Sunday 13 December 2009

Me and Orsen Welles... and that Zak Effron guy.


I really enjoyed Richard Linklater's new film "Me and Orson Welles" and It's hardly surprising. From a guy that made Waking Life, Dazed and Confused and the Before Sunrise/sunset combo the challenge of making Zak Effron likable to me hardly seemed a challenge at all.

The scene where Richard and Gretta are discussing her short story was prectically identical to Linklater's scene in Waking Life where his character describes a novel where nothing happens, just real people have real experiences.

With regards to the film itself, Christian McKay is phenomenal in his portrayal of the arrogant and brilliant actor/director. Zak Effron's character has no struggle at all, he walks into a job and dazzles with minimal effort. There is no major arc for his character, he is as deeply rooted in ego as Welles but with less effort. His youth actually personifies his lack of character to the point where his talent becomes a disadvantage, You think he is there as a nice guy to compare the arrogance of Welles, in fact, it could be argued that Richard is there to remind us that nothing in life should be handed to us so easily, well certainly not if we expect it to taste as sweet as it possibly could. In many ways, Effron is perfectly suited for this role. It's a shame his character wasn't given a chance to show real frustration or anger at being misunderstood. He seems perfectly at ease with people accepting him as someone almost on a karmic pay out! Welles however, commands respect through the use of a reputation created and cultivated. Both these characters are at war with themselves and at war with each other.

Experience and genius vs youth and talent.... It's an explosive match up.

Thursday 26 November 2009

Van Gogh - Life ain't as sweet without the bitter

It's interesting how the unhappiness of somebody's life can be celebrated from an acceptable distance if it brought entertainment and understanding to others. Van Gogh is a perfect example of this. Would we rather he was a happy, well adjusted human being with a comfortable, easy life? Or are we actually happy he suffered the misery he did as we celebrate his genius?


As a society we have no problems extracting the beauty without questioning the source, sometimes a little too lightly. Some obviously appreciate the entire package of Van Gogh's existence but some just appreciate the beauty without seeing the sadness, not that there's anything necessarily wrong with that.

I am fully aware of the importance of suffering throughout the arc of a person's life. Van Gogh experienced higher highs than most but as a result had to deal with the lower lows, many would consider this both a blessing and a curse. The majority of society lives in a mundane medium in which they rarely venture too far in either direction of happiness or sadness. We are all kept in our safe bubbles of content.

Personally I would rather be someone that experiences life to the full, someone who appreciates beauty and misery so much that they experience both bliss and depression in a fluctuating process. Anytime i drift to far into the middle I usually self destruct because feeling misery is still feeling something right? It's the not feeling anything at all that is the curse. Based on this logic, I certainly agree Van Gogh was the lucky one.

Wednesday 25 November 2009

Assumed Familiarity

Can't we all just get along? No, probably not. Often, we can all assume such a great deal from other people. We assume they are at the same point in life that we are and will automatically understand our point of view, which is shaped by a lifetime of unique and personal experience. I was born in 1981. You may have been born in 1969. What does this mean? It means that you are on a different path to me and will share similar experiences in recent times, but will have approached them from such a different perspective. This seems like such an obvious thing to point out, but it also seems to be society's biggest downfall, that being the lack of ability to empathise with others.

Then there are other times, particularly as we get older we develop a particular type of screening process. This actually helps us recognise that we have nothing in common with certain people and encourages isolation for many people.

Finding the balance between these two approaches will lead to a healthy outlook, if we deviate too far to either side then we'll probably have problems!

Tuesday 24 November 2009

The problem of choice - Stranger than fiction


Choice is supposed to be a liberating concept, it's supposed to free us from the shackles of a prisoned life where we are forced to follow only one path. But too much choice is cripling. If the person presented with this choice is an over analytical soul, then he will often reject this choice and self destruct. Why make a choice when you can simply drift along in life?

Well, making a choice, even if it takes you down a wrong path is indeed better than making no choice at all. There is a beautiful illustration as to why this is the case in the film "Stranger than fiction." In this film Will Farrell is advised by Dustin Hoffman to stay at home, not to answer the phone, door, post, basically to cut out all communication. By doing this, he can prevent the plot/storyline/HIS LIFE! from progressing in a way that he deems out of his conrol. What happens is a balldozer comes through his window, forcing the social interaction from him regardless.

The message? You can't run and you can't hide from choice. Make decisions before life makes them for you.

(The day I take my own advice will be the day you see a genius emerge! Untill then..)

Monday 23 November 2009

A lot of people ask me, where the fuck I've been at. I don't know....but I do know, I'm back now.

Saturday 15 August 2009

Wednesday 5 August 2009

Thank You, Martin Huxter

Thank You,  Martin:  For your lovely speech,  and for your participation and presence at the Roosevelt Hotel event.  

Friday 3 July 2009

Waiting for Huxter



Monday 29 June 2009

The greatest dancer the world will ever know

I challenge you to watch this and deny the man was a dancing genius...

MJ doing what he did best

Saturday 27 June 2009

Farewell to Michael Jackson - The world's brightest star will shine forever.



It's been a strange few days for me. I never thought I'd ever become one of those silly people that get so upset over the death of a celebrity but Michael Jackson was a little bit more than that. Anybody in my general age bracket will recall his music throughout their childhood, he gave his so we could have ours in a way. What's upset me the most are all of the cruel and judgemental things being said upon his death. The man was never proven to have done anything. Even if he eventually is, I still don't subscribe to the levels of hatred that people choose to throw his way even before that day has come, or indeed after. Compassion is something he had and it's something the world needs to learn in order to deal with some of it's biggest problems. One person I know wrote "Paedophiles don't go to heaven" Aside from the fact that I don't believe in heaven and hell for many reasons including very problematic issues of morality and judgement, this is just blind hate. It gives no consideration for his kids that are left behind and that in itself is self-defeating and contradicting, if people really cared about the well being of children so much they wouldn't put so much hatred into the world.

Now this is very strange for me. I do, despite this level of compassion, have a very sick sense of humour. But that's because it's humour, the intention is to devalue meaning, some people actually seriously believe some things that are so simplistic it worries me. I actually cried for about 5 minutes watching some of his videos and this in itself tells me something.

The world is essentially just energy. There is positive and negative energy. Now people will say to me that I didn't know him the same way I will tell them the same thing, but you can just sense watching his videos that this man was a kind and gentle soul. The thing that really broke my heart was something my friend Nathan said: "He died thinking the world hated him" This is possibly one of the most upsetting things I think I've ever heard. To think what may have been going through his mind over the past few years is simply upsetting.

I grew up watching his videos, listening to his music, but the most influential thing of all was his dancing. Michael Jackson taught me how to dance and for that I will always love him. You have to be in the moment to be a dancer, you have to be one with the world and understand rhythm.Michael was rhythm, he made the beat come alive.

Thanks for everything you put out into this world Michael, your star will always shine. They can't hurt you now.

Sunday 14 June 2009

The Gun Seller - Hugh Laurie

Hugh Laurie, Hugh Laurie, Hugh Laurie...WHY ARE YOU SO MODEST!!??? You are a fucking genius. This is one of the funniest, wittiest and most enjoyable books I've read in a long time probably ever.

"I hit him because he was trying to kill me," I said "I'm like that"

I heard that Laurie didn't even want to put his name to the book and hesitantly agreed after being told that it needed a name to sell it. Mr Laurie, when will you realise your brilliance? His romantic banter between particular characters is not only perceptive but comforting to experience on the page, he really writes some outstanding dialogue. I will more than likely give this another read very soon, just because laughter is every bit as comforting as realising the intelligence of a guy who deserves every single bit of success he's enjoyed...or should I say achieved

The Outsider - Colin Wilson

I finally finshed this book the other day after taking my sweet-ass time to get to grips with its genius. There is a lot of referencing to books I haven't read which made parts of it somewhat tedious. However, the many sections about Nietzsche, Nijinsky, Van Gogh and Lawrence were thoroughly rewarding. Wilson takes us through a fair and balanced exploration of the outsider and all that it entails. Wilson also manages to summarise perfectly what I've been trying to articulate for many years about the effect film can have on an individual and how it is at best temporary:

...anyone can notice the same phenomenon when he comes out of a theatre or concert or cinema, having been completely 'taken out of himself'. No one would expect to pass through an intense emotional experience and not feel 'a different person' afterwards. But in a cinema you only pass out of your own life into other people's; you learn nothing about yourself; hence the change, the mental reflection, wrought by it can only be expected to last for more than a few hours

Wilson goes on from here but his point is extremely valid. The book can be considered somewhat gloomy but it's a very important book dealing with a very harsh reality of man's paralysis.

