In Defense of 'Diana'

After the countless reviews of this film stating it as the cinematic equivalent of the Holocaust, I went to the cinema to see the film not expecting much from this biopic from Oliver Hirschbiegel. The comments on it being distasteful, tarring the Princess's image and being flat out crap were all things I had read beforehand and as it is when you read the same thing over and over again, I became to suspect that I would have the same opinion as the critics and film goers who have slated this film online. I suspected wrong.

Diana tells of Princess Diana (link here, please read, very important, etc) and her life after her divorce from Prince Charles in the 1990s. Focusing on her constant battle with the British media, her clandestine relationship with a heart surgeon and eventually her public relationship with Dodi Fayed, this dramatic portrayal of the Princess of Wales' life creeps behind the guarded gates of her home in London and into her extremely unfortunate and unfair life after her break up with a member of the Royal family. As with all films regarding members of royalty, elements of fiction have been added alongside factual dates and events, increasing drama and allowing viewers to feel close to the isolated and lonely 'Most Famous Woman in the World'. I think, however, it is the addition of these fictional scenes and events that has critics and moviegoers confused.

People are taking this film as if it has been marketed as the official secret life of Princess Diana, when in reality, it is a piece of dramatic fictional work. Comments have included insults such as 'Naomi Watts doesn't even look like Diana', which, I think, says everything about the mindset that a lot of people, the majority it seems, went into this film in. If you were focussing on the lack of visual similarities between two unrelated people, then a) go back to biology class and b) read the definition of a biographical piece of cinema, revise it, then re-watch the film. There seems to be a certain attachment with the Great British public and Princess Diana that is unbreakable. People's minds are unwilling to accept a fictional piece of film and get caught up in becoming offended by a director's attempts at making a connection with the audience and evoking a state of empathy. When you take a film such as Lincoln, a film that was widely renowned to be historically inaccurate and altogether a little bit talky, if you ask me, and look at the amount of praise it got from critics all over the world, it seems almost like a barrier is put up around such films as this Diana and people immaturely refuse to suspend their disbelief in a state of defiance.

Disregarding all of the nonsense criticism I have read regarding the film, my fears for it were that as a relatively short biopic, it was going to be lengthy. There is a lot of Diana's life that is interesting and focusing on only the last two years was a brilliant way of both cutting down what would have been an extremely long running time, and also allowing those who perhaps don't know the ins and outs of Princess Diana's very public relationship with Prince Charles, to show as little judgement as possible. The rumours of the film being distasteful were also something that I thought were going to be true, and I thought this would be in regards to the death scene that was inevitable going to happen, however, to my surprise the death scene was cut out completely. This lack of showing what could have turned out be an extremely offensive and uncomfortable piece of film shows pure taste in my opinion. We all know what happened to Diana in real life, we have all seen the pictures and read the articles, Hirschbiegel has tactfully left out a scene that would have cause general offense to a lot of people, and I give him props to that, he managed to achieve his emotional scenes through skilful camera work and script writing.

The film is captivating throughout, a beautifully tragic story of love, heartbreak and tragedy, we are taken on a journey of a variety of emotions. Perhaps though, for me, the most important thing I took away from my viewing of this film is to never let a critic, or in this case a lot of critics, tell you how to feel about a movie. The beautiful thing about film is that it is subjective, the most captivating film to some will be the biggest snooze-fest ever to others, believe me, if there is anything I have learnt whilst studying for a degree in film it is that it is rare for you to find people who have the exact same film taste as yourself. Let films take you somewhere, don't hold back because of other people's opinions, and you will find yourself much more aware of what you actually enjoy and a lot more open to the film world.

Ain't Them Bodies Saints - Review

In this tale of love and drama, Bob (Casey Affleck) is arrested after taking the blame for his wife's shooting of a cop, during the time he is in prison, his wife, Ruth (Rooney Mara) gives birth to their baby girl and chooses to wait for him. The film follows Ruth and her daughter, Sylvie, coping without Bob, and also Bob's escape from prison and cross-country journey to be reunited with the people he loves.

This film is without question one of the few absolute masterpieces of modern drama films, David Lowery presents everything, the good and the bad, in such a hauntingly beautiful way that it now feels the genre would be hollow and lacking in substance without this film listed. Reaching down into the deepest caverns of our hearts, the tragic situations the characters find themselves in provoked such an immediate and honest response that the fact I was watching a fictional piece of work never entered my thoughts, I was with the characters emotionally, feeling their pain and hoping for some good to come their way. The fact that the artificiality of the film didn't interrupt my viewing even once is something special, and Lowery should be praised for this seamless feature.

The constant conflict of emotions in regards to what we should be feeling and what we are feeling is something that I felt to be extremely thought provoking and perhaps the greatest thing I took away from the film. We are watching criminals, people who have lied, cheated, robbed and killed people, yet we feel so attached on an emotional level to them, and their love is presented with such strength, that it bypasses all of the bad and we are stripped down to viewing them as two human beings in love who have been separated by an unlucky set of events. The addition of the cop into the equation presents us with a physical representation of the moral dilemma we are facing as an audience, we know that Ruth would be secure and safe if she let go of her longing for Bob and opened herself up to Patrick (Ben Foster), however we know in our hearts that her love for Bob is everlasting, to live on the edge of danger for her is worth it if she can be with Bob, and we never want her to give up on him.

The cinematography of the entire film is reminiscent of the likes of Terrence Malick and other directors influenced by avant garde cinema. Bradford Young shows his natural skill in making a frame as aesthetically pleasing as possible, the lighting, movement of camera and positioning of mise en scene leads us into appreciating a purely visual element of cinema at times almost unconsciously. Everything about this film just adds up, making it one of my favourites of the year so far. With outstanding performances by both Rooney Mara and Casey Affleck, I will be surprised if an Oscar nomination or two isn't given out in regards to acting, the moving portrayals fit perfectly with the atmospheric and memorable film.

Peckham & Nunhead Film Festival: The Immigrant & Steamboat Bill, Jr.

In a small corner of Peckham Rye Park, London on a friday night, a group of film fans gathered to watch two classic silent films. With the sun setting whilst a live pianist accompanied the films, the atmosphere was as relaxed as can be and there was no pretentiousness surrounding the event, which I was extremely happy about, the people that were there simply wanted to watch a good film surrounding by others who want to watch a good film.

