I know this blog is meant to be for film but i’m a Villa fan as well so have got to post this.

Sources suggest that Jurgen Klinsmann is favourite to land the job of Aston Villa manager following the departure of Martin O’Neill. Klinsmann is rumoured to be Villa chairman Randy Lerner’s first choice for the role, and negotiations are supposedly already well underway.  Klinsmann has made it clear in the past that he would like to one day manage a Premiership team and this seems like the perfect opportunity.  He has already demonstrated his ability to develop young talent by masterminding the rebuilding of the German national team.  Villa has a relatively young squad with potential for improvement. This should suit Klinsmann’s ambitions perfectly and he is said to be keen to get back into management after being sacked by Bayern Munich last year.  With the start of the Premiership season looming, Lerner will also be eager to seal the deal as quickly as possible.

Finally, the trailer for the much anticipated (at least by me) Scott Pilgrim vs. the World  trailer has landed. Hit the jump to see it

 Based on the comic book series by Brian Lee O’Malley,  Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is about a 23 year old slacker, Scott Pligrim (Michael Cera) who shares a bed with his gay room mate Wallace (Kieran Culkin) and plays bass guitar in a band called Sex Bob- omb. Scott’s life is changed forever when he meets the girl he has been dreaming about, Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). All sounds simple so far but in wooing Ramona, Scott becomes a target for her ‘seven evil ex-boyfriends’ . The comic is highly influenced by video games and the fights with the ex-boyfriends play out like boss fights in a game. Really what makes the comic so great though is the writing, and hopefully that will transfer to the film.  If you haven’t already, read the comics first. The final edition comes out in July and the film will be out in August.

Here’s the trailer

One of the criticisms that has been thrown at Shutter Island is that, compared with some of Scorsese’s previous work, it feels somewhat trivial. I suspect that the reason for this criticism is that Shutter Island is very much a genre film and that genre happens to be the Thriller. Film critics, particularly British and American film critics, have always taken a slightly condescending view on the Thriller.

Hitchcock honed his craft making thrillers and some of his best work e.g The 39 Steps, North by Northwest, was in this genre. Yes he is considered one of, if not THE greatest director of all time now, but it hadn’t always been like that. In fact it wasn’t until the French critics/filmmakers of the Nouvelle Vague started championing Hitchcock as an auteur, that he began to get the full recognition his talent deserved in the countries in which he had made his films. For a time he had been considered a highly competent technician, good,  but not up there with your John Fords and William Wylers. I believe that this was down to his tendency to make thrillers or horror films or a mixture of both (which in a way, many thrillers are). Can a film which just purely sets out to entertain and provoke a visceral reaction be considered great? the simple answer for that is yes, take a look at the previously mentioned Hitchcock films and others such as The Third Man, The Usual Suspects and maybe even Shutter Island.

In Shutter Island Scorsese presents us with a character who may or may not be an unreliable narrator. I, like many people who have or plan to watch this film, had already seen the trailer before seeing the film. I’m not sure how involved Scorsese was in the construction of the trailer but for many people, including myself, it gave a distinct impression of what the twist would be.  In a way, this actually improved my enjoyment of the film as even when I was sure I had the twist sussed, I felt certain that there would have to be a twist within the twist. In the end there wasn’t, and what I had suspected from the trailer did indeed turn out to be correct. This did not prevent me from enjoying the journey though and that is the key to the films brilliance;  Shutter Island is a thriller which doesn’t rely on a mind-blowing twist to provide entertainment it does so through the intricacies of its story and through Scorsese’s artistry as a director. From the opening sequence in which we approach the island on a boat this aforementioned artistry is immediately apparent. Scorsese uses a slow tracking shot combined with some brilliantly foreboding music to emphasise and stretch the approach to the island.  It is the kind the shot that may have been deployed by Hitchcock or Kubrick. 

