Friend of BRWC and film quiz rival, Jo Mahoney text me her review of Funny People.Do you have a review you want to text me?
Email me first and I may give you my number...
Monday, August 31, 2009
Jo's Review Of Funny People
Friend of BRWC and film quiz rival, Jo Mahoney text me her review of Funny People.Do you have a review you want to text me?
Email me first and I may give you my number...
Arrested Development
Stupidly named Ted Casablanca may have gleaned some info from Teen Wolf Too's Jason Bateman about an Arrested Development feature.
Bad Boys 3 - No Need
The ever excellent Latino Review have details of Bad Boys 3, and its' writer.
"Well, it looks like Columbia wants Will Smith and Martin Lawrence to return as Mike Lowrey and Marcus Burnett for some Bay-directed car chases sometime soon, because the studio has hired Peter Craig to write a screenplay promising enough to lure back the expensive trifecta of Smith, Bay and Lawrence."
Will someone please rub Mr Bay?
"Well, it looks like Columbia wants Will Smith and Martin Lawrence to return as Mike Lowrey and Marcus Burnett for some Bay-directed car chases sometime soon, because the studio has hired Peter Craig to write a screenplay promising enough to lure back the expensive trifecta of Smith, Bay and Lawrence."
Will someone please rub Mr Bay?
The Smurfs Poster
Tim emailed me this teaser poster for The Smurfs. In CGI. Nice Scarface tagline there. Do they get chainsawed to death in a bathtub by any chance?
Did You Love The Descent?
Well, The Descent 2 is coming, and below is the trailer.
What's it about I hear you ask?
Shauna Macdonald returns as Sarah, continuing the story of 2005’s horror thriller The Descent, in which a group of young women disappear during a caving trip in the Appalachian Mountains. Emerging from the cave system alone, distraught and covered in the blood of her missing companions, Sarah is incoherent and half-wild with fear. Sceptical about her account of events and convinced Sarah’s psychosis hides far darker secrets, Sheriff Vaines (Gavan O’Herlihy) doesn’t waste time. Along with his partner Rios (Krysten Cummings), and their cave rescue team Dan (Douglas Hodge), Greg (Joshua Dallas), and Cath (Anna Skellern), Vaines forces Sarah back into the caves to help the rescuers find her friends.
Enjoy.
No 3D Hobbit
“I can safely say that, as of this moment, there are absolutely no conversations about doing The Hobbit films in 3-D.”
Guillermo del Toro puts his foot down. Thanks for Film Misery for the foot stamping.
Guillermo del Toro puts his foot down. Thanks for Film Misery for the foot stamping.
Disvel Or Marney
I found this on JoBlo (via Marketwatch), but most of the webworld have gone crazy with this news. It looks like Disney are to acquire comic/movie powerhouse Marvel for $4billion. A nice but of business for Walt, but a strange one...Will future film form Marvel's canon become watered down?!
Are crossover films a possibly?
Iron Man 3 - straight to DVD?
So many questions.
Saturday, August 29, 2009
The Week in Film by Robert Mann - Week Starting 28/8/09
Funny People **
Adam Sandler in serious acting roles. It’s a concept that has never really caught on, with films that showed Sandler’s more serious side such as Punch-Drunk Love, Spanglish and Reign Over Me being almost unanimously ignored by moviegoers in favour of such mainstream comedies as the (extremely mediocre) I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry and You Don’t Mess With the Zohan. It’s a shame really as Sandler is actually pretty good with serious material and for this reason he is undoubtedly one of the things that his latest star vehicle Funny People has in its favour. Unfortunately, though, his co-star is Seth Rogen, who just a couple of years ago was being hailed as the next big thing in comedy (something that this critic never understood - he isn’t funny) but now seems to be deterring moviegoers in droves. Also, despite this only being the third film featuring Judd Apatow as writer and director, he too isn’t quite the draw he once was, having produced such mediocre comedies as this year’s Year One. And, with mixed reviews and poor box office numbers across the pond the question has to be asked as to whether these really are Funny People anymore.
George Simmons (Adam Sandler) is a very successful yet self-involved stand-up comedian turned movie star who learns that he has leukemia and is given less than a year to live. Ira Wright (Seth Rogen) is a struggling up-and-coming stand-up comedian who works at a deli and has yet to figure out his onstage persona, and whose successful roommates Leo Koenig (Jonah Hill) and Mark Taylor Jackson (Jason Schwartzman) like nothing more than to rub their success in his face. One thing these different men have in common is that neither of them have any close friends. One night, George takes notice of Ira when they perform at the same club and he hires him to be his semi-personal assistant and opening act at his performances. George and Ira form a close bond as George teaches Ira how to win the crowd and Ira helps the dying George find closure in his legacy. However, when George learns that his disease has gone into remission and old flame Laura (Leslie Mann) re-enters his life, his recent near death experience inspires him to reevaluate what is important to him and what truly gives meaning to his life. However, a number of obstacles stand in his way, among them Laura’s tough Australian husband Clarke (Eric Bana) who is none too happy about George’s connection with his wife.
There are two sides to Funny People. The first and perhaps the most prominent is the serious side. In this area the film does have some genuine substance. The story of a big star who seemingly has everything, but is really missing the most important things in life, who faces death right in the face only to be given a chance for redemption is both interesting and quite compelling. In this regard the film does succeed, with a great performance from Adam Sandler, who convinces in a role that is greatly removed from the usual comic characters he plays. He handles the serious aspect extremely well, believably portraying a man who knows that his death is near and is struggling to comes to term with the fact that he has pretty much wasted his life, then gets the chance to change his ways and rekindle a long lost relationship only to realise that he is not really deserving of the second chance he has been given. Sadly, we as viewers do lose sympathy for the character towards the end but this is due to the way the character is written not the way it is played and is more than likely intentional anyway. Regardless, the film is bolstered by this performance which really makes the serious parts work but regrettably it’s in the film’s other side that the film fails. While Apatow has had a degree of success combining serious and comic elements in the past, here the unusual mix of serious elements with crude gags doesn’t really work. Please bear in mind that that comedy really is a matter of taste and what one person likes another cannot stand but personally I found most of the gags to be completely unfunny and while it is great to see a film that features so much stand up comedy as this does, the humour being presented by Sandler (returning to his stand up roots) and the other comics really wasn’t to this critic’s taste. Much of the humour is quite vulgar and it certainly won’t be enjoyed by anyone with a sophisticated taste in comedy. The casting of Seth Rogen and also Superbad star Jonah Hill doesn’t help matters either. While both play far more sympathetic characters than in previous films neither is very funny, something that really lets down the film as a whole. The protégé-mentor dynamic that Rogen has with Sandler is good but this really works more in the serious aspects than the comic ones. On the plus side, however, there are amusing performances from (director Judd Apatow’s wife) Leslie Mann (whose real life daughters appear in the film as her character’s children), Eric Bana - in his third screen role this summer - who sports his native Australian accent for a change, and Torsten Voges as a very game doctor. There are also a number of star cameos including such people as Ray Romano, Eminem, Andy Dick and Sarah Silverman among quite a few others. These are strong points but sadly they are not enough to make the film as a whole funny. Ultimately what really lets the film down is the fact that is way too long, without a truly satisfying conclusion the story kind of falls apart towards the end - and that it attempts to combine elements that simply don’t go together. Played completely seriously (and without Rogen and Hill among the cast) Funny People could have been a really good film but as it stands it is a film that has great moments but getting to these moments is such hard work that it isn’t quite worth the effort.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adam Sandler in serious acting roles. It’s a concept that has never really caught on, with films that showed Sandler’s more serious side such as Punch-Drunk Love, Spanglish and Reign Over Me being almost unanimously ignored by moviegoers in favour of such mainstream comedies as the (extremely mediocre) I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry and You Don’t Mess With the Zohan. It’s a shame really as Sandler is actually pretty good with serious material and for this reason he is undoubtedly one of the things that his latest star vehicle Funny People has in its favour. Unfortunately, though, his co-star is Seth Rogen, who just a couple of years ago was being hailed as the next big thing in comedy (something that this critic never understood - he isn’t funny) but now seems to be deterring moviegoers in droves. Also, despite this only being the third film featuring Judd Apatow as writer and director, he too isn’t quite the draw he once was, having produced such mediocre comedies as this year’s Year One. And, with mixed reviews and poor box office numbers across the pond the question has to be asked as to whether these really are Funny People anymore.
George Simmons (Adam Sandler) is a very successful yet self-involved stand-up comedian turned movie star who learns that he has leukemia and is given less than a year to live. Ira Wright (Seth Rogen) is a struggling up-and-coming stand-up comedian who works at a deli and has yet to figure out his onstage persona, and whose successful roommates Leo Koenig (Jonah Hill) and Mark Taylor Jackson (Jason Schwartzman) like nothing more than to rub their success in his face. One thing these different men have in common is that neither of them have any close friends. One night, George takes notice of Ira when they perform at the same club and he hires him to be his semi-personal assistant and opening act at his performances. George and Ira form a close bond as George teaches Ira how to win the crowd and Ira helps the dying George find closure in his legacy. However, when George learns that his disease has gone into remission and old flame Laura (Leslie Mann) re-enters his life, his recent near death experience inspires him to reevaluate what is important to him and what truly gives meaning to his life. However, a number of obstacles stand in his way, among them Laura’s tough Australian husband Clarke (Eric Bana) who is none too happy about George’s connection with his wife.
