Blind Spot Series: The Polar Express

As I write this last blind spot post of the year on Christmas eve I thought I should go for a seasonal movie. I have seen most of the classic Christmas movies and have no desire to see Elf, that’s how I ended up with The Polar Express.

On Christmas Eve it is revealed that a young boy is beginning to doubt the existence of Father Christmas. Just before midnight he is woken by a noise that it transpires is a steam train parked outside his house. Onboard the train he is joined by other children for a trip of a lifetime to the north pole.

I remember the movie coming out but had no interest in seeing it and knew little more than what I had seen in the trailer. As I looked for a little background, I discovered it is based on a book by Jumanji author Chris Van Allsburg. Considered a classic “Christmas story” in America but largely unknown here in the UK. Particularly admired for its illustrations resulting in a perfect jumping off point for the film adaptation.

Notable as an early example of an motion capture computer-animated, it is actually listed in the Guinness World Book of Records as the first all-digital capture film, a format director Robert Zemeckis would return to three years later for Beowulf. The animation is stunning in both detail and use. Combining the vast landscapes of John Ford with the camera trickery of Steven Spielberg. In its innovative style and production it is in some ways a cousin of Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow and Casshern that came out the same year. Both the most expensive to make and also the most successful, it was a modest success at the cinema, it has found its real home on DVD and television where it appears to have become a Christmas staple.

The story is surprisingly short and simple concentrating mostly on the train journey with one set piece at the north pole. Despite a few scenes of action and adventure there is never any real sense of danger or peril making the final result a little bland. The ending lacks the ambiguity that could have turned it from a full frontal assault on Christmas spirit into a more interesting story. All this is said from the point of view of a cynical thirty-something and not its target audience. For any of my criticism, the film probably only has one fault, its target audience is very narrow having little appeal to older audiences.

It may come across that I am trashing the movie, far from it I did enjoy it and I appreciate the innovation involved in its production.  However, for all its technical innovation it all a little hollow.  While the film isn’t without its charms, I can’t help thinking I would rather be writing about the film that is on in the background as I write this article, the Christmas classic It’s a Wonderful Life.

Check out what Ryan and the others have been watching HERE.

Advertisement

Read Full Post »

Blind Spot Series – Pandora’s Box (1929)

Having already seen a handful of Louise Brooks movies it now seems strange that I have only just got around to watching her most iconic Pandora’s Box but as with so many others, silent cinema has been a blind spot for me for a long time.  It is a sad fact that most people I know have no idea who Louise Brooks was, those that have heard of her know little beyond her iconic haircut.  With the renewed interest in silent cinema after the success of The Artist I can only hope that more people people discover Brooks’ movies.  I have certainly seen more silent films in the last couple of years than at any time since I was a student.  

Based on two plays by German playwright Frank Wedekind; Erdgeist (Earth Spirit, 1895) and Die Büchse der Pandora (1904) and written/directed by Austrian filmmaker Georg Wilhelm Pabst. Brooks plays Lulu a former dancer and mistress of wealthy middle-aged newspaper publisher, Dr. Ludwig Schön (Fritz Kortner). Schön announces that that he is going to marry Charlotte von Zarnikow (Daisy D’ora). Lulu agrees to perform in a musical production produced by Schön’s son Alwa (Francis Lederer). Schön brings Charlotte to a performance where she walks in on Schön and Lulu embracing in a store cupboard, she breaks of the engagement. Schön then agrees to marry Lulu. Events at the wedding that a series of events resulting in a downward spiral for Lulu and those around her.

I’m glad that I didn’t see the movie in the early 90’s when I first saw Brooks’ other seminal movie Beggars of Life, as it would have been a very different film to the I have just watched. When the film first came out there were different versions shown in different territories. By changing the dialogue cards, the relationship between the characters was changed. some versions also included an unconvincing but redemptive happy ending. The 131 minute version I saw is believed to be the closest to the directors original.

