Minggu, 07 April 2013

Trailer Showdown 3/15: ‘The Bling Ring’ is the Best Trailer of the Week

It’s Friday morning, which means it’s time for Trailer Showdown! Once again, we rank the week’s new trailers from best to worst to make sure you’re always up on the latest awesome movies, months ahead of release!

This week sees the release of two phenomenal new trailers for the highly anticipated Sofia Coppola film based on a true story of teenage crime lords, “The Bling Ring” as well as the hot as hell trailer for the quirky and outlandish superhero flick “Kick-Ass 2.” There’s a hefty helping of trailers beside that as well, so take a good look at our offerings.

Did we get the rankings right? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!

1.) ‘The Bling Ring’

Best of the Week: Sofia Coppola is back with this amazingly perfect ripped from the headlines, based on a true story of a group of teens who used the Internet to track when celebs were home, break into their houses and steal their expensive goods. A fantastic trailer as far as teasers go, this movie skyrockets up to the top of the must-see list. Emma Watson as a bad girl is all right with us too!
Starring: Emma Watson, Leslie Mann, Taissa Farmiga
Release Date: June 14, 2013

2.) ‘Kick-Ass 2'

NSFW: The rip-roaring sequel to one of the darkest super hero movies of the decade is finally here! The gang’s all back in action, Hit Girl and Kick Ass return to battle Red Mist, along with new allies and villains. Whether or not you liked the original, it’s clear they’ve upped the ante in every way for round two.
Starring: Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Chloë Grace Moretz, Christopher Mintz-Plasse
Release Date: Aug. 16, 2013

3.) ‘To the Wonder’

We have already featured this Terrence Malick directed film in a previous report, but that doesn’t stop us from salivating over this new trailer filled with lush images, astonishingly seductive soundscapes and the promise of absolute beauty radiating from every element. There’s few things in life worth looking forward to as much as a Malick-directed film that meditates on the concept of romantic love.
Starring: Ben Affleck, Olga Kurylenko, Javier Bardem
Release Date: April 12, 2013

4.) ‘Electrick Children’

A young Mormon girl believes herself to be pregnant after listening to a cassette tape of rock music, and sets out to discover her place in the world. Part coming of age story and part wild shenanigans, this one looks to be wildly original and truly promising.
Starring: Julia Garner, Rory Culkin, Liam Aiken
Release Date: March, 2013

5.) ‘Milius’

This documentary explores the world of writer and director John Milius, who brought us some of the greatest movies of the last century. Interviews with famous friends such as George Lucas, Harrison Ford, Arnold Schwarzenegger and many more populate this dynamic look at a rough ridin’ wild man who redefined the movies.
Starring: John Milius, Peter Bart, Bill Cody
Release Date: March 9, 2013

6.) ‘Tomorrow You’re Gone’

A terrifying revenge flick with a hot dame, a serious case of vengeance and a very formidable foe makes this one to watch. While the specifics of this one seem vaguely forgettable, we’re willing to bet that Dafoe makes it more than worth your while.
Starring: Stephen Dorff, Michelle Monaghan, Willem Dafoe
Release Date: 2013

7.) ‘Penthouse North’

In this dramatic thriller, a blind woman’s idyllic life is targeted by a killer and a power hungry cop, seeking to destroy her. With elements of “Wait Until Dark” throughout, this one looks to be rather spooky and terrifying.
Starring: Michelle Monaghan, Michael Keaton, Barry Sloane
Release Date: 2013

8.) ‘Aroused’

In this documentary, some of the biggest porn stars in the business talk about their work, from the highs and lows of intimacy to the ups and downs of the job. Looks to be a fascinating glance into a world that is filled with endless speculation and assumption.
Starring: Belladonna, Kayden Kross, Lisa Ann
Release Date: Feb. 20, 2013

9.) ‘Imaginaerium’

Confusing, and large scale, this imaginative and bizarre film follows an old man who dreams of being young again, trapped within the confines of his own mind. Could be good, but looks like it might lose too many people along the way.
Starring: Marianne Farley, Quinn Lord, Francis X. McCarthy
Release Date: 2013

10.) ‘Leonie’

A drama that follows a strong young woman and her love of a Japanese man, with whom she has a child. When she follows him to Japan only to be disappointed, she pours her life into her son and his career as a sculptor. Moving and eloquent, this film looks like a wonderful character piece for Emily Mortimer, and a look at the difficulties faced by women then and now.
Starring: Emily Mortimer, Kazuko Yoshiyuki, Shidô Nakamura
Release Date: 2013

11.) ‘The Story of Luke’

A young autistic man attempts to find a normal life, a girlfriend and a job amidst the difficulties of dealing with his own mind. This could be an absolutely great look at the difficulties and specifics of autism, and the lighter side of dealing with heartache. Or it could be terrible, there’s no way of knowing at this point. Here’s hoping for the best!
Starring: Cary Elwes, Seth Green, Al Sapienza
Release Date: 2013

12.) ‘Generation Um…’

Three wild folks explored New York City and their connection to one another in this vivacious and exploratory film. Let’s see if Keanu Reeves can hold up his end of a film, especially one requiring so much emotion.
Starring: Keanu Reeves, Adelaide Clemens, Daniel Sunjata
Release Date: May 28, 2013

13.) ‘Witching & Bitching’

I have no Earthly idea what this movie could even be about, but it looks like one heck of a wild ride, featuring street performers, witches, spells and more? Dark and mysterious!
Starring: Javier Botet, Mario Casas, Carmen Maura
Release Date: 2013

Categories: Columns, Trailer Roundup

Tags: Aroused, Electrick Children, Kick-Ass 2, Milius, Penthouse North, The Bling Ring, To The Wonder, Trailer showdown, Trailers

Jumat, 05 April 2013

Review: ‘The Place Beyond the Pines’

This review was originally published on September 10, 2012, as part of Film.com’s coverage of the 2012 Toronto International Film Festival.

“The Place Beyond the Pines” starts its journey with a dark screen and the sound of breathing as our only stimulus. Stunt bike rider Luke (Ryan Gosling) sports a black Metallica t-shirt, and a group of random scribbles masquerading as tattoos adorn his neck. Everything about him seems “danger, with a side of unstable,” and that’s even before he gets into a rounded metal cage with two other stunt riders, revs the engine, and drives upside-down a few inches from another bike headed full speed in the opposite direction. It’s a county fair, and this attraction is probably called something like “The Wheel of Death” or “Moto-Doom.”

Luke is just passing through town. He smokes a lot, and he has the look of the precise sort of person you wouldn’t want to get into a physical altercation with. After the show, he gets a visit from a woman he met the year before, Romina (Eva Mendes). This sentimental reunion sets in motion a chain of events spanning decades and generations. Lives unravel with steam, with the desperate and ugly past gaining furious and consequential ground on the present.

To say more of the plot would be a disservice, as the cleverness of “The Place Beyond the Pines” springs from the atmospheric tension that comes from not knowing how each scene will play out. Those familiar with director Derek Cianfrance (“Blue Valentine”) will likely have some idea of what they’re in for, though “The Place Beyond the Pines” has better pacing and far less muddled themes than his first feature film. There is true beauty in the despair that pervades “The Place Beyond the Pines,” a film plotted out in triptych, a treatise on the moral compromises we all make to protect and provide for our loved ones. In Cianfrance’s world, there are no heroes, only brutal shared truths, protagonists filled with coiled rage, set against menacingly dark hues of Schenectady, New York.

Also Check Out: Stars Take the Red Carpet at the 2012 Toronto Film Festival

Most of all, “The Place Beyond the Pines” deals with how quickly the fragmented bonds of a culture can slip out from underneath lost souls. These bonds seem plenty sturdy — the kindly police are patrolling your street, your friendly neighborhood mechanic has a place you can crash for the night — but all the illusions are swept away when the action of the film is in full throat. Bradley Cooper does serviceable work as young policeman Avery Cross, and Ray Liotta has solid moments as a fellow officer as well. Rose Byrne and Dane DeHaan are also involved, but let’s not say how, other than to note their participation and talents.

The real art of “The Place Beyond the Pines” is the innovative plot construct, which can only be compared to films such as “The Godfather” and “A Prophet.” No, “The Place Beyond the Pines” isn’t as good as either of those films, and it’s not nearly as watchable as either (less overall arc, too weighty throughout), but it certainly heralds the arrival of a vibrant director. It’s not the type of film anyone outside of “serious” film fans will have the patience for, but it’s no less the accomplishment for the total lack of comfort it provides an audience.

Grade: B

Categories: Reviews

Tags: A prophet, Bradley cooper, Derek Cianfrance, Eva mendes, Rose Byrne, Ryan gosling, The godfather, The Place Beyond The Pines, Toronto International Film Festival

Kamis, 04 April 2013

SXSW 2013: Diary of an SXSW Virgin

It began with getting lost six times in 10 minutes and ended with my wallet getting stolen on Rainey Street (I blame this, and everything else that goes wrong in the world, on the Music festival) but in between I experienced the most fun film festival I’ve ever attended, a week in the magical land of destination BBQ, breakfast tacos, legendary milkshakes, great movies and even better people. As this was my first time not only to SXSW and Austin, but also to an out of state festival, I was three times a noob, and t to document the first 90 of my 168 hours in attendance, if only so others might learn from my mistakes. Drunk bonding with filmmakers, strange “only at SXSW” sightings and the 18 movies I caught, it’s all here.


FRIDAY


5:00 P.M. After settling into the Hyatt Regency, where I will be rooming with Erin McCarthy of Mental Floss and Eugene Novikov of Film Blather, I decide to begin my journey into downtown. The Regency is over the bridge, which is about a 15-minute walk to the convention center, or if you can get a cab, a three-minute drive. I am armed with multiple electronics and a detailed binder. I feel prepared for whatever comes my way!


5:31 P.M. It quickly becomes apparent that I am not at all prepared for whatever comes my way. Or even the things that are vaguely near my way. Outside of the labyrinthine Convention Center I make not one, not two, not three, not even four or five, but six wrong turns before figuring out where I’m supposed to go. Neither my phone nor iPad seems to understand the geography of Austin (seriously, you’d need one of those tracker orbs from “Prometheus” to find your way around the Convention Center) and this binder is way too heavy. I think I’m doing it wrong.


6:04 P.M. I stumble into the Target Lounge to catch my breath, where I find Glenn Tilbrook from Squeeze about to perform. This would probably be more exciting if it weren’t the first time that I’m learning of either Glenn Tilbrook or Squeeze..


6:05 P.M. Just as I leave the Target party, Tilbrook starts singing “Tempted” and I realize I totally know who Squeeze is! Victory! Also, I’m drunk. Was I even drinking!? Austin is very sneaky …


6:15 P.M. In line for my first movie, the documentary about Improv Everywhere, “We Cause Scenes”, at the Vimeo Theater, which is located on the first floor of the Austin Convention Center. I’m about 10th in line.


6:17 P.M. The line behind me is suddenly enormous. Noted.