Scorsese’s brilliance is apparent throughout e.g in how the significance of Teddy’s flashbacks are revealed slowly, piece by piece. Memories, hallucinations and reality merge together as the film progresses. The film makes us unsure of what is real and indeed what real actually means. It is a brilliant exploration into the mind of a troubled character and is littered with cinematic references, particularly to Hitchcock. Of course, The acting is flawless. DiCaprio puts in one of his greatest performance as the trouble protagonist Teddy and is supported by strong outings from Ben Kingsley and Michelle Williams. But despite the top performances from the aforementioned stars, it is the lesser known Mark Ruffalo who steals the show as Teddy’s sidekick Chuck.

Although I have only seen Shutter Island  once, I am sure it is a film that would benefit from repeat viewings. My only criticism is that the film uses unnecessary visual effects on several occasions that don’t seem to quite mesh with the atmosphere of the film.  Nonetheless, despite the mixed reaction from audiences and critics, in the future Shutter Island could be recognised as one of Scorsese’s greatest films.

9/10

A brilliantly rich thriller that will stick with you for days after. Scorsese’s best of the century so far.

I’ve decided to start writing on a broader range of topics on lifeiscinema. Don’t worry though, my primary focus will still be on film. Anyway, I’ve recently been getting into doing surveys online to earn a bit of extra cash. After a lot of time spent using different sites I have to say most of them aren’t worth the time and effort. I now only use one paid survey site regularly, you can sign up for it through this link

http://my.yougov.com/go.aspx?id=40fdb994-a8ef-49c3-bba7-ccd6b31b1b5f

it is called yougov and it is the only one which I have received money from using. It works like this; every time you do a survey you get a number of points (the amount depends on the time it takes to complete the survey). When you get 5000 points you get sent a cheque for £50.00 (or the equivalent in your currency as it is a global company). It takes a bit of time to accumulate the points but it is so easy to do the surveys that there is no point not doing it. Granted, it’s not going to make you rich over night, but it’s nice to get a cheque through the post every so often for doing something so easy.

So what are you waiting for, sign up now!!

http://my.yougov.com/go.aspx?id=40fdb994-a8ef-49c3-bba7-ccd6b31b1b5f

T.Waddington

A breakdown of the clips shown on Avatar Day

“First, James Cameron appears on screen for a quick intro. He assures the audience that the footage about to be shown is only from the film’s first half. Cameron then establishes the setting (22nd century on the alien moon Pandora) and the protagonist (wheelchair-bound former Marine Jake Sully, played by Sam Worthington). And we’re off!

Clip #1: A live-action scene as Col. Quaritch (Stephen Lang) debriefs his soldiers about Pandora. “You’re not in Kansas anymore,” Quaritch quips. As Jake Sully pulls up in his wheelchair, Quaritch describes the Na’vi, a 10-foot-tall, blue-skinned humanoid species that uses “arrows with neurotoxins that’ll stop your heart in a minute.” The overall 3-D effect during this scene is very subtle, merely adding a degree of depth to the picture.

Clip #2: Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver) prepares Jake to be “integrated” with his Na’vi avatar (humans can’t breathe the air on Pandora, so they’ve genetically created Na’vi bodies that can be controlled remotely). Dr. Augustine asks Jake why he came to Pandora, which she calls one of the most hostile places in the universe. Jake responds, “I was sick of doctors telling me what I couldn’t do.” Jake integrates with his Na’vi body and starts moving the body’s fingers, toes, etc. He is ecstatic about being able to walk again, and he promptly darts out of the procedure room (warning: brief blue rear nudity). Now, this scene actually worked wonderfully for me. Cameron isn’t afraid to use extremely close-up shots of the CGI Na’vi, and the combination of live-action actors, real sets, and the Na’vi actually holds up seamlessly. Strangely enough, it’s when the Na’vi enter a completely digital environment that things start to feel a little less authentic.