Silent cinema can be a little alien to modern audiences, Pandora’s Box is surprisingly accessible. The acting although within the traditions of silent movies is more naturalistic than you would expect. Brooks’ performance is expressive and alluring. The character is often described as a femme fatale, but she often comes across as too innocent for this moniker. More reminiscent of the Jessica Rabbit line “I’m not bad. I’m just drawn that way.” She isn’t looking to hurt others, she just wants a good time and doesn’t think about the consequences of her actions or allure. This combination of innocence and sexuality is something that no one before or since has been able to portray like Brooks. It could have all been so different, director Georg Wilhelm Pabst nearly cast Marlene Dietrich to star, that would have made a very different film. Brooks remains an alluring and engrossing screen presence, it is a tragedy of cinema that she didn’t have more great parts.

The appeal of the film is more than just its star. The themes of the carefully and cleverly constructed story are classic, they had been seen in theatre for years and would become a mainstay for cinema for a generation or more. The photography is brilliant making the film look fantastic. Unlike so many movies of the time that look like they have failed to move on from their theatre origins use a small number of similar looking sets, Pandora’s Box makes use of different styles depending on the setting and tome of the scene. The Berlin apartment sequences at the start of the movie are bright sharp. As the film gets progressively darker, the images do too, culminating in the oblique angles and long shadows of German Expressionism. Despite these dark tones and themes the film isn’t without humour, there are many funny moments. Ahead of its time in so many ways, it is often quoted that Countess Anna Escheats (Alice Roberts) is considered by historians to be cinema’s first lesbian character.

I am sometimes hesitant to recommend silent films to people who aren’t used to watching them. A little like foreign language films, if not attuned to the style you may struggle to get into the rhythms of the movie. Pandora’s Box, however is probably accessible to far more film fans than other silent films.

Click HERE for other November Blind Spot Movies. 

Read Full Post »

Blind Spot Series – Sullivan’s Travels (1941)

“There’s a lot to be said for making people laugh. Did you know that’s all some people have?”

How can a comedy from more than seventy years ago still be relevant today? Two reasons, the world really hasn’t changed that much, and writer/director Preston Sturges’ script is unbelievably clever and an on the mark. A timeless satire and social comedy/commentary that is as much about life as it is about films and the movie business.

Film director John Lloyd Sullivan (Joel McCrea) is disillusioned and dissatisfied with the shallow, superficial and lightweight comedies that he has been making. Determined to make his masterpiece by adapting the (fictitious) social realist novel O Brother, Where Art Thou? (yes, this is where the Coen Brothers got the name from). Looking for inspiration and to help him understand the life he hit’s the roads and rails of America disguised as hobo. Along the way he meets “The Girl” (Veronica Lake) a young woman who has given up of her dream of making it in Hollywood.

The first and most comic part of the movie sees Sullivan attempting to escape the his studio minders and live like a hobo. A little like Bill Murray reliving the same in Groundhog Day Sullivan finds that despite his best efforts all roads lead back to Hollywood. The film makers and the studio executives find it as hard to charge the direction of their lives as the hobo’s they are impersonating. For all the wit of its clever, sophisticated dialogue the movie isn’t afraid to descend into slapstick from time to time and is all the better for it. The film is at its best when it introduces Veronica Lake as the unnamed girl. She is tough and streetwise but broken girl, broken by her failure to make it in Hollywood and like Sullivan looking for a way out of town. The two characters bounce off each other with a natural ease with real chemistry between the two actors.

SPOILER WARNING: To be honest, there is no big twist you will see the conclusion coming.  After been knocked unconscious and thrown into boxcar Sullivan finds himself sentenced to six years in a labour camp for assaulting a railroad worker. Through the one part of the plot that feels forced or contrived, everyone believes Sullivan to be dead. A classic case of be careful what you wish for, it isn’t until he truly hits rock bottom that Sullivan understands the value of his work and he finds a direction, but not the one he thought he was looking for. As he finally sees another side to life he still believes his destiny is to make O Brother, Where Art Thou? A social realist story in the vein of The Grapes of Wrath (1940). It isn’t until from the kindness of a local church that he and his fellow prisoners get to see a Disney Pluto cartoon. Not only does he find himself laughing at the lowest point of his life but he sees the escapist enjoyment in the faces of the rest of the audience. In other words: “There’s a lot to be said for making people laugh. Did you know that’s all some people have?”

