Search Results

"Ferrari"     It's the summer of 1957. Behind the spectacle of Formula 1, ex-racer Enzo Ferrari (Adam Driver) is in crisis. Bankruptcy threatens the factory he and his wife, Laura (Penelope Cruz), built from nothing ten years earlier. Their volatile marriage has been battered by the loss of their son, Dino, a year earlier. Ferrari struggles to acknowledge his son Piero (Giuseppe Festinese) with Lina Lardi (Shai lens Woodley). Meanwhile, his drivers’ passion to win pushes them to the edge as they launch into the treacherous 1,000-mile race across Italy, the Mille Miglia.   Passion, ambition, power, the characteristics of Enzo Ferrari racecars came from within the man himself. From the beginning, they began to dominate the competition and fire imaginations worldwide. Born in Modena, Italy, the former racecar driver and team manager formed his own company in 1947. Built with almost no funding, Ferrari’s first car in its sixth race won the Rome Grand Prix. By 1957 the world’s greatest racers were vying for seats in Ferrari’s. Enzo and his wife, Laura, re-invested heavily in the racing division. As a result, by 1957 insolvency was stalking the factory. Meanwhile the tragic death of their only son, Dino, to mluscular dystrophy in 1956 has further shaken their rocky marriage. Dino was their center and future; now gone. Both grieve differently over the devastating loss. Meanwhile, Piero Lardi, Enzo’s son born in 1945 from his liaison with Linda Lardi, now seeks the acknowledgment of his father. Together they constitute a second family of which Laura is unaware until it’s revealed. As crises and revelations converge, Ferrari wagers all on winning one race, the supremely dangerous 1,000-mile race across open roads called the Mille Miglia.   We all know it’s our deadly passion, our terrible joy. But if you get into one of Ferrari cars, and no one is forcing you to take that seat, you get in to win. Enzo Ferrari is one of the most famous, yet inscrutable and complex men of the 20th century. “Ferrari” moves behind the inscrutable image of the iconic Enzo Ferrari. Based on Brock Yates 1991 book 'Enzo Ferrari: The Man, The Car, The Races, The Machine', the film is a character study. There's no equilibrium in his life, and that’s the whole point of Enzo Ferrari, because that’s more like the way life actually is. Ferrari was precise and logical; rational in everything to do with his factory and race team. In the rest of his life he was impulsive, defensive, libidinous, chaotic. The story is not a typical biopic. It seizes on the four months of Enzo Ferrari’s life, in 1957, when all the conflicts and fortunes, the drama of his and Laura and Lina’s lives come into focus. All the hurdles he faced in the mid-1950s, when motorsports was becoming a glamorous, international phenomenon. There's further duality in Ferrari’s life; his wife, Laura, was a woman hardened by struggle, grief, petrified love, and from being a woman involved in a business dominated by men.   An early deal with Ferrari meant that Laura is a 50/50 partner in the Ferrari factory, which became even more complicated when the couple’s personal life became messy and cold, and Laura’s savvy business instincts emerged as one of the few avenues of control she had. The power Laura had over the Ferrari company would anger Enzo, and yet, when his engineering staff once threatened to quit if Laura continued to make production visits at the factory, Enzo fired all of them, the world’s greatest automotive engineers, on the spot, immediately, out of solidarity with Laura. Still, Laura is invested in Enzo’s success and the Ferrari team’s wins on the track. Meanwhile, Enzo met, Lina Lardi, whom he had met in a factory his native Modena, Italy, during World War II, anchored his life. When their son Piero was born in 1945, Lina raised him in Castelvetro. She was a post-war Italian single mother focused on what was right for her child despite his being born out of wedlock at a moment in history, and in a country, that didn’t accept divorce. It's about providing a safe space for her son to feel like he belonged in a world that, during that time, especially in Catholic Italy, told anyone under those circumstances that they didn’t belong.   If Enzo Ferrari’s life was bifurcated into chaos and control, his life with Lina Lardi was a cause for one while embodying a desire for the other. When their affair began during the Second World War, Lardi had been working at a coachbuilding factory in Modena, and as Prime Minister Benito Mussolini’s fascist policies and World War II ravaged Italy, Ferrari and Lardi’s relationship grew. In the disarray of post-war Italy and the hardships that followed, Lardi raised their son, Piero. Lina is a woman at the crossroads of two lives that existed outside of her own, and she was a bit helpless in that situation; all Lina could do was show support and love for her son and the man that she loved. In Lina’s most forthright moment in the film, she confronts Enzo on his hesitancy to acknowledge Piero with his last name (due to Laura’s legal maneuvers and Italian cultural considerations, Piero was not able to be acknowledged as a member of the Ferrari family until after Laura’s death in 1978). The complexities and emotions involved were tumultuous, but Lina’s view is that what matters most is what’s best for Piero, and that has loved by Enzo as his son.   The difficulty of having two families, and two homes, one filled with grief over the loss of a son who hadn’t lived past the age of 24, the other focused on making a 12-year-old boy’s life free from pain and want, crashes into Enzo Ferrari’s pursuit of engineering perfection. He sees all too clearly the risk of losing all he’s built, either to companies like Fiat and Ford who were looking to buy him out, or through personal issues that threatened to overtake his life’s work. In 1957, Ferrari was going broke; the company’s passenger car sales had dwindled as competitors began breaking his cars speed records, making it harder to secure funding. All of that fueled Ferrari’s competitive nature even more. Ferrari would take a huge gamble with the fortunes of his company by entering the 1957 Mille Miglia, the famous 1,000-mile, open-road endurance race through Italy that had begun in 1927. Thirty years after its inaugural race, it was about to collide with a form of blind ambition Ferrari isn’t ready to be accountable for. His aim, going into this dangerous race, is to put together a multigenerational, flashy driving team that would attract financing to keep the Ferrari factory in business, and which would allow Ferrari to maintain control. But the cost would be high.   Moving to the racetrack, chief among the team of drivers surrounding Enzo Ferrari would be Alfonso de Portago (Gabriel Leone), whose horrific crash in the final stretch of Italy’s Mille Miglia, which killed de Portago and nine spectators, would for decades overshadow the legacy of the race and be part of the reason it ended in 1957. Eugenio Castellotti (Marino Franchitti) dies while attempting to reclaim Ferrari’s speed record from Maserati. Sound is also crucial in the de Portago crash sequence. At the moment of impact, the sound almost disappears, leaving a dull, closed-ear vibe to the sounds that follow. The concept is to have the impact noises as the car is plowing into the pole and through the crowd diminish over time. Piero began working with his father in the late 1960s and collaborated with the company’s Formula One teams, as well as in the concept and production process, and other aspects of production. When Enzo Ferrari died in 1988, Piero inherited his father’s stake in the company. Piero served as president of the Ferrari company until 2015.   There's the world of Enzo’s more intimate, domestic life, at home with Laura or in the countryside with Lina, and then there's the world of racing. The former would be a more classically composed aesthetic, while the latter would be filled with visceral, dynamic energy often through handheld camerawork. Italian Renaissance painting is so informed by architecture and the natural light that Italian architecture of that period lends to a space. It’s all this single-source, directional lighting from the windows. As for the color palette, the yellows, oranges, pale greens and terracotta/ochre hues of Northern Italy set the template. The concept is to slash through that palette with the bright, primary red of the cars, signifying aggression and energy in the face of the more austere aesthetic elsewhere in the film. The cars are kinetic, they’re full of agitation. The film wants to show the experience of what it's to drive one of those cars and to be in a tense race, trying to master the forces. It's, by design, a counterpoint to the formality of the dramatic, dialogue-filled scenes. There are incredibly powerful human moments, then we’re roaring around Italy with drivers flirting with death. In so many places around the world, it’s still a very similar situation, working from the shadows and not being acknowledged for what they do, not being valued. It’s as if youve mild chronic pain, only it’s emotional, but it's important for us to see that represented in many ways, but especially physically. Life is asymmetrical. Life is messy. Life is filled with chaos.   Written by Gregory Mann