There are two sides to Funny People. The first and perhaps the most prominent is the serious side. In this area the film does have some genuine substance. The story of a big star who seemingly has everything, but is really missing the most important things in life, who faces death right in the face only to be given a chance for redemption is both interesting and quite compelling. In this regard the film does succeed, with a great performance from Adam Sandler, who convinces in a role that is greatly removed from the usual comic characters he plays. He handles the serious aspect extremely well, believably portraying a man who knows that his death is near and is struggling to comes to term with the fact that he has pretty much wasted his life, then gets the chance to change his ways and rekindle a long lost relationship only to realise that he is not really deserving of the second chance he has been given. Sadly, we as viewers do lose sympathy for the character towards the end but this is due to the way the character is written not the way it is played and is more than likely intentional anyway. Regardless, the film is bolstered by this performance which really makes the serious parts work but regrettably it’s in the film’s other side that the film fails. While Apatow has had a degree of success combining serious and comic elements in the past, here the unusual mix of serious elements with crude gags doesn’t really work. Please bear in mind that that comedy really is a matter of taste and what one person likes another cannot stand but personally I found most of the gags to be completely unfunny and while it is great to see a film that features so much stand up comedy as this does, the humour being presented by Sandler (returning to his stand up roots) and the other comics really wasn’t to this critic’s taste. Much of the humour is quite vulgar and it certainly won’t be enjoyed by anyone with a sophisticated taste in comedy. The casting of Seth Rogen and also Superbad star Jonah Hill doesn’t help matters either. While both play far more sympathetic characters than in previous films neither is very funny, something that really lets down the film as a whole. The protégé-mentor dynamic that Rogen has with Sandler is good but this really works more in the serious aspects than the comic ones. On the plus side, however, there are amusing performances from (director Judd Apatow’s wife) Leslie Mann (whose real life daughters appear in the film as her character’s children), Eric Bana - in his third screen role this summer - who sports his native Australian accent for a change, and Torsten Voges as a very game doctor. There are also a number of star cameos including such people as Ray Romano, Eminem, Andy Dick and Sarah Silverman among quite a few others. These are strong points but sadly they are not enough to make the film as a whole funny. Ultimately what really lets the film down is the fact that is way too long, without a truly satisfying conclusion the story kind of falls apart towards the end - and that it attempts to combine elements that simply don’t go together. Played completely seriously (and without Rogen and Hill among the cast) Funny People could have been a really good film but as it stands it is a film that has great moments but getting to these moments is such hard work that it isn’t quite worth the effort.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Final Destination 3D **
The Final Destination 2D *
The 3D revolution is now in full swing but despite all the buzz thus far cinemas have been greatly lacking in 3D releases aimed at anyone other than the family movie-going audience, the only exceptions being horror flicks such as January’s My Bloody Valentine and now The Final Destination, the fourth entry in the highly resilient ‘Final Destination’ film series. Unlike most of the 3D family films released this year, however, these horror flicks don’t seem to use 3D technology as anything more than a gimmick to attract viewers, as opposed to many films that use it as a means of enhancing the viewing experience, and it is a gimmick that seems to come at the cost of any other redeeming features the films could possibly have. In this regard The Final Destination is no different to My Bloody Valentine.
On what should have been a fun-filled day at the races, Nick O'Bannon (Bobby Campo) has a horrific premonition in which a bizarre sequence of events causes multiple race cars to crash, sending flaming debris into the stands, brutally killing his friends and causing the upper deck of the stands to collapse on him. When he comes out of this grisly nightmare Nick panics, persuading his girlfriend Lori (Shantel VanSanten), and their friends Janet (Haley Webb) and Hunt (Nick Zano) to leave, escaping seconds before Nick's frightening vision becomes a terrible reality. Thinking they've cheated death, the group has a new lease on life, but unfortunately for Nick and Lori, it is only the beginning. As his premonitions continue and the crash survivors begin to die one by one in increasingly gruesome ways Nick must figure out how to cheat death once and for all before he too reaches his final destination.
The Final Destination is a 3D movie in the old fashioned sense, with the 3D serving as a gimmick to attract viewers, based around throwing stuff at the audience, and little more. The fact that the producers decided to take the 3D route suggests that there is probably little life left in the Final Destination franchise (or at least that they are running low on ideas - no doubt we will be seeing more sequels in the future) as this film’s predecessors certainly didn’t 3D to attract an audience. In fact early on all it took was a then intriguing concept and storylines that actually had some depth and that incorporated some smart touches, but the only thing this film has going for it is 3D. As far as the use of 3D is concerned, the technology is used reasonably well in some of the death sequences, although less so others, but serves no purpose in any of the interceding scenes. The deaths on show this time are much bigger and more elaborate than in previous films but bigger is not necessarily better and here only a few death sequences actually provide any scares - mainly the opening sequence at the race course, a sequence in a cinema auditorium and a sequence on an escalator. Sadly, for the most part, more effort seems to have been put into making the film gory than scary and an overuse of CGI, which looks very cheaply done for the most part, means that even those who actually like their horror films gory may well be disappointed. And if the only version of the film being shown in your cinema is the 2D version of the film you may as well not bother at all as without the 3D the impact will only be diminished further, and it is clear that the emphasis on 3D has meant that no attention has been paid to such elements as good acting or decent scriptwriting, with a virtually non-existent plot, the film mainly being just a string of death scenes with little to link them together. The story lacks any of the smart touches that were present in the other films and only briefly acknowledges the events of them. These aspects are probably not going to concern much of the target audience but the fact as a whole the film isn’t very scary is certainly a major negative factor. So, all in all, The Final Destination is one film too many for the franchise and while there are undoubtedly people who will enjoy seeing it this critic certainly wasn’t one of them and I definitely wouldn’t recommend it to anyone. Hopefully this is the final destination for the Final Destination franchise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reviews by Robert Mann BA (Hons)
A Serious Man Trailer
Click on the intriguing photo to be able to watch the trailer for the new film from The Coen Brothers - A Serious Man.What's it about then? -
"Imaginatively exploring questions of faith, familial responsibility, delinquent behaviour, dental phenomena, academia, mortality and Judaism – and intersections thereof – A Serious Man is the new film from Academy Award®-winning writer-directors Joel and Ethan Coen." —tiff.net
Friday, August 28, 2009
New Moon Exclusive: Dakota Fanning Is Jane From The Volturi Coven
From MySpace from all places..."...Summit just released photos of the powerful coven online. We lucked out on our exclusive: feast your eyes on Dakota Fanning as Jane. When it was announced that the 15-year-old actress had been cast we knew we were in for a treat. Check out the photo of Jane (above) and her bio below..."
JANE
Full Name: Jane
Status: Vampire
Group: Volturi Coven
Date of Birth: Unknown
Date of Transformation: Unknown but at a young age
Special Abilities: Ability to inflict debilitating pain with her thoughts
“This may hurt just a little.”
CHARACTER DESCRIPTION:
Jane is a high ranking member of the Volturi Guard. The Volturi were waiting to change her and her brother Alec until she was older, but humans—believing her and her brother to be witches—tried to burn them at the stake, which forced Aro to act while the twins were little more than children. Jane’s experience with the pain of burning alive shaped her into a potent weapon – she developed the ability to inflict immense pain on others with only a look.
VOLTURI
1) The Volturi include: Aro, Caius, and Marcus as the leaders, and then Jane, Alec, Demetri, Felix, Heidi, and several other unnamed members of the guard.
2) The Volturi are similar to a ruling body, and protect the secret of vampires by wiping out any “problems” as vampire law defines.
3) The Volturi live in an ancient Tuscan city called “Volterra”.
4) Aro and Jane’s powers do not work on Bella.
Director Chris Weitz on the Volturi --
"No matter how strange one of the characters is in a work of fantasy, I think you have to approach them as people and then so you start to think, 'They've been around for 2,000 years. How would they interact with one another?' The conclusion was that after 2,000 years you'd probably be more than mildly insane. No matter how cultured or gracious you appear on the surface. And I think that's what Michael Sheen managed to portray as Aro, the head of the Volturi -- on the surface he's terribly gracious, warm, a wonderful host and at the same time he's lethal and frightening. It's also what Dakota Fanning conveys as Jane. She's innocent looking in appearance but she's absolutely deadly. The first thing I wanted to do was put them in a setting that wasn't Dracula's castle. There have been so many vampire movies and werewolf movies and horror movies where everything has been dark and dreary. Instead, their headquarters is surprisingly light and crisp. And the characters that they play have a kind of a tactile reality to them in spite of how bizarre their situation is really. The whole point is not to leave Forks, Washington where everything has really been quite realistic and then suddenly go to a location that completely throws you out of the movie. And the set although it's huge and grand and magnificent actually feels like a real place."
Thursday, August 27, 2009
District 9
Where do I start with this movie?
First of all, the promotion for this film was very well done, at least in the Los Angeles area. You couldn't drive down the street or turn a corner without District 9 posters on bus stops, public phones or billboards claiming that area was for "humans only". If you hadn't heard of District 9 (have you been living under a rock??) you sure were familiar with their advertising, whether they made sense to you or not.
I had gone to see the film without knowing much about it, just the basic concept of the film and that there were no named actors with a $30 mill budget. So honestly, how good could it really be, right? Well, within the first five minutes, you knew that this was something different, but something to be excited about. Peter Jackson has this way of creating worlds and making them so convincing, that you never really question anything about it, you just accept it as it is. The basis of this story is actually very very simple when you strip all the bells and whistles away. In short, it is a story about an alien race who got stranded on earth for 20 years and although adapting to this planet, are still working on getting home to theirs.
It takes place in South Africa, just outside of Johannesburg. Our introduction to our main human, Wikus Van De Merwe, is shot documentary style, interviewing him and introducing us to this world where humans and aliens are attempting to cohabitate. The actor playing Van De Merwe is Sharlto Copley, unknown, because he hasn't really had an prior acting experience. But he takes on this role and blows your mind with it. Without giving away any spoilers, Van De Merwe's character goes through an amazing character arc throughout the film, that you would expect a seasoned actor who understands the transformation of characters would find challenging; but Copley grabs the bulls by the horn and delivers a performance that is absolutely amazing.
As for the aliens, who are referred to in the film as "prawns", they were so realistic and worked so well in the film, it was hard to believe they were born from someone's imagination. The choice of shooting this film documentary style, with a lot of handheld cameras, and also the use of security cameras, makes the reality of it even more convincing. These prawns are stranded in this South African town, and are all contained within an area labeled District 9. Without explanation, you see the interaction between humans and the prawns and don't really question why Wikus is speaking to them in english and they are speaking their language, but everything is understood between them. The prawns have adapted to the lifestyle of earth, with shacks as their shelter, bartering and working for food, wearing clothing, and even a little interspecies prostitution.
Shooting on location in a town just outside of Johannesburg, you really get the feel of this place and can feel the heat and stickiness in the air, and smell the stench of garbage and dead animals everywhere. The film sets up so that we are actually looking at a present day South Africa, by having the prawns land on Earth back in 1982. So, to have an alien movie that is so convincing and so well done, but then to actually make you think the "what if" scenarios, it takes the cake. It sadly reflects our human nature of racism and bigotry, not just with other races, but with other life forms. We are constantly looking for other life forms out there, and wanting to learn more about the planets who can host other life forms, but have we ever really stopped to think what we would do if we ever found them and came into contact with them? This film does, and does it well. The human condition hasn't changed because they are from another planet, instead, humans have become defensive and treat these aliens as a lower life form and kick them while they are down. It's funny that the majority of alien movies out there show aliens being superior to humans, in their evolution and intelligence; whereas this could be the case in District 9, we as humans are so quick to attack, that we don't even give them a chance to show us. Along with the aliens, came their weaponry, which I believe is the reason why humans didn't wipe them out completely or even tried to. The prawn weapons are bio weapons meaning something in their DNA allows them to be used and initiated. Humans alone do not have the same chemical makeup, therefore are not able to work the awesome huge guns these prawns have.
