else gets the joke.
c) In fact, it's just plain no fun at all watching movies on your own. And this film in particular.
d) I'll be able to actually say all the rants which don't quite work on paper.
e) I'll be able to actually coo "Mr *insert colour* is so sweet", which also doesn't quite work on paper.
f) It'll stop me feeling really, really lonely when, eg, the harvest hymn contains innocent lines like "first the blade and then the ear"
g) It's a jolly good film. I've a duty, surely, to pass my good fortune on?
h) There is only one proven way to recapture the fun of seeing a film for the first time. And that's vicariously - by making someone else see it.
Unfortunately, I have some movie-morals, one of which is to only recommend a film if I think people will like it. And I have absolutely no point of reference here whatsoever. I mean, I didn't mind
Speaking of obsessive, there was a plus side to yesterday. I've finally downloaded a program which lets me screenshot DVDs and have gone into a perfect FRENZY of icon making. One film in particular. *hugs Rosencrantz and Guildenstern* They are so so so sweet. I think I managed about a screenshot a minute, and I've positively clogged up the hard-drive, but I don't care! OK, the R to G ratio is slightly (OK, totally...) skewed in G's favour. Whatever. They are making me exceedingly exceedingly happy.
At school we're doing King Henry IV part 2, and if that sounds involved and awful then you're totally right. It's not too bad, but I'd really really rather be doing Hamlet. No prizes for guessing why that is. On the other hand, it has kinda improved my appreciation of R+GaD. Such as the Players, with their incessant string of bawdy jokes, which I was reminded of at the beginning of act II, or Falstaff's comment that he was born "about three of the clock in the afternoon" i.e. when the play started, i.e. he didn't exist before that etc etc. My favourite moment so far is undoubtedly when Falstaff suggests he pretends to be the king, and Hal pretends to be himself and vice versa. Tom Stoppard evidently knows his Shakespeare very very well.
PS - This week we get our Progress Reviews. My film studies teacher made me laugh. His comment on my progress is, I kid you not, that "I need to have more confidence when expressing my views about film."
.....
O-kay...I think we can do that. After all, I obviously lack courage in my opinions. What does he want me to do, correct him when he gets his facts wrong?!
Death by long edit!
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
First draft of film studies coursework due by Friday. Argh!
Let me explain the brief. We've got to do two different pieces of coursework, one on narrative structure (and if you know what that means, please somebody tell me) and one on micro-elements (that's editing and lighting and stuff). One of them has to be rom com. One of them has to be horror. Well, no, they can be any genre, but our teacher just so happened to choose my two least favourites. Which sucks.
Especially, as far as I understand the narrative one, I know I have a great essay in me about how Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid subverts the genre expectations of the western. I'd focus on fifteen minutes in the middle, after the train robbery. The sherrif is trying to raise a posse - unlike your horse-opera, he fails and his stand is taken over by a bicycle salesman. And to rub salt into the wound, our heroes aren't "halfway back to Hole in the Wall already", they're sitting nearby and eating it up with a spoon. Next scene - Sundance and Etta. Again, when he turns up in her room it leads you to expect the worst, but again it leads us down a blind alley. I'd finish with the "Raindrops Keep Falling On my Head" bit. One of the most romantic scenes of all time. Between Butch and Sundance's girlfriend. Surely that can't be right.
I could even mention Sundance's response to seeing them together:
S (threatening?)- "You stealing my girl?"
B - "Yeh, what about it?"
S (after a pause, in which we expect them to fall out, or argue, or kill each other) - "...take her..."
The whole premise of the film is "wrong" - our heroes are being hunted by the law, but unlike all the other Western Heroes, who stand their ground, they turn tail and bolt.
'Tis a crying shame, because it'd be great. But oh well, that's the second essay.
No, the most pressing concern is the "micro-elements" one. Now, we're doing rom-com and horror, and we can write either essay about either genre. But it makes far more sense to do the story of the rom com and the ministudy on a suspense sequence from a horror film; I just can't see it another way around. Though actually, I feel quite a good macro essay on the horror film I finally picked coming on.
The precice instructions - I've got to pick on one or two aspects of filmmaking, such as mis-en-scene/lighting/camerawork/whatever and pick a 5-7 minute sequence where they're used to great effect, to create suspense or something similar.
Anyway, as you may know I don't like horror movies. The first seven minutes of Scream and the first half of Psycho, as watched in the lesson, are about as much as I can take. I had a look through my family's meagre collection, and drew blanks. The scene from Sleepy Hollow (when the horseman comes to the house with the little boy) was far too short, as were both bits from Sixth Sense. Ugh! I gave up on The Others. Because I had other homework to do. And certainly not because I chickened out of watching the second half. Certainly not.
I consulted my parents, and dad said - "What you need is Alien." I nodded dutifully, and felt a bit bad as he rung round all his friends and workmates to rustle up a copy, then went into town and purchased the whole Quadrology boxed set. So I watched it last night, and it was quite good - the Nostromo is obviusly designed by the same company who built Sam Lowry's city in Brazil, all pipes and steam and wires. And ducts ("Ducts...why does it always have to be ducts?" to quote Sig. Weaver in Galaxy Quest.) Though I must say, standards are "slipping" in the world - no way was it 18 material. 15, surely, by these days standards?
One day I'm gonna make a bumper list of the scenes everybody knows. You know, the Shower Scene. The Bit From Battleship Potempkin. The Ear. The Horse's Head in the Bed. Singing in the Rain. Rosebud. Nobody's Perfect. And from Alien, the scene over dinner...
And now I'm watching the same few minutes over and over again, in which a minor character goes off in search of a cat and is menaced by a series of scary loooong edits. I'll post the whole thing when it's finished properly.
PS - OK, so I was bad. After a few dedicated days of standing next to people with streaming colds I realised my immune system was just too strong, and I'd be lucky if I got another day off this side of April. In case I hadn't mentioned it before, I decided twice in a week for one film was far too much and I'd wait till I was next ill to watch this again. And I did wait a week, ok? I saw it last Tuesday and I managed till Wednesday before giving up. Though I was right to want a day off. I saw the first hour (right up until Mr Blonde shows them what's in his trunk) before tea Wednesday, then hung around for another hour in the hope the person who'd stolen the tv would let me have it back They didn't. I then spent the rest of the evening with a friend; I pity them, for I was rather...twitchy. But not as twitchy as this evening, in which I came home late from school and watched the second half over tea (yup, you heard me, over tea. Not the best five minutes to pick, I know...). Well, I say second half. I watched all of it until the last, what, 40 seconds when they dragged me out of the house to spend an hour in another friend's company. And then when I came in, I watched the very very very end. And I sat through the entire credits, to make switching the TV back on seem worthwhile.
