My coursemate and I took a trip to Birmingham's IMAX cinema last week to see the highest grossing film ever (that's now a fact), James Cameron's Avatar. I was extremely sceptical about the whole thing to begin with, more excited about the spectacle of an IMAX theatre than the film itself. In the end I was more impressed by the latter and considerably disappointed by the former. But I digress.
The most impressive thing about the 3D aspect of the film is that rather than the objects and people coming out at the audience, it's that the screen is given a depth which makes everything seem so much more real. Saying that, it took me until at least forty five minutes in to truly appreciate the superiority of the technology thrown at making this film. The 3D works, boy does it work, but some background/foreground blur does occur too often for my liking and some of the details are lost through lack of focus for want of clarity on bigger things- the Na'Vi's capturing eyes for example.
Before going to the film, too many people had told me “it’s got not story, the plot is rubbish” but while actually in the cinema I realised that the film very much does have a plot, a classic story in fact: Boy arrives in new place, Boy meets Girl, Boy decieves Girl, Boy and Girl reconcile and live happily ever after. Avatar is a LOVE story. It’s Tarzan meets Die Hard, or more accurately perhaps Pocahontas meets Star Wars. And I quite liked that. Cameron has taken the best bits from all previous sci-fi, fantasy and war movies, added a bit of romance and merged them to make one brand new, all killer, spectacular genre of it’s own kind.
That’s not to say I want a sequel. According to MTV.com Cameron has a trilogy arc worked out in his mind, and if that’s what he ends up shooting then I think he has a Star Wars phenomenon on his hands. If he sticks with just an “Avatar 2” I think he’s in trouble. Sequels are tricky subjects and the end of Avatar doesn’t really leave you begging for more. Well, it certainly didn’t me.
I’m not going to try and join the Anti-Avatar bandwagon, because I really quite enjoyed the film. I just wouldn’t necessarily go out of my way to watch it again soon, it’s not my thing. It certainly does live up to the hype technically, but I prefer my films with a little more love and devotion put into them, rather than a fancy money-making, crowd-pleasing number. See Burton’s Alice In Wonderland for an example of a technological dreamchild. Not that it’s out yet, but the trailers show me all I need to know. Speaking of which.... the IMAX let me down. Not enough money has been spent on aesthetics for my liking: I want trailers, fancy tickets with images intergrated on them, whopping great posters and a true movie-going experience. Otherwise I’d have waited until they released the DVD and popped over to my dad’s to watch it on his HD 48 inch TV.
Over & Out
Charley
"No Mister Bond, I expect you to die" Goldfinger, 1964
Friday, 12 February 2010
Friday, 29 January 2010
To Be or Not To Be
My Shakespeare On Screen module has required me to watch some interesting adaptations (maybe appropriations) of Shakespeare's Hamlet and King Lear. The first week our required viewing was Festen by Thomas Vinterberg, and The King is Alive by Kristian Levring, both films made under the Dogme95, and the second week was Korol Lir, an interesting Russion adaptation of Lear and Ran, an even more interesting Japanese version of the same play. Here's my responses to all four:
Festen (Thomas Vinterberg 1998)
Festen is a manic-comic-tragedy tale about deceit, revenge, guilt, loyalty and family tradition. Over the course of one night this Danish family is torn apart by son Christian, determined to seek revenge for his sister’s suicide-drowning herself in a bath much as Ophelia drowns herself in Hamlet. Christian’s sister ‘sends a message from the grave’ much as Hamlet’s father does, here in the shape of a letter, confirming all of Christian’s accusations and ultimately leading to the downfall of her implicitly-murderous father. Aside from these quite specific allusions, Festen embraces the themes within Shakespeare’s play like insanity, sexuality, parental-disloyalty- in the shape of Christian's mother, brother and sister relationships- in particular the dysfunctional relationship between Christian and Michael, guilt and redemption, and father-son relationships, something which features heavily in many of Shakespeare's plays.
