A worthy sequel for the potty-mouthed red menace After suffering a personal tragedy and hitting rock bottom, Wade Wilson (Deadpool) finds himself seeking consolation at the X-Mansion where he's reunited with Colossus and Negasonic Teenage Warhead. However, after a training mission goes badly wrong and spending time in the Icebox – a notorious mutant prison – Deadpool's priority changes. Deadpool sets about building a team of rogue mutants with the aim of rescuing Russell – a 14-year-old boy and fellow mutant – from the clutches of the brutal, time-traveling mutant known as, Cable. I had been concerned about Deadpool 2 after the news that director, Tim Miller had left the project over "creative differences" with the lead actor, Ryan Reynolds: stating he "didn't want to make some stylised movie that was 3 times the budget." I have to say, that is essentially what has happened, and something that made Deadpool the success that it was has been lost along the way. Deadpool 2 then, is another example of bigger not always being better. Fortunately, the film retains enough of its predecessor's charm, wit, and other unique qualities to get it through. The cast from the first film are back in full force: Ryan Reynolds reprises his role of Wade Wilson (Obviously - who else?) and T.J. Miller returns as Weasel, Wade's wise-cracking but cowardly friend. Fan favourites, Brianna Hildebrand and Stefan Kapicic return as Negasonic Teenage Warhead and Colossus respectively, along with a mixed bag of new mutants including the brilliant Zazie Beetz as Domino. Deadpool 2 is another strong outing for Josh Brolin in his second Marvel appearance of the year and – like Thanos before him – is able to create a truly three dimensional and sympathetic character in Cable. Overall, the cast is excellent, I enjoyed all the new characters and was thrilled to see Brianna and Stefan return. My only issue with the film (in regards to the cast at least) is that I'd like to have seen a good deal more from Brianna and Shioli Katsuna - who plays Yukio, a new addition to the cast and Negasonic's girlfriend. Negasonic was one of my favourite characters in Deadpool, but here, she never really gets involved, and Yukio's abilities are teased towards the end of the third act but never really explored sufficiently. The soundtrack and cinematography are adequate but nothing like as memorable as Deadpool and the action scenes are competently shot, although some of the larger set-pieces do suffer from the usual Marvel movie problem of looking over-manufactured. In contrast, the smaller fight scenes feel considerably more physical, concise, and enjoyable; something sorely missing from many recent Marvel releases. Verdict Whilst never quite reaching the same heights as its predecessor, Deadpool 2 retains its razor-sharp wit, deadpan humour, and proves itself a worthy sequel to one of my favourite 'superhero' movies of recent years. Deadpool 2 keeps up the tradition of its fourth wall breaking, self-referential humour and parodying of superhero genre cliches, even if it does fall into a few in the process. The cast is superb and – working off a splendid script – delivers their lines faultlessly. Where the film falters slightly is, firstly in the story, and secondly in trying to be bigger and louder than it needs to be. No-one goes to see a film like Deadpool 2 to watch something with an underlying, philosophical message about the importance of family. I'm sorry, but they just don't, and yet that's exactly what this film attempts. There's also a real fear for me that the Deadpool movies may be getting a bit too big for their boots, as they say. The first film was better for being less over the top and more modest in the scale of its set-piece action scenes. I fear that future films could soon become more corporate and lose more of what made them special; until they're just more of the same. For now at least, this will be another film to add to my collection and one I very much enjoyed seeing at the cinema. 8/10

Since early December 2017, you couldn’t escape the empowering anthem, This Is Me from the soundtrack to 2017’s, The Greatest Showman. From radio stations to supermarkets, the song was inescapable, as was other forms of marketing for the upcoming film release. And after initially passing it off as another desperate Oscar baiting film, I sat down at the start of 2018, and was immediately enthralled with the toe tapping songs and sublime cinematography, just like many fans of the film did. But that’s not to say this is the perfect film. If you’re looking for a 100% accurate retelling of P.T. Barnum’s (Hugh Jackman) life, you may not find this as enjoyable. Throughout the film, Barnum is often written in a way that doesn’t justify why he starts what many people of the time would call “a freak show”, but it instead gives you an insight into why Barnum sees this as a good idea. Lines like “they’re already laughing kid, might as well get paid for it” can makes sense to some people, and back then, it could’ve been seen as justification. We also have to appreciate that while doing something like this in 2018 would be morally wrong, back when Barnum started the circus, it was socially acceptable to go to a show like this, and laugh at the “oddities” on display. There’s also the two romantic subplots that didn’t really happen. There’s the added romantic tension between Barnum and Jenny Lind, (Rebecca Ferguson) which was the only narrative element that I didn’t care for. There wasn’t a big impact on the plot apart from one argument with Barnum’s wife, Charity. (Michelle Williams) It also felt like it was forced in for a contrived attempt at drama. The other romantic subplot between Zac Efron’s Phillip Carlyle, and Zendaya’s Anne Wheeler. This one had much better chemistry and tension between the fictional couple, primarily because of the prejudice of the time period. Efron and Zendaya create a real sense of restricted love, where the characters are desperate to be together, but feel restrained by the world around them. Highlights include their tender interaction at Lind’s opening night, and the big expression of their love, and the chains that hold them back during Rewrite The Stars. But forgetting all the historical inaccuracies for just a moment, the film still others a lot for the modern audience to enjoy. Seamus McGarvey’s cinematography is beautifully handled, with sharp and clear use of colour through each frame of the film. From the silhouettes of Barnum at the start, to the shots of yesteryear America, as Barnum and Charity start their lives together, each image comes alive with beautiful imagery. But it never takes away from the first class performances by the entire cast, with a particular highlight coming from Keala Settle as Lettie, (The Bearded Lady) who stole the show whenever she took the spotlight. She’ll make you laugh and cry at each perfect point. And when it comes to the songs, it’s some of the best examples of film songs in recent memory. With the minds behind City Of Stars from 2016’s La La Land responsible for all the lyrics this time, each song fills the listener with empowering messages and thrilling imagery, while bringing the film to life in a whole other way. Just like the opening to La La Land, many audience members will be won over by the end of the first song! So, is The Greatest Showman the most accurate telling of Barnum’s life, not by any stretch of the imagination, but if you can look past that, and be sucked into this interpretation of history, then many are bound to be enthralled with the show stopping tunes, fantastic performances across the board, and some stellar imagery. Having spoken to many viewers of the film, it’s done exactly that to them, with some saying they’ve felt the urge to join in the songs every-time they heard them. All I can say is, no wonder it did so well. Musical fans, you’ll love it! Historians… maybe look somewhere else. 4.5 Stars Out Of 5

(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

(Release Info London schedule; August 2nd, 2018, Silver City, 19:00) "The Darkest Minds" When Ruby Daly (Lidya Jewett)) woke up on her tenth birthday, something about her had changed. Something alarming enough to make her parents lock her in the garage and call the police. Something that gets her sent to Thurmond, a brutal government rehabilitation camp. She might have survived the mysterious disease that’s killed most of America’s children, but she and the others have emerged with something far worse; frightening abilities they cannot control. Now sixteen, Ruby (Amandla Stenberg) is one of the dangerous ones. When the truth comes out, Ruby barely escapes Thurmond with her life. Now she’s on the run, desperate to find the one safe haven left for kids like her; East River. She joins a group of kids who escaped their own camp. Liam Stewart (Harris Dickinson), their brave leader, is falling hard for Ruby. But no matter how much she aches for him, Ruby can’t risk getting close. Not after what happened to her parents. When they arrive at East River, nothing is as it seems, least of all its mysterious leader. But there are other forces at work, people who will stop at nothing to use Ruby in their fight against the government. Ruby will be faced with a terrible choice, one that may mean giving up her only chance at a life worth living. Ruby has been imprisoned for six years, and ultimately she meets up with a group of kids who are the closest thing to family that she's got. When Ruby escapes from the camp, it’s very free and youthful and happy spirited. The character of Ruby is pretty tough. She's really passionate. She stands her ground.  