Comments? Well, this time I really did grin all the way through. The lines are just so great - Eddie's retort that Mr White has become Mr Compassion sticks in my mind along with, oh, every time Mr Pink opens his mouth to speak. Though I've come to a decision. The slight unease I felt from the end of Mr Orange's flashback onwards was not caused by continual thinking about it. It's because I genuinely have issues with the ending. Perhaps it just feels...too contrived...or the scene between Marv and Freddie is just unbeatable and it's all downhill in the warehouse after that...or maybe it's because the flashback's so good, and I get so into it that coming out's a disappointment...or possibly ending the flashback with Messrs O and W in the car from the start again is too big a jolt...I have no idea whatsoever. It just doesn't feel satisfying.
Updateish: after continuing to think about it constantly, I think it's because every character, every line and situation apart from Orange is played for laughs. Think about it - he only has serious lines in a script full of screamers, and his scenes are alarmingly comedy free. That's not bad, it's just that having such a chunk of sustained seriousness affects me so much that it feels weird going back to the warehouse.
Let me explain the brief. We've got to do two different pieces of coursework, one on narrative structure (and if you know what that means, please somebody tell me) and one on micro-elements (that's editing and lighting and stuff). One of them has to be rom com. One of them has to be horror. Well, no, they can be any genre, but our teacher just so happened to choose my two least favourites. Which sucks.
Especially, as far as I understand the narrative one, I know I have a great essay in me about how Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid subverts the genre expectations of the western. I'd focus on fifteen minutes in the middle, after the train robbery. The sherrif is trying to raise a posse - unlike your horse-opera, he fails and his stand is taken over by a bicycle salesman. And to rub salt into the wound, our heroes aren't "halfway back to Hole in the Wall already", they're sitting nearby and eating it up with a spoon. Next scene - Sundance and Etta. Again, when he turns up in her room it leads you to expect the worst, but again it leads us down a blind alley. I'd finish with the "Raindrops Keep Falling On my Head" bit. One of the most romantic scenes of all time. Between Butch and Sundance's girlfriend. Surely that can't be right.
I could even mention Sundance's response to seeing them together:
S (threatening?)- "You stealing my girl?"
B - "Yeh, what about it?"
S (after a pause, in which we expect them to fall out, or argue, or kill each other) - "...take her..."
The whole premise of the film is "wrong" - our heroes are being hunted by the law, but unlike all the other Western Heroes, who stand their ground, they turn tail and bolt.
'Tis a crying shame, because it'd be great. But oh well, that's the second essay.
No, the most pressing concern is the "micro-elements" one. Now, we're doing rom-com and horror, and we can write either essay about either genre. But it makes far more sense to do the story of the rom com and the ministudy on a suspense sequence from a horror film; I just can't see it another way around. Though actually, I feel quite a good macro essay on the horror film I finally picked coming on.
The precice instructions - I've got to pick on one or two aspects of filmmaking, such as mis-en-scene/lighting/camerawork/whatever and pick a 5-7 minute sequence where they're used to great effect, to create suspense or something similar.
Anyway, as you may know I don't like horror movies. The first seven minutes of Scream and the first half of Psycho, as watched in the lesson, are about as much as I can take. I had a look through my family's meagre collection, and drew blanks. The scene from Sleepy Hollow (when the horseman comes to the house with the little boy) was far too short, as were both bits from Sixth Sense. Ugh! I gave up on The Others. Because I had other homework to do. And certainly not because I chickened out of watching the second half. Certainly not.
I consulted my parents, and dad said - "What you need is Alien." I nodded dutifully, and felt a bit bad as he rung round all his friends and workmates to rustle up a copy, then went into town and purchased the whole Quadrology boxed set. So I watched it last night, and it was quite good - the Nostromo is obviusly designed by the same company who built Sam Lowry's city in Brazil, all pipes and steam and wires. And ducts ("Ducts...why does it always have to be ducts?" to quote Sig. Weaver in Galaxy Quest.) Though I must say, standards are "slipping" in the world - no way was it 18 material. 15, surely, by these days standards?
One day I'm gonna make a bumper list of the scenes everybody knows. You know, the Shower Scene. The Bit From Battleship Potempkin. The Ear. The Horse's Head in the Bed. Singing in the Rain. Rosebud. Nobody's Perfect. And from Alien, the scene over dinner...
And now I'm watching the same few minutes over and over again, in which a minor character goes off in search of a cat and is menaced by a series of scary loooong edits. I'll post the whole thing when it's finished properly.
PS - OK, so I was bad. After a few dedicated days of standing next to people with streaming colds I realised my immune system was just too strong, and I'd be lucky if I got another day off this side of April. In case I hadn't mentioned it before, I decided twice in a week for one film was far too much and I'd wait till I was next ill to watch this again. And I did wait a week, ok? I saw it last Tuesday and I managed till Wednesday before giving up. Though I was right to want a day off. I saw the first hour (right up until Mr Blonde shows them what's in his trunk) before tea Wednesday, then hung around for another hour in the hope the person who'd stolen the tv would let me have it back They didn't. I then spent the rest of the evening with a friend; I pity them, for I was rather...twitchy. But not as twitchy as this evening, in which I came home late from school and watched the second half over tea (yup, you heard me, over tea. Not the best five minutes to pick, I know...). Well, I say second half. I watched all of it until the last, what, 40 seconds when they dragged me out of the house to spend an hour in another friend's company. And then when I came in, I watched the very very very end. And I sat through the entire credits, to make switching the TV back on seem worthwhile.