I have only seen the film once, but do plan to go back and see it many more times if possible. I hear that when you go back to see it again, you notice things that you didn't see before and things start to make sense even more than before. While doing a review and trying to be careful not to give anything away, I will warn you that you should be prepared to go on an emotional rollercoaster with this film. Yes, it is THAT kind of film, not just any alien movie where humans and aliens go at it and lots of stuff gets blown up. It's a real look at our world if we were able to host other lifeforms from other planets.
I haven't been this excited about an alien film, probably since the movie Aliens back in the early 80's. Truly one of the best films of this year, and everyone should go and see it at least once!!
Brilliantly well done!
First of all, the promotion for this film was very well done, at least in the Los Angeles area. You couldn't drive down the street or turn a corner without District 9 posters on bus stops, public phones or billboards claiming that area was for "humans only". If you hadn't heard of District 9 (have you been living under a rock??) you sure were familiar with their advertising, whether they made sense to you or not.
I had gone to see the film without knowing much about it, just the basic concept of the film and that there were no named actors with a $30 mill budget. So honestly, how good could it really be, right? Well, within the first five minutes, you knew that this was something different, but something to be excited about. Peter Jackson has this way of creating worlds and making them so convincing, that you never really question anything about it, you just accept it as it is. The basis of this story is actually very very simple when you strip all the bells and whistles away. In short, it is a story about an alien race who got stranded on earth for 20 years and although adapting to this planet, are still working on getting home to theirs.
It takes place in South Africa, just outside of Johannesburg. Our introduction to our main human, Wikus Van De Merwe, is shot documentary style, interviewing him and introducing us to this world where humans and aliens are attempting to cohabitate. The actor playing Van De Merwe is Sharlto Copley, unknown, because he hasn't really had an prior acting experience. But he takes on this role and blows your mind with it. Without giving away any spoilers, Van De Merwe's character goes through an amazing character arc throughout the film, that you would expect a seasoned actor who understands the transformation of characters would find challenging; but Copley grabs the bulls by the horn and delivers a performance that is absolutely amazing.
As for the aliens, who are referred to in the film as "prawns", they were so realistic and worked so well in the film, it was hard to believe they were born from someone's imagination. The choice of shooting this film documentary style, with a lot of handheld cameras, and also the use of security cameras, makes the reality of it even more convincing. These prawns are stranded in this South African town, and are all contained within an area labeled District 9. Without explanation, you see the interaction between humans and the prawns and don't really question why Wikus is speaking to them in english and they are speaking their language, but everything is understood between them. The prawns have adapted to the lifestyle of earth, with shacks as their shelter, bartering and working for food, wearing clothing, and even a little interspecies prostitution.
Shooting on location in a town just outside of Johannesburg, you really get the feel of this place and can feel the heat and stickiness in the air, and smell the stench of garbage and dead animals everywhere. The film sets up so that we are actually looking at a present day South Africa, by having the prawns land on Earth back in 1982. So, to have an alien movie that is so convincing and so well done, but then to actually make you think the "what if" scenarios, it takes the cake. It sadly reflects our human nature of racism and bigotry, not just with other races, but with other life forms. We are constantly looking for other life forms out there, and wanting to learn more about the planets who can host other life forms, but have we ever really stopped to think what we would do if we ever found them and came into contact with them? This film does, and does it well. The human condition hasn't changed because they are from another planet, instead, humans have become defensive and treat these aliens as a lower life form and kick them while they are down. It's funny that the majority of alien movies out there show aliens being superior to humans, in their evolution and intelligence; whereas this could be the case in District 9, we as humans are so quick to attack, that we don't even give them a chance to show us. Along with the aliens, came their weaponry, which I believe is the reason why humans didn't wipe them out completely or even tried to. The prawn weapons are bio weapons meaning something in their DNA allows them to be used and initiated. Humans alone do not have the same chemical makeup, therefore are not able to work the awesome huge guns these prawns have.
I have only seen the film once, but do plan to go back and see it many more times if possible. I hear that when you go back to see it again, you notice things that you didn't see before and things start to make sense even more than before. While doing a review and trying to be careful not to give anything away, I will warn you that you should be prepared to go on an emotional rollercoaster with this film. Yes, it is THAT kind of film, not just any alien movie where humans and aliens go at it and lots of stuff gets blown up. It's a real look at our world if we were able to host other lifeforms from other planets.
I haven't been this excited about an alien film, probably since the movie Aliens back in the early 80's. Truly one of the best films of this year, and everyone should go and see it at least once!!
Brilliantly well done!
Brutal Legend Contest - US ONLY
And so has Romeo...
"Hey there,
I wanted to tip your readers of a Binder Art Contest happening at the official Brutal Legend Facebook fan page. You’ll have the opportunity to get your hands on one of five limited edition Eddie Riggs (Jack Black) statues.
Here’s how to enter:
- Become a fan of the official Brutal Legend Facebook fan page.
- Post your Brutal Legend fan art onto the official Brutal Legend Facebook wall with "Fan Art Contest" somewhere in the title
- 5 winners will each receive a limited edition Eddie Riggs statue
- Sorry to all of our international fans, this is a US only contest
- Sample contest and statue image & rules/full contest details here."
The Chalkboard Challenge
The lovely Victoria has been busy...
"Hope you are doing well! I wanted to share this exciting new contest with you
and your readers for 9. It’s called the Chalkboard Challenge -- and here’s
how you can join in!
You may have been following the film’s Scientist on Facebook.
The Scientist needs some inspiration in these dark times -- are you up to the challenge?
Begin the challenge by visiting here.
When you scroll over to the chalkboard, you can participate by clicking on the piece of chalk to draw a picture. When you’re done drawing your picture, screen grab it, save it, and
post your drawing to the Scientist's wall here to be entered into the Chalkboard Challenge sweepstakes to win a fabulous 9 prize pack!
There will be 9 winners, so the lucky winner could definitely be you. However, in order to be eligible to win, you have to enter by September 9, 2009 (which is the day that 9 is released in theaters)."
"Hope you are doing well! I wanted to share this exciting new contest with you
and your readers for 9. It’s called the Chalkboard Challenge -- and here’s
how you can join in!
You may have been following the film’s Scientist on Facebook.
The Scientist needs some inspiration in these dark times -- are you up to the challenge?
Begin the challenge by visiting here.
When you scroll over to the chalkboard, you can participate by clicking on the piece of chalk to draw a picture. When you’re done drawing your picture, screen grab it, save it, and
post your drawing to the Scientist's wall here to be entered into the Chalkboard Challenge sweepstakes to win a fabulous 9 prize pack!
There will be 9 winners, so the lucky winner could definitely be you. However, in order to be eligible to win, you have to enter by September 9, 2009 (which is the day that 9 is released in theaters)."
Inglourious Basterds
Writer/Director : Quentin Tarantino
Fascinating dialogue, intriguing characters, slices of surrealism, gliding crane shots, ultra cool freeze frames, elements of surprise, rich in colour, quirky humour, appropriate flashbacks and a hip soundtrack... can only equal one thing when your at the cinema - a Quentin Tarantino film.
Two and half hours of utterly absorbing entertainment is what you receive for your money from a hugely anticipated film that has been in the works for over 8 years. Tarantino cleverly lifts, borrows and steals from the encyclopaedia of film within his mind, in particular from his two mentors - Sergio Leone (music score, extreme close ups, credits, character naming freeze frames) and Brain DePalma (empathetic characters, distinctive camera pans, sudden humour, character following crane shots).
Once upon a time in Nazi occupied France... The story begins in 1941 and ends in 1944 with the familiar 'Chapters' being used from his superior epic Kill Bill, to portray this World War 2 fictional action adventure. The 'Basterds' are a ruthless group of Jewish-American soldiers who murder Nazis in barbaric fashion and scalp them afterwards to leave their trademark known to Adolf Hitler (Wattke) and The Third Reich.
Running parallel to this, is the story of a French-Jewish girl (Laurent) who after escaping a massacre from Nazi Colonel Hans Landa (a fantastic showpiece for actor Waltz) and his men in the opening scene - which is arguably the best of the movie - she takes the opportunity for revenge years later as Hitler, Landa and co decide to visit her cinema for a premiere screening of a film which stars soldier turned 'hero' Fredrick Zoller (Bruhl).
Tarantino is having real fun with this, just like he did when he wrote and co-starred in From Dusk till Dawn (1996) and opts to use more humour than any of his other films. Pitt, Waltz, Roth, Wattke, Myers and Groth (who is perfect as Hitler's right hand man Joseph Goebbels) would of had as much fun on set as the cast of a British Carry On film back in its prime.
So where does this rank among his films ? Better than his last effort Death Proof (2007) but it lacks the all round quality of his other movies. Apart from Reservoir Dogs (1992) and his best directorial effort Kill Bill Vol 1(2003), minutes could be cut from his films including this one. Particularly evident is the tendency to let some scenes go that little too long and you feel that perhaps if he used the theory of ‘less is more’ the finished product would be an even more superior film. However this is a minor issue, as Tarantino mesmerises, entertains and leaves you feeling completely refreshed, revitalised and reminiscing you’re favourite moments over and over again - the sign of a genius.
SUPERIOR SCENE : The opening sequence is a great piece of realism as opposed to being surreal. Perfectly shot with intensity, extremely well acted and has you completely engaged to the point that you’re telling yourself not to blink. Brilliant cinema.
QUALITY QUOTE : "What a tremendously hostile world that a rat must endure. Yet not only does he survive, he thrives. Because our little foe has an instinct for survival and preservation second to none... And that Monsieur is what a Jew shares with a rat." Colonel Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz)
RATING : 4 / 5 stars.
Starring : Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz, Melanie Laurant, Eli Roth, Til Schweiger, Diane Kruger, Sylvester Groth, Julie Dreyfus, Martin Wattke, Daniel Bruhl, August Diehl and Mike Myers.
Fascinating dialogue, intriguing characters, slices of surrealism, gliding crane shots, ultra cool freeze frames, elements of surprise, rich in colour, quirky humour, appropriate flashbacks and a hip soundtrack... can only equal one thing when your at the cinema - a Quentin Tarantino film.Two and half hours of utterly absorbing entertainment is what you receive for your money from a hugely anticipated film that has been in the works for over 8 years. Tarantino cleverly lifts, borrows and steals from the encyclopaedia of film within his mind, in particular from his two mentors - Sergio Leone (music score, extreme close ups, credits, character naming freeze frames) and Brain DePalma (empathetic characters, distinctive camera pans, sudden humour, character following crane shots).
