Well, now I've been interested in film for years and years and years. Pretty much forever really, and now a fully fledged film student I was getting ever closer to actually being involved in the making of a film.
Well now I have, in fact its about to wrap up production on this Saturday to both my glee and dispear. I've been working so hard its a relief for my worries to be finally be put at ease, but what an experience its been. The days are long and it can be extremely stressful, but nothing will take away the pride of thinking I've been involved in the making of a movie and seeing it all put together at the end. Its a wow moment. I'm sure this wow moment will be less so, as I continue to (hopefully) make films, but for now I can't wait to see the end product.
Wednesday 28 March 2012
The woman in black review - The suspense was fantastic, literally on edge of seat behind hands 7/10
Horror is my favourite genre of film, but these days the horror films that are churned out lack the most important thing and thats scares. While Woman in Black won't leave much of a lasting impression on you beyond the end credits, it must be noted that the film does pack a punch to your nerves where other films may just try to gross-you-out.
Set in the late 1800's, the film looks stunning set in the dark north of England. The brick work and fog really set the mood, and the under-stated lighting allows the imagination to run wild. The film is directed with a certain flare, the camera is framed perfectly to fill with horrific images and the film is edited so very crisply. The music and sound is also a big plus here, atmospheric and above all creepy. The string orchestration sneaks into the back ground and at the times of pure silence and gentle thudding, it just makes it all the more effective.
Though generally good the film does lack a fair amount of story. The first half hour seems rather pointless, and neither builds character nor furthers the story. And the worst of all is the ending, which not giving anything away, was just a little too "neat" for my liking. The other problem I had is with lead actor Daniel (Harry Potter) Radcliffe, whom seems to only have two facial expressions. Though he played gormless fear rather well, his chemistry with other actors was non-existent. The worst sign of this is with his young son, there is a major unbelievability for his love for his son and this is fatal in the final moments of the film. Though by and large this is only a minor grievance, as supporting actors are great and the bulk of the films best bits are without dialogue.
All in all Woman in Black is a superb horror film, and well worth a watch. It's a nice break to have a horror film, whose interest isn't to splatter blood and guts everywhere. It's the perfect antidote to the Hostel's and Saw's out there.
Set in the late 1800's, the film looks stunning set in the dark north of England. The brick work and fog really set the mood, and the under-stated lighting allows the imagination to run wild. The film is directed with a certain flare, the camera is framed perfectly to fill with horrific images and the film is edited so very crisply. The music and sound is also a big plus here, atmospheric and above all creepy. The string orchestration sneaks into the back ground and at the times of pure silence and gentle thudding, it just makes it all the more effective.
Though generally good the film does lack a fair amount of story. The first half hour seems rather pointless, and neither builds character nor furthers the story. And the worst of all is the ending, which not giving anything away, was just a little too "neat" for my liking. The other problem I had is with lead actor Daniel (Harry Potter) Radcliffe, whom seems to only have two facial expressions. Though he played gormless fear rather well, his chemistry with other actors was non-existent. The worst sign of this is with his young son, there is a major unbelievability for his love for his son and this is fatal in the final moments of the film. Though by and large this is only a minor grievance, as supporting actors are great and the bulk of the films best bits are without dialogue.
All in all Woman in Black is a superb horror film, and well worth a watch. It's a nice break to have a horror film, whose interest isn't to splatter blood and guts everywhere. It's the perfect antidote to the Hostel's and Saw's out there.
The Muppets Review - Fun. lighthearted and self aware. The Muppets are back! 7/10
You either love or hate the Muppet's, I'm on the side of love. There self aware comedy is one that can entertain children and adults alike and it really is commendable.
Though I'd love to give this film a 10/10 for pure enjoyment and its uplifting spirit, it is by no means perfect. Some of the jokes are a little forced and the exclusion of Rizo the rat I thought was a little silly, as his and gonzo's relationships is what made previous instalments so fun.
But these are minor grievances with a film that will fill you with joy and is perfect to take kids too. The whole gang really haven't lost there sparkle, the film will not convert people who hate the Muppet's, but for those like myself who love them its a great addition to the series.
I feel there are some paths unexplored here and with the success of the film, I hope more will be made. I personally would like to see another Christmas carol or treasure island, but this is not necessary, because if the writing is as concise as this keep doing them this way.