8:50 P.M. I am thrilled with my first choice of movie. “We Cause Scenes” is a joyous detailing of Improv Everywhere’s history that touches on the impact of technology, the nature of art and the definition of success.  During the Q&A, the director invites the entire audience to come drink with him. I have a feeling I’m going to like this festival.


9:10 P.M. I notice that the throne from “Game of Thrones” is stationed beside the Vimeo Theater, and unlike at Comic-Con or Wondercon, no one seems to care. I make a mental note to make sure I come back and pose in it before the week is up. Like all of my mental notes, it will soon be completely obliterated by alcohol.


9:15 P.M. I run off to meet up with one of my SXSW partners in crime, Coco Quinn, and run into the entirety of the “Much Ado About Nothing” crew fresh off their Arty Bus. Joss Whedon and his cast are perfectly happy to chat with me like we go way back, because they are the nicest.


9:35 P.M. A random guy on the street offers me pot brownies. I reluctantly decline.


9:50 P.M. We arrive to the premiere party of “A Teacher”, held at an actual public school in East Austin. There’s a ton of food, free drinks, and ruler giveaways that say “Hot For Teacher” on them.


10:50 P.M. Head out of the party, figuring I can easily catch a cab and make it over to the Topfer theater for “V/H/S/2? by 11pm. I am sorely mistaken.


11:23 P.M. A nice girl agrees to pedicab me over there for a discount. I’m not sure if she realizes how far away the Topfer theater is. I start to worry this pedicab ride will kill her.


11:48 P.M. Pedicab girl lives! (for now). She drops me at the theater, a performance space rocking a temporary screen for the duration of the fest. I grab a queue card, and eventually Erin and I are settled in for “V/H/S/2.”


1:25 A.M. The audience bursts into applause after Gareth Evan’s “V/H/S/2? sequence. Holy crap.


1:50 A.M. During the Q&A, the filmmakers and Scott Weinberg start having a fun back and forth. I decide to introduce myself to Twitter friend Weinberg after the Q&A but then chicken out for no discernible reason. This will prove to be a SXSW trend. Next year, Weinberg. Next year.


2:15 A.M. Due to lack of a car and a 90-minute wait for a cab, Erin and I decide to walk back to Hyatt. On the long walk, which involves  going under a terrifying bridge, I comment to Erin that it’s like we’re starring in our own “V/H/S” right now! Erin does not like this.


2:26 A.M. A pedicab driver appears out of nowhere and insists that I high five him. I oblige. He murders neither Erin nor myself. This is good.


2:45 A.M. We make it back safe and sound, our faces eaten by zero drugged up mutants, and meet our roommate Eugene. At 2:45 in the morning. What up, SXSW!


SATURDAY


9:00 A.M. My plan to wake up and go to the Samsung Brunch fails miserably as I couldn’t fall asleep till 6 in the morning, haunted by the disturbing imagery of last night’s Midnighter. I proceed to hit my alarm every ten minutes for the next two hours.


12:13 P.M. I finally head back downtown and share a free Chevy with a bunch of kids from Interactive. Turns out the Hyatt is filled with mostly Interactive folks, as their programming is all across the street at the Long Center. The girl in the car specializes in front loading software or something. The guys are super impressed and they all throw about a bunch of technical terms I couldn’t even begin to decipher. I suddenly feel like I’m LARPing “The Social Network.” They ask what I’m there for and when I say Film, they stare at me blankly and continue talking tech. No yeah cool, I’ll just see myself out.


12:53 P.M. I see Erin at “Much Ado About Nothing” and she tells me about how she just saw a Gorilla break dancing outside. Naturally.


3:37 P.M. After “Much Ado About Nothing”, both the darkest and most accessible adaptation of the play I’ve ever seen, there is a 45-minute panel with almost the entire cast, which you can read about here. One moment that didn’t make the cut? When a high school teacher thanked Whedon for making this movie.


4:13 P.M. Have a meeting with a future co-worker. Accidentally get drunk. That keeps happening.


6:00 P.M. Erin and I begin our party hopping for the evening. First up: Awsomeist Journalist Party, wherein we take our first photo booth pics of SXSW together.


6:15 P.M. We meet the CEO of Indie Go Go. We think he is kidding. He is not kidding. He promises us branded sweatbands if we come to their party Sunday. Spoiler Alert: As tempting as branded sweatbands are, we do not attend said party.


7:32 P.M. On the corner of Congress and Fifth, the center of it all, we encounter a werewolf playing the fiddle.


7:45 P.M. We walk into the WBTV Chuck Lorre cocktail party to discover Amanda Palmer performing, husband Neil Gaiman watching off to the side. She closes with a cover of Radiohead’s “Creep.” Everything is awesome. We drink.


8:00 P.M. Filmmaker/Actor Todd Berger (“It’s a Disaster”) enters the party. We all hop into the ball pit and then Todd and Erin randomly star in some guy’s sketch video. All in a day’s work.


8:55 P.M. I am the 169th person to get into line for “Before Midnight” at the Paramount, and I eat my first meal of the day – an energy bar.


9:15 P.M. I make my first line friends! The producer of “Burma” and three Austin locals. The nice producer man invites me to their premiere party Sunday night. Nothing says “party!” like Burma.


10:10 P.M. The Paramount is enormous and I start to doubt I will be able to see the screen from my seats perched high atop the 1000+ seater.


10:30 P.M. The movie starts 45 minutes behind schedule. But I care not. It’s “Before Midnight”, people. I’ve waited nine years for this, I can handle an extra few minutes.


12:15 A.M. Oh my god “Before Midnight”. I can’t stop crying. I notice the notes I took throughout are exclusively quotes from the film. And exclusively smudged with tears. Helpful! 


12:20 A.M. The sky opens up and tries to drown us all.


12:50 A.M. My high emotions from “Before Midnight” coupled with the raging thunderstorm and knowledge that I have to be up early help me decide to head back to the hotel, rather than drink. I can’t find a cab, so I walk. 40 minutes. In a thunderstorm.


2:00 A.M. It becomes 3am. Good one, daylight savings. I begin to accept the inevitable reality that there is no such thing as a decent night of sleep at SXSW.


SUNDAY


10:15 A.M. I Arrive at the Violet Crown theater for “Haunter.” This will prove to be my favorite theater of the festival. Although the theaters are on the smaller side, they have a bar, food (ghost pepper cake balls!?) and coffee, and once you pick up your queue card, you can wait to be called in the lounge, instead of lining up. I’ve been warned that the venue’s queue system can feel like “Battle Royale,” but it doesn’t even feel like “The Hunger Games”. I am SO EXCITED because I love Vincenzo Natali!


12:37 P.M. I love Vincenzo Natali. I do not love “Haunter”. Great concept, bizarre execution. Damn. Will Goss’ review absolutely nails it.


1:15 P.M. Arrive at Mexican Restaurant & Tequila Bar Iron Cactus for the “Short Term 12? Breakfast Taco reception. Run into a bunch of friends, make a bunch more new friends, walk away with an awesome “Short Term 12? shirt and perhaps most importantly, eat my first non-energy bar meal of the trip: A breakfast taco. In that moment it is the greatest thing I have ever eaten.


3:08 P.M. I wander into the Exhibit Hall and immediately spot Shaquille O’Neal. I’m not entirely sure what he’s doing here, but given the fact that he’s 87 feet tall and towers over many of the booths, the dude’s not exactly Waldo.


3:30 P.M. On the fourth floor of the convention center there are tons of rooms housing panels and lounges. In the hallways leading to these rooms are lockers with phone chargers inside, so attendees can lock away their phones for free to charge while they pop into a panel or relax in a lounge. I attend a discussion on the MPAA, which you can read about here.


5:30 P.M.  I meet a friend from L.A. who is attending as part of Interactive in the giant food truck lot next to the Revolution tent. Here, ten of Austin’s best food trucks, curated by Top Chef winner Paul Qui, line a giant lot, in the center of which are picnic tables and a phone charging station.


6:15 P.M.  I have just come face to (giant) face with an enormous 3D rendering of Ian Somerhalder’s face, in front of which naturally stands the real Ian Somderhalder.


6:56 P.M. We discover that there are shirts with Somerhalder’s 3D face on them. I obviously take two. That guy’s face is everywhere. He might even be a fraction (of a fraction) as ubiquitous as Grumpy Gat.


7:00 P.M. Ian Somerhalder leaves before we can talk to him. Most likely to go meet Grumpy Cat. 


7:45 P.M. We realize if we don’t leave soon we may not make it to “Coldwater” on time. It is screening at the theater at the Long Center, all the way across the bridge near our hotel. We need to stop at our hotel first and getting cabs has been next to impossible. We are beginning to panic.


7:55 P.M. We exit the party and lo and behold an available cab pulls up right next to us. This is the only time this will happen the entire week.


10:30 P.M. After “Coldwater”, which featured some of the strongest acting of the festival, Erin and I catch a shuttle downtown to hit the “Burma” premiere party. Although this shuttle is technically only accessible by those with an Interactive badge, the driver takes pity on our freezing asses and allows us safe passage. It’s a SXSW miracle!


11:05 P.M. The “Burma” party is being held at a salon. Hair washing stations line the space and rather than serving out of an official bar, two hipsters have converted the salon’s kitchenette into a mixing station, where they are offering a variety of spirits, including our pick, Sweet Tea Vodka.


11:25 P.M. I am wasted. Please try to contain your surprise.


1:15 A.M. Have a lengthy, legitimate, completely non-ironic conversation about the merits of Wes Anderson with Dan Bittner, stand out actor from “Burma”, the film that would go on to win an ensemble acting award from the narrative grand jury. I was not thanked in his speech for my scintillating conversation. That ungrateful swine.


MONDAY


12 P.M. Agree to share a cab with a lady who is headed near the Violet Crown where I am going to see “Short Term 12? Before we get in, I realize I don’t have cash and tell her I have to go to an ATM, so she can have my cab solo. She says she wouldn’t have a cab at all if I hasn’t agreed to share it, and offers to split it with me, but pay for it on her own. Nice way to start the day. Also a nice way to start a “V/H/S” segment … wait, no, let’s not think that way.


1:10 P.M. The person sitting next to me for “Short Term 12? is sitting next to Oliver Platt (a producer on the film), and recommends “Milo” to him. Platt takes this advice very seriously. FYI, “Milo” is a movie about a murderous demon who lives in Ken Marino’s colon.


1:17 P.M. The want to see is so major for this movie, Platt and his fellow producers on the movie decide to give their seats up for those with queue cards.


2:53 P.M. “Short Term 12? is beautiful. I has a cry.


2:54 P.M. Skip the Q&A to grab a “Burma” queue card then eat a movie theater fajita. Cause. Austin. It is my second time (of four) eating real food at the festival.


5:30 P.M. Post “Burma”, I chat with the star, Christopher Abbott and filmmaker, Carlos Puga, which you can read about here.


9:07 P.M. Erin and I arrive at what she refers to as a “Boots Party.” It is in fact a store in East Austin that is housing the launch of a new line of men’s boots. To celebrate, there is cold beer, fresh coffee, and a performance by the singer from the band Dream Boat.


