The Film Tag

There is no witty or original name for this tag, I'm afraid. I think the idea of tags are really fun, and after searching for many film-related ones and coming to no real success, I decided to make my own. Feel free to post your own answers even if I haven't tagged you!

If you could choose one (dead or alive) director & two (dead or alive) actors/actresses to collaborate on a film project who would they be? 

→ Alfred Hitchcock, Alfred Hitchcock, Alfred Hitchcock. There could be no other answer to this question, he is the absolute master of cinema in my eyes, delivering amazingly engaging films from his first in the late 1920s to his last in the late 1970s. I would want him to be in the mindset he was in during the 1950s, however, where most of my favourite Hitchcock films were produced and I feel that creatively he was at his best.
Cillian Murphy would work brilliantly with Hitchcock's style, his acting ability constantly surprises me and I love his work. I would also love to see Jessica Chastain in the leading female role, showing her versatility in her constant changes of characters from The Tree of Life to Zero Dark Thirty, she would fully deserve a role in this production.

A film from your favourite director that you think is underrated.

→ Since Hitchcock directed around 53 feature films in his career span, there are so many gems that get out-shined by the handful of films he made that are projected to a legendary status. While the likes of Psycho and The Birds are brilliant in their own right, smaller films such as Family Plot are often disregarded as mediocre films, when the truth of the matter is Family Plot is a hilarious final film from Hitchcock. The comedy is brilliant, the suspense is mastered and the film boasts one of my favourite scripts to come from Camp Hitchcock. With the film being very, very '70s, the style would be one that people, without knowing, would never think of as being a Hitchcock film, yet is as enjoyable as one of his most recognisable.

Your favourite adaptation of a book on screen. 

→ I am absolutely in love with Baz Luhrmann's Romeo & Juliet, with the film being one of my most watched. There is always issues and arguments whenever a director chooses to adapt any of Shakespeare's works, however  I think that Luhrmann is a truly visionary director, and the combination of his love for challenging the canon, incorporating music so effortlessly into his films and his unique style makes his films extremely enoyable.

The last film you watched & the next film you plan on watching.

→ The last film I watched was Coraline, yesterday, and the next film I plan on watching is Annie Hall, this afternoon.

Do you own any interesting film memorabilia? Stories behind them?

→ 'Interesting' is subjective, however in my bedroom at my childhood home I have posters of Pulp Fiction and Taxi Driver, two of my favourite films growing up. In my room in London I have a picture of Alfred Hitchcock, and in my attic somewhere I have a huge, and I mean HUGE, poster that I got when I went to the Oz the Great and Powerful premiere a few months back. It's really big.

Favourite past (dead), present (living) and future (upcoming) directors.

→ Past: Alfred Hitchcock, Stanley Kubrick.
Present: David Lynch, Wes Anderson, Baz Luhrmann, Nicolas Winding Refn.
Upcoming: Adam Leon, Jonathon Levine.

Someone you would like to see a film made about. Who would direct it? Who would star in it?

→ I'm extremely interested in the Royal Family, so I feel like films about them are always fun to watch. I would love to watch a film portraying a fictional dramatisation of the rumours surrounding Prince Charles having an affair with Camilla. I'm not sure that would be allowed, but I think it would be an interesting film. The reason I mention it being a fictional dramatisation is that I'm pretty sure it would be illegal to claim it was based on a real life story. I think Spielberg would be a solid choice to direct the film, with him showing he can make heavy dialogue in films interesting and moving, which I feel that a film of this type would need. Another good choice to direct the film would be Tom Hooper.

So that is the end of the questions on this tag, I enjoyed thinking about the questions and writing my answers, and if you think you will, too, don't hesitate to copy the questions and answer them yourself.

'Dr Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb' Review

Watching Stanley Kubrick's 1964 comedy, Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, we could easily be led to believe that we were watching a piece of propaganda film trying to express the absolute shambles that the American government were in the 1960s. The film is unapologetically satirical and rips apart the idea of the American government being an organised and reliable group of people when something diverges from the plan of action that they have prepared for. With billboards boasting the phrase "Peace is our profession" in the background of a shot of generals in a gun battle, the hypocrisy of this 'profession' is put into the audience's mind, and the comical "You can't fight here, this is the war room" line shows just how unaware the President is of his words and the effects of his actions.

