Movies, The Imitation Game Roger Edwards Movies, The Imitation Game Roger Edwards

The Imitation Game (2014)

Where Mike Leigh's Mr. Turner is a series of vignettes from the painter’s life, The Imitation Game is a far more traditional biopic. Norwegian film director Morten Tyldum follows a tried and tested formula with his story arc, moving from points A to B to C, intercutting with flashbacks to reveal a specific plot theme. Yet such an approach is the perfect means to tell the story of British cryptanalyst Alan Turing, who helped break the Enigma code during the Second World War. It provides a stable foundation for the strong lead performances that drives the movie and compensate for the narratives conceits. 

Where Mike Leigh's Mr. Turner is a series of vignettes from the painter’s life, The Imitation Game is a far more traditional biopic. Norwegian film director Morten Tyldum follows a tried and tested formula with his story arc, moving from points A to B to C, intercutting with flashbacks to reveal a specific plot theme. Yet such an approach is the perfect means to tell the story of British cryptanalyst Alan Turing, who helped break the Enigma code during the Second World War. It provides a stable foundation for the strong lead performances that drives the movie and compensate for the narratives conceits. 

There have been complaints about the veracity of Graham Moore's adaptation of Andrew Hodges biography of Turing. However, The Imitation Game is a drama and not a documentary and the medium of cinema requires dramatic punctuation, so I am happy to forgive some of the stories contrivances. Was Turing truly broken hearted by a failed relationship at school? Did one of the codebreaking team have to put their own brother in harm’s way in order to maintain secrecy? More than likely not but such plot devices certainly do not detract from the central story of one man's obsession and struggle with his own personal demons.

Benedict Cumberbatch is compelling as Alan Turing, playing him as someone who is most definitely on the spectrum. A modern audience will seize upon this justification for Turing's obtuse behaviour. Keira Knightley provides a sympathetic performance as Joan Clarke: a woman with a prodigious intellect who is frustrated by the patriarchal culture of the times. The platonic relationship between the two leads is credibly realised. The movie also has an authentic feel to it due to Óscar Faura's Cinematography and the measured production design of Maria Djurkovic. There is sufficient detail to establish that this is war time Britain but we are not belaboured by an excess of CGI.

With regard to Turing's sexuality, the matter is explored sufficiently to advance the narrative but beyond that, no more is done. Critics have picked up on the fact that there's a lack of any conviction upon this matter throughout the movie. Perhaps this was a practical concession made to make the film more "accessible" for the US market. As a result, The Imitation Game is a very professionally made, absorbing but somewhat calculated biopic. Despite this it does provide an interesting overview into a significant period of war time history and one of the UK's unsung heroes. If that inspires people to explore the subjects further, then that is a good thing. 

Read More
Movies, Creature Feature, Alien: Covenant Roger Edwards Movies, Creature Feature, Alien: Covenant Roger Edwards

Alien: Covenant (2017)

The enigma of the Xenomorph in the Alien franchise is diminished once you start to rationalise its heritage. Sadly, that’s exactly what Alien: Covenant has chosen to do. It jettisons the mystery of the original 1979 movie and pulls back the curtain, so wisely put in place thirty-eight years ago, to reveal a rather lacklustre explanation to the Xenomorph’s origin. Having spent nearly $100 million and employed a production team of some of the finest talent that money can buy, the resulting movie is not bad per se, just crushingly superfluous. After watching Alien: Covenant this week, my overall reaction can be distilled down to a deep sigh of indifference and a shrug of the shoulders.

The enigma of the Xenomorph in the Alien franchise is diminished once you start to rationalise its heritage. Sadly, that’s exactly what Alien: Covenant has chosen to do. It jettisons the mystery of the original 1979 movie and pulls back the curtain, so wisely put in place thirty-eight years ago, to reveal a rather lacklustre explanation to the Xenomorph’s origin. Having spent nearly $100 million and employed a production team of some of the finest talent that money can buy, the resulting movie is not bad per se, just crushingly superfluous. After watching Alien: Covenant this week, my overall reaction can be distilled down to a deep sigh of indifference and a shrug of the shoulders.

Ridley Scott, now in his autumn years, strikes me as a film maker who is more enamoured with the technical, logistical and business aspects of film making. He appears to have a good handle on navigating the choppy waters of studio politics and certainly thrives within the complex process of crafting a big budget, effects driven movies. Yet his body of work has become very hit and miss in recent years and for me it is only The Martian that stands outs as being of note. Frankly, the will to make further Alien movies seems to be driven primarily by the potential box office and Scott’s presence has done precious little to move the franchise forward. He has now delivered two movies that frankly undermine the existing canon, rather than expand upon it.

Much of Alien: Covenant is a pastiche of what has gone before. At times Ridley Scott is plagiarising himself and not in an especially knowing way. He squanders a good cast by giving them precious little to do. Again, most characters serve little purpose other than to die. Katherine Waterston as Janet "Danny" Daniels has scope to be a credible protagonist but is sadly relegated to running, pointing and explaining the plot. Comparing her to Ellen Ripley is unfair because the actor is never given the opportunity to explore the role. Michael Fassbender appears twice this time round playing both a new android named Walter as well as David, who we last saw decapitated by an Engineer in Prometheus. Sadly, despite Fassbenders acting talent, the character remains a contrived and uninspiring foil. Remove the mirth and satire from Marvin, the Paranoid Android from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and you are left with the scope of Fassbender’s role.

Alien was a stripped down, minimalist, science fiction horror movie. It had a tangible air of claustrophobia and bucked some of the usual trends of the genre. The crew of the Nostromo were mainly blue-collar workers, not academics or soldiers. Their concerns were primarily those of their social economic group. Pay, job security and just getting the task done. Their practical story contrasted the esoteric nature of what they encountered. The crashed ship, the space jockey and the alien eggs were all deliberately unexplained and all the more enthralling because of that. Was the Xenomorph a simple predator or a highly evolved creature that natural selection had chosen to rationalise? Where was it from? Was it intelligent? These unanswered questions gave the beast gravitas. The answers that Alien: Covenant has chosen to provide undo this.

There are joyless action scenes, routine jump scares and some arbitrary sex and violence to be had in Alien: Covenant. The production design, cinematography and overall aesthetic screams A list production but the story that plays out is so utterly uncompelling and lacklustre. Ultimately the movie fails because it over thinks the source material. Rob Zombie made a similar mistake when he remade John Carpenter’s Halloween. He tried to explain a force of nature and by giving Michael Myers a detailed backstory of abuse and sadness, he turned the embodiment of the supernatural in to just another sociopath created by society. Alien: Covenant has effectively done the same. The Xenomorph has gone from being an abstract vessel for our subconscious fears to just a laboratory experiment by a disgruntled individual. From high concept to arbitrary in less than four decades. Sad.

Read More
Movies, Creature Feature, Alien, Prometheus Roger Edwards Movies, Creature Feature, Alien, Prometheus Roger Edwards

Prometheus (2012)

I have written many times in recent years about how big titles get announced by the gaming industry, of the ensuing hype up that leads up to launch day and then the subsequent disappointment on purchase. It is a malady that has afflicted the movie industry for decades and has become increasingly more common in the last decade. Hype has a curious link with reputation. There are a handful of directors in contemporary Hollywood who when they add their name to a production, people take notice. Ridley Scott is one of these. His body of work pretty much guarantees he can make whatever he wants, be it a commercial undertaking or a ludicrous vanity project. However, the downside to being a film maker of this stature is that you are not so easily exposed to proper scrutiny by your peers. No one stops you from making a mistake because you are supposed to know what you are doing.  They let you do what you want. Which is bad.

I have written many times in recent years about how big titles get announced by the gaming industry, of the ensuing hype up that leads up to launch day and then the subsequent disappointment on purchase. It is a malady that has afflicted the movie industry for decades and has become increasingly more common in the last decade. Hype has a curious link with reputation. There are a handful of directors in contemporary Hollywood who when they add their name to a production, people take notice. Ridley Scott is one of these. His body of work pretty much guarantees he can make whatever he wants, be it a commercial undertaking or a ludicrous vanity project. However, the downside to being a film maker of this stature is that you are not so easily exposed to proper scrutiny by your peers. No one stops you from making a mistake because you are supposed to know what you are doing.  They let you do what you want. Which is bad.

So, am I saying that Prometheus is a mistake per se? No. However, I am saying that mistakes have been made with regard to narrative and the plot direction of the movie. Scott himself has been open about how during the initial pre-production he and screenwriters Jon Spaihts and Damon Lindelof wished to take the story off on a tangent, rather than make a specific prequel to Alien. This in itself is not necessarily a bad thing to do as long as it is done robustly and intelligently. Prometheus is very much a film of two halves as it strives to embrace a weighty theme, namely the origins of life on earth. It sets the scene for a philosophical and theological exploration of the subject in the first act. However, it fails to sustain this momentum and in the second hour lapses into a far less ambitious, somewhat formulaic, creature feature. The narrative become confused, vague and is eventually sidelined.

There is still much to commend in Prometheus. There are good performances from the cast, despite the fact that they are not given half as much to go on as they should have. Michael Fassbender's portrayal of the Android David is outstanding and is by far the best character in the movie. The production design is handsome and Scott has not in any way lost his visual flair. There are some quite clever parallels to his original movie and he re-imagines certain iconic scenes in an inventive fashion, rather than becoming self plagiarising. There are also some solid action sequences and a liberal dose of gore. One scene involving a quasi-caesarian is not for the squeamish. Yet despite positive aspects one is left feeling that Prometheus is not as good as a film as it could be.