Comments? Well, this time I really did grin all the way through. The lines are just so great - Eddie's retort that Mr White has become Mr Compassion sticks in my mind along with, oh, every time Mr Pink opens his mouth to speak. Though I've come to a decision. The slight unease I felt from the end of Mr Orange's flashback onwards was not caused by continual thinking about it. It's because I genuinely have issues with the ending. Perhaps it just feels...too contrived...or the scene between Marv and Freddie is just unbeatable and it's all downhill in the warehouse after that...or maybe it's because the flashback's so good, and I get so into it that coming out's a disappointment...or possibly ending the flashback with Messrs O and W in the car from the start again is too big a jolt...I have no idea whatsoever. It just doesn't feel satisfying.
Updateish: after continuing to think about it constantly, I think it's because every character, every line and situation apart from Orange is played for laughs. Think about it - he only has serious lines in a script full of screamers, and his scenes are alarmingly comedy free. That's not bad, it's just that having such a chunk of sustained seriousness affects me so much that it feels weird going back to the warehouse.
Cannes here we come - Mk2
Sunday, October 01, 2006
So today we did the final reshoots for our version of Fellowship of the Ring. Don't sound too excited - we're a small all girl cast with far too much homework and no time in the holidays. And we started working on ours before the Indiana Jones people did, so take that!
I always remind my cast of Peter Jackson's Bad Taste. It took him four years of shooting at weekends to finish it. Kinda like us really. Only, of course, Bad Taste was very good and while ours is impressive in places considering we were attempting a 3-hour epic on a £10 budget, I'm no PJ.
In fact, if you want to compare directoral styles, I'd nudge you in the direction of Ed Wood - with two takes maximum (I can't coax anything more out of an impatient cast, honest!), scripts learnt or made up on the spot, scant regard for continuity errors, gratuitous use of stock footage (pinched from the real FOTR) and the same gang of misfits who appear in every feature. Like Johnny Depp proclaims proudly in the film, I'm acting, producing and directing ("Only two people do all that - me and Orson Welles"). I'm also in charge of locations, props, food, getting people there on time, bullying people out of the house in all manner of silly costumes and weather conditions, script management, lighting (I held a torch with a sweet wrapper over the end pointed at the top of Gandalf's staff for half an hour. Best day ever...), music (pinched from FOTR and Donnie Darko respectively), editing (So far we've had about 7 gruelling sessions of about 8 hours each. Did you know that the climatic scene of Barry Lyndon alone took 42 days to edit. Must have been hell), updating the clapperboard and the not-so-special effects. So all those mistakes in the film? Yeh, they're all my fault. It's kinda a roundabout honour, really when you think about it.
But inevitably as blockbuster sequels came the question "What next?" (Coincidentally, those two words have been banging about my head since Tuesday, as "Fight Club" obviously isn't a sufficent enough answer for my piece of mind. The anticipated wave of dispair hit me at around 6:00 last night, a whole impressive four days.)
Well we were going to do Prince Caspian (Friend 3 really wants to play Susan, you see) with Friend 1's sandy cat doubling for Aslan, until we heard the Proper Hollywood bods were doing it. We really can't compete, and the technical difficulties looked pretty insurmountable anyway. We considered a sinister Alice in Wonderland, but I couldn't convince anyone that we could get around the caterpillers.
Then we had a look at our surroundings. We live on an island - what about The Wicker Man? Too much nakedness for a cast which feels self conscious appearing with cloaks in public. Saving Private Ryan always pops up during these discussions - after all, we've got plenty of beach.
We had a think about cast as well - since the departure of our Legolas, we are but six girls. The obvious answer is, of course, The Descent - which if my memory serves really is about six girls. Or we could do The Blair Witch Project, though there's no challenge at all there. Remaking a cheap film with a small cast and a single camera...as a cheap film with a small cast and a single camera is a total waste of time.
Thing is, we covered up for bad action sequences with slo-mo, and it's best if we stick to plain talking. What's got lots of talking...R+GaD came up, inevitably. We can do forests, and I know how to make a biplane. Unfortunately, we got into a mire when casting. Friend 3 suggested herself and Friend 4 for the title roles, which I agree would be good. The only problem is, I can imagine them cast both ways around which hurts my head! I think I was going to be Hamlet - I've always wanted a second stab at it - or the Player, because he and I have the same views on sticking to "the story" without mercy, whatever the consiquences.
And then I had a short conversation with myself about how fun it'd be to do Reservoir Dogs - one location, lots of talking etc - and even got down to casting. This was highly enlightening, and very very funny but as no one who's reading this both seen the film and knows my friends, there's really no point in repeating it. And besides, the swearing would be a problem. Still, I think redoing it with an all-female cast is an innovative idea.
I've got about seven original scripts, but I'm not willing to show them to anyone.
Roundabout back to where we started - The Hobbit? (too many trolls, spiders and dragons, and hopefully upcoming competition from Hollywood) The Silmarillion? (Specifically, the tale of the fall of Gondolin - no balrogs, and while we scraped Fellowship, we're nowhere near noble enough for First Age heroes.) Two Towers? TWO TOWERS!!!!!! Do you know it took us near on half an hour to realise this was the simplest way to reuse the same sorts of locations and costumes? Duh...
PS - last night, I saw Walk The Line. Perhaps I wasn't in the mood, but I didn't enjoy as much as I wanted to. The main attraction for me was a) it's got Joaquin Phoenix in it and b) it's about Johnny Cash. I'm quite a fan - I couldn't name you his mother or his albums in chronological order etc, but I do own four albums I' m larger than your average clique of people who wear Che Guevara t-shirts and have Jim Morrison posters on their wall, just because they're hip. Understand? Anyway, the film reminded me very much of Brokeback Mountain. The colour scheme, the background music, the tone and pacing were all very similar, as was bits of plot - especially his arguments with his wife, the troubled Thanksgiving dinner and sneaking off to go "fishing" with June. Only they really were fishing...it was quite good in places, but I didn't really
enjoy it. I know Johnny Cash had a pretty awful life in places, but it felt like it should have been...a bit more fun. You should have been able to feel what the girls in the audience were screaming for. A bit sedate and family-drama-y for me. As for the acting, Mr Phoenix did a good job - especially in the latter stages - as did Oscar-winning Ms Witherspoon - and may I congratulate their singing. OK, not a patch on the original, but a jolly good job nontheless.
I always remind my cast of Peter Jackson's Bad Taste. It took him four years of shooting at weekends to finish it. Kinda like us really. Only, of course, Bad Taste was very good and while ours is impressive in places considering we were attempting a 3-hour epic on a £10 budget, I'm no PJ.