The film tells the story of an 'insane' general who gives a fighter plane the instructions to bomb Russian missile bases, in effect, launching their 'doomsday weapon' that will destroy all life on the planet. The story is divided into three different perspectives, we have the rogue general who is responsible for the attack, the President of the united states and high ranking generals in the US 'War Room', and the airforce members who are in one of the planes that is heading to bomb the USSR. This division makes the film tense and keeps the plot fresh, brilliantly executing a story that, had it been directed by anyone other than the legendary Kubrick, would have descended into a stagnant and monotonous mess.

Interestingly, Peter Sellers plays three characters in this film, showing a wide range of his acting abilities and proving him to be one of Hollywood's all-time legends. His performances are all entirely different, with accents being perfected and characters becoming real in the minds of the audience, he really shines through as the star of this film, constantly delivering a brilliant performance. The combination of his natural acting talent and his close work with Kubrick leads to the stand-out performance of his career.

The films general mood resembles that of the tension between the USA and USSR at the time of the film. The internalised arguments especially provide tension throughout, with each of them not seeming to trust each other, it seems that egos and selfishness override the importance of a possible nuclear war, again, going back to the satirical comedy that Kubrick masters in this feature.

The film is definitely an interesting one to watch. Perhaps the lack of amazing cinematography and camerawork that we see in Kubrick's later films such as The Shining and A Clockwork Orange means that this film asks for an audience more attentive to the story and the characters than the visual side, however, it is no less enjoyable than either of the two films listed and, if anything, the awesome atomic-bomb montage sequence at the end, played over Dame Vera Lynn's 'We'll Meet Again' makes the film worth the watch, an almost haunting ending, suggesting the constant threat of the Cold War that was still large when the film was released, and for another thirty decades.

GETTING FAMILIAR WITH THE WORKS OF STANLEY KUBRICK

It is impossible to look at masterpieces of modern cinema without bringing up the works of Stanley Kubrick. Being the director of 16 films, his work was progressively more and more groundbreaking as time went on, and in this post, I will be talking about the three essential Kubrick film that you should watch as an introduction to his work.

The first film I will be recommending is 2001: A Space Odyssey. I cannot count the amount of times I have watched television programmes and interviews with directors and film critics and this film has been mentioned as the defining moment where the person in question knew they had to pursue a career in film. The film was released in 1968 and does require a lot of patience and interest from the audience, with over 20 minutes of the film passing before the first word is spoken. The film questions everything we know about existence, about space and about mans want to be in control. Questions that cannot be answered are raised through the most breathtaking images and sequences of film, and once the film is over, the audience are left one of a few ways (A) confused (B) in awe & (C) with their life being changed. I, myself, was left relating to all three. 

The film is utterly inspiring if the audience is willing to disregard all the differences in this sci-fi film and modern (as in- after the film was released, the beginning of CGI etc) sci-fi films, which, granted, can be hard to do, however the end result of having watched this film is one that will stay with you for a long, long time.

The next film is the deviously amazing A Clockwork Orange. This is one of Kubrick's most shocking films, leading Kubrick to ban the showing and selling of the film in the UK for his entire lifetime after reports that people were committing crimes similar to those in the film. The film tells the story of Alex Delarge, a teenager in a dystopian futuristic Great Britain. With some of the most memorable sequences of Kubrick's career (Singin' in the Rain, anyone?) and an impeccable performance by Malcolm McDowell, the film is a must watch for film students (believe me..) and cinema-lovers in general. 

The amount of justice this film deserves is unable to be explained with words, the images, characters and story speak for themselves entirely.

The final film in this list is my favourite of the three, The Shining. The Shining boasts some of the most groundbreaking work of Kubrick's time and is a how-to guide on character development, plot development and all-round how to make a movie. My favourite horror movie of all time, the combination of the beautifully haunting location, psychopathic characters and supernatural activity make for an extremely thrilling watch. The opening titles is one of my favourite moments of the film, a beautiful helicopter shot showing both the isolation of the setting and the beauty of the natural world. The screams in the music played over the shot are haunting, appearing to come from the trees and the ground, following the car and the characters inside, almost setting the film up in one long shot. As soon as I first saw the opening titles, I was gobsmacked and genuinely scared. 