For all his ideals and big ideas Sullivan is a fool, blind to the importance of what he does and the effect has on audiences. His humility and humbleness are not the virtues they first appear to be. Where he thinks he understands ordinary people, his preconceptions separate him from them. It is no great surprise that during the recent economic downturn, cinema attendances went up just as they did during the depression. For a man at the top he needed to find bottom before he can understand this. Hollywood isn’t always great at turning the camera on itself but once in a while it gets it right, really right, and when it does it is something very special, that’s what Sullivan’s Travels is.

Read Full Post »

Blindsided by: Witness for the Prosecution

For the second time since I started writing blind spot posts I really was blindsided by a movie. I recently purchased a box set of Billy Wilder movies, all of which I had seen before, or so I thought. As I started watching Witness for the Prosecution (1957) I quickly realised I had never seen it before. To be honest I think I had had mixed it up with Double Indemnity (1944 – also directed by Billy Wilder) or Otto Preminger’s Anatomy of a Murder (1959).

On release from hospital barrister Sir Wilfrid Robarts (Charles Laughton) is ordered to take it easy by doctors and his overpowering private nurse Miss Plimsoll (Elsa – Bride of Frankenstein – Lanchester, Laughton‘s real life spouse). Despite this, he agrees to take the case of Leonard Vole (Tyrone Power). Vole has been charged with the murder of Mrs. Emily French (Norma Varden), a rich, older widow who he stands to inherit a fortune from. Things are complicated when it is revealed that Voles wife Christine (Marlene Dietrich) is going to be a witness for the prosecution.

Starting life as a play by Agatha Christie, Witness for the Prosecution had already clocked up more than a thousand performances in the West End and on Broadway. With the help of screenwriters Harry Kurnitz and Larry Marcus , Wilder manages to concoct a mystery that Hitchcock would have bee proud of. The announcement at the end: “The management of this theatre suggests that for the greater entertainment of your friends who have not yet seen the picture, you will not divulge, to anyone, the secret of the ending of Witness for the Prosecution.” And the tagline on the poster: “You’ll talk about it, but please don’t tell the ending.” Aren’t that far removed from Hitchcock stunts.

A courtroom dram with lots of twists and turns is nothing new, you have probably seen countless times before, but this movie is over fifty years old, so many of the other movies we have seen have been influenced by this. Like so many Wilder movies, one of the keys to its success is the perfect casting. Tyrone Power, Marlene Dietrich and Elsa Lanchester are all brilliant but Charles Laughton is in a different world, I would go as far as to say I can’t imagine anyone else in the role. The sublime performances coupled with the measured direction allow for the near impossible task of making the twists interesting even if you see them coming. The result of this despite the pleas marketing people, viewers who know the plot aren’t disadvantaged by knowing the plot making me keen to see the movie again. And thanks to Laughton and Wilder, although far from a comedy the movie is full of funny moments.

Full of all the twists and turns you would expect from Christie coupled with the perfect pacing and brilliance of Wilder. The ending is as brilliant and perfect as you would expect of Wilder.

Check out other Blind Spot posts HERE

Read Full Post »

Blind Spot Series: Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins

Most of the films I have spoken about so far in this series are either all time classics or more recent and highly regarded movies (mainly animated as that is where my blind spot lies) but Remo Williams is in a strange way the most appropriate movie for the series. Born in the mid 70’s I grew up in the 80’s watching thousands of movies on VHS as a kid. Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins, or Remo: Unarmed and Dangerous as it is known in the UK market is the type of movie I would have watched in the 80’s. For example I remember watching a glut of cop thrillers involving revenge and or corruption including: Raw Deal (1986), Cobra (1986), Lethal Weapon (1987), RoboCop (1987), Number One with a Bullet (1987), Red Heat (1988), Blue Jean Cop (aka Shakedown) (1988), Cop (1988), Tango & Cash (1989) and Next of Kin (1989). However I didn’t see Remo Williams, why? Because I had never heard of it until I started blogging, over the last couple of years the name keeps coming up, usually on Man I Love Films and the MILFCAST. So it suddenly became an essential movie I hadn’t seen, a Blind Spot.