In fact, if you want to compare directoral styles, I'd nudge you in the direction of Ed Wood - with two takes maximum (I can't coax anything more out of an impatient cast, honest!), scripts learnt or made up on the spot, scant regard for continuity errors, gratuitous use of stock footage (pinched from the real FOTR) and the same gang of misfits who appear in every feature. Like Johnny Depp proclaims proudly in the film, I'm acting, producing and directing ("Only two people do all that - me and Orson Welles"). I'm also in charge of locations, props, food, getting people there on time, bullying people out of the house in all manner of silly costumes and weather conditions, script management, lighting (I held a torch with a sweet wrapper over the end pointed at the top of Gandalf's staff for half an hour. Best day ever...), music (pinched from FOTR and Donnie Darko respectively), editing (So far we've had about 7 gruelling sessions of about 8 hours each. Did you know that the climatic scene of Barry Lyndon alone took 42 days to edit. Must have been hell), updating the clapperboard and the not-so-special effects. So all those mistakes in the film? Yeh, they're all my fault. It's kinda a roundabout honour, really when you think about it.
But inevitably as blockbuster sequels came the question "What next?" (Coincidentally, those two words have been banging about my head since Tuesday, as "Fight Club" obviously isn't a sufficent enough answer for my piece of mind. The anticipated wave of dispair hit me at around 6:00 last night, a whole impressive four days.)
Well we were going to do Prince Caspian (Friend 3 really wants to play Susan, you see) with Friend 1's sandy cat doubling for Aslan, until we heard the Proper Hollywood bods were doing it. We really can't compete, and the technical difficulties looked pretty insurmountable anyway. We considered a sinister Alice in Wonderland, but I couldn't convince anyone that we could get around the caterpillers.
Then we had a look at our surroundings. We live on an island - what about The Wicker Man? Too much nakedness for a cast which feels self conscious appearing with cloaks in public. Saving Private Ryan always pops up during these discussions - after all, we've got plenty of beach.
We had a think about cast as well - since the departure of our Legolas, we are but six girls. The obvious answer is, of course, The Descent - which if my memory serves really is about six girls. Or we could do The Blair Witch Project, though there's no challenge at all there. Remaking a cheap film with a small cast and a single camera...as a cheap film with a small cast and a single camera is a total waste of time.
Thing is, we covered up for bad action sequences with slo-mo, and it's best if we stick to plain talking. What's got lots of talking...R+GaD came up, inevitably. We can do forests, and I know how to make a biplane. Unfortunately, we got into a mire when casting. Friend 3 suggested herself and Friend 4 for the title roles, which I agree would be good. The only problem is, I can imagine them cast both ways around which hurts my head! I think I was going to be Hamlet - I've always wanted a second stab at it - or the Player, because he and I have the same views on sticking to "the story" without mercy, whatever the consiquences.
And then I had a short conversation with myself about how fun it'd be to do Reservoir Dogs - one location, lots of talking etc - and even got down to casting. This was highly enlightening, and very very funny but as no one who's reading this both seen the film and knows my friends, there's really no point in repeating it. And besides, the swearing would be a problem. Still, I think redoing it with an all-female cast is an innovative idea.
I've got about seven original scripts, but I'm not willing to show them to anyone.
Roundabout back to where we started - The Hobbit? (too many trolls, spiders and dragons, and hopefully upcoming competition from Hollywood) The Silmarillion? (Specifically, the tale of the fall of Gondolin - no balrogs, and while we scraped Fellowship, we're nowhere near noble enough for First Age heroes.) Two Towers? TWO TOWERS!!!!!! Do you know it took us near on half an hour to realise this was the simplest way to reuse the same sorts of locations and costumes? Duh...
PS - last night, I saw Walk The Line. Perhaps I wasn't in the mood, but I didn't enjoy as much as I wanted to. The main attraction for me was a) it's got Joaquin Phoenix in it and b) it's about Johnny Cash. I'm quite a fan - I couldn't name you his mother or his albums in chronological order etc, but I do own four albums I' m larger than your average clique of people who wear Che Guevara t-shirts and have Jim Morrison posters on their wall, just because they're hip. Understand? Anyway, the film reminded me very much of Brokeback Mountain. The colour scheme, the background music, the tone and pacing were all very similar, as was bits of plot - especially his arguments with his wife, the troubled Thanksgiving dinner and sneaking off to go "fishing" with June. Only they really were fishing...it was quite good in places, but I didn't really
enjoy it. I know Johnny Cash had a pretty awful life in places, but it felt like it should have been...a bit more fun. You should have been able to feel what the girls in the audience were screaming for. A bit sedate and family-drama-y for me. As for the acting, Mr Phoenix did a good job - especially in the latter stages - as did Oscar-winning Ms Witherspoon - and may I congratulate their singing. OK, not a patch on the original, but a jolly good job nontheless.
!!!!!!!! (PS - now what?)
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Well, it's been a hellava long wait guys. Spurred on by a pal who commented "Why haven't you actually watched your boxed set yet?!", I stopped being miss will-watch-anything and successfully ushered in Reservoir Dogs as the evening's movie.
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It took some rather unsubtle hinting at my sister to get her out of the room for an hour and a half, and some even more unsubtle hinting to persuade my parents but anyway…The one condition was that I’d done my homework, so I bent the truth, said yes and then scooted down to my room and did two pieces in approximately as many minutes. And it was not without a little nervousness (after all, I’d probably have to lie blind to all my friends if I disliked it…) I sat down. I really need not have worried in the slightest…
There are two different ways I could use the phrase "worse than Rififi". The first: "Hannah is a billion times worse than Rififi.", a very likely occurrence. The second: "I've just spent an hour watching a film about the aftermath of a diamond heist; oh it's as bad as Rififi!" in terms of nerve-wrenching suspense. If you understand me. And this gets jolly close to the latter catagory.