If salvation means self-knowledge, then it looks as if most men are pre-destinately dammed

Tuesday 26 May 2009

My First Stand-up performance

I did my first stand up performance last night at The Cavendish Arms in Stockwell, a brilliant place to get your feet wet in the world of comedy. I brought several friends with me and was lucky enough to have someone record it for me. Anyway...
HERE IT IS!!!

Friday 22 May 2009

Pointless popularity contest....but

Please vote for me. Basically, because It's fun to win stuff...Come, make me immortal!

Thursday 14 May 2009

1st stand-up spot


I shall be attempting stand up on the 25th of this month at the Cavendish Arms in Stockwell. I think I am both excited and confident but I might be lying.

Tuesday 5 May 2009

Advice for the month


An insult gives you more satisfaction than praise, provided it smacks of jealousy. ~ Jean Baudrillard

Thursday 30 April 2009

MC Envy - Blinded by the lights.


So I was at work at 2am the other morning doing very little except watching the NBA play offs and my friend Nikhil dropped in with his laptop and recording equipment to record a new track in our meeting room (It's soundproof!) Now 95% of the music he is involved with isn't my kind of thing. I like hip-hop and not so much the garage, drum and base stuff that quite honestly, just isn't my thing.

But this guy is remarkably talented and HE'S SOOOOO YOUNG!!! He's been doing it for years though and has a brilliant, positive and creative outlook on life. If you get a moment, give the guy a listen to, this is a really great track Envy - Blinded by the lights

Friday 24 April 2009

ITLADian filmmaking?

Well, after seven years procrastinating, The God Game series (six short digital films which I call surrealist documentaries) is finally going to be viewable online, thanks to the assistance of a member of the younger generation! All the films (and the final capstone work, Being the One: Document of a Delusion) will eventually be upload to my youtube channel, here

For a description of the God Game film project, which was actually completed back in 2002, you can visit my blog.

The premise of the film (surprise surprise) is quite ITLADian -  it actually began with a dream I had, about being in an acting class and using a megaphone to create an after-death persona, who would comment on one's life from "the other side." This instantly gave me the idea of making a movie - combining documentary format with role-playing, with psychotherapy, in which I would ask players to imagine their deaths and reconcpetualize their lives, as stories, seen from this transpersonal (Daemonic) POV.

An idea ahead of its time? Let's hope so, anyhow, because it's taken seven years for the films to get "released"! But here they are....

Monday 20 April 2009

The Fragmented Self

Hi Martin & friends

Here's a recent interview I did as part of a Guardian project with the artist Mark Titchner

It covers various subjects, including schizophrenia, the environmental crisis, multiple personality disorder as relating to our moods, the personal self as Frankenstein's monster, Matrix Warrior, Fight Club, the primal self, mythic narratives of moden movies, and other juicy tidbits.

JH

Saturday 18 April 2009

New Jersey Devils Playoff Game 1 with Kevin Smith and Jennifer Schwalbach Smith





On the same day I saw the fantastic play God of Carnage I was extremely fortunate to be invited to a Hockey game with the Smith's and several other friends from the world of View Askew. We were grateful guests in the VIP box seats enjoying a spectacular view and wonderful company. Although the night was cut slightly short due to their fatigue of travelling from L.A. that morning, I had an extremely good time chatting with Jen and meeting Amy her husband and once again seeing Teejay. I'd like to thank them both for incredibly kind hospitality to me on my travels and a truely amazing evening. The devils won 4-1 and spirits were high on the train as I got the NJ Transit back to the city. Thanks Kev and Jen, was a pleasure meeting you both.

God of Carnage



I was luckily enough to get tickets (not cheap!) to see the fantastic play God of Carnage during my stay in New York and I thought it was incredibly funny, truly an exhausting journey of humour and drama. Starring Jeff Daniels, Hope Davies, James Gandolfini and Marcia Gay Holden, this witty exploration of parental compromise is perhaps the funniest show I've had the pleasure to catch.



Perfectly paced, the pressure and tension build towards some hilarious climaxes, often at the expense of shortly lived pride and dignity. Gandolfini fluctuates brilliantly between rational and incredibly cut-throat honest. Jeff Daniels comedic timing is perfection and he enjoys some of the best interjections as the play progresses. At the beginning, Gandolfini plays the comedic beats to perfection, often waiting a good 10-15 seconds before replying with a simple one-word-retort. Hope Davies who has been fantastic on Six Degrees recently enjoys a humorous character arch. Her character seems to be the most repressed and when she finally unleashes the fury, the stage is brightened up with all sorts of mess. I hadn't seen much of Marcia Gay Holden before but she was remarkably likable. Her character was very raw, it was one that infected the other characters, she refused to compromise her position which fuels the fun and makes for some fantastic match ups. The chemistry between all four characters is outstanding as they take turns unloading on one another. Gender plays a part as the women take on the men, this is a short lived alliance though as it soon becomes a case of everyone for themselves.

Jeff Daniels monologue about the insignificance of anything we do is something I could relate to and I enjoyed it thoroughly. In the tradition of Peter Boyle's speech about "One guy gets sick, another guy gets well..." it points out how all we're doing is killing time before we ourselves are killed, it doesn't really make a bit of difference. Anna Paquin's speech at the end of my favourite film HurlyBurly is very similar.

Worth every penny, go see it if you're in New York. It's at the Jacobs Theatre.

Thank You to Martin Huxter

I just wanted to say a  hearty  thank you to Martin,  for his company while he was in New York City last weekend.  I t was wonderful to see you again,  and to partake in your lovely conversation.  My niece and son really enjoyed meeting you.  Here's to many more such visits!

Thursday 9 April 2009

My Blueberry Nights



I watched this for a second time the other night and I really, really like this film. It's a very unconventional romantic drama, in the way that it concentrates on the (eventual)couple's time spent apart, rather than their time together. The Cafe owner (Jude Law) that Elizabeth (Norah Jones) becomes close with tells her the story of the big bowl of keys. Customer's that have left their keys behind after having had too much to drink, also left a story for Jude's character to tell. That's really what the film is about. How we're all making impressions on each others lives, we become entangled with others and often we don't even realise how much. It's in this message that the film really appeals to me.


When we're gone, all that's left is the memories we leave behind in other people's lives.


Elizabeth writes to the Cafe owner she became entangled with in the first 15 minutes of the film. She is asked "Why not just pick up a phone?"

She explains that somethings are just better explained on paper. There is a real glimpse into the decline of romance in modern day times due to technology. The greatest romances include travel, separation, longing, suffering, letters and stories being told. With the invention of social networking sites today it's so much easier to stay in touch with people and also to find people who we sadly lose. This is a great and wonderful thing, but I believe it comes at a price of great story telling.

Imagine:

It was the greatest night of my life, we spoke for hours, we laughed and soaked up every minute of each other's company. Then suddenly, we were separated in the crowd and I couldn't find her. I was heartbroken. I made a promise to myself on the way home that one day I would find her. Half an hour later I looked her up on Facebook and found her, I sent her a message and heard back from her immediately. Then I ate some pie.

You see? Not quite as romantic is it!

But back to the film, Norah Jones and Rachel Weisz look EXACTLY THE SAME!! It's sneaky to put them in a scene together, even when they cross paths they can hardly believe it. Elizabeth gets into several adventures on her travels, forever becoming a part of the lives of several other people who are facing their own problems. She arrives back to the cafe a year later, a better perspective on love, life and anything else that matters. The film is a journey and it's an enjoyable journey.

Sunday 5 April 2009

Anthony Peake - Author of the month.

My friend, the author Anthony Peake has been voted Author of the month on the Official Graham Hancock website. There are fantastic updates every day on there from the world of science and technology.

