I went to see Fame. Yes mock me all you want.
It sucked. I wish I had something more to say, but apart from the dancing (which is hugely impressive, especially a Fosse-like number done to Sam Sparro's Black and Gold) it was terrible.
I mean, how can you actually have a Fame movie and not actually have a big, electric film-halting set-piece to the main tune (the remake weirdly echoes many of the other scenes from the first film so it wasn't an attempt at originality)?
I think it also highlights just how good the original Fame movie was. It was gritty, raw and adult in ways that this film can't even begin to contemplate. It gave a sense of the real sacrifices of these kids. Yes it was soapy and melodramatic, but Alan Parker was a true film musical genius (Fame, The Commitments and Evita are tremendous pieces of entertainment) and he found a style that reinvigorated the hackneyed back-stage cliches of the script.
I love musicals. I can forgive a lot for watching the simply joy of people singing and dancing on screen. But Fame never justifies itself as a remake or a re-imagining of a film. The great thing about Fame is that the concept itself is clean and simple - follow a group of kids through their years at a performing arts highschool. There are all sorts of ways that you can have fun and develop it. Fame manages to fuck it up consistently.
What a shame
Monday, 28 September 2009
Wednesday, 23 September 2009
I'm starting to feel old...
I was going to write a post on the death of one of the greatest pop bands of the last 10 years.
But sometimes you just have to bow to somebody who did it better. Glenn from StalepopcornAU gets at why this is something of the end of an era for people who loved classy pop. Like Glenn, Sugababes were one of the first pop bands that I unabashedly and publicly loved. Though after 10 years they no longer seemed quite as fresh as they once did, at their best, they were the best.
And though it may be jumping the gun, PopJustice's nicely worded tirade about the pictures of the WannabeSugababe's video is also worth reading.
Sunday, 20 September 2009
Away We Go
I feel a little sorry for Sam Mendes. I mean, yes, he is a revered theatre director. He won an Oscar with his first film. And he is married to The Divine Kate Winslet (the bastard!).
But like his sadly missed compatriot Anthony Minghella, he seems to have slipped into the realm of Critical Derision. After praising him so lavishly for American Beauty, it now appears to be the fashion to throw feces at whatever he does. Revolutionary Road got some of pretty nasty, dismissive reviews, and you could feel some critics wanting to use the film to tear Mendes down rather then give an honest reaction (I thought the film was very very good but certainly had its faults).
Away We Go was released in the States at the beginning of the Summer and did nice business but was largely dismissed by reviewers. It won't change the world, but I thought this film had a great deal of charm, and showed Mendes working in a freer, more emotionally relaxed style that surprised and delighted me.
The film is quite novelistic in a way (which isn't surprising as it is written by novelists Vendela Vida and Dave Eggers) - rootless parents-to-be Maya Rudolph and John Krasinski go on a road trip and encounter a series of horrific or heartbreaking family types. As a piece of writing, nothing about this film will really surprise you, and some of the characters are grostesques that don't really work.
But what does undoubtedly work is the central couple. Burt and Verona are a happy couple. They don't have any hidden pain. They are open, honest and loving to one another. This is hugely refreshing - their scenes together are nicely understated and realistic, while their moments of clarity are at once simple and rendered with admirable emotional truth. This is where the skill of Vida and Eggers comes through clearest. Besides exploring the fear of starting a family, Away We Go is also a film about people who they have got to a certain age only to end up slightly lost. At one point, Verona asks Burt "Are we fuck ups?" and that line, and the world of emotion it expresses rang completely true to me.
Krasinski and Rudolph are ultimately the reason to see this. Krasinski is sweet and charming and his chemistry with Rudolph is completely believable. They share a moment in a train bunk bed which reminds me of a remarkable scene from Eternal Sunshine where each of the women discuss their fears about how they look. However, it is Rudolph who ultimately is the soul of the piece. She is virtually unknown over here but gives the piece its gravity and depth. Mendes once again proves that he is one of the best directors that an actor could wish for.
What is more surprising is how loose and enjoyable the film was. After the marital Armageddon of Revolutionary Road, Away We Go seems to vibrate with a desire for Mendes to show a partnership of emotional and intellectual equals. Verona and Burt aren't asked to overcome enormous and melodramatic personal demons. They merely recognise in each other the person they want to be with. Their modern, egalitarian take on relationships feels almost entirely different to anything else I have seen on screen for so long and lends Away We Go its power.
Friday, 18 September 2009
Gleeful
Sometimes there seems to be so many exciting TV shows coming out of the states that I am not sure quite where to start. I mean, I haven’t watched Mad Men, The Wire, or most of The Sopranos. I am only one season through 30 Rock and have yet to watch a single episode of Arrested Development. I am a confessed Joss Whedon fanatic and I still haven’t watched a blinkin’ episode of Dollhouse!!