What is on offer is adequate and entertaining but no more than that. Although it is unreasonable to expect this movie to be equal of the 1979 original, it is not unreasonable to expect better material from Ridley Scott. Prometheus should have had a weightier story and stuck to either to its philosophical theme or remained a pure horror in space. As it is it fails to tread the path between the two. Since the release of the film on home media, the deleted scenes available on DVD and Blu-ray clearly show where the problem lies. Too much expositionary material was cut from the film. The producers wanted an action driven movie. They got one but sadly at the expense of narrative and character development.  If all the deleted material was re-instated back in to Prometheus it would be a far more thoughtful, coherent movie. Sadly, Scott has now stated that the theatrical cut of the film is his definitive edition.

On a final note, Prometheus suffers from a common problem found in contemporary fill making; that of an excessively loud soundtrack. Dialogue is difficult to hear one moment and the score and ambient sound effects are deafening the next. I had to watch the film with subtitles enabled to fully pick up on all the nuances of the dialogue. This issue contributed to making a frustrating movie, somewhat more annoying. However, if you are simply looking for a high budget, science fiction thriller, then Prometheus, despite its flaws, may well satisfy. Those who are more invested in the Alien franchise may not be so forgiving and best prepare themselves for disappointment. Because Prometheus feels like a failed opportunity, it beggars the question, do we really need any further movies in this series? If they cannot offer anything new that takes the overall concept forward, perhaps the answer is no? 

Read More
Movies, Mad Max: Fury Road, Action Roger Edwards Movies, Mad Max: Fury Road, Action Roger Edwards

Mad Max: Fury Road (2015)

There was a degree of collective hysteria among critics upon the release of George Miller's Mad Max: Fury Road. Phrases such as "genius" and "masterpiece" were being banded around willy nilly, mainly due to the overwhelming nature of the movie. Make no mistake, Mad Max: Fury Road is very much a case of film making turned up to eleven. The sheer sensory overload that one experiences over the two-hour running time makes for a jaw dropping experience. However, the movie does have a few minor flaws, which are more apparent upon second viewing, so perhaps some of the praise and superlatives that have been heaped upon the film need to be taken with a pinch of salt.

There was a degree of collective hysteria among critics upon the release of George Miller's Mad Max: Fury Road. Phrases such as "genius" and "masterpiece" were being banded around willy nilly, mainly due to the overwhelming nature of the movie. Make no mistake, Mad Max: Fury Road is very much a case of film making turned up to eleven. The sheer sensory overload that one experiences over the two-hour running time makes for a jaw dropping experience. However, the movie does have a few minor flaws, which are more apparent upon second viewing, so perhaps some of the praise and superlatives that have been heaped upon the film need to be taken with a pinch of salt.

That being said, if you can endure Mad Max: Fury Road and its exquisite assault upon your senses, it offers an extremely entertaining action movie with an interesting philosophical subtext. It also has something to say about gender politics, although this is not in any way a lecture. The films visual aesthetics and female casting does somewhat fly in the face of the alleged message. Therefore, one can consider the film’s deeper meaning as an optional extra. If you’re not in the market for sociopolitical subtexts, then ignore it and simply focus on the ongoing visual and the cinematic pandemonium. Please note that's two hours of continuous pandemonium. A potential chore for some.

The plot is simple and for those unfamiliar with the main character and the movies setting, there is a brief exposition at the start of the film that puts everything in perspective. The plot essentially is a continuous chase as Max escapes "The Citadel" with the five wives of local despot Immortan Joe (played by Hugh Keays-Byrne, Toecutter from the original movie). Tom Hardy handles the role of Max Rockatansky exceedingly well through his verbal and physical performance. However, this is a movie with minimal dialogue and often it is more about what is not said than what is. An exchanged glance or a particular stance speak volumes here. In many ways it is Furiosa, played by Charlize Theron, who drives the story with the force of her tangible screen presence. 

Perhaps where director Geroge Miller excels the most is in the way he turns the complex action sequences from a mechanical process and elevates them into an elaborate form of visual opera. The production design, costumes and overall visual aesthetic of Mad Max: Fury Road goes beyond the term sumptuous. It is a physical experience. The nearest I can get to summarising it is that it's like being beaten around the head and shoulders with the collected works of Hieronymus Bosch, while being screamed at and set alight. When I saw this movie at the cinema, I needed a stiff drink when it ended because I genuinely felt that I had experienced everything that happened on screen. Even when viewed at home it is an immersive experience.

Be warned Mad Max: Fury Road is not your standard action movie, meticulously designed by a soulless committee and scrupulously edited to meet the requirements of the sanitised PG-13 rating. This is a raw and grotesque movie set in a neo-feudal world and it's a far from pleasant one. Yet despite the jarring nature of Goerge Miller's post-apocalyptic vision, it still has characters that you care for and there's a positive moral under current. Irrespective of its beautiful visual cacophony, Mad Max: Fury Road is ultimately a film about people and a very telling one at that. Something that is a rare commodity in contemporary Hollywood and something that many would not expect to find in this genre of movie. 

Read More
Movies, Big Hero 6 Roger Edwards Movies, Big Hero 6 Roger Edwards

Big Hero 6 (2014)

Big Hero 6 is a movie about loss and coming to terms with a bereavement. You'd think that Disney would run a mile from such a difficult subject, especially when you consider their core demographic, yet the subject is handled intelligently and sensitivity. There is a genuine sense of moral rectitude and conviction running throughout the story. It is a refreshing change to see a superhero driven plot that actually has a positive message as well as the requisite action scenes. Through years of accumulated experience Disney also ensure that the underlying themes are presented in a engaging and enjoyable manner. Big Hero 6 has a lot of laughs during its hundred minute plus running time. 

Big Hero 6 is a movie about loss and coming to terms with a bereavement. You'd think that Disney would run a mile from such a difficult subject, especially when you consider their core demographic, yet the subject is handled intelligently and sensitivity. There is a genuine sense of moral rectitude and conviction running throughout the story. It is a refreshing change to see a superhero driven plot that actually has a positive message as well as the requisite action scenes. Through years of accumulated experience Disney also ensure that the underlying themes are presented in a engaging and enjoyable manner. Big Hero 6 has a lot of laughs during its hundred minute plus running time. 

The story centres around electronic genius Hiro, who is suffering from depression after his brother is killed in a fire. When he inherits his brother's robotic project, Baymax, a "non-threatening" healthcare robot, he embarks on a journey to discover the truth about his death. After assembling his friends and "upgrading them" along with Baymax into a formidable fighting force, Hiro soon discovers that all is not a straightforward as it may seem and that in pursuing his own personal vengeance he is in fact, doing the opposite of what his brother would have wanted.

At the centre of Big Hero 6, is the character Baymax; the inflatable personal healthcare robot. With a minimum amount of dialogue voice actor Scott Adsitt brings him too life and embellishes him with some wonderful verbal idiosyncrasies. The simple design of Baymax is also an asset and the character is at his best when outside of his armour. Once again, we see the perennial theme of humans learning the nature of their own condition from a non-human source. Due to the emotional depth of the screenplay and the honesty of the performances, the message works and is genuinely moving. It also dovetails nicely into the story arc and set pieces. 

There is a beautiful aesthetic to the city of San Fransokyo and I cannot remember the last time a saw a animated movie with such a fascinating production design. Several times whilst watching I found myself pausing the playback so I could examine the subtleties of the environment. The use of lighting is outstanding and it is clear where the $165 million production cost went. The blending of US and Japanese culture makes for a very striking visual landscape as many familiar landmarks and iconic buildings are given an inventive cross cultural makeover.

The more critical viewer may pick up on a few of the inherent weaknesses of Big Hero 6. Some of the supporting characters are not a well-developed as the lead. The central villain, although motivated by a specific plot device, still seems a little too arbitrary. But I can forgive these minor points as the story really is about Baymax, Hiro and their interdependency. Therein lies the movies strongest asset. Curiously I saw Big Hero 6 in the same week that I say Ex Machina, upon their release in 2014. The latter aslo deals with the issue of humans and AI coming to terms with each other. Although the two movies are radically different in tone and are pursuing different audiences, there are some very similar themes.

Read More

Moral Relativism in Popular Culture

Contemporary Western culture is far from perfect. Although major positive changes have been made with regard to social attitudes, equality and tolerance, there is still much work to be done. Privilege is still rife, be it financial, political or societal. Just to put one’s cards on the table right from the outset, I am a white, middle class, British male in his late forties. I do not feel in any way, shape or form marginalised. At present I am in one of the most advantageous social economic groups in the UK. That statement is devoid of any emotional connotation. It is simply a statement of fact and a means of providing some context for this post. Although I am acutely aware of discrimination, I have seldom personally experienced it. I mention this because this post is about moral relativism in popular culture and thus it is only fair that I define the prism through which I experience the world. 

Contemporary Western culture is far from perfect. Although major positive changes have been made with regard to social attitudes, equality and tolerance, there is still much work to be done. Privilege is still rife, be it financial, political or societal. Just to put one’s cards on the table right from the outset, I am a white, middle class, British male in his late forties. I do not feel in any way, shape or form marginalised. At present I am in one of the most advantageous social economic groups in the UK. That statement is devoid of any emotional connotation. It is simply a statement of fact and a means of providing some context for this post. Although I am acutely aware of discrimination, I have seldom personally experienced it. I mention this because this post is about moral relativism in popular culture and thus it is only fair that I define the prism through which I experience the world. 

