A fine year for British Cinema

On December 7, 2011, in Films, by Patrick
0

It seems that every awards season we hear the phrase ‘the British are coming.’ This usually refers to serious Oscar nods for lavish royal dramas such as The Queen and The Kings Speech, or nominations for actresses like Kate Winslet who conform to a transatlantic ideal of Britishness. This year the final installment of Harry Potter is likely going to try to drum up similar sentiments. This year however, as was demonstrated by the BIFAs (the British Independent Film Awards) last week, has been a fantastic year for independent British cinema that may not be so palatable to American tastes. The fact that Senna, the gripping story of F1 driver Ayrton Senna, won the best documentary category despite not even being long listed by the Academy is just the start.

Clearly we should stop being obsessed with the ‘British invasion’ and for once be proud that this country is producing real quality. The big winner at the BIFAs, Paddy Considine’s Tyrannosaur epitomises this. This gritty tale of violence and an extremely unlikely friendship is hardly going to make a dent at the Academy (although hopefully Olivia Coleman will be an exception, as her performance must surely be one of the finest this year). This doesn’t make the film any less gripping or engaging, and it can stand proudly alongside or even above contemporary American or European cinema. This country has many problems, but as long as it keeps producing quality such as Tyrannosaur, Kill List, Attack the Block, We Need to Talk About Kevin, Submarine and Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, a lack of film making talent clearly isn’t one of them.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • • • • • •
 

Some ill-informed thoughts on the future of news media.

On December 2, 2011, in Asides, Media, Writing, by Patrick
0

There has been much talk ever since the release of the first iPad (“wow, was that only last year?” he pondered rhetorically) about the future of print journalism. Would blogging and social media begin to totally kill of printed newspapers and magazines? Some papers have been quick to react, so as not to be trampled by the march of technology in the way that the plodding music industry have. The Times online has been behind a pay-wall for some time now, and the Guardian have recently released their beautiful subscription-based iPad app. The rest will follow no doubt, but is this really the future of online journalism?

The deadly combination of blogs and the likes of twitter have done irreparable ‘damage’ to the old models of publishing, and in some ways these initiatives still seem to be dragging their feet slightly. Who can blame them for trying, as the alternative is terrifying for the newspapers.

20111202-173901.jpgEnter Flipboard. I know that I am already late to the party, but I have only just discovered the delights of what is fast becoming my favourite app for the iPad. It provides a stunning magazine-like interface for all of the content that you consume on the web, whether that be from twitter, RSS feeds or even Facebook. By pulling content together from all different sources, the experience is tailored to each individual reader. It really is like being the editor of your own magazine. It is a step into a new world, and more will follow suite.

The days of readers aligning with one publication and having everything filtered through that paper are dying. This is the true democratisation of the media. No longer will those who buy the Telegraph for its crossword be exclusively fed that paper’s editorial slant. The same goes for those who pick up The Sun for its sports coverage, or the Guardian for cinema.

Despite this being a scary time for newspapers, it can be seen as an exciting development for journalists. The focus is inevitably going to move toward who is providing the best content on any particular subject. This will allow for greater specialisation and readers can individually cherry-pick writers and thinkers to follow, and read their content through apps such as Flipboard, totally cutting out the middle man. This makes a lot of sense to me. It is more akin to following a band rather than its record label. Obviously there will be a need to monetize this system to ensure that there is still funding available to maintain professional standards. If not, we will have no news coverage outside of the unedited rants of part time bloggers who haven’t done their research (ahem).

The future is as foggy as ever, but these things generally have a way of working themselves out in the most unpredictable of ways. I hope so, because despite the benefit of convenience, to lose the traditional news model at the expense of quality journalism is not a fair trade.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • •
 

Film Review: The Deep Blue Sea

On December 1, 2011, in Films, by Patrick
0

20111201-091143.jpgI strongly believe that not all films have to be ‘enjoyed’. Sometimes the success of a film needs to be judged not by how much enjoyment the audience get from it, but how well it aligns with the creators artistic intentions. In the case of The Deep Blue Sea, I really couldn’t say that I enjoyed the experience, but the film works.

Not being familiar with the original Terrence Rattigan play upon which this film is based, I cannot review this film as an adaptation, rather as simply a film by Terrence Davies. To add to the embarrassment of this review, I must also confess that this is my first ever Terrence Davies film (although Of Time and the City is high on my to watch list).

The Deep Blue Sea paints a portrait of a young woman (Rachel Weisz), who is married to a high court judge in the early 1950s. She falls for a young fighter pilot and begins an affair, trapping her between the devil and the deep blue sea of the title. The film opens with her attempted suicide, and then recounts how she came to be in this situation and the aftermath of her actions.

Although this is my first experience of a Terrence Davies film, it is already clear to me that he is a master film-maker. The opening shot alone is one of the most poetic pieces of cinema I have seen this year, and it rhymes effortlessly with the final moments of the film. The spiky string quartet grated on my ear drums, the convincing portrayal of depression and despair by Weisz and the bleak tone all came together to form an emotionally draining piece that works as a piece of art, but I am in no hurry to re-live the experience. That isn’t to say that there aren’t small moments of humour in the script, but these are few and far between, and do little to alleviate the emotional weight of the piece.