Yet I can’t see that happening with the new show Glee, a taste of which I got over the summer with the first episode. Seriously, it’s almost like somebody sat down and designed the show to appeal to me. It’s set in a highschool. It can be wickedly cruel and satirical about the students, teachers and their relationships. It has singing and crazy dance routines that manage to convey the sheer joy of performing even if the material itself is a piss-take!!
And yet it also understands that as preposterous as it can appear, things such as a school show choir matter when you’re that age. Everything matters when you’re that age.
The drama group I was with for most of my childhood is having a 50th anniversary celebration back home in Cork this weekend. I can’t tell you the amount of hours that myself and my friends spent in classes, rehearsing and performing during my childhood and teenage years. The hours spent dissecting our work, criticising those who got the better roles and dreaming of blinded by a solo spotlight. Getting that amazing, tingly feeling when you realised that a performance wasn’t just going well, but was connecting with those on the other side. The sheer euphoria of doing something you loved and doing it well.
I miss that. The further away I have got from it, the more I realise how much fun it was and how much it changed me for the better. I knew it was geeky. I often died when somebody who didn’t get it mocked me for it in school. But in the end, I didn’t give a shit. Once I was on stage, I was untouchable.
That’s why I am looking forward to Glee. From what I have seen of it so far, the show manages to balance what could be a corrosively nasty wit with a genuine sense of bliss and a touching investment in the delirium of these kids. I hope they keep that balance going (Bring it On is an excellent example of a film which consistently rips the piss out of its characters but manages to do so in a completely loving way).
I mean, any show that teases with something as amazing as this has to be worth my time…
Yet I can’t see that happening with the new show Glee, a taste of which I got over the summer with the first episode. Seriously, it’s almost like somebody sat down and designed the show to appeal to me. It’s set in a highschool. It can be wickedly cruel and satirical about the students, teachers and their relationships. It has singing and crazy dance routines that manage to convey the sheer joy of performing even if the material itself is a piss-take!!
And yet it also understands that as preposterous as it can appear, things such as a school show choir matter when you’re that age. Everything matters when you’re that age.
The drama group I was with for most of my childhood is having a 50th anniversary celebration back home in Cork this weekend. I can’t tell you the amount of hours that myself and my friends spent in classes, rehearsing and performing during my childhood and teenage years. The hours spent dissecting our work, criticising those who got the better roles and dreaming of blinded by a solo spotlight. Getting that amazing, tingly feeling when you realised that a performance wasn’t just going well, but was connecting with those on the other side. The sheer euphoria of doing something you loved and doing it well.
I miss that. The further away I have got from it, the more I realise how much fun it was and how much it changed me for the better. I knew it was geeky. I often died when somebody who didn’t get it mocked me for it in school. But in the end, I didn’t give a shit. Once I was on stage, I was untouchable.
That’s why I am looking forward to Glee. From what I have seen of it so far, the show manages to balance what could be a corrosively nasty wit with a genuine sense of bliss and a touching investment in the delirium of these kids. I hope they keep that balance going (Bring it On is an excellent example of a film which consistently rips the piss out of its characters but manages to do so in a completely loving way).
I mean, any show that teases with something as amazing as this has to be worth my time…
Monday, 14 September 2009
Let the Right One In - The Novel
I will be forever grateful to my friend Therese for lots of things. Firstly, just for being such a good friend to me. Secondly, for actually challenging me about my rather too comfortable-and-pleased-with-myself-views about gender (even if we did ultimately disagree sometimes). And lastly (and more recently) for making me read the original novel on which Let the Right One In was based on.
You may remember that when I saw Let the Right One in a couple of months ago, I said how disappointed I was in the whole thing. That it not only failed to live up to the considerable but it seemed to be a slight badly string together collection of scenes, with a wildly and annoyingly varied tone. I thought the film would have benefited from less concentration on Oskar and more on the twisted relationship between Eli and her minder.
Well, Therese was right. The book certainly gives you more of that relationship, and in the process became on of the most disturbing and creepiest novels I have ever read.
The book works on a lot of levels. It does flesh out Oskar's story and make him a better realised character. But I still don't quite buy him, or the intensity of his relationship with Eli. His strand is still the one element of the story that I find the least interesting.
