Search Results

Why Hide? (Newcastle Film Festival) A derivative, clichéd and low brow attempt at a comedy horror. This film stole from (the makers might say paid homage to) the original Evil Dead. We got similar jokes to Shaun of the Dead (in this case, a cricket bat is replaced by a 9-iron as a comical weapon) but "Shaun" respected the genre it was poking fun at more. I was also reminded of a lesser known British comedy The Cottage but I can't put my finger on why. A lot also seemed stolen from the Conjuring and Insidious films. I.e. creepy inexplicable set pieces which tended to end in a loud bang. There was also one scene I'm fairly sure was ripped straight from the god-awful Insidious: The Last Key. On a side note, it's also a bit awkward when the director brings his own intoxicated crowd (I assume some of the film's actors and the director's mates) to the film who then woop and laugh loudly at every low brow "joke" while the rest of the audience sit in silence. Oh that guy is camp...ahahahah (always hilarious :/)... oh look at that overweight guy running around in his white pants hahaha.... *sigh*. The effects of the creature weren't bad considering this was a low budget production, but it was never quite clear to me what the creature was or what it could do, which removed any kind of fear for me.

(Release Info London/U.K. schedule; October 19th, 2018, Empire Cinemas) "Hunter Killer" Deep under 'The Arctic Ocean', American submarine Captain Joe Glass (Gerard Butler) is on the hunt for a U.S. sub in distress when he discovers a secret Russian coup is in the offing, threatening to dismantle the world order. With crew and country on the line, Captain Glass must now assemble an elite group of 'Navy SEALS' to rescue the kidnapped Russian president Zakarin (Alexander Diachenko) and sneak through enemy waters to stop 'WWIII'. This is the relentlessly tense situation audiences are plunged into in "Hunter Killer", aptly named for the sleek attack subs created to boldly approach the enemy without detection. It all begins as a Russian sub sinks in 'The Arctic Ocean'. Soon after, 'The U.S.' sub ghosting it also mysteriously vanishes. In the midst of investigating these unsettling events, military brass in 'Washington D.C.' are sent scrambling when they discover a rogue Russian admiral is attempting to carry out a bloodthirsty coup at a naval base in Russia. The only hope to halt a war of the superpowers lies in the efforts of two secret crews. First, a clandestine 'Black Ops' team of 'Ex-SEALs' must try to sneak into Russian territory to intercept the kidnapping of 'The Russian President'. Simultaneously, in the sea, Captain Joe Glass and the young crew of 'The USS Arkansas' are under orders to head towards the enemy. As a hunter-killer captain, Glass has mastered the rules of the cat-and-mouse game but will now have to courageously break them, as he realizes that this time the cat and the mouse may have to join forces. As the steely Captain Glass comes face-to-face with his stoic Russian counterpart, Captain Andropov (Michael Nyqvist), it becomes clear that the wary, distrustful bond between them may be all that stands between the world and nuclear catastrophe. Captain Joe Glass reveals a very different side to heroism as the fiercely intelligent and quietly bold Captain of 'The USS Arkansas' He’s an action guy who makes it all happen, but he does it from a position of authority rather than being the guy out there pulling the trigger. Glass knows that trust is the only sinew that can hold together a young and anxious submarine crew with so little contact with the outside world. But he has to forge that trust on his boat one savvy move at a time. At first nobody quite trusts Glass because he seems a little nuts. But you see him carefully build his bond with the crew as they begin to realize how serious their mission is. They start out as young men and women who are mostly playing at their roles and then you get to watch as they become incredibly honed warriors daring to attempt the impossible. The trust issues get far more complicated when 'The USS Arkansas' takes aboard a group of rescued Russians who, though ostensibly the enemy, may actually be the key to everyone’s survival. Glass is more about daring strategy than physical derring-do, which further boosted the development. What’s fascinating about Glass to is that he has to make decisions that will affect the world for hundreds of years because we’re talking about the immediate possibility of sparking an all-out 'World War III'. So he’s up against the highest stakes imaginable, and the way things unfold for him is both really suspenseful and surprisingly believable in today’s geopolitical circumstances. When 'The USS Arkansas' rescues the surviving Russian crew aboard a crippled sub, Captain Glass comes face-to-face with his alter-ego, a man who under other circumstances might be his most feared enemy, but who reflects a mirror image of himself. This is Captain Andropov, and both men will come to take enormous risks as they wrestle with how much to trust the other. He's a patriot in an 'Old School' way. What happens to him is a betrayal by his own country and he finds it unbelievable and that's very relatable. They’re enemies. But as individuals, they each have the ability to do things differently than anybody else would; they both can see above and beyond the normal rules of conflict and engagement. Andropov is an old salty dog of a warrior while Glass is a hard-nosed, blue-collar Navy man. Glass and Andropov trust each other as sailors and at the end of the day, these two captains find they're in the same situation. They have to help each other and that becomes a key theme of the story; trust. Yet they both have respect for the other and their almost silent relationship drives the outcome of the story. While Captain Glass wrestles with the right moves in the deep blue, the military brass in 'Washington D.C.' race to figure out the best response to the imminent global crisis for 'The United States'. The man leading the charge towards military action in 'The War Room is the resolute Admiral Charles Donnegan (Gary Oldman). He thinks that, sort of like a magician’s sleight of hand, that while 'The U.S.' is preoccupied with preventing a nuclear war, he’ll pull off his coup without resistance. But Donnegan feels his job is to respond to any threat with strength and intent. Opposing Donnegan in 'The War Room' with a more cautious 'POV' is Rear Admiral John Fisk (Common). He has to make decisions that are complex and have huge consequences in the world. He knows that the information he provides to his Commander-in-Chief can start or stop a war and he has to take every moment of his job very, very seriously. Donnegan is quick to believe that 'World War III' is already in motion. He has a certain way of thinking about conflict that Fisk sees as rooted in the past. Fisk is from a generation that's more open-minded and about seeking peace. So they represent opposite strategies at 'The Pentagon'. This film is based on the novel 'Firing Point', written by George Wallace, the highly experienced, retired commander of the nuclear attack submarine 'The USS Houston', along with author Don Keith. The book’s action-packed plot, based on Wallace’s extensive knowledge, twisted and turned through a Russian nationalist coup, a 'Black Ops Navy SEAL' mission and an attack submarine captain faced with decisions that could halt, or instantly ignite, 'WWIII'. Complex as it's, the story is so teeth-grittingly plausible it keeps readers up late at night. Even more than the thrills, readers are transported into life on a nuclear sub, immersed into the cramped, sun-deprived, nerve-shredding ambience where steadiness and honor are the only bedrock to be found. Indeed, the submarine movie has been a popular genre since the earliest days of commercial motion pictures. From the silent 'Secret Of The Submarine' in 1915 to a flood of nerve-wracking 'WWII' sub movies to the groundbreakingly visceral German film "Das Boot" to the adaptations of Tom Clancy’s "The Hunt For Red October" and "Crimson Tide" in the 1990s, the tightly-contained space inside a sub full of soldiers facing extremes of confinement, anxiety and danger has been rife with the stuff of drama. But in the wake of vast changes in submarine technology, and in the world, in the new millennium, no film had yet submersed itself into life on a '21st Century' naval submarine. 'Hunter Killer' is a naval vessel, especially a submarine, equipped to locate and destroy enemy vessels, especially other submarines. Deep beneath 'The Icy Surface' of 'fhe Arctic Circle', 'Fhe Cold War' never really ended. Here, at extreme depths invisible to the world, U.S. and Russian submarines continue to play ultra-high-stakes rounds of hide-and- seek through harrowingly narrow passages, as a constant reminder to one another of the unthinkable costs of sudden aggression. Peril has only mounted amid heightened tensions as a new generation of highly sophisticated nuclear attack subs prowl the murky depths, persistently trailing and shadowing one another as if a full-blown battle is about to break out. But what if these charged war games suddenly stopped being a game at all? What if, as chaos erupts on land, there's only one shot to pull the world back from the brink of 'WWIII' and unthinkable nuclear conflicty? The film takes the classic submarine thriller, with all it's nail-biting tension, claustrophobia, physical and psychological pressure, into 'The Post-Cold War Era' when flash coups and counter-reactions can alter the balance of world power overnight. “Hunter Killer is about a fictional event, but it could easily occur in today’s world. There have been many recent news articles about how Russian and American submarines are chasing each other under water in dangerous ways. Yet, because it’s happening under the ocean, the public never knows what's going on. Two submarines ghosting each other through the ocean; resulting in an incident that quickly escalates to the brink of war. These are people who drill and drill and drill so that when things hit the fan, they can make the right moves, like it’s in their sleep. Everything has to be automatic because when you've got freezing cold water coming in, the carbon dioxide is building, there's a fire going on, the place is full of smoke and you know your sub is to go down, you need to be able to act in half a second. Learning about that was very, very enlightening. You see that it takes certain kind of individual to be able to lead in this very hazardous narrow tube. The film’s action moves from deep sea to land and back again. But most of all, "Hunter Killer", captures 'The 21st Century' world of the so-called 'Silent Service', the men and women who serve by patrolling the deep, while their boldest exploits often go unheard and unseen. It’s a classic story with a heck of a lot of great action, a heck of an intricate plot and a whole cast of fantastic characters who are heroes from different walks of life. It feels like an exciting way to revive the submarine thriller for these times. The film takes the audience into the world of submarine culture in a way that's contemporary to our times. You've all the claustrophobia and contained anxiety of being on the sub and then you've the 'Black Ops' team operating amid gunfire in these big, wide-open spaces. That combination keeps things really interesting. "Hunter Killer" is chance for audiences to experience a lot of military action but you also will get a chance to see another core part of Navy life; honor, courage and commitment being demonstrated against all odds. We live in a time now in which a lot of people are afraid, but maybe we can trust more and we can talk to each other more. If you don’t believe in your prejudice and your fears, we might have a better world.