She knows what she wants. Orange is the color classification for those who developed telepathic abilities. Ruby is classified as an orange and develops the ability to read minds, influence people's actions and thoughts, alter or erase memories, and change the feelings of others. It's a fantastic and critical component in a movie that's about difference and the embracing the championing of difference. Ruby is a kind of the make-or-break decision on this film. She's kind of profound in the way she thinks about things and feels things and she really responded to this material and had the right depth, the right ability to hold some things back and to not kind of give it all up and reveal all of who she's in every frame, which is very important to this movie. The whole movie is a quest for this ‘slip kids’ camp. And for this camp where supposedly kids live free, the character of Clancy Clay (Patrick Gibson) is pretty critical because he runs this utopian kind of what could be a ‘Lord Of The Flies’, ‘Maze Runner’, kid-only civilization or outpost, with order, with kindness, with charisma. There's even the possibility of a love triangle between Clancy, Ruby and Liam. Clancy is also classified as an orange and develops telepathic abilities. The character of Liam led an uprising and is on the run. He’s fiercely protective of this young girl named Zu (Miya Cech), who escaped with him. The character doesn’t talk for ninety-five percent of the movie and that’s not easy. The character of Zu, who we learn, over the course of the movie, has been through real trauma; way more trauma than someone that age should ever have to go through. Blue is the color classification for those who developed telekinetic powers. Liam is classified as a blue and he develops the ability to move objects with his mind. Gold is the color classification for those who developed electrokinetic powers. Zu is classified as a gold and develops the ability to create and control electricity. Travelling on the quest to the slip kids camp with Ruby and Liam is Chubs (Skylan Brooks). Chubs is not only a dimensional and authentic character the way all of our characters are, but he brings a certain levity. He kind of calls it like it's. When he sees something brewing between Ruby and Liam, he’s going to name it even if it makes people uncomfortable. And that you need that levity in a world, and in a film, that has some heavy themes and some intense scenes and sequences. And the tone of the Chubs character is that really, kind of winning, comedic aspect in the midst of this virtual family that’s making their way through the landscape. Green is the color classification for individuals who developed enhanced mental and intellectual powers. Chubs is classified as a Green (telekinetic). Chubs develops heightened problem solving abilities and a photographic memory. Cate (Mandy Moore) is a doctor who tries to help Ruby. She's basically a savior of sorts. Lady Jane (Gwendoline Christie) is a bounty hunter who hunts the children down. She's this kind of road warrior/bounty hunter, traversing the landscape looking for escaped kids, trying to collect a bounty, trying to take them out. She needs to be scary, but the film wants her to be kind of scary and a threat in an interesting and different kind of way.   "The Darkest Minds" is an adaptation of the best-selling book by Alexandra Bracken, the first in a YA trilogy ('The Darkest Minds', 'Never Fade', and 'In The Afterlight'). There’s a reason why there are fans of this particular series of books. They resonate with the characters. They resonate with the message, and they resonate with the concept of it. 'The Darkest Minds' starts in a turbulent America where 98% of the children’s population has died of a mysteries disease, deeming the 2% of the surviving children enemies of the state and forcing them on the run. So it's kind of a journey for all the characters do build in the fact that they have to meet each other, find out what each person does. Then they find that they're a little scared of each other because they don't know if each one of them is going turn them in. And so it becomes their part of their trust each other. Once they trust each other, now they can go out and help each other to try and get to where they need to get in the end. But bad guys are always after them and that's the bad part about it is they never know who's their friend and who's their foe. This movie shows that in the end, that what people see as a liability or a difference is actually a power. The movie is about kids being able to use these powers in order to survive, it’s a lot of action, but it’s also a lot of heart. “The Darkest Minds” hinges on audiences identifying with the character's struggles and being able to see themselves in this nightmare. The film feels like a reality that we live in today and recognize. It’s what makes the powers unique, they contrast with our otherwise normal reality. You should be able to imagine being able to go out right now and see someone doing these amazing things. More than ever in the world we're aware of our own mortality. We live in turbulent times, and as a consequence these dystopian stories have greater relevance to our lives than ever because the potential for it to become a reality is great. And it’s so universal, in that it’s about kids growing up into teenagers and discovering that they they’re different, which people don’t understand, especially adults and the government. So they’re thrown into camps. And the story follows these children becoming young adults and learning to stand up for themselves and protect themselves. The fear of fitting in and the search for acceptance often follows us into adulthood. This story is about a world that's not very different from ours. The majority of the population of children has died. And the kids who are left have developed these mental abilities that are inexplicable. And so, because of these abilities, the adults are afraid of them and they put them into camps. And so, this particular story focuses on this girl who escapes from one of these camps and what happens when she finds a family of her own on the outside. Anyone who's been a teenager can relate to this story. And that's really something we feel that set us apart, that when people see this trailer and when people get to go see the film, they're going to realize, this is a film about now and about something that feels very real and that could happen tomorrow, despite the sort of fantasy and the power element of it. It feels to us much more grounded and real and it takes place tomorrow as opposed to some dystopian future with a new world order. There are number themes that kind of run through the spine of the movie. It’s very much a film about belonging and in that regard, this movie happens to be about kids with some powers, but there’s no one who’s ever lived who hasn’t wrestled with that search for identity. It’s a search that's often at it's most heightened in adolescence, and so that’s the focus of the film. It's ultimately about a small group of kids with powers, super-human powers, that they don’t yet fully understand, who find each other by being collectively on the run from the authorities. And it’s about the way in which they rely on and connect with each other as they search for others like them. It might be dealing with intense themes and events, but the movie is fundamentally really hopeful. It’s hopeful about the possibility of connection and the possibility of acceptance. This movie transcends all ages. It’s not just about being a teenager. Everyone has been in that place when they're not completely comfortable with who they're. It’s about facing the things about you that you aren’t happy with, that you consider a flaw, and being able to grow into this place of being able to embrace those things. Being able to access what makes you unique and use it as a strength. This story follows a character that, in the beginning, is powerless and essentially frightened and ashamed of what she's. And by the end, you watch her grow. You watch her become this empowered strong character being able to do things she never thought she could do. Everyone can identify with that journey. The film connects very strongly to our times, to our political situation, severe and deeply upsetting and awful refugee situations around the world, and that in terms of our media, we’re starting to, connect more with human beings that are seemingly different from us, and recognize that those differences aren’t so great after all. And that we can recognize, the humanity in each other, and what it's to need comfort, to need shelter, to need liberty, It’s very much a landscape that is the natural world that, although it's now devoid of young people, is still beautiful and lush and filled with hope. The whole point of the book is showing the hope of people triumphing through these prejudices and using their abilities and surrogate families and being accepted by others who understand what it takes to be free. "The Darkest Minds" is going to give audiences a hell of a ride. It’s going to be a ride that will be thrilling in that it has action, it has adventure, it has super-visual set pieces, battle scenes, powers being used; all of that. Audiences can also expect a deeply emotional experience with this movie because although it’s filled with spectacle and just cool visceral sequences, at it's core it’s also really about characters looking for where they belong and discovering ultimately that where they belong is with each other.  