Based on The Destroyer series of pulp novels; the first Created, The Destroyer was written by Warren Murphy and Richard Sapir and published in 1971. The series now runs to nearly 150 books, but only one movie. The American title “The Adventure Begins” suggests the start of franchise, future films failed to materialise. There was a 1988 TV pilot with Jeffrey Meek in the title role, but it wasn’t picked up. A reboot has been suggested, most recently in 2009 when there were reports of Charles Roven and Steve Chasman, the producers responsible for The Dark Knight and the Transporter respectively (Jason Statham as Remo Williams could be interesting) taking an interest, but things don’t seem to have gone beyond speculation.

Sam Makin (Fred Ward) is a tough New York cop and Marine Corps veteran who is unwillingly recruited by CURE a secret government organization who rename him Remo Williams. Williams is sent to Korean martial arts master, Chiun (Joel Grey – best know as the MC from Cabaret) who trains him in the fictional “Sinanju”. Quickly sent on his first mission involving a dodgy weapons manufacturer and the resulting corruption within the US Army, he comes across Major Rayner Fleming (Kate Mulgrew – captain Janeway in Star Trek: Voyager) who is investigating the same thing.

Directed by Guy Hamilton who had previously been at the helm of a Harry Palmer and four James Bond movies, the potential franchise was in good hands. The interesting thing about the film is that it isn’t actually that good, in fact there are lots of things wrong with it. Chief among the problems, It looks cheep and the story lacks scope, ambition and direction. The portrayal of Chiun by Joel Grey rivals Mickey Rooney as Mr. Yunioshi in its awkwardness. The film never knows when it should be serious and when it needs to be a comedy. Having said all this, it has its moments and is often good fun. Fred Ward makes a good reluctant and moody hero and surprisingly good leading man. The big set piece fight on the Statue of Liberty is well choreographed and shot as are some of the other fight scenes. The first meeting between Remo and Chun is excellent, reminiscent of Morpheus and Neo. This along with the bullet dodging makes me think The Wachowski’s are fans. Composer Craig Safan’s score is often cheesy 80s synth’ but actually fit’s the tone of the movie well and is lifted the kung fu movie inspired sections. I can’t help thinking had I seen it in the 80’s I would embrace the good and overlook its problem the way I can with films like The Running Man (1987) and Road House (1989).

As a fun action movie the film works, but it lacks any depth or subtext. I’m glad to have seen it but it is far from an essential classic and because I saw it 25 years to late it lacks the emotional nostalgia that I have for other 80’s movies.

You can find the rest of the Blind Spot Series at The Matinee 

Read Full Post »

Blind Spot Series: The Iron Giant

When picking a blind spot movie what better recommendation than one from the series organiser, that is sort of what I have done. Back in June, Ryan and his guest Matthew Price spoke about The Iron Giant on the Man of Steel episode of The Matineecast.

Small town America 1957, Hogarth Hughes a young boy living with his mom discovers a giant robot that has crash landed from space. Due to his need to eat metal the giant is sure to be discovered as he leaves a trail of destruction behind him. Hogarth, helps him and hides him in a nearby scrap yard. But soon government agent Kent is on their trail.