A re-watch was a very long time coming. I barely remember being that annoying kid at Age 3 constantly bothering my parents to put that VCR in the player. The video cassette got lost sometime in the 90s. A year ago, I 'discovered'' it once again. It was as good as I remembered. As a 26 year old, I appreciated the darker, more adult content I did not understand. 'Sorry, wrong pocket' as Carey accidentally whips out a used condom. The Mask was a light hearted, cartoonish view of what can happen when nobody, Ipkiss, gets his hands on a mask that transforms him into a man he always wished he was... confident, suave and popular. If only we could all find something similar! 1994 was definitely the year for Carey with Ace Ventura and Dumb and Dumber. Breakout star indeed. He plays Stanley Ipkiss and his 'alter ego' so well in The Mask. Fantastic film which will always remind me of my youth.

(Release Info U.K. schedule; May 9th, 2019, Picturehouse Exeter, Bartholomew St W, Exeter EX4 3AJ, United Kingdom, 12:00 pm) "High Life" Deep space. Beyond our solar system. Monte (Robert Pattinson) and his daughter Willow (Jessi Ross) live together aboard a spacecraft, in complete isolation. A solitary man, who uses his strict self-discipline in a shield against desire, his own and that of others, Monte fathered the girl against his will. His sperm was used to inseminate Boyse (Mia Goth), the young woman who gave birth to the girl. They're members of a crew of prisoners; space convicts, death row inmates. Guinea pigs sent on a mission to 'The Black Hole' closest to Earth. Now only Monte and Willow remain. And Monte is no longer the same. Through his daughter, for the first time, he experiences the birth of an all-powerful love. Willow grows, first of all into a young girl and then into a young woman. Together, father and daughter approach their destination; the black hole in which time and space cease to exist. Monte is part of a motley crew of convicts sent in a spaceship to seemingly exploit an energy resource from a 'Black Hole'. But they're the ones exploited as guinea pigs for sexual experiments by their medical officer Dr. Dibbs (Juliette Binoche). Dr. Dibs is a sort of 'Strangelove' in space, slightly crazed and dangerous. And it's wild to see Willow learning to walk in the corridor of the spaceship, because those truly were the baby's (Scarlett), first steps, taken in front of a camera. At the end of the day she's happily cooing and walking. It’s one of the favorite scenes. That's where we see on Monte's face that his beauty doesn’t get in the way of his goodness. Or rather, that his goodness is beautiful to see. The other crew members are Tcherny (André Benjamin), Nansen (Agatha Buzek), Chandra (Lars Eidinger), Mink (Claire Tran), Ettore (Ewan Mitchell), Elektra (Gloria Obianyo). All of them are wonderful individually and collectively. The same thing about them all; rebellious, broken youth. What unites them is that they’re a group of delinquents, from the community of men and women on death row. In exchange for so-called freedom, they agree to be sent into space to be used as guinea pigs for more-or-less scientific experiments on reproduction, pregnancy, birth; under the strict supervision of a doctor who also has a serious criminal record. It’s a prison in space, a penal colony where the inmates are more or less equals. A sort of phalanstery where no one is really giving orders, even the woman doctor, whose task is to collect sperm like a queen bee. The queen bee is in charge, but the real leader, the only absolute and imperceptible commander, is the spaceship itself, programmed to lead them all to a 'Black Hole', to infinity, to death. A sort of squat house, drab, dirty, poorly lit. There's a main corridor and cells on both sides. On the floor below are a medical lab, a morgue and a greenhouse garden. That earth is their Earth, the only thing that reminds them that they're earthlings, men and women of the earth. For the doctor’s lab, the film shows the same simplicity, the strict minimum; test tubes, a few instruments, a chair for gynecologic exams. None of the typical science fiction props, laser guns, disintegrators, teleportation devices. The same goes for weightlessness. There's no need for weightlessness because the spaceship is accelerating close to the speed of light. Terrestrial gravity, gravity in every sense of the word, reestablishes itself, because gravity is the effect of acceleration. All these men and women have in common is the English they speak. It's the only international language, along with Russian, that's spoken on modern-day space missions. Although soon people will be speaking Chinese in space. English, or more precisely the American English spoken in the film, serves another purpose. There's a flashback in the film that could be considered explanatory. The scene is shot on the roof of train on the frontier between Poland and Belarus. On this train are stowaways, hobos, some of whom we may recognize from the space station. Is it their past? It's more like a melancholic allusion that can evoke not only 'Kerouac’s On the Road' but also those convoys of outsiders and misfits that cross America from east to west. Train, bridge, forests. Other colors which contrast with film’s main palette. In point of fact, that scene is shot in 16mm, not in digital, which tends to rub out nuances. On the computer screens in the spaceship, we see three images from Earth. A random rugby match, an old documentary and a home movie. The documentary is a piece of 'In The Land Of The Head Hunters'. It's not an image of piety, compassion or nostalgia, but one of extreme sadness. What has become of them? Down what fatal rabbit hole did they disappear? These three groups of images, pixelated by the spaceship’s computers, are like archives of times past that can never be regained. Every passenger on the spaceship dresses similarly, in a sort of work uniform with the number 7 on it. 7 is the number of the spaceship. It’s like it is tattooed on their bodies. It implies that this spaceship is one in a series. At an important moment in the film, spaceship 7 docks with another spaceship, number 9, in which the only survivors are dogs; unless it's part of different experiment for dogs only. The film shows this encounter with animality, a mirror of our own, a challenge to our pseudo humanity and the ghoulish fate we've set aside for our so-called pets. The first living creature sent into space was a Russian dog Laïka, who didn’t survive her return to Earth. Sexuality is very present in "High Life" but is treated funereally. Sexuality, not sex. Sensuality, not pornography. In prison, normal sexuality isn’t really on the agenda. But if the prison is also a laboratory destined to perpetuate the human species, sexuality becomes even more abstract, if it's just to reproduce. If the men have to set aside their sperm for the doctor, yes, they get to cum, but for science. Before 'Christianity', marriage served one purpose; procreation. Sexuality is about fluids. As soon as sexuality stirs within us, we know it’s all about fluids: blood, sperm. We've to reduce the sex act to masturbation, more or less technically assisted by the Fuckbox fitted with a dildo for Dr. Dibs, who gives it her all, but in total solitude. This scene is, in part, dark and useless. But what's useful, in the end? Trying to cum isn’t useless. All of her strength is in her back. Later, she goes at night to steal the sperm of Monte, who's knocked out by sleeping pills. It’s a robbery. And definitely a rape. But we see Monte moaning, comatose but not in pain. It’s the story of a man alone in space for the rest of his life, with a baby most likely his, who will become a young woman and eventually his femme fatale, if ever he makes up his mind; this sort of knight, this 'Perceval', this scout of another story, to break his vow of chastity. This is what happens at the end of the film when the young woman, who has no other man on hand, who doesn’t even know that this man his handsome because she has never had anyone to compare him to, makes the first move. We're approaching the forbidden planet, the absolute taboo. A girl is also a woman. Incest is the quest for the ultimate in sex, because it's forbidden. What would you expect from a space opera directed by Claire Denis? Well, everything. "High Life" does to sci-fi what Denis "Trouble Every Day" did to vampire films; it’s a radical interpretation where the filmmaker subverts tropes and genre while preserving their very essence. The film explores Denis favourite themes, bodies and