Though I'd love to give this film a 10/10 for pure enjoyment and its uplifting spirit, it is by no means perfect. Some of the jokes are a little forced and the exclusion of Rizo the rat I thought was a little silly, as his and gonzo's relationships is what made previous instalments so fun.
But these are minor grievances with a film that will fill you with joy and is perfect to take kids too. The whole gang really haven't lost there sparkle, the film will not convert people who hate the Muppet's, but for those like myself who love them its a great addition to the series.
I feel there are some paths unexplored here and with the success of the film, I hope more will be made. I personally would like to see another Christmas carol or treasure island, but this is not necessary, because if the writing is as concise as this keep doing them this way.
W.E Review - Almost, yet not quite 6/10
W.E. is one of three biopics I have seen this year, after The Iron Lady and J Edgar. Of the three I think W.E. is probably the best, but all three tread the path of the mediocre. What W.E. gets right is Wallis Simpson, Riseborough is fantastic in the lead role and has great chemistry with James D'Arcy. The biggest problem with the film is the the second tier of the romance with Abbie Cornish's Wally Winthrop, though the romance picks up momentum around the one hour mark, it slows down the pace of the Wallis Simpson segments.
The script has high and low notes, the romance at times is reduced sappiness, but these are forgivable even when they are at there worst. What is probably the biggest weakness in W.E. is the often close up hand held camera shots. The occasional one works nicely, but these shots are put in far too often and take you out of the story. In most cases the camera work could have been more simplistic, it too often feels erratic which isn't good in the more tender moments of the film.
The music in W.E. is beautiful and the addition of "Masterpiece" in the credits is a lovely song to go side by side with the film. However sometimes the music is a little over powering, once again just a case of less is more. The much discussed and derided scene with Wallis dancing the Charleston with a tribesman to The Sex Pistols "pretty Vacant", I really liked. I felt the scene was a fun and good way to show how frivolous the character could be, using the modern day Wally's imagination to keep the scene from feeling alien.
Undoubtedly the best part of W.E. is the costume and lighting. The attention to detail in this department is incredible. Every costume looks stunning and is meticulously put together down to the nearest diamond, and the lighting makes the landscapes almost feel like paintings it really is stunning.
All in all W.E. is a great attempt from Madonna to craft a stunning looking film, though the storytelling can be muddled and the film takes around 40 minutes to really get going, its once again forgivable. Historical inaccuracies put aside would have made this film a 7, but not exploring the Nazi element could have made this so much more interesting. The negative reviews of this film aren't looking at it from fair perspective and anyone with half a brain can see though not amazing, W.E. is at least half decent and for a directors second film pretty damn good.
The script has high and low notes, the romance at times is reduced sappiness, but these are forgivable even when they are at there worst. What is probably the biggest weakness in W.E. is the often close up hand held camera shots. The occasional one works nicely, but these shots are put in far too often and take you out of the story. In most cases the camera work could have been more simplistic, it too often feels erratic which isn't good in the more tender moments of the film.
The music in W.E. is beautiful and the addition of "Masterpiece" in the credits is a lovely song to go side by side with the film. However sometimes the music is a little over powering, once again just a case of less is more. The much discussed and derided scene with Wallis dancing the Charleston with a tribesman to The Sex Pistols "pretty Vacant", I really liked. I felt the scene was a fun and good way to show how frivolous the character could be, using the modern day Wally's imagination to keep the scene from feeling alien.
Undoubtedly the best part of W.E. is the costume and lighting. The attention to detail in this department is incredible. Every costume looks stunning and is meticulously put together down to the nearest diamond, and the lighting makes the landscapes almost feel like paintings it really is stunning.
All in all W.E. is a great attempt from Madonna to craft a stunning looking film, though the storytelling can be muddled and the film takes around 40 minutes to really get going, its once again forgivable. Historical inaccuracies put aside would have made this film a 7, but not exploring the Nazi element could have made this so much more interesting. The negative reviews of this film aren't looking at it from fair perspective and anyone with half a brain can see though not amazing, W.E. is at least half decent and for a directors second film pretty damn good.