9:45 P.M. Someone brags about being a friend of a friend of Bruce Springsteen’s keyboard tech and we decide it’s time to go. Maybe out of the country.


10:05 P.M. On our way to the next party, we run into a group of bluegrass busker on the street and watch them for a few minutes. Our faith in humanity is saved (for now).


10:13 P.M. We arrive at Cheer Up Charlie’s, where at least three movies are celebrating their premiere parties. The space is enormous, a yard with picnic tables in front, inside bar in the middle, and sprawling back area with four separate sections, featuring a second bar, a stage, food trucks and more.


10:34 P.M. Meet filmmaker Jonathan Lisecki whose film “Gayby” I saw and adored at last year’s L.A. Film Fest. He is every bit as congenial and hilarious as I’ve been told.


10:38 P.M I enter into a conversation about how attractive the cast of “Coldwater” is. No but really.


11:14 P.M. I’m introduced to FilmCritHulk. He’s very nice. I get the feeling that I would like him even when he’s angry.


11:57 P.M. We’re chatting with actor Rami Malek? After he leaves, someone comes up to us and asks what movie he was from. I say “Twilight”, while Erin and Coco immediately, incredulously and simultaneously counter me with “The Master.” I lose.


12:25 A.M. John Gallagher Jr and his “Short Term 12? director Destin Cretton arrive. I am elated when Cretton gives me a “Short Term 12? button, a feeling only to be matched days later when “Zero Charisma”‘s Katie Graham gives me her twenty sided die pin. Why yes, I am a swag hoarder. I’m not proud, but I am happy.


12:46 A.M. As I head inside to find a bathroom, I run into “The Spectacular Now” star Miles Teller and give him a high five. Surely, he will remember this for the rest of his life.


2:28 A.M. We arrive at the karaoke RV known as the RVIP to encounter bloggerati members Jen Yamato, Nick Rob, Devin Faraci, Alamo Drafthouse CEO Tim League and more. It is pretty much the greatest thing ever. There is singing. There is more whisky.


3:45 A.M. Erin and I head back to the hotel. I have no recollection as to how we got there. Probably on a people-mover made out of fermented beer, or something. I dunno. SXSW.


The next three and a half days of my SXSW adventure would involve tons more movies, including favorites “Good Night” and “Zero Charisma”, but significantly fewer werwolves, breakdancing gorillas and dragons. As the fest shifted from film into music, the vibe shifted from “happiest place on Earth” to “please stop stealing my things.” The girls’ hair became shorter, the boys’ hair became longer, and I longed for the days of 36 hours prior when bloggers, tech nerds and cinephiles ruled the land. Still, there is no doubt this noob has fallen in love with the city of Austin, the excitement of discovering fantastic independent cinema, and the summer camp sensibility that bonds attendees instantly and intensely. See you next year, SXSW.

Categories: No Categories

Tags: Before Midnight, Burma, Coldwater, Diary, Drinking, It's a Disaster, Loquacious Muse, SXSW, Sxsw 2013, Vhs 2

Rabu, 03 April 2013

THE FIRST TIME (2012)

 

Tanggal Rilis : 7 February 2013 (Russia)
Jenis Film : Comedy | Drama | Romance
Diperankan Oleh : Dylan O'Brien, Britt Robertson, Victoria Justice


Ringkasan Cerita THE FIRST TIME (2012) :

Dave, a high school senior, spends most of his time pining away over a girl he can’t have. Aubrey, a junior with artistic aspirations, has a hot boyfriend who doesn’t quite understand her or seem to care. Although they go to different schools, Dave and Aubrey find themselves at the same party. When both head outside to get some air, they meet. A casual conversation sparks an instant connection, and, over the course of a weekend, things turn magical, romantic, complicated, and funny as Aubrey and Dave discover what it’s like to fall in love for the first time.

Senin, 01 April 2013

The Great Debate: SXSW vs. Sundance

Our Great Debate this week addresses an explosive question that has incited arguments among philosophers and brought nations to war: Sundance or SXSW? I am pleased to take the Sundance side of the debate; joining me on the opposing (losing) side, speaking up for SXSW, is Rob Hunter of Film School Rejects. Both parties stipulate that they hold both film festivals in high esteem, and that it’s not an either/or situation, this is a rhetorical exercise, yada yada. Let’s debate!


Eric D. Snider, Team Sundance: Let me say up front that I love both festivals. I look forward to them every year, each for different reasons. But by almost every standard of measurement, Sundance is the better festival. The average quality of the films is generally higher at the ‘dance — I know there are clunkers, but I’m talking overall — and the films that play in Utah’s snowy climes are more often the ones that go on to be significant spokes in the indie-cinema wheel. SXSW is more fun and has better weather, but those qualities are merely cosmetic.


Rob Hunter, Team SXSW: It appears that I’ve already won this so-called debate as you’ve not only conceded your love for SXSW but also acknowledged it’s more fun than Sundance, but I’ll go through the motions anyway. The quality of films argument is a bit misleading for the simple fact that many of the “best” movies there also find a home at the ‘west. So you can argue that Utah sees them first, by a matter of weeks, but their appearance in Austin pretty much negates the “better” distinction. And if I’m seeing the same movies in both places then those cosmetic qualities you spoke of start to play a bigger role.


Snider, Team Sundance: Rob, you ignorant slut. Surely the fun quotient is not the most important factor. Yes, SXSW is more fun than Sundance. You know what’s more fun than both of them? Disneyland. Does that mean Disneyland is the better film festival? No. That’s dumb. Why would you even say that? Are you even listening to yourself?


I enjoy a good time as much as the next person (unless the next person is Gary Busey), but that’s not what makes one film festival better than another. The quality of the films is the most critical factor. And while you’re right that SXSW shows SOME of Sundance’s standouts, it certainly doesn’t get all of them. In addition, SXSW’s average is brought down by — let’s be honest — a lot of world premieres (especially among narratives) that simply aren’t very good. I don’t mean that as a slam on SXSW, which is much newer than Sundance and has different priorities. But if quality is the key component, Sundance has SXSW beat.


Sundance also plays a large role in shaping the course of independent film for the year. Last year’s lineup included “Beasts of the Southern Wild,” “The Sessions,” “Safety Not Guaranteed,” “V/H/S,” “Searching for Sugarman,” and “The Queen of Versailles.” Quality aside, there’s no denying those were some of the most talked-about and influential indie films of 2012. And Sundance does it every year. How often are the reverberations of SXSW’s premieres felt once the fest is over?


Hunter, Team SXSW: They say insults and name-calling are the last refuge of an out-argued and drowning man who feels compelled to wear wizard hats to cover his sparsely populated pate, so I’ll be avoiding a descent to your level except to say that I am far from ignorant.


The debate here is in regards to which fest is better, and since that’s a highly intangible and subjective term it has to broken into smaller qualifiers. The fun quotient is one such qualifier, and there’s no question that SXSW wins that round. There’s simply more to do in between films, and even the fest runners bring the funny and entertaining through their bumpers and creatively-written “No talking, cell phones, etc” warnings before each film. And your incorrect claim that Disneyland is fun aside, your analogy is nonsensical. You may as well argue that the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina is the better film fest because it featured more volunteers.


And while SXSW doesn’t get all of the Sundance standouts, this year shows that it can get the best. “Upstream Color,” “Before Midnight,” “Prince Avalanche,” “Mud,” “Don Jon,” “VHS2,” “The Spectacular Now,” “The East”… Sure, they missed “The Way Way Back,” but at least SXSW was smart enough to not grab “Fruitvale.” Sundance has just as high a percentage of duds as SXSW because it’s a matter of math as much as anything else.


The difference is that Sundance has a certain illusory cachet about it that makes people “think” its films are the best of the best even when they’re not. Your own example of “Beasts of the Southern Wild” shows that they can even make amateurish, over-reaching garbage smell like award-worthy roses.


But how about the audience quotient? Because it only took one trip to Sundance for me to recognize that it is not a film fest designed for movie lovers. It’s a buyer’s market designed for people on cell phones who have no compunction about walking out early from every single film they see.


Snider, Team Sundance: I will have you know, sir, that this is a prescription hat.


It’s appropriate that you ignored my question about how often SXSW films make a splash outside of SXSW, because it was a rhetorical question, because the answer is PRETTY MUCH NEVER. You may not have liked “Fruitvale” at Sundance (making you part of a very small group), but do you doubt it will be a significant part of the conversation this year?


There’s nothing about Sundance that gives its films a false aura of excellence. To say that is to ignore the many Sundance films that are panned and disregarded: if you think Sundance critics go easy on stuff just because it’s a “Sundance movie,” you’re not paying attention. (And not for nothing, but plenty of so-so films get a HUGE crowd response at the Paramount Theatre during SXSW — and then, appropriately, fall into oblivion.)


Both fests have good and bad movies. We agree on that. I contend that if you were to watch and grade every single film at both festivals in any given year, the average Sundance score would be higher than the average SXSW score. If you were to count only the films making their world premieres at either fest, the difference would be even more stark. That’s just math, “Rob Hunter” (if that is even your name).


Sundance’s press and industry screenings do attract douchebag industry types whose cell phones glow during the film and who leave once they decide they’re not going to buy the film. But the Sundance public screenings are often exciting gatherings of movie fans from around the world, a mixture of glitz-and-glamour and good old-fashioned cinemania. Those lucky people are often among the very first to see excellent movies that are destined for cultural significance later in the year.


We have reached the end of our debate time. The moderator is waving the flag. I will give you the last word, Mr. “Hunter.”


Hunter, Team SXSW: Your argument seems to hinge mostly on timing in that Sundance gets these “important” films first, but by that standard we could just as easily be arguing that Cannes or Toronto are the better fests as the movies that hit big there often become the conversation throughout the following year. And I can’t argue with the calendar.


Your math-ish contention about watching, grading, collating and analyzing every single film at each fest is a hypothetical that shan’t ever be proven. And I can’t argue with a negative.


Your distinction between the P&I and public screenings at Sundance raises an interesting point though. I’d argue that festival audiences in general are not ideal audiences with which to watch films, but while I witnessed walk-outs and cell phones at every single screening I attended at Sundance they were more prevalent in the P&I ones. And I can’t argue with you being mildly correct in that distinction.


Your argument that you didn’t make is the one I agree with most. Sundance is most definitely the best fest for filmmakers in that the perception and cache surrounding it all often provide enough attention to secure distribution deals and such. Movie fans don’t care about that though, and the fact that they can see many of those same movies a few weeks later in a warmer, friendlier location with better food options, beautiful walking trails and scantily clad human billboards pretty much seals the deal on the audience side of things.


But my final point regarding which of the two film festivals is better comes down to an irrefutable fact from which you will have no possible rejoinder… I’ve never seen Jeff Wells at SXSW.


Snider, Team Sundance: I lied when I said I’d give you the last word (and also when I told you I loved you). Please permit me to conclude by saying that I believe Sundance is the better film festival — but as a movie lover, if I had to choose (which I don’t), I would rather attend SXSW. But Sundance is better, so there.

