top of page
Search Results
Type
Category
806 items found for ""
- BLORT NIGHT FOR POW now on YOUTUBEIn Movie Trailers·January 24, 2020here’s the trailer. the film is now playing here https://youtu.be/wgi6Pg4Mz840275
- "The Whistlers" written by Gregory MannIn Film Reviews·May 6, 2020(Release Info UK schedule; May 8th, 2020, Curzon Home Cinema) (Virtual Screening) https://www.curzonhomecinema.com/film/watch-the-whistlers-film-online "The Whistlers" 'The Romanian New Wave' goes global in 'The Whistlers', the latest eccentric yarn from director Corneliu Porumboiu. Not everything is as it seems for Cristi (Vlad Ivanov), a corrupt police inspector in Bucharest who plays both sides of the law. Embarked by the beautiful Gilda (Catrinel Marlon) on a high-stakes heist, both will have to navigate the twists and turns of treachery and deception. This twisty gangster noir opens on 'La Gomera', where Cristi is sent against his will. In a downright whimsical turn, he’s there to learn the region’s aboriginal whistling language, which he needs to pull off an elaborate plot right under the noses, or rather ears, of 'The Romanian Police'. As the film’s labyrinthine plot unfolds with clockwork precision, revolving, of course, around a stash of money, there are twists, turns, and double-crossings aplenty, involving not just Cristi’s also-corrupt superior Magda (Rodica Lazar), but also his mother (Julieta Szönyi), and femme fatale Gilda. A secret whistling language spoken on 'The Spanish' island of 'LaGomera' might just be what they need to pull it off. The opening scene, the almost triumphant arrival on the island of 'La Gomera', lays the foundations of the film; Cristi thinks he’s in heaven but soon discovers he’s bugged and under surveillance. He's in fact imprisoned by the gaze of others. Within the context of a very ambiguous police investigation, it's a story of a disillusioned cop, who shows up at 'La Gomera' to meet a woman and learn a whistled language. But things get more complicated and nothing goes according to plan. The policeman embarks on an initiatory journey, a kind of adventure with many turns and surprising twists. We don’t immediately understand that Cristi is wire-tapped and suspected by the police. His character does not lend itself to immediate identification, but the film gradually reveals his secret to us. Cristi is a complex character, initially thinks he’s controlling things but he’s mistaken because very soon he's caught in a storm, a vertiginous triangle. He's no longer the master of his fate. Cristi is disillusioned and elusive. He's no longer believes in his vocation, he starts to work with the mafia and to make money from drug trafficking. He’s a person who no longer believes in anything, in his professional life, his private life, and he seeks to escape all of this when he gets to the island of 'La Gomera'. As a police officer, he's part of the power structure and he thinks he’s in control of his life, but rather quickly he's caught up in a storm of events beyond his control. People talk a lot, ponder things, to try to define this revolution that eventually overthrows the power that's unshakeable for so long. In this film, the characters are caught up in a world dominated by strong opinions, where everyone wants to impose their point of view on others; it’s a permanent power play. In a dark world where everything must be negotiated, genuine communication functions better through a secret language that enables, for those who master it, the ability to extract oneself from the control of very tense human relationships, to be able to preserve a kind of sincerity. This secret language is crucial for Cristi, as he comes to use it for personal ends that have nothing to do with the criminal reasons for which he has to learn it. His seriousness in all circumstances occasionally makes him comical. Cristi is quite opaque and doesn’t show much emotion, but he shows his hand at a key moment; when he negotiates Gilda’s future with the mafia. He's madly in love with her. So we discover the truth about the characters only through their actions. Gina is the archetype of a woman. She betrays the men, turning against them. She's a lure, ambiguous and unsettling character who manages to manipulate others without them realising it. She succeeds in giving full weight to the scene of the kiss with Cristi, staged to dupe the police officers following them. It's a moment that reveals her power. She always knows how to play her different roles before the surveillance cameras and she masters some very tense and borderline situations. Gilda eventually escapes this constant roleplaying, gradually revealing herself to herself, and becoming a more real or realistic woman. All the while remaining a film character. Gilda is the femme fatale, and Magda, the prosecutor, Cristi’s boss, is a strong and cold woman in the style of Marlene Dietrich. The mafia boss Paco (Agusti Villaronga) avoids the cliché of 'The Mafiosi'. In the end, we understand that the strongest characters are the women around him; Gilda, Magda, and his mother. The women are pulling the strings to move the story forward. Here, we understand that he's being carried along by the women. In the end, his decisions are not his choices. It's a story with characters who lie, who play a double game. They believe they’re the masters of their fate. The principle of this film lies in transactions, including the transaction of words. The dialogues here are no longer discussions based on an idea but hard and fast exchanges, like ping-pong, blow upon blow. Each character is caught up in their professional role, the cops and mafia have a functional way of talking, there’s not much time for forethought because they’re constantly having to take action. In an increasingly controlled society in which everyone must play a role, a very old form of communication can allow people to escape it; to escape from this control and the constant power relations that determine the actions of each character. The characters are playing roles and the film plays with the codes of language and genre. The visual references follow this idea. Each character plays a role for others. Only Cristi’s mother has retained a kind of sincerity and realism. Each of the chapters bearing the name of a character who plays an important part in Cristi’s story arc. The film establishes distanciated, abstract aesthetic, to emphasise the idea of artifice and the roleplaying of each of the characters. This film is based on the whistled language 'El Silbo', practised on the island of 'La Gomera'. 