On Monday 20 May I hosted a Q&A with Rebekah Tolley, producer and co-author of new documentary We Went To War. Directed by the late Michael Grigsby, it’s a terrific film and I was very pleased to have the opportunity to raise its profile a little.
Here are some photos of the event (courtesy of Chris Boland), held at the ever-obliging Cambridge Arts Picturehouse. Thanks to all who came along and supported it.
My original interview with Rebekah for TAKE ONE
Photos: Chris Boland
On TAKE ONE’s website, I argue the case for why Cineworld’s buyout of the Picturehouse chain might be a good thing:
Now that Cineworld’s purchase of the Picturehouse chain has been referred to the Competition Commission by the Office of Fair Trading, we all have an opportunity to have our say on an issue with the potential to affect filmgoers up and down the country. Initial fears from Picturehouse customers (us among them) that their cinema-going experience was about to be compromised, or worse, removed altogether in a round of “cost-savings” and “streamlining”, have so far proved to be unfounded. It has been, as promised, business as usual. Assurances from Cineworld that Picturehouse Cinemas would be run as an entirely separate business unit under their corporate umbrella, and that their independence would be maintained, appear to be true, though admittedly it is still early days.
Full article: Cineworld-Picturehouse vs. the Competition Commission | TakeOneCFF.com
There’s much to be said for wallowing in MUD, director Jeff Nichols’s leisurely yet captivating follow up to his 2011 drama TAKE SHELTER. This Southern Gothic spin on WHISTLE DOWN THE WIND is a gently absorbing tale of adolescence gone awry, and boasts a beautifully judged performance by Matthew McConaughey, currently on something of a roll. A clutch of strong supporting performances and a satisfying pay-off make this one of the most purely enjoyable films of the year so far.
Full review: TAKE ONE | Mud | TakeOneCFF.com
Iron Man 3 opened last week in UK cinemas to the collective sounds of ringing tills, rustling popcorn buckets and whoops of delight. It’s one of those rare occasions where multiplex audience approval meshes with universal critical praise. Boasting bags of wit and energy, together with a sympathetic storyline, it’s certainly as good as the first film and possibly the best of the entire Marvel universe to date (though The Avengers remains this writer’s personal favourite). It also wraps up a satisfying trilogy in rousing style (dig those funky closing credits!), leaving the door open to future instalments but providing some degree of closure too.
Looking back, it’s difficult to remember now that the Iron Man franchise was never a sure thing; the character had nothing like the public recognition factor of, say, Spider-Man or the Incredible Hulk. Yet today it is notable for serving as the launchpad for the Marvel Cinematic Universe, an ambitious attempt to replicate the world of comic-books on the big screen by having various characters star in their own film series, while also allowing them to crossover into other titles/films as part of a larger shared story. Facing bankruptcy in the 1990s, Marvel sold the film rights to their characters left, right and centre, making the idea of a shared universe all but impossible; Hollywood studios being famously protective of their properties. As the rights slowly reverted back to them, the idea of a cinematic universe gradually turned from pipe dream to realistic possibility, though questions remained as to whether it was financially feasible, let alone practicable. Would audiences be willing to stay (and pay) for the long haul? What if one of them tanked at the box office?
It was an audacious gamble, but Marvel Studios – the movie producing arm of Marvel Comics, itself now a subsidiary of Disney – pulled it off with a degree of success nobody expected. With Iron Man, Captain America and Thor tentpole franchises all up and running (part of what is now called Phase One), further Hulk and Avengers adventures planned (Phase Two), plus new characters waiting in the wings with their own movies (including Edgar Wright’s take on Ant-Man), Marvel’s competitors over at DC must be drooling with envy. Batman has always brought home the box-office bacon, but success elsewhere hasn’t been forthcoming, though this year’s Superman reboot Man of Steel looks to be a significant first step in building up a serious response.
How have they achieved this success? True, there is an insatiable thirst for superheroes at the movies these days, but it’s not only that (just ask DC). It comes down to three things: wooing the existing fanbase with the use of popular storylines, faithful portrayals of key personnel and a smattering of ‘easter eggs’ for long-time readers; updating their origins and surroundings to make it easy for non-fans to climb aboard; and attracting filmmakers with pedigree and appropriate skill sets to make it work. Marvel have emphatically proven that it’s possible to make their films work for just about anyone, whether young or old, nerds or newbies.