Once upon a time in Nazi occupied France... The story begins in 1941 and ends in 1944 with the familiar 'Chapters' being used from his superior epic Kill Bill, to portray this World War 2 fictional action adventure. The 'Basterds' are a ruthless group of Jewish-American soldiers who murder Nazis in barbaric fashion and scalp them afterwards to leave their trademark known to Adolf Hitler (Wattke) and The Third Reich.
Running parallel to this, is the story of a French-Jewish girl (Laurent) who after escaping a massacre from Nazi Colonel Hans Landa (a fantastic showpiece for actor Waltz) and his men in the opening scene - which is arguably the best of the movie - she takes the opportunity for revenge years later as Hitler, Landa and co decide to visit her cinema for a premiere screening of a film which stars soldier turned 'hero' Fredrick Zoller (Bruhl).Tarantino is having real fun with this, just like he did when he wrote and co-starred in From Dusk till Dawn (1996) and opts to use more humour than any of his other films. Pitt, Waltz, Roth, Wattke, Myers and Groth (who is perfect as Hitler's right hand man Joseph Goebbels) would of had as much fun on set as the cast of a British Carry On film back in its prime.
So where does this rank among his films ? Better than his last effort Death Proof (2007) but it lacks the all round quality of his other movies. Apart from Reservoir Dogs (1992) and his best directorial effort Kill Bill Vol 1(2003), minutes could be cut from his films including this one. Particularly evident is the tendency to let some scenes go that little too long and you feel that perhaps if he used the theory of ‘less is more’ the finished product would be an even more superior film. However this is a minor issue, as Tarantino mesmerises, entertains and leaves you feeling completely refreshed, revitalised and reminiscing you’re favourite moments over and over again - the sign of a genius.
SUPERIOR SCENE : The opening sequence is a great piece of realism as opposed to being surreal. Perfectly shot with intensity, extremely well acted and has you completely engaged to the point that you’re telling yourself not to blink. Brilliant cinema.
QUALITY QUOTE : "What a tremendously hostile world that a rat must endure. Yet not only does he survive, he thrives. Because our little foe has an instinct for survival and preservation second to none... And that Monsieur is what a Jew shares with a rat." Colonel Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz)
RATING : 4 / 5 stars. Wednesday, August 26, 2009
The Fixer
I cant stand Pearl Jam, and I'm not the biggest fan of Cameron Crowe.
With that in mind here is the music video from the band, directed by the filmmaker.
All Is Love Indeed
You can preview elements of the soundtrack on MySpace where the first single All Is Love can be previewed. You can also hear bits of the soundtrack on the film’s trailer and featurette.The film is Where The Wild Things Are by the way.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
The Week in Film by Robert Mann - Week Starting 21/8/09
Inglourious Basterds ****
It’s been five years now since the cinema screen was last graced with a film by director Quentin Tarantino (unless, of course, you count 2007’s Death Proof which technically doesn’t count as it was really just one half of the Tarantino/Robert Rodriguez collaboration Grindhouse) and understandably fans have been extremely eager for another effort by the director for some time, their eagerness now rewarded with the release of Inglourious Basterds, which is quite possibly one of Tarantino’s most eagerly anticipated movies. Inspired by the 1978 Italian film Quel maledetto treno blindato - Inglorious Bastards (notice the correct spelling) - Tarantino’s latest has been of a sort of passion project for the director for quite a while, the film having been in the development stage for some time. Because the film has taken so long to bring to the screen there is an understandably level of anticipation, and considering the brilliance of Tarantino’s past works the level of expectation is so high that the film will inevitably suffer from comparison. On its own terms, though, Tarantino’s distinctive style seems a perfect fit for the material and even if this film isn’t as good as his past films it is certainly quite glourious in its own right.
In Nazi-occupied France during World War II, a group of Jewish-American soldiers known as “The Basterds” are chosen specifically to spread fear throughout the Third Reich by scalping and brutally killing Nazis. Under the leadership of Lt. Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt) The Basterds’ ranks most prominently include Sgt. Danny Donowitz (Eli Roth), who becomes known as “The Bear Jew” following his brutal acts of clubbing Nazis to death with a baseball bat; Sgt. Hugo Stiglitz (Til Schweiger), a rogue Nazi who was sentenced to execution for the murder of 13 Gestapo members and freed by The Basterds; and Cpl. Wilhelm Wicki (Gedeon Burkhard), an Austrian Jew who escaped the Nazis and returned to give them hell. Their mission is to kill as many Nazis as possible and take their scalps as trophies and when they do leave survivors they permanently scar them with the swastika symbol on their forehead so that they can never hide or forget the things that they have done. The Basterds carry out an apache style war but they change their tactics somewhat when they are given a special mission to carry out. A cinema in Paris, owned by the young Shoshanna Dreyfus (Mélanie Laurent), has been chosen by German Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels (Sylvester Groth) and German war hero Frederick Zoller (Daniel Brühl) to host the premiere of Nazi propaganda film “Nation’s Pride” and in attendance will be all the high ranking members of the Nazi government including the Fuhrer himself Adolf Hitler (Martin Wuttke) and the British government sends Lt. Archie Hicox (Michael Fassbender) to join the Basterds and arrange a meeting with a British contact, German actress Bridget von Hammersmark (Diane Kruger), who can get them into the premiere, their mission to blow the cinema up, killing the entire Nazi government and thus ending the war. However, standing in their way is Col. Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz), the head of security for the premiere who has earned the nick name “Jew Hunter”. Soon, The Basterds also cross paths with Shoshanna, whose parents were murdered by Landa years earlier and is also plotting to kill all the Nazis in attendance by burning down the building.
As you would expect from Quentin Tarantino Inglourious Basterds is anything but subtle. From start to finish it is extremely OTT and has its tongue firmly in its cheek, with it being clear that this film is not meant to be taken too seriously, something that is essential given that the film bears little resembling historical accuracy (although the look and feel of the time and place seem quite authentic in everything from sets to costumes), making this film a nightmare for historians. Historians obviously are not the target audience though and Tarantino delivers a film that can be appreciated by moviegoers, both mainstream and niche, albeit to different extents. As with his past works, the film is packed full of references and in-jokes to obscure films that only the most ardent of movie buffs will detect or appreciate. The excellent soundtrack, in particular, is packed full of homages to other films, many of them spaghetti westerns, from which the film has clearly drawn much inspiration. These are aspects that only a minority among the audience is likely to appreciate but there is a lot for viewers uninitiated in classic European cinema to enjoy as well. It wouldn’t be a Tarantino film without lots of heavily stylized and quite brutal violence and this film certainly has its fair share with the actions of The Basterds proving to be both brutal and bloody, although stylish enough to never feel gratuitous. The film isn’t entirely what you might expect, however, and there isn’t as much of this violence as you would probably expect. In fact, there are quite large sections of the film in which The Basterds don’t even feature, with a subplot involving Shoshanna Dreyfus getting a lot of screen time. The two story strands are well interwoven, however, with the story as expertly written as any other Tarantino movie, very smartly written and extremely engaging, even though the film is a tad too slow moving and talky at times - the film does drag a little in a few scenes and the film is very long at 2 hours 30 minutes - and much of the dialogue isn’t the sharpest that Tarantino has ever written, with few lines that you will likely to be quoting outside of the cinema. The use of both English and German, and even Italian at one point, in the dialogue is a nice touch, however, with the film being completely realistic in the language department if nothing else. There is also a lot of humour, coming in the form of witty situations and banter between characters. In particular, a scene where Lt. Raine speaks in Italian, attempting to pull off a convincing accent, only for his American accent to be unmistakable, is hysterical. It is a testament to Tarantino’s writing that he can get such great humourous moments out of a film which you really wouldn’t expect to be funny at all. The success of the film isn’t all Tarantino though and the entire cast, consisting of a few big names and a lot of people you’ve never even heard of, deserves credit for their fantastic performances. There are too many great performances to mention them all but Brad Pitt deserves particular recognition for what is quite possibly one of his best, and undoubtedly his most entertaining, performances yet. Eli Roth is also very good, being a perfect fit for the rather twisted role of "The Bear Jew”. Besting both of them, though, is Christoph Waltz whose performance is the single best in the entire film. He is perfectly over the top but at the same time still entirely believable as “The Jew Hunter”, simultaneously entertaining and threatening, something that very few actors would be able to pull off, and there is definite potential for an Oscar nomination in this performance. The film even has performances from a few people you might not expect with Mike Myers (face it, the last person you would ever expect to see in a Tarantino movie) as a British general and some narration from Samuel L. Jackson. Overall, Inglourious Basterds is definitely not one of Quentin Tarantino’s finest works but that doesn’t stop it from being an extremely well made and extremely fun movie on its own terms, and one that has just as many merits as a piece of art as it does as a piece of entertainment. Inglourious? Anything but!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shorts **
When it comes to movie directors there are few with a more bizarre list of credits than Robert Rodriguez. The self made director, producer, writer, and pretty everything else related to film production, has given moviegoers such ultra violent adult orientated fare as From Dusk Till Dawn, Sin City and Planet Terror yet he also made the move into family films with his Spy Kids trilogy and The Adventures of Shark Boy and Lava Girl in 3D, certainly an extremely varied resume. While his family films are hardly his finest works (the latter one is probably one of his weakest in fact) he has shown himself to be quite capable at more family friendly films and with a rather distinctive, somewhat strange style he has created ones that really do stand out from the crowd of family flicks being churned out by Hollywood. Now, he has returned to the family genre once again with his latest film Shorts, a film which thus far has been receiving quite lousy word of mouth, word of mouth which it seems might actually be justified.
In the suburb of Black Falls all the houses look the same and everyone works for Black Box Unlimited Worldwide Industries Incorporated, whose Mr. Black's (James Spader) Black Box is the ultimate communication and do-it-all gadget that's sweeping the nation. Other than keeping his parents (Jon Cryer and Leslie Mann) employed, however, the Black Box has done nothing for 11-year-old Toe Thompson (Jimmy Bennett), who just wants to make a few friends. One day a mysterious rainbow-colored rock falls from the sky, hits him in the head and changes everything. The Rainbow Rock does the Black Box one better: it grants wishes to anyone who holds it. Before long, wishes-gone-wrong have left the neighborhood swarming with tiny spaceships, crocodile armies, giant boogers, and outrageous magical mayhem around every corner. But it's not until the grown-ups get their hands on the Rock that the trouble really starts. Now Toe and his newfound friends - Helvetica Black (Jolie Varnier), Nose Noseworthy (Jake Short) and Loogie (Trevor Gagnon) - must join forces to save their town from itself, discovering along the way that what you wish for is not always what you want.