'The Romanian' title refers to the name of this island in 'The Canaries', a place to get away from it all, a lost paradise. 'The French' and 'English' titles refer to the mysterious whistled language that exists in many different places in the world but whose roots are unknown. This island of 'La Gomera' is closely linked to the tradition of these whistles. The whistled language struck as a possibility for pursuing this theme differently. Adjective on language and the way in which it's used for political ends. The history of a secret language, used for criminal ends, is the core that determined the narrative style and staging. The language 'El Silbo Gomero' allows us to code spoken language, in a similar way to how film codes reality. The film plays with the codes of very different genres, from the detective film or film noir, to the western or comedy. 'The Romanian' auteur’s glossiest, most expensive production to date, "The Whistlers" nonetheless retains a eclectic sensibility and deadpan humour. Watching this deliriously enjoyable tale, you like the characters, you getting away with something. You’ll want to go along for the ride. The film creates an imbalance between heroic pretensions and the reality of things. This terribly serious side, in all circumstances, gives the film a touch of the absurd. "The Whistlers" is edgy, imaginative, and seems to deal with reality. It's a very dark film, a comment on human relations and today’s society.0242
- Incredibles II - Nostalgia Doesn’t Make A Great FilmIn Film Reviews·July 31, 2018Writer, Director: Brad Bird (Contains mild spoilers) Nearly fifteen years have audiences been patiently waiting for the sequel to Pixar’s successful much-loved family superhero flick. All your favourite characters return to take on new villains and new missions that allow each Incredible to use their powers in a fun and exciting way. The question is whether or not that this film was worth the long wait. THE GOOD: The Beginning/A Change in Shift: The best part of the film occurs at the start where we begin where the first Incredibles ended - The Underminer. Straight away action ensues in a chaotic, intense way so that we are drawn into the Incredibles from the get-go reminding us of their powers and personalities. After this chaos is resolved we see the dynamics in the Incredible Family shift. Mrs. Incredible (A.K.A Elastic Girl) becomes the breadwinner whilst Mr. Incredible has to stay at home and look after the kids whilst trying to be supportive and hide his jealousy from his wife’s success. This in itself is quite poignant and relevant when looking at current issues surrounding gender equality in the workplace. The switch makes for humorous moments, but it is a clear statement surrounding the difficulties and ideals of how society still sees women as the home carer and men as the provider. It supports the cliché that whatever men can do women can do it too, sometimes, even better. Old and New Characters: Seeing childhood favourites on the big screen again will put a smile on anyone’s faces and make adults feel like a kid again. Dash (unnoticeably voiced by a different actor) is my personal favourite, and remains the cheeky, high-energetic 10 year old. As hinted before, you get to see more of Elastic Girl and more of what she can do (the motorcycle/metro chase scene was intense) as she hesitantly fights against injustice in the new fictional city of New Urbem. The short appearance of Edna was a clear audience favourite, but it is Jack-Jack who steals the show. Though an old character, his development of new, random powers make him feel like a new one, and with Mr. Incredible taking on the role of an unexperienced stay-at-home parent, this is an inevitable recipe for hilarity (trying to make Jack-Jack reappear with a cookie was priceless). With an array of new super-powered characters, the only one worth mentioning is Voyd. With similarities to the mutant Blink in X-men: Days of Future Past, Voyd’s teleportation abilities bring a high sense of fun and intensity. In particularly, towards the end Voyd tries to teleport Elastic Girl onto an aircraft, but Elastic Girl keeps missing the target, so Voyd attempts at least three more times to get Elastic Girl on the fast traveling turbo jet. This was ingenious, showing us a unique perspective and scenario not seen before in previous superhero movies. The Visuals: Needless-to-say, Pixar is so reliable and consistent with the high-level quality of the visuals and Incredibles II does not disappoint. Colours, light and shade, set designs, together emanated ecstasy for the eyes, and combined with the distinguishable energetic soundtrack, brought a solid, satisfactory completion to the film. THE BAD: Different Different But Same - What is really odd about watching Incredibles II is that after waiting over a decade for this sequel to be made, nothing much has really changed, i.e. the film occurs only days after The Underminer event. The storyline has not really progressed either; Supers are still exiled and forbidden to use their powers in the public domain, Violet’s boyfriend’s memory has been wiped and doesn’t remember ever meeting Violet and so she has to try and win his heart for a second time round, and Dash is still having problems with school (albeit math problems as opposed to behavioural ones). Also, with Violet, she is dramatically different in personality (clichéd teenage mood swings) and in her powers (she can now use her shields in a offensive way). It is great that Violet and her powers have progressed and evolved, but with the time being set only days after the end of Incredibles I, this seems a bit odd and misplaced. What’s more flawed about the film is that, although it seems fresh and different to the original, there really isn’t much difference to the structure at all. Mrs. Incredible has to work alone for some rich people she rarely knows - just like Mr. Incredible in the first - one of the people who Elastic Girl works for turns out to be the villain and is tech-savvy and uses technology as a means to get what they want - just like Syndrome in the first - the identity of the villain is revealed three quarters of the way in, Violet and Dash is left alone to defend for themselves for about