I was aware of the movie from its initial release but didn’t bother watching it because it is animated and as mentioned previously I have never been particularly interested in animation. I had read the 1968 novel The Iron Man by Ted Hughes as a kid and remember enjoying it. It turns out plot of the film is very different from the one in the book, but it does share a lot of themes and ideas. At the heart of the movie is the character of the giant who appears to be some sort of weapon, a war machine, but he chooses to be good, he chooses not to kill. Set in what is to the modern eye a is a more innocent time, a time when the world was in a post war boom the cold war was still relatively cold. But the red scare and the fear of nuclear war was real. In the mist of this the essance of death and killing, a weapon learns the beauty of the world, the importance of friendship and possibly the meaning of life. The beauty of it, is the purity, he learns it froma child with the innocence and optimism of a child. To top all this off the film doesn’t fall into all the usual clichéd problems of animation: cute animal sidekicks, impromptu song and dance numbers, innuendo filled comedy to keep the adults entertained.

I am not one to wax lyrical about look of animation, it doesn’t interest or excite me in the same way as cinematography, having said that The Iron Giant is both interesting and strangely pretty to look at. I’m told it employs a mixture of traditional and computer generated animation, but I really don’t care, how they achieved is insignificant, what they achieved is what matters. What they have achieved is a genuine family film. It isn’t a kids film with nods to adults, or an adults film watered down for kids, it is a film that can hold the interested of kids and adults alike, and one that parents can happily show to kids knowing it won’t be in any way unsuitable. It is a modern-day fairytale, a fairytale for a generation that doesn’t believe in fairytales. The voice cast includes Jennifer Aniston, Harry Connick Jr. and Vin Diesel, but this really isn’t that important. The delivery of the cast is good as is there comic timing, but there is nothing showy or ostentatious about it. A cynical person may suggest the 53 words spoken by the giant represents a larger vocabulary than Vin Diesel is used to delivering in a movie. However you look at it the cast do their job to great effect.

This is the second animated movie I have seen in the Blind Spot series, and while I sort of enjoyed Princess Mononoke and could see what others like about it, I actually liked and enjoyed The Iron Giant and will probably watch it again some day.

See the rest of the Blind Spot films for July HERE. 

Read Full Post »

Blind Spot Series: Billy Elliot

When I mentioned to a friend that I was doing this Blind Spot Series, of all the classic movies he could have suggested he said something along the lines of “I bet you still haven’t seen Billy Elliot”, he was right. So why hadn’t I seen it? The aforementioned friend had seen the movie with his wife and recommended I see it. I wasn’t interested. I wouldn’t go as far as to say I am as small minded as the characters in the film, but in 2000 when it came out I had no interest in a movie about Ballet. So what’s changed? I still have no interest in Ballet, I have never been to a ballet (although I do own a couple of records of ballet music). I have now seen The Red Shoes (1948) and Black Swan (2010) that paint a darker and more interesting picture on the subject. In other words I am a little more open minded. 

Northeast England, Billy Elliot (Jamie Bell) is the eleven year old son of a coal miner during the 1984 strike. When the strike forces the local ballet class to share a hall with his boxing club Billy soon discovers he is more interested in dancing than fighting. Torn between his love of dancing a the gritty realism of daily life Billy is given direction by his ballet teacher (Julie Walters ) who sees something in him and encourages him to pursue greater things.

 The film is perfectly setup in the first scene, it possibly tells us all we need to know and all we will know at the end of the film:

Boucing on bed playing “I Love to Boogie” by T-Rex – Billy likes dancing
Billy caring for grandmother – One of his parents is missing
Riot Police on the hill in the background – Social unrest
Shares bedroom with much older brother –Social deprivation

Further into the movie Billy reads a letter from his late mother telling him to “Always be yourself”. this is the real story of the film. First Billy has to find himself before he can be himself, however he is family and the community what to keep him and everyone else in their place, in their box. This box is beautifully realised by Billy literally breaking out of the outdoor toilet. He is the angry young man we have seen countless times before, but he is an angry young man with an outlet. When Billy is given a pair of ballet shoes, he hides them under his mattress, the place in movies where adolescent boys hide porn! This perfectly demonstrates the conflict and embarrassment he feels about his dancing. He knows there is nothing wrong with it but he can’t share it with his family who won’t understand. The era is perfectly realised in the events and the look of the film. The background of the miners strike is gives it an extra dimension but doesn’t dwell on it. The coming out of a classmate plays well against the Billy’s constant explanation that dancers aren’t “puff’s”. A lot of the music is from the 70’s not the 80’s but fits perfectly. The glam of T-Rex against the anger of The Jam and The Clash not only sets the tone for the movie but also highlights the contrasts.