Categories: Features

Tags: Eric Snider, Rob Hunter, Sundance, SXSW, The Great Debate

Minggu, 31 Maret 2013

Eric’s Bad Movies: ‘Mr. Hush’

If all I did was tell you what happens in “Mr. Hush,” you might think it was a profoundly unsettling horror film in which the main character endures awful torment and heartbreak. You might think there was no way you could subject yourself to such a grueling experience. Fortunately, “Mr. Hush” is executed with such comical ineptitude that none of the protagonist’s torment feels authentic, let alone troubling. It’s actually a fairly insulting disservice to all the real people whose wives and girlfriends have been murdered by vampires.


I was initially reluctant to make fun of “Mr. Hush” because I assumed from watching it that it was made by an illiterate child who had never seen a movie before, starring people who were not actors, using a camera that was really just a cardboard box with a lens taped to it. The performances are especially ludicrous. Every line sounds like the actors are reading it for the first time, as if the audio was recorded at the table read. But it turns out most of them ARE actors. They have been in other movies and television shows! And the writer-director, David Lee Madison, is a grown man who can read. So game on.


We meet Holland Price (Brad Loree), his wife, Julie (Jessica Cameron), and their young daughter, Amy (Megan Heckman), at a time of great domestic tranquility. They have pleasant family interactions from a template the filmmaker copied out of a screenwriting textbook, with details inserted to provide exposition. “Are you looking forward to [upcoming event]?” “Yes, I am! It always reminds me of [event from my past].” That sort of thing. The Prices are very happy together, united by their shared inability to recite basic, mundane dialogue in a manner that resembles human speech. The wife, in particular, looks like January Jones yet is somehow a worse actress, even though that is not possible.


On Halloween night, a priest (Edward X. Young) shows up at the Price home asking to use the phone. The priest has the least convincing Irish accent ever recorded, and is clearly not a priest but a psycho killer. Anyone dumb enough to let him into their house deserves to be murdered. Sure enough, the priest slits Julie’s throat right in front of Holland — which should be dreadful but is instead hilarious thanks to the clumsy staging and over-the-top acting. It’s a powerful reminder that the line separating tragedy from comedy is so thin it can be snapped by one actor shrieking “Noooooooooo!” at the top of his lungs.


The killer says “what’s left of” Holland’s daughter is upstairs, so he rushes into her room and cries “Nooooooooo!” again. (Conservative estimates put the number of times he cries “Nooooooooo!” in this movie at approximately 45,000.) Presumably poor li’l Amy is dead, though the movie has the decency not to show her body, just Holland collapsing on her bed in grief. Bonus point for you, movie!


Then it is 10 years later. Holland is now a restaurant dishwasher who lives in a tent in the woods with his buddy Donald (Tim Dougherty). No explanation is given for the unorthodox living situation; we are left to infer that Holland was so devastated by the loss of his family that he can no longer bear to live indoors. He has grown a wig of long, silver hair that hangs over his face. He looks like Alec Baldwin playing a burned-out hippie in a “Saturday Night Live” sketch.


There is a nice waitress at the restaurant named Debbie (Connie Giordano). It seems possible that Holland and Debbie will have a romance. Holland and Donald have this conversation about it:


DONALD: Maybe some things are just meant to be.
HOLLAND: What’s meant to be?
DONALD: You two bein’ together.
HOLLAND: Hey, s***-for-brains. My wife was murdered. Was that ‘meant to be’?
DONALD: Yeah, I’m sorry. It just breaks my heart seeing you sad and suffering all the time. You know, I had a wife once, too. She was the love of MY life. One night she comes home, tells me she has a headache. Give her a couple aspirin, made her a cup of tea, rubbed her head till she went to sleep. Yeah, she didn’t wake up in the morning. No one stole her from me, but she’s gone just the same.
HOLLAND: (handing him a beer) Sorry, man.


In other words, “You’re not the only one with a dead wife, JERK!” But Holland remains surly, with a real chip on his shoulder over his family being murdered.


Nonetheless, he starts warming up to Debbie, and he reveals his tragic history to her. “On Halloween night, I opened the door of our house to a lunatic,” he begins. Then he recounts the entire incident. The movie makes us listen to his whole speech, as if having seen the events with our own eyes weren’t enough. (“Remember when this happened??” the movie seems to say. “From 20 minutes ago?? REMEMBER???”) He ends with, “I never spoke of this to anyone,” which we know isn’t true because he told Donald, and presumably the police. David Lee Madison probably heard somebody say “I never spoke of this to anyone” in a movie once and thought it sounded very dramatic, so he included it in his own movie even though it didn’t fit.


Speaking of people not being good at what they do, it is only here that we learn a crucial detail of the earlier incident: li’l Amy wasn’t killed; she was just GONE, taken, missing. Holland has been searching for her ever since. We assumed she was dead because the murderer basically said as much, and because Madison didn’t give us a full view of her bedroom when Holland rushed upstairs to rescue her. Remember how we thought the movie was being tasteful? No, it was just being incompetent. Bonus point revoked.


Holland and Debbie start dating, and what happens next is impossible not to laugh at. I’m sorry, but it is. One night the doorbell rings, Debbie goes to answer it, and the SAME GUY is there to slit her throat, right in front of Holland. It has happened again. Here we are reminded of the old adage: “Slit my wife or girlfriend’s throat in front of me once, shame on you. Slit my wife or girlfriend’s throat in front of me twice, shame on me.”


Obviously, the killer is a vampire who has sworn vengeance on Holland’s bloodline because his grandfather accidentally killed the vampire’s wife in 1930. You know how it goes. The film’s interminable second half has him in full vampire mode (including fake teeth that give the actor a lisp), taunting Holland and Debbie’s teenage daughter, whom he has tied up in his vampire basement. Upstairs, Holland’s daughter Amy is still alive, don’t ask me why. I guess the vampire figured if he REALLY wanted to make Holland suffer, he should abduct his daughter but not kill her, but not tell him she’s still alive either, and never let him see her again, and now that I think about it, I can’t think of a way that it makes sense, so never mind.


Tied to a pillar in the basement, Holland’s primary self-defense tactic is to scream vulgar insults at the vampire. We get the full brunt of this because the film’s sound mix is terrible, and every time Holland yells — which is often — it sounds like he’s screaming directly into a microphone. Do you like a movie that periodically assaults you with deafening roars, and that is amateurish and boring when it’s not causing eardrum damage? Then this is the movie for you, weirdo.

Categories: Columns

Tags: Eric Snider, Eric's bad movies, Mr. Hush

Sabtu, 30 Maret 2013

SXSW Director’s Cut: Emily Hagins (‘Grow Up, Tony Phillips’)

At SXSW this week, 20-year-old Austinite Emily Hagins celebrated the premiere of her fourth movie (and her second feature to debut at SXSW), the sweet coming of age story “Grow Up, Tony Phillips”. Hagins has been a known and beloved presence in the Austin scene for years, nurtured and embraced by the local film community and festival circuit. Her fourth effort shows a significant jump in maturity behind the camera. We sat down with Hagins to discuss the film and how she has grown over the years.


FILM.COM: How has your process changed from your first film to now?


Emily Hagins: When I was 12 making my first feature I was wearing a lot of hats, doing a lot of jobs that were taking away from my directing, and anything I wasn’t doing, my mom was, like holding the boom mic or something. I couldn’t do everything but I was trying and the movie suffered from it — I was also 12. I didn’t know I couldn’t do it, or that that was a possibility. I was like, okay I’m gonna start this so I’m gonna finish it. Even though it took years, I just did it. and I just didn’t think it was weird that that’s how it worked it, it didn’t really occur to me until towards the end of the process when someone said to me, well you could just stop, if this is hard for you you don’t have to keep doing this, but I was like, why would I stop? That’s not what happens with movies, you see them, they have to be finished!


So my second film, I had even more troubles and those two experiences combined is when I really learned that I loved making movies because the crews were really small, people didn’t really know how serious I was about it, so going through those experiences from the time I was 10/11ish when I wrote my first feature and the time I finished by second when I was 14/15, I felt like I just gone through this crazy war experience of battling actors and locations and finishing scenes and it just felt like I knew this was it, this is what I wanted to do. So by the time I made “My Sucky Teen Romance”, people knew I was doing features and even though I was young, I was completing them. So I was able to find a crew that wanted to work with me in a very serious way and we kind of finessed that for this movie.


They always talk about paying your dues as a filmmaker and I think people confuse paying your dues with your age. I think there are still lessons to be learned, always, cause technology is always changing and the people you’re working with will change, every project will be so different, but at the same time if you’ve already been working at it, you’re gonna learn lessons no matter how old you are.


So this is by far your biggest film, production-wise. How different was the vibe on set?


On “My Sucky Teen Romance”, I don’t know how legal we were … we were working many hours with kids, cause again I’m a big fan of awkward kids feeling real not 25-year-olds pretending to be in high school, I love teen awkwardness and humor. But we felt very rushed cause we had to think about these vampire rules, we had to shoot at night cause they couldn’t be in the daylight, it was just crazy, it was a mad rush to make that movie, we shot it in two weeks, and I just remember a lady who worked in the hotel we were shooting just walking onto our set and everything was piled in this big room and she was like, I have to clean this up?! And we were like, no no it’s our film, don’t worry about it! That kind of identified that whole experience, everything being in one room, taking it all out every day then putting it all back in.


This movie we shot in five weeks, and it’s very simple and character-driven so I got to focus on the directors and actors while the producers were taking care of my problems. I even got stomach flu for two days and I couldn’t be on set so I was Skype directing, and I would show up for the four hours I could contain food in my body and then I would be like, ok got to go home again. But luckily, everyone knew the movie we were making, the crew was so incredible and understood, so respectful of each other.


What was the Skype direction like?


The laptop was facing the monitor and in the lap of the script supervisor who tracks continuity and which takes I like. When I couldn’t be on set they only filmed scenes where someone is like, looking and someone else is looking back, and I would be like ::thumbs up:: so they weren’t filming any huge emotional scenes….so I would be watching the laptop and they would have to mute me cause of the sound so everything I was doing would be like ::thumbs up, thumbs down, so-so:: but when I showed up on set I would be crying cause I was like “I let everyone down!” and they were like no, you’re throwing up!


Is this the first time you went after actors instead of using people you already knew?


It was a combination of the two. I wrote Tony in mind for Tony Vespe and also had AJ Bowen in mind. We kind of knew each other through friends, so I contacted him before there was even a script and he was excited, so luckily that worked out okay. Once I had met Caleb, who plays Mikey, I started writing for him. He was so professional on the other sets I worked with him on, so natural and amazing. Devin, who plays Craig, he refused to do Halloween costumes with me as my friend and it really made me mad so I wrote that character for him, and then he got mad at me cause I told him about the character and he was like, if you’re gonna do that to me, you have to cast me. Katie, who plays Elle, came on board in the casting process, and Tony’s mom came on board the last week of shooting cause we had trouble casting that part.