For most of history, there have been hierarchies that have perpetuated discrimination for personal advantage. The church, nations states and all manner of other social institutions have done this in the past and continue to do so to varying degrees today. Therefore, it is foolish and factually inaccurate to try and avoid depicting this in any narrative medium. The quasi medieval world of Game of Thrones is therefore potentially justified in depicting the unpleasantness of its faux era. However, accuracy is one thing, exploitation is another. The latter often sites the former as a reason to justify "showing all". Sadly, authenticity is not really the real motivation here. It's purely a case of sex and violence sells. So, it is important to consider context. The harsh realities of slavery are shown without titillation in a movie such a 12 Years A Slave. Can the same be said about Mandingo

There is a difficult line to tread here. Sometimes showing the stark reality of something abhorrent is the best way to make a point and to inform your audience or start a debate on a specific matter. On other occasions, depicting the specific details may not necessarily achieve this. I am of an age where I still remember the debate as to whether the rape scene in the 1988 movie The Accused actually needed to be shown, to make the film’s point about the treatment of women by the US judicial system of the time. On mature reflection, I believe that it did. Showing the assault puts a human face upon the crime and brings home its magnitude. However, can the same be said for “sensational” airport massacre scene in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2? Its primary inclusion seems to be to titillate, rather than to make any wider dramatic point.

Some people have very strong moral and ethical world views. These may be driven by faith or politics and they are also shaped by the prevailing social ideas and customs of the times. For example I have very different views on some subjects compared to my eighty year old parents. They are very much products of their era, as I am of mine. As a result, I believe that it is simply illogical to deny the concept of moral relativism. There are some broad common concepts that most cultures can agree upon, such as murder and theft being wrong. However, there is not a globally accepted moral equivalent of the Beaufort Scale or Periodic Table. Hence, we see disparities between men and women’s status and rites in certain cultures and religions.

As a result of this diversity of opinion, it's pretty difficult to deal in absolutes (unless you are the tabloid press). Yet that doesn't stop people from trying. Some folk feel that there are limits on the exploration of specific subjects or that certain things are just taboo. You mustn’t joke about this, never be disrespectful about that, the list can get pretty long. I cautiously take the opposite view. I don't believe anything is truly out of bounds to explore in a democracy as long as it’s done within the confines of the law. However, one must question what ones motivations are for doing so and straying in to such minefields. For me, I use the litmus test that comedian Reginald D. Hunter suggested. "Was there hate in your heart" when the controversial statement in question was said. It may not be the most sophisticated of tools but I believe it is a strong starting point.

Because so much of our perception of the world around us is visual, humans have a strong tendency towards voyeurism; thus, many people find depictions of sex and violence alluring. This is not necessarily in a sinister or unwholesome sense but possibly more due to the cultural attraction of anything designated taboo. In the UK during the early eighties, the home video market was unregulated. Hysteria and panic lead to ill-conceived legislation, namely the 1984 Video Recordings Act, resulting in lot of movies gaining notoriety as they were removed from shelves. Let it suffice to say that this state of affairs made a lot of these titles essential viewing for many teenagers. It became a rite of passage to try to seek them out and endure them. In many respects this is no different from placing an age based embargo upon smoking, drinking and other sundry vices. There is some truth in the clichés regarding forbidden fruit. It's a curious thing that the appeal of such extreme material often wanes with age. Teenagers are still drawn to such movies such as The Human Centipede and A Serbian Film. I however recognise that there is no real benefit in seeing such unpleasant and extreme material. Subsequently I now have self-imposed limitations. 

Gender is also an important factor within this debate. Reactions between the sexes can differ drastically on matters such as the depiction of sexual violence and the use of pejorative language. Sadly, most media based industries are far from a level playing field and there is often gender bias when dealing with certain material. Often it is this sort of content that proves most financially viable, regardless of its moral rectitude. It’s a matter that seems to be the bane of video games industry at present. Consider the debacles over Tracer’s sexuality in Overwatch and the aesthetics of female characters in Mass Effect: Andromeda. With regard to TV and specifically Game of Thrones which has often been criticised over its lurid content, I would love to have an accurate age and gender based break down of the viewing figures to determine what aspects of the show appealed to whom. Do you think there would be any major surprises? No, neither do I.

Following on from this, I think that we need to focus on the inherent duality of contemporary society with regard to current social issues. There is still a huge gulf between what people say in public when they’re conscious of maintaining an equitable moral and ethical position, as opposed to what they may think personally. We’re all guilty of this to a greater or lesser degree. Perhaps modern life exacerbates this phenomenon. For instance, most places of employment have clear policies regarding equality and discrimination these days and usually staff publicly endorse them. However, do all employees genuinely support such ideals or is it just expedient to do so? Until recently, the prevailing politically correct mindset has silenced certain quarters. In this post Trump, post Brexit world, a lot of people who previous kept their less inclusive views to themselves now are more comfortable sharing them publicly.

Then of course there is the fact that as a species we just seem to have a knack for failing to live up to our finer principles. Consider a commonly held notion such as not judging a person by their looks. Most people will strongly advocate such an ideal, again to possible project an acceptable public image. Yet despite this, so many of us still do the complete opposite, possibly because the ideal is contrary to our genetic imperatives. I'll freely admit that I regularly fail to live up to the standards that society and more importantly myself set. We live in a world where many of us embrace concepts and ideas in principle only; because we've realised that actually acting upon them requires effort, self-denial or having to step outside of our own personal comfort zone. Morality and ethics often go hand in hand with cognitive dissonance.

There is still much more to say and explore about moral relativism and its impact upon numerous social and ethical issues. It's interesting that many of these subjects manifest themselves in genres that are appealing to gamers, geeks and nerds. Games and comics still court controversy at times with the way they depict women or ethnic groups. The debate over the casting of the first female Doctor Who still rages on. The level of sexual content in shows as American Gods still causes tongues wagging. The BBC is about to embark upon its Gay Britannia season, celebrating 50th anniversary of The Sexual Offences Act 1967, which partially decriminalised gay sex. Expect outrage from specific newspapers. There are still mutterings from some fans over both the critical and financial success of Wonder woman at the box office. This is why we see push back as some see progressive ideals as threatening and don’t want them in their social spheres.

Context and the prevailing Zeitgeist have a bearing on representation of all subjects. Why should popular culture be any different? Therefore, we should not carte blanche deny the reality of moral relativism. However, we should not just use it as a “get out of jail” card to justify an “anything goes” mentality. Moral relativism is an academic debating tool and not a life defining philosophy. Just because something taboo can be shown on TV or a controversial subject used as a plot device, doesn’t mean that it automatically should. I would hope that such a decision was tempered by the application of a good many other criteria first. Because despite what some academics, critics and pundits may think, popular culture is not necessarily trivial by default. It is accessible to swathes of the population and can shape a great many opinions. As such it can be a very powerful medium. Whether it is a force for good or not, is down to us.

Read More

Classic Movie Themes: Excalibur (1981)

Excalibur (1981) is a visually arresting retelling of the Arthurian legend. Filmed at a time when studios where happy to finance large budget fantasy films, John Boormans movie is not your typical sword and sorcery fodder. It’s an adult adaptation of Mallory's Morte' D'arthur, filled with scenes of sex and violence, driven by some eclectic and eccentric performances from the ensemble British cast. The film boasts a handsome production design with a very stylised aesthetic. The Irish locations are lush and verdant. This is not intended to be a historically accurate portrayal of the source text but more of a visual homage. Excalibur evokes both the mythic power of Tolkien and the operatic splendour of Wagner. Boorman had tried to adapt The Lord of the Rings a decade earlier.

Excalibur (1981) is a visually arresting retelling of the Arthurian legend. Filmed at a time when studios where happy to finance large budget fantasy films, John Boormans movie is not your typical sword and sorcery fodder. It’s an adult adaptation of Mallory's Morte' D'arthur, filled with scenes of sex and violence, driven by some eclectic and eccentric performances from the ensemble British cast. The film boasts a handsome production design with a very stylised aesthetic. The Irish locations are lush and verdant. This is not intended to be a historically accurate portrayal of the source text but more of a visual homage. Excalibur evokes both the mythic power of Tolkien and the operatic splendour of Wagner. Boorman had tried to adapt The Lord of the Rings a decade earlier.

The soundtrack for the film blends original material by composer Trevor Jones along with classical pieces. The opening scenes in which Uther Pendragon is victorious in battle plays out against Siegfried's Funeral March from The Ring by Richard Wagner. This arrangement was specially recorded by London Philharmonic Orchestra and conducted by Norman Del Mar. It is a very imposing sequence, especially the entrance of Merlin (Nicol Williamson). The use of classical music in movies is not as easy as some may think and it requires a lot of skill to choose an appropriate piece that compliments the movie’s visual. Boorman's choice of Wagner is both wise and appropriate and thus greatly enhances the movie.

Below is the edited version of the track specifically designed for the movie, followed by a full recording.