The two films on show were Charlie Chaplin's The Immigrant, a hilarious short released in 1917. The film only runs a mere 20 minutes long, yet is as engaging as any feature of the time, the slapstick comedy is constant and the accompanying piano was so fitting. The film was extremely well received and had me, along with everyone around me, in stitches.

The other film shown was Steamboat Bill, Jr, a 1928 comedy directed by Charles Reisner and starring Buster Keaton. Being made over a decade later than the previous film shown, the improvements in the production of films was interesting to look at. This film takes slapstick comedy to a new level, with the climatic storm scene at the end of the film being perhaps my highlight of the night. A roar of laughter erupted in this quaint corner of the park and didn't stop until the scene was well and truly over. It was so beautiful to see so many (well over 50) people of all ages, from toddlers to pensioners, come out to the park in a cold September evening to watch some old films.

People were drinking wine, eating scones and sampling the nearby café's burgers and organic beers. There were people on wooden chairs, in sleeping bags, on picnic blankets and on plastic carrier bags, the variety of different people this event attracted was something that struck me as surprising, and something that really started this festival off with a strong feeling that the cinema is not dying, or dead, it is, in fact, in the most unusual places and situations where you find the passion and dedication that comes with the art. What a beautiful evening to start off the festival, heres to the next week.

Rush - Review

With a busy screening in East London full of veteran cinema-goers, Cineworld offered their Unlimited card holders a preview screening of Ron Howard's latest feature, Rush. Although some minor technical difficulties (we were shown the first five minutes of You're Next before the technical crew realised their mistake), the crowd was alive with excitement for what could possibly be the film of the year, and we were not let down one bit.

Rush tells of the rivalry and personal feuds between two racing drivers in the '70s, James Hunt and Niki Lauda. Their lives on the race track and behind the spotlight are portrayed so magnificently by Chris Hemsworth and Daniel Bruhl in this biographical drama that hits screens in the UK on the 13th September. 

Speaking of the actors, the performances given by Hemsworth and Bruhl were absolutely phenomenal, their characters and the lives they lead were so unbelievably captivating, the film raced by (no pun intended) with the performances being the leading factor in how well the film flowed and how beautifully received the twists and turns of the plot were. If Oscar nominations are not given for the acting in this film, I will have no words on the Academy's ridiculous decisions, with the best acting I have seen in a long, long time, I felt a genuine connection and involvement in the character's lives and it was brilliant.

My one fear going into this film was that the emphasis on the racing element would be too strong and would draw away from the characters and other aspects of the film, however my fears were put aside instantly, with the racing scenes never dragging on at all, the less dramatic races were shown for a couple of seconds and only the races that were crucial to the plot and character development were shown, making watching a lengthy racing scene all that more tense due to the knowledge that something is going to happen. Cinematography was strongly considered and after effects used in order to make the races an experience for the audience as much as the characters, the competitions were a break from all of the drama surrounding the other scenes, yet still held interest into the outcome of the characters and their situations. 

The film transcends any words that any critic or fan can label it with, standing out as the film event of the year so far for me, I have no doubt that this is a high point not only in Hemsworth and Bruhl's careers, but also for Ron Howard. Once a director makes a brilliantly received film (such as Howard's The Da Vinci Code) they are often known as the director who made that one film that one time. Yet with Rush, I feel Howard has proved his worth in the filmmaking business and stomped on the heads of critics of the film. This film is truly moving, outstandingly beautiful and so beautiful to watch. Don't miss out on this film.

True Romance - Review

In this 1993 film from Tony Scott, Clarence Worley (Christian Slater) falls in love with a prostitute (Patricia Arquette), kills her former pimp, steals a suitcase full of cocaine and travels to L.A in hopes of selling the lot and living in luxury for the rest of his life. As can be expected from a film written by Quentin Tarantino, things are never as simple as they seem, with pursuits, deception and violence never being too far away, True Romance is an action packed crime thriller that does not fail to deliver in terms of excitement.

There is something awfully endearing about watching a film written by such a prolific figure in modern cinema before their 'big break', Tarantino shows his love for a big plot and even bigger characters in this feature that was released only one year after his magnificent Reservoir Dogs hit the festival circuit and blew critics away. The sky is never the limit with Tarantino's scriptwriting, and the Hollywood norm is never going to be followed wholly, with scenarios put in just for the fun of it, characters introduced just to be killed off and the N-word used as frequently as the name of our protagonist, the film delivers a script that could only be written by something with an intense passion for cinema. With many hints at the ideas brewing in Tarantino's head that would be put on film in his later films such as Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill, parts of the script seem like Tarantino testing the waters of Hollywood to see the reactions to his graphic imagination. Writing the script was market research for Tarantino, a mere peek into some of the ideas he had for future films that he could take the whole credit for.

There is a disconnection felt when we are watching our protagonist's adventures. Speeding through the US with a case full of cocaine, being pursued by big time gangsters and taking it all in their stride, this film is not one that is easily relatable to. This lack of connection with Alabama and Clarence means that some scenes seem too stretched out or too exaggerated, I tried really hard to understand their motives throughout and gain a sense of perspective but found myself repeatedly lost. The lack of understanding, intentional or not, fits rather beautifully with the thematic side of the film, however, this journey that the characters are on is like a dream for them and why the Hell should they filter their enjoyment for us to feel engaged? When looking at this case, the characters seem to have depth, and their diegesis, although seen from our perspective through a non-understanding eye, is captivating and exciting. 

The film packs so much into the two hour running time, action, adventure, crime, romance and thriller are just some of the genres the film touches upon. With spectacular performances from Gary Oldman, Christopher Walken and Christian Slater, and a 30 second appearance from Samuel L. Jackson, it appears that many Hollywood big shots were more than happy to get on board with this film, and with many of them it was the first of many collaborations with Quentin Tarantino. Tony Scott brings everything together in a compact and enjoyable way, making quite a complex and scattered script into an easy to watch crime thriller, this film is cemented as one of my favourites of the 90s. 

Elysium - Review

In this futuristic sci-fi directed by Neill Blomkamp, the earth has become diseased and over-populated, leading to the rich boarding shuttles to a man-made space station orbiting earth named Elysium, where diseases can be cured in a heartbeat and a life of luxury is lived by all inhabitant, whilst the poor have to live in poverty and diseased on Earth. Max (Matt Damon) is a factory line worker who hasn't had the best past, trouble with the police has made him a target for both the security guard robots on Earth and also his boss. When one day, Max is directly exposed to radiation in the factory, he is told he has five days to live. In his mind, he has five days to get to Elysium, and this film follows his journey to do just that.