seven minutes, and, just like the first, there is a similar climatic end which involves the efforts of all the Incredibles working together. So although it appears that the sequel is far different from the first instalment, closer inspection shows that it has more similarities with its predecessor, and the problem with this is that it makes Incredibles II seem stagnant, trite, and unoriginal. Like the latest Star Wars franchise, nostalgia alone cannot make a film a good one; it is the combination of the storyline, script, messages, and themes and ideas that elevate an average film to an incredible one. Screenslaver, The Antagonist - The villain in Incredibles II - Screenslaver, is one of the most flimsy antagonist seen this year. It is extremely obvious who the villain turns out to be, and rather than hiding Screenslaver’s identity, the film should have spent more time building Screenslaver’s backstory and create more empathy behind Screenslaver’s actions. Instead, we get a very bland, forgettable, unconvincing, two-dimensional adversary. With strong villains in superhero films this year - Eric Killmonger in Black Panther, Thanos in Avengers: Infinity War - Screenslaver is by far the weakest aspect of the sequel. The Verdict So was Incredibles II worth the 14 year wait? I hate to say this, but no, it really wasn’t. Definitely go see it and make a family outing out of it, but in no way does Incredibles II outshine the first, nor does it come anywhere close to how outstanding the first one was. The reason for such a long wait was that the creator, director and writer, Brad Bird, wanted to make a sequel until he had a good, compelling story and script. This can only be commended, but unfortunately, even after good intentions, Incredibles II feels like it was trying to capture the magic created by the first encounter, and so ends up being nostalgic but in a repetitive, uninspiring, uncreative way. Kids will enjoy this film, adults will feel like a kid again, but you just won’t leave the cinema feeling like the way you did the first time round. Rating: 6½/100246
- Apostle (2018) - A bit of suspense and a tad of horror.In Film Reviews·December 6, 2018These people… they’re blasphemers… a cult, a disease. Be careful. Be smart. Bring her home. The first thing that came to my mind while watching “Apostle“, was the movie “The Witch“. It takes place in the same time period. Here, too, an old-fashioned sounding English is spoken. And it’s also a religion-tinted theme. The biggest difference with “The Witch” is that I thought that one was rather boring and not a horror at all. It was more a historical costume drama. “Apostle” is, on the other hand, simply sublime. A mysterious film about religious madness. Not only content wise but also visually it all looks perfect And the facet of horror was indeed present. And no, not only because of the bloody and gore scenes. There’s only one thing that puzzled me afterward. What was it that the people of Erisden worshiped? Bring her back home. It all starts when Thomas Richardson (Dan Stevens) is asked by his father to rescue his sister Jennifer (Elen Rhys) from the grasp of an obscure sect. She’s kidnapped. And a large ransom is demanded. Thomas himself was once a sort of missionary spreading God’s word in the land of the rising sun. His experiences there, however, made sure that he got an aversion to everything that has to do with religion. Without further delay, he takes on the assignment to save his sister from the gang of fanatics and bring her back home. Two hours are gone before you know it. The running time of “Apostle” is 2 hours. Perhaps this is too much of a good thing for a horror with religion as a central topic. But believe me. Those two hours are over before you know it. Every sense of time is absent when viewing this captivating film. And this because of the excellent way of build up. The first hour you’ll be carried away in the enigmatic life on the island of Erisden. Beautiful images are interspersed with scenes from the daily life of this primitive living commune. Soon it’s clear that this sect developed a peculiar kind of faith with their own rituals (and despotic rules). Just as in any religion, a limited number of individuals rule and decide how to behave in this community. They are also the only ones who know what’s going on there. Bad harvests mean starvation. The reason why they abducted the daughter of a rich man is that their provisions are drastically reduced due to bad harvests and they are gradually heading towards a shortage of food. Prophet Malcolm (Michael Sheen) tries to turn the tide in a certain way but finally, he has to realize that he’s helplessly watching how his patiently built community gradually crumbles. Despite the sometimes rather barbaric punishments that have been introduced to keep the community under control, Malcolm seems to be a peaceful man who’s worried about the welfare of the islanders. More peaceful than some of his confidants who show a certain hunger for power and who, if the opportunity presents itself, try to claim leadership without delay. A lot of interesting characters. The characters Thomas and Malcolm are played in a brilliant way by Dan Stevens and Michael Sheen. Malcolm isn’t really a cruel despot, though he’s the driving force behind the terrible process of cleansing. And even though Thomas has to be careful while tracking down his sister, he immediately disobeys imposed rules and expresses his doubts about Malcolm towards the prophet’s daughter. Michael Sheen (who played a more funny role in “Passengers” as the robotic butler Arthur) and Dan Stevens were perfectly cast. I especially liked Dan Stevens (“Kill Switch“, “The Ticket” and “Beauty and the Beast“). Even though his grim and furious look started to get boring at a certain moment. There are also a few other characters that are worth mentioning. First, there are Bill Milner and Kristine Froseth who take care of the idyllic part. Then there’s Lucy Boynton as Andrea, the daughter of the Prophet. It’s not the most important role, but her appearance is in sharp contrast with the rest of the film. A dazzling beauty with a refreshing look. She looks like a fragile porcelain doll. And finally Mark Lewis Jones as Quinn, co-founder of this sect and in hindsight also a fanatic. Each and every one was an interesting character. A bit of suspense and a tad horror. “Apostle” is certainly not for sensitive viewers. Not that it ‘s really frightening (except maybe for the sewer scene). But there are some distasteful scenes that can be quite shocking for some. Especially in the second part of the film. It’s filled with sadistic torture practices where the accompanying sounds cause chills. This in contrast to the first part that you can call atmospheric. It’s difficult to label this movie with a specific film genre. But do you like a bit of suspense? A tad of horror? And pagan religious scenes? Well then, this folk-horror movie is definitely your thing. At least one of the better Netflix productions so far. My rating 7/10 Links: IMDB More reviews here0259