Shorts is undoubtedly the strangest family film that you will see in cinemas this year. For this reason, there are some positive things that can be said about it. As with Rodriguez’s previous family films there is something very distinctive that really sets it apart, however it is not something that necessarily makes the film particularly good in its own right. There is a definite quirkiness present throughout, an element that is present in everything from the characters to the set design and to the crazy situations that arise, but, sadly this alone doesn’t make the film especially enjoyable. One of the major flaws is the way in which the story is presented, with events being shown completely out of order, in the form of short stories (hence the title). While it could be said that Rodriguez was trying to do something different here, if anything, the unusual story format just makes the film rather confusing, and rather unnecessarily so as there doesn’t seem to be any particular need for it to be presented in this manner, other than perhaps the fact that each of the stories is really just a skit and the whole ‘wishing rock’ thing is just a weak plot device to link all the skits together. This wouldn’t be too much of a problem if the skits themselves were really funny but the film is also severely lacking in the humour department with only a few scenes that might raise a giggle or two. There does seem to be a message among all the jumbled ideas but the plot is too much of a mess for it to really come through effectively. The film doesn’t exactly impress in other areas either, with effects that are passable, if a times quite charming, and acting that will hardly blow your socks off. In the acting department, almost everyone entertains but no one is even half way believable with big name adult actors (including William H. Macy and Kat Dennings in addition to those aforementioned) being completely wasted and up and coming child actors who may show some potential but are nowhere near fulfilling it yet. All in all, Shorts is a family film that is not without its charms but it is really missing that little something and as a result it is a film that not only will adults struggle to enjoy but even some kids might have a tough time liking as well, and it really is clear that Robert Rodriguez should stick to what he is best at. If nothing else, though, it is certainly unique.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I Love You, Beth Cooper *
Films adapted from teen novels are quite the in thing in Hollywood at the moment it seems with films such as Twilight and Nick & Norah’s Infinite Playlist, as well as the upcoming Youth in Revolt demonstrating that literature aimed at young adults is a good place to find distinctive, refreshing and original movie ideas. I Love You, Beth Cooper is another such adaptation, based on the novel of the same name by Larry Doyle - who also wrote the screenplay for the film. And with Chris Columbus on directing duties it is certainly a film that promises to be a sweet viewing experience. However, Columbus - whose credits include the first two Harry Potter movies and Bicentennial Man - has often been criticised for making films that are way too sugary, raising the question as to whether you too will love Beth Cooper or if, like most sugary treats, viewing this film will prove detrimental to your health. Surprisingly, neither is the case.
Denis Cooverman (Paul Rust) is a geeky high-school valedictorian who throws caution to the wind by expressing his love for popular cheerleader Beth Cooper (Hayden Panettiere) during his graduation speech. Much to Denis' surprise, Beth responds by accepting an invitation to a party at his house later that day. But Beth's meathead boyfriend Kevin (Shawn Roberts) is none-too-pleased that his high school prize is mingling with the biggest dweeb in school, and when Kevin shows up at his house and tears the place apart in a fit of rage Denis, his best friend Rich (Jack Carpenter), Beth, and her friends Cammy (Lauren London) and Treece (Lauren Storm) all pile into Beth's car and flee for their lives. For four long years Denis sat silently behind Beth in class, pining for a way to make his love known. Now, over the course of one long night, Denis will finally get to know the girl of his dreams better than he ever thought possible. If he manages to survive until morning, it's sure to be the story of a lifetime
I Love You, Beth Cooper proves to be somewhat surprising in that it is nowhere near as sweet as you would expect from a Chris Columbus film. This, however, is a not a compliment. Had it been done as a sweet romantic tale this could have been a very charming film but like with many teen films it is let down by a barrage of crude, predictable and lame gags, mostly revolving around drinking and sexual situations, that completely conflict with the sweet core of the story. Were the gags actually funny - for the most part the film is a laughter vacuum, although a few scenes are fairly amusing - they could actually complement the sweeter scenes but instead they simply counteract most of the positive aspects that the film has to offer. The developing connection between Denis and Beth is actually quite touching but a string of poorly constructed situations, which seemingly only exist to create cheap laughs, constantly gets in the way. It would be wrong to blame everything on Columbus, however, as there is plenty of blame to be shared around. The screenplay by Larry Doyle is weak, recycling situations and gags from numerous better (and, in some cases, worse) teen movies and most of the characters are two dimensional stereotypes that are hard to really care about. This is as much the fault of the actors as Doyle though. Paul Rust lacks charisma as Denis and plays the nerd type character so stereotypically as to make the character annoying as much as he is genuinely likable. At times it is actually quite difficult to really empathise with the character as a result. Hayden Panettiere doesn’t fare much better. Despite having shown on several occasions that she is a very capable actress she seems destined to forever typecast as a cheerleader and she doesn’t even do anything notable with the part here. Her character too is a complete stereotype and it frequently seems as if she was cast for her looks rather than acting ability as for most of the film she is seen wearing a variety of revealing outfits and in one scene she is even nude. Clearly the target audience of this film is horny teenagers as it is unlikely anyone else will think much of Panettiere’s performance. Most of the other characters also conform to stereotypes, e.g. the tough guy boyfriend. It is also a shame to see Alan Ruck and Cynthia Stevenson, as Denis’ parents, so completely wasted. In his glory days on sitcom Spin City Ruck was absolutely hilarious but here his comedic talent is not utilized one bit. This is just one problem among many that makes this potentially promising film into a near total dud. If the sweetness within had been allowed to dominate I Love You, Beth Cooper could have a very charming and heart-warming film but instead it just stands as another teen comedy that has little to offer anyone other than the most undemanding of teenagers and will be completely forgotten in no time. Beth and Denis and certainly no Nick & Norah that’s for sure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dance Flick ½
The spoof movie is a genre in disarray. Last year’s Meet the Spartans and Disaster Movie (both by the same ‘creative’ team - Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer) brought the genre to a whole new low. And now there is yet another spoof in the form of Dance Flick although thankfully Friedberg and Seltzer are nowhere to be seen. Unfortunately, though, this film comes courtesy of the Wayans, the people behind the first two Scary Movie films, or at least that is what the studio would have you believe, as the director of Dance Flick is Damien Dante Wayans, nephew of Keenen Ivory Wayans, the director of the Scary Movie. In other words, this is a film made predominantly by the next generation of the Wayans family (although their elders do still play a part among the team of 5 writers, all from the Wayans family, as well as appearing in the film itself). Does this bode well for the film? Don’t count on it.
Megan (Shoshanna Bush) has a dream of going to Juilliard and becoming a dancer. While she is performing at her dance audition, her mother is tragically killed in an auto accident. Megan must move to another city to her destitute father's apartment which is located in a condemned building. She enrolls in Musical High, an inner city high school. Since her mother's death, Megan has given up dancing. Megan meets some new friends at the school like Tracy (Chelsea Makela), Charity (Essence Atkins), and Thomas (Damon Wayans Jr.) who dance in a street dance gang. Thomas and Megan connect, and they must face their impossible dance dream together. They try to bring the ultimate dance crew together to win $5,000 at the local dance contest.
There are two positive things that can be said about Dance Flick. Firstly, (unlike Disaster Movie) the film mostly spoofs films that are actually relevant to its title and central theme - the films spoofed including Step Up, Step Up 2 The Streets, Save the Last Dance, You Got Served, Stomp the Yard, ATL, Roll Bounce, High School Musical, Little Miss Sunshine, Hairspray, Fame, West Side Story, Flashdance, Dreamgirls, Ray, Twilight, The House Bunny, Black Snake Moan and Crash. Secondly, there are no prolonged irrelevant pop culture gags (although there are still a lot of pop culture references, most of them quite irrelevant). Sadly, however, these two things do not make for a film that is even half decent. From a technical standpoint there is nothing at all good that can be said about this film. The storyline is pure rubbish, shamelessly ripping off countless genuinely good movies for the sake of cheap gags that aren’t even very funny anyway, and there isn’t a single smart or original idea to be found. The acting is terrible with the characters themselves being little more than prolonged jokes and, for the most part, the film is completely unfunny, with many of the gags being crude and gross and, in some cases, tasteless and offensive as well. There are a few scenes that will raise a few giggles but these alone are not worth the price of admission, rather being the kind of thing you would watch for free on You Tube. So, all in all, Dance Flick is just like most of the other recent spoof films, poorly made and not even particularly entertaining. It is at least an improvement upon Meet the Spartans and Disaster Movie (not exactly difficult to achieve) but regardless you certainly won’t be dancing if you see this film.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reviews by Robert Mann BA (Hons)
It’s been five years now since the cinema screen was last graced with a film by director Quentin Tarantino (unless, of course, you count 2007’s Death Proof which technically doesn’t count as it was really just one half of the Tarantino/Robert Rodriguez collaboration Grindhouse) and understandably fans have been extremely eager for another effort by the director for some time, their eagerness now rewarded with the release of Inglourious Basterds, which is quite possibly one of Tarantino’s most eagerly anticipated movies. Inspired by the 1978 Italian film Quel maledetto treno blindato - Inglorious Bastards (notice the correct spelling) - Tarantino’s latest has been of a sort of passion project for the director for quite a while, the film having been in the development stage for some time. Because the film has taken so long to bring to the screen there is an understandably level of anticipation, and considering the brilliance of Tarantino’s past works the level of expectation is so high that the film will inevitably suffer from comparison. On its own terms, though, Tarantino’s distinctive style seems a perfect fit for the material and even if this film isn’t as good as his past films it is certainly quite glourious in its own right.
In Nazi-occupied France during World War II, a group of Jewish-American soldiers known as “The Basterds” are chosen specifically to spread fear throughout the Third Reich by scalping and brutally killing Nazis. Under the leadership of Lt. Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt) The Basterds’ ranks most prominently include Sgt. Danny Donowitz (Eli Roth), who becomes known as “The Bear Jew” following his brutal acts of clubbing Nazis to death with a baseball bat; Sgt. Hugo Stiglitz (Til Schweiger), a rogue Nazi who was sentenced to execution for the murder of 13 Gestapo members and freed by The Basterds; and Cpl. Wilhelm Wicki (Gedeon Burkhard), an Austrian Jew who escaped the Nazis and returned to give them hell. Their mission is to kill as many Nazis as possible and take their scalps as trophies and when they do leave survivors they permanently scar them with the swastika symbol on their forehead so that they can never hide or forget the things that they have done. The Basterds carry out an apache style war but they change their tactics somewhat when they are given a special mission to carry out. A cinema in Paris, owned by the young Shoshanna Dreyfus (Mélanie Laurent), has been chosen by German Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels (Sylvester Groth) and German war hero Frederick Zoller (Daniel Brühl) to host the premiere of Nazi propaganda film “Nation’s Pride” and in attendance will be all the high ranking members of the Nazi government including the Fuhrer himself Adolf Hitler (Martin Wuttke) and the British government sends Lt. Archie Hicox (Michael Fassbender) to join the Basterds and arrange a meeting with a British contact, German actress Bridget von Hammersmark (Diane Kruger), who can get them into the premiere, their mission to blow the cinema up, killing the entire Nazi government and thus ending the war. However, standing in their way is Col. Hans Landa (Christoph Waltz), the head of security for the premiere who has earned the nick name “Jew Hunter”. Soon, The Basterds also cross paths with Shoshanna, whose parents were murdered by Landa years earlier and is also plotting to kill all the Nazis in attendance by burning down the building.
