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.
Showing posts with label LOTR. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LOTR. Show all posts
Monday, September 18, 2006
This morning in film studies, we each had to present a few minutes of film and analyse it for the class. I toyed with the Godfather restaurant scene (too unfairly spoiler-y) and a bit of Rififi (foreign French classic - looks like I'm trying too hard) before settling on "get off the road" from Fellowship of the Ring. I forgot to do any preparation work; I barely remembered to bring the DVD, but I came out ok. I'm a pretty good public speaker, and I know the thing backwards - I'm one of those annoying fans who mouths the script while watching. So I commented on the change from comedy ("mushrooms!") to scaryness, the lack of music, the exaggerated sound, the point of view shots and of course the reverse dolly zoom.
It went down well I think. Especially in light of what happened next.
The second presentation was the first ten minutes of Ghost Ship - and those of you who've already seen it will know exactly what's coming next, and if you don't and don't want to then skip the next two paragraphs. It was a good sequence to choose though - light cheery music, a boat party, dancing on the deck. The credits came up in curly pink letters - certainly contrary to one's expectations. This went on for a pretty dull 7 mins or so, and I believe it is what they call "creating suspense". Then the music goes scary and someone mucks up the equipment. Unbeknownst to the dancers on the deck, a very taut thin metal wire has been stretched.
And then it snaps. Whooosh noise. First shot: the heads being lopped off flowers. The dancers freeze. Blood drips onto the floor. "Oh surely not..." is what I was thinking. But yes, the wire cut through about 25 people simultaneously. All of a sudden there are bodies falling in half, severed arms, a writhing red mess of women trying to find their lower halves. It was surreal - so over the top yukky that it was almost unbelievable. I've read that's what seeing blood is really like. They couldn't just chop the captain's head off. Oh no, the top half is allowed to slide down and off with a satisfactory plop.
A bit like my last really good nightmare; I'd be lying if I said I didn't think it was gross. Although I bore it with better fortitude than some other people in the class. It certainly woke everyone up. The teacher commented that he should probably have warned us first. Anyway, then the guy pointed some things out...while playing it through again...
I saw Syriana yesterday, and while I am in no way claiming to understand it - I was utterly confused for 1/3 of the time - I did enjoy it, and thought it was fantastic. The cinematography has class written all over it - really naturalistic camera work. The script is jolly fast paced, it doesn't linger on anything but it still feels sedate.It truly is blink-and-you-miss it for major plot points. The screen never tugs at your emotions. Someone dies, someone gets hurt, bad things happen - but the music doesn't swell and it just lets you react naturally. And then it moves on to something else. The music is very good though - apart from the inclusion of a noise from the Donnie Darko soundtrack. It's a mix of pounding bass, Arabic drumming, entirely suitable for the understated tale they're trying to tell. The acting is ordinary in a good way - all the characters have superfluous families, little plotlets that are never expanded on. The film wastes no time on reminding you what's going on or even showing the characters travel from one place to another - you've got to be awake, and you've probably got to watch it more than once. It's remarkable that big companies keep going for written-by-an-idiot-monkey plots. What with their zeal for profit, I'm amazed they haven't realised clever storylines compell watchers to buy the dvd or visit the cinema more than once.
All in all, it's not one to watch when drunk or dozy, but even if it's confusing you can't help but admire the excellent work up there on screen.
That was the afternoon. And then in the evening we watched The Wicker Man. This is purely because I want to be able to march around vocally complaining about the remake. I would have done it anyway, but it feels more valid if I've actually seen the original...
That too was good - although I defy you not to think of Balamory when copper Howie first comes to Summerisle. I'd also liken the too-happy, creepy inhabitants to the Village in The Prisoner. Howie is very much like Holly Martins in The Third Man, entirely out of his depth - a devout Christian in a community of Pagans, who really needs a few more lessons in guile. The script is excellent ("They do so love their divinity lessons" is the dry comment on watching naked girls leap over a bonfire between standing stones) and the plot quietly gripping. Even if you know what's going to happen. Which most people now probably do. My one criticism would be the negative pagan stereotype - this film is probably responsible for a fair number of mistakes regarding neo-celtic culture - and this hardly dampens your enjoyment unless you are, of course, a neo-pagan in which case try not to be too offended.
I'd recommend it to music fans as well - there are Clannady bits, and the Medieval Babes covered one of of the tracks. The best song is definitely the one Britt Ekland's character sings while...er...that's not the reason I like it, I hope you understand...
I've got the afternoon pretty much off, and I intend to spend my time profitably watching Some Like it Hot in a free room...
It went down well I think. Especially in light of what happened next.
The second presentation was the first ten minutes of Ghost Ship - and those of you who've already seen it will know exactly what's coming next, and if you don't and don't want to then skip the next two paragraphs. It was a good sequence to choose though - light cheery music, a boat party, dancing on the deck. The credits came up in curly pink letters - certainly contrary to one's expectations. This went on for a pretty dull 7 mins or so, and I believe it is what they call "creating suspense". Then the music goes scary and someone mucks up the equipment. Unbeknownst to the dancers on the deck, a very taut thin metal wire has been stretched.
And then it snaps. Whooosh noise. First shot: the heads being lopped off flowers. The dancers freeze. Blood drips onto the floor. "Oh surely not..." is what I was thinking. But yes, the wire cut through about 25 people simultaneously. All of a sudden there are bodies falling in half, severed arms, a writhing red mess of women trying to find their lower halves. It was surreal - so over the top yukky that it was almost unbelievable. I've read that's what seeing blood is really like. They couldn't just chop the captain's head off. Oh no, the top half is allowed to slide down and off with a satisfactory plop.
A bit like my last really good nightmare; I'd be lying if I said I didn't think it was gross. Although I bore it with better fortitude than some other people in the class. It certainly woke everyone up. The teacher commented that he should probably have warned us first. Anyway, then the guy pointed some things out...while playing it through again...
I saw Syriana yesterday, and while I am in no way claiming to understand it - I was utterly confused for 1/3 of the time - I did enjoy it, and thought it was fantastic. The cinematography has class written all over it - really naturalistic camera work. The script is jolly fast paced, it doesn't linger on anything but it still feels sedate.It truly is blink-and-you-miss it for major plot points. The screen never tugs at your emotions. Someone dies, someone gets hurt, bad things happen - but the music doesn't swell and it just lets you react naturally. And then it moves on to something else. The music is very good though - apart from the inclusion of a noise from the Donnie Darko soundtrack. It's a mix of pounding bass, Arabic drumming, entirely suitable for the understated tale they're trying to tell. The acting is ordinary in a good way - all the characters have superfluous families, little plotlets that are never expanded on. The film wastes no time on reminding you what's going on or even showing the characters travel from one place to another - you've got to be awake, and you've probably got to watch it more than once. It's remarkable that big companies keep going for written-by-an-idiot-monkey plots. What with their zeal for profit, I'm amazed they haven't realised clever storylines compell watchers to buy the dvd or visit the cinema more than once.