outsiders, which are desired and rejected at the same time. Mind-bending and very organic, "High Life" is a crossover between "Solaris" and "Alien", but without needing any monster. The shape of spaceship 7 doesn’t correspond to typical science fiction criteria. The spaceship looks like a box of matches. But it’s not a whim or a fancy. Not to play the astrophysicist card. When you leave the solar system, there's zero resistance, so the spaceship can be any shape as long as it's equipped with an energy source to keep it moving. The missile-like aerodynamic shape becomes useless or absurd. It’s above all a fascinating work on on how to keep one's humanity in the space void. The film recalls a country where the death penalty still exists, i.e. certain states in 'The US'. The characters are presented as men and women without a past. There's an earlier version of the script that referenced their former lives. The film makes a point of not over-fictionalizing the characters; they've all probably committed terrible crimes, but we don’t pursue it. Their history, collective or individual, takes place in the present and; who knows? In the future, even if for most of them the future will take the form of a cemetery under the stars. They all are contemporary community, utopians, hippies of a special sort, who've gone from juvenile detention centers to prisons and who do not want to live in any society other than their own. Desire and solitude, that’s the main theme. More or less. But above all, "High Life" is not a science fiction film even if there are healthy doses of fiction and science thanks to the precious participation of the astrophysicist Aurélien Barrau, specialist in astroparticle physics and black holes. The film takes place in space but it’s very grounded. It's a film about despair and human tenderness. About love, despite everything.

(Release Info London schedule; January 15th, 2020, Curzon Home Cinema) https://www.curzonhomecinema.com/film/watch-stardust-film-online "Stardust" Meet David before Bowie. One of the greatest icons in music history. But who was the young man behind the many faces? In 1971, a 24-year-old David Bowie (Johnny Flynn) embarks on his first road trip to America with 'Mercury Records' publicist Ron Oberman (Marc Maron), only to be met with a world not yet ready for him. "Stardust" offers a glimpse behind the curtain of the moments that inspired the creation of Bowie’s first and most memorable alter ego, 'Ziggy Stardust', capturing the turning point that cemented his career as one of the world’s greatest cultural icons. At the time the film is set in 1971, David Bowie is performing a lot of covers, including work by 'The Velvet Underground', 'Jacques Brel', 'Cream', 'The Who' and 'The Yardbirds'. In the film he performs work by 'Brel' and 'The Yardbirds', as well as 'Good Ol Jane'. The script centers on a particular moment in David’s life, as a young artist starting out before he’s really famous, before 'The Ziggy Stardust' years. That's always a really interesting time in Bowie’s life because he's trying really hard and kind of failing a lot. Looking at that point in somebody’s life who goes on to become such an iconic voice and personality in our times. As an artist who influences so many people, where's he before that moment when he brakes through? It’s really clever the way the story focuses on a few months in his life, on his trip to America, which is so important to him. It’s where you see him gather the references and influences that go into 'Ziggy Stardust' that's basically his breakthrough moment as an artist. The David Bowie who arrives in America for the first time in January 1971 is not a star. He's an ambitious but insecure young man, with just one hit under his belt that most of the music business had dismissed as a novelty record. And he also has a deep fear that he would soon suffer the same fate as the man who practically raised him; his half-brother, Terry Burns (Derek Moran). Born ten years before David, Terry gives his younger brother a musical education, takes him to his first ever gig, buy him his first record. David’s maternal aunts and grandmother had all suffered bouts of mental illness and in 1967, when David was just 20, Terry had a complete mental breakdown and was sent to an asylum. David’s fear that he too could be struck down by schizophrenia is very present on 'The Man Who Sold the World'. Singing about his fractured inner life probably helps him to stay in one piece. But it didn’t bring him the fame and recognition he craved. Very little has been written about that first trip he made to America. In some respects, it's a disaster, without a visa or musician’s union paperwork, he couldn’t even perform the songs he's there to promote. But instead he finds some of the ideas and influences that he would meld together to create his alter ego, 'Ziggy Stardust'. Ziggy is the culmination of David’s struggle to experience madness in a safe way. It's a means to develop multiple personalities without becoming a case of multiple personality disorder. It converts the potential delusion that he's to be a world famous rock star into a reality. But above all, it's born out of his family dynamic. The film is very much grounded in fact; but it’s also a work of speculative fiction. The film has a slightly heightened, playful tone, but it's true to the spirit of where David is at around that point in his life. Finding a musician who could connect with that experience of an artist starting out, figuring out his identity as a performer, is far more important than physical resemblance. To be a young guy in America, before the Internet and before that sort of constant commercial integration between 'European' culture and 'American' culture, it's such a separate universe. America is huge. The steam coming up from the subway and the yellow taxis. It’s just so intense. The first time you travel so far from home is so exciting and inspiring and that’s what we’re telling in this story. For David to go to America at this time, in 1971, when it’s even more American, not cross-pollinated with any other culture, is just so staunchly American. This is the era of 'The Vietnam War' and it’s an interesting time when Americans have just been through social change at the end of the '60s'. It’s probably quite a divided country where there’s a lot of what still looks like the '50s'. David goes there and he sees diner culture and all that, and he walks up wearing a dress. He goes to 'The Factory' and meet Andy Warhol; all these massive American cultural references kind of just seeps into him. He mixes 'French' chanson with 'American' garage rock. He really put on a character and slowly reinvents himself over the years. He's a sponge for different musical styles. There are pictures of him at these parties playing little sets in a dress and long hair, which the film replicates. It becomes something completely new and exciting through his own interpretation. How can you play Bowie in a sensitive way that doesn’t betray his legacy and him as an artist?” David Bowie had many different faces and almost looked completely different at various stages throughout his life. There probably are great David Bowie impersonators but that’s not what it’s about. Regardless of whether it’s David Bowie or not, it has to be a truthful character. It's a pretty real set of circumstances that we know he went through, so it feels good. It flows really beautifully and the relationships that are portrayed provide a kind of dynamism and intention. It's a film about what makes someone become an artist; what actually drives them to make their art. That someone is David Bowie, a man we’re used to thinking about as the star he became, or as one of his alter egos; 'Ziggy Stardust'; 'Aladdin Zane'; 'The Thin White Duke'. Someone we only ever saw at a great distance, behind a mask; a godlike, alien presence. Even in his perfectly choreographed death, he didn’t seem like a regular human being. Rather than make a biopic, or a spin through his greatest hits, the idea is a film about what we’ve not seen; the interior journey David Bowie might have taken to become that artist. We've been fascinated by Bowie ever since we'rema kid. We bought every record, read every interview, every biography. What surprised us is how little most people seemed to know about his family background, about his life before that first real flush of fame. Besides music from the period, the soundtrack also includes work from contemporaries like 'Marika Hackman' and 'The Wave Pictures', who are all life-long Bowie fans.  