(Release Info London schedule, June 25th, 2020, Curzon Home Cinema) https://www.curzonhomecinema.com/film/watch-anthropocene-film-online "Anthropocene: The Human Epoch" A cinematic meditation on humanity’s massive reengineering of the planet, "Anthropocene" is a four years in the making feature documentary film from Jennifer Baichwal. Third in a trilogy that includes "Manufactured Landscapes" (2006) and "Watermark" (2013), the film follows the research of an international body of scientists, 'The Anthropocene Working Group' who, after nearly 10 years of research, are arguing that the evidence shows 'The Holocene Epoch' gave way to 'The Anthropocene Epoch' in the mid-twentieth century, as a result of profound and lasting human changes to 'The Earth'. From concrete seawalls in China that now cover 60% of the mainland coast, to the biggest terrestrial machines ever built in Germany, to psychedelic potash mines in Russia’s 'Ural Mountains', to metal festivals in the closed city of Norilsk, to the devastated 'Great Barrier Reef' in Australia and surreal lithium evaporation ponds in 'The Atacama Desert', the filmmaker has traversed the globe using high-end production values and state of the art camera techniques to document the evidence and experience of human planetary domination. At the intersection of art and science, "Anthropocene" witnesses, in an experiential and non-didactic sense, a critical moment in geological history; bringing a provocative and unforgettable experience of our species breadth and impact. 'Anthropocene' is our current geological epoch, proposed by members of 'The Anthropocene Working Group' and beginning mid-twentieth century, in which humans are the primary cause of permanent planetary change. 'The Anthropocene' is a term widely used to denote the proposed current geological epoch, in which humans are the primary cause of permanent planetary change. The research charts the progression of human influence on 'The Earth’s' system through a variety of markers: the terraforming of land for agriculture, industrialization and urbanization; the extraction of resources and the phenomenon of anthroturbation; sediment displacement, the proliferation of dams and groundwater depletion; the technosphere, consisting of all human-systems and technologies, which now weighs upwards of 30 trillion tons; and human-influenced peak levels of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus. At time of writing, 'The Anthropocene' is not a formally defined geological unit within 'The Geological Time Scale'; it must be formally debated and ratified or rejected by 'The International Commission On Stratigraphy', a process that can take decades. Our current period of geological time is widely accepted to be 'The Holocene Epoch', which began some 12,000 years ago as the glaciers of the last ice age receded. We've reached an unprecedented moment in planetary history. Humans now affect 'The Earth' and it's processes more than all other natural forces combined. 'The Anthropocene Project' investigates human influence on the state and future of 'The Earth'. 'The Holocene Epoch' started 11,700 years ago as 'The Glaciers' of the last 'Ice Age' receded. We've left 'The Holocene' and entered a new epoch; 'The Anthropocene'. Humans have become the single most defining force on the planet and that the evidence for this is overwhelming. Terraforming of 'The Earth' through mining, urbanization, industrialization and agriculture; the proliferation of dams and diverting of waterways; 'CO2' and acidification of oceans due to climate change; the pervasive presence around the globe of plastics and other technofossils; unprecedented rates of deforestation and extinction; these human incursions are so massive in scope that they've already entered, and will endure in, geological time. Embracing and developing innovative techniques, the film embarks on an epic journey around the world to every continent save 'Antarctica', to capture the most spectacular evidence of human influence, while taking time to reflect on the deeper meaning of what these profound transformations signify. The result is a collection of experiences that will immerse viewers in the new world of 'The Anthropocene Epoch', delivering a sense of scale, gravity, and impact that both encompasses and moves beyond the scope of conventional screens and prints. It feels like the films keep getting bigger in scope. This is because the urgency around problems we face at a global level demands it. But big picture subjects falls apart without an appropriate balance of scale and detail. Sometimes you need to go up in the sky to convey place, but if you stay up there all the time, you float away from what is meaningful. Humans are not meant to remain at an omniscient level, though we like to contemplate from there and technology allows us to do so. The film tries to intelligently translate one medium into another; which meant in most instances trying to convey scale in time. Hence the eight minute long, single take opening sequence. The vast Eupa factory floor would not have meant as much without the glances up from workers as the dolly passed them, or the person sleeping at his post after everyone left for lunch; the massive resettling of people and cities for 'The Three Gorges Dam' would not have resonated without the woman sewing at the construction site. The biggest lesson is illumination through juxtaposition. The film did not have a lot of information about context; if you needed more than a few words to describe where you're, it isn't going to work. Instead the film puts one place against another to sharpen the focus of both; 'The Buriganga River' next to a pristine 'Lake Ealue' in 'British Columbia'; people taking a sacred bath in 'The Ganges' at 'The Kumbh Mela' next to girls cartwheeling on the beach in California. But here again it's the combination of big picture and particular focus that brought an experiential understanding of context. It's the testimony of Inocencia Gonzales from 'The Cucupá Nation', whose fishing community is decimated as a result of the dry delta, that makes viewers understand that place. "Anthropocene" steps one place back from the other two films in it's premise; that humans change 'The Earth' and it's systems more than all natural processes combined. The film required a global perspective to drive home the fact that we humans, who've really only been up and running in modern civilization for about 10 thousand years, now completely dominate a planet that has been around for 4.5 billion. How do you convey that domination? Here again it's tempting to stay in the realm of the big; the omniscient. The aerial perspective, through helicopter and cineflix or drones, is woven all through the film, and sometimes the only way you experience a place; the phosphate mines in Florida, for example, or the oil refineries in Houston, Texas. But when everything is big or far away and diagrammatic, scale becomes incomprehensible. A timelapse of one small piece of bleaching coral tells the story of anthropogenic ocean acidification, and the tusks of seven thousand elephants, each one carefully weighed and recorded, becomes the way we understand human-directed extinction. The balance of scale and detail is also where we've learned from each other over 13 years of collaboration. This film certainly deploys the big picture, and endeavors sometimes to convey a place in one wide frame. But the film also seeks moments of intimacy, the detail needed to reveal, understand or encourage empathy within context. This is where the ethics of engagement are critical, and go further to say that ethics are the most important dimension of our filmmaking practice. When you go all over the world for your project, it's crucial to try and do so with humility, and an openness to what the context wants to tell you about itself, especially its overlooked margins or ignored corners. The post-1950 period of accelerated industrial development, extraction of natural resources, population growth and globalization, bringing unprecedented increases in forms of human-caused pollution. The measurement of time as it relates to geological phenomena, encompassing the entirety of Earth’s history since it's formation. Our current geologic epoch, which extends to approximately 11.7 thousands years before the twenty-first century, and is the second of two current 'Quaternary Epochs'. A dynamic marriage of lens-based media and cutting-edge technology, "Anthropocene" combines documentary storytelling with responsive gigapixel essays, 360° film, and '3D' modelling to fully immerse audiences in these photographic worlds, revealing what they signify for both the history and future of human civilization, and it's accumulated effect on the planet. The film allows audiences to journey to some of the most imposing, stunning, and remote locations in the world; places they will learn they're connected to, or often accountable for, but would never normally experience. These hot spots encourages exploration of the entire image, give context connecting the photo to the tenets of 'The Anthropocene', and offer gratifying scavenger hunt moments of discovery. Designed to open up a unique and complementary exploration of locations, ideas, and themes, '360°' video and cinematic 'VR' bring the borderless frame to cinema, offering viewers a completely different relationship to the photographic image, where the spatial relationships between objects and people in the images remain intact. The aim is to create experiences that literally take viewers into the realities of 'The Anthropocene'; hard-to-reach, out-of-bounds locations that few people ever get to visit in their lifetime.

I don’t know what you’re fucking saying, I don’t understand. What an impressive film. You won’t get a feeling of excitement or relaxation after watching it. It’ll rather leave a bad taste in your mouth. It was as if the smell of blood, rancid food, vomit, and sweat has nestled itself in my nostrils. I had this annoying, uncomfortable feeling afterward. I’m convinced there are other places in this world where you don’t want to end up and which aren’t good for your health, both physically and psychologically. But the Thai prison Klong Prem seems to me the most damned and inhumane place on our planet. A place where you stop being a person and where you try to survive in any way you can. I’m strongly in favor of setting up an exchange program for prisoners worldwide. In such a way that prisoners from wherever, get the chance to taste the prison climate of these regions. I’m sure many will start realizing how privileged their treatment is in this part of the world. Who knows, maybe even a few will come to their senses. Is there a translator in the house? “A prayer before dawn” feels like a documentary. It’s as if the camera is filming over the shoulders of Billy Moore (Joe Cole) all the time, a Brit who’s a boxer in Thailand and is being arrested for selling drugs. The nightmare in which he’s imprisoned for three years and the daily struggle in this hell hole is the basis for his book that he publishes later on. It’s titled “A prayer before dawn: A nightmare in Thailand“. Don’t expect long dialogues. Or you are someone who understands Thai quite well. That alone would drive me crazy already. The endless whining and shouting of those tattooed, golden-toothed Thai criminals. You have no idea what they are talking about. You can only guess whether they ask a very ordinary question or threat you. Brutal, intense and realistic. The number of films that take place in prisons is almost infinite. But there are none so realistic and painful to behold as “A prayer before dawn“. Even “Brawl in Cell Block 99” doesn’t seem to be so brutal and intense, despite the extremely violent images. Why? Because “Brawl in Cell Block 99” is a fictional story. The story about Billy Moore shows an unambiguous, unvarnished picture of his struggle for survival and his perseverance to maintain himself in this barbaric environment. A story about how an individual has to push his limits both physically and psychically. A black and white portrait with a thin dividing line between life and death. One moment you see how Billy almost kills a fellow prisoner at the request of a corrupt guard. The next moment you see a tender moment between him and the transvestite Fame (Pornchanok Mabklang). A moment to catch your breath after all the brutal violence. Top notch acting. Even from those ex-prisoners. The acting of Joe Cole is extremely convincing. You can simply feel his fury, despair, and fear. Cole’s acting is purely en simply physical as there is practically no dialogue to be heard. A shrill and threatening “Fuck off” is the main thing that comes over his lips. You are witnessing how the accumulated tension and frustration suddenly flares up during confrontations and his Thai boxing. And at the same time, you see Cole fighting against his addiction. The Thai inmates are all amateurs in the field of acting but apparently, a large number of these side characters actually have spent time behind bars. Maybe that’s why it all feels so real. Just go watch this top-notch movie. No, “A prayer before dawn” is no fun to watch and will certainly still haunt you the next days after. If you expect a detailed story, you will certainly be disappointed afterward. The narrative is reasonably straightforward and concise. It’s nothing more than a report of Billy’s stay in this hellish place on earth and his constant fight to get out of it unscathed. But, as I said, this film will certainly stay with you. It’s, as it were, beaten into you. My rating 7/10

Director: Brad Peyton With: Dwayne Johnson, Naomie Harris, Malin Akerman, Jeffrey Dean Morgan Release Date: Apr 13, 2018 Based on the mid-’80s Bally Midway arcade game that unofficially influenced Disney’s “Wreck-It Ralph,” Brad Peyton “Rampage” doesn’t seem to understand its own appeal. Reuniting disaster driven star Dwayne Johnson with his “San Andreas” director, this brainless big-screen monster-smash movie assumes that audiences want to see the Rock stop three enormous mutant creatures from destroying America. I left the film feeling unsatisfied and confused, the whole film was not consistent through out, at the start it starts of at the ISS (International Space Station) which shows all members being eaten/killed by a huge rat. As the film continues it the shows Davis (Dwayne Johnson) relationship with a gorilla who inhales this gene modifying substances and then goes crazy with a wolf and what i can only think is a crocodile. Rampage is not a film that i would happily say to people go and watch, unless your a huge Dwayne Johnson fan there is no other reason to see this movie. Once again Bred Peyton has failed, with his 2015 'San Andreas' the cast was amazing the actual message of the film has been lost again and the film being over dramatic, The same feeling i felt after watching San Andreas i felt after watching Rampage, it is a shame because i loved the cast, scenery, the characters and graphics in the movies but it just deliver the wow factor.