- He's out there (2018)In Film Reviews·October 3, 2018Daddy can see us…when he gets here. But he’s already here. Do you fancy a movie along the lines of “Hush” but with people who aren’t mute? In short, a film in which there’s a lot of screaming. And should there be co-stars who are simply mown down with a wicked-looking ax as in every “Friday the 13th” episode? Then “He’s out there” might be something for you. However, if you are someone who expects a little explanation about why someone is terrorizing a family, then I’ll have to disappoint you. Why Laura (Yvonne Strahovski) and her two daughters Kayla (Anna Pniowsky) and Maddie (Abigail Pniowsky) were suddenly attacked by an unknown, still remained a question mark in the end. And again a cabin in the woods. “He’s out there” certainly isn’t a bad movie. The increasing tension ensures that you’ll be sitting on the edge of your chair. It’s a bit like “The wolf and the seven young goats“, only the wolf is a lurid disguised person and the 7 goats are played by two irritating screaming girls. Now such a disguise as the maniac uses is nothing new in the slasher genre. Jason Voorhees had a hockey mask. Michael Myers a scary rubber mask. Leatherface wore a mask made with the flesh of his victims. The perpetrator in “He’s out there” seems to be a cousin of “The Collector” in “The collection“. Almost an identical disguise and the same used clothes. A disappointing, simple, third-rate film.. I like to watch such a typical slasher full of screaming victims. The least I expect though is a surprising denouement or a unique thought up slaughter as in “You’re next“. But in this film, the standard list for slasher movies is neatly checked off and there’s no deviation from the standard formula. And then there’s also the fact that there are just a few victims and nothing (but absolutely nothing) of background information is shared. That makes “He’s out there” just a disappointing, simple, third-rate film. Even the end was so predictable that I had to sigh deeply. And to be honest, I also thought the denouement was a bit exaggerated. Let’s hope there won’t be a sequel. Is there something positive to report? Yes, there is. Yvonne Strahovski. And not only because she looks nice. She tries in a realistic way to give shape to a character who’s terrified and at the same time tries to protect her two panicky children. So expect a lot of hiding and running away while screaming. Kind of stupid though. Because the person who wants to hurt them, always knows where they are. “He’s out there” is like an ex-girlfriend. It was fun for a while, but then it turns out she wasn’t so special. And before you know it, you are glad you got rid of her. And in no time you are looking for someone else and you have forgotten about her. Let’s hope they aren’t planning to make a sequel. My rating 4/10 Links: IMDB0224
- "Official Secrets" written by Gregory MannIn Film Festivals·September 10, 2019(London Film Festival, October 10th, 2019, Embankment Garden Cinema, Victoria Embankment Gardens, Villiers St, London WC2N 6NS, UK, 17:0 pm) https://whatson.bfi.org.uk/lff/Online/default.asp?BOparam::WScontent::loadArticle::permalink=officialsecrets&BOparam::WScontent::loadArticle::context_id= "Official Secrets" Based on Marcia's and Thomas Mitchell's book 'The Spy Who Tried To Stop A War', "Official Secrets" tells the remarkable true story of 'British Secret-Service' officer Katharine Gun (Keira Knightley) and her effort to stop an illegal war. In 2003 at her job as a 'British Intelligence Specialist', Gun comes across a disturbing email from 'The US National Security Agency' division chief Ken Macdonald (Jeremy Northam); a request for 'UK' assistance in blackmailing members of 'The United Nations Security Council' into endorsing an invasion of Iraq. The memo proposed blackmailing smaller, undecided member states into voting for war. Shocked, she makes a decision that will change her life and put her family in danger. Unable to stand by and watch the world be rushed into an illegal war, Gun makes the gut-wrenching decision to defy her government and leak the memo to the press. Leak the email to the press setting off a chain of events that exposes an international conspiracy and lands her in custody, charged under 'Britain’s Official Secrets Act'. That will ignite an international firestorm, expose a vast political conspiracy, and put Gun and her family directly in harm’s way. She risks everything to stop an unjust war. Her government calls her a traitor. A gripping true life political thriller of a spy gone rogue who risked everything to stop an unjust war. An ordinary person who finds herself in an extraordinary situation. The courtroom in 2004, with Katharine Gun standing alone in the witness box, is where the narrative of "Official Secrets" begins, flashing back to the consequential events, for Gun and for the world, of the previous year. There comes a time when one must take a position that's neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because conscience tells him it's right. Conscience, that still small voice we do not always listen to, but, when we do, banishes cynicism and raises us to a better, kinder place. When Gun is at home and calls in sick to 'GCHQ'; a moment later her husband opens the front door and the incoming daylight makes Katharine flinch. She’s so in the moment of what she’s doing, the reactions are fresh and not planned. The camera is tracking around her on an extreme close-up looking right into her face, asking her to take the time to struggle through the decision. In the hands of a lesser actor, that scene could be a little forced. But in Katharine's case, when she makes that decision to get up, you feel that you’ve lived that