Siegfried's Funeral March (Theme From Excalibur)
Richard Wagner
Götterdämmerung - Siegfried's Funeral March
Richard Wagner (London Philharmonic Orchestra/Sir Adrian Boult)
Read More
Movies, Dunkirk, War Roger Edwards Movies, Dunkirk, War Roger Edwards

Dunkirk (2017)

Dunkirk is an extraordinary war movie, that eschews the traditional sprawling format of its predecessors, filled with celebrity cameos and contrived expositionary dialogue. Instead Christopher Nolan manages to embrace the concept of “show, don’t tell”, yet uses what little dialogue he has to succinctly punctuate the unfolding story with emotion and gravitas. There is a sense of spectacle, yet it is far from the stark and dispassionate CGI we usually see. Through creative and focused editing Nolan generates a palpable sense of tension, be it in the air with extraordinary aerial dogfights or on the ground as men flee sinking ships and dodge artillery fire. Dunkirk facilitates an intense and emotional journey during its lean 106 minute running time. It is altogether a remarkable piece of cinema.

Dunkirk is an extraordinary war movie, that eschews the traditional sprawling format of its predecessors, filled with celebrity cameos and contrived expositionary dialogue. Instead Christopher Nolan manages to embrace the concept of “show, don’t tell”, yet uses what little dialogue he has to succinctly punctuate the unfolding story with emotion and gravitas. There is a sense of spectacle, yet it is far from the stark and dispassionate CGI we usually see. Through creative and focused editing Nolan generates a palpable sense of tension, be it in the air with extraordinary aerial dogfights or on the ground as men flee sinking ships and dodge artillery fire. Dunkirk facilitates an intense and emotional journey during its lean 106 minute running time. It is altogether a remarkable piece of cinema.

Dunkirk features a non-linear narrative with three separate stories that overlap, often providing a different perspective upon the other. The Mole follows three infantrymen as they try to jump the queue and find an alternative means off the beach. The Sea is the story of a Father and son who take their family boat to Dunkirk to rescue survivors and how they pick up a “shell shocked” soldier along the way. The Air focuses on three Spitfire pilots as they try to provide cover for the retreating ships. What Dunkirk doesn’t do is wallow in an excess of historical background detail, contrived patriotism or emotional manipulation. There is no Winston Churchill and more importantly no evil Nazis. The enemy remains conspicuously distant either sniping, shelling or dive bombing. Nolan places the audience in the centre of a military disaster, stripped of most of its subjective context. The tension and sense of threat is constant and authentic.

Hans Zimmer scores Dunkirk with discordant ambient tones. It is far from a traditional soundtrack but as stated, Dunkirk is not a traditional war movie. This is not just a movie about a major military defeat but a tale of those souls caught in the middle of it all. They do not have the benefit of historical hindsight and the film is effectively an exploration of men enduring catastrophic events happening around them. However, Dunkirk is not bereft of character development and there are strong performances by Mark Rylance, Cillian Murphy and Tom Hardy. Rather than building complex backstories and playing with our feelings towards the cast, Christopher Nolan creates genuine jeopardy and is not averse to delivering tragedy without the ubiquitous clichéd Hollywood trappings.

A few critics have already accused Dunkirk as being a soulless representation of combat, citing similarities with the set pieces in the Call of Duty video game franchise. Yet this is not the case. Yes, the physical effects are staggering and the films technical excellence is beyond reproach. But there are touches of humanity conveyed through the subtlest use of dialogue or nuanced acting throughout the film. It is there when Mark Rylance tells Cillian Murphy “there’s no hiding from this son, there’s a job do”, and when Tom Hardy perceptibly winces as he realises that despite being low on fuel he cannot leave an allied ship exposed to a German bomber. It is in these honest scenes that Dunkirk finds its greatness. And when the armada of “little ships” finally arrives to strains of Hans Zimmer’s evocative variation of Nimrod, it is profoundly moving.

I suspect that in the same way Saving Private Ryan significantly altered the depiction of war in film back in 1998, Dunkirk may well have a similar effect henceforward. I’m sure some audiences may view the film through the prism of Brexit and vicariously try and champion it as a metaphor for their cause. However, I think that Christopher Nolan’s delineation of this military disaster that was spun in to a political triumph, elevates it above such partisan perspectives. Dunkirk is an intense, gripping and credible view of the nature of war and its impact upon those caught in it. It strength lies in vignettes of human drama set amid an epic and destructive canvas. It is also a compelling drama imbued with a tangible sense of suspense. Cinema seldom gets this good. Go see it on the biggest screen you can find.

Read More
Movies, Jurassic World, Creature Feature Roger Edwards Movies, Jurassic World, Creature Feature Roger Edwards

Jurassic World (2015)

Hollywood is a cyclical place and often repeats decisions it's successfully made in the past. During the early seventies, the mainstream film industry head hunted a lot of up and coming talent from the independent film making community, or took a chance on directors who were fresh out of film school. It was a means to an end and a way to tap into the new talent that was proving popular and lucrative. Similarly, Warner Bros. followed suit in 2014 when Gareth Edwards was hired to direct the multi-million-dollar Godzilla reboot. His previous movie was the self-financed indie Sci-Fi picture MonstersGodzilla went on to be both a box office and critical hit. 

Hollywood is a cyclical place and often repeats decisions it's successfully made in the past. During the early seventies, the mainstream film industry head hunted a lot of up and coming talent from the independent film making community, or took a chance on directors who were fresh out of film school. It was a means to an end and a way to tap into the new talent that was proving popular and lucrative. Similarly, Warner Bros. followed suit in 2014 when Gareth Edwards was hired to direct the multi-million-dollar Godzilla reboot. His previous movie was the self-financed indie Sci-Fi picture MonstersGodzilla went on to be both a box office and critical hit. 

So, after years of languishing in development hell, the job of making Jurassic World was finally given to director Colin Trevorrow, who like Edwards only had at that time, a single small feature film credit to his resume. But "talent will out" as the expression goes and Jurassic World has proven to be a very respectable entry to the franchise. It develops the existing themes established in the previous three movies and manages to add several contemporary angles. It is tonally astute and finds the right balance between action, suspense and wry humour. The cast is spot on and the narrative is well paced. It doesn't skimp on the "wow" factor either and the digital and animatronic dinosaurs on display still genuinely impress.

What I liked most about Jurassic World is its keen sense of social observation and the fact that despite the Velociraptors, Pterosaurs and Indominus Rex it still nails what humans are like. So many of the ideas that are developed, ring true. Jurassic World is depicted as a declining financial undertaking for its owners because Joe public has grown accustomed and bored with dinosaurs. For many of the tourists the parks denizens have become as common place as elephants. The movie also does an excellent job of cataloguing the monetisation of the holiday resort. There are known brands everywhere, the same way there are in real world theme parks. Kids seem more interested by their smartphones than by the dinosaurs. 

Another interesting theme that runs through the movie is that of animal psychology. Chris Pratt has not “tamed” the group of Velociraptors he works with but through behavioural science has managed to condition them and learn how to interact with them on their own terms. Now as this movie was designed to be a summer blockbuster, naturally such ideas are taken to extremes but it does raise some good questions about exactly how intelligent were dinosaurs, especially those that hunted in packs and therefore required a working form of social interaction.

Once again composer Michael Giacchinno rises to the challenge of writing a soundtrack for a franchise that already has an established set of iconic themes. He uses John William's cues sparingly and effectively. His own original material is as ever, intelligent, appropriate and of the highest quality. Overall the score helps maintain a sense of continuity to the proceedings. The same can be said about the visual effects work by Industrial Light and Magic and Legacy Effects (formerly Stan Winston Studios). Despite the fourteen-year long hiatus Jurassic World still has the same ambience as its predecessors. 

The box office success of Jurassic World yet again demonstrates the public's ongoing fascination with dinosaurs. When I first saw this movie upon its release, you could hear a pin drop for most of the two-hour running time, only for it to be replaced by screaming at the appropriate junctures. I wholeheartedly believe that pretty much everyone left the cinema thoroughly entertained. The tension and thrills remained upon a second viewing two years on. Jurassic World works because the production team fundamentally understands the material that they're making. No postmodern irony or cynicism, just dinosaurs with big pointed teeth and a movie that doesn't try to fix something that isn't broken.

Read More
Editorial, Collecting, Fandom, Movies Roger Edwards Editorial, Collecting, Fandom, Movies Roger Edwards

Collecting

Once again Syp over at Bio-Break has written a post that provides a talking point for other bloggers. This time it’s about collecting which is a very broad church indeed. When I was a child it was a common mantra of adults at the time to “get a hobby”. I suppose from their perspective a busy and engaged child is one that is likely to stay out of trouble and frankly it’s still sound advice. Many hobbies involve collecting and this can tangentially teach positive lessons such as fiscal prudence, patience and learning about that which you enjoy. In his post Syp raises the point as to whether he’s missed out by never having been bitten by the collecting bug but he also reflects on some practical problems associated with such pastimes. I was going to leave a comment on the post but it soon became apparent that it would be a little too long, so this blog post is my response.

Once again Syp over at Bio-Break has written a post that provides a talking point for other bloggers. This time it’s about collecting which is a very broad church indeed. When I was a child it was a common mantra of adults at the time to “get a hobby”. I suppose from their perspective a busy and engaged child is one that is likely to stay out of trouble and frankly it’s still sound advice. Many hobbies involve collecting and this can tangentially teach positive lessons such as fiscal prudence, patience and learning about that which you enjoy. In his post Syp raises the point as to whether he’s missed out by never having been bitten by the collecting bug but he also reflects on some practical problems associated with such pastimes. I was going to leave a comment on the post but it soon became apparent that it would be a little too long, so this blog post is my response.