(Release Info London schedule; March 25th, 2020, Curzon Bloomsbury, The Brunswick Centre, London WC1N 1AW, United Kingdom, 6:00 pm) https://www.curzoncinemas.com/bloomsbury/film-info/the-painted-bird "The Painted Bird" Based on Jerzy Kosiriski novel, "The Painted Bird" is a meticulous 35mm black and white evocation of wild, primitive 'Eastern Europe' at the bloody close of 'World War II'. The film follows the journey of 'The Boy' (Petr Kotlar), entrusted by his persecuted parents to an elderly foster mother (Claudia Vaseková). The old woman soon dies and 'The Boy' is on his own, wandering through the countryside, from village to village, farmhouse to farmhouse. As he struggles for survival, 'The Boy' suffers through extraordinary brutality meted out by the ignorant, superstitious peasants and he witnesses the terrifying violence of the efficient, ruthless soldiers, both 'Russian' and 'German'. In a defining scene, one of the peasants shows 'The Boy' the flight of a captive bird, whom the man has painted and then released back into it's own flock. The bird is immediately ripped apart because it's different from it's fellows. That lesson reinforces all 'The Boy' already knows and will soon know better; difference is fatal. But there are rare moments of compassion. Hans (Stellan Skarsgărd), a 'German' soldier spares 'The Boy, a priest (Harvey Keitel) intervenes on his behalf, and finally 'The Boy' becomes the protégé of Garbos (Julien Sands), a 'Russian' sniper, who's kind to the child, but ruthless with the enemy. And there are signs of love. 'The Boy' is seduced by Ludmilla (Jitka Cvanrarnova), an older girl, finally re-discovering the comfort of intimacy, only to realize that he has been used. When he's miraculously reunited with his weakened father Nicodemus (Petr Varnek) at the end of the war, 'The Boy' is cold and impenetrable, hardened by his ordeal. Yet we can still glimpse something of the old, sensitive 'Boy' (Antonin Masek) behind the eyes of the new. Perhaps there's hope. "The Painted Bird" is a meditation on evil, but also, the opposite, goodness, empathy, love. In their absence, we inevitably turn to those values. When we do have glimpses of good and love in "The Painted Bird", we appreciate their essence and we yearn for more. This is the positive message of the movie, the human longing for good. When 'The Boy' cries: ‘I want to go home!’, we too want to go home, to a safe place of love'. Anything else seems absurd. And to preserve the sense of reality, we've a story order, so that the growth of the child actor mirrors the progression and growth of the central character. The black and white images, the framing, the pacing and the expansive setting of the countryside gives the viewers the emotional room to seriously reflect on the acts of violence that 'The Boy' sees and endures. In several of the most problematic scenes, the boy isn't there at all. The camera views the action in his place and conveys his subjective vision. The goal is to create a series of tableaux that, cumulatively, takes the protagonist on a journey to the very heart of the dark human soul. Each part of the series is a visual clue, a sort of lost fragment of a larger painting, a canvas that draws the protagonist irrevocably toward a final catharsis. It's intended as a kind of gradual peeling away of layers so that, by the end, the viewer has arrived at the very core of the central character, who has discovered a hard-won truth. It’s the story’s spirit of the ballad, it's quiet urgency, the vivid internal world of the central character, 'The Boy', whose nature is beautiful despite the horror around him. It’s also the story of the historical and geographical setting, and the characters 'The Boy' encounters. It’s not always important that we love these characters or mourn their fate. What's important is that we see them and bear witness. Adults have their own pasts, which they're aware of, and at the same time they can imagine a future. But this is not true for a child. The past is an unbelievably shallow body of water, where it’s not possible to swim. And the future cannot be imagined at all. A child, basically, can only think a few days ahead. What will happen in a month is unknowable. Several clinical psychologists have concluded that children, paradoxically, accept difficult reality far more easily than adults do. They take it as it's. And of course, this is the quality that helps children survive by allowing them to believe that the terrible things around them are normal. Something like this happens to the main character, 'The Boy', who's saved but perhaps irrevocably damaged by the very resilience that allowed him to tolerate horror. 'The Boy' is a kind of symbol, a representative of all those hundreds of thousands of children who lived through the war, wandered through ruined Europe, lost their parents and perhaps never saw them again. And it’s just the same now across the entire world wherever military conflict is going on. After reading the original novel 'The Painted Bird', we're shocked by the descriptions of violence and brutality. The conception of violence can be disturbing, but it's not one-dimensional, or even two-dimensional. Violence unveils and frames the essence of humanity. The book was seen as autobiographical, but then, Kosinski was accused of having invented most of the situations, of writing a work of fiction and imagining horrifying situations that he himself never experienced. Kosinski during his lifetime made a mistake when he said that it was his personal autobiography. But to understand why he did it, it's necessary to know his life, his spirit and his thoughts. Whether the book reflects his own experiences or not is completely irrelevant, because the essential element of a work of art is not it's biographical truth, but it's truthfulness. Even movies that make the valid claim 'based on a true story' are not reality. Without imagination, whether deliberate or not, art is impossible. At the end, every Creator arrives at some degree of aestheticization. It's not a literary fiction; the book simply relates the dreadful, deadening facts and the knowledge that all of this really happened, and will happen again. No artwork can deliver such raw reality, that's not it's purpose and it will always fail. But art is capable of treating these stories empathetically, and above all truthfully. A film, unlike a novel, is based not on words but on images and no adaption to film can match what been created in the imagination of the reader. The camera is absolutely uncompromising; it offers the viewpoint of the director and no one else. An adaptation can only be successful if the aesthetic concept of the film, the narrative style and the message of the story re-create for the viewer the emotional and intellectual impact the book would have on it's readers. The film resolutely avoids pathos, and eliminates well-worn clichés, exploitative melodrama and music that attempts to evoke artificial feelings. Absolute quiet can be as stark and more emotionally charged than any music. The 'Cinemascope' is a richly emotive format. No other format can capture, with such accuracy and force, both the beauty and the cruelty playing out on screen. The quality of the digital image still lags behind the tactile properties of the classical negative, most especially because the digital image loses it's rawness. Black-and-white captures the essential truthfulness and urgency of the images. The negative is more authentic, especially for something like “The Painted Bird”, which is in black and white precisely to reinforce the basic narrative line. Filming it in colour would have been a catastrophe. It would have looked entirely unconvincing, fake, commercial. The locality is describes only as a place somewhere in 'Eastern Europe', where a special dialect is spoken. The film is a mixture of all 'Slavic' languages, while 'German' and 'Russian' soldiers speak in their native tongues. The style of storytelling is not verbal, it’s cinematic. There's no interior monologue or explanatory narration. The tempo of the film is set by the pace of a flowing river, unpredictable and continually shifting in it's rhythms. This directorial approach forces the viewer to experience the events unfolding on screen, to essentially live both moments of great emotional tension and moments of resolution. We've to find the key to the door named 'Kosinski’s The Painted Bird'. The film fully awares the controversies surrounding both the authorship and the relationship between Kozinski’s novel and the plot of “The Painted Bird”. "The Painted Bird" wants the audience and the novel’s readers to come away with the same questions. Are psychologists right when they say we will turn towards evil if there's no danger of punishment? Is evil inevitable within a struggle for life itself? What circumstances allow us to betray our principles? The story asks us many unpleasant questions and to struggle, alone, for the answers. We're left in doubt about the purpose and fate of 'Homo Sapiens' as a species and these doubts hurt so much that we've to hang on to anything positive. It's not a war film, nor even a 'Holocaust' film. It's a story of the struggle between darkness and light, good and evil, true faith and organized religion and many other opposites. And this is precisely where the magic lies; only in darkness can we see light. Through confronting evil, we arrive at the unshakeable conviction that good and love must necessarily exist. At least, through the horror is hope.