All in all, it's not one to watch when drunk or dozy, but even if it's confusing you can't help but admire the excellent work up there on screen.
That was the afternoon. And then in the evening we watched The Wicker Man. This is purely because I want to be able to march around vocally complaining about the remake. I would have done it anyway, but it feels more valid if I've actually seen the original...
That too was good - although I defy you not to think of Balamory when copper Howie first comes to Summerisle. I'd also liken the too-happy, creepy inhabitants to the Village in The Prisoner. Howie is very much like Holly Martins in The Third Man, entirely out of his depth - a devout Christian in a community of Pagans, who really needs a few more lessons in guile. The script is excellent ("They do so love their divinity lessons" is the dry comment on watching naked girls leap over a bonfire between standing stones) and the plot quietly gripping. Even if you know what's going to happen. Which most people now probably do. My one criticism would be the negative pagan stereotype - this film is probably responsible for a fair number of mistakes regarding neo-celtic culture - and this hardly dampens your enjoyment unless you are, of course, a neo-pagan in which case try not to be too offended.
I'd recommend it to music fans as well - there are Clannady bits, and the Medieval Babes covered one of of the tracks. The best song is definitely the one Britt Ekland's character sings while...er...that's not the reason I like it, I hope you understand...
I've got the afternoon pretty much off, and I intend to spend my time profitably watching Some Like it Hot in a free room...
Films I'm looking forward to...
Saturday, September 16, 2006
SALE AT WOOLWORTHS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Absolutely worth the exclamation marks; Dad came home with The Sting, Usual Suspects, Syriana, Spy Game and a Genesis dvd. That is one exciting pile!
Having gone slightly miserable after a week's deprivation of films, I finally decided to remedy it by setting my alarm clock for 6:30 and getting half of L.A. Confidential in before school. Which was great, up until the point I was too dozy to remember what day it was and got dropped off in the wrong place, resulting in a 10 minute walk. Not so good...
On the other hand, at the end of that walk was my film studies class which today revolved around staring at this for 15 minutes. We were doing posters, see? We had to read things into them - one of the guys in the class described it as "very rock and roll", which I thought was a fab description.
Unfortunately we then did a less-good poster. This is actually a vast improvement on the one we looked at - it doesn't have the lame taglines "The legend comes to life" and "The classic tale of conscience, conviction and something else beginning with c", and the colours don't clash as much. A totally horrible effort in every way.
And now for the main feature. For once, I'm looking forward to seeing films which haven't actually come out yet! To celebrate, I thought I'd list them here in case it doesn't happen again!
17 The Departed - looks kinda interesting...
16 American Gangster - its at the bottom because I've only just heard of it, and beyond the fact Ridley Scott is directing I don't really know much more.
15 Grindhouse - yay new Tarantino film for me to complain about not having seen!
14 The Prestige - starring Michael Caine, it's about a battle between two rival magicians in Victorian-ish London. The trailer is somewhat lousy, but I am curious. And it starrs Christian Bale, spouting a mean tash...and I've a friend who adores Hugh Jackman, so we'll probably go...
13 Pathfinder - OK, this is the plot as far as I can remember. There's a Viking who is rescued and brought up by Red Indians. When the Indians and Vikings start fighting, he's got to choose between his true family and the people he has grown to love. And the love interest is a girl called Starfire. High art it ain't, in fact it's bound to be awful...
12 Alatriste - I've a history of throwing wobblies when bumping into actors I've seen in something great in something else. In some cases, I flatly refuse to watch things. This may be one of them. Or it may be not - I don't know, wait till the time comes. Anyway, it seems ok.
11 The Fountain - Friend-who-likes-Hugh wants to see this too, and I'll admit I'm intrigued.
10 Southland Tales - I've heard this isn't very good. Does it matter? Of course not! Still wanna see it anyway...
9 DOA: Dead or Alive - secret tournament of expert fighters takes place on mysterious island? Count me in! This is the last "it's going to be awfuls", honest. And I am anticipating lots of scantily clad females kicking ass, but I kinda fell in love with the teaser...I think it was the chick in purple with purple hair which did it. Mary Sue alert! It's Charlie's Angels meets Hero...
8 Batman: the Dark Knight - more Gary Oldman please. If this is the same quality as the first one, then I'm all eyes...
7 The Assasination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford - wow, uber-spoiler name of all time, and not one for the verbally challenged. a) it's a western. I thought they didn't make westerns any more?! Not complaining... b) it's got Brad Pitt in it.
6 Pan's Labyrinth. Thishas me written all over it. Hopefully it'll be like Brother's Grimm without the rubbish bits.
5 Black Dahlia - fell in love with the poster - I cut it out from the back page of the Culture and it's now on my bedroom wall. I calmed down after seeing the trailer, which was disappointing, but I'm still looking forward to it. I found a curious James Ellroy quote about L.A. Confidential - "[the actors]...they don't look like I imagined them, but they are now indelibly my people." While on the subject of James Ellroy, I took The Cold Six Thousand out of the library - and put it back three days later. I simply could not get to grips with his style resulting in serious confusion, stumbling over slang.
4 Lady in the Water - it's not reaally new, but it still hasn't come to our cinema and it is recent.
3 Tideland - Terry Gilliam makes new film!!!!!! It's so small and arty our cinema won't touch it!!!!!!!!!!! It'd better be out on DVD in time for my birthday!!!!!!
2 Hot Fuzz - Aside from nos 4 and 1, this is the only one I'll be seriously disappointed if it's rubbish. Possibly because a lot of the ones at the bottom I already know are going to be rubbish. But please, in the name of Orson Welles, let this be good! The title is the campest thing ever, and Simon Pegg's costume cracks me up. I can't wait!
...aaaand finally...drumroll...
1 The Hobbit! - yeh I know it's not certain news yet, don't you dare rain on my parade! The word on the street is MGM has the rights, New Line are going to distribute and PJ's up to direct! Though he claims he wants nothing to do with it. Well, that shaky and not too reliable titbit is way enough for me...
Absolutely worth the exclamation marks; Dad came home with The Sting, Usual Suspects, Syriana, Spy Game and a Genesis dvd. That is one exciting pile!