When I was young, I dabbled with collecting. Comics, trading cards, action figures are some of the things I doggedly pursued. But often I found that time, money and the practicalities of being a child, IE being busy playing, meant that such enterprises were doomed. It was not until the early nineties, when I had a job and a sizeable disposable income, that I was able to sustain the practical realities of collecting. I think this is an important factor to mention. Collecting requires passion which is something available to all age groups. Money is something that we don’t have continuous access to all our lives and it subtly alters the dynamic of collecting. It is far easier to start your collection while you still live at home and have “spare cash”. Marriage, family and mortgages can radically alter this equation.

Being a consummate film fan and an ardent completist, I started collecting films on what was the best physical medium of the time; LaserDiscs. In the early nineties, VHS sell-through tapes where king. However, if you were a serious movie aficionado, who wanted superior picture and sound quality as well as alternative cuts of a film, then LaserDiscs was where it was at (Daddy-o). At the time, a VHS tape of a popular film such as Terminator 2 would cost about £10. If you wanted the Director’s Cut of the same movie, in the correct aspect ratio with optional commentary by the cast, then it would cost between £30 to £40 on LaserDisc. It was a superior viewing experience all round. Although there were UK releases on this format, they were somewhat limited. A far greater choice was available if you bought US and European imports. Buying internationally also added to the allure of collecting.

Because of my passion for film, I bought circa 1991 a LaserDisc player that was dual standard (NTSC/PAL) and a new TV that could handles both UK and US picture standards. I think I spent near £750 on both. Over the next few years, I spent a great deal of time and money building up a collection of classic and cult films. Due to prohibitive censorship laws that prevailed in the UK at the time, a lot of the material I bought was technically illegal to import. There was a network of small companies at the time that worked within various legal loopholes to offer a specialist purchasing service. Thus, I owned the Director’s Cut of George A. Romero’s Dawn of the Dead at a time when it was only available in the UK in a pre-cut version. I also had the Criterion version of RoboCop in all its bloody glory. But the jewel in the crown of my collection was the Star Wars Trilogy in their original theatrical versions. LaserDiscs satisfied my needs as a fan as well as a film purist. For about seven or so years, I spent thousands of pounds on my collection. Being twelve-inch discs, they took up comparable space to a vinyl music collection.

However, time and tide waits for no man and it also doesn’t give a shit about collectors. Towards the end of the nineties, DVD became the de facto medium of choice and so I changed the focus of my collecting activities. Due to regional variations, multiple versions and good old-fashioned censorship, DVD proved to be an even more collectable format than LaserDisc. It was round about this time, when my personal collection of movies was over five hundred that I realised there had been a shift in the pleasure I got from collecting. It was no longer just about seeing the best and most complete version of a much-loved movie. I was in the thrall of the “thrill of the hunt”. A fact borne out by the number of discs I had that remained unwatched, still in their shrink wrap. I was also using up considerable storage space to accommodate my collection and it was proving to be somewhat of a drain on my finances. And then Blu-ray appeared on the market and opened up not only a new avenue of potential collecting but a can of worms. Did I really want to replace so much of my precious hoard?

It’s a curious thing how something that has taken years to amass, can be dispensed with and disposed of in a far quicker time. My Father-in-law was a prodigious collector of coins and medals. He was very proud of his collection and guest were frequently regaled with it. Yet collecting is often very personal and means little to those who do not share similar passions. When my Father-in-law died in 2012, his collection was sold quickly and efficiently to several professional collectors. It was just another asset to be disposed of, once his estate had been settled. And so it was with my film collection. Once I had determined that it was no longer the collection that mattered to me but just the act of acquisition, I felt no reason to continue doing either. The very rare and signed LaserDiscs where sold to a specialist film and memorabilia store. The rest of the DVDs where then sold online, or traded in at game stores. What was left was given away to charity shops.

I’m not sure if I have a major philosophical point to make about collecting, beyond the fact that many people that I’ve spoken to on the subject have had a similar journey. What starts off as a fun undertaking eventually becomes a millstone and possibly a minor addiction. It certainly can become a massive financial drain. I also think that collecting is a very solitary pastime and is not accommodating of relationships and other situations that compete for your time, attention and money. I am now at a point in my life where I have embraced downsizing and decluttering. Technology has also made so much previously rare material readily available. As a film fan, I now live in an age where tracking down high-quality copies of most movies is quite easy. I doubt if I’ll ever collect anything in my life again, yet I cannot totally write off the period of my life in which I did. It was fun initially regardless of where it led and I think it ended up teaching me a lot about myself.

Here's an episode of the Burton & Scrooge Podcast from September 2015. Brian and I have a fairly lengthy conversation about collecting, drawing upon our own personal experiences. The discussion begins at 27:12 into the show.

Burton & Scrooge #17
Messrs Burton & Scrooge
Read More
Movies, Shoot 'Em Up Roger Edwards Movies, Shoot 'Em Up Roger Edwards

Shoot 'Em Up (2008)

Michael Davis Shoot ’Em Up is the tale of Mr. Smith (Clive Owen), a drifter with a possible special forces background and a liking for carrots who wants nothing more than to be left alone. However, he finds himself embroiled in a complex political conspiracy once he aids a pregnant woman who is being chased by a hitman. After the woman is killed, he takes the baby and goes on the run with a lactating prostitute (Monica Bellucci). Meanwhile, they are stalked by the intelligent and ruthless Hertz (Paul Giamatti), an ex-FBI forensic psychologist and his never-ending army of foot soldiers. A myriad of elaborate gunfights ensues and Smith slowly pieces together the reasons behind their pursuit. A United States Senator who strongly supports gun control has been breeding babies for their bone marrow to treat his cancer. A prominent gun baron has contracted Hertz to kill the babies, thus ending the senator’s political ambitions. Once the plot is expedited the mayhem continues.

Michael Davis Shoot ’Em Up is the tale of Mr. Smith (Clive Owen), a drifter with a possible special forces background and a liking for carrots who wants nothing more than to be left alone. However, he finds himself embroiled in a complex political conspiracy once he aids a pregnant woman who is being chased by a hitman. After the woman is killed, he takes the baby and goes on the run with a lactating prostitute (Monica Bellucci). Meanwhile, they are stalked by the intelligent and ruthless Hertz (Paul Giamatti), an ex-FBI forensic psychologist and his never-ending army of foot soldiers. A myriad of elaborate gunfights ensues and Smith slowly pieces together the reasons behind their pursuit. A United States Senator who strongly supports gun control has been breeding babies for their bone marrow to treat his cancer. A prominent gun baron has contracted Hertz to kill the babies, thus ending the senator’s political ambitions. Once the plot is expedited the mayhem continues.

It is alleged by director, Michael Davis that Shoot ’Em Up is a satirical look at American gun culture and the way it has become an integral part of the social fabric of the country. It also supposedly lampoons the contemporary action movie focusing on its style, ethics and “raison d’etre”. Whether or not this is the case remains to be seen. Joe Public didn't discern any hidden depths upon the films initial release. As it stands Shoot ’Em Up is simply an action film with a plot more preposterous than Crank, with a bunch of frenetic action scenes cribbed from Hong Kong cinema. The film lurches from a sense of tongue in cheek, to abject incredulity within the first ten minutes of the film, when a bad guy is dispatched by a carrot.

If you want action with a satirical subtext, then it is better represented by the work of Paul Verhoeven. Robocop and Starship Troopers being prime examples. The intellectual pretensions of Shoot 'Em Up definitely got lost during its making. However, there are a few good aspects to the proceedings. It is enjoyable spotting the homages to such classics as Hard Boiled and Django. And some of the dialogue is so excruciating it becomes quite droll. But by and large this film is a mess. Neither Owen or the talented Giamatti can save it. With the message lost, there’s nothing more than a film destined to be wilfully misconstrued by the tabloids. Therefore, avoid Shoot 'Em Up if you are easily offended or intolerant of the cinematic equivalent of the concept album.

Read More
Movies, Licence to Kill, James Bond, Action Roger Edwards Movies, Licence to Kill, James Bond, Action Roger Edwards

Licence to Kill (1989)

Licence to Kill was the sixteenth instalment in the James Bond series and the last to star Timothy Dalton as MI6 agent James Bond. He sadly only made two and remains an underrated Bond. Licence to Kill was also the first official James Bond film to use a title not derived from either an Ian Fleming novel or a short story. However, it does contain characters and elements from Fleming's novel "Live and Let Die" and the short story "The Hildebrand Rarity". The film follows Bond's dismissal from MI6 and his vendetta against a South American drug baron. The film was originally due to be called "Licence Revoked" but was changed allegedly to avoid confusion with American audience

Licence to Kill is the sixteenth instalment in the James Bond series and the last to star Timothy Dalton as MI6 agent James Bond. He sadly only made two movies and remains an underrated Bond. Licence to Kill was also the first official James Bond film to use a title not derived from either an Ian Fleming novel or a short story. However, it does contain characters and elements from Fleming's novel "Live and Let Die" and the short story "The Hildebrand Rarity". The film follows Bond's dismissal from MI6 and his vendetta against a South American drug baron after an attack on his friend Felix Leiter. The film was originally due to be called "Licence Revoked" but was changed allegedly to avoid confusion with American audiences. 