Directed by the one and only Guillermo Del Toro, and starring Sally Hawkins, Michael Shannon, Doug Jones, Richard Jenkins and Octavia Spencer. The Shape of Water is the story of a mute by the name of Eliza, who works as a janitor in a top secret facility in the 1960’s. Run by Strickland (Shannon), the government are harbouring something extraordinary that Eliza just happens to stumble across whilst cleaning in a certain area, when she realises what this creature is, she soon realises that love isn’t only a thing meant to be shared by two humans. Now this film sweeped up at the oscars, Taking best picture, best score, best production design and also best director. I was worried that this film would’ve been completely overhyped and disappointing to me. I’m so happy to say that I’ve completely eaten those words and this film is so so worthy of the Best Picture award. The Shape of Water is Del Toro’s best work in years. It’s an absolute spectacle to watch, every scene is just so scattered with little things here and there and all around the screen, and the deeper meaning behind the film is just gorgeous. I’ve never felt so emotionally connected to a mute and a monster, who also can’t talk. Acting wise, no surprises here that it’s acted superbly. Sally Hawkins is incredible, if it wasn’t for Francis McDormand, then I think Hawkins would’ve taken best actress, you feel every inch of emotion from her and she doesn’t speak a word throughout. You really feel her pain, or her happiness, or any emotion she’s feeling, and that’s just by facial expressions and hand gestures, and that just blew me away, I don’t think I’ve ever seen that done so well, Sally Hawkins take a bow, it’s an incredible performance. Michael Shannon was my personal standout though, he floored me as Strickland. He’s one of those proper All American, 1960s father figures who constantly needs to be in control, otherwise he gets all pissy and feels insecure in my opinion. Michael Shannon is always brilliant and always delivers, and this is no excuse, he’s fantastic in this, a truly villainous human who’ll stop at nothing to sabotage certain plans. The secondary characters are also really great, Richard Jenkins as Eliza’s friend and neighbour is also a real stand out, doing what he possibly can to help the one person in his life, you can see he loves her, not in the generic romantic way, but in a way that’s almost like family, a true friend, and you can tell he’d be lonelier than ever if he lost her. Octavia Spencer is also brilliant, but again, what isn’t she brilliant in at this point? If you can’t tell by now, I adored The Shape of Water, the pacing is perfect, every scene was fantastic, the meaning behind the film was emotional and I can see it hitting a few people emotionally harder than others. I don’t think this is a film for everyone, I don’t think all scenes are gonna mesh with everyone and I think some people are going to be confused with the visual imagery and possibly offended by certain scenes. But for me, this is a perfect, gorgeous and heartfelt film, and truly is a remarkable love story. I adore The Shape of Water.

(Release Info London schedule; March 25th, 2018, Picturehouse Central, 30 Orange Street, 17:00) "Isle Of Dogs" "Isle Of Dogs",tells the story of Atari Kobayashi (Koyu Rankin), 12-year-old ward to corrupt Mayor Kobayashi (Kunichi Nomura). When, by 'Executive Decree', all the canine pets of 'Megasaki City' are exiled to a vast garbage-dump, Atari sets off alone in a miniature Junior-Turbo Prop and flies to 'Trash Island' in search of his bodyguard-dog, Spots. There, with the assistance of a pack of newly-found mongrel friends, he begins an epic journey that will decide the fate and future of 'The Entire Prefecture'.   'Canine-Saturation' has reached epidemic proportions. An outbreak of 'Snout-Fever' rips through the city of Megasaki. 'Dog-Flu' threatens to cross the species threshold and enter the human disease pool. Mayor Kobayashi of 'Uni Prefecture' calls for a hasty quarantine; the expulsion and containment of all breeds, both stray and domesticated. By official decree, 'Trash Island' becomes an exile colony, 'The Isle Of Dogs'. Six months later, a tiny, single-engine, miniature airplane crash-lands onto the teeming waste-land. A pack of five starving but fierce abandoned dogs scrambles to the wreckage and discovers a twelve-year-old pilot staggering from the burning fuselage. Atari, orphan-ward to Mayor Kobayashi. With the assistance of his new canine friends, Atari begins a search for his lost dog, Spots (Liev Schreiber), and, in the process, exposes a conspiracy that threatens to destroy all the dogs of 'Megasaki City' forever.   Atari is a heartbroken Japanese boy who makes a heroic flight to search for his lost dog. Mayor Kobayashi is the authoritarian who outlaws dogs from 'Megasaki City', though the consequences hit closer to home than he ever imagined. His greatest nemesis proves to be Tracy Walker (Greta Gerwig), a feisty young foreign exchange student and editor of 'The Megasaki Senior High Daily Manifesto'. It's a paper that stands for transparency and truth. And Tracy believes that’s what all newspapers and news outlets should stand for. Even though it’s a student publication, they hold themselves to a very high, rigorous standard. That standard pushes her to discover the truth about the dog virus and Atari’s trip to 'Trash Island', and perhaps also the first hints of a crush. Tracy just admires Atari’s bravery. And she thinks he has a nice face. He’s the only person standing up to the madness that’s going on in 'Megasaki City'. And he’s doing it on his own for the love of his dog, which she thinks is noble. Each member of the conversationally gifted 'Trash Island" pack has a well-worn canine name suggesting they're once beloved as top dogs, which only serves to remind them of how much they miss their former human homes. Rex (Edward Norton) is a wiry, wire-haired mutt with spiky, mottled coat and the eyes of an Arctic sled-dog. His ribs stick out like a cast-iron radiator. He's a sleeping on a lamb’s wool beanbag next to an electric space heater. So, he’s not some rich man’s dog. He was probably comfortably middle-class, maybe upper middle-class. But he has a work ethic. He’s scrappy, willing to be resourceful and to fight for what he needs. At the same time, he has had a certain baseline of comfort and so psychologically 'Trash Island' is difficult for him. He can only take so much. King (Bob Balanon) is a graceful, red-haired mutt with a sable snout and a handlebar moustache. He's dappled with scabs, scars, scuffs, and scratches. Boss (Bill Murray) is a stout, liver-spotted mutt with black paws and a tail like a stubbed-out cigar. He wears a soiled, grimy, unraveling, striped, woolen dog-sweater with embroidered baseballs and the word Dragons scrolled across it in cursive. When there's the chance of a great success, you need a mascot, someone that’s going to be with you when things get tough, but someone that you’re really going to want to be there when things go well.  That’s Boss.   Duke (Jeff Goldblum) is a bohemian mountain-dog. Slender face, sleek ears, and a ballet-dancer’s overly-nimble gait. He has seven missing teeth and a consumptive dry-cough. Chief (Bryan Cranston) is a coal-black hound with long legs, black nose, a boxer’s jaw, and floppy, black ears with white spots all over them. He has the sturdy frame of a middleweight, but the starved mass of a long distance-runner. Chief is the odd one out, but he also has a great nobility. He represents the idea that with hope can come second chances. Spots is a 'Short-Haired Oceanic Speckle-Eared Sport Hound', who was once the beloved assigned bodyguard to the Mayoral ward Atari, but is now lost to the winds on 'Trash Island'.  He's highly trained, highly sophisticated animal who's not only the constant companion to Atari but also protects him.  In many ways Spots embodies the ideals of loyalty, duty and honor. Spots also finds romance amid the ruins with the steadfast survivor Peppermint (Kara Hayward). Peppermint has been terribly mistreated and Spots goes from feeling bad for her to falling in love with her. He’s really a dog who cares about other dogs.   Among the most enigmatic of 'Trash Island’s' dogs is Nutmeg (Scarlett Johansson), the coquettish show dog with her femme fatale persona and curiously spotless coat of fur. Nutmeg is incredibly resourceful. She keeps her fur clean by collecting garbage ash in an old coffee bean can. The she works the ash through her fur from root to tip. That’s a very important part of the process. You've to work the ash through from root to tip. And then she shakes off the remaining ash and collects it in the found coffee bean can. Which she then stores for next time. She knows what it’s like to lose something and come back stronger. She might be more civilized than Chief, but she recognizes in him a fighting spirit and a leadership quality she admires.  