(Release Info London schedule; Februar 5th, 2021, Curzon Home Cinema) https://www.curzonhomecinema.com/film/watch-simple-passion-film-online "Simple Passion" The story of a 'simple passion', that of Hélène August's (Laetitia Dosch) passion for Alexandre Svitsin (Sergei Poluniv), a young Russian diplomat, whom she barely knows, whom she nevertheless sees with the same intensity each time they meet. Since last September she waits for him to call her and come to her place. Everything about him is so precious to her, his eyes, his mouth, his childhood memories, his voice. The character of Hélène seems to be astonished by this state of siege, at once sweet and insidious. Pure dopamine. A drug, really. Hélène is an unfettered, free-spirited, woman. A mature, self-assured woman. Ultimately, she's a woman who submits herself out of love. But it's her decision. This is how we've to see the story of 'Passion Simple'; from a voluntary, not a victim’s viewpoint. Alexandre represents a free man, with a complex and elusive personality. He's the objectified man in the film. It's a complex vision of woman, the character is not a model of independence, because she's completely addicted to this man. And she's a bright woman, on top of that, who raises her son alone, who teaches literature at 'The Sorbonne', and yet she says that for a whole year, the only thing that mattered to her is this man. The protagonist waits for her lover anywhere, not only at home, thanks to today’s new technologies, to cell phones. So that she can wait for him anywhere in the world, even though the world is shrinking around her because all she ever does is wait for him. Yet she's always active and wanting, even if she submits herself to that man’s desire. To be an object of desire, to desire, to wait, to fantasise, isn't it the antithesis of an independent woman? It's a sexual film. Filming bodies is a way to glamorize characters. Characters who are comfortable with their own bodies. In the film, the evolution of their passion follows that of the choreography of their bodies. The film is based on Annie Ernaux’s 90s' bookseller 'Passion Simple'. It established a perfect and precise picture of passionate love. It inspires you with a lot of courage. Her words make you want to be honest without being ashamed. They give you the energy to be precise, sincere, not sappy. You've to dig really deep into your own neuroses to understand Annie Ernaux to the full extent. And when these neuroses are looked by a filmmaker who infuses passion with some radiant energy, then it's pure bliss. The ultimate power of the book is that it doesn’t try to explain things. Passion probably involves a will to submit yourself to the other person, either a man or a woman, and to put your whole self into it. Moral judgement has nothing to do with it. It's really brave to explore so meticulously female desire, passion, that place where there's freedom but at the same time a total dependence on the other person. It's scary. We've to understand where it’s coming from. We don’t judge her. It's a story about how lucky you're when you fall in love. About the emotional rollercoaster it actually is. The absolute loss of control when you meet someone, when you idealize that person. The film sparks off a debate around the issue of feminism. With today’s 'MeToo' climate, of course, But it's a precious thing that there are so many different visions of woman in films, that some might arouse controversy, or bring out tensions. The worse thing would be to have women who are all similar, to have everybody agreeing, it would mean that we've left a norm only to confine ourselves to another. We do not want to see only models of flawless independent women. The situation is interesting because it's vertiginous. Beyond morality, neither black nor white.

(Release Info London schedule: Saturday 27 April 11.00 am - Canterbury | Knutsford | Richmond | Ripon | Soho Sunday 28 April 11.00 am - Colchester | Mayfair | Oxford | Sheffield | Victoria | Wimbledon) "Vox Lux" "Vox Lux" follows the rise of Celeste (Natalie Portman) from the ashes of a major national tragedy to pop superstardom. The film spans 18 years and traces important cultural moments through her eyes, starting in 1999 and concluding in 2017. Beginning in 1999 with a violent mass tragedy, a teenaged Celeste (Raffey Cassidy) is rushed to the hospital, barely surviving a harrowing encounter. With her loyal sister Eleanor (Stacy Martin) by her side, she recovers. After singing at a memorial service, Celeste transforms into a burgeoning pop star with the help of her songwriter sister. The duo puts their grief to song, composing a memorable ballad sung by Celeste that becomes an anthem to an ailing nation. Her parents hire a scrupulous manager (Jude Law) to take her under his wing. Under his tutelage, her career skyrockets to superstardom, with all the vice that comes along. Celeste's meteoric rise to fame and concurrent loss of innocence dovetails with a shattering terrorist attack on the nation, elevating the young powerhouse to a new kind of celebrity; American icon, secular deity, global superstar. As the film enters it's second phase set in 2017, Celeste has grown into her early 30s. She's mounting a comeback after a scandalous incident that derailed her career. Though praised by legions of fans, her private life has been plagued by scandals and addiction, a strained relationship with her sister, and a teenage daughter of her own that she neglected to raise. As the launch of her grand opus looms, she must confront another act of violence. Touring in support of her sixth album, a compendium of sci-fi anthems entitled 'Vox Lux', the indomitable, foul-mouthed pop savior must overcome her personal and familial struggles to navigate motherhood, madness and monolithic fame in 'The Age Of Terror'. The film incisives a character study with a mature sense of style all his own. It's protagonist is a pop star called Celeste and it chronicles key events and cultural patterns that have so far defined the early '21st century' via her gaze. Celeste becomes a symbol of 'The Cult Of Celebrity' and 'The Media Machine' in all it's guts, grit and glory. Her music is a great luxury. But there's a difference in the sort of eco-system that comes, that grows around a pop star. Or if they had been present, in the case of a memoir, has her memory of past experiences not betrayed her? The character feels attacked. So, she lashes out at absolutely everybody. In the scene with her and 'The Journalist' (Christopher Abbott) both have extremely valid perspectives and points of view and she’s mostly in the wrong, in fact. In that moment, the most important thing is not when she says to the journalist, 'You’ve got nothing to be proud of. I don’t share that sentiment remotely'. The most important thing is when she goes, 'You’re right, you’re right', and that’s the reason that moment appears in the film, because she’s consoling herself by basking in a lie, to try to comfort herself. The character of course has a few of those moments where she’s a bit 'Trumpy’ and that’s one of them. And also, this character is suffering with 'PDST'. She’s not really designed to be a monster at all. She’s as much a victim of the era as she's a leader of the era. The film is very much about the fact that 'The 20th Century' was marked by the turn of the banality of people and 'The 21st century' will be defined by the pageantry of people. The film’s themes and the character are intrinsically linked, and so, she’s not a monster. It's about the questions around the psychology of what violence does to individuals and to mass psychology, to group psychology; certainly because of being from a place where people have encountered it for so long. But, unfortunately, it’s been a phenomenon now that, in 'The United States', we experience regularly with the school shootings, which are a type of civil war that we've in 'The US', and of terror in 'The US'. And the psychological impact of what that means for every kid going to school every day, of every parent dropping their kid off every day, and how small acts of violence can create wide-spread psychological torment. There’s a great moment in the film where she says, 'Let’s make it we'. So, her trauma becomes a collective trauma. "Vox Lux" is based on Robert Musil’s book 'The Man Without Qualities', which is about a character whose sort of on the periphery of major events, during the fall of 'The Astro-Hungarian Empire'. There’s an omniscient narrator (William Dafoe) that’s sort of sardonic and the film applies this Robert Musil-style and tone to something contemporary. The film is the continuation of "The Childhood Af A Leader", but on the other side of the century; an historical melodrama set in America between 1999 and 2017. The film connects the life of the protagonist to some major historic events. 1999 was 'Columbine', then we see 'The Twin Towers' in 2001. But this film definitely represents a more corporate brand of fascism. But yeah, we've to see them as being linked in a way for structural reasons and the fact that they're both fables that are sort of defining moments of an era. One in the early part of 'The 20th Century' and this one in the early part of 'The 21st century'. "Vox Lux" demonstrates a more transparent contract with the reader than the traditional historical biography because one is able to access the past without questioning the author about how they could provide such a detailed account of an event without having been present for the event themselves. Featuring original songs by Sia, "Vox Lux" is an origin story about the forces that shape us, as individuals, nations, and gods. The film guides into fearless places in the name of art, finding beauty in the ugliness of the world and daring us to pay attention. It’s a piece of art that's really more of a portrait, and more of a reflection of our society; the intersection of pop culture and violence, and the spectacle that we equate between the two. It's a statement or send an important message to 'The US' about their gun control policies. It makes people feel things that they recognise and that they can see some of things that we’re facing in our society right now. "Vox Lux" chronicles moments that defined 'The 20th century', the last twenty years. We’re all been through a lot. But the truth is, it’s quite a difficult film to speak about because it isn't an attempt to create.anything which is too didactic. It's something that's supposed to be a sort of fable or a poetic rumination of what we’ve all been through for the last twenty years. We live in an age of anxiety. We feel like we’re having more sleepless nights than ever. The film is sort of born of that. It's designed to be where we could all come together and think about it together collectively.