internal struggle with her. Katharine is amazingly sane. She's very clear about why she’d done what she did. She’s someone who decides to take this stand at considerable cost to her career and her personal life. Katharine is in a quite tricky position because if you question her on it, she still is bound by 'The Official Secrets Act'. Gun isn't a journalist. She navigates and endures the consequences faced by an ordinary person committing an extraordinary act. Gun beautifully captures the moral complexity and vulnerability of a high-stakes whistleblower whose fight against government misinformation remains unnervingly relevant. She allows us a unique look into the psychology behind her decision to risk both her family’s safety and her own life without always knowing why. The result is a portrait of human nature that focuses on what's best in all of us. Yasar (Adam Bakri) is Gun's husband. There's a genuine love between Gun and her husband, which is rocked after the scandal. As depicted in the film, Yasar is almost deported during the aftermath of the leak but saved at the eleventh hour. The emotional feeling of that reconciliation is what re-established their love, their connection, after he’d been pretty frustrated and thrown. She leaks the e-mail without telling him she's going to do it. Ben Emmerson (Ralph Fiennes) has a very strong presence, which can be intimidating if he chooses it to be. Within a few minutes of talking to Ben, you feel the force of someone who will take on tough causes because there's an ethical urgency within his work. On March 2nd, 2003, British newspaper 'The Observer' published a front page article with the headline, 'Revealed: US Dirty Tricks To Win Vote On Iraq War'. This was mere weeks before 'The United States' would invade Iraq and topple the regime of 'Saddam Hussein', but journalists Martin Bright (Matt Smith), Ed Vulliamy (Rhys Ifans) and Peter Beaumont (Matthew Goode) were detailing a blackmail scheme targeted at members of 'The United Nations Security Council' from five countries, coercing them to authorize the invasion. The breathtaking claims in the article, challenging the whole pretext for war, were based in part on a classified email that had been leaked from a 'British Intelligence Agency' called 'Government Communications Headquarters' (GCHQ). As a rigorous internal investigation began at 'GCHQ' to expose the whistleblower, a quiet young translator in her late twenties stepped forward to confess to the leak. Her name was Katharine Gun. Gun’s actions did not prevent the invasion of Iraq, which commenced on March 19th, 2003, or the huge loss of life that followed. In the American media, her story was only glancingly covered. In 2004, she went to trial, defended by human rights lawyer Ben Emmerson. And remarkably, the charges against her were dropped, with many suspecting that 'Fhe British Government' risked exposure and embarrassment if it pursued a case against Gun, especially after the search for 'Weapons Of Mass Destruction' in Iraq had proved fruitless. Her story, however, is finally being told. '9/11', Osama, Bush, Afghanistan, Powell, 'WMD', 'OSP', Iraq, Obama, drone strikes, 'ISIS', Syria, refugees, Trump, walls, 'Fake News . It’s been a maddening, confusing two decades that has left many of us disillusioned, angry and uncertain. Can anyone be trusted? Is it all just too complex to fathom? Are the basic concepts of personal integrity and human decency, those simple ideals we teach our kids, dead? Is cynicism our only refuge? 'The UN' didn’t vote in favor of an invasion. Bush and Blair relied on false intelligence claiming Iraq had 'WMD' to justify going to war. Everyone knows that now. But imagine if they’d secured a 'UN' resolution authorizing war as they initially tried to do? There’d have been no need to rely on 'WMD . If 'The UN' had backed the war, Bush and Blair would have had perfect legal cover for their invasion. They’ve never been held legally accountable for their 'WMD' lies anyway. Katharine Gun leaks a top secret 'NSA' memo about an illegal spying operation designed to push the smaller, non permanent 'UN Security Council' members into voting in favor of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. "Official Secrets" dramatizes these real-life events and brings Gun to life as an ordinary woman in an extraordinary situation. By slowly revealing specific details and lingering on pivotal moments, the film creates an intense atmosphere that captivates you until the very end and begs the question; what would you do? Watching "Official Secrets" nvariably stirred up old feelings from 'The Iraq Invasion'. We're all saying how angry we're again about the whole debacle and how really it’s an open sore. It will make people realize how nothing much has changed. It’s been a continuum of the same for the last fifteen years and it’s a really shocking state of affairs. There’s a whole new generation who won’t have caught onto this yet, because they're under ten when it happened. Gun’s story and 'The Iraq War' itself has huge ramifications. This is a war that corroded all our major institutions, our judicial system, our political system, the intelligence services and the press. So it continues to have a major effect on our public life. What Katharine was revealing went beyond a simple piece of wrongdoing. What she was revealing was something wrong at the heart of our national and international institutions. As difficult as the process was 16 years ago, Gun is delighted that 'The British Government’s' lack of transparency will once again come under the spotlight when "Official Secrets" is released to audiences worldwide. It’s this whole paradigm of what's national interest? So much gets swept under that overall heading. Who's to decide what's in the national interest? It's a story about government transparency or lack of transparency, which is still resonant now.0291