What sets the film apart and makes it work is the heart, the humour and the realism. These are characters we believe in and more importantly and that care for. This is because of the faultless direction, but more importantly the actors playing them. At the heart of the movie is Jamie Bell in the title role, he deservedly won the Best Actor BAFTA beating Russell Crowe, Tom Hanks, Michael Douglas and Geoffrey Rush (all Oscar winners). Looking back now knowing what a great actor he has become this is no surprise, but we have to remember this was his debut film. Julie Walters (Oscar nominated for Best Actress in a Supporting Role) is fantastic as the ballet teacher, a mixture of Mr. Miyagi, Dr. Frank Bryant, John Keating and Mickey Goldmill in equal parts. The first and still possibly the most significant movie from director Stephen Daldry, but again looking back this is no great surprise. The notable thing about all his subsequent movies has been the acting.

The emotion of the film never feels forced or contrived, neither does the comedy.  But we have seen these things many times before.  the remakable simplicity and perfection of the story is the arc of the characters.  Not Billy, but the supporting characters he drags along for the ride.  for the change in attitudes to not be out of place in the context of the story and the setting is a great triumph from Daldry and for screenwriter Lee Hall.  

A very British film. Looking back it tells the story of a significant time in British history that wasn’t that long ago, but equally it was stepping stone in the rejuvenation of the British film industry. The film always falls more on the side of uplifting than grim social realism, this certainly helped the box-office, but surprisingly doesn’t devalue the film, it just makes it more accessible. I’m sorry I waited so long.

Read Full Post »

Not Exactly, Blind Spot Series – Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

The dog ate my homework – Okay so I don’t have a Blind Spot entry for this month.  The real excuse, I have been on holiday for the past week, prior to going I failed to get hold of one of my shortlisted movies.  I will post a new blind spot entry soon until then, here is the re-post of an old article from the early days of my blog in 2009:

I recently got around to watching a film I had recorded form TV a few weeks ago, I had missed it at the cinema and never bothered renting the DVD. Now I have seen it the big question is why haven’t I seen Kiss Kiss Bang Bang before? The most likely answer is the ridicules title, but having seen the film it is so ridicules (in a good way) that it needs a silly title.

Harry Lockhart (Robert Downey Jr) is a petty crook who stumbles into acting (literally). Gay Perry (Val Kilmer) is a private detective with a sideline in teaching actors how to play detectives. Harmony Faith Lane (Michelle Monaghan) is a failing actress. They are all at a party hosted by actor turned mogul Harlan Dexter (Corbin Bernsen). Following the party dead bodies start appearing in a series of events that Harry and Perry don’t understand but can’t get away from. All this is held together by a voiceover from Downey Jr that frequently stops and rewinds the action to retell something he has missed out or to explain something that may be important later. It really shouldn’t work but for some reason it does.

The film is fast paced and full of very dark humour. The chemistry between Val Kilmer and Robert Downey Jr is excellent and they aren’t afraid of making fun of themselves and their screen personas. Michelle Monaghan, who is a vastly underrated and underused actress provides fantastic support for them. The story carefully plays with and even deconstructs the conventions of Film Noir and pulp literature making the film far more intelligent then its goofball appearance. Directed by Shane Black, his first and so far only attempt at directing but his real credentials are in writing. He was responsible for action comedies including Lethal Weapon, The Last Boy Scout and The Long Kiss Goodnight. On the evidence of this film I would like to see him direct again, unfortunately the film didn’t perform well at the box-office barely making back its modest budget.