Please click here and go and show your support or simply soak up the wonderful discussions that are currently taking place there

Sideways



Probably the best film from 2004 and another for my Top Ten which may have run into the teens in a somewhat strange fashion. It's the most generic method ever to simply take two characters that are very different, put them together and watch the hilarity, but this film is so much smarter than that. We've been both of these characters at different moments of our lives and they illustrate the plight and misery of all men, regardless of circumstance.

Miles (Giamatti)is a self destructive writer fresh off of divorce, clinging to the hope that his recently finished novel will sell and therefor make everything else in his life, seem that much better... Or perhaps just a little less shit. Miles is taking his long time friend Jack (Hayden Church) on a Wine tasting get away in the vineyards of Santa Ynez Valley. Jack is an actor with a sexual appetite that refuses to compromise with his impending marriage and all that this commitment entails. Jack is on the hunt for fresh flavour while Miles wishes to recreate moments of comfort and familiarity. We are given a glimpse of their differences early on when Miles stops by to pick up Jack and is asked to sample two different types of Wedding cake. One of them is light, one of them is dark. If pressed to make a decision, Miles chooses the dark, oh, yes he certainly does.

Before they begin their week, Miles takes Jack on a small detour to see his mother on her birthday. After getting annoyed at her constant meddling in his (ex) marital affairs and complimenting his friend ot the point of embarrassment, Miles believes he has received enough crap to justify stealing a healthy amount of money from his mother's underwear draw. The scene is nicely capped off by his mother asking if he needs some money... oops.



Finally arriving in wine country, Miles hesitantly points out Maya (Virginia Madsen)to Jack. She seems very pleased to see Miles and Jack is not surprised by this, he sees the good qualities in Miles and wishes his somewhat negative friend would attempt to do the same. Still before long he has his own agenda, Maya's friend Stephanie (Sandra Oh) who is a single mother with an appreciation for Jack's more care free approach to life.

What follows is a hysterical exploration of sex, deceit, friendship, a naked trip through an ostrich farm, golf course violence, disappointment, heartbreak and a lot of laughs. The running metaphor of wine is climaxed beautifully in a scene between Miles and Maya. Miles tell us the reason why he likes Pinot Noir so much, it has to be coached and encouraged to reach it's full potential, it can't be rushed and much patience is needed to see the beauty it has to offer.



Miles is a painful character to watch. We watch as he reaches several conversational crossroads and can see he has the ability to make the right choice displaying his many positive qualities, but time and time again we are subjected to him running scared into the familiarity and comfort of misery and failure. It would be rather depressing if it wasn't so funny. "Did you drink and dial?" Jack humorously asks after Miles gives us a display of self-pitying at the restaurant. Moments before they went in there Jack anticipates the fuck up and warns him not to ruin the night. It's at this point that Miles barks the quote of the film at his friend.

I am NOT drinking any FUCKING MERLOT!!!

Having read the book and loved it, I can honestly say that this film does more than do the story, characters and everything about it absolute justice. The type of colour the film is shot in is a distinctive one and really adds to the beauty of the Wine country these two characters embark upon. An absolutely classic film that really shouldn't be missed by anyone.

Thursday 2 April 2009

Agents of Chaos: Alan Moore's Alchemical Worshop, and an Authentic Miracle of a Movie

Warning: the following review is likely to be somewhat “biased”: When I first read Watchmen in my early twenties, it affected me as deeply as any work of fiction ever had—it changed my life. So my responses to the movie—as described below—are going to be more than a little colored by a highly personal connection to the source material.


Watchmen, the movie, directed by Zack Snyder and adapted by David Hayter and Alex Tze, sticks remarkably close to the source material, the ground-breaking graphic novel written by visionary author Alan Moore (whose name isn’t on the film) and illustrated by Dave Gibbons. Moore is a self-confessed magician and uncontested genius of comic books, and his twelve issue, 300+ page superhero epic is a stupendously ambitious work, not merely one of the great accomplishments of comic book writing, but an outstanding work of fiction in any field. (It made Time magazine’s 100 greatest novels—what more do you need to know?!)

When I first heard about the Watchmen movie, I was skeptical—to put it mildly. In fact, I was indifferent. And when I saw the first stills from the movie, I knew, absolutely knew, it was a bust, that they were turning it into something gaudy and noisy and messy and dumb—what Hollywood does best. Beyond all doubt, “the visionary director of 300”—a mind-numbingly vacuous live-action cartoon cum commercial for Spartan warfare—would debase the material by catering to the lowest sensibilities of the mass audience. 


But within ten minutes or less of the movie, it’s clear that something else is happening. The film, like the graphic novel, starts with the murder of the Comedian. The perfect pre-credit sequence, it sums up the delicate resonance of the story by both keeping to genre conventions (for an opening action set-piece and plot-starting murder) while adding a whole new layer of emotional nuance and poignancy. The Comedian’s weary acceptance of his fate speaks volumes. He has been waiting for this moment, and he’s secretly relieved that it’s finally come. If he puts up a token resistance, it’s only because he doesn’t know how not to. He keeps up his end of the mythic narrative to the bitter end. 

This is followed by the lovely, eerie frozen images of the credits, by which flesh and blood becomes comic book image, or vice versa. The credit sequence is inspired: both delightful—enchanting—and wryly amusing, it lets us know that we are in good hands and can settle back to enjoy the most fully satisfying and morally complex superhero enactment in the history of movies. Watchmen is an authentic miracle of a movie—the best of its kind (the philosophical action fantasy) since The Matrix came out ten years ago. (Plot wise, Watchmen is less ingenious than The Matrix, but morally it’s far more sophisticated.)

What’s really astonishing about this movie is that, in under three hours, it manages to capture not only the spirit of the novel but the full, epic breadth of its storyline. I’ve read the comic book at least a dozen times and yet I couldn’t even say which parts the movie misses out (except for the obvious, the parallel story within a story of “Tales of the Black Freighter”). The odds against a big budget Hollywood adaptation of a fiction masterpiece being almost 100% faithful, and at the same time managing to translate it whole into a new medium, are truly phantasmagorical.

Yet therein may be a problem: Watchmen is so completely true to its source that anyone not already enamored of the comic book may be unable to fully grok it. The storyline is straightforward enough, but the peculiar blend of social realism with the pulp roots of comics, and the idiosyncratic, poetic, magical genius of its creator, make Watchmen utterly unlike any superhero movie, or any movie, we've ever seen before. It’s a freak in the best sense of the word: a creature of unfathomable beauty so unique that some people may mistake it for ugliness. It creates its own aesthetic.


What’s perhaps most unusual about the film is its complete moral ambiguity, the way in which it steps entirely outside of the usual mythic paradigm of good and evil, spins off a parallel reality, and weaves its very own mythic narrative. Just as the graphic novel did within the comics field, Watchmen creates a new paradigm for the superhero movie. It’s a paradigm which I highly doubt other filmmakers will be willing, or able, to match, much less develop. There are no heroes in Watchmen, and no villains either. There are rather extraordinary (and extraordinarily flawed) human beings, struggling to make sense of a world in chaos, wrestling with their own complicity in that chaos. These are easily the richest and most affecting characters to ever grace what is ostensibly a fantasy movie. They are not just functions of the plot, as Neo and Morpheus are functions of the plot. As in all great writing, Watchmen’s story develops out of the characters and not vice versa. And these characters are nothing if not ambiguous.


The most dislikeable of the characters, Ozymandias, is driven by a seemingly pathological, philanthropist desire to save the world, and this he succeeds in doing. But we don’t admire him for it—we can’t admire him, because no end could justify these means. He’s an elitist, driven by intellect and a sense of his innate superiority, but devoid of heart. On the other hand, there is much to admire in the murderous vigilante Rorschach—who is all heart. His code of no compromise, his ruthless implacability, his deranged sense of justice, beneath which is a strange tenderness and a deeply wounded soul. Rorschach simply cares too much not to cause mayhem. Like Travis Bickle, his pain, rage and confusion spills out into the world—and he matches it atrocity for atrocity.