Plus, he has just the right amount of bite; and who doesn’t like a guy with bite? Jupiter (F. Murray Abraham) has chosen to live his life as though he’s given himself over to a Zen existence. He has a barrel of spirits around his neck. It's very wise because you never know when you might need a little shot, or when you’ll run into someone who could use one. And it’s a communal, convivial thing; we’re all going to drink from the same barrel; we’re all going to enjoy this together; and we’re going to find a way out of this mess. We would sure use Jupiter right about now in this poor old world of ours. "Isle Of Dogs" is a grand adventure set in a near-future Japan in the grips of a canine crisis and mass anti-dog hysteria. Here, in a far-flung floating junktopia known only as 'Trash Island', a scrappy pack of exiled dogs who’ve banded together to survive makes an amazing discovery, the crash-landing of a little human pilot who will take them on a life-changing journey. The resulting journey is packed with humor, action and friendship. But on it's trek, it also pays homage to the epic scope and beauty of Japanese cinema, to the noble loyalty of canine companions, to the hopeful heroism of the small and the overlooked, to the rejection of intolerance and most of all to the unbreakable boy-dog bond that has launched countless escapades. The film is inspired by Japanese movies. It's a story with chatty canines, furred femmes fatales, a boy aviator, an intrepid school reporter, mutant viruses, mythical isle and step-by-step unraveling of a big human mistake. In fact, "Isle Of Dogs" may owe as much to the storytelling legacy of Akira Kurosawa as the history of stop-motion animation. The story’s invention expanded from a dreamlike spark to the spectacularly detailed creation of 'Megasaki City', the rubbish-geography of 'Trash Island', and a cast of misfit but hopeful characters, both fur-bearing and human. An outsider (the little pilot) arriving in a new land (Trash Island), and an analogue of the timeless tale of, well, in this case literal underdogs striving against blinded oppressors. But the magic of it all sprang out of the details, from the charm and texture of each dog’s story, from the cluttered but artful architecture of 'Trash Island', from the idea that a child searching for his faithful pet might set off a world-altering chain of events. It just seemed the matching form for emotionally fluent, if down-and-out, dogs and a Japanese island lined with society’s strange, funny and downright calamitous discards. It’s a movie about talking dogs. Yet, it’s not a cartoon, it’s a movie. It pushes the boundary in terms of what people think can be done in this medium. In fact, stop motion animation’s century-long evolution has long been more creative than technical. Little has changed in the fundamentals. Though digital cameras and computers have smoothed the process, it’s still a matter of shooting the infinitesimally small movements of 3D objects frame-by-frame, in a painstaking process that nevertheless generates palpable life. So the biggest changes in the form have come in the content, in the kinds of stories one might tell, in pressing the limits of imagination.   "Isle Of Dogs" is a worldbuilding story that by it's very nature breaks animation norms and brings together all the themes, shots, emotional intricacy and adventures. From the intricate puppets and micro-sets arises this living, breathing realm of cold-nosed questers whose plight is intimately relatable.  The feel is of a whimsical legend but the grounding is in the real concerns, big and small, of modern life; friendship, family, humanity’s future and coming together to clean up our messes. It's a story of disenfranchised dogs, but that's also a very real experience for human beings in every country and walk of life. The main characters might be dogs, but they exist in a zone between animals and humans. They've all the dog behaviors we know and recognize but we connect to them through their very human emotions, through their excitement, sadness, anger, hope and their love for one another and their friends. There are disenfranchised people, the throwaways. And the demagoguery of fear, the kind that leads all the dogs of 'Megasaki City' to be put on an island to fend for themselves, is something humans are dealing with as well. It's a very timely theme. The music becomes another layer of a film that, not unlike 'Trash Island', is piled high with bits and pieces that, when combined, seem to alchemically forge a world that feels lived-in and alive in it's fantasia. If any single word seems to define the movie that word might be scale, both for the tiny scale of the intricate stop-motion work and the enormous scale of the story of how the 'Trash Island' pack unites in their trek towards freedom and to discover the potential in themselves. While the sheer number of individual moving pieces, physical and thematic, that make up "Isle Of Dogs" might be staggering, the paradox is that the prevailing core of the film is one of the most timelessly simple relationships on earth.   The animation is wild and the amount of detail packed into every frame is astonishing. It's a beautiful fable that takes you into a world of it's own, a world no one else could have imagined. With it's semi-fictional Japanese setting, it's construction out of comic book-like chapters and it's intercut themes of nature, heroism, technology, rescue and honor, perhaps it's only natural that the film is also reverberate with echoes of Japanese pop culture and some of Japan’s greatest film directors, from Yasujiro Ozu to Kurosawa to Seijun Suzuki, as well as the Japanese monster films of the 50s and 60s, with their climactic disasters. It's as referring to a whole range of Japanese filmmakers and Japanese culture, but Kurosawa is the main movie influence. It’s hard to even quantify Kurosawa’s impact on cinema because he arced so gracefully through a huge pendulum of genres from noir, to Samurai, to Shakespeare, to melodrama. Each seems to transcend the dark side of the modern world with characters of the utmost honesty and humanity. And seen in each is the legendary Toshiro Mifune, whose expressive countenance inspires the look of Mayor Kobayashi. Another branch of inspiration came from two 19th Century, Edo-period woodblock print masters; Hiroshige and Hokusai, whose emphasis on color and line deeply influenced European Impressionists. Their ukyio- artworks capture fleeting moments of pleasure focusing on natural landscapes, far-flung travels, flora and fauna, geishas and kabuki actors. The film collects a wide swath of woodblock print images and the storyboard artists trawled through the extensive collections at 'The Victoria And Albert Museum' in London. Then, by osmosis, the folkloric Japanese style began to merge with the tactile, handmade feel of stop-motion. The world of "Isle Of Dogs" is kind of an alternative reality. It looks and feels like Japan, but it's a slightly dreamier version. That's the beauty of setting the film in a make-up city, in a make-up time; you get a certain amount of artistic license. The blending of old and new is very common in Japan. There are scenes in the film that are very minimalist and wabi-sabi; but then you switch over to the city, which is maximalist and very intense. The film is a scope of Samurai movies and adventure. It's a big movie in every way, but with simple basic themes that anyone can relate to. 

(Release Info London schedule; July 6th, 2018, Curzon Cinemas) "Mary Shelley" "Mary Shelley" tells the story of Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin (Elle Fanning), author of one of the world’s most famous Gothic novels ‘Frankenstein’, and her fiery, tempestuous relationship with renowned romantic poet Percy Bysshe Shelley (Douglas Booth.) The pair are two outsiders constrained by polite society but bound together by a natural chemistry and progressive ideas that are beyond the boundaries of their age and time. Mary and Percy declare their love for each other and much to her family's horror they run away together, joined by Mary's half-sister Claire (Bel Powley.) In the midst of growing tension within their relationship during their stay at Lord Byron's (Tom Sturridge) house at Lake Geneva, the idea of 'Frankenstein' is conceived when a challenge is put to all houseguests to write a ghost story. An incredible character is created, which will loom large in popular culture for centuries to come, but society at the time puts little value in female authors. At the tender age of 18, Mary is forced to challenge these preconceptions, to protect her work and to forge her own identity. This film is about the arc of Mary’s journey transitioning from a young girl into an adult and a creator in her own right, saying; it’s a story of a girl growing up and finding her voice and stepping out of the shadows of her family. She's a free spirit, powerful and very attentive, she picks up on all things, she's curious and very observant. It goes from Mary being essentially a teenager to stepping into womanhood and standing for something that she has created, bucking the conventional norms of her society. Mary is not perfect, and makes questionable choices and mistakes throughout her journey. But she does not give in to disappointment or the agony of loss, she just pushes forward. She's an example of someone who takes the weight of misery and transforms it into a personal and profound work of art. It would have been very easy for her to give up at any point along the way, or to defer to her accomplished parents or brilliant husband, but she decided ultimately to find her own voice.     