Licence to Kill was one of the least commercially successful Bond films. It had production costs of approximately $36 million and made only $156 million back at the box office. The previous Bond outing, The Living Daylights had made over $196 million. This drop can be attributed to the decision to release the film in the summer, in direct competition with Lethal Weapon 2, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (starring former Bond Sean Connery) and Batman. Bond films have traditionally been Autumn releases. Due to the death of screenwriter Richard Maibaum and subsequent legal battles over the ownership of the James Bond series, there was a subsequent six year hiatus until the next Bond movie Goldeneye in 1995. Licence to Kill has many unique factors that make it a milestone within the Bond franchise. 

Licence to Kill has many unique factors that make it a milestone within the Bond franchise. It the first Bond film to be rated PG-13 in the US and 15 in the UK; all previous films were PG. Violent scenes still had to be trimmed in both the UK and US to avoid a higher classification. Director John Glen decided to make the film stronger in tone to directly compete with the contemporary competition. Action films had become more prevalent during the eighties and often included expensive and elaborate set pieces. These had been in the past the exclusive province of the Bond films. However, the release of the James Bond "Ultimate Editions" on DVD in 2006, restored all previously cut material. The fully uncut print was also sourced for the more recent Blu-ray disc in 2009.

Licence to Kill featured another major change for the franchise. Veteran Bond composer, John Barry was not available at the time of the post production, as he was undergoing throat surgery. Therefore, the soundtrack was composed and conducted by Michael Kamen, a British composer who had already scored several action films such as Lethal weapon and Die hard. Licence to Kill, despite poor financial returns, did perform well with numerous critics. It is still a source of division among fans. It is hard edged, minimalist and reflects the tone of Fleming's early novels very well. Dalton's performance, the lack of fanciful gadgets and glib one liners, is a radical change in style from the self-parodying excesses of Moonraker. Director John Glen deemed it to be the best of his five Bond films. On reflection, the market at the time was simply not ready for such a radical shift in the franchise. It is ironic that Casino Royale successfully managed to make such a change seventeen years later.

Read More
Movies, Lockout, Science Fiction, Action Roger Edwards Movies, Lockout, Science Fiction, Action Roger Edwards

Lockout (2012)

Let's cut to the chase. Lockout is derivative, clichéd, has some dodgy CGI FX work and has nothing new to add to the Sci-Fi sub-genre of future prison action movies. However, that does not mean that the movie is not enjoyable. On the contrary, if approached with the right mind set, then Lockout can be an entertaining experience, which will have you chuckling as it ticks boxes in a knowing fashion and offers some budget action and hard-boiled dialogue. It certainly isn't going to win any awards, but is does everything that a B movie should do. If you treat it as such then you won't be misled.

Let's cut to the chase. Lockout is derivative, clichéd, has some dodgy CGI FX work and has nothing new to add to the Sci-Fi sub-genre of future prison action movies. However, that does not mean that the movie is not enjoyable. On the contrary, if approached with the right mind set, then Lockout can be an entertaining experience, which will have you chuckling as it ticks boxes in a knowing fashion and offers some budget action and hard-boiled dialogue. It certainly isn't going to win any awards, but is does everything that a B movie should do. If you treat it as such then you won't be misled.

For starters, think Escape from New York, then No Escape and then finally Fortress. Follow that order to find the appropriate level. Where John Carpenter made Snake Plissken a Clint Eastwood/John Wayne hybrid, Guy Pearces' Snow is more of a John McClane/Han Solo crossover. Lockout never strays into being a total rip-off of Carpenter's work, but it sails close to bounderies of what can be labelled "a homage". Guy Pearce, armed with pumped biceps and an arsenal of waggish badinage plays Snow, a former government agent who must single-handedly rescue the President’s daughter (Maggie Grace), from a space prison to escape (for some particular reason as Homer Simpson said). The prisoners are the usual collection of cinematic sociopaths, although Hydell (Joseph Gilgun), the psychotic brother of the prisoner’s leader, has all the best lines and is immense fun to watch. Stuff gets blown up, fist fights ensue, the laws of physics are conveniently bent to suit the plot as you expect from such movies.

When Luc Besson initially started putting his name to broader action productions, it was a pleasant alternative to mainstream Hollywood fodder. The European vibe brought something new to familiar action material. However, these movies are now plagiarising the very material they seek to be different to and the distinction is not so great now. Written and directed by relative newcomers James Mather and Stephen St. Leger, Lockout perhaps needed a more experienced pair of hands at the helm. The movie was shot on location in Belgrade but also had extensive green screen footage shot in post-production. The movie struggles to integrate both elements. However, it's quirky continental pedigree, tongue in cheek approach, along with its fast pace does allow the directors to effectively "blag it".

I was in an unusually forgiving mood when I saw Lockout in the movie theatre on its release and chose to ignore its faults and simply dealt with it like a DTV action title from the eighties. I even smirked when Snow balked at being beaten by a guy called Rupert. However, this is the sort of movie that plays a lot better in the home entertainment market. It’s something that goes well with a few beers and a curry. If you are a casual film viewer, you may wish to give this one a miss as it lacks some of the polish of bigger budget releases. For those who have a deeper love for the action genre and have sat through Freejack and Fortress 2: Re-Entry, then you can take this one on the chin easily.

Read More
The Raven, Movies, Horror Roger Edwards The Raven, Movies, Horror Roger Edwards

The Raven (2012)

The Raven is a high concept movie in which author Edgar Allan Poe discovers that a serial killer is copying his literary work. It mixes a traditional Gothic sense of style with postmodern depictions of violence and has a quirky, erudite and fun screenplay. The film has a strong streak of gallows humour running through it and a solid cast. It is however an unbalanced production that never quite hits its stride, despite its fast pace. Like director James McTeigue's earlier film V for Vendetta I suspect that The Raven may be another slow burner, finding its audience over time rather than initially.

The Raven is a high concept movie in which author Edgar Allan Poe discovers that a serial killer is copying his literary work. It mixes a traditional Gothic sense of style with postmodern depictions of violence and has a quirky, erudite and fun screenplay. The film has a strong streak of gallows humour running through it and a solid cast. It is however an unbalanced production that never quite hits its stride, despite its fast pace. Like director James McTeigue's earlier film V for Vendetta I suspect that The Raven may be another slow burner, finding its audience over time rather than initially.

The cast is strong with Luke Evans, Alice Eve and John Cusack as Poe. Brendan Gleeson sports a splendid pair of sideburns (grips) and as usual provides an assured performance as Poe's father-in-law. The cinematography is reminiscent of Hammer's baroque style with a hint of Argento thrown in, courtesy of DP Danny Ruhlmann. The dialogue is equally whippy and writers Ben Livingston and Hannah Shakespeare script is not without merit. Poe fans will enjoy spotting the many homages both great and small. Yet despite its virtues The Raven still doesn't quite reach the heights of the material it references.

A lot of the films shortcomings stem from the character of Poe himself. John Cusack’s performances is strong and he is very watchable but is perhaps a little too good looking compared to the alcoholic, drug addicted, dissipated reality of the author. Furthermore, the film pits Poe as a foil to Detective Emmett Fields, rather than making him the lead in the investigation. The dynamic although well-structured seems wrong. Shouldn't Poe, the creator of the great fictional detective Monsieur Dupin, not be taking the lead in the solving the ongoing crimes? The denouement when the killer is unmasked in true Scooby Doo fashion, also doesn't come as a major surprise.

The Raven, despite its uneven nature is still an enjoyable film and it is nice to see period set costume horror making a welcome return. If you liked V for Vendetta, I suspect that you may also embrace this movie. It has many of the former's strengths and weaknesses. Those who favour the current vogue of horror film making, as seen in the likes of Paranormal Activity or any of the recent reboots, may be disappointed. The Raven may well improve with a second viewing and I intend to do so at a later date. I shall not say anything further less I give in to my urge to say "nevermore" or make a reference to the Teletubbies.

Read More

H. P. Lovecraft's The Shadow Out of Time (2012)

The writings of H. P. Lovecraft have been an inspiration for many a film maker. Their brooding atmosphere along with intriguing blend of science and the occult, offers a wealth of themes to be explored. Unfortunately, there have been very few movies that have come anywhere near to capturing the spirit of the author. So, it was with great interest that I watched the fifteen-minute short film The Shadow Out of Time. This low budget production made by independent film makers Richard Svensson, Daniel Lennéer and Christopher Johansson, succinctly distils a classic Lovecraftian tale without losing any of the ambience of the source text. It puts to shame some of the hand-fisted adaptations that have preceded it.

The writings of H. P. Lovecraft have been an inspiration for many a film maker. Their brooding atmosphere along with intriguing blend of science and the occult, offers a wealth of themes to be explored. Unfortunately, there have been very few movies that have come anywhere near to capturing the spirit of the author. So, it was with great interest that I watched the fifteen-minute short film The Shadow Out of Time. This low budget production made by independent film makers Richard Svensson, Daniel Lennéer and Christopher Johansson, succinctly distils a classic Lovecraftian tale without losing any of the ambience of the source text. It puts to shame some of the hand-fisted adaptations that have preceded it.

The plot follows an academic, Nathaniel Wingate Peaslee who collapses during a lecture to find that he has exchanged bodies with an extraterrestrial life form from Earth's past history. His own body is occupied by the alien who spend the next two years studying the present era. Eventually the process is reversed and Peaslee attributes the events to a mental collapse. However, it becomes apparent that he is not the only one to have had this experience. His resulting investigation leads him to Australia and an uncomfortable truth emerges. The story touches upon the experiences of both individuals and hints at a further menace that threatens the future of both species. Told via narration, the film is set in the 1900s and reflects the cinematic style of the time.