The King Is Alive (Kristian Levring 2000)
The King Is Alive is very much, as character Henry states, “good old Lear again”. A story of survival and loyalty, weaknesses and strengths, and most importantly a story of language and mis-communication. With references to plays and musicals dotted throughout and an emphasis on the raw elements of theatre the film, this ‘play within a play’ storyline serves as a narrative structure for the isolation and entrapment experienced by the characters lost in the African desert. Henry acts as a leader in their desolate surroundings and gradually encourages the others to engage in the Shakespearian tragedy, which he writes out on individual scrolls- which are the backs of Hollywood scripts. This back-to-basics approach to the play echoes the way in which Jacobian theatre would have been rehearsed, and the juxtaposition of the Hollywood scripts against Shakespeare’s verse echoes a filmic approach to Shakespeare seen in Baz Lurhman’s Romeo + Juliet (1996). It also emphasizes the fact that Shakespeare’s verse has more impact and a better means of expression, indeed a favored means of expression and communication, than a modern Hollywood script may have. In acting out a play, the characters are able to become someone else, a notion which is found in many Shakespearian plays, the most obvious being Twelfth Night.
Ran (1985) and Korol Lir (1970)
Both Ran and Korol Lir are incredibly cinematic re-imaginings of Shakespeare’s tragic tale of King Lear for opposite reasons. Korol Lir focuses on the use of sound effects and a moving score in order to emphasise the intensity and despair carried through Lear’s kingdom and his journey, and this in turn intensifies elemental semiotics like fire and water by drawing the audience’s attention in with fierce crackling fires and soothing running water. On the other hand, Ran focuses heavily on visual symbolism and use of intense colour- the Eastern setting serving as a vast dramatic backdrop for Kurosawa’s scenes of vivid spectacle as we follow King Hidetora through his betrayal and his madness.
Korol Lir is visually enjoyable, the black and white shots serving well to create an eerie feeling of doom from the opening shots of the peasants gathering around Lear’s castle walls. However, watching the film with subtitles (which are a direct translation of Shakespeare’s text) disengages the audience from the action and creates a distance that Ran manages to avoid, despite being a subtitled film as well. Kozintsev’s transformation of the narrative into a thoroughly road-movie film works well as we follow Lear on his journey through madness and into redemption. Kozintsev employs various techniques of emphasising his ‘journey’ motif, such as extended shots of peasants journeying along barren roads, shots of roads which continue into the distance and off-screen, Cordelia’s marriage taking place not in a church but literally on the roadside, and the characters almost always moving in some way while maintaining conversations. Rarely in the film (exceptions being moments in the first scene) are characters still for extended periods of time. Other than this difference from the source text however, Korol Lir presents itself – at least on the surface- as a realist transposition of King Lear, with little mediation from the language, themes and narrative in the original.
Ran on the other hand moves the story to Japan, and inverts the narrative so that Hidetora is the father of three sons as opposed to daughters, allowing the film to explore in depth the samurai traditions and the implications of this specific culture in terms of family, relationships, loyalty and hierarchy. Every scene contains great attention to detail, utilising the bold spectrum of colours associated with 17th centure Japanese culture to juxtapose positions of power and lifestyles of luxury with scenes of death and war which are shot in such dark monochrome they could almost be in black and white were it not for the pronounced blood red symbols in the warriors’ shields and uniforms. Kurosawa’s use of choreographed scenery and symmetrical images is striking, and creates not just a filmic commentary of Shakespeare’s text but also a deeply moving analogy in which Hidetora’s madness and his insignificance within his own kingdom is emphasised and dramatised by the vast landscapes and barren outdoors in which the action takes place.
Charley
"Walking around on those, what are they called? Feet" - The Little Mermaid, Disney, 1989
Festen (Thomas Vinterberg 1998)
Festen is a manic-comic-tragedy tale about deceit, revenge, guilt, loyalty and family tradition. Over the course of one night this Danish family is torn apart by son Christian, determined to seek revenge for his sister’s suicide-drowning herself in a bath much as Ophelia drowns herself in Hamlet. Christian’s sister ‘sends a message from the grave’ much as Hamlet’s father does, here in the shape of a letter, confirming all of Christian’s accusations and ultimately leading to the downfall of her implicitly-murderous father. Aside from these quite specific allusions, Festen embraces the themes within Shakespeare’s play like insanity, sexuality, parental-disloyalty- in the shape of Christian's mother, brother and sister relationships- in particular the dysfunctional relationship between Christian and Michael, guilt and redemption, and father-son relationships, something which features heavily in many of Shakespeare's plays.