Also take a look at the great James Bond inspired (like the movies title) title sequence:

Read Full Post »

Blind Spot Series: Princess Mononoke

When I decided to take part in the Blind Spot Series I came to the concussion that if I was going to take it seriously I would have to confront my biggest blind-spot, animation. After talking to people who know and love animated movies I decided to take their advice and pick a movie each from Studio Ghibli and Pixar. Having looked at the synopsis of a few movies I decided the Studio Ghibli production that appealed most was Princess Mononoke original title もののけ姫 or Mononoke-hime from 1997, written and directed by the legendry Hayao Miyazaki.

Ashitaka, a young warrior prince, saves his village from rampaging demon possessed boar-god, in the process his arm is cursed/infected making it a deadly weapon. Advised the infection will eventually take over his entire body and kill him, Ashitaka begins a quest to find a cure. Along the way he meets many strange people and creatures and finds himself in the middle of a battle between an industrialised village led by Lady Eboshi and the intelligent animal inhabitants of the forest and their gods. The gods of the forest include a wolf-god and her adoptive human daughter Princess Mononoke. Seeing good and bad in both sides Ashitaka tries to stop the killing and find peace but is met with suspicion and animosity on both sides.

A note on how I watched the film. The DVD I watched came with both the original Japanese dialogue and English subtitles as well as the English language version complete with star-studded Hollywood cast (including: Billy Crudup, Claire Danes, Minnie Driver, Billy Bob Thornton, Gillian Anderson, Jada Pinkett Smith). I first watched the movie in its original form and am now playing the English language version in the background as I write this review. The English version isn’t bad despite some clunky dialogue but I do prefer watching movies as intended in their original language.

Hayao Miyazaki has sighted John Ford as an influence on this movie, I can see this and Akira Kurosawa in the epic nature of the story, the settings, the idea of a quest and the transparency with witch the subtext is demonstrated to the audience. Like Ford and Kurosawa, he isn’t afraid to depict violence, although it doesn’t in my eyes have the same impact in animated form. The story is basically good, with ideas, ideals and themes that are universal, this clearly explains the wide appeal. The thing that surprised me about a film seemingly aimed at a younger audience is how it follows the conventions of a three act manga movie (I have seen a few) intended for older viewers: An introduction to the setting and characters using standard liner storytelling and conventions of character development – a less interesting and less coherent middle with some philosophical deeper meaning and message – a finale involving a character introduced in the middle act turning into a god and/or daemon and going bat-shit crazy before being destroyed or appeased and finding a satisfactory conclusion.

The most notable thing about the movie for me is the way it looks, it is clearly Japanese making it very different to the works of Disney or DreamWorks, but more than that, it is clearly traditional hand drawn cel animation and not computer animation (although I understand there is some computer animation used) and all the better for it. Although I haven’t researched the style of the art, I get the impression it is inspired by Japanese art (possibly from the period the film is set). Whatever the inspiration, it does look beautiful at times, but I can’t help my prejudice, I would rather see a live action movie. There are times when I felt I was been preached at from multiple angles. The overriding message of conservation is overt through much of the film. The depiction of opposing characters who appear to be different races (or nationalities) point to an idea of acceptance and equality. My first impression was that I had seen it all done before, but it is worth remembering the film came out in 1997 long before many similar themed movies that came to mind while I was watching it, I suspect James Cameron has seen it more than once! To give it credit, although neither message is subtle, I can’t complain too much as they are good messages to depict especially to a young and impressionable audience. What I do have a problem with is the length, at around two and a quarter hours, it could easily have been trimmed by half an hour to make a tighter more concise movie that held the attention better.

In pointing out my problems with the movie it probably comes across that I didn’t enjoy it, I am pleased to report this isn’t the case. There is lots to like, admire and indeed enjoy in the film and I did enjoy watching it, however it didn’t charm or wow me enough to make me want to rush out and watch the rest of the Studio Ghibli movies (or animation in general). I would recommend it to any fan of animation and have to admit it has softened my opinion to some degree, I think I can safely say if a Ghibli film were to come on TV I may give it a chance, where in the past I would probably wouldn’t have. I will revisit animation later in the series, having already seen the Toy Story movies I will most likely watch WALL·E or Up.

You can see what Ryan and all the other Blind Spot contributors watched this month HERE.