I may not be rushing out to see The Deep Blue Sea again any time soon, but watching this film has confirmed to me that there must be a wealth of great Terrence Davies cinema out there that I am eager to go to and explore.

Tagged with: • • • • •
 

Film Review: The Beaver

On November 16, 2011, in Films, by Patrick
0

I try not to let my personal feelings towards film makers or actors get in the way of my opinions. I review Polanski films that I enjoy objectively, and I must also treat Mel Gibson with the same unbiased approach. I am reviewing the work, not the man. Luckily this hasn’t been a problem with Mel Gibson, with his recent work not exactly setting the world on fire. I did approach The Beaver with an open mind however. In fact, I approached it with positive expecations.

I knew that the film was one of those mythical ‘great unmade scripts’ that has floated around Hollywood for a long time, and I actually really liked the concept. For those unaware, The Beaver is the story of a depressed man Walter Black (Mel Gibson), who finds an old beaver hand puppet in a skip. He takes to only communicating through this strange bedraggled puppet, and goes about trying to re-build his life with this odd social handicap.

The likes of Steve Carrel and Jim Carrey have been previously attached to this project, and I’m rather glad that they went with someone more seemingly straight faced. Mel Gibson bizarrely voices ‘the beaver’ in a strong cockney accent reminiscent of Bob Hoskins. Why he chose to do this no one knows, but it actually has an odd charm that I felt worked rather well.

The Beaver is Jodie Foster’s directorial debut, and the direction seems fairly effortless, so no obvious complaints there. The real problem lies in the script and the editing. A torturous sub-plot involving Mel Gibson’s son (played by Anton Yelchin) writing a cheerleader’s graduation speech turns into a sickly and unnecessary love story that takes up as much screenplay as Mel and his beaver. When trying to present a concept as strange as The Beaver, the best approach would be to throw yourself at it with full force. Mel Gibson’s does this admirably with his performance, but the film itself is scared of its own oddity. It hides away in this dull and contrived teenage love story that practically sinks the film, and this is a real shame. Given the extra fifty minutes of screen time that dumping this arc would have provided, they could have expanded much more on Walter’s depression before finding the beaver, and learn more about his strange coping mechanism. Instead it feels rushed and sidelined, which is a real shame as this film had the potential of being a little black comedy gem in the vein last year’s World’s Greatest Dad. The Beaver ends up being fairly forgetable, which is actually a remarkable achievement considering its subject matter.

Tagged with: • • • • • •
 

Film Review: The Adventures of Tintin: the Secret of the Unicorn

On November 15, 2011, in Films, by Patrick
0

I must admit that I have never read a Tintin book, but the iconography of Tintin is something that I grew up with. I remember looking at the books in the library before I could read and by the time I learned to read for myself I wasn’t so interested in reading books filled with pictures. It is because of this that I also missed out on Asterix, something people constantly tell me I should go back and correct now my adolescent snobbishness has faded.

However, I do love a good Steven Spielberg adventure film and like many others consider Raiders of the Lost Ark to be the pinnacle of the genre. We have been deprived of a great Spielberg adventure for many years, with many of his more recent dramas such as Catch Me if You Can and Munich outshining his action packed yet hollow blockbusters like War of the Worlds and Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Now, teaming up with Peter Jackson and some of my favourite current screenwriters in Steven Moffat, Edgar Wright and Joe Cornish, I had high hopes that we would be returning to the Spielberg glory years. And in many ways, my hopes have paid off.

Tintin is a great fun adventure story. Some reviewers have commented that the plot is overly complicated, blending the story of three Tintin books into one film. I don’t understand this criticism, as the story seemed fairly simple to me. Plucky journalist Tintin stumbles inadvertently into an adventure when he buys a model ship that contains a secret scroll that could hold the secret to a long lost treasure. Classic stuff. Cue lots of action packed set-pieces, involving kidnapping, escapes, and furious chase scenes. The motion capture style gives Spielberg a freedom with the camera that he has never had before, and the shots he achieves are remarkable, plunging us right into the heart of the action without the need for gimmicky 3D effects (I thankfully managed to see this in two dimensions, as the cinema gods intended).

Some degree of critcism has fallen onto the motion capture, and while I can understand why, I had much less of a problem with it than others seem to. In previous motion capture films such as Polar Express and Beowulf, I was as freaked out by the ‘uncanny valley‘ as the next film fan. Tintin avoids this pitfall by exaggerating the faces enough thast they actually look like cartoon characters instead of the walking dead. Unfortunately the one character who does occasionally slip into creepy realism is Tintin himself, but for the most part this did not bother me. The one huge advantage of the motion capture as opposed to straight live-action is that they are much more free to play with the tropes we are familiar with in cartoons (such as an opera singer shattering glass) without losing any sense of danger. This gives Tintin an identity unlike anything we have seen before and elevates it from simply being a sub-par Indiana Jones wannabe.

The performances are solid, and Andy Serkis’ Captain Haddock is particularly enjoyable. This is to be expected though, as Serkis truly is the godfather of mo-cap (already demonstrated earlier this year in his awards-worthy performance in Rise of the Planet of the Apes).

