Twilight does its best to forget about its fantastical premise of the 'cold one's' living amongst us, and focuses on what it really is: an old fashioned love story. That the two teenage leads can't touch each other (well, at least not to much) makes for an effective allegory of an American High School relationship - where eating your girlfriend takes the place of shagging her. She wants to be a vampire too, but he won't corrupt her. They are always in close proximity to each other, held apart and together with the threat of forbidden love. The first hour or so is a great period of sexual tension between the couple. Its at its strongest and most engrossing best - then the film suddenly (and unconvincingly) remembers its meant to be a fantasy film. This leads to a tiring and familiar second half that feels half hearted compared to the first hour. I suspect the second half was made for the men in the audience, but this is unmistakably a film for girls.
Last week I bought a software plug-in that should allow me to re-create the bleached out look of the film. I thought the look suited the bleakness of the surroundings, especially when they made the vampires paler than the background. Some of the sweeping camera moves conveyed a sense of other-worldliness - these were particularly effective when cut with close-ups of the two standing together. The actors doing little, the camera and editing style conveying the characters exhilaration.
Sunday 28 February 2010
Friday 26 February 2010
A Prophet
In many ways A Prophet is a classically American film. It a rags to riches tale; a perverted version of the American Dream, or more aptly, a French version of the American Dream.
At the end of The Godfather, the hero of the piece is in a morally terminal decline, and at the end of Scarface the hero's period at the top is ended in brutal fashion. Whereas in A Prophet, you can't help but feel pride in just how far the hero, your boy, has climbed in such adversity. I've never rooted for, and invested in, an anti-hero in the way that I did when i was immersed in this film. In some respects, and without revealing plot, Malik comes away unscathed from his 6 years in prison.
I was recently at a story writing seminar as part of the Glasgow Film Festival, and the best thing I got from it is that character is everything and your film sprouts from strong character. Jacques Audiard's film has an unforgettable character in the soil of his film, and it makes for one of the best films of recent years simply for how it gripped and occupied me for its two and a half hours.
I know it was shot handheld, in social realist mode, like so many other european films, but it completely transcended that, and showed what cinema is really capable of in terms of hitting you intellectually and emotionally. I can't wait to see it again and find out how Audiard achieved that. Its something that I want all my films to aspire to. Then again, I would love to have a similar reaction with a non-violent film. Its a rare thing.
At the end of The Godfather, the hero of the piece is in a morally terminal decline, and at the end of Scarface the hero's period at the top is ended in brutal fashion. Whereas in A Prophet, you can't help but feel pride in just how far the hero, your boy, has climbed in such adversity. I've never rooted for, and invested in, an anti-hero in the way that I did when i was immersed in this film. In some respects, and without revealing plot, Malik comes away unscathed from his 6 years in prison.
I was recently at a story writing seminar as part of the Glasgow Film Festival, and the best thing I got from it is that character is everything and your film sprouts from strong character. Jacques Audiard's film has an unforgettable character in the soil of his film, and it makes for one of the best films of recent years simply for how it gripped and occupied me for its two and a half hours.
I know it was shot handheld, in social realist mode, like so many other european films, but it completely transcended that, and showed what cinema is really capable of in terms of hitting you intellectually and emotionally. I can't wait to see it again and find out how Audiard achieved that. Its something that I want all my films to aspire to. Then again, I would love to have a similar reaction with a non-violent film. Its a rare thing.
Saturday 13 February 2010
Where the Wild Things Are
Where the Wild Things Are resembles the sort of trendy toy that is bought more for the parent than the child. I'm thinking of the beautifully crafted toy boxes with tasteful red soldiers that kids just ignore: its what's inside that counts. This is definitely a kid's film made for adults. Its not fun, there's not many laughs, but it is a great representation of the loneliness of childhood. I remember Maurice Sendak's book as if it was a dream, (it was my mum that reminded me I actually had it), and it had a deep effect on me as an introverted boy. Spike Jonze's film is a sad, nostalgic, piece that had me reflecting on the lonely moments of early youth.
However, when the film focuses on the injustice of childhood (no food for misbehaving) it can't help but reflect Truffuat's The 500 Blows, the definitive cinematic statement on the subject. All that Where the Wild Things Are adds to it is that injustices can happen to advantaged American boys as well as French disadvantaged boys. Whatever else it tries to reveal just comes off like a bad episode of Big Brother; all character flaws and joylessness from the protagonists. The Wild Things come to represent psychological conditions, and all but happiness is included. I think its because of this that I found the film so disappointing. Max's world is full of darkness and the kind of aggression that is unique to young boys, but with Jonze, it also has the seriousness unique to pretentious young men. He steadfastly keeps to his own hand held sun set look, rather than succumb to a more typical kids film style, and for that it has to be congratulated as a brave film. Otherwise, it came up frustratingly lacking the substance which would have made it a classic.
However, when the film focuses on the injustice of childhood (no food for misbehaving) it can't help but reflect Truffuat's The 500 Blows, the definitive cinematic statement on the subject. All that Where the Wild Things Are adds to it is that injustices can happen to advantaged American boys as well as French disadvantaged boys. Whatever else it tries to reveal just comes off like a bad episode of Big Brother; all character flaws and joylessness from the protagonists. The Wild Things come to represent psychological conditions, and all but happiness is included. I think its because of this that I found the film so disappointing. Max's world is full of darkness and the kind of aggression that is unique to young boys, but with Jonze, it also has the seriousness unique to pretentious young men. He steadfastly keeps to his own hand held sun set look, rather than succumb to a more typical kids film style, and for that it has to be congratulated as a brave film. Otherwise, it came up frustratingly lacking the substance which would have made it a classic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)