Can you talk about relationship and character building you had your actors do?


One thing we did is have them make Facebook profiles for each character and they had to upload photos that define their character and enter a certain amount of information: Their likes, interests, movies, music, and post on each others walls. It was like real homework, I got on their butts if they didn’t do it cause they’re actors and didn’t do it, but they did eventually! And also because Tony Vespe had pre-existing relationships with everyone except Caleb and Katie, I got Caleb and Tony together and they were hanging out at my house for a while and we did script read throughs but also they’d be eating lunch and getting to know each other. With Katie, I sent them to go find an item that belonged to their characters and they had to explain to me how they defined who that character was, and they carried those items with them the whole movie. I loved that, I’m gonna do that with all my movies from now on, its such an important part of how the actors interpret the movie. Tony would get really mad if he forgot his little totem, which was a Frankenstein hand puppet. Katie wears hers everywhere, its a little ring with googly eyes.


What inspired you to make this shift into simple coming of age story with no genre element?


I guess I enjoyed the comedic parts of “My Sucky Teen Romance” more than the genre parts, and at a certain point when I was thinking about making more horror movies, I kind of got depressed and wanted to make something really sweet and real at the same time. To me, Tony embodies those qualities, he’s honest with you but also a really sweet person and I thought he could carry a movie, so all of that wrapped into wanting to use Halloween aesthetic without being a genre movie created some elements I could work with and the story kind of emerged from that.


The costumes in the movie were so elaborate, who made them and what was the thought process behind them?


Allison Murphy built the Halloween costumes, and she was very thorough cause one thing we talked about was that Tony wants them to be amazing cause of his enthusiasm, but also he is a teenage boy sewing, so it couldn’t be – like he didn’t’ have a million dollars and he didn’t have all the skills, so we wanted to make them still feel homemade. She was so elaborate to the point where the binary code on his robot costume spelled Tony Phillips. Our other costume person was Misty Tavares,® and even though she was doing the normal costumes, she was very conscious of the fall color palette that made the movie feel like it wasn’t shot in Austin, and also having characters mirror each other and what they are wearing. Certain characters only wear a color for a scene cause in that scene they are not being themselves, so it’s very subtle, but everyone — including costume designers — was very intentional with every decision they made.


I love the little throwaway things, “Pimps v Vampires”, space hipsters, even the zombie Marty McFly costume, so many visual treasures, what’s the story behind those?


I think it showed how much people enjoyed being there cause they knew what their job was and knew it was gonna take a long time regardless, so they could have taken a smaller long amount of time to do production design, just this and this and whatever, but people were working really hard to make fun clever things to go in the background cause they were having fun being there. Pimps v Vampires is actually a real game apparently, an independent game, but we got permission to use it, we had some support through our arcade resource, this thing called Fantastic Arcade. I haven’t played it, its probably great, no way it cant be!


How do you feel Austin has impacted you and this movie? Are you interested in making a movie somewhere else?


I love people, I love working with teams and meeting new people who love movies as much as I do and Austin is just a great supportive town where everyone tries to help each other out and be at each others movie screenings and clap and everyone just embraces every movie that is filmed here, which is incredible because there aren’t wonderful film incentives in Texas compared to Louisiana and New Mexico, but the fact that people still film in Austin says something about how influential the community is. I feel the same way, I mean I don’t know what I can do, I have baby arms and I can’t lift things but I’ll do anything else you need! I’ll be a PA on anybody’s movie if they need help! There’s no “I’ll do this for you if you do this for me”, none of that. Austin is great in that way. but I  would love to make movies elsewhere cause I think its important as a filmmaker to understand what else is out there.


Are there are genres or stories in mind you are hoping to get together soon?


There are a couple projects I’m trying to get together, some are genre films,but I’m trying to do more comedies. I wanna keep them separate, comedies that are reality-based and genre films that are scary, that’s kind of what I’m thinking for the next couple of projects, but I love blending the genres as well. There’s nothing too specific yet, but one thing I’m kind of working on is adapting a book.


Were there any scenes you had to cut that you didn’t want to but it just didn’t fit?


Yeah, two things got cut. One thing will be on the DVD, the other probably not. The first is a flashback scene that originally went at the beginning, of all of the characters when they are like ten. So the footage in the opening with the kids treat or treating, that actually from the flashback scene that got cut, that’s young Tony, young Craig, young Elle, so they were all cast as those characters! In it, Tony is trick-or-treating and getting money instead of candy and then they find out he was set up by young Pete to do that, but with good intentions, and he kind of tricks tony into giving him all the money, but still cares about him. You also see where his friendship with Craig and Elle came from, they’re like, should we invite her to watch movies with us? but decide no girls don’t like monster movies forget about her. I’m a big fan of book-ending things or lines that are significant and repeated later, so the later lines are still in the movie, you just don’t know that they were references to the flashback. So that’ll definitely be on the DVD. The other scene is Tony finds Mikey in the arcade when he is looking for him and Mikey is beat up and peed his pants and so Tony realizes the magnitude of what he did, but a better way of showing that was that Tony never found him. It had more weight to it, it didn’t feel like an after school special, it felt like, uh oh, he really screwed up. We never imagined cutting that scene would add so much more weight to the moment. It kind of changed some of the lines in ADR.


The soundtrack was incredible. What made you want to try for original songs by Santiago Dietche?


We’ve known each other since we were little kids and he kind of knows my style and had read the first draft of the script so he had been involved in the very early stages and we would meet about, well this scene needs this kind of song, this part feels like way, this part is less angsty, this is more angsty, etc… When he would show up on set, cause he plays one of the popular kids in the movies, he would see how things are going and send me recordings so that would help me as I was filming. Santi’s perspective of what the story was, I think he calls himself the narrator, I think it really defines the type of movie we are making. This movie would definitely be like 50 levels worse if Santi did not do the soundtrack. It’s such a huge part of this movie. I hope that he has many more successes to come!


“Grow Up, Tony Phillips” will next play in the Chicago Critics Film Festival.

Categories: Interviews

Tags: Director's cut, Emily Hagins, Grow up tony phillips, Interview, My Sucky Teen Romance, SXSW

Kamis, 28 Maret 2013

Studio Ghibli’s 7 Best Films

A legitimate case could (and assuredly has) been made that Studio Ghibli is the single  most consistently brilliant production outfit in the history of motion pictures, animated or otherwise. Founded in 1985 by directors / living legends Isao Takahta and Hayao Miyazaki (whose films are commonly synonymous with the company itself), Studio Ghibli has become a veritable institution in its home country — it’s tempting to call them the “Pixar of Japan,” but doing so would vastly underestimate Ghibli’s contributions to Japan’s cultural identity, and the ubiquity of Miyazaki’s characters on their shores (I snapped this photo the last time I was in Kyoto, in a shop that’s immediately adjacent to the city’s most famous shrine).


Ultimately, the biggest difference between Pixar and Studio Ghibli might be that Studio Ghibli doesn’t make bad movies. Once upon a time, Pixar was justifiably famous for their track-record (until “Cars” ran over that legacy like roadkill), but Ghibli endures as a force in the industry in part because even their oddities and lesser works are obviously created without a shred of cynicism. Perhaps the studio’s reputation is furthered by their strictly hand-drawn approach, or maybe they just don’t hire Larry the Cable Guy to provide the voice of a special needs tow-truck. Whatever the case, Ghibli’s commitment to quality is unparalleled.


Nevertheless, Ghibli’s image is uncharacteristically vulnerable these days, as the aging (but still creatively engaged) Miyazaki has only directed one of their four most recent films, while the emergence of new contributors — such as Miyazaki’s son, Goro — has naturally threatened to dilute the brand. Hayao Miyazaki will always be regarded as the Steve Jobs of Studio Ghibli, but some of the films produced by his company now seem to bear the stamp of his influence more than they do the hand of his involvement.


The latest Studio Ghibli film, “From Up on Poppy Hill” (which opens today in limited release), feels vaguely emblematic of the company’s future. Written by Hayao Miyazaki and directed by his son (a veritable passing of the torch), the modest but wistfully nostalgic romantic drama tells the story of two teenagers trying to save their school’s clubhouse against the backdrop of the 1964 Olympic games. It’s hardly one of Ghibli’s strongest films, but neither is it one of their worst. Ultimately, it suggests that our most beautiful days may be behind us, but the future is bright all the same.


With that in mind, we ranked the seven best Studio Ghibli films so far — they’ve only made 18, so listing 10 would have forced us to include more than half of their output. Consider this a reminder of what Ghibli has accomplished, and how important their continued success is to the world of hand-drawn animation as a whole.


7.) ONLY YESTERDAY (1991)


Isao Takahata’s low-key 1991 charmer is one of Ghibli’s most criminally under-seen gems, an unusually wistful animated film that reconciles childhood dreams with adult frustrations. The story of a 27-year-old woman named Taeko hops the bullet train from Tokyo to her family’s rural home, and loses herself in the memories of her youth while on the way. Her nostalgia trip only deepens when she actually arrives, though the film almost never makes an overt argument as to why it had to be drawn. Of course, what Takahata understood was that filters, props and set design can only contribute to a patina of the past, whereas creating history from the ground up allows Taeko’s memories to become a place every bit as real as her present.


On a slightly more controversial note, I’d go so far as to say that “Only Yesterday” almost completely negates the need for Yoshifumi Kondo’s similar (but more fantastical) Ghibli film, “Whisper of the Heart”.


6.) CASTLE IN THE SKY (1986)


Studio Ghibli’s most unfortunately titled movie (the film was originally named after the floating fortress Laputa, which literally translates to “the whore”  in Spanish) is also their most fun … as you might expect from a project that was originally called “The Whore.” Okay okay, Laputa is also a reference to a giant flying landmass from “Gulliver’s Travels,” which Miyazaki has repurposed as a fabled land to which a strapping young lad named Pazu must deliver a young lady named Sheeta who literally falls into his life from the clouds.


“Castle in the Sky” is probably the lightest film that Miyazaki has ever directed (even “Ponyo” alludes to the apocalypse), a fleet adventure yarn that moves with a rare kinetic energy — Ghibli films deploy a seemingly unique ripple effect when characters move at a high speed (you guys know what I’m talking about?) and “Castle in the Sky”    whips hair and fabric through the wind like Miyazaki’s pen is rolling its “R”s.


Bonus: Disney’s English-language dub stars both James Van Der Beek and Cloris Leachman.


5.) MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO (1988)


Perhaps the film that’s most synonymous with the Studio Ghibli brand, “My Neighbor Totoro” is among the most iconic films of the last 30 years. A simple story that feels slightly overextended at 86 minutes, Miyazaki’s watershed classic follows two young sisters in the days after their father moves them to an old rural house in order to be closer to their mother, who is hospitalized with a vague ailment (most likely cancer). Each of the girls copes with their mother’s illness in their own way, but both find some relief in their burgeoning friendships with the strange beings that inhabit their local forest.