Clip #3: Jake and Dr. Augustine, both using their Na’vi avatars, are in the Pandora jungle. Quick note: Jake’s Na’vi doesn’t bear much resemblance to Sam Worthington, but Dr. Augustine’s Na’vi clearly looks like Sigourney Weaver.  Did Dr. Augustine specifically ask for her Na’vi avatar to be designed to look like her, or is Cameron simply trying to help the audience keep track of who’s who? Anyhow, in this clip, Jake encounters a rhino-like creature. Our lead character has some machismo swagger in him. For instance, when the rhino creature appears to be retreating, Jake yells, “That’s what I’m talking about, b*tch!” Chances are that Avatar’s dialogue will not be singled out as its strongest trait. What will be appreciated, however, is what happens next: A tiger-like creature suddenly appears and chases Jake through the jungle. Cameron joyously glides his virtual camera through the jungle in ways you could never manipulate an actual camera, and the sequence is a virtuoso thrill. The audience during the first screening erupted into applause after this clip.

Clip #4: A native female Na’vi named Neytiri (Zoe Saldana) rescues Jake from a group of small but vicious dino-ish creatures. The two Na’vi then walk through the nighttime jungle, which lights up in stunning fluorescent colors. The person next to me let out a “wow,” and I couldn’t agree more. Words cannot describe the bewitching beauty of this scene.

Clip #5: A continuation of the last clip. Jake thanks Neytiri for saving his life, but Neytiri responds, “You don’t thank for this. This is sad. Very sad only.” Apparently she’s upset about killing those dino-creatures, thereby hinting at the movie’s ecological theme — it seems the Na’vi, unlike humans, exist harmoniously with nature. We also discover that Neytiri uses a simple staccato speech pattern: “You like a baby making noise. Don’t know what to do.” Nobody laughed during her “primitive” dialogue, and it didn’t bother me, but I bet some audiences will find it unintentionally humorous.

Clip #6: Jake (still a Na’vi) has to tame a dragon-like reptile before he can fly on it. He takes control of the beast by inserting what looks like a lock of hair into the dragon’s ear, and the dragon’s ear hair then fuses with Jake’s hair-lock thingy, and viola, the dragon is tamed. Yes, that’s the best I could do in describing that very odd moment. Jake then takes the dragon for a ride that starts out dangerously chaotic until he yells, “Shut up and fly straight.” The dragon mercifully complies.”

Source- EW

One of the most important aspects of any werewolf film is the key transformation scene. Here they seem to be using 100% cgi rather than prosthetics, but the results look pretty strong. Far better than An American Werewolf In Paris but still not as creepily real as An American Werewolf In London.

The Wolfman was originally meant to be released in November 2008. It eventually ended up at the end of this year. Now it’s been pushed back yet again to February 10, 2010. A shame really, I imagined it as a spooky Christmas release. While this sort of delay normally means the film isn’t very good, Universal claim it’s simply because they’re waiting for special effects work to be done. In that case those are some la-zy animators, they better stop smoking dope and watching morning TV or whatever they’re doing.

Last week saw an unusual day in the world of film, that day was the self proclaimed ‘Avatar Day’. Audiences alll around the world were shown 15 mins of clips from the first half of the film demonstrating its 3D virtuosity.  I didn’t go, mainly because there wasn’t any cinemas near by participating in the event. However from what I’ve heard, it was a bit of a let down. To be honest i’m not surprised, no film can ever live up to the amount of hype its received and there is a bit of naivity from Cameron and co in thinking that the film will revolutionise cinema.

The trailer itself is very disappointing, as someone I know said, it looks like a video game cutscene. Maybe it’s a bit harsh to judge it on a 6 by 4 inch screen when it’s obviously been made with the big screen in mind and with its 3D on show. But no matter how impressive it looks, its still going to come down to whether it is actually a good film, whatever a good film is.

I’m still looking forward to seeing it though, but remain as sceptical as ever.

The trailer uses the star power of Johnny Depp, Jude Law, Colin Farrell and of course Heath Ledger to its advantage. The four actors all play transformations of the same character, kind of like Doctor Who but better looking. This idea was used as a way of dealing with Ledger’s tragic, untimely death in January 2008 halfway through the films production. Have to say after seeing this trailer, which reveals a lot more than previous ones , it’s probably top of my most anticipated films list. Being Ledger’s last film and Gilliam’s latest and with all the other big names attached, it’s pretty much guaranteed to be a box office success- something that Gilliam, being the visionary renegade he is, is not particularly used to.