The King Is Alive (Kristian Levring 2000)
The King Is Alive is very much, as character Henry states, “good old Lear again”. A story of survival and loyalty, weaknesses and strengths, and most importantly a story of language and mis-communication. With references to plays and musicals dotted throughout and an emphasis on the raw elements of theatre the film, this ‘play within a play’ storyline serves as a narrative structure for the isolation and entrapment experienced by the characters lost in the African desert. Henry acts as a leader in their desolate surroundings and gradually encourages the others to engage in the Shakespearian tragedy, which he writes out on individual scrolls- which are the backs of Hollywood scripts. This back-to-basics approach to the play echoes the way in which Jacobian theatre would have been rehearsed, and the juxtaposition of the Hollywood scripts against Shakespeare’s verse echoes a filmic approach to Shakespeare seen in Baz Lurhman’s Romeo + Juliet (1996). It also emphasizes the fact that Shakespeare’s verse has more impact and a better means of expression, indeed a favored means of expression and communication, than a modern Hollywood script may have. In acting out a play, the characters are able to become someone else, a notion which is found in many Shakespearian plays, the most obvious being Twelfth Night.
Ran (1985) and Korol Lir (1970)
Both Ran and Korol Lir are incredibly cinematic re-imaginings of Shakespeare’s tragic tale of King Lear for opposite reasons. Korol Lir focuses on the use of sound effects and a moving score in order to emphasise the intensity and despair carried through Lear’s kingdom and his journey, and this in turn intensifies elemental semiotics like fire and water by drawing the audience’s attention in with fierce crackling fires and soothing running water. On the other hand, Ran focuses heavily on visual symbolism and use of intense colour- the Eastern setting serving as a vast dramatic backdrop for Kurosawa’s scenes of vivid spectacle as we follow King Hidetora through his betrayal and his madness.
Korol Lir is visually enjoyable, the black and white shots serving well to create an eerie feeling of doom from the opening shots of the peasants gathering around Lear’s castle walls. However, watching the film with subtitles (which are a direct translation of Shakespeare’s text) disengages the audience from the action and creates a distance that Ran manages to avoid, despite being a subtitled film as well. Kozintsev’s transformation of the narrative into a thoroughly road-movie film works well as we follow Lear on his journey through madness and into redemption. Kozintsev employs various techniques of emphasising his ‘journey’ motif, such as extended shots of peasants journeying along barren roads, shots of roads which continue into the distance and off-screen, Cordelia’s marriage taking place not in a church but literally on the roadside, and the characters almost always moving in some way while maintaining conversations. Rarely in the film (exceptions being moments in the first scene) are characters still for extended periods of time. Other than this difference from the source text however, Korol Lir presents itself – at least on the surface- as a realist transposition of King Lear, with little mediation from the language, themes and narrative in the original.
Ran on the other hand moves the story to Japan, and inverts the narrative so that Hidetora is the father of three sons as opposed to daughters, allowing the film to explore in depth the samurai traditions and the implications of this specific culture in terms of family, relationships, loyalty and hierarchy. Every scene contains great attention to detail, utilising the bold spectrum of colours associated with 17th centure Japanese culture to juxtapose positions of power and lifestyles of luxury with scenes of death and war which are shot in such dark monochrome they could almost be in black and white were it not for the pronounced blood red symbols in the warriors’ shields and uniforms. Kurosawa’s use of choreographed scenery and symmetrical images is striking, and creates not just a filmic commentary of Shakespeare’s text but also a deeply moving analogy in which Hidetora’s madness and his insignificance within his own kingdom is emphasised and dramatised by the vast landscapes and barren outdoors in which the action takes place.