Having gone slightly miserable after a week's deprivation of films, I finally decided to remedy it by setting my alarm clock for 6:30 and getting half of L.A. Confidential in before school. Which was great, up until the point I was too dozy to remember what day it was and got dropped off in the wrong place, resulting in a 10 minute walk. Not so good...
On the other hand, at the end of that walk was my film studies class which today revolved around staring at this for 15 minutes. We were doing posters, see? We had to read things into them - one of the guys in the class described it as "very rock and roll", which I thought was a fab description.
Unfortunately we then did a less-good poster. This is actually a vast improvement on the one we looked at - it doesn't have the lame taglines "The legend comes to life" and "The classic tale of conscience, conviction and something else beginning with c", and the colours don't clash as much. A totally horrible effort in every way.
And now for the main feature. For once, I'm looking forward to seeing films which haven't actually come out yet! To celebrate, I thought I'd list them here in case it doesn't happen again!
17 The Departed - looks kinda interesting...
16 American Gangster - its at the bottom because I've only just heard of it, and beyond the fact Ridley Scott is directing I don't really know much more.
15 Grindhouse - yay new Tarantino film for me to complain about not having seen!
14 The Prestige - starring Michael Caine, it's about a battle between two rival magicians in Victorian-ish London. The trailer is somewhat lousy, but I am curious. And it starrs Christian Bale, spouting a mean tash...and I've a friend who adores Hugh Jackman, so we'll probably go...
13 Pathfinder - OK, this is the plot as far as I can remember. There's a Viking who is rescued and brought up by Red Indians. When the Indians and Vikings start fighting, he's got to choose between his true family and the people he has grown to love. And the love interest is a girl called Starfire. High art it ain't, in fact it's bound to be awful...
12 Alatriste - I've a history of throwing wobblies when bumping into actors I've seen in something great in something else. In some cases, I flatly refuse to watch things. This may be one of them. Or it may be not - I don't know, wait till the time comes. Anyway, it seems ok.
11 The Fountain - Friend-who-likes-Hugh wants to see this too, and I'll admit I'm intrigued.
10 Southland Tales - I've heard this isn't very good. Does it matter? Of course not! Still wanna see it anyway...
9 DOA: Dead or Alive - secret tournament of expert fighters takes place on mysterious island? Count me in! This is the last "it's going to be awfuls", honest. And I am anticipating lots of scantily clad females kicking ass, but I kinda fell in love with the teaser...I think it was the chick in purple with purple hair which did it. Mary Sue alert! It's Charlie's Angels meets Hero...
8 Batman: the Dark Knight - more Gary Oldman please. If this is the same quality as the first one, then I'm all eyes...
7 The Assasination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford - wow, uber-spoiler name of all time, and not one for the verbally challenged. a) it's a western. I thought they didn't make westerns any more?! Not complaining... b) it's got Brad Pitt in it.
6 Pan's Labyrinth. Thishas me written all over it. Hopefully it'll be like Brother's Grimm without the rubbish bits.
5 Black Dahlia - fell in love with the poster - I cut it out from the back page of the Culture and it's now on my bedroom wall. I calmed down after seeing the trailer, which was disappointing, but I'm still looking forward to it. I found a curious James Ellroy quote about L.A. Confidential - "[the actors]...they don't look like I imagined them, but they are now indelibly my people." While on the subject of James Ellroy, I took The Cold Six Thousand out of the library - and put it back three days later. I simply could not get to grips with his style resulting in serious confusion, stumbling over slang.
4 Lady in the Water - it's not reaally new, but it still hasn't come to our cinema and it is recent.
3 Tideland - Terry Gilliam makes new film!!!!!! It's so small and arty our cinema won't touch it!!!!!!!!!!! It'd better be out on DVD in time for my birthday!!!!!!
2 Hot Fuzz - Aside from nos 4 and 1, this is the only one I'll be seriously disappointed if it's rubbish. Possibly because a lot of the ones at the bottom I already know are going to be rubbish. But please, in the name of Orson Welles, let this be good! The title is the campest thing ever, and Simon Pegg's costume cracks me up. I can't wait!
...aaaand finally...drumroll...
1 The Hobbit! - yeh I know it's not certain news yet, don't you dare rain on my parade! The word on the street is MGM has the rights, New Line are going to distribute and PJ's up to direct! Though he claims he wants nothing to do with it. Well, that shaky and not too reliable titbit is way enough for me...
Final word: done a bit of counting up. Do you know I've seen R+G 9 times at least this year? That's phenominal! I never watch films more than twice a year - I don't think I've even seen Zulu 9 times!
A little more film education
Friday, September 08, 2006
Today we started on sound in Film Studies, which was pretty interesting. We started off with diegetic/non diegetic sound. We saw a clip from Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, a clip which in no way inspired me to watch any more. You know that thing when a character says something dramatic, strides off and then his partner makes a remark, character turns back and says something else even more dramatic before striding some more? Well we watched a scene between the captain and his first mate, and this happened five times in a row - no fooling.
Anyway, for those of you curious and dim enough not to know what those long words meant, diegetic sound is sound within the movie world - though not necessarily on screen. People talking, birds tweeting, cars passing...whereas non-diegetic is anything the characters can't hear, such as voiceover or music. Though not music from a radio. You mean to tell me you didn't know that? Well my my...shame on you...
The real dielemma comes when dealing with, eg, imaginary friends in imaginary friend movies (I could name some, but I've a spoiler free policy) which only some people can hear...or what about the accompaniment in musicals, like Moulin Rouge?
This made me particularly cheery because we watched a bit of Once Upon a Time in the West's opening - the dialogue-free opening until the train turned up. Which was great, but then I wanted to see the rest of the scene...
I was trying to untangle the infamous baptism montage in the Godfather earlier, which was a thorough mess. The music is obviously non-diegetic, but the priest's voice flickers between both depending on the screen and it's all too confusing...this one's easier...
So that's a wuvvy bit of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and it shows off the types of sound quite nicely - they chat (diegetic sound) and then the music kicks in, which I jolly hope they can't hear (non-diegetic sound). The scene I really wanted to find was the prologue from Fellowship of the Ring but unfortunately I wasn't prepared to wade through 400 pages of fan videos and bad parodies on youtube to find it. But that's an interesting one, with voiceover, music and diegetic sound - concurrent or consecutive.
We also learnt about sound bridges, which I'd never noticed before cos they're kinda dull. That's when you hear the sound of dogs barking a split second before you see the dogs on screen - it links scenes together, and is pretty clever but not as fun as the final thing we learnt - that's parallel and contrapuntal sound.