- "Beanpole" written by Gregory MannIn Film Festivals·September 14, 2019(London Film Festival, October 3rd, 2019, Curzon Soho Cinéma, 99 Shaftesbury Avenue, London W1D 5DY, England. Soho, 18:00 pm) https://whatson.bfi.org.uk/lff/Online/default.asp?BOparam::WScontent::loadArticle::permalink=beanpole&BOparam::WScontent::loadArticle::context_id= "Beanpole" 1945, Leningrad. 'World War II' has devastated the city, demolishing it's buildings and leaving its citizens in tatters, physically and mentally. Although the siege, one of the worst in history, is finally over, life and death continue their battle in the wreckage that remains. Two young women, Iya Sergueeva (Viktoria Miroshnichenko) and Masha (Vasilisa Perelygina), search for meaning and hope in the struggle to rebuild their lives amongst the ruins. On a surface level, "Beanpole" is a word that describes the physical attributes and outlook of the main hero, Iya, as she’s a very tall woman. Masha has scars, based on the injuries she suffered during the war and the operations that she had to undergo. But "Beanpole" is more about clumsiness and this is how the heroes feel and express feelings in the film, they're clumsy, they're learning how to live again after the war and it's very difficult for them. The story is based around the lives of two young women who've their whole lives ahead of them. A major focus in the film is their desire to reproduce. One of the film’s primary heroes chooses birth as a kind of medicine for her trauma. Iya believes that if she gives birth, then this new person will be able to cure them both. This is a very powerful creative decision that makes the story even more relevant today, to talk about the role of women in society. It allows us to retell a story about traditional 'PTSD' in a more dramatic and radical way. Until Stepan (Konstantin Balakirev), Sasha (Igor Shirokov) and Iya find the internal strength to rid themselves of war and of it's memories, it will continue. In the young women’s apartment, the precise texture of an authentic, historical St. Petersburg’s flat of that time is recreated. Every wall is covered by up to five layers of different wallpaper; from pre-revolutionary wallpaper to the pages of biological atlases depicting exotic birds. Some of the materials used are actual historical wallpaper and not modern recreations. For later periods the film uses 'Soviet' newspapers as wallpaper. The film also uses authentic newspapers from 1942 to plug the holes in the windows of the girls flat as people of that period used to do. These newspapers are also use to make paper napkins for the 'New Year’s' scene at the hospital. They're placed on the patients’ bedside tables. It's very important that the story takes place in 1945. The heroes, like the city they live in, are mangled by a horrible war. They live in a city that has endured one of the worst sieges in the history of warfare. This is a story about them and about people they meet in Leningrad, the obstacles that they've to overcome and the way they're treated by society. They're psychologically crippled by the war and it will take time for them to learn to live their normal lives. The film is interested in the fates of women and especially women who fought in 'The Second World War'. This was the war with the highest participation of women. The film want to find answers to the question; what happens to a person who's supposed to give life after she passes through the trials of war? Out of this deep and intimate psychological drama grows a powerful metaphor about war; it never stops, even when the actual battles are over. This film is based on the book 'The Unwomanly Face Of War' by 'The Nobel' Laureate Svetlana Alexievich. We know very little about the war and how little about the role of women in the war. What happens to a woman after the war is over, when there's a tectonic shift in her mind and her nature, a violation of her nature that would obviously take place afterwards. Leningrad is especially important as it's the city that survived this terrible siege, and the consequences of the siege played an important part in the film. It's vital to feel this space and background in the film, and you can feel it even now, in today's Leningrad (Saint Petersburg). There's not a single image of Stalin, Lenin or any other traditional communist symbols of the time in the film. The streetcars in "Beanpole" are authentic. They're a loan from 'The Museum Of Electrical Transport' in St. Petersburg. The challenge is to construct a special step outside of the streetcar, usually used by people without tickets who rode, just hanging on for dear life. Given it isn't possible to do in a museum exhibit, the film constructs a special contraption that damage the original step, but at the same time can support the weight of a dozen people. For example, in the scene where the patients in the hospital celebrate 'New Year’s, the decorations, thread with pieces of wadding threaded through, are recreated with historical accuracy by the prop-masters. During the post-war years, the patients who lost limbs in Leningrad’s hospitals had to design exercise equipment for physical therapy themselves. The close-up shots of injections in the hospital scene are shown in such a way that the design and manufacture custom-made foldable needles. To make the bandages look more authentic, the film soakes them in tea and dried them on radiators before shooting. This gave the bandages the appearance of having been washed multiple times. "Beanpole" talks about war as a personal tragedy; this is a story of post-traumatic stress. We've seen similar films but almost all of them are stories of men whose lives were crippled by war, who come back to their normal lives and try to find their place in the world. "Beanpole" looks at the post-war world through women’s eyes. When we study the diaries of people who lived during that time, we learn that despite all the hardships and the devastation, they're surrounded by bright colours every day. This conflict between bright colours and the nature of post-war life is also very interesting. We feel the consequences of war in the space where the action takes place, and in the colour palette of the film. But most importantly it’s in the fates of our heroes. It's important to show the consequences of war through people’s faces, eyes, physiques, bodies, not just through abandoned or destroyed buildings. The fact that we live in a world where wars still rage, makes "Beanpole" a traditional story through powerful visual metaphors that create an intricate tapestry. The colour palette tells us more about the internal struggles of his characters than the words could ever do. Two colours, green and ochre, dominate the film. We see them in costumes, in interior design, even in covering shots. These colours give us both drama and warmth. They speak to us both about intimacy and a conflict with the world to which our