Charley
"Walking around on those, what are they called? Feet" - The Little Mermaid, Disney, 1989
Wednesday, 27 January 2010
When you Wish upon a Star
Disney's The Princess and the Frog
I've just watched the above trailer for Disney's The Princess and the Frog (out this Friday, woo). I'd not seen a trailer for it in full before now, just a couple of TV spots in the last few weeks. YouTube actually has two or three different ones, but out of the ones I found this is the better. The trailer starts by reminding us that "hey look, Disney are good at hand-drawn animation" and emphasising their attempts to please all those whiners who believe Disney don't deliver good films anymore by returning to classic animation. They've also returned to fairytale adaptation, something they've also avoided doing since about 1989, and something which they've created a reputation for doing annoyingly well. The trailer follows with the promise that we're about to discover what happens to the princess after she kisses the frog- so already we're aware this isn't going to be the sanitised versions of familiar stories like we saw in Snow White and Cinderella. This hopefully means that Disney have been a fair bit more liberal with the narrative and the various themes in their adaptation than they have been previously- sure there's some seriously evil bad guys in previous movies (Maleficent and Ursula spring immediately to mind) but if Disney really want to make a point this film has got to be less 'soft and squidgy' and more gritty and tough. Think Emperor's New Groove meets Meet The Robinsons maybe. Something we can get our teeth into.
Disney have a habit recently of referring to all their past work in their trailers. This is commonplace, it's rare in a trailer not to see "From the director of...." or "The producer of .... brings you....." but one trailer for the recent release of Disney Pixar's Up somewhat takes the biscuit, 'clip-merging' all eight of their previous hits in the opening 30 seconds before even mentioning the "next great adventure" they'll take us on. Same for The Princess and the Frog, we take a rapid journey through various sketch-realisation sequences for Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, The Lion King and The Little Mermaid before showing a similar sequence to reveal Princess Tiana, our heroine for the new movie. Sure they're stating a good case by parading all their previous hit films, but doesn't it show a certain amount of doubt on Disney's part? Are the trailers asking for forgiveness incase this movie doesn't live up to our expectations? Or on the other hand, is the message more 'you thought these were good? Well watch out'.
I hope it's the latter.
On a different note, I've just watched a trailer for Streetdance 3D. Check it out, it looks fantastic.
Charley
I want, I want, I want, me, me, me, mine, mine, mine, now, now, NOW! - Hook, Tristar 1991
I've just watched the above trailer for Disney's The Princess and the Frog (out this Friday, woo). I'd not seen a trailer for it in full before now, just a couple of TV spots in the last few weeks. YouTube actually has two or three different ones, but out of the ones I found this is the better. The trailer starts by reminding us that "hey look, Disney are good at hand-drawn animation" and emphasising their attempts to please all those whiners who believe Disney don't deliver good films anymore by returning to classic animation. They've also returned to fairytale adaptation, something they've also avoided doing since about 1989, and something which they've created a reputation for doing annoyingly well. The trailer follows with the promise that we're about to discover what happens to the princess after she kisses the frog- so already we're aware this isn't going to be the sanitised versions of familiar stories like we saw in Snow White and Cinderella. This hopefully means that Disney have been a fair bit more liberal with the narrative and the various themes in their adaptation than they have been previously- sure there's some seriously evil bad guys in previous movies (Maleficent and Ursula spring immediately to mind) but if Disney really want to make a point this film has got to be less 'soft and squidgy' and more gritty and tough. Think Emperor's New Groove meets Meet The Robinsons maybe. Something we can get our teeth into.