With a plot that features space ships, space stations and robots as recurring characters, Elysium shows off our ability to create truly believable environments through CGI and watching the film excited me regarding the potential of both our current films and also the future of cinema. Earth in the film sees endless tall buildings and crowds of people in a dusty and unclean environment, a chilling reminder of our current population problems and rich/poor divides and an exaggerated portrayal of them being our ruin as a race. Humorous at parts and full of action, the film is just as exciting and enjoyable as it is eerily creepy, with parts reminiscent of a video game, the fight scenes are amazing, Blomkamp presents us with unique angles and ways of showing the action, capturing the audiences attention and making the experience a thrilling one, as opposed to one that gets lost among all the other fight scenes we've ever watched.

The character of Kruger (Sharlto Copley) is presented as a genuinely scary, psychopathic villain. His introduction as a hooded man working undercover on Earth gives him a veiled background and allows our imagination to create our own dark beginnings for the character. His face being destroyed and rebuilt by the technology on Elysium makes him seem almost invincible, that behind all of this technology that is causing disruption and unfairness, there are also terrible humans. Matching Max's strengthened outfit, we feel that Kruger is a genuine threat to our hero's journey and the fight scene between the two near the end of the film was one of my favourite moments. Whilst on the topic of the bad guys, Jodie Foster plays an awful member of the Elysium council, allowing death to happen all around her without her batting an eyelid. Blomkamp has villains sussed out in this film, with the combination of robots and humans, the threat is ever present, seaming the film together with an overwhelming sense of tension throughout.

Outside of the obvious themes, questions are raised regarding our quick technological advancements. The idea that if we were able to simple cure diseases, there would be an injustice, is raised, surely the rich would be entitled to a better service, widening the gap between the poor and the well off and resulting in injustice towards those with little money. A lot of political thoughts came to me after watching this film, it's portrayal of a society gone corrupt enabled me to question for myself the direction in which our world is heading. The scariest part of watching sci-fi films is that elements of truth may be involved, this film is well thought out, beautifully written and oh, so thought provoking. The acclaimed director of District 9 does not disappoint with this wonderful follow up.

Mister Lonely - Review

Ever since one of my favourite films of the year, Spring Breakers, came to my attention, I have been meaning to look into the history of films directed by Harmony Korine, watch them all and try and get acquainted with the roots of Korine's career in which elements of Spring Breakers style may have come from. Whilst watching films from his (extremely short) filmography (only 5 feature films long, including Spring Breakers), I encountered Mister Lonely and have been blown away ever since watching it by the amount I have been thinking into the themes and characters, relating to it and just reminiscing over how much fun I had watching it and couldn't think otherwise than to write about how much I enjoyed it.

Mister Lonely has two separate plots, the main one revolving around a Michael Jackson impersonator who meets a Marilyn Monroe impersonator in Paris and travels to Scotland in order to live with her and her husband, a Charlie Chaplin impersonator, her daughter, a Shirley Temple impersonator and many other impersonators. The group are striving to build a stage on their land and perform in the greatest show the world has ever seen. This characters of this portion of the plot are living their life through the image of their chosen celebrity and in isolation from the general public for most of their screen time, meaning their lack of awareness of the outside world is uncomfortable to watch for viewers. We feel as if we are intruding on a group of mentally unstable people's lives and that isn't something that is easy to watch, but as the running time of the film moves along, there is almost a beauty in the delusion of these people, choosing to live their own non conformist lives. These people choosing to live in their own bubble are perhaps a throwback to Korine's troubles with a heroin addiction prior to the production of this film, the lack of responsibilities that a heroin user feels when he is on the drug are personified into these outrageous characters and plot.

The subplot of the film shows a group of nuns working with people in a poor country. When, in a freak accident, one of the nuns falls out of an aeroplane without a parachute and survives, she tells the other nuns that it must be God's plan for them and a way of him testing their faith. Whilst the film only cuts to this subplot a few times, we see the final result of the nuns all boarding a plane to the Vatican and it crashing into the ocean. It appears that Korine is showing extreme contempt for the idea of everyone having their own destiny, and someone else being in control of their lives. The nuns, who do not even second guess that the one surviving nun must be telling the truth, are ridiculed in their comedic death, they are made to look like complete idiots, and perhaps I am looking into this film too much as autobiographical on behalf of Harmony Korine, but I read between the lines that in order to successfully live your life, you have to live the path that you decide for yourself and not think much more into it.

The film, shot in Korine's typically gritty framing, lighting and movement, shows just how brilliant a film can be when you do not insult the audience's intelligence and spoon feed them your messages. Art is subjective, and therefore so is every film, and whether people take Mister Lonely as a fictional piece of work with interesting characters and a quirky plot or as a film very closely linked to the life of the director is up to them, the fact of the matter is that what Korine produced is an interesting and thought provoking piece of film with beautifully written monologues contrasting with an anti-Hollywood style of production. Harmony Korine is the king of independent dramas and Mister Lonely is the crown jewels.

The Fly - Review

David Cronenberg's 1986 gore filled horror film, The Fly, has gained cult status among movie fans throughout the years. With its comic book violence and graphic make up, the film embodies everything good about '80s horror. The plot is simple, a scientist (Jeff Goldblum) working on a teleportation device decides one drunken night to test it on himself, everything seemingly goes to plan until strange changes start to appear on the scientists body. It is revealed that a fly had got into the machine with the scientist and the computer responsible for teleporting the object fused the two, the man and the fly, together.

Choosing to look primarily on how the deformation of Brundle, the scientist, affects his once blossoming relationship with Veronica (Geena Davis), Cronenberg focuses heavily on characters in the film, ignoring the cheap scares and pointless horror that is featured in many other films of the same genre. Cronenberg uses the transformation of Brundle's physical appearance, from handsome man in a suit to a beast that the audience struggles to look at without wincing, as a representation of his connection with Veronica. The interest thereby comes in two forms, one, in the repulsive features of the changed Brundle, a physical display of horror, and two, the lack of humanity that is evident in the way he speaks, walks and thinks. We do not question Veronica's fear of the new Brundle as we have the exact same fear within ourselves when he comes on screen, Cronenberg masterfully puts viewers in the shoes of the female character, forcing them to forget the passionate, human, scientist we once watched and focusing on what can only be described as an animal. Using horror as a form of telling the story and allowing the audience to understand characters more, the film chooses narrative as a priority over scares, something that relates directly to the success of the film, in my opinion.