Percy Shelley is a complex character, a strange blend of charismatic genius, romantic poet, scandalous rebel and wildly irresponsible maverick. Percy Shelley is an anarchist; he wants to be a revolutionary. He’s much more than just this lover, this romantic poet, he's a flawed character. He has so many traits that are wonderful but there are so many that are just devastating for the people around him. He's constantly pursued by his demons and his desire to live a life that's so unconventional in those days. Percy is a man who walks into a room and women swooned. There's a scene between Mary and Percy when first she confronts him about his potential infidelity, it’s the moment in the story where Mary grows up. Lord Byron is broke and brave, unpredictable and passionate. He's an astonishing historical figure. These women, Claire and Mary, are incredibly forward thinking for their age and their time. They're like hippies in the sixties, they're ahead of their time. Relationships are the foundation of "Mary Shelley", providing a framework within which Mary craves out her own identity, pushing back against the expectations of society, the legacy of her parents and the overshadowing prowess of her partner. The various relationships that exist throughout this film, between Mary and her father William Godwin (Stephen Dillane), Mary and her sister Claire, the relationship between Mary and Percy, Claire and Lord Byron, Lord Byron and Percy, Lord Byron and John Polidori (Ben Hardy), Polidori and Mary and finally the interconnecting relationships between all the main characters Mary, Claire, Percy and Byron, underpin this film. Claire’s relationship with Mary is complicated. Perhaps Claire wants to be Mary. She's not jealous of her but she tried to emulate her. If Mary gets Shelley, then Claire will get Byron! But they love each other unconditionally even though they're half-sisters. She's in awe of Mary but she loves and adores her. They're ying and yang. In life and the reality of them is that one is a bit more elegant and erudite and educated and the other is more wild and frivolous but together they created a specific energy. Claire is not as formidable as Mary but without a doubt there's real love between these two half-sisters, they protect one another. The only parental figure in Mary’s life is her father, so when he dismisses all her writing it’s like a dagger to her heart. A man who's so respected in his field not believing in his daughter is so hard for her to take. All she wants is recognition from him. Percy is the one for her. With him she feels that they can take on the world and all that it throws at them, and they will be okay because they've each other. There are times she certainly questions her beliefs. But ultimately, she knows their love, this mad, huge crazy love story, is strong enough to withstand what's thrown at them. Being with Mary is for Percy a challenge, he challenges her to live this life with him. She's incredibly smart, had this fresh sexuality, she has a cheekiness to her and so he fell in love with this vision. Percy looks up to Byron; he's in awe of him. Byron is a star and at the time Percy really respected him and the way he's and what he stands for. Their relationship, if indeed you can call it that, is relatively complicated and quite unbalanced. Claire’s perceptions of it are potentially very different to Byron’s. Claire is a very determined woman, she doesn’t take no for an answer, she knows what she wants and it's Byron and even though it ends badly for her she believes in herself. Claire is not the bimbo of the trio; she's not a dumb little sister, she's very smart and she's fighting to make her mark in this trio. Their's an unconventional relationship, they live as a unit and there's clearly a close-ness between all three of them. Polidori’s relationship with Mary is kind of the antithesis of her relationship with Percy. He's the bad guy.     "Mary Shelley" is an English period film about the story of a young girl growing up who's trying to find her voice, surrounded by superstition that she wants to break free of. Mary was only 18 when she created and wrote 'Frankenstein'. The story essentially subverts everything that we think we know about the early 1800’s in England. We're blown away by the strength and fight that this extremely young woman found within her, and that the life of "Mary Shelley" is a powerful story that feels very relevant right now. Although set in the 1800’s, her journey is so modern and relevant to today’s world. Mary has a story to tell but society is not letting her tell it. Mary is the center of the piece and she's such a strong feminine force within a community. heavily dominated by men. It's split into two facets, Mary and 'The Monster'. Within Mary there's the love story with Percy, her strengths, her disappointments her huge loss and her inspiration. 'The Monster' theme is more about the ghost stories Mary herself is obsessed with, the otherworldliness and ultimately the darkness that 'The Monster' in-habits within her. She grows up in this very conservative culture, where women’s roles were much more rigid and opportunities were extremely limited. But she rose above it, and wrote a story that continues to capture the imagination of readers to this day. She chose to write a book that's so outside of the acceptable realms of literature for women, and created a genre that continues to be dominated by male voices. She writes a book that challenged religious doctrine and raised new ethical questions about the impact of uninhibited scientific experimentation would have on a society. Although they're set in two different times and worlds, Mary’s story does have some very interesting parallels to "Wadjda’s". Both young women were struggling against conservative social structures in order to pursue the lives they wanted to live. They're both women who unapologetically follow their hearts, against the norms and expectations of their societies, without compromise to achieve a personal triumph. What's interesting about this film is that you’re dealing with people who very much rebelled against and revolted against the kind of conformity of the period; these guys were free. Although the film is a period drama set in the 1800’s "Mary Shelley" has a very modern message. It’s about the emancipation of a young girl’s soul and that whatever period you're in you can recognize that desire for freedom. It’s a coming of age story about a girl who through her own life experience is able to express through her writing how the various conflicts and de-mons that she has to deal with comes to the fore. A young woman trying to find and own her voice, and that’s massively universal whether it takes place 200 years ago or two weeks ago. And you know 'Frankenstein' is also the precursor to all of science fiction and was written by a woman. The film is in a period of time of a couple of hundred years ago but you can relate to it now. They're pushing boundaries, take away the costumes and there's something in the film that every 18 or 19- year-old will relate to. Her life story is an important aspect of 'The Frankenstein' legacy, and it's a beloved work to so many people for so many different reasons. The film focuses on aspects of her personal journey that may not be that well known but are key to truly understanding everything that went into her writing. The journey of Frankenstein’s monster reflects many of the tragic events of her own life.     "Mary Shelley" is the remarkable true story of a woman who railed against the constraints of her society to create a story that would outlive the work of her contemporaries, including her brilliant parents and husband, to influence generations of writers and dreamers with an entirely new genre; science fiction. Her own story feels so strangely familiar because so much of it ended up allegorically in 'Frankenstein'. We all know the basic story, but her journey reveals so many layers and deeper philosophical elements that help explain the work’s appeal. A modern-day example is J.K. Rowling. Many of the problem’s that Mary Shelley faced continue to challenge women today. Philosophically the way in which Mary went after what she wanted in her life, without regard to moral or societal limitations, was extremely shocking to the public in her time. Whereas the same behavior would perhaps be more acceptable for a man, public pressure to be chaste and morally pure is still something that women struggle with today. Sadly, even her struggles to publish her book under her own name show a societal reluctance to embrace works of science, horror, or other traditionally ‘masculine’ themes from a female writer that continue to this day. Look at a book like 'The Outsiders'. Sarah Hinton had to abbreviate her name to S.E. Hinton so readers wouldn't know her gender just by looking at the cover. Whenever women write something out-side of the realm of acceptable topics for the gender-romance, cook books, children’s books, we see that there's still a long way to go in unrestricting the potential of the female voice in our society.    