Dr. Manhattan, on the other hand, cares little for humanity’s plight: he’s moved beyond that. Was ever a god this chillingly disconnected, a superhero this utterly disaffected? Yet, as Billy Crudup (the only recognizable face in the movie) plays him, Dr. Manhattan is deeply touching. He’s human despite himself, and in his way he’s as lost a soul as the rest of these characters, because he is so utterly, completely alone. As written by Moore, Dr. Manhattan is the first fully believable depiction of a superhuman being—a god—in movies.


On the face of it, the Comedian is the most sheerly unpleasant of the characters: a rapist and child killer, the puppet of the military industrial complex (in a beautiful twist added by the moviemakers, he’s also JFK’s actual assassin). Yet, loathsome as his actions are, he doesn’t ever become hateful to us. None of the characters are defined—or limited— by their actions; they are far too alive for that. Moore’s genius is that he uses the very limited and limiting genre of the superhero comic as an arena—a sort of child’s playground, but also an alchemical workshop—to work through his philosophical themes and develop flesh and blood characters—like forging gold from lead. With Watchmen, he created a kind of feedback loop that expands the story from genre melodrama, into infinity—the realm of archetypes, of true myth. Paradoxically, by turning superhero archetypes into ordinary, believable human beings, ordinary beings are transformed into something extraordinary, something magical, transcendent. 


Moore creates a world of impossible possibilities, and the movie recreates that world with breathtaking fidelity—the kind of loyalty and integrity that seems unimaginable in Hollywood, but that has somehow come to pass. Admittedly, the film does fail in one crucial area: that of mapping the endless series of synchronicities between images, words, events, that form the texture of the graphic novel, and that in a sense are what it’s really about. More than the story, or even the characters, Watchmen describes the texture and flow of mystery that living in a quantum universe entails, and what’s lacking in the film is the necessary plethora of fine details, of recurring motifs and themes. Besides that smiley face, I didn’t notice any repeating phenomena, and so the scenes aren’t woven together at this subtler, more esoteric level. The result, for those who aren’t familiar with the original story, may seem to be an almost straightforward, though complex, action movie; they may well miss the finer undercurrents moving beneath the gloriously gaudy surface. 

There are other minor flaws: the sex scene to Leonard Cohen’s “Hallelujah” is something we could certainly have done without; perhaps more seriously, the extreme violence seems out of place here, largely gratuitous—it doesn’t add anything and may even detract from the dreamlike quality of the story (though with the Rorschach scenes a degree of savagery is probably intrinsic to the material). And sometimes what works in the graphic novel can seem mannered and contrived on screen (such as Night Owl’s question, “Whatever happened to the American Dream?”). Moore’s dialogue is often self-consciously clever, loaded, and this works better when we can hear it in our heads and give it our own inflexion. Actors can be all at sea with these multi-layered lines. There are also areas, such as Rorschach’s revealing the abyss of his soul to the liberal-minded psychiatrist, that need more time to be developed, that are rushed and hence diminished, and the film would probably have worked better, been less choppy and more textured, if it had been allowed an additional ten or twenty minutes of screen time.

But despite these flaws, the sheer joy and originality of the source material fills every frame. It animates every performance with an exuberance, audacity, and poetry, that is unique to the genre. I haven’t even begun to analyze the schizophrenic subtext of this film—perhaps another day?—but I can honestly say that, in thirty years of movie-going, I have never been so pleasantly surprised by a movie. Watchmen has every imaginable reason to crash and burn. Yet somehow, against impossible odds, it takes flight.

Monday 30 March 2009

R.I.P. Andy Hallett



Andy Hallett, who starred as Lorne on the TV series Angel, died of heart failure last night at age 33. My thoughts go out to his friends and family.

Knowing.


First of all I'd like to say that overall, I was pleasantly surprised with this film. I had heard a lot of bad things and it IS Nicholas Cage on his current run of awful films so, all things considered, it was pretty good. Don't get me wrong, Nicholas Cage is one of my favourite actors, he is capable of some outstanding performances; Bringing out the dead, Leaving Las Vegas, Matchstick Men and Face Off being just several to mention.

The film initially ponders the debate of Determinism vs Probabilistic theory with regards to the origin and fate of the Earth and its hosts, them being us. The factors are obviously hopelessly generic to support the storyline, Nicholas Cage is the son of a preacher who has lost his faith after his wife passed away. He finds comfort in the proceeding events as he learns there was nothing he could do to save her.

The catastrophe scenes with the plane crash and the subway are brutally hard-hitting and loud. Loud in noise, in rawness, they feel incredibly real and this is actually surprisingly scary. The angel people or whatever you want to call them are a freaky cross between James Masters and the "Hush" whisperers from Buffy the Vampire Slayer. The scene where one of them creeps into the boy's bedroom and points behind him out the window to a glimpse of the future is incredibly freaky, mainly because of the music which is rather unsettling.

The gift of death for Emily's daughter brings her the comfort that her mother was not crazy. She doesn't have to endure the pain of letting her daughter leave with the Spike looking Angel people sporting Matrix leather Jackets, unlike Cage's character. Also, It's always a brilliant idea when freaky shit is happening left, right and centre and the world may be ending, to drive to the middle of the forest and leave your children unattended to in the back of a car.

As many critics of Nostradamus have argued, by predicting something we can often make it happen. The ITLADian perspective that we create our own universe can be taken to the extreme view that these predictions become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Nicholas Cage comes into contact with these predictions yet by trying to stop them he merely allows them to follow their natural course. Such reflection is an inevitability, we think we are gaining control over our universe by learning physical laws and understanding it's past but it would seem we are only learning what we are spoon fed. As audience members we have the luxury of looking at the film from an outside perspective and being able to realise certain things that they can't. We are the people in the film and this realisation in itself, is actually rather paradoxical!

So what do we learn from this film? Well, we learn that Bunny Rabbits are regarded to be on a higher hierarchy than Nicholas Cage by Angels. As the kids are taken onto the spaceship they are told they can bring the Bunny Rabbits. The little boy tries to bring his father but soon learns that Nicholas Cage is not a desirable guest for where they're headed. So where are they headed? Well, it seems they are taken to a Weetabix advert to run through the fields. This modern day Adam and Eve run towards a tree which arguably has religious significance. The ending is a bit silly, it's almost as if it abandons its path towards the end and splits into about four different type of genre.

Bunnies yes, Nicholas Cage no.

Saturday 28 March 2009

Bright Lights Big City



A brilliant film from 1988. So why is this one of my favourites as well? Well, In many ways this film is quite similar to HurlyBurly. It's sort of like HurlyBurly but with an actual storyline! Storyline, how conventionally boring right?

The film is about a young writer who is trying to make a name for himself, despite being trapped in a self-created world of drugs, a terribly mundane job as an editor and a world of pain at the loss of his wife to a career in modeling and his mother to cancer. The film appeals to me in the same way HurlyBurly does in that it celebrates and then condemns self destructive behaviour. Jamie Conway is on a path of destruction and before he can wake up, he must first go down in flames, he must hit rock bottom. His unwillingness to "wake up" on the words of Spike Lee's "School Daze" are shown in a running analogy throughout the film. The newspapers keep us updated on the situation with the "Coma baby" that seems rather stubborn to come out and join the rest of the world.

The film begins with a beautiful shot of Times Square at around 5-6am. Having experienced this view myself after a first date with a New York Girl it brings back wonderful memories. I also lived in the West Village where a lot of this is shot, there are shots of the "Village Cigars" store and the laundrette around the corner from where I lived 17 years after this film was made.

There is one scene with a ferret and Keither Sutherland that almost lowers the tone of the whole film but somehow, they manage to pull it off (literally) without hurting the film too much. The film takes place over the course of a week in the life of Jamie Conway, Sunday is humorously missed out due to a rather large hangover which induces a sleep running into the ever enjoyable Monday morning.

Michael J Fox is very likable and manges to provoke sympathy despite constantly making the wrong choices, he tries to stay in one night and write, however this doesn't last long and he's soon back out sampling some more "Bolivian marching powder" The dialogue is extremely funny in places and allows J. Fox to show off what he does best. His character is a kind of stepping stone from Back to the future to Spin City and he really captures the plight of Jamie Conway. There's something very enjoyable and interesting in living vicariously through others, especially when they're lapping up a life of such a hedonistic nature.