Anyway folks, I promise to post some reviews, updates, and more for you guys on a more regular basis from now on.

Trailer of the Swedish vampire film everyone has been raving about, apparently the title is a reference to the Morrissey track ‘Let the Right One Slip in’, can’t wait to see it. Check out a review of the film at Screen Rant!

For me Red Dwarf is one of those formative programs that I enjoyed as a kid and will forever stick in my memory. Its brilliance was based on superbly scripted character interaction combined with clever sci-fi narratives that would succeed even without the comedy.  It peaked with the sixth series in 1993 which included many fans favourite episode ‘Gunmen of the Apocalypse’. However when creators Rob Grant and Doug Naylor split due to irreconcilable differences the show was never the same and was ended after the unwatchable Eighth series. Rumours of a return in the form of the crews first big screen outing have been around for a while but never came into fruition. However this Easter the crew were reassembled for a special mini-series that may or may not be their last.

It would have been easy for you to miss their comeback due to the show being broadcast on a non-commercial channel. The return of the Dwarfers was shunned by the BBC and left to rot on the dreaded Dave,  the home of endless Top Gear repeats and named after the guy you all know down the pub who loves nothing more than a swift pint with the lads. Unsurprisingly the channel achieved record ratings however they did their best to fuck things up as much as possible by splitting it up over three nights and randomly inserting advert breaks without warning.

It was good to see they attempted to go back to basics and try to do what Red Dwarf did best in its prime by reworking the classic episode ‘Back to reality’ from the end of the fifth series. Unfortunately they didn’t pull it off as well as they could have done. For some odd reason they decided to recreate the ship in low budget CGI form and also didn’t perform the show in front of a live audience in a bid to keep the plot secret. The result of this was a stilted and awkward hour and a half that wasn’t helped by  the creakiness of the aging crew. It did have its funny moments, for example a hilarious scene in which Kryten tries to tell Rimmer that Katerina (played by Big Suze from Peep Show, Sophie Winkleman) is standing behind him while he is slagging her off  “Your breasts look nice today Ms”. Also I liked the idea of bringing Blade Runner into the storyline but again it was done with a lack of finesse. For the most part the repeated references to Blade Runner were more imitation than parody, the only moment that really stood out was the send up of Deckard’s photo analysis.  It definitely lacked subtlety and humour but I suppose it was visually impressive. All in all though it was good to see the crew re-united and was a definite improvement from the terrible eighth series. It seems unlikely that there will be another series with Craig Charles tied up with Coronation Street but it was nice to see the guys together if only for one last time.

T.S.Waddington

Classic Woody Allen quote, I don’t know where or when he said it though. Although I’m not particularly a fan of his work he is a witty guy and has said a few memorable things.

Summer approaches and so does the release of the new Harry Potter film The Half Blood Prince. Originally intended to be released last winter it was delayed by money hungry studio execs in a bid to rinse out a few extra pennies, much to the anger of many a’ Harry Potter fan the world over. So far I think it’s fair to say that the Harry Potter films have pretty much gradually increased in quality as the series has progressed. The fifth installment and David Yates’s first as director managed to avoid the trap of becoming regimented by the chapters of the book, ironically he probably made the best film out of the worst book in the series. It will be interesting to see what he does with the 6th book. However,  i’m still wondering how amazing the films could have been if J.K Rowling’s first choice for director Terry Gilliam had been allowed to impose his twisted imagination on them. I suppose it was always unlikely such a big budget project would be given to the guy who famously took on Universal over the final cut of Brazil.

But, as well as Harry Potter 2009 also sees three other childrens books being brought to the  big screen….

 Coraline

• Based on on the book by Neil Gaimen it tells the story of a young girl who discovers an alternate version of reality through a little door. 
• A creepy 3-D stop motion animation by the guy who made The Nightmare before Christmas,  Henry Selick. It will probably give a generation of children a fear of buttons. 
• It has already received highly positive reviews in the US , Jennie Punter gives it the dubious accolade of being “possibly the best 3-D movie ever made”.