The script is written, with many quotable phrases featured, "Be afraid. Be very afraid.", and perfectly combining science fiction and horror, showing off the new technology of the '80s and also the advancements of prosthetics. This film attempts to hammer the final nail into the coffin of horror films made previously to The Fly, screaming "Welcome to the '80s" at the top of it's lungs, we see a huge contrast in this film to the popular horrors of the '70s, with The Exorsist, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Halloween appearing to be worlds away from a film such as this. Aside from the advancements in technology shown both in the film and through the camerawork, the lack of discretion regarding the graphicness of the attacks shown in the film also proves Cronenberg wanted to set this film apart from the rest. In mainstream cinema, people would have been, and perhaps still are, discomforted by bones sticking out of wrists and baboons being blown to bits, but Cronenberg was aware of the advancements of cinema and the new features that were available in regards to special effects and camera tricks. No rating was going to stop him from displaying the possibilities of the developing film form, and with the film going straight to an 18 rating in the UK and an R rating in the US, no rating did stop him. 'If we could now show bones breaking and baboons exploding, the people should be able to watch bones breaking and baboons exploding' seems to be the mentality he went for in regards to the more graphic side of the film.

This film is really, really important in regards to the development of the horror film as we know it. With a strong plot and a clever mind behind the whole project, the film is a lot of fun to watch, featuring 'cover your eye' moments and laugh out loud moments, the film is a staple in any horror fan's collection.

The Conjuring - Review

It appears that James Wan took every single cliche feature of every horror film of the past 20 years, put them in a large mixing bowl, added a shitty script and some half-assed acting and put it in the oven to bake for 112 minutes. The cake we receive at the end of the running time is burnt, bland and tasteless. Excuse the metaphor, but it's the only thing that I felt could liven up this review that is quite frankly going to slate the entire film.

Directing such great horror films as Insidious and Saw, James Wan should have the genre completely sussed out. With these two films, I felt genuine respect for the director, they were ground breaking plot wise and really, really scary, with The Conjuring, however, I don't think I've ever been so disappointed whilst watching a film- perhaps an overstatement but anyway, lets continue. With a sold out cinema on a tuesday night several weeks into the film's release, everybody in the theatre was giddy when the opening titles played, awkwardly laughing in order to hide their nerves from their friends or their dates. The awkward laughter quickly turned to full fledged hilarity before the film had even hit half of the running time. The predictable 'scares' (if they can be called that), attempts at creating dramatic tension along with the plot taking itself far too seriously meant that the once nervous crowd had to remind themselves that this film wasn't a joke throughout. I, myself, felt like checking my phone half way through the feature just to clarify that this wasn't a parody of every shitty horror film ever made. Sadly, it wasn't.

Disregarding the fact that it was based on a true story, the character's were too many for the audience to even try and feel a connection to any one of them during the 1 hour 50 minutes of the film, meaning the connection, or lack thereof, we were meant to share with these characters, only identifiable through the fact we are of the same species, rendered the psychological horror aspects of the film useless. I did not care about a single character in this film, in fact, I was hoping a few of them would die off in order for me to possibly remember the names of some of them, sadly my wishes weren't granted. Without psychological scares, we are left with jump scares, and jump scares only to scare us, and giving them the credit they deserve, there were a few shouts from unsuspecting audience members who had quite clearly never seen a horror film before and were not aware of the lack of originality in the build up to these events, but for the most part, there were no surprises in the hands, faces and slamming doors meant to shock viewers.

Following another of the popular features of horror at the moment, The Conjuring uses home video cameras in order to give us a more edgy view of the events occurring. Whether the effect of these clips was to make us feel more intimate with the characters and closer to the events occurring, or whether they were used in order to give the audience a genuine headache (only one of which was effective), I don't know, however the only thing displayed to me through this feature was once again the unoriginality of the whole project.

I understand the one sided-ness of this review, but I honestly cannot remember any redeeming qualities the film offered besides the ending, which I thought was shot so poignantly and was moving, it's a shame that I had no interest in any of the character's well beings after I had just sat through almost two hours of garbage. The film is full of cheap thrills and is no different from any of the other bad horror films being produced at the moment, therefore it is not to say that people who enjoyed films such as The Purge or Texas Chainsaw 3D will not be mind blown by this feature, but for me, it didn't really cut it. Perhaps my expectations were too high from the director's previous works and the circulating reviews I happened to read before watching it, or perhaps I am missing something that most other bloggers and critics are picking up on, the fact of the matter is that I gained nothing from watching this film except a whole lot of laughter.

(I do really, really, dislike writing bad reviews and will rarely post on a film that I saw no good in, but before I went and watched The Conjuring I was dead set on writing something about it because I was expecting something so brilliant, but go and see the film, watch it and make your own mind up, prove me wrong, tell me about all the ways in which the film excited you, scared you and was original, I am such an open minded person that I enjoy listening and reading other people's views on the film).

My letterbox'd review summarises this post for those who did not read it all:

Midnight in Paris - Review

A writer's wet dream come true, in Midnight in Paris, Gil (Owen Wilson), a screenwriter and hopeful novelist is holidaying in Paris with his fiancé and her family. When, on a stroll around the midnight streets of the city, he is invited into a car full of people and taken to a party, he quickly realises he has travelled back in time to his image of the 'Golden Age', 1920s Paris. Partying with Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald, meeting Ernest Hemingway, Luis Buñuel, Salvador Dali and Man Ray in a bar and having Gertrude Stein critique his writing whilst arguing with Pablo Picasso, Gil is having the time of his life, which continues when he meets, and is attracted to, Adriana, a French girl living in the 20s. When the confusion of living in two moments in time becomes too much and they start interfering with each other, Gil is forced to choose between the time of his life or his real life.