(Glasgow Film Festival: Film At Home; Wed 24 Feb to Sat 27 Feb) https://glasgowfilm.org/glasgow-film-festival/shows/minari-n-c-15 "Minari" It’s 'The 1980s', and David (Alan S. Kim), a seven-year-old 'Korean American' boy, is faced with new surroundings and a different way of life when his father, Jacob (Steven Yeun), moves their family from 'The West Coast' to rural 'Arkansas' in search of their own 'American Dream'. David and his sister Anne (Noel Cho) have mixed feelings about this move; at first excited by their new mobile home, they soon grow bored being in a backwater. His wife, Monica (Yeri Han), is aghast that they live in a mobile home in the middle of nowhere, and naughty little David and Anne are bored and aimless. When his sly, equally mischievous grandmother Soonja (Youn Yuh-jung) arrives from 'Korea' to live with them, her unfamiliar ways arouse David’s curiosity. The arrival of their foul-mouthed, but incredibly loving grandmother brings new energy to the family dynamic, but Jacob’s determination to make it as a successful farmer throws the family’s finances, and it's relationships Meanwhile, Jacob, hell-bent on creating a farm on untapped soil, throws their finances, his marriage, and the stability of the family into jeopardy. Amidst the instability and challenges of this new life in the rugged 'Ozarks', "Minari" shows the undeniable resilience of family and what really makes a home. It all begins as recent 'Korean' arrival Jacob whisks his family from 'California' to 'Arkansas', determined to carve out the rugged independence of farm life, even if it's one on shaky ground in 'The US' of 'The 1980s'. While Jacob sees Arkansas as a land of opportunity, the rest of his clan is flummoxed by their unforeseen move to a new life on a pint-sized piece of land in the far-flung 'Ozarks'. But it's two unlikely family members at opposite ends of the spectrum, wide-eyed, unruly seven-year-old David; and his equally defiant, just-off- the-plane-from-'Korea' grandma Soonja, who start to forge the family’s new path. In the midst of profound change, they clash at first, but soon discover the imperfect but magical bonds that root the family to their past as they reach towards the future. Jacob takes deep pride in his self-reliance while his wife Monica pragmatically tries to keep family life intact amid the chaos Jacob has whipped up with the move. Oldest sister Anne rapidly gains savvy and responsibility as she's handed big, unasked-for responsibilities, while David mischievously tries to repel his newly arrived grandmother Soonja, who upends the fragile peace with her foul-mouthed but perceptive commentary. Then there’s the humor and humanity of Jacob’s employee Paul (Will Patton), a fervent 'Pentecostal' in a perpetual state of repentance. He has a more unusual vision for his life. You root for Jacob because he’s doing this terribly risky thing, taking his family to this crazy place without even consulting them and putting them on the edge of disaster. You could easily despise this guy and not trust him at all. We've to understand of what it’s like to be Jacob, to be thirtysomething and to have kids relying on you but also have this fire to pursue your own ideas of success and happiness. Jacob holds firm to the idea that ultimately David and Anne will benefit from his dream, once the dust settles. But while Jacob’s wife Monica admires his aspirations, that doesn’t mean she can easily embrace life in an 'Arkansas' trailer in the middle of nowhere. She’s anxious about the family’s isolation, and about where her own life and marriage goes from here; even as she transforms their trailer into a place that increasingly feels like home. As "Minari" builds, David witnesses his father’s dream waver on the edge of absurdity, then near catastrophe as it seems the family’s future might literally go up in smoke. David offers an impish, joyful way into complicated memories, but he also offered something else, that open, awed-by-it-all spirit that can illuminate the beautiful strangeness of life. With his lack of language for what it means to be an immigrant, David becomes a conduit for the feeling of an entire unmoored family trying to find their bearings. Conjuring David’s boyish exuberance, angst, and cheekiness is a particular revelation, merging the child and parent within him. There’s a dance going on where David is a creation of two opposing things; out inner memories of being scared, excited, and curious as a kid. An important part of Anne’s character is that she’s serious about caring for the people she loves, There are so many little moments, like when Jacob’s digging the well and David’s sits there looking bored. The film’s momentum completely opens up when Soonja arrives. She’s vulgar and has a wicked sense of humor, but what we find interesting is that quite often salvation comes from someone like that. Somehow, she might embody ideals of tolerance and love more than anyone. For all the tumultuous changes in David’s life, nothing sets off more sparks than the arrival of Soonja, who, much to David’s abject horror, moves into his bedroom, making them instant rivals. To David, Soonja can’t possibly be a real grandmother. She certainly doesn’t bake cookies or tenderly dote. She smells weird, gets a kick out of teasing him, and is as foul-mouthed as anyone he’s met. Nevertheless, in ways David cannot immediately see, he and Soonja share much in common; both are spirited rebels, both are physically vulnerable, and both are linchpins of the family, with Soonja connecting them to where they’ve come from just as David points to an unseen future. And when David pulls a boyish prank on Soonja, hoping that will make her go away, it instead binds them closer as David realizes Soonja understands him better than he could have known. Salvation is more directly sought by the family’s invaluable neighbor, who lends Jacob the help he needs to tend to his crops. This is Paul, a completely committed 'Pentecostal$ who speaks in tongues but doesn’t say much about the reasons he's driven to make so many amends. Even as the ferocity of Paul’s faith is a mystery and at times an affront to Jacob, no one in David’s family can quite shake the strange, poignant beauty of Paul’s kindness to them. The film uses the intensity of Paul’s belief as a means to reveal who he's as a person. Paul is always an important character. The companionship he finds with Jacob speaks to how two people can come from entirely different backgrounds, yet find a closeness rooted simply in shared work. Like Jacob, Paul’s a man living in the gaps. He's alone, misunderstood, and burdened. Jacob relates to that intrinsically, even if he sees himself as a man who believes only in science and hard work. They both have their beliefs, but at core, they’re just two lonely dudes trying to do their thing, which is their connection. Jacob and Paul discover they can simply be themselves. As 'The Arkansas Dream' threatens to dry up and upend each member of the family, the film explores how a family navigates not only the very specific dilemmas of assimilating into rural America but also broader questions of elemental humanity, the gaps we all wrestle with between family ties and independence, faith and skepticism, feeling like an outsider and yearning to belong. Though each character has their own comic plight, there's no judgement or satire. Too often you see people in American films speaking English who would not in their real lives. But the more authentically a film depicts the details of how people really live, the more meaningful it's. There’s a dissonance to speaking 'Korean' at home that you can’t get at any other way. Two human beings trying to exist together is difficult enough, but when you add the pressure that they’re under there are going to be cracks. Just as working his own patch of land is the lure for David’s father to head for Arkansas, so too is the power of the land woven throughout "Minari". This family might speak 'Korean', but their fates are as tied to the potential and peril in 'The American' soil as the characters in John Ford’s "Grapes Of Wrath", George Stevens’ "Giant", William Wyler’s "Big Country", or Terrence Malick’s "Days Of Heaven". There’s a constant level of risk in farming that so few movies let you feel. Named for a peppery 'Korean' herb that thrives best in it's second season, "Minari" is a tender, funny, evocative ode to how one generation of a family risks everything to plant the dreams of the next. The film unspools with all the vividness of a lived memory. While in it's basic outlines "Minari" might seem to be a story we know; a tale of immigrants making a go at their own vision of 'The American Dream; the film brings a fresh and illuminating take. For within the film’s at once playful, powerful, and candidly detailed family remembrances comes a larger story: the impact of the journey on a new generation of young 'Americans'. It's a deeply personal immersion into reconciling two worlds, with boundless affection for both. There’s so much more drawing us together as human beings than the superficial categories we have created. For some, "Minari" might be a chance to see a 'Korean American' finally telling the story, but we've find these characters mean just as much to people from 'Arkansas', or from 'New York', or anywhere. Loving people is a lot of work, and things will go awry at times, but at the end of the day you have that love and it’s real and so meaningful. All people have their masks, all people have their triumphs and their failings.