Parallel music is basically when the images and the music match up. Contrapuntal is when it doesn't. The clip above is 100% parallel music - it's a cheery, sunny scene accompanied by the most affable music imaginable. Whereas, for example, if somebody should choose to torture a policeman to, say, "Stuck in the Middle with You" *cough*, that would be contrapuntal music. Savvy? Now I'm pretty sure that clip would be relitavely easy to find, but I probably shouldn't seeing as it's probably cheating...though I already know what happens...and having seen half of it...(it was on one of these "top 200 scary moments" things; it also was the point at which I got sent out of the room and so the two seconds of knife not yet connecting with ear have engraven themselves rather deep. After all, you never forget a film you see half of...) but debate aside I'm not going to find it - instead, here's a bit from Shaun of the Dead which is also pretty much spoiler free, though the very brief flashes of zombie may freak some people out:
Zombies! Scary! Terror! Queen! That is the very essence of the contrapuntal soundtrack...now I think of it, lots of great scenes are made great by the odd but fitting choice of music. My review of The Third Man suffered greatly from the lack of the word contrapuntal - but now I can use it, may I add the slightly odd contrast of cheery zither/bleak noir works great.
My friend was pretty happy too, because they showed us a clip from Trainspotting, when he's preparing to quit heroin to the sounds of Carmen, and she loves it. So all in all, all was well.
The joy of film studies is it teaches you things you already know in principle; it just informs you that some clever chap has invented a long word for it.
In other news, a jolly nice person posted links to www.garyoldman.info on my friendly neighbourhood Rosencrantz and Guildenstern site (look, it's an active community of people just about as obsessed as I am (I have over 600 icons on my system...so in love...); I can overlook the slash side. Not that I mind, it's just...I'm a fan of the "they don't exist" school, called into existence and given no time for anything else. There's something not right about the way they communicate - they don't even articulate their friendship, let alone anything else. Plus...it's much sweeter when it's only implied...*sighs*...), in particular the interviews from the R+G dvd. Because they're jolly hard to get hold of, my copy's actually Dutch and came without extras. Woes! Anyway, here's the most interesting things gleaned from that:
--> originally, the interchangable sweethearts were actually cast the other way around - which is a hell of a mindwarp. I pride myself on my imagination, my unfailing ability to add bungee jumpers to the Argonath and actually nudge Robert Redford into the Godfather (which only a series of lucky accidents prevented him from being in). Well this is one scenario I simply cannot visualise, and believe me that's unusual. Still, interesting, eh?
--> To complicate things more, he adds he thinks he could have played Hamlet pretty well...
--> they had such a lot of fun that they did lots of rehersals. In their spare time as well. And sometimes when they were just hanging out at the pub etc. And sometimes when they'd actually already shot the scene, just because it was such fun. OK, so you guys might not quite sympathise with how utterly wonderful this is, but I certainly think it is very sweet...
In fact that's just about it...PS visit the Film Experience Blog, I just found it today and it's a nice site...
Anyway, for those of you curious and dim enough not to know what those long words meant, diegetic sound is sound within the movie world - though not necessarily on screen. People talking, birds tweeting, cars passing...whereas non-diegetic is anything the characters can't hear, such as voiceover or music. Though not music from a radio. You mean to tell me you didn't know that? Well my my...shame on you...
The real dielemma comes when dealing with, eg, imaginary friends in imaginary friend movies (I could name some, but I've a spoiler free policy) which only some people can hear...or what about the accompaniment in musicals, like Moulin Rouge?
This made me particularly cheery because we watched a bit of Once Upon a Time in the West's opening - the dialogue-free opening until the train turned up. Which was great, but then I wanted to see the rest of the scene...
I was trying to untangle the infamous baptism montage in the Godfather earlier, which was a thorough mess. The music is obviously non-diegetic, but the priest's voice flickers between both depending on the screen and it's all too confusing...this one's easier...
So that's a wuvvy bit of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and it shows off the types of sound quite nicely - they chat (diegetic sound) and then the music kicks in, which I jolly hope they can't hear (non-diegetic sound). The scene I really wanted to find was the prologue from Fellowship of the Ring but unfortunately I wasn't prepared to wade through 400 pages of fan videos and bad parodies on youtube to find it. But that's an interesting one, with voiceover, music and diegetic sound - concurrent or consecutive.
We also learnt about sound bridges, which I'd never noticed before cos they're kinda dull. That's when you hear the sound of dogs barking a split second before you see the dogs on screen - it links scenes together, and is pretty clever but not as fun as the final thing we learnt - that's parallel and contrapuntal sound.
Parallel music is basically when the images and the music match up. Contrapuntal is when it doesn't. The clip above is 100% parallel music - it's a cheery, sunny scene accompanied by the most affable music imaginable. Whereas, for example, if somebody should choose to torture a policeman to, say, "Stuck in the Middle with You" *cough*, that would be contrapuntal music. Savvy? Now I'm pretty sure that clip would be relitavely easy to find, but I probably shouldn't seeing as it's probably cheating...though I already know what happens...and having seen half of it...(it was on one of these "top 200 scary moments" things; it also was the point at which I got sent out of the room and so the two seconds of knife not yet connecting with ear have engraven themselves rather deep. After all, you never forget a film you see half of...) but debate aside I'm not going to find it - instead, here's a bit from Shaun of the Dead which is also pretty much spoiler free, though the very brief flashes of zombie may freak some people out:
Zombies! Scary! Terror! Queen! That is the very essence of the contrapuntal soundtrack...now I think of it, lots of great scenes are made great by the odd but fitting choice of music. My review of The Third Man suffered greatly from the lack of the word contrapuntal - but now I can use it, may I add the slightly odd contrast of cheery zither/bleak noir works great.
My friend was pretty happy too, because they showed us a clip from Trainspotting, when he's preparing to quit heroin to the sounds of Carmen, and she loves it. So all in all, all was well.
The joy of film studies is it teaches you things you already know in principle; it just informs you that some clever chap has invented a long word for it.
In other news, a jolly nice person posted links to www.garyoldman.info on my friendly neighbourhood Rosencrantz and Guildenstern site (look, it's an active community of people just about as obsessed as I am (I have over 600 icons on my system...so in love...); I can overlook the slash side. Not that I mind, it's just...I'm a fan of the "they don't exist" school, called into existence and given no time for anything else. There's something not right about the way they communicate - they don't even articulate their friendship, let alone anything else. Plus...it's much sweeter when it's only implied...*sighs*...), in particular the interviews from the R+G dvd. Because they're jolly hard to get hold of, my copy's actually Dutch and came without extras. Woes! Anyway, here's the most interesting things gleaned from that:
--> originally, the interchangable sweethearts were actually cast the other way around - which is a hell of a mindwarp. I pride myself on my imagination, my unfailing ability to add bungee jumpers to the Argonath and actually nudge Robert Redford into the Godfather (which only a series of lucky accidents prevented him from being in). Well this is one scenario I simply cannot visualise, and believe me that's unusual. Still, interesting, eh?