(Release Info London schedule; August 25th, 2019, Cineworld Leicester Square, 5-6 Leicester Square, London WC2H 7NA, United Kingdom, 6:30 pm) http://www.frightfest.co.uk/2019films/index.html#sunday "Ready Or Not" "Ready Or Not" follows Grace (Samara Weaving), a young bride, as she joins her new husband’s Alex Le Domas (Mark O’Brien) rich, eccentric family in a time-honored tradition that turns into a lethal game with everyone fighting for their survival.   In "Ready Or Not", the stakes are high as a newlywed literally fights for her life, trying to survive her in-laws in a deadly game of hide and seek on her wedding night. Grace is a spirited young woman from modest beginnings who has been wooed by wealthy Alex. Their 18-month courtship is culminating in a marriage ceremony at his family estate, where the mansion is imposing and so is 'The Le Domas Clan', headed by Alex’s parents Tony (Henry Czerny) and Becky (Andie MacDowell). With a fortune built on board games, this eccentric family is bound by time-honored traditions. The rich really are different, Alex’s brother Daniel (Adam Brody) cautions Grace before she heads down the aisle. The wedding goes off without a hitch, but the carefully planned celebration has a detour mapped out for the bride. Grace, still in her wedding dress, unsuspectingly joins her new husband and in-laws for a midnight gathering to play what they describe as a traditional family game. As a new member of the family, she must draw a card from a deck to determine which game they will all play, as danger lingers in the air, Grace unsuspectingly chooses the rare 'Hide And Seek' card. With only a few moments head start, Grace is to leave Alex behind and stay hidden and quiet somewhere on the premises. The others fan out to find her before sunrise. Soon Grace makes the terrifying discovery that she's being hunted in lethal blood sport. Pushed to her limits physically and emotionally, Grace becomes hellbent on not only staying alive, but attempts to change the game forever by fighting back in any way she can. 'The Le Domas Family' is dysfunctional and deadly. On day one, with a bow-and-arrow being pointed at you, followed by a face being bashed in. Nice to meet you! The film places a young woman into next-level conflict with her new in-laws, a nocturnal fight for survival. Grace is the bride whose shocking discoveries about her new in-laws galvanize her into action. The weapon of choice for Grace in this scenario is, whatever she can get her hands on; yielding some nasty and funny surprises. The audience’s entry into the family’s bizarre backroom rituals comes through the story’s fish out of water heroine, Grace, whose unfortunate destiny is to play the family game to determine her fate. You pick the card and that's your fate, but the card also picks you. There’s a little underlying message that the devil is seeking out people who are pure of heart, and Grace is just that. He can’t wait to get rid of her. But the devil didn’t count on Grace fighting back. There's a fearlessness to the way that she approaches all of her performances, and this movie is going to live or die. With Grace we're turning on it's head the horror genre trope of the final girl; where in many horror films, you've a cast of innocents stalked by one psycho and one final girl remaining to challenge the killer. But in "Ready Or Not" Grace is the only intended victim, one whom several people are hunting. In a lot of horror films women in danger are crying or screaming. This film turns that on it's head and make Grace a bad-ass. What drives her to fight back to survive until the sun rises isn’t fear, although that definitely enters into it. Her fighting back has to be part of her personality as well as her actions. Even when Grace is in her most vulnerable and scared moments, there’s a confidence in the way that she approaches it which maintains believability. She has a choice to make. Is she going to be able to rise to the occasion? Is she going to be able to survive? The journey that Grace goes on pulls you in. Filthy rich and fully loaded, Becky is the matriarch of 'The Le Domas Clan' dominant and willing to pack a punch. She has a cool head and is able to keep things on track as things horribly spiral out of control. She’s very determined to see this through and also try to reestablish a relationship with her son, Alex. She's devoted to her family 100 percent, and they're who they're. She’s very protective of her family and wants things to work out; there's a deep love that she has for her son Alex, which grounds the story. Becky has a dark wit, but she's also the responsible one. No one plays dirtier than the ridiculously rich, and Tony Le Domas is no exception. He's the patriarch of 'The Le Domas Family'. Tony and Becky’s relationship is, he’s a little bit of a hothead and she’s constantly trying to keep him on track. There are things he will not let go. The camera might not be on Tony, and we might not have conversations with him, but he brings things to Tony in the background of a scene; it's so clear to him what the character called for. While 'The Le Domas' parents are reasonably secure in their perches, the next generation has to be a more conflicted group. Daniel is a dark and twisted son, who still carries with him childhood traumas from a previous family game gathering. Daniel brings a sense of humor to the story, so it isn't just darkness; he's very aware of not being one-note. The question within Daniel is there a good person in there? In "Ready Or Not", there’s a nice blend of what’s said and what’s not said. Alex is Grace’s newly minted husband. He's a prodigal son. He’s torn between his love for his family, his love for Grace and this horrible deal with the devil his family has made. Alex is the most complicated character in the story. He’s a man who thinks he can have everything without sacrificing anything. Alex definitely has his own moral compass. He's already conflicted when we meet him because he doesn’t really know how to broach the subject of his family’s traditions to Grace. Also, he’s used to the lifestyle that his family has provided for him even though at the same time he shuns it. There are moments where you see him fighting what’s underneath what he’s presenting. Emilie (Melanie Scrofano) is Daniel's over-energetic and deadly sister. Her character is a combination of clenched jaw and wide-eyed drug-fueled hyperactivity who has the heart of a sparrow. She's sort of the black sheep of the family. She tries her best and fails spectacularly; that’s why she’s turned to drugs. She’s married to Fitch Bradley and they've two children who are little brats. But she still wants to do right by her family. Charity (Elyse Levesque) is Daniel's wife. In this family game, tradition calls the shots, and Charity doesn’t fit into any one genre. Fitch (Kristian Bruun) is Emilie’s husband. He's a former frat boy, a little bit past his prime, who's very happy to be part of a very, very rich family. But he's not necessarily willing to make sacrifices. When he’s assigned an old-fashioned crossbow as his weapon, it’s, who’s supposed to be able to do anything with this? Proving that some family traditions are deadlier than others, Aunt Helene (Nicky Guadagni) is bloodthirsty and vengeful. She's a very bitter older woman; Aunt Helene is frustrated because she feels she could have been head honcho of the family. But when she was a young woman, she was led by her heart instead of by loyalty to her family. It’s not every movie you get to have a battle axe on set. Stevens (John Ralston) is the sinister head butler. He's an expert cleaner; in more ways than one. Stevens runs the show and is well aware of 'The Le Domas Family’s' idiosyncrasies. Once the wedding night doesn’t go as planned, he will go to any length to protect the household. Every character has a very fun death. Everyone getting bloody and there’s blood everywhere. All the deaths are devilishly put together. It’s absolutely disgusting. The kills encapsulate the tone of "Ready Or Not". They’re brutal and violent; yet at the same time you can’t help but giggle a little bit. Another iconic character is Grace's wedding dress. More than any other costume in the film, Grace’s wedding dress externalizes and expresses all that she fights through on this night of fright. The dress represents the course of the movie as a whole; we've always discuss how "Ready Or Not" starts grand and classical before it degrades and degrades. The camera moves get quicker and the music gets crazier. The dress is gorgeous at the start, but by the end? In watching the dress devolve and break down with Grace, audiences will see the garment mimic other memorable, and malleable costumes for genre movie heroines such as Carrie White’s prom dress in "Carrie; Tree Gelbman’s long-sleeved T-shirt in "Happy Death Day"; and 'The Bride' track suit and violently disrupted wedding dress in "Kill Bill". When you see Grace for the first time, you see the dress, and in it she ends up going to extremes. In the movie, there are 15-17 different looks all with the same dress in various stages of disrepair for Grace. Since Grace is, as she readily admits, a woman from humble beginnings marrying into a wealthy family, she has grown up idolizing someone like Kate Middleton, and now dresses as who she thinks the family would want to see. The dress needs to have a rich undertone and not be the classic off-white movie white. It's a warm cream color, almost yellow. The dress is a road map of what transpires with Grace. Grace sneaker shoes area sort of reference to her past life, and to show how down-to-earth and casual she's. It's also the color of optimism, which Grace must keep within her. As the night darkens and Grace is plunged into kill-or-be-killed violence, the dress itself takes on darker hues. She's got the same thing on, but it’s gotten tattered and bloody and so has the corset she wears underneath. Grounding this fantastical story of a devil-worshipping family can only be done with perfectly ominous and creepy locations. To cement an authenticity to the film,"Ready Or Not" uses practical locations and physical effects. By not relying on typical visual effects. A lot of what you’ll see in the movie is done practically, which is fun to kind of roll up your sleeves and get your hands dirty, literally, on this movie. The requirements of the action-packed and highly physicalized script necessitated that not one, but three locations be pressed into service to embody 'The Le Domas Estate'. Oshawa, 'Ontario’s Parkwood Estates' is one of Canada’s last remaining grand estates and was once the private residence of 'General Motors Of Canada' founder R.S. McLaughlin. The film uses 'Parkwood’s' surrounding lands for the wedding ceremony sequences, and a number of it's 55 rooms are given over for filming "Ready Or Not" interior scenes. The historic 'Casa Loma'; the only full-sized castle within range of 'North America', was built in 1911 at a cost of some $3.5 million and remains a top destination for visitors to the city. 'Casa Loma' afforded the "Ready Or Not" troupe winding and ornate interiors for deadly pursuits; and the family’s board games ethos can be seen as further manifesting in the form of 'The Clue-Style' trappings. The camera moves around and follow characters, fast!, through hallways and into rooms. So even though you don’t have the comfort and the control of being on a soundstage, there’s a lot of creativity that results. “Ready Or Not" is a little bit outside the box. This film has an unique blending of comedy, adventure, and horror, with an eye for original screenplays that are comparably distinctive. It's about the idea of taking a conventional story to the extreme. You take something that’s as familiar and relatable as marrying into a family and give it a genre bend in a playful way, but also in a dangerous and extreme way. The stakes are deadly in "Ready Or Not". It's very character-driven. The movie is terrifying but there’s also a hint of mischief in it and a hint of the absurd. It's a female-driven thriller, both contemporary and timeless. It's difficult to understand the tone of this movie and know to balance the irony and comedy with horror. Crafting a good scare is actually similar to crafting a good joke. You set it up and there's a punchline. The look and feel of the family’s classic board games, and the sinister backstory of 'The Le Domas Dynasty' is the extra touch the film needs. The film responds to the classic games feel dating back to carnivals, with a sense of history. There are secret passageways. The rumor is that there’s a ghost. It’s beyond opulent. Many body bags and many blood bags. Keeping the physical element of props and stunts raises the stakes a bit more, when you actually have the blood there. It puts you more into the world you’re playing. There's a light version make of rubber, and a much heavier version make out of metal. You can use mop oil, shaving cream, your own saliva; that’s the magic trifecta. But she cautions that when making a genre movie. Don't send things to dry cleaners. It never goes over well; they will get freaked out, no matter how well you know them. This movie is such a mix of gags, and great character stuff and that’s what makes the movie so exciting.