(Release info London schedule; April 20th, 2018, Empire Cinemas, Leicester Square) "Every Day" Based on David Levithan’s 'New York Times' bestseller, "Every Day" tells the story of Rhiannon (Angourie Rice), a 16-year old girl who falls in love with a mysterious soul named 'A' (Justice Smith) who inhabits a different body every day. Feeling an unmatched connection, Rhiannon and 'A' work each day to find each other, not knowing what or who the next day will bring. The more the two fall in love, the more the realities of loving someone who's a different person every 24 hours takes a toll, leaving Rhiannon and 'A' to face the hardest decision either has ever had to make. Rhiannon is a good 16-year old, she helps out at home, doesn’t cause trouble, and does well at school. However, her family has been struggling, her father Nick (Jake Robards) had a nervous breakdown and stopped working leaving her mother Lindsey (Maria Bello) the pressure of being the sole breadwinner. While her sister Jolene (Debby Ryan) is the wild child who acts out, Rhiannon just wants to help keep her family together. At school things are little better, Rhiannon’s boyfriend Justin (Justin Smith) is the popular athlete, however, he’s also self-centered and takes Rhiannon for granted. That's, until one day when Justin shows up at school acting differently. Suddenly, he’s attentive and curious and sweet. Taken aback and enamoured, Rhiannon suggests they play hooky and steal away to Baltimore. The two take off in Justin’s car, listen to music and sing along, share stories they’ve never shared before, and play at the beach. Rhiannon is surprised to see a softer side of Justin, one that’s playful and unselfconscious. It's a day like they’ve never had before: perfect. Yet the next morning at school, Justin seems back to normal and he barely remembers what they talked about or the day they spent together. Rhiannon is perturbed, but tries to shake it off. By that weekend, though, it’s clear that the Justin who Rhiannon played hooky with isn’t coming back. She tries to recapture that day by playing the song they sang along to at a party, but Justin seems uninterested. It does get the attention of a boy Rhiannon doesn’t know named Nathan (Lucas Zumann), however, who starts dancing wildly and putting on a show to make Rhiannon laugh. Rhiannon joins him on the dance floor and something suddenly seems familiar, but she doesn’t know what. Justin shows up and chases Nathan away and Rhiannon is left with a lingering feeling of 'déjà vu'. A few days later she's contacted by Nathan who says he wants to meet and talk. They arrange a date at a bookstore, but when Rhiannon shows up Nathan isn’t there. Instead, she meets Megan (Katie Douglas), who says she's there on Nathan’s behalf. Yet when Rhiannon and Megan begin to talk, Megan explains that she in fact is someone named 'A'. That weekend at the party 'A' was Nathan, and the day at the beach 'A' was Justin, because 'A' is a bodiless spirit who wakes up inhabiting a different person every day, for just twenty-four hours. Always someone 'A’s' age, always someone close to the last, never the same person twice. Rhiannon is naturally disbelieving at first, until 'A' manages to make contact with her a few more times over the next few days and eventually proves they are telling the truth. What follows is an extraordinary love story that transcends external appearances and physical limitations. A love story about loving someone truly and completely for who they're in their heart and soul, regardless of what's on the outside. The Rhiannon who we meet at the beginning of the film is living a fairly conventional life, albeit being the rock of her destabilized family. A nice girl, a good friend, a solid student, Rhiannon is dating the popular boy at school, though she doesn’t feel very connected to him or much appreciated. She’s playing all the parts she feels she should play at the expense of her own self-discovery. Especially when we’re young we tend to be defined by our relationships. In the beginning of the story, Rhiannon is Nick’s daughter, Jolene’s sister, Justin’s girlfriend. As a result of her father’s breakdown, the whole family is in stasis. Their family has been fractured and they haven’t figured out how to move past it. These things are standing in the way of her freedom to grow. And what we see in the movie is that her interactions with 'A' broaden her perspective and give her space to find herself. She and everyone around her are all seeing each other not for who they're, but for who they think they should be, which is pretty common. Another important part of Rhiannon’s journey is learning to see and accept those around her, and she then shares that perspective with her family. In the beginning of the film we’re introduced to Rhiannon’s boyfriend Justin. Justin is the popular athlete at school and he takes Rhiannon for granted. He's kind of oblivious to other people’s feelings though. He thinks a lot about himself and his own needs and when he doesn’t get those needs met, he gets frustrated and easily irritated. But one day Justin wakes up, promptly examines his hands, takes his bearings and heads off to school. On this day Justin is not himself, he has been inhabited by 'A'. Rhiannon can tell something’s off with Justin, yet soon suggests they play hooky and head off for adventure. What follows is 'A" and Rhiannon’s first date, driving and listening to music, hanging at the beach, and talking and sharing more than Justin and Rhiannon ever have. 'A' falls for Rhiannon that afternoon and, without knowing it, Rhiannon falls for 'A', too. The next day at school, Justin doesn’t seem to really remember this day that was so special to Rhiannon. We've this character 'A' who's an entity who inhabits a different body every day for 24 hours and so in the film is portrayed by fifteen different actors. Several of the actors who play 'A' in the story play a character in Rhiannon’s life as well, so each actor has to both differentiate between when they're their main character versus when they're inhabited by 'A', as well as supporting a single, clear character for 'A'. It’s quite complex. In motion pictures, you've twenty-four still frames in a second and when they’re run together your brain compensates and creates the fluid motion connecting the frames. There's an intermittent motion effect happening in this movie in which the film asks the audience to bridge the gaps and perceive 'A' as a fluid and consistent character. That maturity and depth coming from the eyes becomes a big part of the throughline for 'A' and makes the character feel whole. Jolene’s pretty sassy and sarcastic. But her relationship to Rhiannon is really important to both of them. They’re cut from opposite cloth and they've responded to the family situation really differently, Rhiannon by trying to hold everyone together, Jolene by going a bit off the rails. She’s tough and aggressive but she has good intentions. And she's one of the few people in Rhiannon’s world who's pushing her to demand more for herself. In 2012, young adult author David Levithan published a book that pushed him to new creative heights. It resonated so deeply with his readers that it spent months on 'The New York Times' bestseller list and spawned online chat groups, fan art and writing. That book was 'Every Day'. Ask any teenager or parent of a teenager if they’ve heard of 'Every Day', and not only will they know it, they’ll most likely have read it and passed it on to a friend. The story of a teenage entity named only 'A', who wakes up every day in a different body. "Every Day" deals with the challenges faced when 'A' falls head over heels in love with Rhiannon, a girl unlike anyone they’ve ever met. Can you've a relationship with a soul who inhabits a different body every day, sometimes boy, sometimes girl, sometimes the school quarterback, sometimes the outcast? Who are you removed of your body, your race, your clothes, your family? The story is the actualization of the old adage that we should love someone for who they're on the inside, all the more powerful because it's set during the teenage years when we customarily try on and experiment with myriad external identities in an effort to figure out we're. Levithan’s book explores all these themes, but fundamentally it’s a story about true love, growing up, and the lengths we’ll go for those we care about. This is about not being defined by your body, or externally imposed ideas of who you're, but by who you really are. What does it really mean to love the inner person devoid of the external? The book is a juggernaut, clearly resonating with young people the world over, and taking Levithan on tours to visit high school and college students across North America. There’s a freedom in what 'A' is that’s really interesting to explore, and that’s creates a lot of great side conversations about gender and race and the binaries that society is built on, but that we can choose to step out of if we want. The book challenges gender presumptions in a way that's as entertaining as it's unexpected and, perhaps most important, that's relatable to teens who may not think they need sensitivity training when it comes to sexual orientation and the nature of true love. His name is 'A'. Every day he wakes up in a different body. Always someone his age, never too far from the last person, never the same person twice. He has no control over any of it. He doesn't know why it happens, or how. He knows what makes each person different and what makes everyone the same. He has seen the same color blue look fifty different ways with fifty different pairs of eyes. Every day of his life, he wakes up and just try to live that day, for that person. Make no mark, leave no trace. In the film, we've 15 actors playing 'A' and the film unites those characters in one coherent arc. By making Rhiannon the protagonist and following her journey as she meets 'A' and learns about who 'A' is, the audience gets grounded in her experience, and projects into her relationship with 'A', which gives us an entry point into the more fantastical and magical idea in the story. To fill out Rhiannon’s world, the film gives her a family backstory that didn’t exist in the novel. Rhiannon’s father is recovering from a nervous breakdown and not working, her mother is the sole breadwinner, her sister Jolene is a bit of a wild child, and Rhiannon is the rock trying to hold everything together. When we meet Rhiannon she has a real desire for normalcy but she's also somewhat stuck and unable to fully discover herself because her focus is on supporting her family. This is the foundation from which she takes off on this incredible journey. A great love story is timeless and remains one of the most satisfying cinematic genres. On the one hand the book very simple, the embodiment of loving someone for who they really are, while also being very complex in how it addresses a lot of issues in the lives of young people today. The results something really extraordinary about manifesting that in a character who literally has to walk in someone else’s shoes every single day. The profoundness of that and the magic of that just grabs people and inspires awe. Beyond exploring the most universal themes of true love, identity and coming of age, "Every Day" also reflects very contemporary ideas about acceptance and the freedom to be whoever you're, a particularly resonant idea for young people right now who increasingly reject categorization. It's such a commonplace and simple piece of advice, that you should appreciate someone for what's on the inside, and not judge them by external appearances. Yet it's also true that what seems simplest on the surface can often end up being the hardest thing. In the end, the question of who we're at the core, without body, gender, any external identifiers that all, is not so simple to answer. Equally, at first look "Every Day" is a charming, funny, and smart coming-of-age story about the ups and downs of true love and growing up. But dig a little deeper and there’s more. This movie is a love story, but there's so much more, it's a coming-of-age story, it's a story about family love, it's a story about loving someone so much that you choose to do the difficult thing, and it’s a magical story. It's a total swoon. This story will have resonance at this amazing time we're in where a generation seems to be turning away from black and white definitions around identity, which is such an exciting thing.