There is not too much I can say regarding this film apart from watch it. It is absolutely amazing, and that is from someone who doesn't usually find horror films to be that appealing. 

As is evident from this post, I am a huge admirer of Kubrick's work, perhaps once you have watched all three films you'll move on to some of his classic films such as Lolita or Paths of Glory. Perhaps you'll even find yourself watching the terrifyingly long and dull period drama, Barry Lyndon and appreciating the highly stylised mise en scene. I hope this post provokes interest in people who perhaps have never had the final kick up the backside to get familiar with Kubrick's work, and I hope you enjoy the films.

THE CONSPIRACIES IN KUBRICK'S 'THE SHINING', AND 'ROOM 237':

Sorry for my lack of posts for the past few weeks, assignment deadlines at university were piling up, but now I'm on Easter break, meaning I have the time to write some posts on here.

Tonight I watched the documentary regarding Stanley Kubrick's masterpiece, The Shining, titled Room 237. Incase you're unaware of the documentary and the subject it explores, it deals with the numerous conspiracy theories and subjective interpretations of the 1980 film, giving close analysis of scenes in the film and using the social and historical context of Stanley Kubrick himself, and the time he grew up in, as reference for many of the points. The theories explored include the film being a portrayal of the rise of the white American and degrading/destruction of the Native Americans, a portrayal of the holocaust, a confession from Kubrick that he helped to create the 'fake' video of the 1969 moon landing and many more.

Through all 100 minutes of this documentary I was absolutely in awe. The detail that the critics speaking have gone into in their research of the theories is clear in their analysis of individual frames, set locations, and even the directors childhood, and gives a well-structured and interesting argument in trying to prove their case. The openness of the ending of the film is one of the things that makes all of the conspiracy theories key, with no clear message to guide the audience, the interpretation of the audience is something that Kubrick enjoyed, therefore I feel it is plausible that numerous hints of historical events and theories were put in the film in order to spark critic's interest, I believe that Kubrick would have been happy to watch this documentary, gaining an insight into just how effective his extremely detailed mise-en-scene and cinematography is in provoking thoughts.

The theory that has always interested me the most is the theory of Kubrick being involved in the faking of the 1969 moon landing footage. This footage has always intrigued me, as a child I thought it was incredible that I could witness, at my disposal, something that was recorded on a different planet (the moon isn't a planet, whatever, I was a kid.... OKAY?). As I grew older, started school and found ways to distract myself (watching documentary channels on repeat for days on end), I was interested in the faking of the footage because of numerous factors. Why is that flag blowing in the 'wind'? Why does the scenery look exactly like a part of Area 51? etc. etc.
This is going off on a most wonderful tangent, however, this is a film blog so I'll stick to Kubrick. I have explained one of the most solid theories of the faking of the moon-landing of '69 footage down below. The documentary explains it in much more detail, as you can expect, but anyway, enjoy.

THEORY: KUBRICK SUGGESTING HE WAS INVOLVED IN THE FORGING OF THE MOON-LANDING FOOTAGE.The pattern on the carpet that Danny rises from is shaped exactly like the launch pad for the space ships that sent astronauts to the moon. Danny steps up from this hexagon take off pad, wearing a jumper that has a picture of the Apollo 11 on it, physically showing the spaceship taking off from the launch pad.

Danny then walks to room number 237. Kubrick changed the number of the room from the original Stephen King novel from 231 to 237, claiming that the hotel they were filming in already had a room number 231, and the manager worried that nobody would want to stay in that room after the film was released, however it has been said that many people have rung up the hotel requesting said room, and it does not exist, suggesting Kubrick was covering this up. The relevance that the number 237 has to the moon-landing theory is that the moon is exactly 237,000 miles away from earth! Simple as that. Also, as said in the documentary, if you read the writing above the number 'ROOM No' the only capitalised letters are R O O M & N. The only two words you can make out of this are 'moon' and 'room', suggesting this is the 'moon room'. A confession from Stanley Kubrick of his involvement in the 'false' recording?