Tintin isn’t perfect though, and doesn’t quite manage to achieve the heights of Raiders’ benchmark. Its problem perhaps is the lack of a truly heroic role. We can only dream of being Indiana Jones or James Bond, and this is a a part of their undying appeal. Tintin isn’t so much of a hero as he is an avatar; an everyman to carry us through the story. He is perhaps a bit too much like us to allow the audience to be swept up in his cinematic adventure, but this may well be what makes him so endearing on the page.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • •
 

Film review round-up

On November 11, 2011, in Films, by Patrick
0

I have seen quite a few films in the past few weeks, and I am really behind on reviewing them. The only way I have any hope of catching up is to do a quick succession of mini reviews here, and then try and start again fresh.

So take a deep breath…

Rise of the Planet of the Apes

Terrible title aside, this is possibly my favourite mainstream Hollywood film of the year. The story is simplistic, and the human characters are as two dimensional as they come, but this is irrelevant. This film is essentially a character study of the lead chimpanzee Caesar, who transforms from a lovable intelligent baby chimp into an angry teenager, and eventually into a powerful and inspirational leader. Caesar is brilliantly portrayed by Andy Serkis, and I genuinely think that the man should be up for an Oscar for this role. Serkis has proved again and again that motion-capture technology is no more responsibly for his great performances than make-up or prosthetics. This is one of the best physical performances I have seen in a long time, and transforms what may have been a forgettable, pessimistic cash-in into a film well worth your time.

 

Drive

Drive is a deceptively simple film that seems transplanted from another time. Its neon pink titles and buzzing soundtrack perfectly set you up for a thriller in the vein of the Hollywood’s second golden era. This story of a stuntman turned getaway driver is shockingly violent, but it is a far more subtle film than the marketing and synopsis may have you believe. Winding Refn’s direction is wonderfully considered, teasing out of drop of dramatic electricity from dialogue scenes. Even the car chases are choreographed deliberately, building up tension rather than serving up instant visceral thrills in the vein of Bond or Bourne. The performances are well judged, all balancing on the knife-edge between b-move pantomime and gritty drama that this film delicately treads. But this is undoubtedly Ryan Gosling’s film, who is clearly channelling the unsettling awkwardness of Travis Bickle in his unnamed ‘Driver’.

Tyrannosaur

I was excited about seeing Tyrannosaur for a long time, being the directorial debut of Paddy Considine, one of my favourite actors. I’m happy to report that I was not disappointed. Tyrannosaur is not an easy watch. The film opens with Peter Mullan’s Joseph kicking to death his own pet dog in a drunken fit of rage. Considine then begins to play with the audiences instant judgement of this character, demonstrating the complexity of human behaviour. Olivia Coleman gives a stunning performance, one of the best of the year in fact, as charity worker Hannah, who the audience is also invited to make a snap-judgement about (as does Joseph). However, beneath her seemingly idyllic middle class life and strong faith in Jesus, lies a violent life that is sadly all too common. Paddy Considine has clearly learned much from long time collaborator Shane Meadows, in that he manages to get an astonishing amount of warmth from a a film that seems on the face of it to be unrelentingly grim. There is plenty of darkness to be found in Tyrannosaur, but this film is ultimately about a form of love and friendship that can surface even in the most unlikely circumstances.

Midnight in Paris

Every review I read of every Woody Allen film is essentially a review of Woody Allen’s career up until this point, and then discusses whether the film in question is a ‘return to form’ or another disappointment. I find with Midnight in Paris this is unnecessary, as it really is just a ‘proper’ Woody Allen film. Owen Wilson does a great Woody Allen impression throughout, and the whole film is filled with ‘whimsy’ in the best way possible. Michael Sheen also plays a wonderfully snotty Woody Allen antagonist, that could have wandered off of the set of Manhattan. I won’t go into details of the plot, because I think if you don’t know how it plays out you will probably get an even bigger kick out of the film. This isn’t an all time classic, but I had a great time with Midnight in Paris, a film with real wit and heart that has something to say about the pitfalls of nostalgia.

We Need to Talk About Kevin

We Need to Talk About Kevin is a thing not as rare as some make out – a film adaptation that is better than the source material. I tried reading the book a few years ago, and really struggled to wade through the treacle to get to the meat of the story. The structure taking the form of letters I found extremely irksome, and I have to admit that I gave up long before the end. Lynne Ramsay has taken a book that I really was not fond of at all, and twisted it just enough to transform it into a really gripping and disturbing film. We Need to Talk About Kevin tells the story of a mother (Tilda Swinton) who fails to bond with her child, and chronicles their difficult relationship as he grows into adolescence. The direction is at times heavy handed (occasionally bashing you over the head with symbolism), but this matches the story, and the colour pallet comprising of deep reds and blues really bring the horror elements to the fore. It does carry some of the issues I had with the book, but the performances by Tilda Swinton and Ezra Miller bring a whole new level of reality to the story that makes the denouement all the more disturbing. This is a horrific film in the truest sense, and although it won’t appeal to a huge section of the population, I found it gripping, with just the right amount of jet black humour to stop the film disappearing into its own sense of doom.