We have no idea what it was that bit you. It had fingers, Andy! Fuck! If there’s one genre with so many releases that you get tired of it, it’s certainly the zombie genre. I’m sure this kind of movies is made on a daily basis. Movies in which infected undead stumble around, searching for victims, to have a portion of juicy brains. Most movies aren’t very innovative and all known clichés are being used. But occasionally you come across something completely different where they want to give a new direction to the zombie genre. Just like in “Maggie” it’s about a father who wants to protect his daughter. Only, little Rosie (Finlay and Nova Sjoberg) isn’t aware of any threat. It starts off idyllic. The story is set in the Australian bushes (the last Australian zombie flick I have seen was “Wyrmwood“. Also highly recommended). Andy (Martin “The Hobbit” Freeman), his wife Kay (Susie Porter) and their baby-daughter Rosie are quietly riding a dilapidated boat across a river. It seems idyllic and has a high “The African Queen” mood. There’s no indication of a post-apocalyptic situation with humanity again being the victim of a viral outbreak. Until they come across the wreck of a boat. The same stupid decisions over and over again. The only thing that bothered me in this film are the stupid, illogical decisions that were made. It’s understandable that this family can’t go on forever without providing themselves with new food and provisions. Trust me. I would also go and check if there wasn’t anything useful to find on board this boat. But knowing that every moment you can be attacked by a hungry zombie, I would certainly not do this unarmed and without informing the other person. I suppose they are of the same intellectual level because Kay makes the same primal mistake. With all the consequences. Hit the tree instead of the zombie, please. The next stupid fragment announces itself when the family is on the run in an abandoned off-road vehicle. In normal circumstances, you as a driver will try to avoid inattentive crossing pedestrians. You’ll probably perform some neck-breaking maneuvers that are a risk to your own life. But when knowing that the mainland is populated by soulless creatures whose only goal is to take a big bite from any uninfected after they have towed them to a local zombie barbecue, you would rather put the pedal to the metal. But no. Not Andy. He’s so good-hearted that he prefers to crash the all-terrain vehicle against an Australian boab instead of hitting such a creature. But as I said before, these are the only drawbacks in this, for the rest, fascinating and especially emotionally poignant zombie story. Problems in Australia? Ask the Aboriginals for help. The film itself isn’t unnervingly exciting. It shows the self-sacrificing agony Andy undergoes so he can take his daughter to a safe place. Far from the mutated fellowmen and half-wits who do totally crazy things in this chaotic world. Like putting an Aboriginal in a cage after which the target practice can start with zombies, which are lured by fresh meat. Incidentally, it’s the Aboriginals who know how to maintain themselves in this new world. With primitive-looking rituals they succeed in liquidating zombies and plant-based ointment provides protection. It’s also a young Aboriginal girl (Simone Landers) who helps Andy with his trip through the bush and who provides a safe haven. An emotionally touching zombie-flick. Who would have thought that? Frankly, I thought this film was original in many ways. Not only the zombie concept was elaborated in a different way. The transformation is totally different than in a typical zombie movie. Here it’s not only blood and ripped off flesh, but it’s a blubbery, slimy substance that manifests itself during the 48-hour transformation. Also, the phenomenon of zombies with their head in the ground (ostrich-like behavior) was surprising. Was it to shut themselves off from the outside world? Or is it part of the transformation process? No idea. But it was fascinating enough. And finally, the most impressive thing for me personally was the atmosphere that this film radiated. I never thought I would ever watch a zombie movie and get emotionally touched by it. You really have to be a zombie if you don’t want to be moved by this movie. And finally, praise for the admirable acting performance of Martin Freeman. A whole movie he played a leading role and not for a moment I had the feeling he was playing a hobbit. That’s what I call an achievement. My rating 7/10 Links: IMDB More reviews here

(Release Info London schedule; February 21st, 2020, Curzon Soho, London W1D 99 Shaftesbury Avenue, London, W1D 5DY, 6:45 pm) https://film.list.co.uk/listing/1425630-vivarium/ "Vivarium" Gemma (Imogen Poots), and Tom (Jesse Eisenberg), a young couple, are in search of the perfect starter home. When their mysterious local estate agent (Mark Quigley) informs them of a new housing development, somewhere between suburban 'Ireland' and 'The Twilight Zone, the enigmatically named 'Yonder', they ignore their initial reservations and decide to check it out. In a quiet neighborhood, he leads them to house number 9 and disappears. Soon, they realize that they're in an infinite space filled with identical houses, and that any attempt to escape will lead them right back to number 9. But this cautious couple should have listened to their instincts, quickly finding themselves unable to escape the seemingly endless maze of picture-perfect streets. As the weeks pass, they're forced to accept that they're trapped inside this manufactured utopia. Then, one day, a surprise package is about to arrive at their doorstep with a baby boy (Senan Jennings) inside. Invoking both the mind-bending weirdness of a classic Tom discovers that the soil of 'Yonder' is made from a seemingly artificial substance. He starts to dig a hole. He becomes obsessed. Digging makes him feel as if he has a purpose, but the hole just gets deeper and deeper. Tom hears noises at the bottom of the hole. He digs further. Tom’s physical and mental health deteriorates further. Tom attempts to harm the boy, but Gemma intervenes. Gemma attempts to understand the couple’s predicament by engaging with the boy. She discovers that he's incapable of imagining things. Tom’s emotional distance pushes her closer to the boy. One day the boy vanishes, only to reappear with a strange text book. Gemma asks the boy who gave him the book. To show her, the boy takes on a disturbing physical form. Time has passed. Gemma and Tom have grown weaker. The boy (Eanna Hardwicke) has grown into an adult. Gemma and Tom reunite in their fear of him. The boy leaves the house every day and Gemma and Tom do not know where he goes. While digging, Tom finds a withered corpse in a body bag. Tom weakens to the point of death. Gemma begs the boy to help. The boy provides them with a body bag. Tom dies and is flung into the hole. A vengeful Gemma attempts to kill the boy. He escapes into a bizarre, subterranean corridor. Gemma follows and tumbles through parallel homes where other young couples live lives of similar despair. Gemma is spat back out into number nine. After a final act of verbal defiance, Gemma dies. The boy buries her in the hole with Tom and leaves 'Yonder'. He becomes an estate agent, replacing Martin (Jonathan Aris). The idea of owning your own home has become like a faery tale. Insidious advertising promises ideal living, a fantasy version of reality that we strive towards. It's the bait that leads many into a trap. Once ensnared we work our whole lives to pay off debts. The social contract is a strange and invisible agreement that we flutter towards like moths to a flame. Natural areas are destroyed to make way for rows of identical houses, mazes for an atomised society to live out their days. We eat processed food wrapped in plastic. Media competes with parents to set strange new agendas in the minds of children. The dream of owning a home can soon turn into a nightmare. Consumerism is consuming us. "Vivarium" is fed on these ideas. It amplifies and the ordinary through a sci-fi lens. It's a surreal and twisted tale that's darkly humorous, sad, frightening and weirdly satisfying. "Vivarium" is a surrealistic, dark, but humorous film that lures us into a unique space and captivating experience. It's an eerie portrait of domestic life that poses questions of class and gender roles, even as it sucks the audience into it's hellish suburban maze. The nightmarish jaunt up the property ladder is as thrillingly provocative as it's wickedly enjoyable. Audiences get a kick out of it and it lingers in the mind.