As you would expect from Quentin Tarantino Inglourious Basterds is anything but subtle. From start to finish it is extremely OTT and has its tongue firmly in its cheek, with it being clear that this film is not meant to be taken too seriously, something that is essential given that the film bears little resembling historical accuracy (although the look and feel of the time and place seem quite authentic in everything from sets to costumes), making this film a nightmare for historians. Historians obviously are not the target audience though and Tarantino delivers a film that can be appreciated by moviegoers, both mainstream and niche, albeit to different extents. As with his past works, the film is packed full of references and in-jokes to obscure films that only the most ardent of movie buffs will detect or appreciate. The excellent soundtrack, in particular, is packed full of homages to other films, many of them spaghetti westerns, from which the film has clearly drawn much inspiration. These are aspects that only a minority among the audience is likely to appreciate but there is a lot for viewers uninitiated in classic European cinema to enjoy as well. It wouldn’t be a Tarantino film without lots of heavily stylized and quite brutal violence and this film certainly has its fair share with the actions of The Basterds proving to be both brutal and bloody, although stylish enough to never feel gratuitous. The film isn’t entirely what you might expect, however, and there isn’t as much of this violence as you would probably expect. In fact, there are quite large sections of the film in which The Basterds don’t even feature, with a subplot involving Shoshanna Dreyfus getting a lot of screen time. The two story strands are well interwoven, however, with the story as expertly written as any other Tarantino movie, very smartly written and extremely engaging, even though the film is a tad too slow moving and talky at times - the film does drag a little in a few scenes and the film is very long at 2 hours 30 minutes - and much of the dialogue isn’t the sharpest that Tarantino has ever written, with few lines that you will likely to be quoting outside of the cinema. The use of both English and German, and even Italian at one point, in the dialogue is a nice touch, however, with the film being completely realistic in the language department if nothing else. There is also a lot of humour, coming in the form of witty situations and banter between characters. In particular, a scene where Lt. Raine speaks in Italian, attempting to pull off a convincing accent, only for his American accent to be unmistakable, is hysterical. It is a testament to Tarantino’s writing that he can get such great humourous moments out of a film which you really wouldn’t expect to be funny at all. The success of the film isn’t all Tarantino though and the entire cast, consisting of a few big names and a lot of people you’ve never even heard of, deserves credit for their fantastic performances. There are too many great performances to mention them all but Brad Pitt deserves particular recognition for what is quite possibly one of his best, and undoubtedly his most entertaining, performances yet. Eli Roth is also very good, being a perfect fit for the rather twisted role of "The Bear Jew”. Besting both of them, though, is Christoph Waltz whose performance is the single best in the entire film. He is perfectly over the top but at the same time still entirely believable as “The Jew Hunter”, simultaneously entertaining and threatening, something that very few actors would be able to pull off, and there is definite potential for an Oscar nomination in this performance. The film even has performances from a few people you might not expect with Mike Myers (face it, the last person you would ever expect to see in a Tarantino movie) as a British general and some narration from Samuel L. Jackson. Overall, Inglourious Basterds is definitely not one of Quentin Tarantino’s finest works but that doesn’t stop it from being an extremely well made and extremely fun movie on its own terms, and one that has just as many merits as a piece of art as it does as a piece of entertainment. Inglourious? Anything but!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shorts **
When it comes to movie directors there are few with a more bizarre list of credits than Robert Rodriguez. The self made director, producer, writer, and pretty everything else related to film production, has given moviegoers such ultra violent adult orientated fare as From Dusk Till Dawn, Sin City and Planet Terror yet he also made the move into family films with his Spy Kids trilogy and The Adventures of Shark Boy and Lava Girl in 3D, certainly an extremely varied resume. While his family films are hardly his finest works (the latter one is probably one of his weakest in fact) he has shown himself to be quite capable at more family friendly films and with a rather distinctive, somewhat strange style he has created ones that really do stand out from the crowd of family flicks being churned out by Hollywood. Now, he has returned to the family genre once again with his latest film Shorts, a film which thus far has been receiving quite lousy word of mouth, word of mouth which it seems might actually be justified.
In the suburb of Black Falls all the houses look the same and everyone works for Black Box Unlimited Worldwide Industries Incorporated, whose Mr. Black's (James Spader) Black Box is the ultimate communication and do-it-all gadget that's sweeping the nation. Other than keeping his parents (Jon Cryer and Leslie Mann) employed, however, the Black Box has done nothing for 11-year-old Toe Thompson (Jimmy Bennett), who just wants to make a few friends. One day a mysterious rainbow-colored rock falls from the sky, hits him in the head and changes everything. The Rainbow Rock does the Black Box one better: it grants wishes to anyone who holds it. Before long, wishes-gone-wrong have left the neighborhood swarming with tiny spaceships, crocodile armies, giant boogers, and outrageous magical mayhem around every corner. But it's not until the grown-ups get their hands on the Rock that the trouble really starts. Now Toe and his newfound friends - Helvetica Black (Jolie Varnier), Nose Noseworthy (Jake Short) and Loogie (Trevor Gagnon) - must join forces to save their town from itself, discovering along the way that what you wish for is not always what you want.
Shorts is undoubtedly the strangest family film that you will see in cinemas this year. For this reason, there are some positive things that can be said about it. As with Rodriguez’s previous family films there is something very distinctive that really sets it apart, however it is not something that necessarily makes the film particularly good in its own right. There is a definite quirkiness present throughout, an element that is present in everything from the characters to the set design and to the crazy situations that arise, but, sadly this alone doesn’t make the film especially enjoyable. One of the major flaws is the way in which the story is presented, with events being shown completely out of order, in the form of short stories (hence the title). While it could be said that Rodriguez was trying to do something different here, if anything, the unusual story format just makes the film rather confusing, and rather unnecessarily so as there doesn’t seem to be any particular need for it to be presented in this manner, other than perhaps the fact that each of the stories is really just a skit and the whole ‘wishing rock’ thing is just a weak plot device to link all the skits together. This wouldn’t be too much of a problem if the skits themselves were really funny but the film is also severely lacking in the humour department with only a few scenes that might raise a giggle or two. There does seem to be a message among all the jumbled ideas but the plot is too much of a mess for it to really come through effectively. The film doesn’t exactly impress in other areas either, with effects that are passable, if a times quite charming, and acting that will hardly blow your socks off. In the acting department, almost everyone entertains but no one is even half way believable with big name adult actors (including William H. Macy and Kat Dennings in addition to those aforementioned) being completely wasted and up and coming child actors who may show some potential but are nowhere near fulfilling it yet. All in all, Shorts is a family film that is not without its charms but it is really missing that little something and as a result it is a film that not only will adults struggle to enjoy but even some kids might have a tough time liking as well, and it really is clear that Robert Rodriguez should stick to what he is best at. If nothing else, though, it is certainly unique.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I Love You, Beth Cooper *
Films adapted from teen novels are quite the in thing in Hollywood at the moment it seems with films such as Twilight and Nick & Norah’s Infinite Playlist, as well as the upcoming Youth in Revolt demonstrating that literature aimed at young adults is a good place to find distinctive, refreshing and original movie ideas. I Love You, Beth Cooper is another such adaptation, based on the novel of the same name by Larry Doyle - who also wrote the screenplay for the film. And with Chris Columbus on directing duties it is certainly a film that promises to be a sweet viewing experience. However, Columbus - whose credits include the first two Harry Potter movies and Bicentennial Man - has often been criticised for making films that are way too sugary, raising the question as to whether you too will love Beth Cooper or if, like most sugary treats, viewing this film will prove detrimental to your health. Surprisingly, neither is the case.
Denis Cooverman (Paul Rust) is a geeky high-school valedictorian who throws caution to the wind by expressing his love for popular cheerleader Beth Cooper (Hayden Panettiere) during his graduation speech. Much to Denis' surprise, Beth responds by accepting an invitation to a party at his house later that day. But Beth's meathead boyfriend Kevin (Shawn Roberts) is none-too-pleased that his high school prize is mingling with the biggest dweeb in school, and when Kevin shows up at his house and tears the place apart in a fit of rage Denis, his best friend Rich (Jack Carpenter), Beth, and her friends Cammy (Lauren London) and Treece (Lauren Storm) all pile into Beth's car and flee for their lives. For four long years Denis sat silently behind Beth in class, pining for a way to make his love known. Now, over the course of one long night, Denis will finally get to know the girl of his dreams better than he ever thought possible. If he manages to survive until morning, it's sure to be the story of a lifetime
I Love You, Beth Cooper proves to be somewhat surprising in that it is nowhere near as sweet as you would expect from a Chris Columbus film. This, however, is a not a compliment. Had it been done as a sweet romantic tale this could have been a very charming film but like with many teen films it is let down by a barrage of crude, predictable and lame gags, mostly revolving around drinking and sexual situations, that completely conflict with the sweet core of the story. Were the gags actually funny - for the most part the film is a laughter vacuum, although a few scenes are fairly amusing - they could actually complement the sweeter scenes but instead they simply counteract most of the positive aspects that the film has to offer. The developing connection between Denis and Beth is actually quite touching but a string of poorly constructed situations, which seemingly only exist to create cheap laughs, constantly gets in the way. It would be wrong to blame everything on Columbus, however, as there is plenty of blame to be shared around. The screenplay by Larry Doyle is weak, recycling situations and gags from numerous better (and, in some cases, worse) teen movies and most of the characters are two dimensional stereotypes that are hard to really care about. This is as much the fault of the actors as Doyle though. Paul Rust lacks charisma as Denis and plays the nerd type character so stereotypically as to make the character annoying as much as he is genuinely likable. At times it is actually quite difficult to really empathise with the character as a result. Hayden Panettiere doesn’t fare much better. Despite having shown on several occasions that she is a very capable actress she seems destined to forever typecast as a cheerleader and she doesn’t even do anything notable with the part here. Her character too is a complete stereotype and it frequently seems as if she was cast for her looks rather than acting ability as for most of the film she is seen wearing a variety of revealing outfits and in one scene she is even nude. Clearly the target audience of this film is horny teenagers as it is unlikely anyone else will think much of Panettiere’s performance. Most of the other characters also conform to stereotypes, e.g. the tough guy boyfriend. It is also a shame to see Alan Ruck and Cynthia Stevenson, as Denis’ parents, so completely wasted. In his glory days on sitcom Spin City Ruck was absolutely hilarious but here his comedic talent is not utilized one bit. This is just one problem among many that makes this potentially promising film into a near total dud. If the sweetness within had been allowed to dominate I Love You, Beth Cooper could have a very charming and heart-warming film but instead it just stands as another teen comedy that has little to offer anyone other than the most undemanding of teenagers and will be completely forgotten in no time. Beth and Denis and certainly no Nick & Norah that’s for sure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dance Flick ½
The spoof movie is a genre in disarray. Last year’s Meet the Spartans and Disaster Movie (both by the same ‘creative’ team - Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer) brought the genre to a whole new low. And now there is yet another spoof in the form of Dance Flick although thankfully Friedberg and Seltzer are nowhere to be seen. Unfortunately, though, this film comes courtesy of the Wayans, the people behind the first two Scary Movie films, or at least that is what the studio would have you believe, as the director of Dance Flick is Damien Dante Wayans, nephew of Keenen Ivory Wayans, the director of the Scary Movie. In other words, this is a film made predominantly by the next generation of the Wayans family (although their elders do still play a part among the team of 5 writers, all from the Wayans family, as well as appearing in the film itself). Does this bode well for the film? Don’t count on it.