 Where the Wild things are

Based on the classic Illustrated childrens book by Maurice Sendak, it is about a boy whos imagination takes him to a kingdom full of giant monsters to escape from the frustrations of childhood.

• Directed by Spike Jonze maker of Being John Malkovich, there have been rumours of tussles over the final cut with Jonze’s original version supposedly being too dark .
• Voice actors for the nine foot monsters include James Gandolfini (The Sopranoes) and Forest Whitaker.

 Fantastic Mr Fox

• Roald Dahl classic (and a childhood fave of mine) about a sneaky fox who steals poultry from three grotesque farmers in order to feed his family.
• Directed by indie auteur Wes Anderson whose films include Rushmore, The Royal Tenenbaums and The Darjeeling Limited. As with Coraline it’s going to be a stop motion animation.
• Features an all star cast of Bill Murray, Cate Blanchett and George Clooney as the eponymous hero.

I think what makes these projects so exciting is that all three of them have such unique and visionary filmmakers at their helm. Personally i’m most intrigued by the prospect of Wes Anderson’s take on Mr Fox but all three should prove to be cinematic highlights of the year.

You can learn it in 10 minutes”                                   

Here’s a quote from Robert Rodriguez’s inspirational book Rebel Without A Crew. For anyone who doesn’t know about it, it’s basically a diary of him whilst shooting his debut feature El Mariachi and how he went to crazy measures to fund it, including subjecting himself to several clinical trials.  Definitely worth reading for anyone with filmmaking aspirations!

  Apparently one of the reasons for Cameron’s long absence from feature-film directing is because he has had to wait for the technology to become advanced enough to match up with with his ideas for this mammoth project. The movie pioneers technologies such as a new advanced e-motion capture which uses images from tiny cameras attached to the actors head to replicate their expressions in extraordinary detail and digital 3-D. All of this is used to create the alien world in which the story is centred. Cameron has created a living breathing world with its own languages, cultures and ecosystems. The story is about earth’s colonisation of this planet in the distant future  and revolves around an injured ex-marine who is torn between the two planets because he falls in love with one of the native inhabitants. It stars Sam Worthington(newbie) and Zoe Saldana (who will also be playing Uhura in the new Star Trek film) along with more established actors such as Michelle Rodriguez and Sigourney Weaver. When it comes to the Science Fiction blockbuster there are few better equipped to handle the task of Avatar than James Cameron. Cameron’s resume includes such Sci-Fi classics as the first two Terminator films and Aliens, the sequel to Ridley Scott’s Alien, which many believe exceeded the original(I personally prefer Alien).

But the film has the potential to be a pretentious nightmare. I was one of many who wasn’t won over by Titanic. Also, how many more CGI heavy blockbusters can people swallow? The techniques described in making the film bring to mind the horribly bland film Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow ( starring the rich tea biscuit of the acting world Jude Law). With such attention to the technological and visual elements of the film there is the danger that the film doesn’t manage to connect with its audience as seen with recent blunders like Indiana Jones 4. Also I thought that 3D cinema was a fad that had come and gone but it has had a recent resurgence as more and more cinemas are being equipped with the projectors to show the films, it’s not something I am welcoming back with open arms. One positive thing is that in a year full of remakes, rehashes and sequels, Cameron is creating something original. Whether it will be merely an empty visual feast or something more is yet to be seen. It could either be the best Sci-fi since The Matrix, or,  a doozie of titanic proportions.

 T.S.Waddington

 

  I was up into the early hours of the morning yesterday when I chanced upon the first part of a documentary by Martin Scorsese called My Voyage to Italy. It proved to be a tonic to all the other crap that I had watched that night, including the second half of Zach Braff’s The Last Kiss, which being a fan of Garden State thought I would have enjoyed.