(Glasgow Film Festival ● Select event time ● Here are a list of days and times at which this event will take place ● March Mon 07 Screening time 20:30 ● Tue 08 Screening time 15:00) https://glasgowfilm.org/glasgow-film-festival/shows/benedetta-nc-18-1 "Benedetta" In the late 17th century, with plague ravaging the land, Benedetta Carlini (Virginie Efira) joins the convent in Pescia, Tuscany, as a novice. Capable from an early age of performing miracles, Benedetta’s impact on life in the community is immediate and momentous. Benedetta is a 17th century woman who has acquired real power, both in her convent of 'Theatine' nuns and in her town of Pescia. Benedetta is famous as a saint and as abbess of the convent. She reaches positions of power through her talent, visions, manipulations, lies and creativity. Whatever the means, she manages it in a society and era totally dominated by men. Women counted for nothing, except male sexual gratification and reproduction. They held no positions of power. What does physical climax bring her? Benedetta has a strong belief in Jesus, and she's also looking for power. She's not all sweetness and altruism. She takes sexual pleasure without giving it. The issue of love intersects with that of faith. The film shows the conflict between faith, in the private sphere, and clergy, as a component of a system of power. The theme is an intrinsic part of Benedetta’s story. If you take a closer look at her case, she's clearly a fervent believer. Her visions of Jesus may have been authentic, while also being a means to obtaining what she wanted. Benedetta truly believe she's Jesus’s bride. Every time, she sees him as a shepherd guiding his flock, in keeping with the imagery of St. John’s Gospel. From the moment Bartolomea (Daphne Patakia) joins the convent, roughly sixty minutes of the film are devoted to the gradual crystallization of their lesbian love affair. After Bartolomea slips a finger into her lover’s behind for the first time, She sees Jesus, who tells her that she must resist Bartolomea and stay with him. At that point, Benedetta is still deferring to the religious orthodoxy of the time. She obeys Jesus and abides by the rules. She even punishes Bartolomea by forcing her to plunge her hands into boiling water in a demonstration of tough love. In the end, the erotic attraction is too strong. And then Benedetta has another vision, in which Jesus tells her that the previous apparitions were a false Jesus, an impostor. Benedetta’s visions take her in opposite directions depending on the circumstances! Later, another vision has Jesus ordering Benedetta to strip naked, saying there's no shame in it. Benedetta’s visions provide what she needs. She has her own private Jesus constantly at her side. Of course, that Jesus is a creation of her brain. It’s Benedetta’s psyche generating the visions, but she genuinely believes in them. Benedetta dreams up a Jesus who permits her to have sexual relations with Bartolomea. Benedetta is no saint, either. She reaches a point where she cannot bear dissent. There are also some very funny notes; when Felicita (Charlotte Rampling) asks Benedetta if Jesus gave her advice, she replies, 'No, he didn’t mention you!' It’s important not to forget that the film is funny. Bartolomea is direct and frank, tending toward how a modern young woman might express herself with regard to sexual desire. She was the victim of rapes within her family. In western Europe, notably in the Netherlands, where there are no longer very many believers, Bartolomea is most likely seen as more sympathetic. It's not the case in other parts of the world, where there are strong religious movements, such as the United States with it's evangelicals. People like them would probably empathize more with Benedetta than Bartolomea. It’s interesting to note that the evangelical concept goes back to the Middle Ages. The man as head of the family, the wife secondary and only there to satisfy the man. To see that concept in 2021 is very surprising. Moreover, that concerns every religion. Bartolomea and Benedetta use a statuette of the 'Virgin Mary' as a dildo. It’s more than an object, it perfectly encapsulates the conflict between Catholic taboos and sex, between body and mind, which is present throughout the movie. For Bartolomea, it's just an object. For Benedetta, the object is of high symbolic value, but she abandons that on her journey to love. There's a shot where Benedetta and Bartolomea are performing forbidden sex acts, while in the background, the statue of the Virgin Mary is illuminated by a candle. That shot sums it up; let’s ignore rules and taboos, let’s do what we want. In the book, Bartolomea is the main witness at Benedetta’s trial. She tells the inquisitors that she's abused by Benedetta, who forced her into sexual relations. That’s one of the major changes the film makes in comparison with the book. Bartolomea doesn’t seem to believe in Benedetta’s love. It’s like a disavowal for her, as if she were not loved enough. It’s difficult to shine a light on the person whose love is real, and the person whose love is not..Christina (Louise Chevilotte) is another interesting character. When she becomes aware of Benedetta’s manipulations, she denounces her because, for Christina, it's blasphemy. Soeur Felicita, the abbess, retorts, however, that Christina is blaspheming by refusing to believe Benedetta. Once more, who's right and who's wrong? Except that Christina was not there to see Benedetta’s manipulations. She's caught in her own trap, in her own lie, even though she's basically right. The religious authorities are happy to think of Benedetta as a medium, a prophetess, and it’s dangerous to go against the deep power doctrine of the Church. So, Christina is compelled to self-flagellate half-naked, and then she commits suicide. She cannot live with the shame. It all comes from her initial lie. To qualify that, Christina is the most realistic, the first to realize that Benedetta is inventing her visions and manipulating everyone around her. By lying, she digs her own grave, which is tragic. It also shows the reach of the deep power of the religious system. The abbess is very authoritarian, but she uses her power with discernment in the context of the times. Felicita is not a believer, except perhaps when death is approaching. She's a politician who respects extant power structures because it’s in her interest to do so. She denounces Benedetta in the end, but not out of religious conviction, rather for revenge after her daughter’s death. Benedetta drove Christina to suicide. Basically, none of these characters are completely sympathetic! But if you observe the behavior of present-day politicians, they’re not always very likable either. 'The Nuncio' (Lambert Wilson) is a dangerous, threatening character. After Christina’s suicide, there's no menace from within for Benedetta. 'The Nuncio' can be charming, unctuous, smiling. But he's still a man of power. The popular uprising is not in the book. To maintain the narrative tension, the Nuncio has to be intelligent and motivated by the desire to defeat Benedetta. The film is based on Judith C. Brown’s book, 'Immodest Acts: The Life Of A Lesbian Nun In Renaissance Italy'. Judith C. Brown stumbled across the story while researching another project in the archives in Florence. She opened up a box, and found the minutes of the trial of Benedetta, which took place in the early 17th century. She was impressed and intrigued. It’s a rare document. There are no other known trials of lesbians in the history of Christianity. In the original document, the clerk of the court is shocked by the sexual details described by Bartolomea, the nun who slept with Benedetta, that he could hardly write! He left blanks, scratched words out, rewrote them. Bartolomea is very explicit in her account of how they licked each other. The script is a superb balance between religion, sexuality and the Church’s political scheming. The film never says if Benedetta is a slightly deranged mystic or a manipulator, or both. Right to the end, the film maintains the uncertainty about her deepest nature. Two truths coexist, and the film does not say which is the real truth. You've to accept that some facts can be seen from two different perspectives. There's an assimilation to Arnold Schwarzenegger's dream about reality in "Total Recall". You see a good example of those dual realities later in the movie, when the plague hits; Benedetta tells the crowd in Pescia that Jesus will protect them, then she orders a soldier to shut the city gates, instituting a sort of lockdown! It once more shows her dual nature as a believer and politician. The Church does not prohibit sexual relations, except for members of the clergy. We humans are, fundamentally, animals, right? We've a body and instincts. Benedetta does not resist the call of the flesh, but why would she resist it? Science tells the truth, legends tell stories. That’s how we see it. The film shows what religion prohibits, especially with regard to sex. The hypocrisy and corruption is at the heart of the religious authorities. It's a film about freedom that's very relevant to the times we live in. Not all mystics believed in Jesus as a means to obtaining positions of power, but mysticism is often the only way for a woman to climb the social ladder. The issue of blasphemy is also shifting, ambivalent, with the accusation bandied about between characters. Yes, blasphemy works both ways. Religion forbids things, as if it's possible to lock away impulses, desire, urges and the unconscious in a little box. Except it doesn’t work like that. It’s important not to reduce the dildo to an immature prank, the desire to shock. History advances and evolves over the centuries, but it's always subjected to contradictory currents and the advances of civilization. You think that freedom has been won, but no, we get the feeling that a period movie always resonates with the present. We should be happy that in the partisan times we are living in, this film blurs boundaries, with mystery. And it's a film of powerful cinematic convictions. Written by Gregory Mann