--> To complicate things more, he adds he thinks he could have played Hamlet pretty well...
--> they had such a lot of fun that they did lots of rehersals. In their spare time as well. And sometimes when they were just hanging out at the pub etc. And sometimes when they'd actually already shot the scene, just because it was such fun. OK, so you guys might not quite sympathise with how utterly wonderful this is, but I certainly think it is very sweet...
In fact that's just about it...PS visit the Film Experience Blog, I just found it today and it's a nice site...
Someday you're gonna kill ten-thousand in one of these firetraps...
Saturday, August 26, 2006
There are 2 reasons why Towering Inferno hasn't been on TV for 5 years - they're tall, American and no longer standing. Comparisons are inevitable, and let me preface this by saying it's not an easy watch by any means. It's gonna be a long time before burning buildings and helpless civilians in any way equates to entertainment. I've no personal connections to the attacks whatsoever, and I found it pretty upsetting in places. It really does take you back - and if you can claim anything closer than simply being a horrified TV-bystander I'd say definitely avoid. As much as I tried not to think about it, it's impossible at times (PS imdb trivia fascinating - I love the ratio of sets built to sets standing by the end - just don't dwell on the day filming wrapped, or where they got their inspiration.)
The justification is probably that with Hollywood making films like United 93 and World Trade Center, no one can really object. Hmmm, yes and no. No because they didn't stop The Two Towers (about a fake war) during a real war, and if people are facing up to these things in cinema then what have we to fear for a film entirely fictional. Yes too though - the current offerings about the actual event are very aware of the people involved, so the subject will be handled with careful tact and sensitivity. Even a touching dedication to brave firefighters everywhere can't excuse the melodramatic music and a poster like this.
Not that I'm saying they shouldn't have shown it. Obvious connections aside it's a smashing film - about as good as disaster movies ever are. In general, I don't like them. It's beyond simple to get caught up in the plight of the survivors, it takes no skill at all - and there's an awful tedium about them. Fifteen minutes of introducing the large cast (pregnant women, film stars, claustrophobic people, reluctant heroes etc) and laying imaginary bets on their survival. Another 15 minutes of "suspense" i.e. waiting for the Inferno. And then the film gets started. The characters are so textbook,why bother introducing them - start from the point our hero realises there's a fire. Jump straight into the action for once! Was anybody surprised when that plane last week was overrun with poisonous snakes? Thought not...No other genre is so traintracked. You know the kissing couple are going to get it. You know the children are going to survive. Nasty, greedy people who try to save themselves first will be got by some obscure disaster-movie karma. Although I admit it's normally more of a gamble as to whether the animals survive. As for the fire itself - it's all Paul Newman's fault. Why? HE WAS RESIGNING! Never resign! Ever! They never learn...final sneer at the plot. There's a family. The mommy is deaf. The little boy always listens to loud music and the cute blonde girl translates the sign language. I just felt the need to comment on that.
So don't come expecting anything great. However this did feel a cut above the average.
Paul Newman, the architect who designed the place was our everyman-hero-guy, and Steve McQueen, firefighter with an indomitable gaze was the heroic-hero-guy. They were probably equally good, I'm not really brave enough to get involved (see note on Channel 4 below). All I'll say is this - the architect had 1/3 of a load of guilt for the whole affair, and you can really tell. And if there's anything I go for in a character it's obvious remorse, or obvious lack of it - I really sympathised with him. As for the fire fighter, he reminded me of when Eric Bana's character explained why he kept going back in on those trucks to fight in Black Hawk Down. He wasn't given as much to do, and he had less chance to stretch his acting range, but I'm sure he's just as good (see note on Channel 4 below).
We watched it on TV, and they cut bits. I'm just commenting that me parents noticed parts missing.
There are hundreds of wonderful moments - notably OJ Simpson rescuing a cat, a woman fretting her daughter doesn't know where the safety deposit box key is kept, a shadow of a tear on a guy's face which I just spotted, a brief shot of someone praying and a waiter serving up extravagant ice-cream-chocolate-marshmallow indulgences for a pair of frightened children. Pretty understated in places - it could have been far more melodramatic.
All in all, this is pretty much as good as they come, with some suitably terrified chorus acting and ace special effects. But (and it's a big butt, like mine...) you really cannot escape the connection between the real World Trade Center, especially as that's what the building in the movie was based on. 'tis a pity (sorry, that sounded really insensitive. Pity as in at the veeery bottom of the list of reasons why said event was bad) as there will be a lot of people who'll find themselves unable to watch this. If you think you may be one of them, give it a miss entirely.
On a personal note - a complaint to Channel 4. The lady introduced the film as "Towering Inferno starring Steve McQueen". If you know anything about the history of the film - the squabbles, Steve insisting 12 extra lines be added to his script to match Paul Newman's, artfully - then you can see why that's an unforgivable gaffe; Mr Newman's lawyers are probably on the phone this very minute.
The justification is probably that with Hollywood making films like United 93 and World Trade Center, no one can really object. Hmmm, yes and no. No because they didn't stop The Two Towers (about a fake war) during a real war, and if people are facing up to these things in cinema then what have we to fear for a film entirely fictional. Yes too though - the current offerings about the actual event are very aware of the people involved, so the subject will be handled with careful tact and sensitivity. Even a touching dedication to brave firefighters everywhere can't excuse the melodramatic music and a poster like this.
Not that I'm saying they shouldn't have shown it. Obvious connections aside it's a smashing film - about as good as disaster movies ever are. In general, I don't like them. It's beyond simple to get caught up in the plight of the survivors, it takes no skill at all - and there's an awful tedium about them. Fifteen minutes of introducing the large cast (pregnant women, film stars, claustrophobic people, reluctant heroes etc) and laying imaginary bets on their survival. Another 15 minutes of "suspense" i.e. waiting for the Inferno. And then the film gets started. The characters are so textbook,why bother introducing them - start from the point our hero realises there's a fire. Jump straight into the action for once! Was anybody surprised when that plane last week was overrun with poisonous snakes? Thought not...No other genre is so traintracked. You know the kissing couple are going to get it. You know the children are going to survive. Nasty, greedy people who try to save themselves first will be got by some obscure disaster-movie karma. Although I admit it's normally more of a gamble as to whether the animals survive. As for the fire itself - it's all Paul Newman's fault. Why? HE WAS RESIGNING! Never resign! Ever! They never learn...final sneer at the plot. There's a family. The mommy is deaf. The little boy always listens to loud music and the cute blonde girl translates the sign language. I just felt the need to comment on that.