heroes have much trouble adapting. Even though this is not a documentary, there's a natural authenticity to everything that we see and to all the actions the heroes make. Everything takes place in a carefully reconstructed world where every little detail, from interiors to everyday objects, is authentic to the time period. But attention to detail doesn’t make "Beanpole" a period story. This is not a story about a historic period; this is a story about the world today. This is why the ages of the heroes, the way they act in front of the camera, even their clothes although authentic to the time period, look very modern and visually appropriate to contemporary filmmaking. The film combines true knowledge of classical cultural tradition with a voice of this generation. The true strength comes from a realization of the drama and cruelty of life. There's a deep affection and empathy towards the people who are trying to survive and overcome terrible obstacles. We've to understand the problems that the world faces today and also the hardships and cruelty. The film feels compassion to those who still suffer.0231
- Dunkirk - Movie TrailerIn Movie Trailers·March 15, 2017Christopher Nolan is back! Take a look at the Dunkirk movie trailer which makes other war film trailers quake in their boots...0273
- I still see you (2018)In Film Reviews·December 17, 2018The Event took people we cared about, but it also left a part of them behind. Remnants. When I saw “Shovel Buddies” a while ago, I decided to add the item “Watch movies with Bella Thorne playing in it” to my to-do list. Now, I have a large number of to-do lists in the meantime. I could wallpaper my living room with it. In short, too much talk and too little action. I was pleased to see at the beginning of the film that she also participated in “I still see you“. The only thing that surprised me was her appearance. Not such an adorable, fresh looking, and stunning appearance as in the first mentioned film. No, this time she’s an alternative looking, rebellious goth chick with raven black hair and sturdy shoes on her feet. Such a type of girl you’d encounter in a pub full of smoke and doom music. The only thing missing was a piercing through her eyebrow and lower lip. Belle Bella Thorne. And yet you can catch a glimpse of that lovely face with those sparkling eyes through the mascara. I myself was such an alternativo in times long past and I knew girls who looked like this. But believe me. There were quite a few scarecrows between them who used the thick layer of make-up as a camouflage. Bella Thorne, on the other hand, remains a ravishing appearance. Maybe her lips look rather botox-treated. But otherwise she’s a very attractive looking young lady. Especially when she’s a wearing a T-shirt braless. But enough about Bella Thorne. There is also the movie. One day they were gone. Just like in “Shovel Buddies” we are dealing here with deceased fellow humans. Something Veronica (Bella Thorne) is confronted with in her daily life. And not only Veronica. People worldwide see the victims of a scientific fiasco in which a laboratory imploded. An implosion that made people disappear within a mile radius, after which they re-appeared as holographic images in society. Somewhat like the shadows that remained behind of the people who were present in Nagasaki and Hiroshima when the atomic bomb fell. I see dead people. So these aren’t phenomena as Cole could see in “The Sixth Sense” or Thomas in “Odd Thomas“. Cole and Thomas saw real spirits. In “I still see you” it’s visualized memories that appear daily at regular intervals, performing the same routine all the time. Until you touch them and they disappear with a plop. They are immutable appearances without consciousness that have no influence on daily society. Until one of them appears in the bathroom where Veronica is taking a shower. It tries to tell her something life-threatening is going to happen. I found a remnant in my soup. And that’s what’s similar to the aforementioned films. Namely that entities from the hereafter warn the main character that something is about to happen. Anyway, these appearances are part of today’s society. Kids at school are having lessons about these “remnants” as they are called. They are remains from the past. The only thing I didn’t understand very well, was the presence of people from an ancient past. Teenage girls will love it. I add “I still see you” to the list “horrors for teenage girls“. There’s certainly no trembling and shuddering while watching such films (such as in “Happy death day” or “Before I fall“). So, don’t expect screaming teenage girls running out of the movie theater. And there’s also a bit of romance in this movie so that this target audience can daydream a bit. At first, I expected an exciting film with paranormal and ghostly events. In retrospect, it’s sort of a Nancy Drew-like film in which Veronica tries to solve the mystery of a so-called serial killer with the help of fellow student Kirk (Richard Harmon), who’s really interested in these “remnants”. In the end, it was disappointing. Although the movie is filled with sometimes beautiful images and you can call the story highly original, it’s all in all a bit disappointing. The start was promising. But as the film progressed it all became rather superficial. And guessing the ultimate outcome wasn’t so hard either. “I still see you” is indeed a movie suited for teenagers who are sitting anxiously close to each other while watching. For me, it was just like watching a political debate. Always the same and nothing special. My rating 5/10 Links: IMDB More reviews here02250