(Release Info London schedule; June 14th, 2919, Cineworld Greenwich, The O2, Peninsula Square, London SE10 0DX, United Kingdom, 21:10pm) "The Hummingbird Project" From director Kim Nguyen comes a modern-day 'David & Goliath' story that is equal parts financial thriller and human drama, excavating the pitfalls and perils of two men who risk everything in order to have it all. Cousins from New York, Vincent Zaleski (Jesse Eisenberg) and Anton Zaleski (Alexander Skarsgård) are players in the high-stakes game of 'High Frequency Trading', where winning is measured in milliseconds. Their dream? To build a fiber-optic cable straight line between Kansas and New Jersey, making them millions. But nothing is straightforward for this flawed pair. Anton is the brains, Vincent is the hustler, and together they push each other and everyone around them to breaking point on their quixotic adventure. Constantly breathing down their necks is their old boss Eva Torres (Salma Hayek) a powerful, intoxicating and manipulative trader who will stop at nothing to come between them and beat them at their own game. No matter what the cost, Vincent and Anton are determined to cut through America, only to find redemption at the end of their line, not through money, but through family and reconnecting to the land. Cousins from New York, Vincent and Anton are players in the high-stakes game of high frequency trading, where winning is measured in milliseconds. Vincent is the hustler and Anton is the brains; together they push each other and everyone around them in their quixotic quest to attain 'The Ultimate American Dream'. Embarking on 'The Herculean' task of installing a fiber-optic cable in a straight line between Kansas and New Jersey, so they can yield faster trades and greater riches, the cousins clash with their rapacious former boss, Eva Torres, a hedge-fund manager who tries to beat them at their own game using a rival technology. Racing against time, navigating heavy machinery, stubborn landowners, and the elements, Vincent and Anton move mountains to cut through America and get rich faster, only to find redemption and renewal at the end of the line. The film exposes the ruthless edge of our increasingly digital world.   "The Hummingbird Project" speaks to the ridiculousness of our monetary pursuits; and the humanity behind getting rich quick. The film takes this massive, real-world concept of high frequency trading and placed two unique and unusual people in the middle of it. The story centers on high-frequency trader cousins Vincent and Anton, second-generation 'Eastern European New Yorkers' who leave their 'Wall Street' trading-floor jobs to construct a fiber-optic line stretching from 'The Midwest' to 'The East Coast', guaranteeing faster trades. The film's title suggests an inconceivable task, laying a cable in the earth that can transfer data from Kansas to New York in the time it takes a hummingbird to flap it's wings. Much of "​The Hummingbird Project​'s" story plays out on the open road, with Vincent and his hired crew of diggers and drillers troubleshooting the line as it stretches across the American heartland. With Vincent in the field wheeling and dealing over land rights, boring through granite mountains to keep the project heading in a straight line, his cousin Anton barricades himself in hotel rooms around the country, writing algorithmic code to outpace Eva Torres microwave-tower technology. It's also an immigrant's tale set in the digital age, telling the story of second-generation cousins of 'Eastern European' descent who are trying to attain 'The American Dream' after successful careers on 'Wall Street'. After burning it all down on the trading floor, Vincent and Anton strive for an event greater net worth. Vincent and Anton Zaleski have risen through the ranks of the financial sector as trader and quant, respectively. At the story's outset, they find themselves frustrated not only with their jobs but also their positions in life. Fast-talking and entrepreneurial, Vincent wants to get rich quick and take down his competition, including his former boss Eva Torres, who will stop at nothing in her own right to implement and patent the technology for faster trades. Vincent is a salesman who wins arguments by talking around his opponent, if he pauses to think, he could be vulnerable to counter-argument. He spends most of the movie living in the delusion that his project will be flawless, as he tries to convince people to invest in his vision. He literally can't afford to take a breath. Anton, in contrast, is an introverted quant more comfortable crunching numbers at a computer terminal, quietly longing for a simple country life far from the madness of the financial sector. In an early scene, after finding an investor to fund their fiber-optic scheme, Vincent and Anton quit their jobs in Eva's firm and brazenly embark on the adventure of a lifetime; trying to beat the very system that shaped them. Vincent rents drilling machinery and negotiates land rights while Anton perfects the algorithm that will hopefully yield them untold riches. Vincent is the salesman of the operation who's more ambitious than he's thoughtful. He doesn't just want to succeed in the financial system, he wants to beat it by going around the establishment. He's interested in winning regardless of the consequences to him or the world around him, and while he's a smart guy, he doesn't always think before he speaks. Without his cousin Anton, he would probably be selling fake 'Gucci' handbags on the streets of New York City. Skittish and reserved in the face of Vincent's brash, live-wire determination, Anton is a balding husband and father who happens to be a math genius, capable of seeing order in the chaotic flow of numbers and data that course across his computer terminal in a given second. He's socially awkward and probably on 'The Spectrum'. His goal in life is to be around the people he can tolerate, and there's not that many, basically his wife and kids, and Vincent, who's his best friend and cousin, as well as Anton's connection to the outside world. He can shelter Anton in a way that allows him to focus strictly on writing code and coming up with new algorithms. At it's heart a 'David & Goliath' story, Vincent and Anton are the underdogs who come up against a much stronger adversary in the form of their one-time employer Eva Torres. Symbolizing rapacious capitalism at it's most extreme, the flashy, foul-mouthed Eva will stop at nothing to gain the competitive edge over her former underlings. 'The Hummingbird Project' reaches it's apotheosis when Vincent, suffering from a serious illness, finds himself negotiating drilling rights with an obstinate Amish farmer who won't yield his land, giving Eva the advantage in their race for speedier trades. By pushing himself to the extreme, and finding himself pitted against a 'Luddite', Vincent discovers that his relentless pursuit of financial gain is an untenable and even unhealthy pursuit. Vincent begins the story with what he believes is his purpose in life but his journey of discovery switches course at a certain point and becomes more about realigning his priorities. The stakes of the journey are resolved but they're completely different than when his journey started. At ​'The Hummingbird Projec​t's' conclusion, Vincent and Anton discover that the object of their pursuit, whether money in specific or 'The American Dream' in general, isn't exactly what they thought it was when they set out on their epic journey. As Vincent and Anton come to learn, sometimes we're blown off course from what we're truly meant to achieve in life. The cousins also realize they're inconspicuous in the face of rapid-fire change, this week's hot technology will be irrelevant before the next big thing comes along, whether neutrino messaging, microwave drones, or something as yet undiscovered. But does it really matter in the grand scheme of things? By 2010.financial companies were spending $2.2 billion on trading infrastructure, the high-speed servers that process trades and the fiber-optic cables that link them in a globe spanning network. One company specializing in trading infrastructure is 'Spread Networks', founded in 2010 with the mission of providing Internet connectivity between Chicago and New York City at close to the speed of light, using so-called dark fiber, or optical fibers, to make faster trades. The first fiber-optic line planted by 'Spread Networks' ran 827 miles, from 'The Chicago Mercantile Exchange', where futures and options are traded, to 'The Nasdaq Data Center' in Carteret, New Jersey, costing $300 million to construct. By October 2012, 'Spread' announced improvements to their line, decreasing the round-trip time from 13.1 milliseconds to 12.98 