All the characters are great, totally great. I'd like to make individual comments, but I'm having problems with anything more than "really great". I certainly couldn’t pick a favourite from the central four. Mr Blonde is just so chilled, you've got to have respect for his total lack of panic - and while the ear thing was nasty, at least it looks like he was enjoying it. Mr Pink gets all the good lines - the tipping scene is so funny, as is him complaining about his colour. And also, of the set he's probably the most like me - I wanted to cheer when I saw him crawl out from under the ramp. Mr Blue's tash is cool (what else is there to say?). Mr White was sweet, in the same way that Bruce Willis' character in The Sixth Sense is sweet. Both of them give the feeling things were safe when they were on screen - like nothing drastically awful was going to happen as long as they were there. He really should not have left Messrs Orange and Blonde on their own with Marv…
And then Mr Orange who is also very sweet, despite having the worst pair of sunglasses. He deserves a special mention for being so un-like himself. I've a history of getting uncomfortable seeing actors from great things in other things. After The Godfather, for example, seeing Robert Duvall in a western was actually quite hard. It seems to be totally random, but after R+GaD I was slightly worried I may have the same problem with this. Needn't have worried, really (on the subject, I was overjoyed watching the special features to see how overjoyed Tim was that QT had seen R+GaD. After all, I’m always happy to see people who love it as much as me…)
I also love the way they actually talk like real people. The opening scene at breakfast could easily have been me and my six chums over lunch. Only we don't swear so much...and Lauren would kill me if I ever so much as mentioned Madonna...
And now a bit of spoilervision:
A bit more for Mr O. and Mr W., both of which you need to feel a bit sorry for. Mr O was beyond fantastic - and it seems horribly unfair that he's the one to be badly injured. Not only because he's really a "good guy", but also he's shot by a woman and a woman that misses fairly badly (as Mr White points out comfortingly(?!), a stomach wound takes hours to die from...) You kinda expect the wound to be a little more noble than that. And he's got the mean knowledge that rescue is as far away as Jo arriving. He has the worst, worst luck.
He’s an interesting character too, because he is a goodie. But then, as the criminals are our heroes, teeeechnically he’s the bad guy. And then on the other hand, he rescues Marv (temporarily, at least. And out of the two, I'd much rather be shot by Eddie than burnt to death) which is a good thing to do. Lets put it this way - I'd be hard pressed to choose a fave, but I was certainly rooting for Mr O to aim well as opposed to Mr B succeeding in toasting the poor guy. Then Eddie comes back and extols Mr B as the best and most loyal guy in the universe - he's a sadist, but not a traitor like Freddie is, which is worse/better/just as bad(?). And the contradictions go on and on. Marv's a little bit of a hero really - he doesn't say anything, even though he knew Mr O was a cop and it would have been a good way to try and squirm off the hook. I love that scene between them - "We're just going to lie here and bleed".
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It took some rather unsubtle hinting at my sister to get her out of the room for an hour and a half, and some even more unsubtle hinting to persuade my parents but anyway…The one condition was that I’d done my homework, so I bent the truth, said yes and then scooted down to my room and did two pieces in approximately as many minutes. And it was not without a little nervousness (after all, I’d probably have to lie blind to all my friends if I disliked it…) I sat down. I really need not have worried in the slightest…
There are two different ways I could use the phrase "worse than Rififi". The first: "Hannah is a billion times worse than Rififi.", a very likely occurrence. The second: "I've just spent an hour watching a film about the aftermath of a diamond heist; oh it's as bad as Rififi!" in terms of nerve-wrenching suspense. If you understand me. And this gets jolly close to the latter catagory.
All the characters are great, totally great. I'd like to make individual comments, but I'm having problems with anything more than "really great". I certainly couldn’t pick a favourite from the central four. Mr Blonde is just so chilled, you've got to have respect for his total lack of panic - and while the ear thing was nasty, at least it looks like he was enjoying it. Mr Pink gets all the good lines - the tipping scene is so funny, as is him complaining about his colour. And also, of the set he's probably the most like me - I wanted to cheer when I saw him crawl out from under the ramp. Mr Blue's tash is cool (what else is there to say?). Mr White was sweet, in the same way that Bruce Willis' character in The Sixth Sense is sweet. Both of them give the feeling things were safe when they were on screen - like nothing drastically awful was going to happen as long as they were there. He really should not have left Messrs Orange and Blonde on their own with Marv…
And then Mr Orange who is also very sweet, despite having the worst pair of sunglasses. He deserves a special mention for being so un-like himself. I've a history of getting uncomfortable seeing actors from great things in other things. After The Godfather, for example, seeing Robert Duvall in a western was actually quite hard. It seems to be totally random, but after R+GaD I was slightly worried I may have the same problem with this. Needn't have worried, really (on the subject, I was overjoyed watching the special features to see how overjoyed Tim was that QT had seen R+GaD. After all, I’m always happy to see people who love it as much as me…)
I also love the way they actually talk like real people. The opening scene at breakfast could easily have been me and my six chums over lunch. Only we don't swear so much...and Lauren would kill me if I ever so much as mentioned Madonna...
And now a bit of spoilervision:
A bit more for Mr O. and Mr W., both of which you need to feel a bit sorry for. Mr O was beyond fantastic - and it seems horribly unfair that he's the one to be badly injured. Not only because he's really a "good guy", but also he's shot by a woman and a woman that misses fairly badly (as Mr White points out comfortingly(?!), a stomach wound takes hours to die from...) You kinda expect the wound to be a little more noble than that. And he's got the mean knowledge that rescue is as far away as Jo arriving. He has the worst, worst luck.
He’s an interesting character too, because he is a goodie. But then, as the criminals are our heroes, teeeechnically he’s the bad guy. And then on the other hand, he rescues Marv (temporarily, at least. And out of the two, I'd much rather be shot by Eddie than burnt to death) which is a good thing to do. Lets put it this way - I'd be hard pressed to choose a fave, but I was certainly rooting for Mr O to aim well as opposed to Mr B succeeding in toasting the poor guy. Then Eddie comes back and extols Mr B as the best and most loyal guy in the universe - he's a sadist, but not a traitor like Freddie is, which is worse/better/just as bad(?). And the contradictions go on and on. Marv's a little bit of a hero really - he doesn't say anything, even though he knew Mr O was a cop and it would have been a good way to try and squirm off the hook. I love that scene between them - "We're just going to lie here and bleed".
I really don't envy him one bit. Besides the obvious reason. I mean, two people (Larry and Marv) actually give their lives for him, waste of time that it is. That's got to hurt. "A man's got to have rocks in his head the size of Gibraltar to work undercover" - damn right!