The originality and playfulness of the script is one of the main factors which makes this film as enjoyable as it is. I'm sure Woody Allen had the most fun of his career re-writing historical figures to be just like any other characters in his film, and the relationships between the fictional characters, that is, those made completely from Allen's imagination, and the characters based on important artists and author's, is humbling, showing a humanisation of these names that are drilled into all of us during our time at school. Our knowledge of the figures presented prior to the film is a pulling factor in regards to us wanting to know more about them as minor characters on Gil's journey, and the addition of them to the plot allows Allen to make a point regarding our illusions of these figures as perfect examples of artists and novelists, our idealised visions of their lives are smashed instantly with suicide attempts and affairs, history is well and truly being rewritten.

The Fitzgeralds.

The film opens with a series of shots of Paris, and it seems that throughout the film there is always a constant infatuation with the beauty of the city. Be it the architecture and the cafes, or the creatively minded type of people which Paris attracts, the film never tires of the location, presenting itself, as well as Gil, as a love-stricken tourist. The cinematography is beautiful also, the lavish parties are presented as whimsical and dream-like, making the viewers second-guess the validity of the things we are seeing, therefore by default we appreciate Gil's lack of understanding of his new environment. 

Rachel McAdams plays Inez, Gil's fiancé who is very in touch with reality, her performance is not entirely breathtaking but believable, and the lack of any real interest in her character brings the audience to feel sympathetic towards Gil, a creatively minded person who's not taken seriously by the people closest to him. The most memorable performances are those of the actors playing historical figures. Tom Hiddleston plays a kind F. Scott Fitzgerald, Corey Stoll a witty and drunk Ernest Hemingway and Adrien Brody the eccentric Salvador Dali.

The film breaks down the modern person's created image of past eras and bluntly discourages ideological thinking, emphasising that history continually repeats itself, people, in years to come, will look at our generation as the perfect one to live in, however what Allen states with this film is that each era faces the same problems, we are all human and will always have our flaws, cheating on partners, alcoholism and suicide are eternal traits of our characters. The film is a really interesting watch, exploring both the troubles of creating art in the modern world and also that of the world in which a lot of our inspiration comes from, it is humbling to think about the wider themes the film presents, set in a romantic comedy following a troubled couple holiday in Paris.

Se7en - Review

Mills (Brad Pitt) and Somerset (Morgan Freeman)'s detective skills are put to the ultimate test in Se7en, when a serial killer seemingly targets random victims, torturing them and playing with their deaths. It is not until after several murders that the detectives realise the killer is murdering people for the sins they commit. Keen on enlightening the detectives, and anyone who will listen to him, of people around the city every day committing some of the seven deadly sins, the serial killer (an uncredited Kevin Spacey) feels he is doing no wrong in forcing death upon these sinners. It takes all that the detectives have, and playing by his rules, to catch up to the murderer who appears to be constantly one step ahead of them, and when they do catch up to him, with two sinners left to complete a murder for each on the list, an unexpected twist presents itself to Mills and Somerset.

David Fincher has proved himself able to produce brilliant thrillers with the likes of Fight Club and Zodiac, however before both of these films came Se7en. Se7en shows Fincher becoming comfortable in directing a film with an ever-twisting plot, which would become key when directing the likes of Fight Club. With it being only his second ever feature film, the raw talent of Fincher is evident, it seems he has mastered dramatic tension and capturing the emotion of a character just two films in to his career. The film features one of my favourite chase scenes of all time, between John Doe and Mills, from the initial shot of John Doe's gun to the final blow of his crow bar, the chase is fast paced, the gun shots are many and a feeling of genuine excitement consumes viewers. The 'thriller' genre has never been so literal, with just the right amount of drama and just the right amount of action, we are engaged on an emotional level with the characters, yet still get to see them go about their business, dealing with the murdered and the murderer.

A constant uneasiness surrounds the character of John Doe, the murderer, his unpredictable actions and seemingly unstable mind puts genuine fear in the audience and where the two detectives mask their discomfort, the viewer finds it hard to, with Spacey's absolutely outstanding performance, his smug look, high intelligence and distorted morals make it hard for us to identify as the same species as him. Spacey proves himself to be a chameleon actor, able to take on the shape and persona of any character thrown at him, and his performance in Se7en is no exception.
The relationship between Mills and Somerset comes across so natural that you would think Brad Pitt and Morgan Freeman were both stubborn work colleagues outside of the film. The build up of tension and little remarks given off by the characters are done with such ease that the relationship is easy to believe and invest in.

Se7en is a film that is hard to write about. The pure brilliance of the seamless overall film leaves even the most attentive viewer too deeply involved in the characters and the plot to make many mental notes regarding criticism of the film. The plot is thick, the acting is brilliant and David Fincher's sophomore film is still one of his best to date. Se7en is a truly exciting film and climbs itself straight to the top end of films in the thriller genre.

Dial M For Murder - Review

There are some Hitchcock films that are often ignored by a lot of people in favour of focusing attention on his bigger budget, box office record smashing films, Dial M for Murder is one of these forgotten gems. Set mainly in one single room, the film sees Tony Wendice (Ray Milland) enlist the help of an old college friend, Captain Lesgate (Anthony Dawson), to murder his wife, Margot (Grace Kelly). When the murder doesn't go quite to plan, and Margot ends up killing Lesgate, Wendice must think fast in order to cover his tracks, and what we get is a cat and mouse chase in a typically suspenseful Hitchcock style feature.

The biggest topic for discussion regarding this film is the extremely thick plot, which was adapted from the play by Frederick Knott. The many twists and turns of the plot are presented to us throughout the whole 1 hour and 45 minutes of screen time that the film runs for, showing Hitchcock's understanding of pacing and how not to overwhelm and audience with information. The plot twists are very often unseen, and the characters, specifically the Inspector, (John Williams) have more knowledge on the events of the night of the murder than the viewer, even though we were the ones that witnessed the deed happening. The murder is meticulously planned out in the film by Wendice, in order to inform Lesgate, and the audience, of the way in which the events should pan out, meaning that when, on the night of the attack, things don't really go to plan, we are already full of suspense over what position Wendice will find himself in and how he will deal with it.

With the remorselessness of Wendice sending shivers down viewer's spines, Ray Milland's performance was brilliant as the sadistic brain behind the murder. Grace Kelly, although being a minor character in terms of how often we see her, shows her perfect fit to the role of the Hitchcock blonde in this film. Her innocence is captured through her lack of awareness of her husband's manipulative side, the audience is immediately sympathetic towards her, even though she is in fact flawed, cheating on her husband with Halliday, however we discover that in Hitchcock's world, there is rarely an unflawed character and therefore should not show contempt for people's flaws, it is only when people's evil is shown that we should express out contempt. The casting for this feature was great, with the actors giving just enough performance so the realism and excitement of the investigation is relatable and not viewed as too much.