Great film that probably makes my top 10 favourites.

Friday 27 March 2009

New York City to Welcome Martin Huxter

As Martin Huxter's ( aka Hurlyburly)  American associate,  I just wanted to announce that Martin will be arriving in New York City on April 12.  I,   my 21 year old son,  Andrew,  and my 28 year old niece,  Danielle,  will be giving him a heartly welcome in Times Square,  where he will be staying at the Hilton Hotel on 42nd street.  We look forward to fine conversation with this lovely and illustrious British film critic and social satirist par excellence:   Bravo,  Martin!  It will be a privilege to have your lovely British self in Times Square.

Living with Demons

Excerpt from The Blood Poets: A Cinema of Savagery, vol. two, "Millennial Blues," by Jake Horsley

If the eye could see the demons that populate the universe, existence would be impossible.

The Talmud

Demons come in all shapes and sizes; they can be metaphor or metaphysic, troll or goblin or gremlin or vampire, werewolf or poltergeist, serial killer or zombie. But, whatever they are, the horror film is a washout without them. Very few movies, horror or otherwise, have endeavoured to deal with demons in the true, theological sense of the word—that is, the inverse of angels, spiritual (therefore invisible) beings that populate the Earth and meddle in the affairs of men, specifically, to possess his body and/or torment his soul. Adrian Lyne’s overwrought but genuinely terrifying thriller, Jacob’s Ladder (1991), is the only, outstanding case I know of of a Hollywood mainstream movie (until Fallen, that is) dealing with “the problem of demons,” more or less directly and (what’s more) intelligently. The fact that, by the end of the movie, the whole story has proven to be no more (but also no less) than the hallucinations of a dying man does little or nothing to detract from the film’s intensity (though it may undermine its integrity somewhat). This is, after all, the story of one man’s soul, and its battle to come to terms with the life it has lived, to overcome the demons of the past that refuse to let it go. Jake’s doctor, played by Danny Aellio, quotes Eckhart on the subject: 

The only thing that burns in hell is the part of you that won’t let go... Your memories, your attachments; they burn them all away. They’re not punishing you, they’re freeing your soul. If you’re frightened of dying and you’re holding on, you’ll see devils tearing your life away. But if you’ve made your peace, then the devils are really angels freeing you from the Earth. It’s just a matter of how you look at it, that’s all.

Although as a thriller, Jacob’s Ladder appears to be little more than medieval-gothic/new age hokum, at a more esoteric level, the film is surprisingly, at times disturbingly, persuasive. The writer, Bruce Joel Rubin (who went on to write the insipid Ghost and the loopy Deep Impact ), has obviously taken the time to research his subject, and the film achieves an atmopshere of occult menace and paranoia such as few horror films ever come close to (Polanski’s The Tenant, though a more obviously psychological thriller, is one of the few). Lyne’s direction is characteristically unimaginative, slick and assured but lacking either subtlety or sensitivity. Yet his commerical touch here (Lyne is yet another English filmmaker trained in advertising) is more suited to his material than in his other, uniformly lousy sex-orientated films (Flashdance, 9½ Weeks, Fatal Attraction, Indecent Proposal). He shows a horrifying flare for depictions of demonic presences and hellish landscapes, and the monsters here, which are the monsters of the protagonist’s mind—are amongst the most appalling ever put on the screen.

Lyne’s lack of empathy as a director is compensated for (as it isn’t in his other films) by the presence of Tim Robbins in the lead role of Jake. It’s Robbins’s first major role, and although he doesn’t do anything really suprising here, he’s sympathetic enough in what amounts to a difficult part (like Harry Angel, Jake is the fall-guy), and his proficiency carries the film along. The story concerns not merely demons of the spiritual kind, in fact, but also of the political and technological variety: it’s about a secret mind control drug used on American troops in Vietnam, designed to bring out the savage, aggressive side of the psyche (to tap into the liminal part of the brain?) and to turn the soldiers into “unstoppable killing machines.” The drug proves too effective by half, however, as even the most miniscule doses turn the troops into homicidal maniacs who tear into anything in sight, including each other. What’s worse, a side-effect of the drug is the onset of intense hallucinations, and a kind of sickly, encroaching paranoia. The survivors (of which Jake is one) suffer from the conviction that they are being persecuted by inhuman forces, and literally see demons on every side. 

The trouble with the film’s resolution (that Jake is in fact dead) is that, if all this is just a dying man’s dream or vision, then how are we supposed to take it? As a creation of his own mind, or as a projection of a future which he might have lived, had he survived? The film seems to want to have it both ways. After all, we’ve watched the whole movie taking it to be “true,” then, in the last few minutes, we are asked to accept it as a dying man’s fantasy. Obviously, the first hundred minutes far outweigh the last two, no matter how much of a “revelation” they may be. And in actual fact, the last scene is a bust, anyway, because it doesn’t add anything to the film, really, but only takes (or attempts to take) everything we’ve just seen away from us. The film closes with a rather lacklustre caption informing us that, “the hallucinatory drug BZ was used in experimentation on soldiers during the Vietnam war. The Pentagon denied the story.” This—the fact of mind control experimentation by the government—is a reality that I trust most discerning American citizens are aware of by now, however dimly; but the film itself offers us no specifics, no authentic details, no single reason for us to take it as factual. The case it presents us with (even if it hadn’t just been exploded as “fictitious” by the film itself) seems flaky, not because it’s far-fetched or exaggerated (anything but, I fear), but simply because it is insufficiently well-researched, and therefore seems to lack plausibility. Actually, the whole script is a mess, because it seems to be unsure itself, as to whether the demons are an hallucination caused by the army drug, or whether the whole army-drug story is just an hallucination created by the demons, or whether it’s all just a metaphor anyway, created by the human mind, as it prepares to face its annihilation. Etc., etc...

Still, to a large extent, this chaotic lack of structure, of coherent intentions, works for the film and not against it, because it creates an appropriate level of uncertainty and mental panic in the viewer, provided of course that he’s prepared to suspend his disbelief and go along with the action, at a more emotional level; which is where the infernal presences and nightmare visions come in. Jacob’s Ladder is one of the very few recent movies (perhaps the first since The Manchurian Candidate) that successfully describes, or evokes, something of the despair, dread, paranoia and outright horror of modern life, in the age of psychological/germ warfare and shadow governments. It may even be that, with this film, “covert operations” became the modern version of “occult forces,” hence the use of theological terminology here meshes almost seamlessly with the espionage-paranoia plot. Jacob’s Ladder is an outstanding film of the ’80s, because it brings two very distinct kinds of horror together into a single nightmare: the nightmare of control. This effectively combines the ancient fear of possession (i.e., demons) with the modern fear of corruption (i.e., evil men, or government). 

Jacob’s Ladder is like an update, for TV generations, of the Frankenstein myth. The hidden forces of the American government, and their Nazi-like doctors (standing in for the old Baron), are never seen in the film—as befits their covert nature—but their presence is certainly felt. No longer working to create life, modern science is now dedicated to conquering the human mind, to turning man into a machine that can be controlled and deployed, like a living weapon. And of course, in the process of harnessing this forbidden knowledge, the demons of the psyche are unleased. Once unleashed, these demons (like Frankenstein’s monster) cannot be placated, they can only be confronted. Knowledge, science, technology, in this myth they all equal disaster. In Lyne’s film, mankind itself, represented by the shadowy, omnipotent but wholly corrupt powers of the Pentagon, has become the modern Prometheus; while society, as the laboratory in which these infernal powers-that-be operate, has become the arena where the unspeakable consequences unfold. It has become Hell on Earth.