The Ides of March

The Ides of March is one of those films that is really pitching itself as an a worthy Oscar contender. The posters are adorned with stars (the actors as well as critical praise). This is slightly misleading however, because rather like 2008′s Frost/Nixon, it is not a ‘worthy’ film but rather a really enjoyable drama that rattles along at great pace. Ryan Gosling (in his second great performance in as many months) plays an idealistic junior campaign manager in Governor Morris’ (George Clooney) race to become the Democrat’s presidential candidate. He begins to find out that politics is never more nasty than when it comes to rivalries within the party. Cue heaps of deception, back-stabbing and questions about loyalty as he is caught between Paul Giamatti and Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s rival campaign managers. This is an extremely watchable film, bursting with charismatic performances by actors that the cameras clearly love. It is solidly written and directed, more proof (if any were needed after Good Night and Good Luck) that George Clooney is a more than capable film maker, as well as an electric screen presence. It may not have the depth that some were looking for, but for a great political thriller look no further.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
 

Remember.

On November 11, 2011, in Asides, Politics, by Patrick
0

Remembrance should not be a weapon used by patriots. In many ways, it is about remembering how shitty Britain  was to those who fought, died, and were injured in the world wars. Many men were treated purely as canon fodder and were not given any support when they returned.

Today isn’t a day to be proud to be British.

It isn’t a day to spout the kind of racial prejudices that our soldiers died fighting against.

It is not a day to  romanticise war.

It is a day to see how disgusting war is. How dangerous empire building is. It is a day for the entire world to remember not to make the same mistakes. Remember not just those who died, but what it was that caused them to die.

Lest we forget…

Tagged with: • • •
 

Film Review: One Day

On September 13, 2011, in Books, Films, by Patrick
0

I enjoyed the novel of One Day much more than I expected it to. I found it less of a predictable romance, and more a story of how people change over the decades: emotionally, politically and in our relationships. It wasn’t a book that rocked my world, but it was perceptive and well written.

I remember the first thing I thought after finishing the book was ‘I enjoyed that, but it could make a crappy film.’  The hands of a clumsy bean-counter could have easily turned the film adaptation of One Day into an overly sentimental disaster.

Enter Lone Scherfig, the director of An Education. Add to the pot a script by original author David Nicholls, along with Jim Sturgess and Anne Hathaway, a solid pair of actors. It began to look as if they were actually going to pull this off, and I have to admit that they did. One Day is a much classier film than it had any right to be. The direction is smart and the eras are wonderfully painted, particularly the recreation of early 90s late-night TV (I challenge you to not hum ‘The Rhythm of the Night’ on your way home).

One Day is the story of friends Emma and Dexter, who meet on the night of their graduation. We follow them through the next twenty years, only catching up with them on the same day each year. This device could have been trite, and I initially feared that we would witness terrible coincidences, with major events always falling on this day. Nicholls does well to avoid this both in the book and the film, and this structure allows us to peer into the genuine changing lives of the characters.

Jim Sturgess makes a great Dexter. In fact, this is one area where I feel that the film actually improves on the book. He is on the face of it a disgusting, self-centred human being; a talentless privileged man who presents vacuous and obnoxious ‘youth’ TV. However, through Sturgess we actually feel some of Dexter’s pain, and I found myself empathising with him far more than I did in the novel.

I think Anne Hathaway is a talented actress, and I thought her performance was great despite the much talked about accent, which really is a car crash. It is a testament to the other skills she brings to the table that it wasn’t long before I could ignore her major vocal miss-step. The real problem lies in the difference between the forms of film and the novel. In the book, which is partially written from Emma’s perspective, we see her unique attitude and peculiar wit that is hidden behind her lack of confidence. This is hidden from us in the film, not only clouding our view of Emma but also removing much of the humour from the story. This is an unfortunate but perhaps inevitable side affect of adaptation.

Because of these differences, I felt that the film slanted towards Dexter’s story more than Emma’s. His story is more nuanced and interesting on celluloid than on paper. This has the added advantage of making the denouement make more sense than it did in the source (although I think a good five minutes could still be snipped from the final act).

Whether you have read the novel or not, One Day is solidly made romantic drama, in the same way that the book is a solidly constructed period comedy. It is a different yet enjoyable animal. It isn’t going to change the world, but good performances and deft direction makes One Day definitely worth your time.

Tagged with: • • • • • •
 

Film Review: Kill List

On September 12, 2011, in Films, by Patrick
0

I’ve heard it said that critics tend not to embrace films that provoke a physical reaction. This goes for tears, laughter or nauseousness. Based on this, Kill List should get a critical kicking that it doesn’t at all deserve.

I admire many horror films more than love them. I love the splatter of Raimi and Ramero, but these produce a thrill more akin to riding a ghost train than genuine scares. The problem is, I have very rarely been genuinely scared by a film. Usually at worst I have been made to feel slightly uneasy by the likes of Ju-on or Rosemary’s Baby. But sadly I never got to enjoy the scares that so many others have.

I’d be lying if I said Kill List broke this trend, as I don’t think fear is the right word for my emotional reaction to this film. Anxiety, unease and stress would probably be more accurate, but not in a bad way.