milliseconds, giving Spread traders a slight advantage over the average round-trip of 14.5 milliseconds. Because glass has a higher refractive index than air, the round-trip time for fiber-optic transmission is 50 percent faster than microwave towers, the technology used by 'The Hummingbird Project​'s' Eva Torres in her battle to outwit and out-earn 'The Zaleskis'. The result became 'IEX', or 'Investors Exchange', a transparent stock exchange that has gone on to trade 229.2 million shares at a collective value of nearly $11 billion. It's a story about the ​people behind trading algorithms and fiber-optic lines, the speed demons who take an unethical approach to high frequency trading, discovering in their pursuit of vast wealth that their lives are not made richer in the process. A cautionary tale for our cutting-edge times, the project positions two scheming underdogs up against the behemoth of global capitalism, symbolized by the ruthless and merciless hedge fund manager Eva Torres. She's the most unique person in the business. She wants to get to places before anyone else and break new ground in technology so she can stay ahead of the game. It's not just about the money for her, this is a movie about obsessions, and Eva's obsession is devouring and co-opting genius. Playing out like a high-stakes thriller that substitutes the trading floor for 'The American Terrain', ​'The Hummingbird Project' becomes a glorified arms race across the country, over hills, rivers, highways, and private farmland, to implement the new technology before Eva can erect her own. She's a woman who's very content in her life, not some robot. You can see the passion in what she does. When things get dangerous, there are tantrums. But she's also heavily focused on strategy, she doesn't take a lot of time to indulge in drama. Eva wants to be intimidating toward people but she dresses simply, in a way that's not distracting. So many women her age are afraid of getting old, but Eva embraces it and even owns it, making a statement of her power through her hair. She's smart, she's fearless, she's a woman, and she's Latina, so she has to be tougher than everyone else. The film includes a voice of sanity and reason in the form of chief engineer Mark Vega (Michael Mando), the project manager of Vincent's vision, who maneuvers and operates the heavy equipment in the field. If Vincent is the mouth of the operation and Anton is the brains, Mark is the heart of the project in that he has to make sure as chief engineer that everything is steady and stable; including Vincent. They're digging this elaborate straight line across the country and someone has to stay level-headed, that responsibility falls on Mark. He joins Vincent's team because he sees this as an opportunity to create something bigger than himself. A kind of bromance develops along the way between Mark and Vincent; at the end of the movie Mark discovers his true purpose, more than finishing the fiber-optic line, is to save Vincent's life. A good portion of ​'The Hummingbird Project' involves heavy machinery, in particular the directional-drilling equipment Vincent must track down and place in the hands of Mark Vega in order to facilitate his dream of laying a 1,000-mile cable between Kansas and New Jersey. Mark Vega has a profound bond with Vincent Zaleski; even when the wheeling and dealing character is at his lowest ebb, Vega sees a human being, working tirelessly to get the job done while at the same time helping to keep his cousin going. Mark is drawn to the humanity in Vincent, he understands his desire to want to leave his mark on the earth, but there's also an underdog quality that Mark relates to, and wants to see through. This film is based on the 2012 ​'Wired' article 'Raging Bulls: How Wall Street Got Addicted To Light-Speed Trading'. One such consultants help make the project more comprehensible to a general audience, including a high-frequency trading expert accustomed to dealing with billion-dollar money flows on a daily basis in his former career as a 'Wall Street' options trader, is ​Haim Bodek, a former 'Goldman Sachs' trader. After working at 'Goldman Sachs' in the late '90s, where he was a successful options trader, and 'UBS', where he was the global head of volatility trading, Bodek formed his own high frequency company called 'Trading Machines', which at the height of it's success in the early 2000s accounted for half a percentage of all 'U.S.' options trading, a huge number for such a small firm. When 'Trading Machines' began losing money, Bodek set about reverse-engineering his own algorithms in an effort to find out why he was hemorrhaging cash. What he discovered alarmed him: traders were rigging the game by manipulating the order in which trades were placed electronically, an especially shrewd trader could effectively jump the line and profit in the millions without anyone knowing. Bodek tipped off 'The Securities And Exchange Commission' on the practice, outfoxing his corrupt rivals by exposing what became known as the largest heist in 'Wall Street History'. Nicknamed 'The Edward Snowden Of Finance' by 'The Russians', Bodek was quickly blackballed by the industry for blowing the whistle on high frequency trading. Bodek is instrumental in helping shape the characters of Vincent and Anton Zaleski, having known and worked with traders and quants for much of his 'Wall Street' career. Vincent and Anton are two individuals who think they can beat the system. What's so interesting about this movie is through it's characters you realize this way of living is not designed for human beings, who are plugged into lunar and sun cycles. Those cycles are slow; 29 days, 24 hours. Like Vincent Zaleski discovers, our obsession with milliseconds is bound to make people sick. Sometimes it's better to slow down; you'll get more mileage out of life when you do. While ambitious in scope and a powerful commentary on the absurdity of our financial institutions, at it's core ​"The Hummingbird Project" is character-driven. This is the rare story about something timely and important in which the characters propel the plot. 'Wall Street' is a zero-sum game. There are winners and losers, and if you're a loser, you've no one to blame but yourself, you simply aren't good enough. Someone else is smarter, faster. At once a high-stakes financial thriller with a gripping cautionary tale on the perils of rapacious greed, and thoughtful human drama about reclaiming life's essentials, "The Hummingbird Project" is a story for our up-to-the-minute times; where a millisecond can determine fortune or failure, and the next big technological advancement could wipe out today's way of doing things almost instantly. This film is about the amazing premise of people digging thousand-mile long tunnels to try and shave a couple of milliseconds off of the time it took to make their stock market trades. We've this haunting image in our head of stock market hustlers struggling to walk through swamps and muddy forests in their expensive suits, putting their sanity on the line all for the good old dollar. It's about quantum physics experts, fiber optic physicists, highly specialized tunnel digging experts who dig hundred-mile-long, four-inch-wide tunnels for a living. High frequency trading experts dealing with billion dollar  money flows on a daily basis. Boy, what a ride. In retrospect, there's something about bringing forward what seems to be a metaphoric world, when in fact most of what's in the script is, in some way, true to life. "The Hummingbird Project" builds on a growing body of work that's global in scope and scale yet intimate in its examination of ordinary people living in extraordinary times, often at the mercy of nature, who connect and conspire amid hurdles ranging from technology, time and distance to warfare and climate. The film is fascinated by the idea of finance professionals digging thousand-mile-long tunnels to try and eliminate milliseconds from their stock-market trades. This is a relatable and very human struggle; one that's rooted as much in the natural world as the digital realm. It's about speed-obsessed quants, the physicists, engineers and mathematicians-turned-financiers who generate more than half of all 'U.S.' stock trading. In the pursuit of market-beating returns, sending a signal at faster than light speed provides the ultimate edge; a way to make trades in the past, the financial equivalent of betting on a horse after it has been run. One of the underlying themes of the film is the elasticity of time, similar to the way Einstein explains 'Relativity'. There's something about our experience of time that's so different depending on our emotional status. Things are becoming so fast-paced that we're losing our sense of reality, and we feel it.