Dial M for Murder is definitely not one of Hitchcock's films to skip. Whatever simplicity Hitchcock chose to go with in regards to the technical side of the film and the cinematography is overrun by the winding plot and diverse range of characters, where we are genuinely at a loss as to where the film will go next. A masterpiece of '50s cinema, this film is an example of Hitchcock at his best and most comfortable.

Only God Forgives - Review

After his brother dies, Julian (Gosling) a drug dealer, is confronted by his mother, Crystal (Kristin Scott Thomas), and pushed to seek revenge on his brother's murderer. Choosing not to go ahead with the revenge initially, we see a divide in the family, with Crystal confident that she can find someone else to do the job. However, when countless murders happen and Crystal realises she is alone without protection, she chooses to beg one last time for her son's protection and an end to the trouble.

There was, and still is, a lot of controversy around the latest feature from Danish director Nicolas Winding Refn, with reports that the film was booed at Cannes along with many other negative comments made, it seemed like fans of Refn were expecting a sequel to Drive, his last collaboration with Ryan Gosling, who stars in Only God Forgives, and what viewers got was anything but that.

The film is influenced by avant garde cinema, but too much so to be considered a masterpiece by violence and action fans, yet is also too violent and linear to be considered avant garde, leaving the film in a limbo between genres, and the limbo where it resides is where I feel people's discomfort and dislike of the film comes from. Rather than take the film for what it is, which, in my opinion, is a piece of work that transcends genre boundaries all together, people want a defined piece of work, they want to be told what they are watching and what other films it is similar to, they want comparisons, one word descriptions and a star-rated system, the fact that Refn gives his audience ambiguity in all corners of the film shows the respect he holds for the intelligence of the viewers. The film is set in the East and the majority of viewers are from the West, the underground world of Bangkok in which we are viewing is meant to seem alien to us, this unfamiliarity of culture is mirrored in the unfamiliarity of the film's style, the differences from films set in Westernised countries is meant to detach us from the location, making it seem that bit more dangerous and unknown. It is with this that the film has been misunderstood, people had expectations for the film as opposed to an open mind and their ability to pass judgement on the film as a stand alone piece is tainted by the hauntings of Drive, two years after it was released.

Every single shot of the film looks like it could be framed and put in an art museum, the amount of beauty in each frame is breathtaking, the line "Time to meet the Devil" is spoken at the beginning of the film, making us aware of the nightmare journey we are about to embark on, but slow motion effects are used, making the film seem a lot softer than most dark films, it is a nightmare shot in the style of a dream.

The film's pacing is a little slow, shots are held for long periods of time in order to build tension, with the action and violence not taking up too much screen time, but being memorable when it does for the sheer brutality of it. Along with the pacing not being at super-speed like most thrillers, dialogue is not heavy at all, either, with Refn taking the approach of quality, not quantity. Gosling's character speaks a mere 22 lines throughout the whole 90 minute film. As said previously, the film does not spoon feed information, it requires a close eye and presents the majority of information visually, which is a real pleasure to watch in a time when I feel most director's take for granted the actual ability that a camera has.

Nicolas Winding Refn has definitely proved himself as a force to be reckoned with in the world of indie cinema, with his next feature set for release in 2015, we can only wait and see the direction that the director will take. With Only God Forgives, he has presented himself as one of the top young directors of our generation, making the films that other director's are too afraid to risk making and pushing the limits of cinema as an art form.

Nosferatu Review

Nosferatu is a must watch for fans of horror and/or vampires. Released in 1922, we see Count Orlok showing his interest in purchasing a residence in the city of Wisborg, and Thomas Hutter, and estate agent, having to leave his wife to go and confirm Orlok's request. Orlok, who is soon found out by Hutter to be a Nosferatu (a vampire), sets his sights on Hutter's wife, who is having nightmares and fever-ish conditions caused by Orlok. When Orlok disappears from his home in the 'Land of the Phantoms', Hutter realises that his hometown may be at risk, and what follows is the journey of both men back to Wisborg.

Modern Horror films have shown us that fear can be created through violent murder scenes and that gore is essential in any attack, Nosferatu, an example of a classic horror film, uses nothing of the kind. The horror element of the film comes from what we don't see. When there has been an attack, we are only given a glimpse into the aftermath of the event, seeing the bite marks on the neck of the victim and using our imagination to figure out the ways in which Orlok would have attacked these innocent people, which can be much more gore-filled than any of the modern horror films in theatres today. The appearance and characteristics of Count Orlok, his dark eyes and the fact he is constantly emerging from the darkness, also add to the fear element of the film. The extended shadows of Orlok's eyes combined with his gaunt face add an undead-like appearance to the character, his long, thin body seems almost inhumanely giant when next to the average sized Hutter, and the power in which he holds is evident even when the focus is not on him.

Cross cutting is effectively used in this film to create tension in the audience, we will be set up with a scenario that is going to be horrifying and then the film will cut away to something less dramatic, but with the dramatic scene still lodged in the forefront of our mind, it is as if we had never cut away. A factor that I have always enjoyed and felt added to my fear of Orlok, and one that may not be intentional by director FW Murnau, is the lack of clarity of shots. As the film form had only been around for just over 25 years at the time this film was released, the camera for motion picture was obviously not highly developed, leading to some of the shots being too dark to make out much else than one or two things, this lack of knowing the location being shown puts the audience in an alien environment and therefore an uncomfortable situation, mirroring the trapped position of those being targeted by Orlock.

As the film fits in to the German Expressionist movement, the use of lighting and shadows is key in the film. Elongated shadows of Orlok, with his claw-like hands and his long nose, are key shots in which viewers remember and associate with the film. The moment where Orlok is ascending the stairs in order to reach Hutter's wife, where we only see him by his shadow, is an iconic moment not only in the German Expressionist movement, but in film history as a whole. The constant playful techniques that directors of this movement used make the films so much more fun to watch than modern ones focusing on jump scares and CGI gore.
The film is a delight to watch and comparing Nosferatu to horror films from the past few years such as the remake of Evil Dead and the likes of Saw shows just how much change and development has happened in both audience expectations of horror films and also in the way they are produced. The film is a well-rounded, tense horror film, with a few problems regarding pacing along the way, however the interesting style makes up for what it lacks in the weaker parts of the script and the overall outcome of the film is one that is most definitely a classic in every sense of the word.