The plot starts off fairly conventionally, with an unemployed Iraq veteran struggling to find work, putting a strain on his familial relationships. The film takes a sinister turn early on when we learn that Jay isn’t actually a salesman, but a retired hit man. His best friend Gal (Michael Smiley, who has come a long way from playing Tyres in Spaced) comes out of the woodwork and tries to coax him into one final job that will cure his financial worries. No prizes for guessing that things quickly take a turn for the worse.

It would be unfair to go into much more detail about how this film plays out beyond that, because it is the fear of the unknown that gives this film its edge. Every scene feels like it is building towards something deeply disturbing, and flashes of very strong violence do nothing to release the ever-increasing pressure.

I never saw Ben Wheatley’s previous film Down Terrace so I was on new territory. The film opens on a blistering domestic argument between our lead (convincingly played by Neil Maskell) and his wife (MyAnna Buring) and the drama never lets up from there. The smell of Mike Leigh’s kitchen sink permeates the opening act of the film, but there is an uneasy atmosphere underpinning everything that never lets you settle into anything as comfortable as genre expectations. The performances are gripping, with many of the scenes so naturalistic that they help mask the film’s tightly wound script, allowing you to believe these events are really happening right before your eyes. There is one particularly well done set-piece centred around a dinner party, where each line of dialogue adds subtle layers of tension and in many ways feels more horrific than later scenes of extreme violence.

Some critics have complained about the final act where things take a turn for the surreal, but I feel that the film really earned its final pay-off. Kill List subtly uses the language of horror throughout, masqurading as a gritty thriller, and when the film is finally allowed to reveal its true nature I completely went with it. Kill List really worked on me. It left me rattled to the bone, and while it would be wrong to say I enjoyed it, I have never been so viscerally affected by a horror or thriller in this way. If it has the effect on others that it had on me, this film is destined to become a true classic of British horror.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • •
 

Film review: The Skin I Live In (La piel que habito)

On September 6, 2011, in Films, by Patrick
0

I’m glad that Pedro Almodóvar’s latest The Skin I Live In (La piel que habito)  has been so well received, as it is one of those films that I loved, and instantly assumed I would be out on a limb. The fact that it is being embraced by Almodóvar fans and newcomers alike is a great testament to the power of an intriguing story told with stunning visuals.

This is a hard film to review, as I think it is best seen knowing absolutely nothing about how the plot develops. In fact ideally, you shouldn’t even know that there is a plot-point that should be avoided (so  accept my apologies). There is no twist as such, as in one great reveal that makes you re-think all you have seen. Rather the twists and turns develop gracefully, with the film always being one step ahead, but never patronising.

I honestly think that this is one of Almodóvar’s best films in years, and I would rank it up there with his best work. It has all the black humour and twisted sensibilities of his earlier work, but with a more refined, at times even clinical visual style, painted with a beautiful palate of soft turquoise and reds.

The performances are all fantastic, particularly Banderas, who has to perform with enough subtlety to sell the whole concept that could easily descend past ‘quirky’ and into ‘irksome’.

I would not urge everyone to see this film, as I appreciate it may be an acquired taste. If you have ever enjoyed an Almodóvar film in the past, you probably don’t need me to tell you to see this anyway. However, if you don’t want to miss one of the best films of the year, and have a strong constitution for weirdness, then you simply must see The Skin I Live In. It is a truly unique piece of cinema, and how often can you say that?

Tagged with: • • •
 

A new mouse replacement.

On July 13, 2011, in Asides, Technology, Writing, by Patrick
0

Tagged with: • •
 

Book review: Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman

On July 7, 2011, in Books, by Patrick
0

A couple of months ago I took American Gods by Neil Gaiman on holiday with me, and really enjoyed it. It isn’t without its faults: some of the dialogue is clunky and sounds like a Brit trying to write American dialogue (which is exactly what is). But it is a enjoyably bizarre book with insane ambition and a recklessness to it that I found hugely satisfying. Gaiman is a writer who seems to revel in ideas more than language, and once this is established you begin to see how much talent this man possess. It is the kind of book that would never be accepted by a publisher if it was a debut work. It is the work of a writer who knew the rules intimately enough to break them.

American Gods is a great analysis of what  makes America unique; a country made up of foreigners who let their own beliefs die away in favour of a new dream. However, everyone told me that the Neil Gaiman book I simply had to read was Neverwhere. I normally don’t like reading more than one book by a writer back-to-back, but I enjoyed American Gods so much I picked it up anyway.

Neverwhere is the novelisation of a TV show that Gaiman wrote in the nineties that I have never seen. It is about a young man called Richard Mayhew who winds up stuck in a world called London Below, an alternate London populated by those that have ‘fallen between the cracks’. There he meets all manner of strange and wonderful characters as he sets off on a surreal quest to get back home. As a Londoner, the idea of Neil Gaiman getting under the skin of a city I knew so well in the same way he did for America in American Gods was an exciting prospect. But in this sense I think the novel fails.