And Mr White? Aw...as I said, I got the feeling nothing truly terrible would happen when he was around - especially as he seemed to be the only one at all concerned that Mr Orange was making a bit of a mess of the floor. He says he'll take care of him, and you really think he's going to. And the end is a total killer, because they've developed this bond and he sticks his neck out against a pair of very old and good friends in his defence. As I've said so, so many times before, betrayal's a subject which gets me every time. As much as I like Mr O, I think Mr W is entirely justified in putting a third bullet in him because the knowledge must hurt...
There is a lot of sick irony running through the film. Mr Blonde is widely regarded as a psycho, but we don't actually get to see him kill anyone even though we know he took out a bunch of civilians. If I recall correctly, the only civilian we see get killed is shot by undercover cop Mr Orange, which is just twisted and mean. In fact, he just has the worst luck...similarly, Mr Pink the professional, is the only guy whose name we the audience don't learn. I'm sure that was deliberate.
And Mr White? Aw...as I said, I got the feeling nothing truly terrible would happen when he was around - especially as he seemed to be the only one at all concerned that Mr Orange was making a bit of a mess of the floor. He says he'll take care of him, and you really think he's going to. And the end is a total killer, because they've developed this bond and he sticks his neck out against a pair of very old and good friends in his defence. As I've said so, so many times before, betrayal's a subject which gets me every time. As much as I like Mr O, I think Mr W is entirely justified in putting a third bullet in him because the knowledge must hurt...
There is a lot of sick irony running through the film. Mr Blonde is widely regarded as a psycho, but we don't actually get to see him kill anyone even though we know he took out a bunch of civilians. If I recall correctly, the only civilian we see get killed is shot by undercover cop Mr Orange, which is just twisted and mean. In fact, he just has the worst luck...similarly, Mr Pink the professional, is the only guy whose name we the audience don't learn. I'm sure that was deliberate.
The problem is, they're all so indecisive. They have to get Mr Orange medical attention, they've got to work out who's the rat and they frequently consider (with good reason) getting out of there, in case the location's been compromised. Which it has. They just never get around to any of it. Useless!
End spoilers.
The whole film was one long best scene, but the notable moment is during Mr Orange's story about the drugs in the toilet. The standing in front of that beautiful wall of graffiti, pacing in his room and then finally coming to the event...he's chatting away and suddenly, we're flashing back to the event within the flashback, and he's so in the moment he's standing in the loo but still talking about it. The camera circles him and the stationary cops, and he’s chatting away. It just produced a “wow” moment, even though it’s just a cut to a guy in a lav.
I liked the direction, it was really sedate but quite beautiful - lots of unbroken shots which really gave the actors a chance to show their stuff. The bits in the warehouse almost reminded me of a play - lots of talking on one location. We could call it "Waiting for Jo", and instead of Vladamir and Estragon considering killing themselves, they ponder killing each other and when Pozzo arrives, he beats Lucky up to pass the time. There were hardly any close ups - this sometimes made the dialogue hard to understand, but it did look very pretty.
End spoilers.
The whole film was one long best scene, but the notable moment is during Mr Orange's story about the drugs in the toilet. The standing in front of that beautiful wall of graffiti, pacing in his room and then finally coming to the event...he's chatting away and suddenly, we're flashing back to the event within the flashback, and he's so in the moment he's standing in the loo but still talking about it. The camera circles him and the stationary cops, and he’s chatting away. It just produced a “wow” moment, even though it’s just a cut to a guy in a lav.
I liked the direction, it was really sedate but quite beautiful - lots of unbroken shots which really gave the actors a chance to show their stuff. The bits in the warehouse almost reminded me of a play - lots of talking on one location. We could call it "Waiting for Jo", and instead of Vladamir and Estragon considering killing themselves, they ponder killing each other and when Pozzo arrives, he beats Lucky up to pass the time. There were hardly any close ups - this sometimes made the dialogue hard to understand, but it did look very pretty.
The story is virtually flawless. I say virtually, because while it's pretty great it can't stand up to two days of uninterupted scrutiny (that's how long it took me to write this up, by the by) - in fact, I'm not sure anything can. Totally flawless then. It never felt forced. The flashbacks dissipated the tension somewhat, and it gave the whole thing a very unstudied, incidental feel. Frequently with flash back/forwards films, you get gripped on one plot and have to sit through the rest - thankfully, this was not one of them.
In Film Studies we're doing the difference between story (what happens) and plot (how it unfolds on screen). Just needed to add that, because it would not have been half so effective presented in chronological order.
As for the violence? Ok, this is not one for people with weak stomachs, but I didn't mind it. In fact, coming from the cuddly world of PG-13 when a bullet wound equates to an easily brushed off paper cut if it's a hero, or an instant life drain if it's a henchman, it was very refreshing. You'd be forgiven for thinking it didn't hurt. Although I continue to disagree that cutting away is more effective than holding the camera still (having said that, I watched all the deleted scenes apart from the alternate versions of Mr Blonde's big scene...) Interesting fact you may not have known - the type of fake blood they used was very sticky, and it set very hard - to the extent that some of the actors had to be peeled off the floor and hosed down after a days filming before they could move properly.
All in all, this must be the weirdest feel-good film ever. Yes, you heard me, feel-good film. I dunno, it could be the cheery soundtrack, or the light hearted dialogue - I don't think I stopped grinning throughout. Awfully good fun. To be fair, it was cinematic join-the-dots most of the way. All the major events I knew of several months in advance, but actually it didn't matter. It was almost like coming back to an old friend, like smiling before the joke in a comedy you've alreadt seen. My mum managed to remain awake all the way through - an occurrence I can only remember one other time this year.
Anyway, I’m weighing up how soon the laws of decency allow me to rewatch it. I've already devoured the special features - the most exciting thing is that Mr Blonde’s car is actually a yellow Cadillac Coupe de Ville. Should I be proud that a fictional psychopath happens to drive my dream car? I’ve loved that make for years, ever since I saw one in a colouring book. When I was 12, I bought a small 5 inch replica which sits on the shelf near my bed. And yellow is the only colour for a car...If I had enough cash and, er, a driving licence I’d want one of them more than anything else, though I’d also settle for the thing Mary Kate and Ashley drive in Sweet Sixteen, or a hippy bus like the one in Cars.