The period setting along with its stylised format really enhances the unfolding story. Åke Rosén performance is very much in the appropriate idiom and John Hutch narration embellishes without descending into melodramatics. Overall this is a polished production when you consider the budgetary and the logistical constraints imposed upon the film makers. It never ceases to amaze me the dedication and love that fans can muster to create such outstanding work using just “over the counter” hardware and software. Therefore, I thoroughly recommend The Shadow Out of Time and would urge readers to check out the creators You Tube channel for further H. P. Lovecraft adaptations.

Read More
Movies, Parents and Movie Ratings Roger Edwards Movies, Parents and Movie Ratings Roger Edwards

Parents and Movie Ratings

Movie ratings in the UK are overseen by the British Board of Film Classification. A movie legally requires certification to be shown theatrically or released on DVD or Blu-ray. Ratings are governed by guidelines that have been determined through public consultation, expert advice and peer review. In recent years the BBFC has become a measured, informed and progressive body that broadly reaches appropriate decisions that are mainly agreed with by cinema audiences. UK ratings, unlike their US counterparts, are exclusionary. Films rated 15 or 18 prohibit the admission of those below that age. With regard to home media, it is illegal to rent or sell DVD or Blu-ray discs rated similarly.

Movie ratings in the UK are overseen by the British Board of Film Classification. A movie legally requires certification to be shown theatrically or released on DVD or Blu-ray. Ratings are governed by guidelines that have been determined through public consultation, expert advice and peer review. In recent years the BBFC has become a measured, informed and progressive body that broadly reaches appropriate decisions that are mainly agreed with by cinema audiences. UK ratings, unlike their US counterparts, are exclusionary. Films rated 15 or 18 prohibit the admission of those below that age. With regard to home media, it is illegal to rent or sell DVD or Blu-ray discs rated similarly.

In the past the BBFC has made poor decisions and policies have varied under various directors. However a far more level headed attitude has prevailed of late and I believe the organisation now makes sound decisions. More importantly the organisation remains independent and free from political interference and industry lobbying. The BBFC has a wealth of resources available on its website and provides great detail about how it has arrived at a rating. They even go so far as to give readers spoiler warnings, when discussing the content of a movie. Strong language, drug use and violence as well as adult themes are listed if they feature in the film.

As a parent that has raised a child, I applaud such rigour and in-depth information. Being a movie fan, I have always had an immense love of cinema. Naturally my son was exposed to a lot of films while growing up. However personal fandom was never allowed to trump common sense and both my wife and I always took time to consider the suitability of any material we watched with our son. It is something I encourage all parents to do. Ratings are there to inform and an assist. We currently live in an age where there is a wealth of information available. Therefore making an informed decision about family viewing need not be difficult.

Sadly despite the wealth of resources available parents still remain oblivious to ratings and I have often seen children in theatres watching movies that are patently unsuitable for them. Furthermore they are frequently distressed and I do wonder about the long term harm that can be done by such ill-considered parenting. Two such examples from 2015 were Jurassic World and SPECTRE. On both occasions I sat next to families with children under the age of ten who were far from happy about certain scenes. It should be noted that both these movies were rated 12A which is broadly equivalent to the US PG-13 rating. In recent years, it has become the most common rating in the UK film industry and potentially the most misunderstood.

The most common problem associated with the UK 12A rating, is the fact that is an advisory rating. According to the BBFC website “Films classified 12A and video works classified 12 contain material that is not generally suitable for children aged under 12. No one younger than 12 may see a 12A film in a cinema unless accompanied by an adult. Adults planning to take a child under 12 to view a 12A film should consider whether the film is suitable for that child”. Therefore, as a parent, if you’re planning to take children under the age of 12 to see a movie such as Kong: Skull Island, it is incumbent upon you to determine if the film is suitable and whether the child in question is mature enough to enjoy the film without becoming upset or distressed. The 12A rating is not by default a guarantee that a movie is child friendly, nor does it mean that the movie in question is exclusively marketed towards children per se.

At present mainstream film making loves the PG-13/12A rating. It makes a film accessible to the broadest of audiences, thus maximising box office takings, while still accommodating a degree of sex, violence and strong language. The rating can also encompass a variety of adult themes and material that is dour, bleak and even threatening. This is specifically why the advisory nature of the rating needs to be acted upon. Just because younger children can be admitted to see films with this rating, doesn’t by default mean that they should. Cinema, like TV should not be used as a convenient babysitting service. Perhaps some parents would be wise to reflect upon this and take more time to research a movie before allowing their children to watch it. The BBFC website like so many others can be easily accessed by phone. Continued failure by lax parents to adhere to rating correctly, could potentially lead to a more draconian system being implemented.

Read More

Mrs. Brown, You've Got a Lovely Daughter (1968)

I was channel surfing a while back when I stumbled across Mrs. Brown, You've Got a Lovely Daughter, a feature film starring none other than Herman's Hermits! Now I was aware that after the success of the Fab Four's A Hard Day’s Night and Help, several popular bands tried to follow in their wake. The Dave Clark Five made Catch Us If You Can (directed by John Boorman) and there were numerous vehicles for Cliff Richard. But apparently, Herman's Hermits were signed to MGM records in the US and it was standard marketing practice to make at least one feature film vehicle for their bestselling artists. Apparently, this included Hank Williams, Connie Francis and Roy Orbison although I’m not familiar with the movies they made. Hence there’s nothing really that unusual about this film’s existence.

I was channel surfing a while back when I stumbled across Mrs. Brown, You've Got a Lovely Daughter, a feature film starring none other than Herman's Hermits! Now I was aware that after the success of the Fab Four's A Hard Day’s Night and Help, several popular bands tried to follow in their wake. The Dave Clark Five made Catch Us If You Can (directed by John Boorman) and there were numerous vehicles for Cliff Richard. But apparently, Herman's Hermits were signed to MGM records in the US and it was standard marketing practice to make at least one feature film vehicle for their bestselling artists. Apparently, this included Hank Williams, Connie Francis and Roy Orbison although I’m not familiar with the movies they made. Hence there’s nothing really that unusual about this film’s existence.

So on to the plot. When Herman Tulley inherits his Grandfather's most prized possession, a greyhound named Mrs. Brown, he and his friends (Barry, Keith, Karl, and Derek) decide to make their fortune racing the dog. After the animal has won the Manchester heat of the National Greyhound Derby, Herman meets wealthy Londoners Mr. and Mrs. Brown and their daughter Judy, a model. Hoping to see Judy again, Herman and his friends decide to take the dog to London for the derby finals and to see if they can find fame with their band. Hijinks, misadventures and sundry shenanigans promptly ensue, along with a handful of contrived song and dance numbers. You know the form.

Sounds harmless enough, doesn't it? Well so you would think. But the plot doesn't follow the usual path you'd expect from such films. The hero doesn't get the girl of his dreams at the end. The dog doesn't win the race it's been entered for. The guys do not find fame with their band. The songs are very eclectic, with one, "The World Is for the Young" verging on suicidal melancholy. There are also some seriously outdated social attitudes displayed, particularly towards women. A young lady is told that if she doesn't stop following them (the band) she'll get "sloshed". When Herman's girlfriend expresses and interest in accompanying them to London, she is told that it's fine as long as she doesn't mind "Cooking and cleaning for five guys". There is also a lot of violent pub brawls and market fights that seem out of step with the rest of the film.

Frankly, this film really threw me. It's just so bizarre and incongruous. The concept of using a film to promote a band seems to have died out these days. I'm sure this comes down to simple financial costs and the fragmentation of the music industry. The last movie of this ilk that I’m familiar with being Spice World and that was an event for the time. Overall, Mrs. Brown, You've Got a Lovely Daughter is not a complete dog’s dinner. It’s more of a curiosity than an outright failure, right up there with Slade in Flame. It’s lack of the inherent “chumminess” you expect with sixties pop is its main selling point. Best recommended to completist music fans and hardcore cinema aficionados. File under "Right turn, Clyde".

Read More
Movies, Skyline, Science Fiction Roger Edwards Movies, Skyline, Science Fiction Roger Edwards

Skyline (2010)

When I first saw the initial trailers for Skyline, I was not overly impressed. Once again, here was a film that appeared to offer a great deal of spectacle but was there any substance? Would there be a good script, engaging performances, likeable characters? Call me old fashioned but I do consider these to be important attributes to any film. Well I finally caught up with Skyline, in the comfort of my own lounge, an environment that is often more forgiving that the cinema itself. As I suspected, Skyline turned out exactly as I predicted and once again I was left thinking "so what?" It’s an all too common refrain these days.

When I first saw the initial trailers for Skyline, I was not overly impressed. Once again, here was a film that appeared to offer a great deal of spectacle but was there any substance? Would there be a good script, engaging performances, likeable characters? Call me old fashioned but I do consider these to be important attributes to any film. Well I finally caught up with Skyline, in the comfort of my own lounge, an environment that is often more forgiving that the cinema itself. As I suspected, Skyline turned out exactly as I predicted and once again I was left thinking "so what?" It’s an all too common refrain these days.

Skyline is technically well made. The film opens with a startling event, then lapses into flashback to introduce the characters and set the scene. The story exposition is executed efficiently and within fifteen minutes the film moves on to the action. The cast, drawn mainly from a TV background are competent. These include Eric Balfour, Scottie Thompson and Donald Faisson. The story follows a traditional arc climaxing in what the writers obviously consider a twist. The ending leaves the door firmly open for a sequel should the need arise (Alleged a second movie is being considered starring Iko Uwais). The visual effects are very high quality but they did constitute over 90% of the films overall budget.