(The Banshees of Inisherin • 2022 ‧ Drama/Comedy ‧ 1h 54m Showtimes London • Fri 21 Oct, Sat 22 Oct, Sun 23 Oct, Mon 24 Oct, Tue 25 Oct, Wed 26 Oct Thu 27 Oct, ODEON Luxe, 400 m·24-26 Leicester Square, LONDON WC2H 7JY, United Kingdom, 12:00 • 14:45 • 17:30 • 20:15 Leicester Square, 400 m·Leicester Square, LONDON WC2H 7NA, United Kingdom, 12:30 • 15:10 • 17:50 • 20:30 Vue Cinema London - West End (Leicester Square), 500 m·Leicester Square, 3 Cranbourn Street, LONDON WC2H 7AL, United Kingdom, 12:45 • 15:30 • 17:45 • 19:45 Picturehouse Central, 600 m·Piccadilly Circus, 13 Coventry Street, LONDON W1D 7DH, United Kingdom, 13:00 • 15:35 • 18:10 • 19:15 • 20:45 Curzon Soho, 650 m·99 Shaftesbury Avenue, LONDON W1D 5DY, United Kingdom, 12:00 • 15:40 • 17:50 • 21:20 ODEON Covent Garden, 800 m·135 Shaftesbury Avenue, LONDON WC2H 8AH, United Kingdom, 14:30 • 17:30 • 20:30) "The Banshees Of Inisherin" Set on a remote island off the west coast of Ireland, "The Banshees Of Inisherin" follows lifelong friends Pádraic Súilleabháin (Colin Farrell) and Colm Doherty (Brendan Gleeson), who find themselves at an impasse when Colm unexpectedly puts an end to their friendship. A stunned Pádraic, aided by his sister Siobhán (Kerry Condon) and troubled young islander Dominic (Barry Keoghan), endeavours to repair the relationship, refusing to take no for an answer. But Pádraic’s repeated efforts only strengthen his former friend’s resolve and when Colm delivers a desperate ultimatum, events swiftly escalate, leading to disastrous, anarchic consequences. “The Banshees Of Inisherin" is the story of an island, the small group of people on that island, and two friends who early on in the film are forced by the decision of one friend to go their separate ways. The other friend finds that particularly hard to deal with. The story opens with Pádraic walking happily around the island of Inisherin where he lives with his sister, Siobhán. Pádraic is a sweet, mild mannered, happy-go-lucky guy. Every day, Pádraic and Colm meet at 2pm to go for a drink in the only pub on the island. It’s a daily routine. On this particular day, however, everything changes. Colm ignores Pádraic when he calls. Colm starts acting very strangely and starts avoiding Pádraic. Colm doesn’t answer the door, which is how we start off the journey. That’s how it begins, with the shutting of a door against a good friend, for no apparent reason. Pádraic is initially surprised, then shocked, and eventually heartbroken. He’s also confused, since Colm has given no particular reason for the breakup. These two men have been friends for their whole lives..Why did Colm torpedo his friendship with Pádraic, was it something that Pádraic said, or did? Is Colm depressed? Should he respect Colm’s wishes and back off? Or should he try to change Colm’s mind or change himself? Within the first six minutes of the movie, the plot is in place. Pádraic can't understand why Colm doesn't want to be friends with him anymore and won't accept it. It’s similar to the feelings you feel when you've been dumped in a relationship. You think, ‘So did you ever like me, or was I imagining that we were in love'? We've to .understand the tough line that Colm, the breaker-upper, has taken, or do they identify with the nice person who's broken hearted. But Colm has his reasons. He doesn’t want to waste his time anymore. He wants to devote himself to artistic enterprises, music or thought. Pádraic is the fallout from that decision. Until this point things have been easy going. But Colm is older than Pádraic by 15 or 20 years. Colm identifies that time is precious and he sees Pádraic as a waste of time. It's a.smart way of playing with those feelings that everyone has in terms of a loving couple, heartbreak and rejection, but doing it with friends so there's a comedy element to it. Colm decides to embrace art and creativity as the most important thing in life and it leads to hellish consequences. The Irish Civil War was a tragedy, that’s the context here. Through examining it and trying to understand how things can get dragged out of shape, maybe we can face it down and not take that path. Do you devote yourself totally to life as an artist? Is work the most important thing? Does it matter who gets hurt in the process? It's a debate that isn't answered by the film. As Pádraic continues to prod Colm for a response, the situation escalates. Colm comes to a place where unless he does something very drastic, he's not going to be left alone. He threatens to cut his fingers off unless Pádraic leaves him alone and allows him time to create. Colm is curious in his mind and he’s a little bit intense. He reckons he has 12 years left, for no particular reason. He’s not ill but he knows his time is finite and he wants to leave a legacy. His art becomes his main priority. Colm’s quite sophisticated in his mindset. It’s a bit like a nuclear deterrent. Symbolically, he’s threatening to destroy his own gift of musicianship. Colm sees it as a badge of commitment. Pádraic shares a home with his younger sister Siobhán. It's coming up on eight years since their parents have died, so there's nobody else living here, apart from Pádraic’s miniature pet donkey Jenny, who Pádraic keeps sneaking into the house. They're close as siblings, so when Colm shuns Pádraic at the start of the film, Siobhán is perturbed. Siobhán is, perhaps, the wisest voice on the island. She realises the limitations of this community. It's inward-looking and resentful attitudes will eventually drag her down. She has ambitions that extend beyond the island, but she's also acutely aware that Pádraic needs her. Siobhán has been through a lot and so there's this sadness and loneliness to her. She's stuck. Pádraic drives her a little crazy, like a sibling would, yet she's motherly to him. She calls things out in the way that probably only a woman can. Her voice, wisdom, and enormous heart take you beyond the island and in a new direction. Colm’s artistic dilemma is reflected in Siobhán, whose life is consumed by reading, cooking dinners, and loneliness. Colm, perhaps, represents a struggle that Siobhán may find herself in within a few years. However, what's taking place on Inisherin, the division between Pádraic and Colm, and the growing rifts with other people on the island, mirrors what's occurring on the mainland. There are allegorical aspects to the division between both sides in the Irish Civil War. Then the islanders become involved. There's Peadar Kearney (Gary Lydon), the local cop whose dislike of Pádraic and his sister intensifies after his separation from Colm. Dominic Kearney (Barry Keoghan), the policeman’s son, is another person who's affected by this schism between the two men. Dominic is smart in his innocent, childlike sort of way. He has feelings for Siobhán, but she's the only girl for miles. Dominic bears a lot of that sadness and horror, as a lot of kids did in Ireland in the last century..The fictional island of Inisherin has a single pub run by Jonjo (Pat Shortt), whose best friend Gerry (Jon Kenny), is normally in residence. The pair provide a brilliant commentary on Pádraic and Colm’s declining friendship and subsequent duelling. Jonjo isn’t a mediator, but he tends to be there when some of the key moments happen. The pub is a major character in the story. It's yellow, bright. It has a red floor, which is an old oilskin from a sailcloth, and a black ceiling. These are strong colours for a period film. It's a multi-character piece and there are many strands that go through the story. Colm is the only character who wears a coat. The coat is light enough to blow in the wind and has elements of the American Western. There’s discord and madness, loss and suffering, and some laughs along the way. There’s something rotten in the community. All the characters are bananas. They're mad in their own unique ways; archetypes brought together to create a certain amount of chaos, but not chaos for the sake of it, and not just dark moments or themes to titillate and shock. The film is set in 1923 when Civil War was raging in Ireland. The fictional island of Inisherin is not affected but there's tension across the water on the mainland. Cannon roars and gunfire can be heard some nights and so we're very aware on the island that there's a civil war taking place. But we're also kind of shielded from it by virtue of being out of the way and a coastal outpost. The Irish Civil War was waged from 1922 to 1923, following the War of Independence and the establishment of the Irish Free State, which created an entity in one half of the country that was separate from the United Kingdom. Two opposing groups, the pro Anglo-Irish Treaty provisional government, and the anti-treaty Irish Republican Army (IRA), fought for dominance. They're not bothered about the war. It's like they're a separate little country, a separate little everything. The civil war was a catastrophic fallout that can emerge from a struggle for freedom. In the case of the Irish conflict, brother would be cast against brother, and friend against friend. Historically, it ended in horrific atrocities. The film does not adhere to the strict boundaries of history. Instead, it is it's own self-contained fantasy, a mythical place, a streak of madness permeating it's bones. The period setting of Banshees, 1923, leant itself to the idea of a Western. Shooting through doorways and that kind of John Ford-ian trope is something we explore in the storyboarding. The story lent itself to this idea of two almost lone gunmen falling out and getting into tiffs at the local saloon. The explorations of fidelity, separation, loneliness, sadness, death, grief and violence. Violence begets violence. The story is dark enough anyway, but the film wants the visuals and the locations to be as cinematic as possible. The mountainous geography of the island impacts the story. These looming mountains have a lot of tragedy behind them. It’s been informative, in terms of the broadness of Irish life. Everything is a little bit shabby and sad. The scale of this movie is massive. Filmmakers don’t usually try to send an audience away sad. But that's part of it, a about Ireland at that time and maybe about life. Written by Gregory Mann