Among them is Totoro, Ghibli’s most famous creation — imagine a single character who combines the enduring relevance of Buzz Lightyear, the zeitgeist appeal (and adorability) of Grumpy Cat and the formative impact of Mickey Mouse and you’d be close to understanding this fluffy beast’s stature in the Land of the Rising Sun. In a way, Totoro is like the Japanese version of The Beatles, if The Beatles were giant rabbit-like creatures that rode a bus shaped like a cat and let you sleep on their bellies.


“My Neighbor Totoro” is a nearly plotless film (though this is only felt in hindsight), with most of the running time devoted to the girls exploring the brave green world that surrounds their house — while the story culminates in a pronounced set-piece, a typical sequence in the film finds one of the girls offering Totoro her little red umbrella as they wait at a rain-soaked bus stop (when the bus arrives, it’s a giant flying cat whose ribs morph into seats, because why not?). For all of the fantastical things they come across, their mother’s illness remains the girls’ most inexplicable mystery, the magical world they encounter helping them to understand the world in which they live. Part of growing up is learning that life doesn’t always make the sense you need it to, and everyone grapples with that on their own terms. “My Neighbor Totoro” suggests that, young or old, that it’s better to find peace than to look in vain for answers.


4.) PRINCESS MONONOKE (1997)


“Princess Mononoke” holds a very special place in the Ghibli oeuvre, as Miyazaki’s most epic and muscular film may be single-handedly responsible for alerting a generation of American cinephiles to the wonders of Japanese animation. Centering around the eponymous warrior princess, a fierce and feral huntress who could make mincemeat of her docile Disney equivalents, “Mononoke” introduces us to a verdant world in which giant forest gods are being tainted and weaponized by the humans of Iron Town, whose lust for industry is choking the area’s natural resources.


More than 20 years in the making and running 133 minutes (well-earned, but unusually long for animated film), Miyazaki’s masterpiece may be his most articulate statement on the delicate relationship between civilization and the environment, an idea that resonates across the full span of his career. Powerfully told, lushly animated and broadly accessible, “Mononoke” became a watershed moment for anime when Miramax picked it up for American distribution (Miyazaki famously sent Harvey Weinstein a terse letter that simply read: “No cuts”). Neil Gaiman was hired to smooth over the dub, Keith David was brought onboard to voice a giant boar-god, and both of those things were awesome. The film’s domestic run may have been a dud, but every Miyazaki film since has enjoyed a robust release on our shores.


#3.) GRAVE OF THE FIREFLIES (1988)


Not many people know this, but the literal translation of Isao Takahta’s soul-scorching “Grave of the Fireflies” is “Give Us All Your Tears, Puny Humans” (please update the Wikipedia page accordingly). Why Ghibli decided to change the title for the film’s American release is a mystery lost to the sands of time, but the devastating effect of Takahata’s work is hardly diminished by its poetic handle.


“Grave of the Fireflies” is the kind of movie that validates an entire mode of filmmaking, proving once and for all that animated films can resonate with the same humane power as live-action fare.  The sparse story of a teenage boy and his young sister trying to survive after being orphaned by the 1945 firebombing of Kobe, Takahata’s tragedy is a neo-realist fable of the highest order, combining the spartan detail of Vittorio De Sica with the appeal to children of Vittorio De Sica. Takahata may not have intended to make an anti-war film (he claims that the movie is a plea for inter-generational sympathy), but “Grave of the Fireflies” is one of the best.


#2.) PORCO ROSSO (1992)


The two best films that Studio Ghibli has ever made both involve people being transformed into pigs, both only “Porco Rosso” has the courage to give that pig a mustache. An endlessly endearing cross between “Top Gun” and “Babe” (inevitable, if you think about it), the only thing stranger than the fact that “Porco Rosso” exists is that it works so damn well.


The year is 1929, the world is between wars, and pirates rule the skies. When we first meet the eponymous man-swine, an ace fighter pilot, he’s a stout but soft bounty hunter, hunting down bad guys in his open-air plane (a “Piccolo”) above the wide blue waters of the Adriatic Sea. From this unusual premise, Miyazaki develops a relatively simple story about debt, dependence and survivor’s guilt, never allowing the backdrop of brewing global unrest distract from the intimacy of the tale’s modern stakes. Nevertheless, this particularly zesty bit of animation is a rip-snorting adventure, loaded with indelible characters and a central romance so sweet that you find yourself actively rooting for beastiality (hooray?).


The film soars on the strength of its meaty hero — Porco revealing himself to be a tender homage to Jean Gabin and his ilk of flawed heroes — and the dogfights are some of the most exciting ever realized on film (and Miyazaki’s animation is better than that of “Flyboys”). Last but not least, it’s worth noting that even Miyazaki’s most ostensibly male-driven narrative makes a point of empowering its female characters — in the world of “Porco Rosso,” the best mechanics are all women, and nothing flies right without them.


#1.) SPIRITED AWAY (2001)


I’d like to come right out and call this the best animated film ever made, but such a claim might seem a bit premature, given that “The Croods” is set to hit theaters next week. “Spirited Away” is first and foremost a work of supreme alchemy, stirring all of Miyazaki’s defining themes into a wild fantasia of bitter witches and fomenting spirits, exploring the unknown terrors of maturation through a bathhouse for the spirits, to which the young and perfectly plain Chihiro is transported after her parents are turned into pigs. A magical place that’s structurally concise but suffused with an infinite sense of wonder, the bathhouse is nevertheless a tainted business, polluted by evil and hungry to consume whatever purity it can find. Chihiro’s identity is literally at stake, as she engages in the fight of her life while her (well-meaning) parents remain utterly oblivious to their daughter’s struggle to make sense of a strange new world.


“Spirited Away” isn’t quite as clean and compact as some of Studio Ghibli’s other great films — Chihiro’s experiences are dense, sometimes inexplicable, and eventually touched with an impossible sadness. The immortal ghost train sequence is the great moment in Ghibli history (and that’s just a fact), but it’s also so damn sublime that thinking of it invariably takes you to a better place that you’re free to draw in for yourself.

Categories: Lists

Tags: From Up on Poppy Hill, Hayao miyazaki, List, My Neighbor Totoro, Porco Rosso, Princess mononoke, Spirited away, Studio Ghibli

Rabu, 27 Maret 2013

Habibie & Ainun (2012)

 Tanggal Rilis :
Jenis Film :Drama
Diperankan Oleh :Reza Rahadian, Bunga Citra Lestari, Tio Pakusodewo

Ringkasan Cerita Habibie & Ainun (2012) :

Ini adalah kisah tentang apa yang terjadi bila kau menemukan belahan hatimu. Kisah tentang cinta pertama & cinta terakhir. Kisah tentang Presiden ketiga Indonesia dan ibu negara. Kisah tentang Habibie dan Ainun.


Bacharuddin Jusuf Habibie seorang jenius ahli pesawat terbang yang memiliki mimpi besar: berbakti kepada bangsa Indonesia dengan membuat pesawat terbang untuk menyatukan Indonesia. Sedangkan Ainun adalah seorang dokter muda cerdas yang mempunyai jalur karir terbuka lebar untuknya.


Pada tahun 1962, dua kawan SMP ini bertemu lagi di Bandung. Habibie jatuh cinta seketika pada Ainun yang baginya semanis gula. Tapi Ainun, dia tak hanya jatuh cinta, dia iman pada visi dan mimpi Habibie. Mereka menikah dan kemudan pergi ke Jerman.


Punya mimpi tak akan pernah mudah. Habibie dan Ainun tahu itu. Cinta mereka terbangun dalam perjalanan mewujudkan mimpi. Dinginnya salju Jerman, pengorbanan, rasa sakit, kesendirian serta godaan harta & kekuasaan saat mereka kembali ke Indonesia mengiringi perjalanan dua hidup menjadi satu.


Bagi Habibie, Ainun adalah segalanya. Ainun adalah mata untuk melihat hidupnya. Bagi Ainun, Habibie adalah segalanya, pengisi kasih dalam hidupnya. Namun setiap kisah mempunyai akhir, setiap mimpi mempunyai batas. Kemudian pada satu titik, dua belahan jiwa ini tersadar; Apakah cinta mereka akan bisa terus abadi?

PIGGY (2012)

 

Tanggal Rilis : 4 May 2012 (UK)
Jenis Film : Thriller
Diperankan Oleh : Paul Anderson, Neil Maskell, Martin Compston


Ringkasan Cerita PIGGY (2012) :

Joe, seorang pemuda santun yang bosan dengan hidupnya yang monoton. Ketika adik tercintanya dibunuh Joe menemukan pelipur lara di Piggy, salah satu dari teman-teman lama saudaranya. Piggy membantu untuk mengatasi kesedihan Joe, berniat menyelamatkan dia dan membantunya mendapatkan keadilan atas pembunuhan saudaranya. Sebagai persahabatan mereka mulai tumbuh, Joe menemukan dirinya dalam sebuah dunia yang berbahaya dan keruh meningkatnya kekerasan dan rasa ingin balas dendam. Sebagai kehidupan Joe runtuh di sekelilingnya ia mulai mempertanyakan siapa Piggy sebenarnya, dan bagaimana ??dia benar-benar telah bersamanya. Ketika Joe menghadapkan Piggy pada serangkaian peristiwa yang diletakkan di tempat yang mengarah pada klimaks bencana.

Selasa, 26 Maret 2013

Trailer Showdown 3/8: ‘The Hangover 3′

Sound the alarms and batten down the main hatch, it’s time for our weekly Trailer Showdown, in which we break down and rank the trailers that were released during the previous seven days. Not every trailer is created equal, so why waste your time with bad movies?

This is a big week, with the release of the trailer for the long-awaited drunken buddy comedy “The Hangover 3,” as well as trailers for the family drama “What Maisie Knew” and a few Sundance Film Festival films start their foray into the wider world.

While it’s a particularly good week overall, with no out and out terrible-looking films getting trailers, it’s a particularly good week for Steve Coogan fans, see if you can spot him in two of the trailers.

Did we get the rankings right? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!