Disney have a habit recently of referring to all their past work in their trailers. This is commonplace, it's rare in a trailer not to see "From the director of...." or "The producer of .... brings you....." but one trailer for the recent release of Disney Pixar's Up somewhat takes the biscuit, 'clip-merging' all eight of their previous hits in the opening 30 seconds before even mentioning the "next great adventure" they'll take us on. Same for The Princess and the Frog, we take a rapid journey through various sketch-realisation sequences for Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, The Lion King and The Little Mermaid before showing a similar sequence to reveal Princess Tiana, our heroine for the new movie. Sure they're stating a good case by parading all their previous hit films, but doesn't it show a certain amount of doubt on Disney's part? Are the trailers asking for forgiveness incase this movie doesn't live up to our expectations? Or on the other hand, is the message more 'you thought these were good? Well watch out'.
I hope it's the latter.
On a different note, I've just watched a trailer for Streetdance 3D. Check it out, it looks fantastic.
Charley
I want, I want, I want, me, me, me, mine, mine, mine, now, now, NOW! - Hook, Tristar 1991
Good Morning Baltimore!
I guess this post should really summarise everything that this blog is, or intends to be.
I played for a long time (okay, over night, which in my little world is quite a long time) with the idea of calling the blog 'Confessions of a Mouseaholic' because I don't want people to be put off in thinking this is just a Disney fan-blog. It's not. Undoubtedly my interests in Disney are massive, but not in a "oh, Disney films are so pretty, oh, I want to be a Disney princess, oh listen to all the lovely songs" kinda way. Don't get me wrong- The Lion King is my favourite film of all time. But I'm more interested in the industry side of Disney's empire, in the literal magic kingdom surrounding the studios and, I suppose, the man who began it all, Uncle Walt. My MA dissertation is focussed on representations of Tinkerbell across culture, looking in detail at the rise and rise of the fairy as an independant in Disney's corporate marketing model, moving from a beam of light to the queen of her own online gaming world, and because that all probably sounds a little dull, I guess simply this blog is just a place for me to play with writing some film reviews, to collate various Disney/other-related news stories, and generally just get some things down on paper (slash electronic writing device).
My interests are in Disney/Tim Burton/Harry Potter/other mainstream popular culture movies and franchises and auteurs but requirements of my course and my unwitting ability to end up watching odd films mean that I will end up reviewing a lot of other stuff too, at least I intend to.
Down the lefthand side is an amazon-sidebar, where you can see a list of things that I'm currently really enjoying- from films to books to merchandise, things I've owned forever, things I simply want, things I'm just enjoying this week. I'll update it regularly so have a look, hopefully you'll be alerted to something of interest.
So that's me, and this is my blog. Enjoy!
Charley
"BURN IM AT STAKE!" - Peter Pan, Disney, 1953
I played for a long time (okay, over night, which in my little world is quite a long time) with the idea of calling the blog 'Confessions of a Mouseaholic' because I don't want people to be put off in thinking this is just a Disney fan-blog. It's not. Undoubtedly my interests in Disney are massive, but not in a "oh, Disney films are so pretty, oh, I want to be a Disney princess, oh listen to all the lovely songs" kinda way. Don't get me wrong- The Lion King is my favourite film of all time. But I'm more interested in the industry side of Disney's empire, in the literal magic kingdom surrounding the studios and, I suppose, the man who began it all, Uncle Walt. My MA dissertation is focussed on representations of Tinkerbell across culture, looking in detail at the rise and rise of the fairy as an independant in Disney's corporate marketing model, moving from a beam of light to the queen of her own online gaming world, and because that all probably sounds a little dull, I guess simply this blog is just a place for me to play with writing some film reviews, to collate various Disney/other-related news stories, and generally just get some things down on paper (slash electronic writing device).
My interests are in Disney/Tim Burton/Harry Potter/other mainstream popular culture movies and franchises and auteurs but requirements of my course and my unwitting ability to end up watching odd films mean that I will end up reviewing a lot of other stuff too, at least I intend to.
Down the lefthand side is an amazon-sidebar, where you can see a list of things that I'm currently really enjoying- from films to books to merchandise, things I've owned forever, things I simply want, things I'm just enjoying this week. I'll update it regularly so have a look, hopefully you'll be alerted to something of interest.
So that's me, and this is my blog. Enjoy!
Charley
"BURN IM AT STAKE!" - Peter Pan, Disney, 1953
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)