As for the violence? Ok, this is not one for people with weak stomachs, but I didn't mind it. In fact, coming from the cuddly world of PG-13 when a bullet wound equates to an easily brushed off paper cut if it's a hero, or an instant life drain if it's a henchman, it was very refreshing. You'd be forgiven for thinking it didn't hurt. Although I continue to disagree that cutting away is more effective than holding the camera still (having said that, I watched all the deleted scenes apart from the alternate versions of Mr Blonde's big scene...) Interesting fact you may not have known - the type of fake blood they used was very sticky, and it set very hard - to the extent that some of the actors had to be peeled off the floor and hosed down after a days filming before they could move properly.
All in all, this must be the weirdest feel-good film ever. Yes, you heard me, feel-good film. I dunno, it could be the cheery soundtrack, or the light hearted dialogue - I don't think I stopped grinning throughout. Awfully good fun. To be fair, it was cinematic join-the-dots most of the way. All the major events I knew of several months in advance, but actually it didn't matter. It was almost like coming back to an old friend, like smiling before the joke in a comedy you've alreadt seen. My mum managed to remain awake all the way through - an occurrence I can only remember one other time this year.
Anyway, I’m weighing up how soon the laws of decency allow me to rewatch it. I've already devoured the special features - the most exciting thing is that Mr Blonde’s car is actually a yellow Cadillac Coupe de Ville. Should I be proud that a fictional psychopath happens to drive my dream car? I’ve loved that make for years, ever since I saw one in a colouring book. When I was 12, I bought a small 5 inch replica which sits on the shelf near my bed. And yellow is the only colour for a car...If I had enough cash and, er, a driving licence I’d want one of them more than anything else, though I’d also settle for the thing Mary Kate and Ashley drive in Sweet Sixteen, or a hippy bus like the one in Cars.
I'm gonna say this once - it sucks big time wanting to talk about something and not having anyone to talk with. It also sucks knowing you can only ever see something the first time once. And it sucks knowing that the only way to recapture the feeling is to make somebody else see it, when you're surrounded by people who'd attack you at the suggestion - and who you're totally unsure if they'd like anyway. Still, I've celebrated by reading all the things in various movie magazines and books I've (almost) managed to resist looking at all these months. And now it's just a wait until it hits me properly that I now no longer have anything to look forward to or complain about...
(PS - if you've seen it, check out this short. I particularly love the director's credit at the start. It's a mini triumph of great editing. OK, so who cares where the plot got plagarised from - it's still an entertaining little watch)
I also saw Man in the Iron Mask the night before. I borrowed it off a friend, and she refused to return my copy of Rosencrantz until I gave it back. Needless to say I went home that very evening and watched it straight away. It was ok, though I had some difficulty getting really involved. The costumes were very pretty, and Jeremy Irons had all the best lines. Or possibly it’s his delivery. “Sometimes there are more important things in life than a great pair of tits” sticks in my mind as especially funny. It’s a mess of accents, but it doesn’t really matter. What does is the cheesy moments – especially the end. I never managed to finish the book, but it almost felt like a death was a sacrifice demanded by Orson Welles (head in the pantheon of the Gods of Film, savvy?) to let them end the movie. It felt so cheap. Still…today she returned my baby, early in the morning. My pals asked me if anything was wrong, I must have been acting somewhat erratically (To start with, I was early, and my hair was neat…). I managed fifteen minutes before coming out with the news, and predictably nobody wanted to discuss it with me, hence the rant above.
(PS – my parties are the event of the year. OK, it’s an exaggeration, but they’re certainly a lot of fun. We still do party games, and always dress up. This year we’re gonna do film costumes, of course, though I’m tossing up who to come as. The most likely candidate is Shaun from Shaun of the Dead. I’ve got a cricket bat, and most of my friends have seen it.
On the other hand, I do have my excellent Frank costume lying around from last Halloween:
I’m also considering Rosencrantz. Because I think his costume the most wonderful thing in the world, and I’ve got a combination of clothes almost exactly like his – I subconsciously bought a jacket which is similar, though not perfect. I only realised when I accidentally went out “in costume” and looked down. Plus, now I can make the biplane I’d have me props all done. But something else I’ve been mulling over for a while, and now I can actually in fairness do, is Mr Orange. I know – awful awfully bad taste, but it would be very easy. And pretty funny too…)
I just found this soundtrack site – it’s great! It’s a mp3 blog for soundtracks, without the guilt of downloading things and then wondering whether it’s really all that bad to keep them. Mostly, it’s the type of stuff I don’t like, but there’s the odd good one, and John Williams fans will have a field day.
Final word: is it OK to list films you haven’t actually seen as favourites on your ymdb.com account? I’m not asking this for myself, I’ve got a friend who’s put two I know she hasn’t seen. I’m just curious as to if this is acceptable?
My IMDB top 250
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
I saw someone do this on the filmwise site, and thought it had meme potential. So here we go, taking into account my age and the fact I live in a small area with bad dvd shops and my parents get suspicious of internet ordering drumroll please...
So far I’ve seen
movies from the IMDB top 250.
5 movies that I think should not be in the IMDB top 250. (Random Order)
1 Vertigo (I'm sorry, but you know how I feel...)
2 Finding Nemo (The visuals were absolutely great. Just like Underworld. The stunning water effects did not make up for the slightly lame plot, dull script and charmless characters. Unlike, for example, Toy Story which not only was very impressive, but had spark as well.)
3 The Pianist (good, but not that good...)
4 The Incredibles (Pixar grudge? Nah...)
5 I'm getting desperate now (I haven't seen all that many after all), and I'm gonna go with Million Dollar Baby. I saw it on a plane, which never helps, and though I quite enjoyed it...it was a bit...like The Pianist it just didn't have that stunning factor some of the others have. Occasionally you just see a film, and you know you're in the hands of a master. This is not one of them.
6 Thought of another one - Finding Neverland. It's not even all that good...
5 movies that I think should be in the IMDB top 250 but are not. (Random Order)
To be honest, I can't think of any. Wait, is Moulin Rouge in there? Should be...