Any Marvel movie that has to follow Infinity War is unfairly going to be compared to the grandeur of that film and while Ant-Man and the Wasp was never meant to be as grand in scale or serious as that film, it just about manages to succeed in being a light-hearted, low stakes affair much like the 2015 original. Not everything here works though and I’d say that it’s the weakest MCU film this year and probably in Phase 3 so far. That doesn’t mean it’s bad, it’s just a little lacking to me. For those confused about the film’s place in the timeline, it takes place before Avengers: Infinity War (2018) and syncs up with those events come the end. The story revolves around two major plot lines, the first being that of Hope (Evangeline Lilly) and Hank’s (Michael Douglas) mission to rescue her mother/his wife from the Quantum Realm, while the second involves the threat posed by The Ghost (Hannah John-Kamen) to them and Scott Lang (Paul Rudd). While I found neither of these plot lines all that investing, it’s the chemistry between the three main leads that holds everything together. Rudd, Lilly and Douglas continue to shine as these characters. Giving Lilly the chance to suit up and become The Wasp for this film was an exciting prospect and she does great in all her action scenes, but there are times where Hope should clearly have been given more input in a scene, but sometimes Scott and Hank will steal the moment from her. Despite this, I felt the character really came more into her own here. Scott Lang continues to be the earnest and underdog hero of the MCU. For me the moments that he has with his daughter are the moments where he’s the real hero and Rudd really sells these scenes. The supporting cast of Michael Peña, Tip Harris and David Dastmalchian are usually the comedic highlights of the film, just as they were in the original, although I was disappointed we didn’t get more of Luis’ (Peña) signature stories. The weakest characters of the film though really fall of the villain side of things. John-Kamen as Ava/The Ghost doesn’t get much to do in the role and the actress doesn’t give a particularly memorable performance either. Her motivations are clear, but understandable meaning she isn’t really much of a villain in the end. This means the only straight-up villain of the film is Sonny Burch (Walton Goggins), a black market dealer and he’s too one dimensional and not very threatening either. Overall, the villains of the picture were easily the weakest of Phase 3 which is a shame because Phase 3 has had some pretty strong villains. What’s unique about Ant-Man’s world is the shrinking and growing perspective that adds an often comical and surreal experience to many scenes. The action scenes in particular inventively use the shrinking/growing aspects to create some fun set-pieces. The climax is where a lot of this used; unfortunately a lot of it is shown in the trailer. Actually a lot of this movie was shown in the trailer, including the post-credit scene. However, the technical filmmaking is an all-around improvement over the original with the direction feeling more confident and the actors more settled into their characters. It’s just the story seems to go in circles sometimes throwing off the pace. Director Peyton Reed delivered on everything audiences came to like about the original Ant-Man, but this sequel fails to always be interesting or exciting. It’s many moments of comedy don’t always work and the villains are too bland to feel menacing. It’s certainly a fun distraction while we wait for the next Avengers, but it won’t go down as one of the MCU’s best.

Scott Pilgram Vs The World is a Edgar Wright cult classic starring Michael Cera as Scott Pilgrim, a loser who plays base for a band started in a living room with some friends. Now off the cuff nothing really special about what I’ve just described right? Wrong, upon first view, the opening credits hints at exactly what type of movie you are about to watch. We are introduced to Scott (24 yrs) via a highly inappropriate romantic relationship with 17 year old school girl Knives Chau (Ellen Wong). She seems to adore Scott and his friends comment of his decision to date a high school girl following his previous failed relationship, we’ll speak on that later. As the opening scene introduces us to his band (Sex Bob-omb) we witness the stylistic choice Edgar Wright chooses to use for this film. Based off a comic of the same name by Bryan Lee O’Malley, Wright emphasises on comic style imagery, scene transitions and character direction to make it feel as if you were reading a comic book rather than watching a film. As mentioned earlier, the opening opening scene transitions from sex bob-omg simply rehearsing one of their songs into it being the theme song for the opening credits. I am a big fan of Wright’s direction style with his filmography including some of my all time favourite movies (Cornetto Trilogy, Attack the Block), but on this occasion I truly believe he was able to find a perfect balance of comedy with total insanity. The premise of this movie is Scott who is currently in a relationship with Knives meets Ramona Flowers, a delivery girl with a weird taste in hair dye, he becomes infatuated with her and ultimately woo’s her with his strange ways. Unbeknown to him, Ramona has 7 exes, and in order for Scott to truly be with her, he must overcome them, via combat. As Scott encounters all 7 exes, he is faced with having to dig deep and find something within himself to overcome each obstacle. The film follows the narrative in from the comics, with Scott having to fight both male and female exes, and the fight scenes are styled as if you were playing a fighting game like Tekken or Street Fighter, with Scott earning points for combos, there being a consistent trend of someone shouting ‘Fight’ prior to the beginning off every bout and Scott earning a reward if when he defeats each opponent. Wright is able to fuse the comical elements, expertly delivered by Cera, with the dramatic plot of Scott’s fascinations with Ramona, the first fight includes a sing and dance number, something that would seem preposterous on paper but turned out great and fitted with the narrative of the insane world Scott has been thrown into. At first all that is happening seems to confuse Scott and he shows no seriousness towards what is happening, but as he begins to understand that in order for him to get his girl, this is what he must do, we begin to see a shift in Scott from a goofy character to one determined to win at all costs. The film starts to slow a little bit towards the middle of the second act , in which Scott has to fight a movie star, a lesbian ex lover, a super hero vegan, twins who happen to be DJ’s and the final ex Gideon Graves (Jason Schwartzman). Some would ask what exactly it is about Ramona that makes Scott willing to go so far to get her, and from their on screen chemistry, it doesn’t exactly scream comparable. Ramona is often very introverted, mild mannered and quiet, the contrast of Knives, not Scott’s ex, who is outspoken, animated and naive to say the least. This decision to have both women in Scott’s life be the antithesis of each other is a ploy used by the screenwriter to explore Scott’s mental state, dos he want to stay a child, living a stone’s throw away from his childhood home, sharing a mattress with his best friend or does he want to ‘grow up’ an repeated rhetoric lambasted at him by his sister and close friends? This film examines at what point we all must develop an inner monologue about who we are and set standards for ourselves as we look to grow and develop as individuals. By the end of the movie, Scott is tasked with facing the final ex and the ‘Boss Villian’ in gaming terms, Gideon Graves. Graves has somehow been able to manipulate Ramona into dumping Scott and and returning to him, along with signing Sex Bob-Omb (minus Scott) to play for him. It seems like Scott is lower than ever, but the third act delivers Scott’s redemption as he able to harness not the power of ‘Love’ (He tried that and had to restart the level, another game reference), but the power of ‘Self respect’. At the end of the movie and comics Scott ends up with none other than Knives, as he comes to understand that although their relationship may have seemed inappropriate on first glance (Age difference), Scott was enjoyed being with her, he enjoyed quoting obscure facts nobody cared about, he enjoyed playing video games with her and he loved the fact she cared so much about his ambitions to be part of a great band. Whereas, with Ramona it was just an obsession with a girl he had no real connection or compatibility with. Scott Pilgram Vs The World poses that same question to the viewer, are you someone willing to stick with something that might seem inconvenient to you at the time or are you willing to sacrifice your happiness for what you would perceive as a more overtly satisfying relationship in which compatibility is out of the question? The witty dialogue and comedic moments shine at the hands of Edgar Wright and for me its no surprise this film in the last 7 years has build a massive cult following. Although not a smash in the domestic box office, racking in just over $31M from a $85M budget, it has since garnered the acclaim it rightly deserves with many praising Wright for his forward thinking and stylistic decisions. I would suggest giving this movie a watch with some friends and can guarantee a laugh, if not a cheer for our nerdy protagonist. Check out the trailer for Scott Pilgrim Vs the World below.

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