Jacob’s Ladder is an authentic apocalyptic vision of a society on the brink of devouring itself, of succumbing to its own insanity, and being overrun by its own demons. Like its protagonist, it walks the razor’s edge between madness and illumination, between paranoia and heightened awareness; and the awful, unthinkable visions it conjurs up are—far from being the deranged rantings of a diseased mind or mere chimera summoned up by blind hysteria—images of things to come. The Vietnam war was a bizarre and covert kind of sociological experiment, as much as it was a bid for power. Drugs were used (on both US and Viet Cong), not only in an insane attempt to win the war, but, more disturbingly, in order to test their properties and discover more about the workings of the human mind, ways in which it might be controlled, manipulated, reshaped, destroyed, and to discover just what the human being was capable of. The war itself was unlike any other war before it or since; none but the very few know what really happened there, or why, and those few aren’t talking. 

For a Hollywood horror fantasy, Jacob’s Ladder draws on some pretty painful home truths. Its use of the supernatural, as the only feasible way to account for, portray, and above all do justice to, the kind of organized evil and insanity which government has become, seems to me to be neither arbitrary nor unjustified, but genuinely inspired. The human psyche is a dark and dangerous place, alright, maybe not unfathomable but certainly as-yet-unfathomed by modern man. Science and psychology, when in the service of governments, tend to plunder and pillage in precisely the same spirit as army troops in a foreign land—they are there to conquer, not to comprehend. The unmapped territories of Heaven and Hell, which in Rubin’s script are suggested to be strangely synonymous, are like areas of the human soul which we have been unable, or unwilling, to recognize in anything but metaphorical terms. Jacob’s Ladder literally brings the demons of the Vietnam war home to us, and makes no bones about designating the enemy: ourselves. And, by rediscovering the metaphysical dread that lies beneath our modern, urban angst, it presents possession (and corruption) not merely as a plausible reality, but as a fact of life, and one that we had better learn to live with, if we want to die right.


There’s so such thing as fucking demons!
Jacob’s Ladder

Thursday 19 March 2009

The curious case of Benjamin Button


Like so many films today, the film begins with a story being told by somebody on their deathbed, further supporting the theory that as we approach our death the playback of our lives begins, giving us access to all kinds of distant memories.

Entropy, the thermodynamic arrow of time and a whole bunch of other stuff that I occasionally manage to get my head around, indicate that time could run backwards in a particular set of circumstances but it is highly improbably, more than highly in fact, hence "the curious case!"

The concept of time pertains to man and consciousness, we are bound by it and our lives make sense because of it. Flipping chronology of life on its head as we know it makes for an extremely moving film that tackles many issues of our lives including perceptions on age, love, rites of passage, friendship and general expectations.

Lightning is a major mention in this film as it is in Francis Ford Coppola's Youth without Youth. Probability and inevitability are usually explored through miracles within film and arguably this is no exception. In the Coen Brothers film "The Hudsucker Proxy" Tim Robbins' character falls to his death and is saved as time stands still for him when an angel stops the clock. This idea that we step out of time upon our death is one explained by Anthony Peake throughout his work, helpfully explained with his "Sky Diver falling out of time." In this film though, a clock is intentionally made to run backwards in order to bring back casualties from the war, it's one of several indications towards our generalisations and assumptions of time and the way we take its nature for granted.

The film is beautifully shot and although enjoying the luxury of a fairly long running time, still manages to capture an entire lifetime in just a few hours on screen.

Wednesday 11 March 2009

VALIS

I just finished reading my first Philip K Dick book, that being the wonderful VALIS. Dick strikes me as someone that could have easily written in many different areas with ease, but for reasons lucky to us all, Philosophy and Science Ficition were the areas that allowed him to share his voice and his life best.

The mix of religion, physics, insanity, humour and just great story telling made this a real treat for me. The way in which VALIS is described is indeed extremely similar to that of the Daemon put forth by Tony, Or Anarch Peak!

"Kevin, inhaling deeply and gripping the seering wheel tight said, "She said that MY DEAD CAT...." He paused, raising his voice. "MY DEAD CAT WAS STUPID" ......

"My cat was STUPID." Kevin continued, "because GOD MADE IT STUPID. So it was GOD'S fault, not my cat's fault"

Pg 236

These two pages had me smiling very brightly. The way in which the book is structured is a perfect summary of the lengths to which individual search for meaning can be taken, but after all is said and done, we are left obliterated by choices and freedoms that usually leave us a bit perplexed (completely nuts!)

The story of his son who is saved by some information sent by VALIS kept reminding me of Anthony Peake's mention about the lady who was going to take those pills that would have harmed her baby, very similar and very interesting.

What engaged me so quickly was Dick's wit and humour, he is a very humorous writer, reinforcing my belief that the best comedy requires massive intelligence and perception about the world around you. As his world got more confusing, his humour and work obviously got more daring and from this, greatness was an inevitable consequence.

Next read from him?

Monday 2 March 2009

The Anniversary Party



This is another one of those little unknown gems that get found for a few pounds and turn out to be hidden treasures. I first saw this film a few years ago and loved it. Allan Cumming and Jennifer Jason Leigh play the troubled couple who throw themselves a party on their sixth anniversary. The two of them wrote, directed and produced the film managing to capture beautiful and horrifically awkward moments of love and friendship.

The cast is outstanding, boasting Gwyneth Paltrow, Phoebe Cates, Kevin Kline and John C. Reilly... Oh and the neighbours! After the guests share their stories everyone drops some Ecstasy just to give the drama and conversation that little kick-start it needs! A fantastic film that may just about sneak into my top ten favourites.

Thursday 26 February 2009

The never ending days of being dead - Marcus Chown

This morning at around 6am I would have like to have been asleep. Instead, I was finishing of one of the most enjoyable books I have read, that being Marcus Chown's "The never ending days of being dead"

The most interesting part of this book for me was learning about the concept of the "Omega Point Universe" This being a universe which contracts faster in one direction than all other directions. In such a universe, the temperature difference grow without limit, enabling an infinite amount of information processing before the universe ends in the Omega Point

I loved Chapter 11 - "The never ending days of being dead" and plan to look up more material from Frank Tipler as soon as possible. This particular concept is extremely similar to Anthony's Theory in many ways. Chown explores the possibility that we may already be in a computer generated reality brought about by the future fate of the universe.

I was also fascintated to learn more about "Omega" That being a number that cannot be generated by a computer programme shorter than itself. Far more interesting that I first anticipated. Chown's style of wrirting is so addictive and so easy to understand, he makes it enjoyable to learn as he has a great sense of humour about the topics he discusses.

Interesting insights also into the opinion that we should be searching for E.T in the computer rather than the universe. The entire book was an absolute pleasure, every bit as educational and enjoyable as "The universe Next Door". I will definately go out and get a copy of "Quantum Theory cannot hurt you" as soon as possible.

Sunday 22 February 2009

And the Oscar goes to...



Couldn't have been more deserved. The man is one of, if not the greatest, actor of our generation. I feel for Rourke, but it's hardly a complete snub in light of the tremendous performance by Sean Penn in Milk.

So incredibley deserved

So great to see the beautiful Robin Wright Penn crying in the background.

Saturday 14 February 2009

On the Road


I finished "On the road" a day or so ago. I really enjoyed it and can see why people were so enthusiastic about it's ability to capture a particularly era of adventure, freedom and search for meaning. The style of writing, although almost tedious at times, really allows the imagination to explore the adventure with Sal and Dean. I think I enjoyed part two the most, I'm positive another read of this at a later date would be complimentary to it's brilliance.

There were actually a few rather ITLADian quotes to enjoy - *

"Mankind will someday realize that we are actually in contact with the dead and with the other world, whatever it is; right now we could predict, if we only exerted enough mental will, what is going to happen within the next hundred years and be able to take steps to avoid all kinds of catastrophes. When a man dies he undergoes a mutation in his brain that we know nothing about now but which will be very clear someday if scientists get on the ball."

* ITLAD (IS THERE LIFE AFTER DEATH - PHYSICS AUTHOR ANTHONY PEAKE - SEE LINKS ON SIDE AND BOTTOM OF THE PAGE)

Incidentally, I find a striking similarity between the picture here and the rather famous shot of Marlon Brando? Anyone else?