That isn’t to say that I didn’t enjoy it hugely. The humour is very well judged, and I was relieved by the lighter tone of it after the weightiness of American Gods. The story rattles along at a good pace and every chapter is filled with Pratchett-esque wit and inventiveness. There are also some great passages about the history of London, bringing out an interest in the city’s Victorian sewer system that I never knew I had in me.

I had a great time with this book, but unfortunately I failed to see a subtext as wonderfully rich as American Gods. There are obvious similarities between the works, with both novels featuring powerful fantastical beings living just beneath the surface of society. However, whereas American Gods stayed with me for days, leaving me to ponder the nature of national identity, religion and human behaviour, I found Neverwhere to be somewhat more superficial. Rather than getting into what makes London tick, it seemed to rely much more on puns (an Angel called Islington, an Earl who owns a Court). This is a funny and quirky concept, but it doesn’t really shed any new light on the identity of London. To me this seems like a missed opportunity.

Neverwhere is a fun adventure, and one that I would heartily recommend (to a certain type of reader I may even recommend it over American Gods). Unfortunately for me, it didn’t quite have as much to say about my fine city as I’d have liked. Perhaps it was my expectation at fault rather than the novel.

Tagged with: • • • • • •
 

Requiem for Aronofsky

On July 6, 2011, in Films, by Patrick
0

I really like Darren Aronofsky. I enjoyed Black Swan in a big honking 80s horror kind of way, and I think The Wrestler is a masterpiece. I liked Pi, but always thought it was all to obvious it was a debut feature, brimming with untapped talent was waiting to explode. I did have a problem with him however, which I know will make me many popular in some circles. And that problem was Requiem for a Dream.

I know that this is highly contentious as I have had this argument many times in my life, but I have a real problem with Requiem for a Dream. I have a couple of friends for whom this is their favourite film, and I just can’t understand it. It is certainly well made and well shot. It also features some great harrowing performances, particularly from Ellen Burstyn. Clint Mansell’s score is also the work of an absolute master. My problem is that the film is essentially just a study in grimness. It is essentially a series of mostly unlikeable characters doing very stupid things and suffering terribly because of it. There is no relief.

Its disturbing atmosphere is a feat in itself, but for me the film ends up feeling like a directing school project with the brief “make the most depressing and bleak ninety minutes possible”. I’d give him an A+, but I think that the film has very little to say beyond ‘drugs are bad’, and ‘its not only illegal drugs that are bad’. Compare this with a film like Trainspotting, which not only shows the dark side of drugs, but also the highs, the effects of drugs on society, music culture and personal relationships. It also has a witty script and a real narrative thrust. In my view, Requiem for a Dream pales in comparison.

Aronofsky showed great promise as a cinematic stylist with Requiem for a Dream and Pi, but I never really imagined that he would become a great storyteller. I’m glad that he came back with The Wrestler (I’ve still not seen The Fountain) and proved me very wrong, as he is quickly earning his place as one of my favourite filmmakers working today.

Tagged with: • • • • • • •
 

I love the taste of Apple

On July 5, 2011, in Technology, by Patrick
1

I’m an Apple user. My mobile is an iPhone 4, my computer is a Macbook (Aluminium Unibody if you are interested), and I still regularly use my iPod classic for those longer trips.

I can’t tell you how much stick being an Apple user over the years. Many of them stating that people only use Apple products to look cool. Well the ‘cost vs specs’ argument when it comes to Macs vs PCs is an ancient one, and the Android vs iOS seems to be a simple continuation of this. And it is just as stupid and juvenile, often on both sides of the fence. There are many arguments to be made, but they litter the internet with their filth and I’m not about to fight in that war just now.

The one thing I’m going to add to the debate however, is an angle not often explored: the one of pleasure. I really enjoy using my iPhone and my Mac. It gives me joy to work on these devices, and that is something that I am willing to pay for. I know I could get a HTC for cheaper than an iPhone. I know I could use Gmail/Google Calendar instead of Mobile Me, and Google Docs instead of Pages. I could get a cheap netbook instead of an iPad, and build a much faster PC tower for much cheaper than the price of an iMac.

But the Apple ecosystem brings me happiness and inspiration. I am actively inspired by the UI, hardware and software design. Surroundings mean a lot when creating art, so why would the device being used not enter into that? For me, this is at a level as visceral as music appreciation. The best of Elkie Brooks might only cost £1 in a HMV bargain bin, with the latest Sufjan Stevens album costing closer to a tenner, but no one would suggest I should buy the Elkie Brooks record (as good as it may be to some) if I’m not a fan. Cost is irrelevant (although I accept that I am lucky enough to afford enough to be able to save up for Apple devices). I like Apple’s design, and I believe that filters through into my work.

This isn’t a pro-Apple rant from any perspective other than my own preference. You might enjoy using Windows, I know many who do. I know those who love open-source, and enjoy tinkering with Linux distributions. That’s fine, we are all beautiful individual snowflakes. So please stop telling me that I only use Apple products because I’m a poser, or because I’ve been sucked in by Steve Jobs’ marketing machine. Digital devices permeate virtually every aspect of our living in today’s world, so forgive me if I want these machines to put a smile on my face.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • •
 

Wasted Celluloid – lost lyrics

On July 5, 2011, in Writing, by Patrick
0

Here are some lyrics I wrote for a Butterflies On Strings song that was never used. It may be dug up again one day, but as it doesn’t look likely in the near future I thought I’d put the lyrics up here. The song is called Wasted Celluloid, and is inspired by the true story of an alcoholic old lady who was killed by the fire from her cigarette as she passed out in her arm chair.