So don't come expecting anything great. However this did feel a cut above the average.
Paul Newman, the architect who designed the place was our everyman-hero-guy, and Steve McQueen, firefighter with an indomitable gaze was the heroic-hero-guy. They were probably equally good, I'm not really brave enough to get involved (see note on Channel 4 below). All I'll say is this - the architect had 1/3 of a load of guilt for the whole affair, and you can really tell. And if there's anything I go for in a character it's obvious remorse, or obvious lack of it - I really sympathised with him. As for the fire fighter, he reminded me of when Eric Bana's character explained why he kept going back in on those trucks to fight in Black Hawk Down. He wasn't given as much to do, and he had less chance to stretch his acting range, but I'm sure he's just as good (see note on Channel 4 below).
We watched it on TV, and they cut bits. I'm just commenting that me parents noticed parts missing.
There are hundreds of wonderful moments - notably OJ Simpson rescuing a cat, a woman fretting her daughter doesn't know where the safety deposit box key is kept, a shadow of a tear on a guy's face which I just spotted, a brief shot of someone praying and a waiter serving up extravagant ice-cream-chocolate-marshmallow indulgences for a pair of frightened children. Pretty understated in places - it could have been far more melodramatic.
All in all, this is pretty much as good as they come, with some suitably terrified chorus acting and ace special effects. But (and it's a big butt, like mine...) you really cannot escape the connection between the real World Trade Center, especially as that's what the building in the movie was based on. 'tis a pity (sorry, that sounded really insensitive. Pity as in at the veeery bottom of the list of reasons why said event was bad) as there will be a lot of people who'll find themselves unable to watch this. If you think you may be one of them, give it a miss entirely.
On a personal note - a complaint to Channel 4. The lady introduced the film as "Towering Inferno starring Steve McQueen". If you know anything about the history of the film - the squabbles, Steve insisting 12 extra lines be added to his script to match Paul Newman's, artfully - then you can see why that's an unforgivable gaffe; Mr Newman's lawyers are probably on the phone this very minute.
"This is the one. This is the one I'll be remembered for."
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
Last night I had a fantastic dream. Remember the lovely shot from R+GaD I found? Well - I dreamed I saw the scene it had been taken from. It was wonderful! I also, for a change, dreamed I was watching The Usual Suspects - although I jolly well hope the film is a tad more logical than that. When I say it meant no sense, I mean it in a Hitler-reincarnating, sand dunes, tricycles and bear costumes way. Though Gabriel Byrne, as I dreamed him, was pretty good looking.
And now for the review. It's one of those reviews where I'm still slightly overbowled, and hence my critical powers are...just forgive me if this comes out like the garbled rantings of a nutty mind.
Ed - I direct, produce, write and act.
Kathy - Nobody does all that...
Ed - Two people do. Me and Orson Welles.
Oh the irony. Orson Welles, "best director ever" (reputedly, as I've never seen any of his films), idolised by Edward D. Wood Jr. "worst director" (ditto) in this wonderful biopic, the title of today's post, his awestruck and loving comment about his masterpiece, Plan 9 from Outer Space, reputed worst film ever.
Ed himself is great! He has this naive love of the movies, he really deserves to do well through sheer enthusiasm. He mouths along to the actors, and you do get the feeling he'd do anything for his films. The way his face falls when Criswell tells him it's all an act...Plus, he has a great pair of sunglasses. He gradually picks up a gang of oddballs and misfits (washed up stars, Swedish wrestlers, looney fake psychics) who help him out. Most of all, I was really touched by Ed and Bela's friendship. I thought it was so sweet. Even though it looks a bit like he was exploiting Bela's fame to get his film made, he genuinely did want to make a hit to save his friend.
Apart from Danny Elfman's absence, from the first frame the audience are plopped straight back into Burton-ville - creaky houses, rain, tombstones, Johnny Depp...it's a feeling that actually lessens during the film, though perhaps I just stopped noticing it. It's very well done, though if you thought Tim Burton had a thing for making wacky films...well, you ain't seen nothing yet. The whole thing is done in the style of a bad B-movie - black and white, lightning all the time - it's wonderful.
You know, when Ed first mentioned the transvestite thing to the producer, I thought he was lying to get the job. Oh no...and when I say this film is played totally straight, I mean it. There's not a single "joke" in the traditional sense. How it managed to be so hilarious I don't know. There are literally too many great laughs to count.
Pretty much everyone in here is worth a mention. Both blonde, angora-wearing girlfriends are great in their own way; Bill Murray sparkles (literally) in the few scenes he's given; and I've mentioned Bela, right?
I felt a lot of this film very personally. I've been feeling miserable about my own film career (or lack thereof) for the last few days and this...well, touched a nerve. Especially when my father mentioned "this lot makes your crew look professional" during the octopus sequence* That may be why I was crying at the end. Not crying with laughter, crying and laughing simultaneously (along with exclaiming "oh my God I don't believe it..." in disbelief.)
Best scene? Oh, Criswell's introduction. Possibly. Or the scene where a colour blind assistant in this black and white movie is asked to pick between a red and green dress. The running angora joke. The "isn't he dead?" joke. You can't really single one bit out. I've been overcome with the urge just to post quotes from imdb.
There are a lot of people who won't like this film. They'll get offended by the cross-dressing, they won't find the jokes funny, they don't know enough about the film industry. I'm not at all surprised it bombed at the box office. It just screams "cult classic". But I loved it and I'm sure there are others who'll adore it's entirely mad pot pourri of loons.
This is the third film this year I haven't dared to rate, along with Withnail & I and Monsoon Wedding. Because you simply can't judge them by "normal" standards.
What Matrix Persona Are You?
You are Neo, from "The Matrix." You display a perfect fusion of heroism and compassion.
Take this quiz!
Final word: until yesterday, I was the only person of my age in the country who did not know how many days until the results came out, and was not going to fret about it. Was - it's six days, and I am now petrified for a good result. And yeh, it's not out of concern for my future career (seeing as [insert famous director] never needed great GSCEs) - how did you guess. The target is 5 As and 5 A*s, not including art in which I can get whatever I like. The reward? This. Which is why I am now counting the MINUTES until next Thursday, and positively killing myself from anxiety.