Megan (Shoshanna Bush) has a dream of going to Juilliard and becoming a dancer. While she is performing at her dance audition, her mother is tragically killed in an auto accident. Megan must move to another city to her destitute father's apartment which is located in a condemned building. She enrolls in Musical High, an inner city high school. Since her mother's death, Megan has given up dancing. Megan meets some new friends at the school like Tracy (Chelsea Makela), Charity (Essence Atkins), and Thomas (Damon Wayans Jr.) who dance in a street dance gang. Thomas and Megan connect, and they must face their impossible dance dream together. They try to bring the ultimate dance crew together to win $5,000 at the local dance contest.
There are two positive things that can be said about Dance Flick. Firstly, (unlike Disaster Movie) the film mostly spoofs films that are actually relevant to its title and central theme - the films spoofed including Step Up, Step Up 2 The Streets, Save the Last Dance, You Got Served, Stomp the Yard, ATL, Roll Bounce, High School Musical, Little Miss Sunshine, Hairspray, Fame, West Side Story, Flashdance, Dreamgirls, Ray, Twilight, The House Bunny, Black Snake Moan and Crash. Secondly, there are no prolonged irrelevant pop culture gags (although there are still a lot of pop culture references, most of them quite irrelevant). Sadly, however, these two things do not make for a film that is even half decent. From a technical standpoint there is nothing at all good that can be said about this film. The storyline is pure rubbish, shamelessly ripping off countless genuinely good movies for the sake of cheap gags that aren’t even very funny anyway, and there isn’t a single smart or original idea to be found. The acting is terrible with the characters themselves being little more than prolonged jokes and, for the most part, the film is completely unfunny, with many of the gags being crude and gross and, in some cases, tasteless and offensive as well. There are a few scenes that will raise a few giggles but these alone are not worth the price of admission, rather being the kind of thing you would watch for free on You Tube. So, all in all, Dance Flick is just like most of the other recent spoof films, poorly made and not even particularly entertaining. It is at least an improvement upon Meet the Spartans and Disaster Movie (not exactly difficult to achieve) but regardless you certainly won’t be dancing if you see this film.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reviews by Robert Mann BA (Hons)
Monday, August 24, 2009
Interview With Theresa Shell From The Imaginarium Of Dr. Parnassus Support Site
I managed to stop Theresa Shell, curator of The Imaginarium Of Dr. Parnassus Support Site for a while and had a lovely chat. Below is the result.
BRWC: How did it all start for you? How did we get to the support website for Dr. Parnassus?
Theresa: I'm a screenwriter and producer of indies myself and my daughter is an actor and when I started reading in March about the issues with US distribution, I knew that a lot of it was that the global public didn't know the movie existed. How can fans want to see a movie if they don't know it exists? So I decided that we had to let them know this amazing film existed. I deal with the same thing with my own projects. If you don't have a big studio behind you then you have to take the laboring oar. People tended to think it was just the US who didn't know about the movie but it was the globe. I'm proactive by nature so I thought, well, then let's just get it out there. This is too important to not tell people. This is going to be an incredible picture. They still don't know in a great deal of the world. We have to tell them.
BRWC: Distribution seem to be one of the recurring problems filmmakers face, even more so for Gilliam. How do you overcome that? The website is helping big time... Is the United States the problem? The UK and most of Europe seem more interested in this film. Is that an unfair thing to say?
Theresa: Distribution is a problem for any small independent film. Even one with a stellar cast. In this economy it's even worse. Distributors are leaning toward the big budget, cookie cutter films that they keep regurgitating by the fistful and because of this the landscape is changing for all special-division and small indie films. It's terrible. If we do not speak up now and change this then we may not have these amazing films to share with generations to come. There would be no Slumdog Millionaires, no Brokeback Mountains, No Capotes. That is a tragedy beyond measure in my book. A lot of people think the US has been the big sticking point with this movie, but that's not the case. Terry told our site in an interview just last Friday that they made the decision not to wait for America but to concentrate on Europe. America will have to catch up, but it did not stop or slow them down.
Is US distribution important. ABSOLUTELY. We're talking almost half of the world's film market being the US. But more importantly than that is the US citizens want the opportunity to see this film. Not in only big cities and tiny arthouse theaters. They want to see it all over the USA. Europe and Australia are onboard with the film, but only in the last couple of months really. Since Lionsgate and Hoyts started announcing dates and promoting the film. As a whole the global population is still very much in the dark as to its existence.
BRWC: Terry is an awesome, world renowned filmmaker, responsible for some wonderful movies, The Fisher King, Twelve Monkeys, Brazil, Tideland... I would have thought his name attached as director would be enough. And you mention the credit crunch, that should be another reason for the studios to embrace Gilliam's latest. Or is he unlucky/cursed!?
Theresa: LOL, I knew this question was coming. I'm smiling. I think this "unlucky or cursed" thing folks have tagged on to Terry is just not true. Everyone has rough times in life, all of us, it's just that Terry or any "celebrity" lives their lives in the public eye and with society talking about so many things on the internet, they tend to only talk about the sensational things and not the normal everyday things that go right in these people's lives. They don't find the normal things as exciting as the things that go wrong. So no I don't think he's unlucky or cursed. As for distribution being connected to his being a world renowned director, that's the way the business is in this economy. For instance one would think that with a cast of Johnny Depp, Heath Ledger, Colin Farrell, Jude Law and the great Christopher Plummer, distribution would be a given. It's just not. A good example of that was Johnny Depp's The Libertine. FABULOUS movie. One of his best. The movie almost didn't get seen. The distributors want the most $$ for the least investment. Who made the movie or the cast has a lot less bearing on it than the public realizes. If they can continue to feed the audience the same diet of the same movies and make mega bucks off it. They will. The public isn't stupid though. They are tiring of it.
If I may say one more thing on that. The distributors/studios take on what they consider wise usage of their funds (in this economy) escapes me. Instead of investing reasonable in amazing films like Dr. Parnassus, they will spend obscene amounts of money to make and promote a movie that turns out to be a disaster. Then when called on the carpet by it by the public, cry economic hard times as being the reason they cannot support truly creative, artistic film.
BRWC: The whole studio those baffles me sometimes. They let pointless people like Michael Bay run riot on film, yet films like this one and even Tideland are neglected. Tideland I liked a lot. I had to wait until it release on DVD. Did you think it needed a site like yours?
Theresa: The whole Tideland distribution debacle makes me sad. What a great film. It is pure theater at its best. I do think that it could have used a place to bring it to the public. I can't tell you how many people I have talked to who never even knew there was such a film. I wish someone could please explain to me how you can call any project a failure when it has never been given appropriate exposure to the public. It's ridiculous. Tideland is brilliant.
I echo Terry's feelings that the audience isn't as dumb as the studios/distributors treat them. It's just that they are given no choice. They need to quit dumbing down their audiences with mush. Give them a substantial meal and they will grow stronger and be challenged and attend movies more and with more enthusiasm. The audiences tend to become lethargic from lack of proper creative nourishment.
BRWC: Tideland is wonderful. Most of his films are. Any there any of Gilliam's work you particularly lean to? Which one have you seen the most and why? I didn't like The Brothers Grimm by the way!
Theresa: Ha, ha, I loved The Brothers Grimm. Loved it. My grandchildren watch it and are totally mesmerized by it. They adore it. I would have to say The Fisher King is my favorite. It just touches my heart so much. I love the film.
In a film, I look for something that really affects me, either with humor, poignancy, anger, fantasy. I don't want to see guns and getting blown up and that kind of tragedy simply because I can watch that every day of the week on CNN. It's part of the very sad state of our world. I want something that makes me feel. That transports me. I feel like Grimm would have played much better with audiences, had it not been fooled with by those in control of the film's destiny.
BRWC: So you're not a fan of Brazil then?! It's dystopia isn't it? I think it's my favorite of his work so far.
Theresa: Not a huge fan of it, however, I don't dislike it. It's just not my favorite. Now Parnassus! That one's completely down my alley. I can't wait for people to get a load of this film. I don't think they have a clue how glorious it is going to be.
BRWC: Me too! Are you privy to more than the rest of us? Are you in contact with Terry at all? He does read the site... What does he think of the support site? If he walked in now, what would you ask him?
Theresa: Am I privy to more than the rest of you. Maybe just a little, LOL. I've read the screenplay and seen clips. I have friends in the industry who have seen the film and can't stop talking about it. I love the screenplay. It's very exciting, funny, heartwarming. I mean every emotion you can imagine. I'm not an expert by any means, I'm a fan, but I think we have something truly amazing on our hands. Pure, unadulterated Gilliam at his best. The site is completely unofficial. It's by fans for fans. I do talk to Terry from time to time and he has been incredibly supportive of us. He's a lovely man. So brilliant. So funny. So normal, lol. He held an hour long live online chat with our members and visitors after Comic-Con (I've got the transcript on the site) and he has judged a fan video contest for us. He has been so kind as to mention our site at Munich and at the BFI event and told Phil Stubbs that he comes to our site to find out what's going on with his movie. That meant so much to me. But as far as "knowing" him, no I don't though I do have the honor of speaking with him from time to time.
BRWC: How are the people who come to your site? Generally all nice? Have anyone given you anything of interest? Any gossip/rumours? Give BRWC an exclusive!