Rating: 4.5 out of 5 Song of the Sea is by far one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen. It holds emotion in its backgrounds and wonderful colours. Most have never seen animation like it. Song of the Sea holds an element of wonder combined with sadness. It shows both the loss and gain of hope within a character's facial expressions. For example, when Saorise (one of the main protagonists, the selkie) falls ill - they manage to include lines, implying that she's tired. The way this is animated can suggest this is for children, including that the protagonists are only six and (roughly) ten or eleven, but it is not a children's film. The film battles with issues that most children would not be able to comprehend. Added to the Irish folklore, it's overwhelming. The film forces you to pay attention, just so you understand what is going on. It shows us what is beyond our imaginations. Some even suggest research before you watch it, which is a valid point to make. Characters have their own muse, with the father (Conor, voiced by Brendan Gleeson) having sadness, Saorise (voiced by Lucy O'Connell) has a muse of temptation. She struggles to hold back from the ocean, she finds it difficult to stay by her brother; forcing him to tie her by a leash. Ben (voiced by David Rawle) has an ongoing theme of envy, jealous, for his sister. Feeling as if she's praised more, being spiteful towards her for a long duration of the 93 minutes. Furthermore, the emotion. It can sometimes be difficult to convey such feelings within a voice and a drawing. There is a certain scene where Conor is in a pub, drinking a Guinness (adding to the ongoing Irish theme), and you can see his inner torment. Not necessarily from himself but from the lighting of the pub. It's dark, golden light reflecting off some places but not massively. It's dark enough to tell us that he's grieving, black lights connoting it heavily. Saorise is mute. She can't speak. All of her emotion, sickness, is conveyed through her face. For an animator especially, it's difficult to show how she feels within a scene. The storyline relies completely on her. Song of the Sea is execellent in showing her joy when she's swimming with the seals. Her eyes hold wonder and hope within them, it's incredibly clever. Ben, however, speaks as much as he can. Coming across as incredibly spiteful towards a lot of people, seeming very irritating. We learn that Ben is extremely envious of his sister, feeling as if she's more than he is. On her birthday, he's extremely rude towards Saorise and his grandma. The grandma, in fairness, isn't too nice herself. There is one thing that kept me from giving this a full five stars. Song of the Sea has plenty of unexplained plot-holes. At the end, the people and I who watched it had mountains of questions we wanted to be answered. For those with little to no explanation of Irish folklore, we don't understand how or why their mother leaves and why Saorise falls extremely sick. Overall, Song of the Sea is a brilliant watch. It's exceptional at showing the struggles of, even after six years, a grieving family and unexplained disappearances of their mother. For those who have expereinced losing a parent, not even from death, it shows the upset and gives a soft, delicate, punch to the heart. It is certainly not a children's film. It holds issues close that today's kids would not grasp. With visual aspects conveying emotion greatly, Song of the Sea smashes your expectations of thinking it's an animated children's film. It tackles myths and real issues in a way animation has only done a few times.

Wonder Woman! The final 'trinity' movie in DC's universe. I must speak of what first comes to mind - the cinematography. The entire movie looks beautiful, from the orange beaches of Themyscira to the colours of the poison gas, 'Wonder Woman' is designed perfectly. The movie is flawlessly integrated into history, with real parts of World War One (such as General Ludendorff) playing key roles in the movie. Perhaps what is done well (where its predecessors fell) is the structure and pacing of the movie - each act builds up to the final climactic battle between hero and villain. There is no over-cluttering of characters and plot points, a feat that makes this movie great. Instead, there are very few characters, all developed well with enough dedicated screen-time. The film's key strength is its era; those engineering the war are very dismissive of Diana due to her being a woman (a historically accurate feat). How so that the movie ends with Diana being mankind's only hope! Please do yourself a favour and see this film. It is the DC Universe's first truly outstanding piece and DC's best movie since 'The Dark Knight'.

Having worked beside KSI covering media for all his Misfits & DAZN Boxing events and having had several closed door conversations with the human rotating door of professions, I was always intrigued the origin of his mindset and how he maintains it indefinitely in the public eye. When I heard a documentary detailing exactly this was debuting this month, it went straight to the top of my watchlist. As the documentary opens, it very quickly reminds you how long it has been in development – since June of 2021, over two and a half years. The timeline is somewhat chronological. While it follows JJ through 2021 and 2022, the documentary retains the freedom to jump forward and back in time to provide context to the current storyline; one such example is the representation of the genesis of the KSI character. I say character, as the film makes sure to depict JJ Olatunji and KSI as two distinct entities: JJ Olatunji is the real, aspirational KSI is the fictional alter ego created by JJ to portray a confident, funny character to win over the internet. As the life of KSI becomes more appealing, the lines between the two individuals get blurred. These benchmarks in JJ’s life allow the documentary to split into three key moments that are spliced together: the origin of KSI, the merging of KSI and JJ Olatunji, and the separation of the two identities. All the important relationships of JJ’s life are put on display. While some are kept private out of personal choice (such as that with his girlfriend), they are still featured in some regard, and their significance in JJ’s journey are still reflected. One that shines in the one-and-a-half-hour feature is JJ’s elastic relationship with his brother, Deji. As most prospective viewers will know, the Olatunji brothers have had a bumpy relationship - they were very close at the start of their YouTube journeys but fell out heavily as their YouTube personas overshadowed the real people behind them. The film has the pair explain in their own words how and why their relationship fell apart and the slow process they embarked on to rebuild it. This is a topic that I was highly anticipating an examination into and is one I think many will be satisfied with. The documentary features deep moments with the Olatunji family, and doesn’t shy away from challenging topics, informing viewers of the many struggles their family went through. Even his parents openly discuss the severe mistakes they made in raising their sons, including their use of physical abuse, and their reasons for doing so, and current regret. The portrayed upbringing of JJ is one I anticipate a lot of viewers will relate to – something I was surprised was so similar to my own. The lives of other people important to JJ’s life and the effect he had on them, good and bad are front and centre. Each of these figures provide their insights into JJ and has them explain why they believe he’s been so successful and what they believe he lacks in his life. What is perhaps the strongest positive I can surmise for the feature, is that despite being a documentary about KSI, the film doesn’t shy away from painting JJ in a bad light at times. It provides a strikingly honest portrait of JJ and how other perceive him and the KSI alter ego. This documentary doesn’t have the typical production value of a TV documentary. The Prime Video budget and care from Mindhouse Productions really shines through the cinematography of the feature, as it’s shot more like a traditional film than a documentary; this extends to the aspect ratio, which adopts the theatrical “letterbox” approach rather than the adapted-for-TV “widescreen” format most documentaries have – this awards the film a larger than life feeling that is fitting to the ambitious and ever-expanding persona of KSI. Even the structure of the documentary deviates from other documentaries in true Louis Theroux fashion. If you’re a fan or are merely interested in the pop-culture personality of KSI, I strongly encourage you to spare an hour and a half to traverse the mind of JJ Olatunji. KSI: In Real Life is an exploratory journey in time that explores sensitive and private topics with full force and uses emotional fragility to its strength. It is an honest and intelligent biographical tour that forces all doors open in the mind of the man behind the internet persona KSI. KSI: In Real Life debuts Thursday 26th on Prime Video. Watch the trailer below:

Upgrade is a science-fiction movie which follows Grey Trace, a man who becomes paralyzed and has been implanted with an experimental technology which allows a hyper-intelligent AI to control his body. It explores the dangers of technological advancement as well as the more interpersonal, emotional facets of grief, revenge, and power. When you're writing about technology and AI, there's an extremely thin line between refreshing and cheap. UPGRADE is that line. It has wobbles on either side, but it mostly traverses a wonderfully stylistic if unoriginal narrative that is elevated by the stellar craftsmanship at hand here. The writing, for the most part, I was very okay with. The story is convincing, bouncing off all-too familiar plot beats to set up the delicious blend of technological thriller and body horror revenge movie. The two genres bounce off each other very well, providing some fresh insights on a somewhat worn out concept of futuristic technology with some nice balancing between tones. Leigh Whannell keeps everything moving very quickly, the pacing extremely fitting for a movie like this. The direction is solid throughout, the action pieces hyper-stylistic with works beautifully with the premise. The duality of Grey's initial hesitation with STEM's monotonous, danger presence is played out very well in these moments, particularly during the first big action sequence. I'm certainly looking forward to whatever Whannell chooses to tackle next. The performances are all efficient, from what should be Logan Marshall-Green's star-making performance. He shows a variety of range with this turn, with shades of Tom Hardy popping in and out throughout, at least that was the vibe that I got from it. The supporting players do their jobs well, but special mention must be given to Simon Maiden as the voice of STEM. Playing off the infamous HAL in every way but without directly impersonating him, Maiden provides a gentle, delicate baseboard for a quietly lurking presence with serves the film very well in its later acts. Some of the dialogue I had an issue with, basically everything that the character of Fisk says in this entire movie is weak and doesn't do a lot to ameliorate his already lacking characterisation. I wish it had gone through another edit because it stood out like a sore thumb. It's a shame because the rest of the writing was really quite engaging. I also didn't care for how the third act plays out - I really liked the tone of the ending, but the 10 minutes before that provide absolutely no pay off and I would have liked to have seen something different done to set up the ending in a less expository way. But those are minor gripes in something I very much enjoyed!

Either I’m pissed off my chest mate, or that’s the biggest fucking boar I’ve ever seen. In 1955 we had a giant octopus in “It came from beneath the Sea” and last year we had the giant shark in “The Meg“. And in between, we were treated to a manifold collection of giant animals. There were also enormous ants (“Empire of the ants” from 1977), a big ass spider (“Big ass spider” from 2013), a giant snake (“Anaconda” from 1997), a monkey (“King Kong” from 1976), a crocodile (” Rogue ” from 2008), cockroaches (“Bug” from 1975) and wasps (“Stung” from 2015). And after doing some research you’ll notice there are more films about huge animals. Perhaps the makers of this film thought they had something original when they came up with a whopper from a wild boar. And to be honest, I thought so too. Turns out there are other movies with a frenzy boar, such as “Razorback“, “Pig Hunt” and “Chaw“. For starters, it isn’t as bad as Lake Placid: Legacy. I was convinced that this film could never be as bad as “Lake Placid: Legacy“, where a big crocodile was chasing a group of young people. This was really a crap movie. A completely ridiculous story, stupid acting and a monster that’s hardly shown on the screen. All in all, a waste of my already scarce time anyway. About “Boar” I can only say that the acting was generally not too bad. The boar was sufficiently visible. And there were even some funny moments in it. But to claim that this was one hell of a movie is also a bit exaggerated. It was full of improbabilities. And the story itself was also rather simplistic. Wow, and you expect the boar being gigantic. Wait till you see Nathan Jones. The story is set in Australia. The fact that the Australian production house Slaughter FX released this film (in the past they also released “Charlie’s farm“) made me feel hopeful. Frankly, I think most Australian horrors are sublime anyway. Maybe it has something to do with that beautiful Australian accent. It makes me instantly happy. So you’ll hear the stop word “mate” regularly here. There was no indication that the Monroe family their holidays would turn into a real nightmare. Debbie (Simone Buchanan) and her American husband Bruce (Bill Moseley) are on their way to Debbie’s brother Bernie (Nathan Jones). Together with the rest of the family. If you already think that the size of the wild boar is going to be impressive, then you’ll certainly be impressed by Bernie’s height. What a giant. He looks like a kind of Obelix who likes to eat such a wild pig for breakfast. So I was looking forward to a “Clash of the Titans”. Apparently, Slaughter FX are fan of Nathan Jones because he was also allowed to take on the role of Charlie in “Charlie’s Farm“. It’s even mentioned briefly in this movie. How come it got so big? Let’s talk about the subject: the gigantic wild boar. If you set up such a typical monster film as “Boar“, then you know in advance that you won’t get a phenomenal and astonishing story. The only thing that counts in such films is: how frightening and horrible is the huge monstrosity that kills so many innocent people and in what a horrible way they are slaughtered. The rest is secondary. Furthermore, you need to empty your head and don’t ask too many questions about the hows and why. Because it all remains a mystery. Is this wild boar so gigantic because of the consumption of large quantities of truffles or acorns? Or did it roll in a pool of chemically polluted mud? Or did a hunter shoot a load of lead in its buttocks after which the beast got so mad it took on such a grotesque form? Or is the beast coming from the underworld? I have no idea. The boar sometimes looks ugly? But what you can say is that the creature does have some remarkable skills. It turns out to be an expert in camouflage because nobody has ever seen the monster roaming around. And I thought Australians were outdoorsy who are connected with nature and spend a lot of time in the bushes with the local wildlife. Furthermore, the boar has an ingenious GPS system because it always appears in the right place at the right time. The biggest disappointment, however, is the visualization of the creature. It’s clear they used a model for the close-ups. A kind of XL Muppet of the Muppetshow. And on rare occasions, the digital version is used. But those images are extremely bad. Only when you see the monstrous head with gigantic tusks full of mucus, blood, and mud this pig looks frightening. And you can expect a few bloody, gory slaughter scenes when this monster tears up his next prey. You love movies with giant creatures? Oh well, try it. “Boar” is not of a high level and has its weak moments, but this is compensated by its uncomplicated goriness and sometimes awkward humor, such as the clumsy doings of Ken (John Jarratt) and Blue (Roger Ward) or the embarrassing behavior of Bruce (Bill Moseley). The most annoying aspects were the exaggerated flirting of the two youngsters Ella (Christie-Lee Britten) and Robert (Hugh Sheridan). And of course the bad CGI. This ensures that the film doesn’t rise above the average. But do you like a monster movie from time to time, you can still enjoy it when you see Miss Piggy roaming around. My rating 5/10 Links: IMDB

“Poor Things”     “Poor Things” in the fantastical evolution of Bella Baxter (Emma Stone), a young woman brought back to life from the brink of death by the brilliant and unorthodox daring scientist Dr. Godwin Baxter (Willem Dafoe). Under Baxter’s protection, Bella is eager to learn. Hungry for the worldliness she's lacking, Bella runs off with Duncan Wedderburn (Mark Ruffalo), a slick and debauched lawyer, on a whirlwind adventure across the continents. Free from the prejudices of her times, Bella grows steadfast in her purpose to stand for equality and liberation.   At the beginning of the film, Bella is a prisoner in the house and wears very Victorian looking blouses, but never a complete outfit. Bella doesn’t have any shame or trauma, or even a backstory. She's not raised by a society that's putting these confines on women. Bella draws things from the men she meets, from the women she meets, from the environment she's in, from what she's eating. Her character has never been told that there’s anything wrong with enjoying sex or the freedom to do whatever she wants when she wants. She's like a sponge. From being trapped at home, she goes to Lisbon on a romantic voyage with her lover. On the ship, she's met with a constant desire to escape. Then Alexandria are her younger years, where she sees the world as a messed-up place. Paris is her exploration of sexuality, where she pushes herself as far as she can before she returns home. Bella’s representation of woman sexuality is more in line with today’s landscape rather than thirty years ago. She's able to explore sex without feelings of guilt, which makes her a modern heroine. It feels like an unlocking and acceptance of what it's to be a woman and to be brave and free. Socially, you're so wired to think, ‘do people like me? She's not thinking about that.   