Read Full Post »

Blindsided by They Shoot Horses, Don’t They?

Ryan always titles his Blind Spot Series “Blindsided by ….” I have copied him this month because I really was blindsided by my choice this month. Of course I had heard of They Shoot Horses, Don’t They? and was aware that it is considered to be one of Jane Fonda’s best performances, however to my shame I knew nothing about it. I didn’t who what it was about, who was in it other than Fonda or that Sydney Pollack directed it. And that is why it wasn’t on my Blind Side list. For reasons that will become clear, I had to write about it.

For those as ignorant as me about the movie here is a little background. Based on a novel of the same name written by Horace McCoy and published in 1935. The story centres around a dance marathon held in the faded and tattered La Monica Ballroom on the Santa Monica Pier during the depression. Drawing from his own experiences, McCoy had worked as a bouncer on the same pier at several dance marathons (There is a bad horses mouth pun in there somewhere) . A film was very nearly made in 1952 when Norman Lloyd purchased the rights with the intention of collaborating with Charlie Chaplin on an adaptation. They intended to cast Marilyn Monroe and Chaplin’s son Sydney. The film didn’t get off the ground as Chaplin didn’t return from England where he was promoting Limelight after his re-entry permit was revoked.

Amazingly it was the first significant movie directed by Sydney Pollack who had made a handful of movies but had mainly worked in TV. A lot of the strength of the film comes in the way Pollack’s capturing the faded glamour of the surroundings and the broken desperation of the characters. James (Bruce Dern) and his pregnant wife Ruby (Bonnie Bedelia) are there as much for the three square meals a day as they are for the $1,500 prize money; aspiring actors Alice (Susannah York) and Joel (Robert Fields) are looking for fame, aging sailor Harry Kline (Red Buttons) is trying to prove he isn’t too old; but it is Gloria (Jane Fonda) and Robert Syverton (Michael Sarrazin) who capture the desperation of the depression. As I watch these desperate kids clinging onto some kind of existence I can’t help thinking of a few lines from the Bruce Springsteen song Racing in the Streets “Some guys they just give up living, And start dying little by little piece by piece” and “Some guys they do it for the money, Other guys do it cause they don’t know what else they can do”. The movie and the contest within it are held together by Master of Ceremonies Rocky (Gig Young) who isn’t much better off emotionally than the contestants that he is happy to exploit. concentrating on the disparate and desperate characters grounds the movie in existentialism as much as any road movie or melodrama. This is what elevates it beyond mere drama as it asks questions of both it audience and its characters. The philosophical angle isn’t subtle, but the way it is handled isn’t heavy-handed either.

Nominated for nine Oscars including: Best Director (Sydney Pollack), Best Actress in a Leading Role (Jane Fonda), Best Actor in a Supporting Role (Gig Young), Best Actress in a Supporting Role (Susannah York) winning just one, Gig Young for Best Actor in a Supporting Role. It also picked up a BAFTA for Best Supporting Actress, Susannah York. It is however Jane Fonda who stands out at a time when she was making the move from movie star to serious actress. We see the unraveling of a smart and sassy but cynical and damaged woman before our eyes. As with all great performances, I can’t imagine anyone else in the role.

In an interesting twist on conventions of film making you soon realise that what appear to be flashbacks are actually flashforwards, indicating but not explaining what will happen at the end of the movie. I’m sure nobody watching the movie expects a happy ending, the grim beauty of what we get is a tragic and shocking conclusion with no hope or liberation just all encompassing futility, the fact that we see it coming doesn’t stop a sense of a rug being pulled from under us. The other depression era classic The Grapes of Wrath ends on a note of hope and defiance with Tom Joad’s “I’ll be all around in the dark……” speech and his declaration of a search for to social justice, we get none of that here. As a portrait of the depression it is truly bleak, what makes it great is that it was relevant in 1969 when it was made three decades after it was set and it remains relevant today another three decades on. “Yowzza”!

You can find the other blind spot entries for the month HERE.

Read Full Post »