What you get in the novel, and what was hinted at only broadly in the film, is the effect that Eli's presence has on a depressed, isolated community. Eli's actions, and those of her helpers, act as a contagion on estate, spreading outwards and infecting the lives of dozens of people. This is the part of the novel that both surprised me and touched me. Lindvquist has genuine empathy for these characters and creates a believable rag-tag group of lost souls already crushed by the daily realities of their life. Their attempts to reach out to one another to find warmth and companionship are moving, and provide the real emotional depth to much of the novel.
What I wanted from the film was more of Eli's keeper. Hakan is a horrifying creation - repulsive, destructive sad and pathetic. That Lindqvist manages to take this horror of a human and give him dimension and plausibility without ever trying to excuse the horror of his actions is a brilliant high wire act and I respect and admire his commitment. The vast majority of Hakan's story is jettisoned in the movie and it provides and interesting lesson in adaptation.
For all the critic's crowing over the skill with which the film was made, I actually think it is a poor adaptation. The filmmakers (I include Lindqvist as screenwriter, as well as director Alfredson) chose the easiest storyline to tell. Oskar's story is essentially linear - he matures in a twisted kind of way, becomes a man by finding a woman to protect and to care for. Eli may be older, may be stronger. But she still needs to rely on a man to help her out. Oskar fulfills was is essentially a traditional male role model, however kinky and weird.
The Grand Guignol moments that I found funny in the film (and not in a good way) are in the book, but they have a force and a horror that the director fails utterly to capture.
The stories surrounding this are infinitely more interesting. Hakan's alone develops into a truly grisly and horrific end that had my skin crawling. Virginia and Lacke's story has some of the most poignant and horrific material but is treated with cursory attention. This is frustrating, but allowed me to discover the richness of Lindqvist's story for myself. I loved this book.
There were howls of outrage when Hollywood announced that it was going to remake Let the Right One In. I am slow to join in the chorus in the hopes that instead of remaking the film, they will go back to the source novel and re-focus it on some of the material I consider superior. Though that may be giving them all far too much credit.
You may remember that when I saw Let the Right One in a couple of months ago, I said how disappointed I was in the whole thing. That it not only failed to live up to the considerable but it seemed to be a slight badly string together collection of scenes, with a wildly and annoyingly varied tone. I thought the film would have benefited from less concentration on Oskar and more on the twisted relationship between Eli and her minder.
Well, Therese was right. The book certainly gives you more of that relationship, and in the process became on of the most disturbing and creepiest novels I have ever read.
The book works on a lot of levels. It does flesh out Oskar's story and make him a better realised character. But I still don't quite buy him, or the intensity of his relationship with Eli. His strand is still the one element of the story that I find the least interesting.
What you get in the novel, and what was hinted at only broadly in the film, is the effect that Eli's presence has on a depressed, isolated community. Eli's actions, and those of her helpers, act as a contagion on estate, spreading outwards and infecting the lives of dozens of people. This is the part of the novel that both surprised me and touched me. Lindvquist has genuine empathy for these characters and creates a believable rag-tag group of lost souls already crushed by the daily realities of their life. Their attempts to reach out to one another to find warmth and companionship are moving, and provide the real emotional depth to much of the novel.
What I wanted from the film was more of Eli's keeper. Hakan is a horrifying creation - repulsive, destructive sad and pathetic. That Lindqvist manages to take this horror of a human and give him dimension and plausibility without ever trying to excuse the horror of his actions is a brilliant high wire act and I respect and admire his commitment. The vast majority of Hakan's story is jettisoned in the movie and it provides and interesting lesson in adaptation.
For all the critic's crowing over the skill with which the film was made, I actually think it is a poor adaptation. The filmmakers (I include Lindqvist as screenwriter, as well as director Alfredson) chose the easiest storyline to tell. Oskar's story is essentially linear - he matures in a twisted kind of way, becomes a man by finding a woman to protect and to care for. Eli may be older, may be stronger. But she still needs to rely on a man to help her out. Oskar fulfills was is essentially a traditional male role model, however kinky and weird.
The Grand Guignol moments that I found funny in the film (and not in a good way) are in the book, but they have a force and a horror that the director fails utterly to capture.
The stories surrounding this are infinitely more interesting. Hakan's alone develops into a truly grisly and horrific end that had my skin crawling. Virginia and Lacke's story has some of the most poignant and horrific material but is treated with cursory attention. This is frustrating, but allowed me to discover the richness of Lindqvist's story for myself. I loved this book.
There were howls of outrage when Hollywood announced that it was going to remake Let the Right One In. I am slow to join in the chorus in the hopes that instead of remaking the film, they will go back to the source novel and re-focus it on some of the material I consider superior. Though that may be giving them all far too much credit.