*if you missed the significance of that, me and my friends re-shot Fellowship of the Ring over the last four years. It's actually pretty darn good to say we had a cast+crew of seven (one of which never turned up on set, one of which had a fit if she had to act, and the rest of which just weren't very good...), no mountains, rivers or armies. Anyway, that particular moment was a sore choice to pick on as well. Five words: The Watcher in the Water. Stuffed green tights and some very selective shots. Watching movie career sink into pool like undead octopus...
And now for the review. It's one of those reviews where I'm still slightly overbowled, and hence my critical powers are...just forgive me if this comes out like the garbled rantings of a nutty mind.
Ed Wood
Ed - I direct, produce, write and act.
Kathy - Nobody does all that...
Ed - Two people do. Me and Orson Welles.
Oh the irony. Orson Welles, "best director ever" (reputedly, as I've never seen any of his films), idolised by Edward D. Wood Jr. "worst director" (ditto) in this wonderful biopic, the title of today's post, his awestruck and loving comment about his masterpiece, Plan 9 from Outer Space, reputed worst film ever.
Ed himself is great! He has this naive love of the movies, he really deserves to do well through sheer enthusiasm. He mouths along to the actors, and you do get the feeling he'd do anything for his films. The way his face falls when Criswell tells him it's all an act...Plus, he has a great pair of sunglasses. He gradually picks up a gang of oddballs and misfits (washed up stars, Swedish wrestlers, looney fake psychics) who help him out. Most of all, I was really touched by Ed and Bela's friendship. I thought it was so sweet. Even though it looks a bit like he was exploiting Bela's fame to get his film made, he genuinely did want to make a hit to save his friend.
Apart from Danny Elfman's absence, from the first frame the audience are plopped straight back into Burton-ville - creaky houses, rain, tombstones, Johnny Depp...it's a feeling that actually lessens during the film, though perhaps I just stopped noticing it. It's very well done, though if you thought Tim Burton had a thing for making wacky films...well, you ain't seen nothing yet. The whole thing is done in the style of a bad B-movie - black and white, lightning all the time - it's wonderful.
You know, when Ed first mentioned the transvestite thing to the producer, I thought he was lying to get the job. Oh no...and when I say this film is played totally straight, I mean it. There's not a single "joke" in the traditional sense. How it managed to be so hilarious I don't know. There are literally too many great laughs to count.
Pretty much everyone in here is worth a mention. Both blonde, angora-wearing girlfriends are great in their own way; Bill Murray sparkles (literally) in the few scenes he's given; and I've mentioned Bela, right?
I felt a lot of this film very personally. I've been feeling miserable about my own film career (or lack thereof) for the last few days and this...well, touched a nerve. Especially when my father mentioned "this lot makes your crew look professional" during the octopus sequence* That may be why I was crying at the end. Not crying with laughter, crying and laughing simultaneously (along with exclaiming "oh my God I don't believe it..." in disbelief.)
Best scene? Oh, Criswell's introduction. Possibly. Or the scene where a colour blind assistant in this black and white movie is asked to pick between a red and green dress. The running angora joke. The "isn't he dead?" joke. You can't really single one bit out. I've been overcome with the urge just to post quotes from imdb.
There are a lot of people who won't like this film. They'll get offended by the cross-dressing, they won't find the jokes funny, they don't know enough about the film industry. I'm not at all surprised it bombed at the box office. It just screams "cult classic". But I loved it and I'm sure there are others who'll adore it's entirely mad pot pourri of loons.
This is the third film this year I haven't dared to rate, along with Withnail & I and Monsoon Wedding. Because you simply can't judge them by "normal" standards.
What Matrix Persona Are You?
You are Neo, from "The Matrix." You display a perfect fusion of heroism and compassion.
Take this quiz!
Final word: until yesterday, I was the only person of my age in the country who did not know how many days until the results came out, and was not going to fret about it. Was - it's six days, and I am now petrified for a good result. And yeh, it's not out of concern for my future career (seeing as [insert famous director] never needed great GSCEs) - how did you guess. The target is 5 As and 5 A*s, not including art in which I can get whatever I like. The reward? This. Which is why I am now counting the MINUTES until next Thursday, and positively killing myself from anxiety.
*if you missed the significance of that, me and my friends re-shot Fellowship of the Ring over the last four years. It's actually pretty darn good to say we had a cast+crew of seven (one of which never turned up on set, one of which had a fit if she had to act, and the rest of which just weren't very good...), no mountains, rivers or armies. Anyway, that particular moment was a sore choice to pick on as well. Five words: The Watcher in the Water. Stuffed green tights and some very selective shots. Watching movie career sink into pool like undead octopus...
Cult Movie Rant 2: the Superflous and Badly Spelt Sequel
Friday, July 28, 2006
The debate continues. The current approach in the fight to prove Star Wars is not a cult film is a Venn diagram. For the uninformed, forgetful or just plain dim, a Venn diagram contains three overlapping circles, each with a bit of criteria. So films in the middle will agree with all three. You'll get the hang of it, my description is lame.
Here are the three circles:
Twelve Monkeys factor - odd, dark, mind bending, confusing, disturbing or plain bad taste. If it feels like a cult film. Also known as the films my mum didn't like.
Blade Runner factor - died at the box office, resurrected through video or midnight showings. Also applies to taccyness, floppyness, so bad-it's-good-ness, cheapness, ever-so-slightly-rubbishness,badly over budget-ness, smallness or indieness. Also known as no-blockbusters.
Star Trek factor - If it's quotable, causes dressing up or drinking games, inspires devotion and leads people to claim "Jedi" as a religion on public census records.
Yup, you spotted it. Star Wars does fit into one of the catagories. Whatever. The point of the venn diagram is this - everyone's definition of cult is different (it's just mine happens to be right...) but on the diagram all factors are equalled out, and thus the more culty the film, the more circles it'll be in. Savvy? For example, Once Upon a Time in the West died at the cinema and was resurrected on video, but nobody's claiming that as cult (see below)
So the question you are doubtless all asking - What DOES fit into the circles. Well, let's have a look....
Little red spots indicate films I haven't actually seen, so may be wrong about. RHPS stands for the Rocky Horror Picture Show, BR is Blade Runner, R+G is Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, DD's Donnie Darko and W+I is Withnail & I. It's all objective anyway. Or subjective. One or the other - I know what I mean. If I gave this challenge to somebody else, they could get completely different results.
(You'll notice SoaP is not a cult movie. Because it's not. Hype does not equal cult, it's a virtual nemesis. Web hype created the Arctic Monkeys, and they're hardly an underground phenomenon. Yeh, it's called SoaP and guess what it's about! Ha ha! How clever! How funny! They're making a self-consciously awful movie! How post-ironic! It's not even very good at being bad, it's not half awful enough - just tediously subpar. See my review, which is a tad less harsh.)