1st hour poor, 2nd hour better, 3rd hour dull 5/10
Firstly this film is too long and I can happily sit through long films as long as they hold my interest. At 2 and a half hours long, J. Edgar was pushing it, especially because it takes a long time to really get into the story. I'm a fan of Clint Eastwood's films, Million Dollar Baby is a personal favourite of mine, but J. Edgar suffers from serious pacing issues. The film has the same problem that The Iron Lady had, told from the point of view of the character in an elderly state and it slowed the film considerably. The other major issue with this is the two story lines going on at once, the "modern" story and the "old" stories don't match, they are so different that you lose track of where you were in each one. The other issue being the story of how Edgar rose to power in the FBI is far more interesting than his quick decent into death.
Music in the film is fine but by no means spectacular, just your average strings driven arrangement. The camera is handled as Clint Eastwood often does with simplicity, nothing worth noting. Nicely framed and good at capturing the actor nuances, exactly what you want from a film of this kind. The scripting on the other hand was often laughable, especially in more dramatic moments. The "coming out" scene of Clyde Tolson is particularly funny, whether this is to do with bad acting on Armie Hammer's front or just poor scripting would involve re-watching, something that I wouldn't put myself through.
Though acting here is mostly good, Leonardo Di Caprio is obviously fantastic in the title role. Supporting actors are fine but once again nothing that stands out, Di Caprio and Hammer have decent chemistry. Naomi Watts is OK at best and Judi Dench seems to put little to no effort in her role. I haven't yet seen Dench play any other character other than Judi Dench, I think more notice needs to be put on Imelda Staunton in my opinion.
Now this isn't the worst of the elements of the film I have saved that for last. That goes to costume and makeup, now the bits based in the 1930's I'm pretty sure the actors don't have to wear clothes that are quite literally 80 years old? They look scruffy, and out of place even the costuming on more modern time characters is uninspiring. This element wasn't helped by seeing W.E. just before it whose costumes were a highlight. And the "old" make up on the actors was rubber, and you could tell. More gentle lighting could have been more forgiving on this makeup, but unfortunately it was very flushed out and you could see it was fake which completely destroyed the illusion. Once again after seeing The Iron Lady I expected more from this film on this front.
J. Edgar was a very disappointing, overlong and joyless ride. There are some poignant moments here, but they are over shadowed by poor scripting, bad costumes and makeup and uneven amateurish lighting. I expected a lot more from a veteran like Eastwood, but for a convincing portrayal of this historic man Leonardo Di Caprio does deliver, even if the rest of the film doesn't.
Music in the film is fine but by no means spectacular, just your average strings driven arrangement. The camera is handled as Clint Eastwood often does with simplicity, nothing worth noting. Nicely framed and good at capturing the actor nuances, exactly what you want from a film of this kind. The scripting on the other hand was often laughable, especially in more dramatic moments. The "coming out" scene of Clyde Tolson is particularly funny, whether this is to do with bad acting on Armie Hammer's front or just poor scripting would involve re-watching, something that I wouldn't put myself through.
Though acting here is mostly good, Leonardo Di Caprio is obviously fantastic in the title role. Supporting actors are fine but once again nothing that stands out, Di Caprio and Hammer have decent chemistry. Naomi Watts is OK at best and Judi Dench seems to put little to no effort in her role. I haven't yet seen Dench play any other character other than Judi Dench, I think more notice needs to be put on Imelda Staunton in my opinion.
Now this isn't the worst of the elements of the film I have saved that for last. That goes to costume and makeup, now the bits based in the 1930's I'm pretty sure the actors don't have to wear clothes that are quite literally 80 years old? They look scruffy, and out of place even the costuming on more modern time characters is uninspiring. This element wasn't helped by seeing W.E. just before it whose costumes were a highlight. And the "old" make up on the actors was rubber, and you could tell. More gentle lighting could have been more forgiving on this makeup, but unfortunately it was very flushed out and you could see it was fake which completely destroyed the illusion. Once again after seeing The Iron Lady I expected more from this film on this front.
J. Edgar was a very disappointing, overlong and joyless ride. There are some poignant moments here, but they are over shadowed by poor scripting, bad costumes and makeup and uneven amateurish lighting. I expected a lot more from a veteran like Eastwood, but for a convincing portrayal of this historic man Leonardo Di Caprio does deliver, even if the rest of the film doesn't.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)