Despite all the above, Skyline is derivative, clichéd, predictable and utterly disposable. It is not dull but conversely it is not especially engaging. You can happily watch it whilst performing another task such as gaming, reading or plucking a chicken. The characters are not unlikeable as they were in Cloverfield but they are not sufficiently developed to merit any serious emotional investment. For instance, David Zayas plays an intriguing concierge who seems to be the only practical member of the group. Yet his back story is never explored and apart from a pithy "kiss off" line, his role doesn't really go anywhere.

Directors of Skyline, The Brothers Strause, have a technical background in the industry and own the visual FX studio Hydraulx. Their pedigree in this field speaks for itself. Yet ninety minutes of CGI does not a good film make. Frankly, the proliferation of visual effects in films, TV and advertising these days has somewhat jaded the public's attitude to them. Although they are an expected facet of any production, they are paradoxically diminishing as a major point of interest. How many times have we seen a major US city demolished. In the seventies, this was a rare event but now days it’s as common as politicians lies. Apart from Mad Max: Fury Road, I cannot think of any recent film that got by mainly because of its visuals.

In many respects Skyline is like a fifties B film. It tries very hard to follow the path of larger budget predecessors. You only have to look at the imagery that is used, such as the spaceships over Los Angeles or the squid like harvesting drones. The familiarity of these visuals reflects a sort of cinematic fast food culture. Sadly, it has the same overall results. After an innocuous viewing experience akin to a drive-thru meal, the audience soon forgets the inherently bland movie experience they’ve just partaken off. Without the substance of a genuinely good script or an original idea, alleged big spectacles, such as Skyline, become no more than a hollow one.

Read More
Movies, Horror, Train to Busan, Zombies Roger Edwards Movies, Horror, Train to Busan, Zombies Roger Edwards

Train to Busan (2016)

The horror genre has more than its fair share of bad movies. It’s the nature of the beast (no pun intended). Films of this type can be made quickly and cheaply but have the potential to make a tidy profit. Therefore, they attract not only burgeoning talent but those bereft of any as well. Furthermore, traditional formulas work, so any new innovative production is often followed by a wealth of copycats and knockoff films. To say that the genre is self-plagiarising is an understatement. Yet, from time to time, horror movies can surpass mainstream cinema with regard to social commentary, satire and intelligent adult narratives. Look no further than Dawn of the Dead, The Thing and The Descent if you want three solid examples. Horror is a versatile and malleable genre that can facilitate great stories and reflections upon the human condition.

The horror genre has more than its fair share of bad movies. It’s the nature of the beast (no pun intended). Films of this type can be made quickly and cheaply but have the potential to make a tidy profit. Therefore, they attract not only burgeoning talent but those bereft of any as well. Furthermore, traditional formulas work, so any new innovative production is often followed by a wealth of copycats and knockoff films. To say that the genre is self-plagiarising is an understatement. Yet, from time to time, horror movies can surpass mainstream cinema with regard to social commentary, satire and intelligent adult narratives. Look no further than Dawn of the Dead, The Thing and The Descent if you want three solid examples. Horror is a versatile and malleable genre that can facilitate great stories and reflections upon the human condition.

Although Train to Busan starts with a very tried and tested premise, it quickly establishes itself as more than just a standard horror offering. The emphasis is upon characters with credible foibles and traits. The film presents us with an interesting overview of South Korean socio-economic culture. Class, etiquette and morality are all touched upon in the screenplay but organically, not clumsily. Nor are viewers bludgeoned with any obvious social messages. What the film does well is show us how humans deal with adversity and come to terms with extraordinary circumstances. Unlike so many US horror movies, the protagonists are not obnoxious and as the cast is inevitably culled over the course of the film, we genuinely mourn each loss. Another interesting cultural difference is how the disposal of zombies becomes more complex when firearms are not common place.

Like so many zombie movies, the most engaging scenes are those that happen as the emerging apocalypse unfolds. Despite living in a world surrounded by the media, it’s fascinating how we can remain oblivious while being immersed in it. Something else that Train to Busan does very well is accurately catalogue human reactions to the totally incongruous. Often passengers look on utterly dumfounded, as zombies bite into people’s neck. However, once the magnitude of the situation finally registers, the passengers are innovative as they seek to save themselves. Wet newspaper is stuck on the windows to obscure them. Cell phone ringtones are used to distract the undead.

There are obvious stylistic similarities between Train to Busan and World War Z. The fast moving, aggressive zombies that transform their prey in seconds are again seen in this film. However, director Yeon Sang-ho does more with his smaller budget, making his undead horde far more threatening than the boiling CGI-fest of Word War Z. The zombies in this instance go semi dormant when cut off from the light. They are predominantly attracted to sound and seem to have lost most of their higher reasoning abilities. A closed sliding door is enough to outwit them and they do not use tools or their environment to their advantage. Train to Busan although tense and atmospheric, is not excessively gory. There are blood spurts and the bone crunching zombie transformations are ghoulish but the film does not rely on the extremely grotesque. Tension stems from the viewers concern for the casts wellbeing.

Performances are universally good in Train to Busan, although it would be remiss of me not to single out Kim Su-an as Soo-an. This young actress acquits herself extremely well as the young daughter of work obsessed fund manager. The film takes several bleak turns during the course of its story and I was concerned that it may end in a downbeat manner, similar to Romero’s Night of the Living Dead. However, the final resolution to the tale is poignant and certainly within the idiom of the proceeding one hundred minutes. Overall Train to Busan is an infinitely superior genre outing than most contemporary US mainstream horror films. It is engaging due to its international setting, moral integrity and cultural differences. Sadly, all these positive aspects will more than likely be lost when the US remake is released in 2018.

Read More
Movies, World War Z, Unrated Cut, Horror, Zombies Roger Edwards Movies, World War Z, Unrated Cut, Horror, Zombies Roger Edwards

World War Z Unrated Cut (2013)

World War Z Unrated Cut runs seven minutes longer than the theatrical version of the movie and contains "intense footage not shown in theaters". The material consists of more violent alternative takes of existing action scenes and features mainly CGI effects work. There is no additional plot, although there may be some nominal changes to dialogue. Overall the unrated cut is an improvement over the theatrical print in so far it offers a more traditional zombie movie experience. However, compared to other examples of the genre, the unrated version of World War Z still remains relatively sedate in terms of violence. The movie focuses on the scale of the zombie outbreak, rather than the visceral mayhem of a George Romero film. 

World War Z Unrated Cut runs seven minutes longer than the theatrical version of the movie and contains "intense footage not shown in theaters". The material consists of more violent alternative takes of existing action scenes and features mainly CGI effects work. There is no additional plot, although there may be some nominal changes to dialogue. Overall the unrated cut is an improvement over the theatrical print in so far it offers a more traditional zombie movie experience. However, compared to other examples of the genre, the unrated version of World War Z still remains relatively sedate in terms of violence. The movie focuses on the scale of the zombie outbreak, rather than the visceral mayhem of a George Romero film. 

I thought it may be useful to post a selection of screen captures highlighting the major differences between the two versions of World War Z. Again, it is not in any way a comprehensive list but it broadly shows the major differences. If you require further details Movie-Censorship.com has produced a more thorough breakdown. My original opinion of the film itself still stands. World War Z is flawed but has good performances and explores some interesting concepts. The unrated cut of the movie certainly addresses one of the many criticisms levelled at the PG-13 theatrical release; namely that it was too tame. If you have yet to see World War Z, then this is the cut of the film I would recommend.

During the initial zombie outbreak in Philadelphia, we see more blood when people are bitten. Unfortunately, due to the colour palette that is currently in vogue with many film makers it is still not very clear.

Gerry shoots a zombie in the head while trying to find safety in the tenements of Newark. It is the only major head shot depicted in the movie.

Gerry is covered in more blood from the zombie he bayoneted in the stairwell.

In the unrated cut the camera clearly shows that it is Tommy that shoots the zombie attacking Gerry.

When Fassbach trips and accidentally shoots himself, we see the aftermath more clearly.

The imprisoned CIA operative pulls out one of his front teeth, while explaining how North Korea did this to its entire population in twenty four hours, to prevent the spread of the disease.

He then adds the tooth to a collection of others he has removed.

As the zombies overrun Jerusalem, we see more bullet hits as they are shot by Israeli soldiers.

Most of the gunshot wounds have been added in post production by CGI.

When an Israeli soldier uses his grenade, we see more explicit carnage caused by the explosion.

Further CGI blood and gunshot wounds are seen as the zombies are shot through the closed gate and railings.

A further grenade explosion shows more destruction to the zombies.

Segen's hand amputation is more graphic. Unlike the theatrical print it is obvious what Gerry has done.

Gerry binds Segen's wrist and waits to see if she becomes infected or not.

The zombie attack aboard the plane has a lot more CGI blood when victims are bitten.

Again due to lighting and editing, even the more explicit scenes are difficult to see clearly.

Another victim is bitten, prior to the plane explosively decompressing due to a grenade explosion.

Gerry's impalement injury is shown more clearly.

Gerry dodges the attacking zombie and hits it at the base of the spine with a crowbar.

He subsequently stamps on the zombie's face, crushing it.

Read More