Alongside themes of sexuality and social constraints comes the exploration of the male character's need to control Bella. Dr. Godwin Baxter is a brilliant, traumatized scientist, and a lonely man who wants to push his science and his art as far as it can go without a care for society’s rules. Baxter has his own journey as well. He starts out trying to possess her in a way, to parent her in the only way he's learned through his father. But you see that he kind of matures through his interaction with her. And eventually he comes to understand that he needs to let go and let her experience the world, and he's really supportive. Baxter also comes from an experiment, and he’s quite literally scarred by what his father has done to him. When Baxter brings Bella back to life, she becomes more than just an experiment to him, their relationship is not easily defined. Baxter hasn’t loved before, but he accidentally loves Bella, cares for her deeply and sees something of himself in her. There's an intelligence, curiosity and aliveness in Bella that he maybe wishes he could explore in himself. They're father and daughter, scientist and experiment, and even soul mates in a way, though not in a romantic or exploitative way. It’s not a simple relationship to categorize. The dynamic is being worked out over the course of the film through Bella’s discoveries. At a certain point, Baxter realizes she has to go out into the world, but he’s selfish and needs to go to a higher love.   Their relationship reaches a crisis point when Bella decides to leave home with Duncan Wedderburn. Duncan embodies toxic masculinity. He’s controlling, insecure and has a deep alpha male mentality. When Bella decides to leave London with Duncan Wedderburn and travel to Lisbon, she leaves with the mind and outlook of a young girl. Lisbon is her first time out in the world, and she wants to consume and experience everything, revealing in all the possibilities it has to offer. The danger with Duncan is that he just come across as a cad. As a ladies man who has been with many women, when he unexpectedly falls in love with Bella, it ultimately destroys him. She’s the perfect woman for him if he would just let her be herself. She’s rebellious, she’s game, and she makes him feel something, but his need to control kills the relationship. Under every raging narcissist is a really broken, vulnerable person, and Bella just cracks him open.   A bittersweet catalyst in Baxter and Bella’s relation's hip is the introduction of his student, Max McCandles (Ramy Youssef). Max is a poor-disheveled student who's clearly in awe of his professor, who has offered him an opportunity he can’t refuse. He has a gentle and friendly energy, but we also see an edge of darkness that he wants to let go. Part of the draw for Max is that he has lived a very sheltered life, and Bella seems safe, and very pure for obvious reasons. He’s a character that grows and whose moral compass shifts as he encounters Baxter and Bella. There's a rawness about Bella which attracts Max, she really speaks to something that any person is probably trying to regain. She's a modern woman in this time, and she gets to retain that human curiosity that we all had at a young age. It really shows the multitude of what is thrown at women from a young age. Bella gets to experience that from a different vantage point and then pick it apart and demolish it.   Harry Astley (Jerrod Carmichael) is someone that Bella meets at a key point in her journey on the ship. So far, she thinks that people are good, which comes from a place of privilege. Harry broadens the scope of the world. He shows her poverty that she didn’t know existed in a way that's juxtaposed to the very wealthy as a spectator sport. Harry is a cynic, through his life and career, his viewpoint has narrowed, which is why the scenes with Bella work so well; the juxtaposition of her naivety to his prejudices. When he takes Bella to Alexandria, she's confronted for the first time by mankind’s inhumanity to poverty. When he takes her to Alexandria, her soul shatters and her entire life changes. It's her first trauma and leads to some very important decisions in her life. Bella’s eyes are opened to the monstrous part of society when Harry takes her to Alexandria, and she sees the impoverished slum dwellers. This is the only time we see Bella as a representative of her social class and as an upper-class woman. There are really souls in the world that are pure and nonjudgmental, and you oscillate between thinking that they’re naïve and also wishing that you could have that freedom.   Bella is fascinated by Martha Von Kurtzroc (Hanna Schygulla) when she meets her on the cruise ship. She’s an older woman who's dressed eccentrically for the time and is very independent, so Bella is inspired by her instantly. Martha is a Women’s Libber and emancipated. She’s wealthy and can afford to have certain thoughts and ideologies because she’s never been dependent on a man. In Paris, Bella reaches a pinnacle for her sexual and intellectual development. It all comes together there in a way, she truly decides on how to see the world and how she wants to live in it. Swiney (Kathryn Hunter) is outrageous and cruel. On the face of it, she’s the horrid Madame of the Brothel, but then she falls for Bella, and she wants to possess this extraordinary creature. With Swiney’s character, Bella ultimately understands that it’s not just men who try to control her. With the profession she works in and the assortment of characters that have come through her doors, Swiney assumes that she has seen every facet of womankind. When Bella shows up on her doorstep, it astonishes her. She’s amazed by this, kind of naïve genius.   After Bella returns home and starts to settle back and relax into this world — and the happiness of her existence, Alfred Blessington (Christopher Abbot) suddenly appears, and her whole backstory comes to surface. He’s a bit of a cunt, generally, but he still has a heart somewhere deep down, shrouded under a bunch of ice. He's very possessive in some ways, but he's been through war and has a lot of PTSD. While Alfie knows Bella from her former existence, he's, ultimately, seeing her for the first time. It's probably quite jarring for Alfred because he's catching her when she's become a fully formed adult again. To him, he probably actually believes this is her, and it's some farce, there's a lot of denial happening. His character admits that their relationship had not been an ordinary one. It feels like they probably had this sort of mischievous, very combative, but fiery relationship in the past.   “Poor Things” deals with the patriarchal tension through Bella’s eyes. Bella is not only the protagonist but also the foil for the male characters. It's her ability to remain true to her humanity and to use her experiences to discover a sense of purpose that makes her admirable. Her zest for life encapsulates the curiosity that humans possess and crave new life experiences. It's about the development and liberation of a woman who grows up in a very repressive male society. That’s a lot of the source of the comedy because her relationships with the male characters are very frank and quite exposing of the fear men have of women. The male characters are trying to control Bella in their own various ways, and she doesn’t even entertain it. She's just too autonomous. The film explores men’s views of women and the lens that they're put under, and how men believe women are there to serve them.   What would a woman be, if she were able to start from scratch? Alasdair Gray’s novel is immediately something very visually striking and complex, the themes, the humor, and the complexity of its characters and language. The book is packed with ideas about gender, identity, and even Scottish nationalism. You’re in this incredibly rich philosophical and political world, all while being hilarious. It's a story about a woman’s freedom in society. To imagine a world where your mind isn’t conditioned by growing up and being taught to be a certain way. But it's also a version of the Frankenstein story, inverting the classic story by making the monster’ a very perceptive, beautiful woman, and her love interests potential monsters. While the book is told from numerous points of view, the script gives Bella the central one. It’s Bella’s coming-of-age story, and it lives in a dystopian version of a Merchant Ivory film, with the idea of a grand tour. The script pulls on different mythologies and story tropes. The story is grotesque and visceral.   There's a different mentality around sex in Europe versus America. We can watch so much violence and pain inflicted on people in a mass way in America, but nudity and sexuality are shocking to us. With the liberation of social constraints, also comes the return to a child-like wonder of the world. It’s that draw to purity, to something that hasn’t been tarnished. A wish to possess something that maybe reminds us of whom we used to be and try and regain that innocence in ourselves. We're very cognizant of the sexual politics and how that relates to the present day. There are always those people in society that don’t have the look of the time. You could walk down the street now and see someone who looks like they’ve come straight from the 70s. We're exploring who those people might have been, and what if they thought differently? When reading about women in the Victorian times, she noticed it was often much more about what rules they should follow. Bella has no shackles on her, making her a wonderful character to watch and the perfect example of pushing back against what was expected in Victorian England.   “Poor Things” comes at a time that might offer some insight into the problems currently faced around the world. The times that we live in right now can feel particularly chaotic. Sometimes you want to look back in history and learn lessons from the past. This is a political film, and we've to recognize the feminist and socialist aspects. The endeavor of the novel and the film is to make the world a better place by not accepting the evils we've come to regard as normal.   Written by Gregory Mann