1.) ‘The Hangover 3'

Best of the Week: With Justin Bartha nowhere in sight, the three main “Hangover” castmembers are back and at it in Las Vegas. Full of action, wild misunderstandings and fairly hilarious zingers, let’s put this oft-copied franchise to bed with a glass of water and an aspirin. While these films are not for everyone, this does look like required viewing, if only to satisfy the curious.
Starring: Bradley Cooper, Zach Galifianakis, Ed Helms
Release Date: May 24, 2013

2.) ‘Much Ado About Nothing’

In the middle of making “The Avengers,” director Joss Whedon snuck off and made this modern Shakespearean adaptation, about the war of wits between two well matched couples. It’ll be fun to see Whedon’s take on things, and bask in a wholly new take on the classic work!
Starring: Alexis Denisof, Amy Acker, Fran Kranz
Release Date: June 21, 2013

3.) ‘What Maisie Knew’

A bitter divorce tears a family apart in this updated take on the classic Henry James novel. Powerful performances and the world of adulthood seen through the eyes of a child, this film looks both intriguing and wildly entertaining.
Starring: Alexander Skarsgård, Julianne Moore, Steve Coogan
Release Date: 2013

4.) ‘Rapturepalooza’

NSFW: The rapture has happened and two teens must survive it, together, in this wild, tumultuous comedy. Anna Kendrick and John Francis Daley are at their funniest battling the Anti-Christ as they struggle to keep body and soul together as, literally, all hell breaks loose. Could be absolutely funny, could be an absolute pile of dreck — there’s no way to know this early on, but my money is on hilarious!
Starring: Anna Kendrick, John Francis Daley, Ken Jeong
Release Date: 2013

5.) ‘Stories We Tell’

Oscar-nominated filmmaker Sarah Polley turns the lens on her own family in this fascinating documentary look at the way we remember our own lives and the stories about our own families. Caught this one at Sundance, and it’s a wonderful mysterious film in the vein of Orson Welles’ “F is for Fake.”
Starring: Sarah Polley, Pixie Bigelow, Deirdre Bowen, Geoffrey Bowes
Release Date: May 17, 2013

6.) ‘The Look of Love’

A biopic based in reality, this film takes a look at the life and wild, sexy times of Britain’s king of smut, Paul Raymond. Building his empire on the belief that classy sex sells, he sold quite a bit, though it seems to have left him alone and wanting more from his life. Caught this one at Sundance, and it’s a classy, wildly sexy romp through the mid-century and beyond.
Starring: Steve Coogan, Matt Lucas, Imogen Poots, Anna Friel
Release Date: 2013

7.) ‘Disconnect’

Oh noes technology is all around us and will ruin our liiiives! This thriller centers on the ways in which seeming separate events are deeply connected, and the search for human connection in a very wired world. Could be powerful stuff, or it could simply devolved into a diatribe about the evils of technology. Either way, we’ll be seeing this one for sure.
Starring: Jason Bateman, Alexander Skarsgård, Paula Patton
Release Date: April 12, 2013

8.) ‘Not Today’

A rich and entitled American young man becomes embroiled in rescuing a little girl sold into the sex trade in India. Powerful and moving, my eyes got a little misty during this one, not going to lie. Could be a little schmaltz but still, an incredibly powerful topic.
Starring: Cody Longo, Walid Amini, John Schneider
Release Date: April 12, 2013

9.) ‘Grow Up, Tony Phillips’

One young man loves Halloween so much, he’s continued his Halloween traditions into high school, far past the appropriate age for such shenanigans. With the help of his friends, can he grow up? This one looks low budget but absolutely charming, and who doesn’t love Halloween!?
Starring: AJ Bowen, Seth Lee, Devin Bonnée
Release Date: 2013

10.) ‘New World’

A Korean film that focuses in on the troubles faced by an undercover policeman who becomes a member of the gang he’s meant to dismantle, all leading up to a final, wild battle and a choice from which there’s no coming back. There’s hints of “The Departed” throughout, making this Korean film one to see, for sure.
Starring: Min-sik Choi, Jeong-min Hwang, Lee Jeong-jae
Release Date: March 22, 2013

11.) ‘Epic’

An animated family film we’ve posted about previously, but here’s a new and wilder trailer! Any movie that carries the luscious voice of Beyonce Knowles to the people is an OK movie by us.
Starring: Amanda Seyfried, Josh Hutcherson, Beyoncé Knowles
Release Date: May 24, 2013

12.) ‘A Resurrection’

A murdered young man’s brother begins to come into conflict with the very boys who killed his brother in this horror thriller. The scariest thing of all? How badly Mischa Barton must need the money that she would agree to be in this movie.
Starring: Mischa Barton, Devon Sawa, Michael Clarke Duncan
Release Date: 2013

Categories: Columns, Trailer Roundup

Tags: Disconnect, Grow up tony phillips, Hangover Part III, Much Ado About Nothing, Rapturepalooza, Stories We Tell, Trailer showdown, What maisie knew

Senin, 25 Maret 2013

Director’s Cut: Sacha Gervasi (‘Hitchcock’)

Sacha Gervasi’s “Hitchcock” was one of last fall’s most curious releases, a star-powered ode to one of filmdom’s most beloved personalities that confounded expectations by refusing to be either self-serious or definitive. Hardly the tedious and mannered piece of Oscar bait that the season typically invites, “Hitchcock” was a fun and frothy portrait of the mythic filmmaker, imbued with the playful attitude of its namesake. In retrospect, hiring the guy who made “Anvil! The Story of Anvil” should have primed people for a different take on a familiar figure, but folks weren’t entirely sure what to make of it on first blush. Of course, if a film about Hitchcock is to accurately reflect The Master of Suspense, it must never be fully appreciated in its own time.


In honor of the film’s home video release, I recently had the opportunity to chat with Mr. Gervasi, an affable and articulate guy who — even over our brutal cell connection — communicated a clear passion for all things Hitchcock, an enthusiasm that has somehow withstood the slog of shepherding a film of this scale into theaters and beyond. There was a bit of a lag between our voices, but I like to think that it added to the suspense of his answers.


This is David Ehrlich from Film.com, thanks so much for talking with us.


Sacha Gervasi (politely ignoring the fact I’ve introduced myself as if possessed by the One Ring): No problem, David! What’s up man, how are you?


I’m doing just fine. You sound far away.  


Uh yeah, I’m sorry, I’m just in the middle of some craziness, but I’m very happy to talk to you. Can you hear me well enough?


Yeah, the connection sounds a little weak but we’ll do our best. Alright, well let’s get started. So… As we see in the film, Hitchcock famously reversed his stance on the music cues in the shower scene in “Psycho”, and I was curious: Was there anything in the making of your film that you were really stubborn about and really fought for and eventually relented, only to realize that you were wrong the whole time?


Uh yeah, multiple things. I have a genius editor called Pamela Martin, and Pamela is quite the brilliant editor, as I’m sure you know from films like “Little Miss Sunshine” and “The Fighter”. There were at least three occasions when I was set on things and she pointed out my errors. And there were times when I might have been correct and we argued it out. I think, it was interesting because obviously the actual creative process mirrors often what we were seeing in the story, including the adversity of trying to get the film made, which in the environment today is so hard. Everyone wants to say no, and it’s sort of a miracle when any movie gets made at all, in particular character movies like this.


I think as a director you need to have brilliant collaborators who can see things you don’t, and I was fortunate that I had some amazing people to work with.


There’s another thing that Hitchcock does in the film that struck me, which is early in the film when he’s thinking about making “Psycho” the idea that infatuates him is when he says “What if someone really good made a horror picture.”


Yeah.


And here we are in 2013, and I find myself asking the same question all the time. So my question to you is, what do you think Hitchcock would have to say about the current state of horror films?


Well of course it’s all supposition, I have no idea, but I think part of him would be thrilled that… I think anyone who knows a little bit about cinema would be able to see quite easily that the violence you see in the shower scene directly tracks to the violence you see in “Bonnie and Clyde,” and “The Wild Bunch”, and then that goes to Tarantino… So I think he’d be very pleased at a certain level.


But that scene and the import of “Psycho” alone has lasted more than 60 years, I think he’d be thrilled. I think he’d be pleased giving that to the young directors, but I do think that it’s much easier to make a movie now, and that’s why there was something charmingly old-fashioned about this film. It was quite sad seeing the editing process that we do, it just doesn’t exist anymore. Movie studios probably aren’t outputting movies to film by the end of this year, so it was sort of a look at something… not only the editorial process, but even film itself is obsolete, so there’s something sort of bittersweet about that. But I don’t know, I think Hitchcock would appreciate, you know, movies like “Evil Dead.” I haven’t seen the new one, I mean like Sam Raimi, because I think he was all about movies that have a tremendous effect on an audience, and movies like that have and do.


Any way to make the audience feel something, regardless of how you do it, I suppose. 


Exactly, and what you said about the beginning, the whole idea is that these movies were looked down on at the time as trash, so when you have a master filmmaker like Hitchcock elevate these things that are genre, you have a chance to make a really original and fresh and satisfying for an audience. So that was a badge for him, that he was able to bring a fantastic and very accomplished sensibility to something that people looked down on, and he always liked that idea of playing with people’s expectations.


I feel like in a way you were sort of taking a similarly unusual approach to biopics, and you know the film is much more interested in an honest Hitchcock than it is a factual Hitchcock. It’s a lot closer to the spirit of “Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters” than it is to the Ray Charles biopic, “Ray”. Do you feel like a straight-on approach to a biopic is limiting? 


I don’t know, you know we sort of embraced that ironic, mischievous sense of humor that Hitchcock had that’s so quintessentially English. And we sort of took that tact with the film. The intention was never to make a never furtive, kind of serious biopic, that would have been quite boring and missing the point about Hitchcock. Which seems to have been lost… he was really sort of a surrealist, as well as being a master filmmaker, he was a performance artist, he was the first star director. He and Alma created this “Hitch” character. He used to say “I’m not an English snob, I just play one on television.” It was a chance to explore that persona. But it was definitely highly stylized and sort of surrealistic, because I think he was to a certain degree. The other real counterpoint to that was his relationship with Alma that most people don’t know about. The film isn’t really about Hitchcock or “Psycho,” it’s really about marriage, and how hard it is to creatively collaborate with someone you’re with.


It’s funny, because the Hitchcock film that it most reminded me at times was “Mr. & Mrs. Smith,” which is maybe not the film that someone would think of when they think of him. 


Well I think what we were doing is that we wanted to do something a little unexpected, we knew people would have an idea as to what it should be. But we also wanted to tell a story for an audience and have fun with it — that’s what Hitchcock did. Remember when he made these films, they werent’ considered high art, they were considered genre movies. A lot of critics looked down on Hitchcock for making these “crowd-pleasures,” because they thought that he wasn’t a serious filmmaker. You know, during his lifetime of course, with Truffaut and some of these other people coming over from France, he was obviously flattered, and according to those who interviewed him he was amused by all of this adulation, so he didn’t start off making high art, it’s in retrospect that these films are considered what they are. Remember, when “Vertigo” came out it was a commercial and critical flop, and now last year in the Sight & Sound poll it was voted the #1 film of all time. Again, there’s a big debate about that, you know “Kane,” but it’s funny how time changes things.


And now people take these things incredibly seriously. And I think he took it a lot less seriously than some people do. I think it would find it delicious that there’s a tremendous debate on what kind of a person was Hitchcock. Was he an evil monstrous sort of sadistic genius who attacked his actresses, or was he a surrealistic quiet… to me, he was sort of everything, and that’s the interesting thing about him.


The chief point of the movie was really to expose this incredible collaboration that was the closest of his life, which frankly most people don’t know about, and some people are frightened of. They want Hitchcock to be this cold forbidding genius, but Alma was a huge part of his life, and changed his life.


I think when you focus on… not in your film, but maybe in that other Hitchcock film that came out last year, when you focus on one element of somebody as complex as Hitchcock, it can be rather reductive. I was reading an interview with you when you said that “The Girl” made him look like Pol Pot, which I thought was hilarious. I think that by focusing on the relationship with Alma, you’re able to diversify his personality and explore that he wasn’t just one type of creature.