The Darjeeling Limited Review

Wes Anderson is one of the most exciting auteurs of our generation. It seems that each of his films have a certain life given to them that some directors will try their whole life to achieve, The Darjeeling Limited is an example of a film effortlessly thriving with just that excitement and life. 
This 2007 feature tells of three brothers (played by: Adrien Brody, Jason Schwartzman & Owen Wilson) who are travelling around India in order to regain the bond that they lost the previous year when their father died. After numerous failed spiritual trips and a disruption to their travel plans, the three men find themselves in rural India, and after a fatal accident involving a small child, regrow their bond in places they never thought they would.

The cinematography in this film is stunning, with Robert Yeoman, a long time collaborator with Anderson, responsible. The creative placement of the camera in some shots makes a change from the thousands upon thousands of soulless manufactured films that are released each year and neglect the creative possibilities of the art form. Films directed by Wes Anderson are instantly recognisable as being created by someone who is in love with cinema, Anderson has found actors and crew that get his style of production, and it works for him, allowing him to try interesting camera techniques and the likes with a crew of people who have faith in him. The cinematography is complemented by the breathtaking landscape of both urban and rural India. The shots of the built up areas of India show us bustling towns filled with market stalls and eccentric characters, with quick and snappy camera work, while the exceptional natural beauty of rural India is shown through slow motion editing and less dramatic pans and tilts.

The casting of this film was also a positive, with the three lead actors brilliantly conveying emotions of pent-up frustration through as much as a glance. Owen Wilson's performance sticks out as prime of the three, however whether this is due to his character seemingly being more developed in the writing process than the others or whether his acting abilities add the development to the character, I don't know, but he gave a brilliant performance as the surrogate parent to his brothers and the hilariously deluded figure of reason. The lack of a shining star performance by Brody and Schwartzman coincides with their character's emotional troubles back home, their slightly reserved personalities in comparison to their brother's adds almost a divide to the group, creating tension at even the slightest disagreement on the train, all of this is intentional and brilliant.

The film combines really dark themes such as death and grief with some of the most laugh out loud comedy. With many quotable moments, the film perfectly balances having a substantially moving plot with breaks for laughs and cries, which I feel a lot of films struggle to do, with a lot of recent films focusing too much on the ability to make the audience laugh than to engage with them through narrative. I think it may even be my favourite thing about Wes Anderson, his ability to perfectly balance his films, the moments with music are just enough for the audience to listen to the lyrics and take a message from it, the moments of slow motion are just enough for viewers to admire the framing, the actions of the characters of even just the technical ability of the modern camera.

Wes Anderson's films have just enough of everything you could want, and The Darjeeling Limited is a perfect example in support of this statement.

Ghost World Review

Enid (Thora Birch) and Rebecca (Scarlett Johannson), two recent high school graduates, are bored with their summer after finishing high school. Enid is forced to take a remedial art class in order to graduate whilst Rebecca works in a coffee shop, earning money for the apartment that the two girls have always said they would get after school. All is normal until the girls find a posting in the newspaper from Seymour (Steve Buscemi) and decide to play a prank on him, after the prank, Enid becomes interested in Seymour and wants to find out more. The film shows Enid and Rebecca's friendship drift apart whilst hers and Seymour's strengthens.

If you have been on websites such as Tumblr or Twitter, you have most likely seen pictures of, or quotes by the character of Enid. Having being propelled into a cult icon due to her quirky personality which is matched in her sense of dress and her hilarious misanthropist personality, it very quickly feels like this film should have been called The Enid Show or something along those lines, with Rebecca being a fairly bland character who I never really felt any interest in. Although it can seem a little bit too try-hard at times, the character of Enid is a fun one who is relatable in a sense and exaggerates all of the teen angst we all once felt, or feel now, or are to feel in the future.

The film is an adaptation of a comic book of the same name by Daniel Clowes, which is obvious in the general style of the film. The colours used in this film are bright, mostly coming from Enid's adventurous hair and clothing, however the settings are also extremely playful and interesting to watch, with Enid's bedroom and the diner being the two most memorable locations. A lot of the characters are two dimensional, perhaps because of their stems from a comic book or perhaps because of director Terry Zwigoff's adaptations of them, I have not read the graphic novel and therefore cannot comment on the reasons why they appear to be shallow and have no real qualities, all I can say is that they do. Rebecca is a shell of a human, with the only thing we really see her do being working and being a shadow to Enid, who is pretty much the opposite of her. Seymour, who I know is not featured as a major character in the graphic novel, is a character who Enid is obsessed with, however this interest is not mirrored in the audience, with his character just being there and not provoking any real response from viewers.

I just felt while watching the film that it was missing something. Perhaps I will read the graphic novel and then be able to make more sense of the director's intentions in making this film, however in a stand alone film, I don't think this should be necessary in order to fully enjoy the feature. The plot is stagnant, the only thing interesting is Enid and her failing relationships, and the films attempt at a thought provoking ending fails quite miserably. The film was interesting in regards to the style, however it doesn't go much further than that, I'm afraid.

Annie Hall Review

Annie Hall is often considered to be Woodie Allen's best work. It revolves around the rocky relationship between Alvy Hall, played by Allen, and Annie Hall, played by Diane Keaton. We see the couple live their day to day life in New York, take a trip to Los Angeles and... not much else, really.

It appears to me that the film was missing a plot. The film feels like a collection of home videos thrown together in chronological order, and although interesting to watch, there is a sense of emptiness about the whole film, especially once the ending is revealed. This lack of story is almost mimicked in Annie Hall's lack of ability to connect with Alvy on an intellectual level. It appears that as we are watching the film, and realising that a good plot is vital in sustaining an audience's attention, Alvy is realising that intellect in a partner is vital in sustaining a relationship and understanding a pessimist such as himself. Perhaps the intellect is in the script of a film, and if so, Allen chose a beautiful way to get across his message, however, as the film was originally intended to be a murder mystery but the idea got dropped last minute, it seems to me that this is not the case.