Theresa: Nothing short of amazing. They are just the most amazing people you could hope for. They awe me. I have received some information from some fans, however, I'm afraid we don't do the gossip thing. Sorry, guys. I never print anything I can't back up because I feel like you guys are depending on me for facts. Lord knows, there are rumors in abundance on the internet, what is in short supply is dependable information. Wish I could help you.
BRWC: What's the most stupid, untrue rumour you have heard about the film, or Terry?
Theresa: To me, the most untrue rumor I've heard, has been that the US didn't want to distribute the film. Many don't know that Sony Classics was far from the only distributor in the game to distribute this movie. They wanted to announce the distribution deal at Comic-Con, but Samuel Hadaida, whom I think is just amazing, is so meticulous with contracts that he just wants to be sure all the i's are dotted and the t's crossed before the announcement. There is great enthusiasm for the film, but when the media doesn't hear what they want to hear when they want to hear it they tend to spin it as something's got to be wrong. Then the public reads it and believes it because they trust their media sources. It's quite sad. But that has got to be the most untrue rumor.
Now as far as the type of distribution it gets in the US, that remains to be seen and will depend tremendously on the fans participation and appropriate publicity which is a weak point with Sony Classics
We need to be sure this film gets out of Los Angeles and NYC and gets into cities and towns all over the US. This is true of all other countries too. Distribution does not guarantee you're going to see it in your home town. That's the next step which is Exhibitors. The theaters owners. You can have distribution rights coming out your ears but if those exhibitors don't buy your film to put in their theater, you're out of luck. That's where the audience comes in. They have to let these theater owners know they have an audience.
BRWC: What are you hoping for when the film's released? What will you and the site do? Push for DVD/VOD?
Theresa: Wow! I have so many hopes for this movie and everyone involved. I am hoping that it will be shown in wide release around the world and that this world who deals with such sadness and hatred in their everyday lives will be given the opportunity to walk through the mirror into this beautifuly, funny, heartwarming fantasy. For us all to escape to that wonderful place that just amazes us. I hope it will be successful and that it and its cast will be appreciated for their contributions, not by awards, though they are wonderful, but by the appreciation of the audience, the public. This movie is such a labor of love for this cast and crew and Terry. I want them to be able to spread that generosity further to the world. As for DVD/VOD I definitely feel that it in its future, and I'm sure Sony will make a wonderful DVD available around the world. One thing I do know, lol, is there won't be a director's cut as Terry says he never does them. But you can count on it being something very very special.
BRWC: Ah director's cuts... Are they a good idea? I always wonder if Terry would ever revisit Jabberwocky for example, or any of his films in 10,15,20 years from now.
Theresa: Good question. I think that people who are really into a specific film, that faction of the audience, adores them. But, at the same time I think a lot of the audience really don't consider that when they purchase a DVD. I seriously don't think Terry will revisit old completed projects. From everything he's said of late when this type of thing comes up he gives me the impression he is quite looking forward to moving forward with new projects. I don't know though. I guess anything is possible.
BRWC: What of his next projects are you looking forward to? Zero Theorem? I know nothing of this, expect Billy Bob is involved...
Theresa: I don't have a preference actually, though I am so excited about Quixote. Terry has never failed to amaze me with his films, even when the film may not be one that is one of my favorites. His brilliance and imagination never disappoint. So, it's very difficult for me to name a favorite. My daughter worked with Billy Bob in a film and says he's just such a brilliant, natural actor. She really enjoyed working with him. Terry has scrapped his plans to do Zero Theorum however.
BRWC: Are they other filmmakers and films you love other than Terry? Anything that has stuck with you since you were a child?
Theresa: Oh Wow! Yes. Luke Davies' Candy! I love this film. Love it. It's brilliant. To Kill A Mocking Bird. I love the fabulous old Cecil B. DeMille films and absolute love Todd Haynes as a director as well. I've been on a personal mission over the last two years to see as many old classic films as I can and if I got into that list, I would drive you nuts, LOL. I also love Hitchcock. I think also that Catherine Hardwicke is going to be something special in the realm of directing. She's got the most wonderful eye. That's all I think.
BRWC: If someone who knew nothing about the site or indeed Terry's work, what would they expect to get from clicking to you guys?
Theresa: Well, they would find us at our site or through our Twitter or lastly our facebook page. We are very active on the social networks to get the word out about the movie and are blessed that we have a good following on each. They would find out that we aren't like most websites. We're not just Terry Gilliam fans of Heath Ledger or Johnny Depp fans. We have been amalgamating sites for Terry, Johnny, Heath, Verne, Lily, Colin Farrell, everyone in the film. We carry all the current news and video for them
We also have a forum where fans can discuss topics about the stars, Terry, the movie, what's going on with the film. We carry a total list of current release dates for all countries and update any date that changes and we Tweet them as well.
BRWC: How long has it been going for, it must take a lot of your time. Is their a team behind the site?
Theresa: We started in March with 10 members and right now are well on our way to over half a million hits since May. And hoping always for new members. We started the last week in March. I am the owner and administrator and I have a research admin, Jodelle, who helps me by gathering and organizing all our media (we have a gallery with over 300 pictures from the movie) and a head moderator for the forum. The members are very proactive though and we do numerous projects where everyone participates to spread the word around the internet. We are from every country you can imagine.
We have online brainstorming chats and set our course and each go about our assigned tasks from there. We have a global public awareness campaign in which fans from all over the world, including Terry, lol have sent in their photos holding signs telling the world about the movie and what country they are from. The Bulgarian Magazine BGFun dedicated their entire August issue to the site and campaign. And I'm proud to say that we are the only site Terry has recommended on his Twitter
BRWC: Do the member contribute in other ways? Have they sent you stuff? Any one involved in the film itself. An old friend of mine was involved in an ill fated documentary on the film's making. Not sure if it will make the light of day. Hopefully we will see it. I also watched the vid from the awesome Brendon! It's great to see people meeting the great man and giving your site the goods.
Theresa: I finance the site completely myself. Members give me the greatest donation of all and that is their time and participation. No more. Terry did donate drawings he did as prizes for our video contest. Other than than everyone's incentive is their faith in this movie. Anything financial I take care of. We run no ads and generate no profit.
BRWC: Similar system we have here at BRWC. Just hard work and love. It's great Terry loves your work enough to recommend it to his peers, that must mean a lot.
Theresa: Oh as for anyone at the movie giving anything, other than Terry's drawings no. However, we did join the British Film Institute in a contest where together we gifted 5 winners with tickets to the Gilliam Season they are having throughout the month of August.
BRWC: Fingers crossed for you. I know your based in the US, but you have a lot of readers from all over, at moment a lot from Brazil! I've seen the photos! What is that about?
Theresa: It is totally our faith in this man, our love for great film and our faith in the cast. It's also the fact that we think it's time we made it clear that the audience wants this movie. We have chosen to speak up and we want to be heard. We fill those theater seats. We are international, yes. I love that, because we may have language barriers but we get on a translator and we communicate just fine. The Brazilians are just fabulous aren't they. Such heart, such support we get from them. Their pictures are part of the ones from the worldwide global awareness campaign I mentioned about. How do you get the word out, you put yourself out there, and tell the world what you want, you tell the distributors and you tell the exhibitors and everyone. You stand up and speak. That's what our photos are. We are putting a human face on the audience. We're not some statistic, we are human beings. We're showing them that.
We say it very clearly. Give us this movie in wide release around the world. You have an audience. Here we are, just waiting for it. You should go to our YouTube Channel and watch some of the videos they've made. They're incredible.
BRWC: What sort of thing would we see on the YouTube channel?
Theresa: Oh my goodness, a little of everything. We have a lot of Terry's old animations, interviews and other videos of the cast, interviews with Terry, festival footage, fan support videos, videos in support of US distribution. Some made with professional actors some with non-actors, montages, the High Definition trailer. You name it, it's there. We have a channel and subchannel. It's called Jodelle's Imaginarium.
BRWC: Amazing, I'll be looking later after this. The internet's a powerful which could be used in different to support and promote film and its' makers.
Theresa: I also have the HD movie clips on the main site. You can access them in the side bar along with HD photos and movie stills.
It's been such a fun and gratifying experience. People have become so used to just accepting whatever the studios throw at them for movies and not being listened to. It needs to stop and we feel like this is the time to do that. We need to show them that we are here. It's been such a joyful journey. Frustrating at times, but joyful
BRWC: You mention some frustration. What has that been? Any problems getting the support site up and running?
Theresa: The frustration is of course things like release dates or not seeing enough publicity for the film. Waiting for things to happen. We can't sit and be angry that we don't get to see the films we want to see if we don't try to do something about it. We can't be complacent, we have to make it happen. We can make it happen.
BRWC: I agree, and I love your site. Do you ever look at other sites, like Dreams? Sites like yours are there to promote this great man to more people. Do you ever talk to other sites, etc.?
Theresa: Oh Dreams is the mecca of Terry Gilliam sites and Phil Stubbs is one of my heroes. I'm very active on their forum and keep in touch with Phil. It's a fantastic site. I keep a finger on the pulse of the movie on all kinds of sites and also keep very close touch with sites for all of the cast as well. We are in constant communication with a large group of sites, they contribute to our site and also carry links and information from our site. We have quite a network around the world of affiliates and links.
BRWC: Do you feel the publicity for the film will pick, especially when we get closer to the release date, whenever that is?! And what are your thoughts on the trailer?
Theresa: And for those of you out there who are interested, we are always looking for more members, member sites and affiliates to spread the word. We'd love to hear from you. I definitely feel as we get closer to TIFF and the kick off of release dates with the UK release of the film publicity will pick up. Lionsgate is doing a stellar job of promoting the film. Also I think we will see excellent promotion in France, Samuel Hadaida's home, and Australia is infamous for it's excellent publicity for films and with Heath being their star, I think we will see wonderful things from Oz. Those people know how to promote a film. I think the US is going to be difficult. Sony Classics is known for under publicizing films. That is an area of concern. But I think with TIFF we're really going to start seeing more.
As for the trailer - in a word - BREATHTAKING
BRWC: Have you thought about how your site will cover both TIFF and the film release?
Theresa: I'm already working with some of my folks to be at TIFF. We were at Munich, Terry joined us in an online chat the morning after he was at Comic-Con, we have someone going to Dragon*Con which he'll be doing in Atlanta over Labor Day Weekend. We try to cover every event. We had someone at BFI as well. LOL, We're everywhere, we're everywhere! Or we try to be.
As for the film release in the UK, it is my great hope to have someone there, though I don't know for sure at the moment. I'm doing my best on that one. Keep your fingers crossed for me. How about you? What are you doing that night?!
BRWC: I'll see what I can do when it comes out! Theresa, you are gorgeous, wonderful and amazing. Thank you so much for your time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)