 

Wasted Celluloid

Sat
in an old chair,
staring out the gas fire.
It just grins right back
glowing teeth.

Above,
faded photos
three daughters but not the son
who would waste celluloid.
on him?

Skin hotter than this cigarette
Ignite till there’s nothing left

In
the morning,
knocks on wood black and thin.
Last to see me alive,
serves him right.

 

Tagged with: • •
 

A Hero Rises

On July 1, 2011, in Writing, by Patrick
1

20110701-065652.jpg

In less than two months, my first ever play will be performed at the Camden Fringe Festival. This feels me with much excitement, and much dread. But mostly excitement.

A Hero’s Journey began life as my first sitcom pilot script, written with my comedy writing partner Steve Jordan. We began writing it in the early days of university in a grim yet somehow charming pub in Enfield, always in the same seat and with the same drinks (for me, Diet Coke, for Steve, mineral water – who said comedy was the new rock and roll?). It was based on our experiences studying creative writing, and on the strange characters we found attracted to the odd pursuit of sitting in a darkened room with a bunch of words for friends. Considering our age and naivety I actually think it was pretty good in that form.

We sent it round to agents and production companies, and took the flood of rejections in our stride. After all, these people were the ones who helped the likes of Little Miss Jocelyn and Life of Riley torture us through our television sets.

We loved the concept and the characters, but had no outlet for it, so the screenplay sat in a drawer to mature with age like a fine cheese. At least that was the idea. At university we were never told writing doesn’t work like that. We ploughed on with life and many other projects (including Hollywoodn’t, our very own Man Who Killed Don Quixote).

After the nightmare of trying to get Hollywood ‘t produced for the stage (a whole different story), we were faced with a decision. Re-write, re-cast or move on. We were all ready to pick the third option, when I caught a whiff of maturing comedy gold from within my desk drawer. We rubbed the dust from our TV pilot, and took the decision to re-write it for the stage.

The finished script is almost unrecognisable from the screenplay. Key characters and a handful of gags survived, but this was a whole different beast, with a different arc and a new villain – Peter Davison’s fifth Doctor Who!

Now we have cast the play and are looking forward to rehearsals ahead of the big days, the 17th, 18th and 19th of August. We are collecting props and sorting out all of the practicalities involved in putting on a play. It’s hard work, but amazing fun and really a privilege.

On this blog I am planning on documenting the process of getting our first piece of writing on the boards, and I can’t wait.

What are you waiting for? Get your ticket now!

Tagged with: • • •
 

Film Review – Helvetica

On October 20, 2010, in Films, by Patrick
0

A few weeks ago I was mercilessly taken the micky out of by my Mum after telling her that I had recently watched a documentary all about the font Helvetica. Not only did, I watch it, I loved it. This fact spread, and for a while I was under attack from all angles about my passion for something seemingly so boring.

Well here I am officially singing its praises. Helvetica is a 2007 documentary film by Gary Huswit to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the ubiquitous typeface. Featuring interviews with leading graphic artists and type designers, it explores the gulf of opinion between modernists who believe meaning should come from the words and context rather than the font, and postmodernists who are critical of the simplicity of Helvetica.

The sound track is really fantastic, featuring the likes of Four Tet and The Album Leaf over montages of the modern world and how often we see the striking Helvetica typeface in our day to day lives.

I understand that this film is a hard sell; a whole film about a font, its ubiquity and beauty. But it really is a great film. The passion of those who create things we take for granted every day is humbling. If you have any more than a passing interest in art, design, modernism, advertising or  graphic design, this film really is a must see.

Tagged with: • • • •
 

Film Review – Toy Story 3

On October 19, 2010, in Films, by Patrick
0

A bit of a catch-up this one. I wrote this review a while ago, and I only just found it again:

So here is a review that for a long time I never thought I’d get to write. A Toy Story 3 made by Pixar. This is the true reward we get for the buyout of Pixar by Disney in 2006.

Now firstly, let me preface this review by quickly getting the 3D issue out of the way. As much as I detest 3D, I was forced to see Toy Story 3 in 3D just because the 2D showings were at inconvenient times (inconvenient to the point of impossible). On a technical level, the 3D wasn’t particularly off-putting (the fine tuning of 3D available with CG animation makes it far smoother than any live action 3D I have seen – including Avatar). Also, one thing I will say is that the 3D actually made sense in a really satisfying way for the short film Night and Day which preceded the main feature.

So the best thing I can say about this 3D experience is that ‘it didn’t get in the way.’ Not exactly what I want to be paying an extra 2 pounds for!