The best 5 movies that are in the IMDB top 250 are: (Random Order)
1 The Godfather (part 1)
2 L.A. Confidential
3 Once Upon a Time in the West
4 Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
5 er...er...well there's Memento, Eternal Sunshine, Twelve Monkeys and Brazil all on that list and I can't choose...ok, as I can't decide and they're all a similar sort of film, I'm gonna go with something entirely different - Hero, or whatever the Mandarin translation is.
The last 5 IMDB top 250 movies I’ve seen.
The next IMDB top 250 movie I am going to see.
No idea. Probably Harvey - I've got it on video, and I may get around to seeing it sometime in the next...year...
The most disappointing IMDB top 250 movie I’ve seen.
Vertigo. As you've been told so many many times before. And Seven Samuri, but I don't really want to talk about that.
IMDB top 250 movie I really have no interest in seeing:
The Shawshank Redemption and Schindler's List. Both at the top. What a tragedy for me.
11 IMDB top 250 movies I really want to see (virtually random order)
1 Reservoir Dogs (duh...)
2 Fight Club (ditto)
3 The Third Man (Just because. There was a really good reason why this has lodged itself in my mind as a must-see, and I cannot remember what it is...)
4 OK, now what. Well those are the three I reeeeally want to see, lets have a look at the rest of the list. Well I've cut it down to a shortlist of 8 more...ah hell, I'll list 'em all. The Usual Suspects (Kevin Spacey, right?)
5 American Beauty (Kevin Spacey. Agan.)
6 The Good The Bad and The Director Who Just Can't Handle Tiny Titles (The also irritatingly titled Once Upon a Time in the West is responsible for this. Gotta see more of his films!)
7 Once Upon a Time in America (ditto!)
8 Leon (Gary Oldman and 5 separate "for your consideration" posts on the Empire board, when every other film had one or less)
9 Strangers on a Train (Friend-who-likes-12-Angry-Men recommended it)
10 The Big Lebowski (Er, I dunno. The tagline is v. cool)
11 8 1/2 (Partly so I can say I've seen it, and partly so I can understand the "My Life in Film" episode based on it)
(oops forgot Das Boot and Seven Samuri)
I'll have to update this in half a year. Oh well. I'm going on holiday tomorrow, to France. I've been told I'm not to touch the new family video camera and I'm not allowed to direct the holiday film. Which sucks. We're going to Dinard's medieval fayre - the entire town dress up, apparently. My dress is absolutely fab, and it'll be two wonderful days of quoting Robin Hood and Excalibur at anyone who'll listen. Au revoir, mes cheres amis!*
*Cinecism&co. are not responsible for the foul quality of the French found in said blog, and disown all bad uses of the masculine plural whether they are being bribed or not.
So far I’ve seen
movies from the IMDB top 250.5 movies that I think should not be in the IMDB top 250. (Random Order)
1 Vertigo (I'm sorry, but you know how I feel...)
2 Finding Nemo (The visuals were absolutely great. Just like Underworld. The stunning water effects did not make up for the slightly lame plot, dull script and charmless characters. Unlike, for example, Toy Story which not only was very impressive, but had spark as well.)
3 The Pianist (good, but not that good...)
4 The Incredibles (Pixar grudge? Nah...)
5 I'm getting desperate now (I haven't seen all that many after all), and I'm gonna go with Million Dollar Baby. I saw it on a plane, which never helps, and though I quite enjoyed it...it was a bit...like The Pianist it just didn't have that stunning factor some of the others have. Occasionally you just see a film, and you know you're in the hands of a master. This is not one of them.
6 Thought of another one - Finding Neverland. It's not even all that good...
5 movies that I think should be in the IMDB top 250 but are not. (Random Order)
To be honest, I can't think of any. Wait, is Moulin Rouge in there? Should be...
The best 5 movies that are in the IMDB top 250 are: (Random Order)
1 The Godfather (part 1)
2 L.A. Confidential
3 Once Upon a Time in the West
4 Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
5 er...er...well there's Memento, Eternal Sunshine, Twelve Monkeys and Brazil all on that list and I can't choose...ok, as I can't decide and they're all a similar sort of film, I'm gonna go with something entirely different - Hero, or whatever the Mandarin translation is.
The last 5 IMDB top 250 movies I’ve seen.
The next IMDB top 250 movie I am going to see.
No idea. Probably Harvey - I've got it on video, and I may get around to seeing it sometime in the next...year...
The most disappointing IMDB top 250 movie I’ve seen.
Vertigo. As you've been told so many many times before. And Seven Samuri, but I don't really want to talk about that.
IMDB top 250 movie I really have no interest in seeing:
The Shawshank Redemption and Schindler's List. Both at the top. What a tragedy for me.
11 IMDB top 250 movies I really want to see (virtually random order)
1 Reservoir Dogs (duh...)
2 Fight Club (ditto)
3 The Third Man (Just because. There was a really good reason why this has lodged itself in my mind as a must-see, and I cannot remember what it is...)
4 OK, now what. Well those are the three I reeeeally want to see, lets have a look at the rest of the list. Well I've cut it down to a shortlist of 8 more...ah hell, I'll list 'em all. The Usual Suspects (Kevin Spacey, right?)
5 American Beauty (Kevin Spacey. Agan.)
6 The Good The Bad and The Director Who Just Can't Handle Tiny Titles (The also irritatingly titled Once Upon a Time in the West is responsible for this. Gotta see more of his films!)
7 Once Upon a Time in America (ditto!)
8 Leon (Gary Oldman and 5 separate "for your consideration" posts on the Empire board, when every other film had one or less)
9 Strangers on a Train (Friend-who-likes-12-Angry-Men recommended it)
10 The Big Lebowski (Er, I dunno. The tagline is v. cool)
11 8 1/2 (Partly so I can say I've seen it, and partly so I can understand the "My Life in Film" episode based on it)
(oops forgot Das Boot and Seven Samuri)
I'll have to update this in half a year. Oh well. I'm going on holiday tomorrow, to France. I've been told I'm not to touch the new family video camera and I'm not allowed to direct the holiday film. Which sucks. We're going to Dinard's medieval fayre - the entire town dress up, apparently. My dress is absolutely fab, and it'll be two wonderful days of quoting Robin Hood and Excalibur at anyone who'll listen. Au revoir, mes cheres amis!*
*Cinecism&co. are not responsible for the foul quality of the French found in said blog, and disown all bad uses of the masculine plural whether they are being bribed or not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)