Don't get me wrong, the film was enjoyable to watch, perhaps due to the fact that it only runs for an hour and a half, and the quirky character of Alvy is hilariously easy to relate to. His exaggerated misanthropist opinions make for great comedy, and nobody I can think of would fit the role of Alvy more than Woody Allen himself. We listen to him and relate to what he is saying, be it through his bluntly honest opinions on Sylvia Plath, and the 'college generation' readers of her poetry, his opinions of the two states of being, the miserable and the horrible,  or his flashback to his school days.

The most interesting feature of the film is the way it shows its awareness of the differences between the film world and the real world. Alvy actually states "If only this was real life" to the camera, and frequently turns, breaking the fourth wall, and showing us his feelings, he is aware that he is only a character in a film, it appears. We see him visit his school class back in the days when he was a student, with him, a fully grown man, sitting at his desk and arguing with the teacher, and also taking Annie and Rob back to his childhood home, in a time where his parents are arguing and there is a party going on. Allen is aware of the possibilities of the film form and uses them interestingly and engagingly.

The camerawork of the film is remniscent of indie cinema. The use of natural lighting, off-screen space and sometimes handheld camerawork allows us to feel that New York is not the concrete jungle that sits thousands of miles away, but a reachable place that contains people just like those from our own towns and cities. Split screens are used for comparisons and superimposition is used to represent Annie's lack of mental interest in sex, the technicalities of the film are done very straight forwardly, which works, I don't think it was Allen's goal to achieve any groundbreaking technical work on this film, he wanted to create memorable characters, and that he did.

I did really like this film, the performances were brilliant and a definite highlight for me. The film collected awards upon awards at the Oscars and the BAFTAs back in 1977, and for a reason, an extremely quirky romantic comedy with laugh out loud scenes, this film is hilarious and a pleasure to watch.

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.

Coraline Review

If there is any film that cements one of my older posts about animation being not only for children (found here), it is Henry Selick's Coraline, a dark, stop-motion 3D animated film released in 2009. In the film, Coraline is a young girl who moves to a new, secluded house, bring her loneliness and through that, boredom. When she finds a door in her house that leads to an alternate version of her world, including improved versions of her parents and neighbours, everything seems perfect. That is, however, until she discovers the dark secrets that this alternate world holds and has to fight to get back what she realises she really loves.

Selick has proved that he is a master of animation, presenting us with wonderful The Nightmare before Christmas back in 1993, and his experience in the field is shown, with the dark and mysterious world in which Coraline lives being eerily intriguing to the viewer. The film is extremely self aware, also, playing around with the possibilities of animation in terms of creating and erasing the world in which the characters are exploring. The numerous shots of characters against blank white backgrounds shows us as an audience just how much work goes in to creating every little detail, and allows us to appreciate the art and the artists involved as we return to the stylised backgrounds of the 'other' world.

Through the films focus on Coraline as a lead character, we get to know her extremely well. Constantly misinterpreted, from her blue hair, her unique sense of style and her being frequently called Caroline by almost everyone, we feel sympathy towards the character, almost finding happiness in the way she is treated in the other world. With Coraline entering the other world and discovering that everything she could ever want is there, as an audience, we are instantly suspicious of this new world and suspect almost instantly that it holds danger, and we aren't wrong.

The villain is awesome, the story is awesome and the art is even more awesome. Derived from a graphic novel of the same name, Coraline, is a beautifully haunting portrayal of what can happen when the dark side of our imaginations are let loose.

With the dark themes and the even darker characters, Coraline would have scared the life out of me as a child. As an adult, I was able to appreciate the visionary genius of Henry Selick's directing and uniqueness of this animated feature compared to almost any other film I've seen. Selick is definitely a director to watch, with his latest feature The Shadow King in pre-production, it could be several years before a new film is released, however, I am confident it will be worth the wait.

Hitchcock's Shadow of a Doubt

A young woman from a small-town family in Santa Rosa is ecstatic at the news that her Uncle Charlie is coming to stay with them for a while. Everything goes swimmingly until a pair of detectives come over posing as government workers taking a survey and the suggestion that her uncle is an infamous serial killer is placed upon young Charlie. Relationships are tested and secrets are revealed in this brilliant piece of cinema from Alfred Hitchcock.

In Shadow of a Doubt, we can see that Hitchcock was beginning to discover his love for the trope of the 'wrong man'. Hitch showed extremely early on in his career that he had an interest in the scenario of a man being wrongly accused of his crime with The Lodger (1927), however what we get with Shadow of a Doubt, which was produced 16 years later, is a film so much more engaging and an example of the amount of progress that Hitchcock had made due to the experience of directing 27 feature films in that time period. The 'wrong man' trope is used off-screen in this film, which is interesting as Hitchcock has mirrored the characters in focus in his films such as The 39 Steps, where we follow a man who is wrongly accused, in Shadow of a Doubt, we follow the right man who is being pursued for the murder just as the wrong man is, somewhere else in the off-screen world of the diegesis.

Experimentation can be seen in all of Hitchcock's work and the key features of Shadow of a Doubt include canted shots, suggesting the character in frame to have an unstable mindset as he is pacing up and down the room, along with causing a feeling of uneasiness in the audience. This is where Hitchcock's brilliance lies, he knows how to experiment with film without screaming it in his audience's faces and therefore taking away from the meaning behind the experimentation. His innovational use of the camera in presenting a certain mood are used infrequently and it is there that the magic lies.
We can see that Hitchcock really grasped the knowledge that music is the perfect form of art to collaborate with film in order to create certain moods in this feature. With blaring orchestral music playing during the build-up of, and throughout, the dramatic moments of the film, we associate this music with danger in our subconscious, so when it is played quietly during the less dramatic moments of the film, we are still clinging on to our seats in fear that something is going to happen. Hitchcock would go on in his career to realise that music can make or break a film, with the screeching string soundtrack of his 1960 masterpiece, Psycho, being embedded into any viewers ears for a long time after leaving the cinema or turning the television off.

There is a certain brilliance to Alfred Hitchcock's films which one rarely finds in thrillers anymore. Hitch's understanding of the ins and outs of cinema, due to his involvement since the beginning of the mass production of films, is something that has been attempted to be replicated by other director's but has not ever been as brilliant, think Psycho II, Psycho III, or even the Gus van Sant remake of Psycho. Watching a Hitchcock film is truly a delight, even in the modern day, where technology can simulate tigers out of absolutely nothing and destroy the city of New York in post-production, there is nothing, for me, like sitting back and watching a director master the art with as much ease as it appears Hitchcock did.