- The Shape of Water - A Visual MasterpieceIn Film Reviews·March 10, 2018Guillermo del Toro's visionary ideas of shine through in a beautiful love story in a Beauty and The Beast type fashion with the heroine falling in love with the beast. Del Toro's film is packed full of extraordinary colours - from the beautiful blues to the lavish greens, this is something not to be missed. The film is littered full of brilliant performances, from the dark Strickland played by Michael Shannon, The hilarious Zelda played by Octavia Spencer, the treacherous yet kind Robert Dr. Hoffstetler played by Michael Stuhlbarg who also recently put on an Oscar worthy performance in "Call Me By Your Name" and finally Sally Hawkins plays a mute cleaner named Elisa Esposito of which she gives the performance of her career portraying Elisa as a sly yet kind woman full of love. The visuals are stunning and Del Toro's mark unmissable as every single shot has his own signature written all over it, from the opening expressionistic scene as the camera takes us through an omnious water filled corridor to Elisa as she floats alone in her flooded apartment which is symbolic of a particular key scene later in the film. Del Toro has claimed a lot of his work with monsters has been influenced by Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein" novel and the influence from James Whale's "Frankenstein" film is evident along with such films as Steven Spielberg's "ET". The Shape of Water is an outstanding piece of cinema diving into tones of melancholy, love and the supernatural that is made from pure passion - from director Guillermo del Toro as seen in his BAFTA ceremony speech, this is Del Toro's finest film. 5/5 Ben Rolph02103
- Doctor Strange (SPOILERS) - This doesn't make any sense! Will the film continue the trend of critically acclaimed MCU projects?In Vlog Film Reviews·November 7, 201802165
- Film Review : Guns Akimbo (2019)In Film Reviews·March 10, 2020I would have shot you in the dick, if the target wasn’t so small. “Guns Akimbo” is simply too absurd for words. It’s absolute nonsense and you shouldn’t take it too seriously. It’s simply “over the top” pulp and looks as if it’s based on some Asian comic strip. But believe me. This film is simply top-notch entertainment. A roller coaster that slowly takes a very steep run-up and then crashes into the depth with a breakneck-speed, shaking you back and forth. And this crazy, hyperkinetic ride lasts until the end. The action scenes with Nix (Samara Weaving) are equivalent to those in “John Wick“. Flashy editing. Blood splattering when bullets rip apart human flesh in slow motion. And all this under the guidance of an energetic soundtrack where you will hear amongst other “The Ballroom Blitz” from The Sweet. In short, I greatly enjoyed this film for an hour and a half. Once again respect for the actor Radcliffe. I have infinite respect for the actor Daniel Radcliffe. This guy could have benefited all his life from the “Harry Potter” stamp that they have tattooed on his forehead. It would have been possible to come up with a few sequels without any problems and without hesitation they could have exploited the success formula of the book series and film versions. He could also have demanded to be part of the “Fantastic Beasts and where to find them” franchise. But no. Instead, Radcliffe opted for not so obvious projects such as “Kill your Darlings“, “Horns” and “Swiss Army Man“. A homosexual-tinted film, full of literary blabbering on the one hand. And on the other hand a film about a friendship between a castaway and a corpse. It’s hard to say that these were commercially safe films that suit the fantasy-loving Harry Potter fans. And to avoid any misunderstanding. I was also enchanted by the Potter films (at least the first four anyway). Where did these freaking guns come from? So no magic formulas, mythological creatures and a Radcliffe with a wizard hat showing a boyish, shy smile. Nope, he’s a nobody in this flick. A nobody with a futureless job, who empties one beer bottle after the other while playing violent video games at home. And as a notorious online troll hunter, Miles (Daniel Radcliffe) cannot resist posting derogatory comments on the “Skizm” website and provoking supporters of this obscure platform. “Skizm” is an illegal website that organizes duels in real life where opponents try to eliminate each other. And this is thrown on the internet and followed by hundreds of thousands of fanatic fans and bettors. Obviously, the first movie that came to mind was “Death Match“. The organizer of all this is an ugly tattooed guy called Riktor (Ned Dennehy) who’s obviously completely nuts and is accompanied by a gang of weirdos whose muscle mass is noticeably heavier than the weight of their brains. And Riktor isn’t happy with the muscular language Miles places on his forum. And before the latter realizes it, he lies in bed with two automatic guns bolted to both his hands. And furthermore, he himself is a candidate for a duel between him and Nix. Over-the-top action. With this film, Daniel Radcliffe leaves his comfort zone for the umpteenth time and tries to show that he’s more than just Harry Potter. A bushy beard, constantly covered in blood and using a portion of self-mockery and humor, ensure that. Not to mention his clothing: a checkered dressing gown, boxer shorts, and fluffy giant slippers in the shape of tiger claws. For Samara Weaving, this is a little bit an extension of her role in “Ready or Not“. The same bloody and over-the-top situations. But here she got more of a Harley Quinn attitude. A disturbed, fearless person who’s extremely effective in terms of eliminating opponents. That her insane behavior was caused by an incident in her youth is briefly mentioned, but in fact, has no impact or significance. This mindless action film has only one goal in mind and that’s to show chaotic and limitless action. And all this topped with a sauce of humor à la “Deadpool“. There are quite a few hilarious moments in this film. The hand-mounted guns that cause problems for Miles to accomplish daily routines. Like for instance opening a door. Or making a phone call. And peeing is even a hazardous thing to do. The Australian-sounding hobo (Rhys Darby) was simply hilarious with his advice on suicide techniques and his Cypress Hill imitation. How he got Miles in that coat, however, remains a mystery to me. Wtf is Akimbo? If you can’t stand a chaotic storyline and you get annoyed when it’s a movie that’s plain predictable and that looks more like an exaggerated comic, then I recommend you avoid this one. Or you don’t take a too critical attitude and you simply undergo the film. Perhaps then you can appreciate the vibrant pace, the screamy images, the creative camera techniques and the complete insane undertone of this movie with a limited budget. “Guns Akimbo” is certainly not a film for everyone because of the video game-like mood and the raw sense of humor. And for those who want to know what the film title actually means: Akimbo is a combat technique in which two weapons are used, with one in each hand. Well, I had to look it up myself. My rating 7/10 Links: IMDB02365
bottom of page