Friday 13 February 2009

Teachers - Andrew Lincoln



What ever happened to this gem of a show? The first season was outstanding boasting the charming Andrew Lincoln and a whole cast of interesting and humorous characters. The second season was also fantastic until Andrew Lincoln left but the strong supporting cast managed to keep it interesting in his absence. By the third season the cast had changed much more noticeably and a brief return from Simon (Lincoln) brought back the old chemistry from previous seasons. After his absence though the show just went further and further downhill. A new term brought new teachers but we had lost interest by then. By this point the best of the show had either moved onto the hit film "Love Actually" or other projects. I think I recall seeing Lincoln in an old episode of Drop The Dead Donkey as Henry's nephew but have not seen much of his post-Teachers career other than Love Actually. Ben Chaplin should have been huge but has enjoyed massive success in film since "Game On" Hopefully we will see more from the charismatic Lincoln in years to come.

Thursday 12 February 2009

Igby Goes Down

I may have to reconsider bumping this into my top ten after giving this another view tonight. The film is supposed to be very loosely based on Catcher in the rye and the similarities are there to be enjoyed. It has that adventurous nature about it. Igby is a rich kid kicked out of school, several schools in fact. His mother, a cold and rich woman played comically by Susan Sarandon, tries to straighten out Igby before finally sending him to spend some time with his rich Godfather. Igby, feeling that over analytical teenage confusion, tries to live the more care free life of the down and out but ends up mooching off of the social networks of which he has become surrounded by. It's like a social class safety net that keeps him from falling too deep into the streets. He stays with his rich Godfather, sleeps with his mistress, why not? Rich kids love the perks of room service without knowing any different. He shares some drugs and then some sex with the beautiful Claire Daines as she becomes too weak to resist his boyish ignorance and enthusiasm for confrontation/arrogance. Unfortunately for Igby his brother is slightly more her age. Ol' Holden Caulfield like to call his brother a prostitute and a sell out for whoring his work, Igby has similar thoughts for his brother's loyalty to his sleazy Godfather. His preppy image is enough to take Sukki away from Igby and spark the frustration that ignites his resentment for his more successful brother. In the same way we saw a visit to his teacher from Holden, we enjoy the rather humorous moment of Igby delivering drugs to his former teacher and her husband at their home. Even in this rather humbling moment he has to make up a hysterical tale of his brother becoming disfigured to deflect the annoyance of hearing complimentary enquiries about his brothers academic success.


Igby's father played by Bill Pullman, has left the family after suffering with mental illness. We see a series of flashbacks that show Igby's admiration as well as his fear of what his father has become. Between his father and his mother Igby has a well of dysfunctional behaviour to draw from. Even on her death bed, his mother jokes back and forth with Igby who gives as good as he gets in an exchange of very dark and dry wit. Keiran Culkin's acting is pretty fucking impressive to be honest as he does a fantastic job fluctuating from numb one minute to out-of-control-crazy the next.

Slumdog Millionaire.



I was very impressed with this film, as many have been recently, the film has won many awards and It couldn't be more justified. At times the poverty-fuelled adventure of the characters resembles certain moments from "City of God" Few children slip through the cracks of the dangers they encounter, at times, it's almost a roll of the dice who makes it to adulthood and who doesn't. The film is essentially an underdog story but told in a way that manages to find hope through a world of suffering. The victory of the main character comes only at the expense of the misery of many others who aren't as fortunate as he is; he is the inevitable outcome of the poverty pyramid. The soundtrack is equally impressive, the moods of the film are echoed through the many wonderful songs used to compliment it. A great underdog story, the "Rocky" of it's Genre indeed.

Wednesday 4 February 2009

7 Pounds



This was a rather sweet and inspiring film although i did have issues with it in places. The film flashes a very slight resemblance to the film 21 Grams in it's subject matter but told in a very different way. I was reading a chapter in "The Happiness Hypothesis" about Altruism vs Selfishness in the evolution of humans. Self sacrifice is common with many animals and insects as they regard themselves as many cells in one giant organism. But despite evidence to show that the selfish people often prosper from a Darwinian viewpoint, Altruistic behaviour appears time and time again with Human Beings. It's a rather touching and inspiring film about redemption.

This film was very touching. I did have slight issues with the distribution of film time devoted to particular characters. Woody Harrelson's character barely saw more than 5 minutes of screen time despite being a very interesting actor/character to watch. The film seems to stop progressing about two thirds in with Will Smith struggling to do more than continue his portrayal of a strong silent type with a past to hide and a future to plan.

Despite being somebody who teared up watching "The pursuit of Happiness" I did manage to make it through this one without succumbing to the desire to shed a tear. The end scene brought me very close though, very close indeed. A fine performance by Will Smith, his acting ability never surprised me, ever since the often unknown performance he gave in "Six Degrees of Separation" I have seen the range that this superstar has. Bravo Mr Smith, keep up the good choices in roles, but next time, more of Mr Harrelson, he is rather underrated too.

Friday 30 January 2009

Gridlock'd



Vondie Curtis Hall (the man playing the Reaper) has written and directed an absolute gem of a film that you may have never gotten around to seeing yet. If you haven't do yourself a favour and go see it now. It's not about much, two Junkies trying to get into a detox-rehabilitation programme and having very little luck. Along the way they get caught up in the lifestyle to which they have become a custom to and all that it can entail. The beauty of the film can be found in the dialogue, the pacing, the frustration but mainly from how likable these to characters are, essentially it's a very unorthodox buddy movie. It stars the legendary Tupac Shakur boasting some of his best acting ever, he's stripped of his gangster image and able to show a much wider range of his acting skills. Tim Roth, who in my opinion can fluctuate from greatness to just painfully bad (although these may be more of a reflection of the actual films themselves) is hysterical throughout the film. It also features Thandie Newton, though we mainly see her through a series of flashbacks, the chemistry between these three actors is fun to watch as they remain upbeat, mainly through drugs and humour. Gridlock'd is also probably in my Top Ten films. The soundtrack is amazing and features some great tracks from 2PAC himself.

A fantastic indie film with a great performance from the actor who was just hitting his stride when he was taking away from us.

Thursday 29 January 2009

HurlyBurly - Misogynistic?



I wouldn't personally consider the play or the film to be misogynistic really, some of it's characters act in such a way but face the consequences of their actions. It therefor, doesn't celebrate misogyny, instead it explores it through a journey in which the characters have become extremely lost in a sea of self destructive behaviour. It's message is not one that views women in a negative light, the three women in HurlyBurly are very different and very strong characters. Donna is the youngest of the women, but she is wise beyond her years. She is the one that Finally helps Eddie find peace with his thoughts, explaining to him that everything pertains to him, yet he has complete freedom on how he feels about things because the truth is, it doesn't make any difference what he thinks about anything. This complete futility actually brings him comfort. Finally realising that he has no control over anything is his epiphany as he says "I may never go to sleep again, I may stay awake forever"

There is a scene where all the guys are sat around drinking and chatting, Mickey is telling a very misogynistic story about Bonnie. We see the very different reactions of the three guys as they each deal with their disgust in very different ways. Mickey makes light of it as he always does with every thing, Phil shows no form of disgust as he looks for acceptance where ever he can get it and Eddie is the character who actually refuses to find any of it funny, he is repulsed by it and we sense there may be hope for him yet.

Darlene is the most adaptive and suitable to their world. She is a woman who has come between two friends and makes no apologies for her decision to play the field. Although seemingly the most "normal" of the three women, she is not necessarily the most respectable

Eddie Is up and down, all over the place. (HurlyBurly) He is the unification of all of the characters positive and negative qualities. Mickey Is Jaded, detached, manipulative and will continue to live a very guarded and numb existence. Phil commits suicide as he is the most miserable of them all. Phil's character is arguable repulsive and disgusting, but he has a very honest and raw edge to his personality. Each of these characters face a different reality based on the way they treat others, it does not celebrate misogyny in the slightest, it is actually a warning against it and the hedonistic lifestyle with which it is often associated.

To summarise. Just because there is misogyny present in the themes explored by the film, doesn't necessarily make the film misogynistic. How can you ever discuss and explore the negative aspects of misogyny without showing it in a film? You can't.

I stand by my opinion that HurlyBurly is a masterpiece and remains my favourite film of all time.