While on that note, let me introduce you to my new best friend - The A-Z of Cult films and filmmakers, a far better book than the rough guide to cult films I reviewed last month, for several reasons. Lets start with the fact it only contained cult movies. No Godfather. No Pirates of the Carribbean. No Zulu. No Star Wars. Take that!!!!!!! Although there are one or one I disagree with - Once Upon a Time in the West...a nice touch though is it justifies its controversial decisions, such as The Matrix and Alien, which are defended pretty well.
The book is larger, but with far less entries so the films get a lot more space. Each has an entire page with a box of basic details and an extra colomn for MEMORABLE DIALOGE!!!!!!!!! Yes, an area celebrating cult quotability. OK, many of the quotes will mean very little unless you've seen the film ( I've seen Brazil several times recently, and I don't recognise all of them...), but it shows willing. Plus it adds yet more varaity to the ever-growing list of things I know about films I haven't seen.
The rest of the page is text- part synopsis, part discussion, and it's interesting even to those who haven't seen the film and mostly blissfully spoiler free! OK, not entirely. Quadrophenia, Brazil, the RHPS and a few more I've forgotten - but crucially it didn't give anything away about anything I wanted to see.
It also contains minibiographies of culty directors. I knew this to be accurate because I'd only heard of five of them. But the bit on Terry Gilliam was interesting, if erronious (the Good Omens project vanished). There's the occasional photo too, mostly black and white copies of the film poster.
And plus, another five-or-so films have piled onto my must-see list. So all in all, a good read - a book filled with films I'd never heard of, surely the final indicator that these films are truly culty.
This week has been the dolly zoom week. For those of you uninformed, thats a fun camera effect caused by walking backwards while zooming in or vice versa. It's famously used in Vertigo, and you'll also spot it in the "get off the road" scene in Fellowship of the Ring. I always keep a look out for them, cos they're cool - this week, an all time record of four. Two in Twelve Monkeys, one on Robert Redford's head in Spy Game and one during a cut scene for the Lara Croft computer game...
Finally, we need to congratulate the bright spark showing The Descent on a large screen underground. It could start a spate of location-inspired cinema. Titanic on a boat. Jaws on a beach (they actually did this last year; I didn't go). The Blair Witch Project in a dark forest. Airplane! on an, er, airplane...ok, a practical question now which possibly skirts tastelessness - do you think they'll show United 93, cos you know Hollywood never misses a trick...
Here are the three circles:
Twelve Monkeys factor - odd, dark, mind bending, confusing, disturbing or plain bad taste. If it feels like a cult film. Also known as the films my mum didn't like.
Blade Runner factor - died at the box office, resurrected through video or midnight showings. Also applies to taccyness, floppyness, so bad-it's-good-ness, cheapness, ever-so-slightly-rubbishness,badly over budget-ness, smallness or indieness. Also known as no-blockbusters.
Star Trek factor - If it's quotable, causes dressing up or drinking games, inspires devotion and leads people to claim "Jedi" as a religion on public census records.
Yup, you spotted it. Star Wars does fit into one of the catagories. Whatever. The point of the venn diagram is this - everyone's definition of cult is different (it's just mine happens to be right...) but on the diagram all factors are equalled out, and thus the more culty the film, the more circles it'll be in. Savvy? For example, Once Upon a Time in the West died at the cinema and was resurrected on video, but nobody's claiming that as cult (see below)
So the question you are doubtless all asking - What DOES fit into the circles. Well, let's have a look....
Little red spots indicate films I haven't actually seen, so may be wrong about. RHPS stands for the Rocky Horror Picture Show, BR is Blade Runner, R+G is Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, DD's Donnie Darko and W+I is Withnail & I. It's all objective anyway. Or subjective. One or the other - I know what I mean. If I gave this challenge to somebody else, they could get completely different results.
(You'll notice SoaP is not a cult movie. Because it's not. Hype does not equal cult, it's a virtual nemesis. Web hype created the Arctic Monkeys, and they're hardly an underground phenomenon. Yeh, it's called SoaP and guess what it's about! Ha ha! How clever! How funny! They're making a self-consciously awful movie! How post-ironic! It's not even very good at being bad, it's not half awful enough - just tediously subpar. See my review, which is a tad less harsh.)
While on that note, let me introduce you to my new best friend - The A-Z of Cult films and filmmakers, a far better book than the rough guide to cult films I reviewed last month, for several reasons. Lets start with the fact it only contained cult movies. No Godfather. No Pirates of the Carribbean. No Zulu. No Star Wars. Take that!!!!!!! Although there are one or one I disagree with - Once Upon a Time in the West...a nice touch though is it justifies its controversial decisions, such as The Matrix and Alien, which are defended pretty well.
The book is larger, but with far less entries so the films get a lot more space. Each has an entire page with a box of basic details and an extra colomn for MEMORABLE DIALOGE!!!!!!!!! Yes, an area celebrating cult quotability. OK, many of the quotes will mean very little unless you've seen the film ( I've seen Brazil several times recently, and I don't recognise all of them...), but it shows willing. Plus it adds yet more varaity to the ever-growing list of things I know about films I haven't seen.
The rest of the page is text- part synopsis, part discussion, and it's interesting even to those who haven't seen the film and mostly blissfully spoiler free! OK, not entirely. Quadrophenia, Brazil, the RHPS and a few more I've forgotten - but crucially it didn't give anything away about anything I wanted to see.
It also contains minibiographies of culty directors. I knew this to be accurate because I'd only heard of five of them. But the bit on Terry Gilliam was interesting, if erronious (the Good Omens project vanished). There's the occasional photo too, mostly black and white copies of the film poster.
And plus, another five-or-so films have piled onto my must-see list. So all in all, a good read - a book filled with films I'd never heard of, surely the final indicator that these films are truly culty.
This week has been the dolly zoom week. For those of you uninformed, thats a fun camera effect caused by walking backwards while zooming in or vice versa. It's famously used in Vertigo, and you'll also spot it in the "get off the road" scene in Fellowship of the Ring. I always keep a look out for them, cos they're cool - this week, an all time record of four. Two in Twelve Monkeys, one on Robert Redford's head in Spy Game and one during a cut scene for the Lara Croft computer game...
Finally, we need to congratulate the bright spark showing The Descent on a large screen underground. It could start a spate of location-inspired cinema. Titanic on a boat. Jaws on a beach (they actually did this last year; I didn't go). The Blair Witch Project in a dark forest. Airplane! on an, er, airplane...ok, a practical question now which possibly skirts tastelessness - do you think they'll show United 93, cos you know Hollywood never misses a trick...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)