I think the question is what it means to have someone who was clearly very smart, and difficult to work with sometimes, but was obviously a loving husband and father. People want to put Hitchcock in a pigeonhole. They want to stereotype him and put a label on him, but I think what’s interesting about him is that he’s many things. And when showed facets that some people didn’t want to accept, but the fact is that Alma was who she was, you know? And I think that he was the first to give her the credit. There’s that great quote: “I beg permission to mention by name only four people who have given me the most affection, appreciation, encouragement and constant collaboration,” Hitchcock said. “First of the four is a film editor. The second is a scriptwriter. The third is the mother of my daughter, Pat, and the fourth is as fine a cook as has ever performed miracles in a domestic kitchen. And their names are Alma Reville.”


He was very open about acknowledging all of the roles that she played in his life, and it was only Alma who was so humble and didn’t want the limelight, and I think that’s so interesting. She recognized that Hitchcock was a genius, but that he couldn’t be seen… She very dutifully and elegantly tried to hide her role, and I think that was a story worth telling.


Do you think that there’s something inherently lonely about being a director? Where you’re on the set with hundreds of people and you’re surrounded by activity, but everyone is looking at you for answers…


Well I think the story is a very common one. I can’t tell you how many people have come out of the film and said “Oh my God, that is my life.” But I think it takes an extraordinary person to be there for someone who has to go through all that. At the same time, as they used to say in UCLA Film School, it’s a privilege to be mistreated in this fashion. Just the fact that you can work in the film industry and tell these stories is such an immense honor that there’s not really much to complain about. You have a chance to work with fabulous actors and tell stories that hopefully engage and entertain an audience, you’re sort of lucky to be able to do that, and of course it is working, but the fact that you’re lucky enough to tell stories for a living is hopefully something that never escapes you.


Well, I have one last question before I let you off the hook. So you came from a documentary background and this was really your first major opportunity to make a fiction film, you may have been in an impressionable position as a filmmaker, so I wonder if Hitchcock left any residue, any sort of indelible impression that you’re always going to have as part of your work from here on out?


Well I think any filmmaker, if you’re a fan of his work like I am, you’re affected by what he did. In a lot of cases with directors you have 3 or 4 great films, but with Hitchcock you have 11 or 12 masterful movies. And that’s a huge canon of work, and so I think that if anything the ability to find a great story across any genre, across thrillers and romances… all the types of things that he did. And the willingness to experiment! I mean here he is, 60 years old, willing to risk his own money on this crazy horror movie. I mean, no one wanted to make “Psycho,” so I think the key thing that I got from it is always be willing to take a huge risk. No matter what you do, people are going to have an opinion about it, but you have to always maintain your willingness to risk everything and keep going, and he did that. I know it was obviously hard when certain films that he loved like “Vertigo” were rejected by critics, but he kept going in spite of that, and it’s ironic that “Vertigo” is now seen the way it is, but it was really hard at the time.


But I think it’s that ferocious determination to keep going and follow your instincts and I think “Psycho” is the perfect example of that. He could have, coming off of “North by Northwest”, he could have done anything. You know, particularly those big movies, those lush riviera kind of epics with movie stars, but he felt like he was repeating himself and he wanted to take a risk, and people didn’t want him to. And I think it’s that kind of fortitude that I’ll walk away with.


“Hitchcock” is now available on DVD & Blu-ray, as well as on iTunes and other VOD services.

Categories: Interviews

Tags: Alfred Hitchcock, Director's cut, Evil Dead, Hitchcock, Interview, Sacha gervasi

Minggu, 24 Maret 2013

Trailer: M. Night Shyamalan’s ‘After Earth’

From our pals at NextMovie:

Every year, untold thousands of American fathers and sons embark on a ritual bonding trip that often involves camping in the wilderness, hiking, fishing and other manly rites of passage. But you know what would make that stuff even cooler? If they were being attacked by hordes of mutated animals.

At least, that’s the takeaway from the new trailer for Will and Jaden Smith’s “After Earth.”

Courtesy of Apple Trailers, the latest look at this summer’s M. Night Shyamalan sci-fi epic features a closer look at the father-son bonding element of “After Earth.” Turns out that the story starts with the duo heading off into space for a little face time to repair their unhappy relationship. And then, of course, it ends with them trying to repair a crashed spaceship on the surface of a deadly future Earth filled with bizarre monsters.

All of which makes “After Earth,” which arrives on June 7, the perfect movie for Father’s Day this year. So check out the new trailer and then give your own dad a hug.

Because chances are, that guy would literally fight a horde of irradiated baboons for you, just like Will Smith.

Categories: No Categories

Tags: After Earth, Jaden smith, M. night shyamalan, Trailer, Will smith

Review: ‘The Call’

If not for a few sizable structural problems, “The Call” very easily could have been a movie worth seeing. You know, the sort of thriller that wasn’t completely ridiculous, an effort in the vein of “Seven” or “The Silence of the Lambs,” an experience worthy of accolades. The tension was there, the actors were willing, and the stage was set for a well-executed suspense film. Sadly, “The Call” is not that, instead coming off as a very slick-looking exercise in getting an audience to disconnect from the content. Near the end people will laugh at the moments of peril that should be immersing them in terror.


Jordan Turner (Halle Berry) is a 911 operator in Los Angeles, her workplace a tension-filled “hive” that is considered the brain of first responders all across the city. The work environment, it must be noted, looks exceptionally cool, a cross between NASA mission control and a tech start-up, screens and blinking status lights signifying that work of import is being handled 24/7. Jordan fields a few calls, some serious, some silly, and we’re introduced to the fast-paced and immensely stressful world of a 911 dispatcher. The opening scenes are especially strong, mostly because this is a public service that almost never gets mentioned, but also due to the gambler’s mentality of each call. The next interaction could be a petty squabble, or alternatively a life-threatening crisis requiring immediate intervention. Within a few minutes Jordan gets a call of the terrible variety, a home invasion replete with screams and violence, and from there on out “The Call” becomes completely frenetic.


Six months later, our favorite 911 operator finds herself voluntarily out of active duty and in a training role. She’s walking new recruits through the call center when another terrifying call comes in. All of her skills will now be put to the test, or so “The Call” would have you believe. Major problems begin presenting themselves, and this is the spot where “The Call” consciously decides to slowly drown itself in the tub. The very first sticking point is the massively coincidental nature of Jordan’s involvement in the call itself. Even if you’re willing to give the film some slack, the wave of logic bombs this portends will soon cause a viewer to question the entire enterprise.


Plot-wise, the second major action beat of “The Call” involves a massive police response, helicopters, multiple units assigned, an amber alert – but all of it is orchestrated by … well, actually nothing. At the beginning of the call no one knows where Casey Welson (Abigail Breslin) is, which way she’s headed, or has any clues which would even guide them in a general direction. And yet, everyone speeds around like they have bees in their pants. While one might concede that police action isn’t always focused, there very easily could have been a line of dialogue that went something to the effect of “She could be anywhere with this 15 mile corridor, tell all officers to keep a look out for a suspicious looking blah blah blah.” Then, after the initial imagery of the entire police force getting involved, “The Call” decides to dial it back, likely to up the simplicity level of the film. We are then treated to one cop driving around like a mad man. “The Call” wants you to figure that the safety and well-being of this little girl depends entirely upon one cop driving around in circles.


The helicopter will only make cameo appearances from here on out, and it offers all the helpful utility of a clown in floppy shoes. Well sure, clearly everyone wants a story that is easy to follow and offers character development, but to do so at the expense of any hope of a realistic film, well, that seems not so clever. “The Call” is a film where you can feel the puppet strings being pulled, each and every character’s motivation being derived from exactly what the script wants them to do. There is no life force, no authenticity, it’s a movie by proxy mixed with large amounts of “just because”.


 


45 minutes into “The Call” you can tell it’s a movie that should last an hour. I actively wondered how they could possibly stretch the film out, and then, in horror, I realized the plan. They were going to place generic time-wasting obstacles in front of all of the protagonists. In one instance a character’s cell phone doesn’t have service (natch), a groan-worthy device exacerbated by the fact that we just saw someone else make a call from the exact same spot. Then, 20 minutes later, service is magically restored in the exact same spot. It’s a double whammy of awfulness. There are also plenty of times you might find yourself screaming at the screen, “Where are all the other policemen? Does Los Angeles only have one officer that they ask to do everything? Can we give him a raise and some rocket boots?”


There is also the rather large issue of the grand finale. It’s preposterous on a level we haven’t seen since Christopher Guest was delivering genius mockumentaries. In the final moments of the film, “The Call” manages to throw away any goodwill it hasn’t already squandered, going for a cheap thrill to “wow” people with. It’s a surprise, to be sure, but so is finding a rotting fish in your desk. With this sledgehammer of an ending, “The Call” officially stakes out a claim as a forgettable film, to be lost to the ages once the weekend passes.


Where do we end up with a film like “The Call”? Some modicum of love must be given for a few elements, the look is crisp, the acting is solid, and there are a few really poignant moments that drive home the thin line between life and death for those on the front lines of emergency services. Still, even with all that, “The Call” manages to falter, a pretty remarkable feat given most movies of its ilk aspire to the very things “The Call” accomplishes. As it stands, “The Call” is an active affront to logic, placing us in a world we firmly know doesn’t exist.


Grade: D+


Laremy wrote the book on film criticism and researched LAPD response times to verify one of the elements of “The Call”.

Categories: Reviews

Tags: Abigail breslin, Halle berry, Laremy Legal, Review, The Call, Thriller

Sabtu, 23 Maret 2013

CASINO ROYALE (2006)

 

Tanggal Rilis : 17 November 2006 (USA)
Jenis Film : Action | Crime | Thriller
Diperankan Oleh : Daniel Craig, Eva Green and Judi Dench


Ringkasan Cerita CASINO ROYALE (2006) :

James Bond kali ini mendapat tugas dan misi rahasia untuk memata-matai salah seorang anggota teroris yang berasal dari Madagaskar, Mollaka (Sebastien Foucan). Karena tidak berjalan sesuai rencana, maka Bond memutuskan untuk menyelidiki secara terpisah, tentang data-data anggota teroris yang dikumpulkan dinas rahasia Inggris M-16.


Dengan berbekal informasi tersebut, Bond kemudian menuju ke Bahama untuk bertemu dengan Alex Dimitrios (Simon Abkarian) dan teman kencannya, Solonge (Caterina Murino). Bond juga, mengetahui bahwa Dimitrios terlibat dengan Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen), salah seorang Bankir sekaligus investor yang banyak membiayai kegiatan terorisme dunia.


Berdasarkan laporan intelijen, Le Chiffre sedang merencanakan untuk mengumpulkan dana lewat sebuah kegiatan judi secara maraton dengan jumlah taruhan tinggi dalam sebuah permainan kartu Poker di Montenegro, di tempat judi yang terkenal bernama Le Casino Royale. Bond pun kemudian ditugaskan untuk mengalahkan Le Chiffre untuk merusak rencana organisasi tersebut.