Anyway, Scorsese’s documentary is a study of Italian cinema between the end  of WW2 and the early 60′s, basically the Neo-Realism era which coincided with Scorsese’s early film viewing years. He talks about the films’ historical relevance and how they inspired him in his usual erudite way. Anyone who has seen or read any of Scorsese’s interviews will know that he is a walking encyclopedia when it comes to films. The film looks particularly at masterpieces such as Roberto Rossellini’s Rome Open City and Vittorio De Sica’s The Bicycle Thieves and Umberto D (see above image). With a documentary like this there could have been the temptation for a less humble director than Scorsese to draw the attention away from the  subject films and onto their own career.  Although he does discuss the influence of the films on his own work it is never in a egocentric way. Scorsese’s admiration and affection for the films he discusses is contagious, in fact it made me really want to re-watch Umberto D which I first saw a couple of years ago on my film course but didn’t fully appreciate (mainly due to a bad hangover).  The whole thing is delicately handled and for the most part Scorsese keeps quiet letting the clips speak for themselves, making his intermittent insights all the more poignant. It’s definitely worth checking out  if you are interested in film history or just great cinema in general. I myself have only seen the first half and there doesn’t seem to be a region 2 DVD release, hopefully they’ll repeat it again some time soon.

T.S.Waddington

Inevitably, in the decade of the comic book movie, Hollywood has dipped into Moore’s works on several occasions for inspiration. The most recent conversion to the big screen being with his most highly acclaimed work to date, Watchmen. Regarded by many as the greatest graphic novel of all time it is the only one to make Time magazines 100 greatest books list. So far the screen adaptations of his work have had mixed results. The League of extraordinary Gentleman was less than ordinary, however the Wachowski brothers version of V for Vendetta proved to be good, stylised entertainment with a charismatic performance from Hugo Weaving ( watch out for the dodgy English accent by Natalie Portman though). Moore has continually distanced himself from the projects though and claims that he has not and will not be seeing the film versions of his books stating that he doesn’t believe stories written specifically for the comic book form can be translated to celluloid.

The question is, does Watchmen prove him wrong?

the answer is, well not really

I must admit  my expectations before seeing it, despite all the hype, were pretty low. This was mainly down to the fact that I had seen the last film directed by Zack Snyder, 300 ,which was a pile of shallow,macho, racist, CGI crap. Watchmen did exceed my low expectations to a certain extent, for a start it was definitely better than 300. It is stylishly shot and uses its eclectic soundtrack effectively, Jimi Hendrix’s  All Along the Watchtower is used to particularly good effect over images of  the Watchmen contributing to America’s annihilation of the Vietcong in an alternate history to our own. However you can see why Moore thought the book un-filmable. Its mistake is in trying to stay too loyal to its source material. The film copies the structure of the book by separating the story into chapters for each of the key characters. In theory this should make for interesting viewing, in practice the film struggles to justify its 162 minute running time. With such a mammoth running time Watchmen never really manages to explore the interesting themes it presents with any great depth.The core idea of the film is that these Watchmen who have been chosen to help maintain law and order in society are flawed individuals themselves. By the end of the film I definitely didn’t feel I had learnt much or could empathise with any of the characters, which was a shame because some of them, notably the nihilistic Comedian and the merciless Rorschach,  had potential for development. Along with this, the cold war fears of nuclear holocaust  prominent in the story are obviously less relevant in modern times than they were when the comics were originally published.

Furthermore, Watchmen makes the mistake of thinking that including adult material like rape, the shooting of a pregnant woman and a creepy menage a trois make it an adult film.  Unlike last years The Dark Knight which turned out to be one of the only blockbusters in recent years that managed to maintain the balance between high octane action and intelligent drama, Watchmen (for the most part) only manages the former. It is by no means a terrible film, enjoyable while it lasts but forgettable when it has finished like so much of Hollywood’s output these days. Take out all the sex and violence and what you are left with is a visually impressive but ultimately childish experience.

6/10

Highlight- Opening Montage showing the history according to Watchmen and accompanied by Bob Dylan’s “The Times They are A-Changin”. Unfortunately nothing for the rest of the film comes close to matching this.

 Low point-Most of the scenes with the tedious Dr. Manhatten parading his blue penis, not appropriate really. If they had just given him a pair of pants I might have given the film a 7.

T.S.Waddington