Friday, 11 September 2009
Movies Catch-up
District 9
Not quite the masterpiece that many in the States have claimed, but this is a bracingly intelligent, exciting and emotional story that is told with real skill and intensity. Sharlto Coptly is incredible in the lead role - a complete unknown, he is in virtually every scene and manages to portray a weak, vacuously cruel man who finds something resembling a soul as his body crumbles with astonishing skill. The CGI work is impeccable and there is real thought gone in to this story. I think this is the most exciting first film I have seen in a long time and Neil Blomkamp is surely going to have as long and brilliant a career as the mercurial producer Peter Jackson (I really REALLY want to see The Lovely Bones now).
Inglorious Basterds
Thank Christ Taratino is back. This is his first film since Jackie Brown that I can wholeheartedly endorse. I love the style of Kill Bill 1 - it's hugely exhilarating, but essentially empty. Vol 2 is turgid, ruined by Taratino's fascination with Michael Madsen and David Carridine, both of whom give painful performances and a sense that Tarantino's dialogue was parodying itself. Death Proof is the same - great action but the script sounds like a bland imitation. Basterds announces itself with a humdinger of a first scene that balances tension, comedy and menace almost perfectly. It has four superb performances (and in Diane Kruger, a genuine revelation as I thought she was terrible in Troy). The film is basically a series of long dialogue scenes, but Tarantino seems to take joy in his language and that joy, rather than feeling like the dead end of his own obsessions, felt inclusive. The actors run with these scenes, delighting in the twists and turns, while Tarantino direct stylishly but always with an eye to serving the story and characters. It doesn't have the depth of feeling that Jackie Brown had, but it certainly feels that Tarantino may have found a way out of his rut.
Time Traveller's Wife
I am lucky in a way. My Straight Wife Rachel McAdams has yet to make a truly awful film so, while I can always watch her in quiet rapture, the films themselves are generally good (State of Play) and frequently brilliant (Mean Girls, Family Stone). The Time Traveller's Wife is probably the dodgiest of her outings so far, though that is not the fault of her or Eric Bana who do trojan work in helping the audience to invest in this improbable situation. People I know who are fans of the book seem to be slightly let down, and I have to admit that this is one of those films with such an irrisistable premise that this bland, inoffensive weepy is more of a disappointment then it might otherwise be. But McAdams and Bana was sweet, charismatic and work hard at giving subtlety and nuance to the whole thing.
Not quite the masterpiece that many in the States have claimed, but this is a bracingly intelligent, exciting and emotional story that is told with real skill and intensity. Sharlto Coptly is incredible in the lead role - a complete unknown, he is in virtually every scene and manages to portray a weak, vacuously cruel man who finds something resembling a soul as his body crumbles with astonishing skill. The CGI work is impeccable and there is real thought gone in to this story. I think this is the most exciting first film I have seen in a long time and Neil Blomkamp is surely going to have as long and brilliant a career as the mercurial producer Peter Jackson (I really REALLY want to see The Lovely Bones now).
Inglorious Basterds
Thank Christ Taratino is back. This is his first film since Jackie Brown that I can wholeheartedly endorse. I love the style of Kill Bill 1 - it's hugely exhilarating, but essentially empty. Vol 2 is turgid, ruined by Taratino's fascination with Michael Madsen and David Carridine, both of whom give painful performances and a sense that Tarantino's dialogue was parodying itself. Death Proof is the same - great action but the script sounds like a bland imitation. Basterds announces itself with a humdinger of a first scene that balances tension, comedy and menace almost perfectly. It has four superb performances (and in Diane Kruger, a genuine revelation as I thought she was terrible in Troy). The film is basically a series of long dialogue scenes, but Tarantino seems to take joy in his language and that joy, rather than feeling like the dead end of his own obsessions, felt inclusive. The actors run with these scenes, delighting in the twists and turns, while Tarantino direct stylishly but always with an eye to serving the story and characters. It doesn't have the depth of feeling that Jackie Brown had, but it certainly feels that Tarantino may have found a way out of his rut.
Time Traveller's Wife
I am lucky in a way. My Straight Wife Rachel McAdams has yet to make a truly awful film so, while I can always watch her in quiet rapture, the films themselves are generally good (State of Play) and frequently brilliant (Mean Girls, Family Stone). The Time Traveller's Wife is probably the dodgiest of her outings so far, though that is not the fault of her or Eric Bana who do trojan work in helping the audience to invest in this improbable situation. People I know who are fans of the book seem to be slightly let down, and I have to admit that this is one of those films with such an irrisistable premise that this bland, inoffensive weepy is more of a disappointment then it might otherwise be. But McAdams and Bana was sweet, charismatic and work hard at giving subtlety and nuance to the whole thing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