Anyway, onto what’s important – the film itself. The original Toy Story is a seminal film for me. Not only the first ever fully CG animated film, but a truly amazing piece of work in its own right. In my opinion, the most perfect children’s film ever made. This was always going to be a tough act for Pixar to follow with Toy Story 2, but I saw it at an age where I wasn’t pessimistic about the idea of sequels. This became a moot point anyway, as Toy Story 2 was a phenomenal sequel, bigger and bolder, and more heartfelt than I ever thought possible. The Jessie’s Song scene was the most heartbreaking scene I had ever seen animated.

Fast forward eleven years to a more pessimistic me. I moan about sequels, I moan about prequels, I moan about franchises, I moan about 3D. So was I ready for one of the most important films of my childhood to get the trilogy treatment? I’m not sure.

I needn’t have been worried. Toy Story has become perhaps the perfect trilogy. A trilogy where each entry has been crafted with as much care and love as the first instalment. Three films that will be timeless classics, and I’m proud to say I was there at the beginning.

I feared Toy Story 3 was destined to simply become some kind of Great Escape spoof already done to perfection by Chicken Run. What I wasn’t quite prepared for (and I should have been given a clue by Jessie’s Song in Toy Story 2 and the heartbreaking opening of Pixar’s Up) was the emotional punch his film has. After the trademark action packed opening, we see what life is like for the surviving toys of Andy, and it isn’t a happy site. Only the bare bones of the gang remain, being replaced over time with electric guitars and computers.

But it isn’t all doom and gloom. The gags are flawless, and work the younger and older audiences at the same time, with none of the hidden innuendos that the Dreamworks films often rely on to keep adults entertained. The visuals are eye-popping and the heroes and bad guys are given proper motivation and are just as three dimensional with the glasses off!

As someone who grew up with these characters, Toy Story 3 was the perfect send off. These films, like the toys, don’t just belong to our generation, they exist to be loved and treasured forever, and I’m convinced that these films will live up to this legacy. Thank you Pixar, it has been a dizzying fifteen years!

Tagged with: • • •
 

Film Review – The Social Network

On October 19, 2010, in Films, by Patrick
0

A story about jealousy, loyalty, status, college life and the nature of genius. To simply call it ‘the Facebook film’ is to do The Social Network a massive disservice. This is a film by David Fincher from a script by Aaron Sorkin, and the quality you’d expect from such a pairing is exactly what you get from The Social Network.

Facebook is now an unstoppable force, with over 500 million members worldwide. It has fundamentally changed the way we connect and communicate with each other. It has taken true fluid internet communication to the masses, and as such is possibly the most important creation since the internet itself, or even the telephone. That it was created by an unassuming and frankly unlikeable student in his dorm room is an incredible fact, and one that defines our generation. Why shouldn’t this be a suitable subject for one of the most powerful film makers today?

I loved The Social Network. I loved it because it isn’t about money, it isn’t about fame, and it isn’t even really about Facebook. It is an exquisitely crafted character study of someone who prizes success above all else. To what end this success will lead to we are unsure, but the journey is at once funny, thrilling and moving. That we are denied a payoff to the story is the fault of real life closed doors, but the open end somehow manages to add to the film’s power.

How much of the real Mark Zuckerberg is in Jesse Eisenberg’s performance is irrelevant. It is a master turn, serving us sympathy and understanding for a character we would rather slap than spend any real time with. He manages to turn a figure so hateable into something immensely watchable. The support is solid as well, with Andrew Garfield milking as much empathy as he can from Zuckerberg’s only friend Eduardo, who in other hands could come across as frustratingly naive. Justin Timberlake is also great as the biggest prat in a vast sea of them.

The visuals are as lush as you’d expect from a David Fincher film, and the colour palette of this vision of Harvard is as atmospheric as the best of his work. He even manages to sneak in some special effects in the form of the Winklevoss twins (humorously referred to as the Winklevi) both played by the one talented Armie Hammer. The script is impeccable, quick witted without ever losing realism. The thrill Sorkin manages to conjure from just words spoken in a small room is rather amazing. The score by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross is also worth a mention, managing to lift scenes depicting something as dull as computer programming into something resembling a full blown action sequence.

Oscar nods are sure to come, and I think they are very well deserved all round. The Social Network feels like a film that I saw and loved alone one night, but can’t manage to convince anyone else of its greatness. The fact that it is a huge box office hit in America warms my heart, and that films as intelligent (and might I add 2D) as the likes of this and Inception are finding huge audiences makes me very optimistic for the future of mainstream cinema.

Tagged with: • • • • •
 

A Phoenix From the Flames

On October 12, 2010, in Asides, by Patrick
0

It has been a long time since I have posted here. This is a shame.

Since my last post I:

  • Was greatly moved by Toy Story 3
  • Was thrilled by Scott Pilgrim
  • Was wonderfully surprised by World’s Greatest Dad.
  • Have been depressed by the coalition government
  • Am excited by Ed Miliband’s success
  • Have been disappointed by the new Arcade Fire album
  • Have fallen in love with the new Arcade fire album.
  • Have been working on my novel (ten thousand words since I last posted)
  • Have been very busy at work
  • Found a new flat
  • Have played lots of gigs.

Enough of the excuses. The call of the blog still beckons and I will try my hardest to bring back MoviePat from the embers once again. Here I go!

Tagged with: • • • • • •
 
« Previous Entries