Wednesday 28 January 2009

25th Hour



Without a doubt, one of my top 10 films of all time, Edward Norton had been wanting to collaborate with Spike ever since He got Game. which Norton considers to be a personal favourite

As far as I know (which means the following information is as reliable as your neighbours account of seeing Lord Lucan yesterday) this is the first film Spike Lee was a part of as a Director where he did not write the screenplay. He knew it had enormous potential obviously, the cast alone is enough to spark interest. It's the story of Monty, a guy who has one more day of freedom before he serves a 7 year sentence for dealing drugs. If that wasn't enough to deal with, he is left to ponder who sold him out and has been giving his girlfriend Naturelle some very uneasy looks as of late.

Monty's two friends Frank and Jacob lead very different lives. Jacob is a school teacher fantasising about one of his students. Frank is a high roller on Wall street flexing his ego by making bold moves on the stock market. Neither is arguably any less deviant in nature than Monty, instead, their lives and behaviour reflect the choices they have made.



Monty's father played by the great Brian Cox is a retired fireman with a bar. Monty's loyalty to his father is reflected in his actions throughout the film, his father had put up his bar as collateral for Monty's pre-sentence freedom.

One of the most powerful scenes in the film comes when Monty gives his angry summary of New York city's neighbourhoods and it's residents of different backgrounds. It all begins with a "Fuck you" on the mirror, it ends with Monty's reflection telling him to take a better look at himself, to stop blaming others for his predicament and take responsibility for his choices in life. It's a scene that pertains to the film but is also a separate message, to New York but also to the world. At the end of the film we see a message left with a heart stating, "You can't stop New York city" It's very powerful. You must remember this is one of (if not the) first films released after 9/11. The view above Frank's apartment is the closest they could get to the remains of Ground Zero. Frank and Jacob bicker about Monty's predicament and display different levels of sympathy dealing with it as their own fears become more apparent. Frank in particular practically sentences Monty to death with his opinions yet later on in the club when Monty says similar things about his chances, Frank argues that this is nonsense and he'll survive just fine. The conversation with Jacob is the first in the film that really emphasises that Monty is a Dead man no matter what choice he makes between Suicide, running or facing the music. The film is about mortality and without the presence of death lingering in the limelight. The choices we make have real consequences. Monty asks Jacob to take dog that Monty saved from being left for dead. Monty identified with the little fighter and when Jacob questions the size of his apartment Monty replies in a suspiciously optimistic manner. The emotional distance of describing the himself through the dog gives him temporary comfort as he comes to terms with his fate.

Doyle's a tough dog, he'll learn to live in a small space, he'll survive


Spike has always liked his dolly shots and their is a real gem featuring Phillip Seymour Hoffman in the club, shortly after he imposes himself romantically (I say that loosely) on his student Mary, we see him moving in front of the camera with a look so indescribable it deserves a watch. Feel free to laugh as you feel sympathy for him!

As the three friends stare into the ocean in the early hours of dawn, Monty suggests living the life of working on a tugboat. It seems so nice because from the outside it looks like three guys discussing the possibilities of life, but it actually stings with pain as Norton is an hour or two away from prison.

It's followed by one of the most uncomfortable scenes I've ever witnessed comes from Monty asking Frank to beat him to the point of ugliness. Monty is scared and doesn't want to go into prison looking all pretty... arrogant much!?!? Kind of like the Scene in Gridlock'd where Tupac asks Roth to stab him, only without the humour! It's a horrible scene to watch but it's actually admirable in a repulsively sick way, how many people could actually do that to someone as a favour in the spirit of friendship? Not many I'd imagine, but I guess it doesn't come up that much...

One of the coolest moments of the film comes as Monty views all of the members of the neighbourhood that he insulted earlier. A young boy on the bus spells out his name in the window as Monty does the same. Tom (almost Monty backwards) takes off in the opposite direction both on the road and hopefully, in life.

The end of the film is very sobering, the consequences have seemingly been dodged as we believe Monty has decided to run at the last minute as his Father drives him to the West Coast to start a fresh. But he's still in the car, dreaming of a life that "came so close to never happening"

Tuesday 27 January 2009

The Penn is mightier than the sword


Got Milk?

One of the greatest actors of our generation takes on his most important and challenging roles yet (Other than HurlyBurly of course...)


I am yet to watch "The Wrestler" yet but Rourke's performance is going to have to be pretty weighty in order to top the sensational effort put forward by Sean Penn. Harvey Milk was another brave soul who was chosen to lead a fight against homophobia, civil-rights-violations and just general stupidity.

Towards the beginning of Milk's journey into politics he is sent a death threat which his lover is startled by and keen to put out of sight, Milk refuses to do so. Instead, he pins it to the refrigerator where it loses it's power to shock, scare and repulse. It's fitting that hate exposed by ignorance loses credibility from mass exposure, where as love, compassion, tolerance and acceptance of others is contagious and unstoppable when spread amongst people who exercise their rights to the most basic of freedoms.

Most of us live our lives in a comfortable, small world of love and hate which remains moderately safe for us. The great men that fight their causes are thrown into an amplified arena of love and hate that forces them to make great sacrifices, but yet, also leads them to make great changes for the benefit of society as a whole.

It's astounding to look back at times when voices of such ignorance and stupidity were elected to speak on behalf of the masses (Not so long ago I hear you say?). Milk was an inevitability of his time in America, a time when fear, a lack of understanding and acceptance were manifested in it's politics. America has always had a tendency to cry outrage about the threat to "Family values" and a "Christian way of life". These non-sensical phrases are brainwashing McTerms that have managed to influence a nation of people always on the look-out for a scapegoat.

Milk visits the Opera towards the end of the film and he knows his time is coming to an end as the fat lady does indeed begin to warm up her voice. His demise is shown to be rather theatrical, remaining consistent with his life's work, seeing the beauty of the world around him, even in the final moments of his death. Like Malcom, Martin, Tupac and other figures who predicted their own death correctly, Harvey Milk was aware that his life was a sacrifice made for the greater good. As he said, It's not about ego or personal gain, it's a movement for the preservation of the youth, to guarantee that they don't have to feel persecuted for simply being whatever they happen to be.

The film's best moments derive from observing Milk embarrass his political opponents with what seem to be very obvious facts about the nature of Homosexuality. I hope he would forgive me for saying the stupidity of his opponents beliefs and arguments seemed to personify his own ability to deliver fantastic one liners with such sharp wit. There should have been a bit more of this shown as it really does celebrate the essence of who he was, like watching an artist at work. You could see the pleasure he got from changing people's minds and influencing people to question certain prejudices. It would be fair to say that he was armed with such truth and support that charisma wasn't necessary to clinch his political victories, all he had to do is show up and allow his good natured intentions to shine through. The camera work does a nice job of capturing the era of a restless crowd rallying in the streets of San Fransisco.

I've found it extremely rewarding to read many reviews of this film. Mainly because there has been countless mentions from people that cannot usually stand the sight of Sean Penn who have been pleasantly surprised by his amazing ability to capture the essence of this historically brave man. I consider Sean Penn to be one of, if not the greatest actor of his generation so his performance is no surprise to me at all. Perhaps it is fitting then that two men who seem so desperately misunderstood (obviously to very different degrees of importance), merge into one character on the big screen to deliver such an important message to the world.

Dan White - Two guys can't reproduce

Harvey Milk - But we keep on trying!

Sunday 25 January 2009

Valkyrie



I watched Valkyrie last night and was rather inspired and depressed simultaneously! It offers a very much needed insight into history and to the fact that not all German's should be held accountable for the horrors of Hitler's actions during world war II. A Jewish friend of mine tells me that Tom's character was actually very much a hater of the Jewish people that just so happened to also hate Hitler. Regardless of this, the film is necessary to remind people that there are always degrees of variance in people's beliefs and that the honourable and brave plights of the these particularly group of people should be acknowledged and respected. Cruise's performance was moderately impressive, the choice of roles was not a big stretch for him though in my opinion. I'd like to see if he could take on a self-destructive character, those being the more interesting ones to watch on screen!

It's arguably much like John Cusack's "MAX" which bravely attempts to put a human face on Hitler and explain his descent through social and economical circumstances. It attempts to do this rather than just reduce him to a character of pure evil, however much this may bring us a strange sense of comfort in our world of absolutes.