Case in point: Iron Man.
Beyond its blockbuster ambitions, one of the most remarkable achievements of the Iron Man franchise has been its ability to blend real world politics and dangers with the soaring adventure and escapism of comic books. They might not have the inflated heavyweight drama of Christopher Nolan’s lauded Dark Knight trilogy, which similarly layered political elements into its narrative, but then they had no need to. Marvel and DC have always been very different kettles of fish, treating their superhero subjects in their own distinctive ways. Where the Batman films bent over backwards to make its characters and storylines as credible as possible within its shadowy world of corruption and personal sacrifice, Iron Man has been refreshingly carefree in its approach, happy to let the fun rise to the top with a quip and a smirk, though not at the expense of emotion or its contemporary context.
That real-world milieu drives themes that run through much of the trilogy’s storylines; among them terrorism, the global arms trade, global stock markets, backdoor political dealings, and of course super hi-tech advanced technology (which, in the age of Google Glasses, seems less futuristic with each passing day). The third film goes one step further, using bioengineered suicide bombers as the chief weapon in The Mandarin’s arsenal – extrapolating and exploring a real world problem through the medium of a superhero adventure. It’s a neat trick to pull off without making it seem cheap and tasteless.
But the main thrust of the plot in IM3 sees the past return to bite Tony on the ass once again. The arrogance of his former life and his ability to create weapons of enormous power combine to put his life, as well as that of his precious Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) and his countrymen too, in danger. It’s a recipe that’s been used in all three films to various extents, and many other comic-book adaptations besides, but hey – if it works, it works. After travelling his road to Damascus, life’s been far from easy for him – so he’s earned our sympathy.
What’s more surprising is that, in these financially austere times, so many people have taken a self-declared “genius billionaire playboy philanthropist” to heart. He’s almost an updated version of one of those dapper, debonair, gentleman heroes from the 1930s, like The Saint or The Falcon: handsome, resourceful, unflappable, ready with a wisecrack no matter how desperate the situation, and all too aware of how swoony he is. You need just the right sort of actor for that sort of role, which brings us neatly to Robert Downey Jr; the undisputed heart and soul of the franchise, and the man born to play Stark. Audiences adore him, especially those normally averse to superhero silliness. His electric performances have not only raised the profile of a character previously considered to be in Marvel’s second tier, but have also infused a spirit of wit and spontaneity into a massive Hollywood money-making machine – no mean feat.
The actor has spoken in the past about how dialogue was often improvised on the set of the original film as a way of circumventing a problematic script, and that impulsive, almost impudent tone has seemingly carried on through the sequels. Has there ever been a franchise based on a previously existing character so conspicuously steered by and built around its star? For now Downey Jr IS Tony Stark – it’s nigh on impossible to imagine anyone else playing the character. That’s not to say the role won’t be recast at some point – of course it will – but whoever fills those shoes better have damn big feet. Marvel would be wise to keep him onboard for as long as they possibly can.
With Downey Jr currently out of contract, Iron Man may no longer be the supporting pillar of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but it’s done its job. As Phase Two begins, can this venture continue to grow without him? That remains to be seen; if there are wobbles along the way, don’t be too surprised if Tony drops by to check up on things. Let’s hope so – we’ll miss him if he’s gone for too long. Swoon.
[xrr rating=4/5]
Tom Cruise tackles space invaders in Oblivion, a half decent science fiction film constructed from stitched together parts of older and better science fiction films – a Frankenstein’s Monster of a sci-fi film, if you like. While being a perfectly respectable attempt at forging a story that attempts to engage the brain as well as dazzle the eyes, there is nothing here that you haven’t seen before. In fact there’s some fun to be had in identifying its various constituent parts; there are bits and pieces pinched from the likes of Silent Running, WALL-E, The Matrix, RoboCop, Planet of the Apes, Independence Day, I Am Legend, and quite a few others. That wouldn’t be so bad if writer-director Joseph Kosinski had moulded them into something different or added to them with a few new ideas, but no such luck.
That said, it’s refreshing to see a genre piece that has enough confidence to take the time to establish an atmosphere and tone – a throwback to the days when science fiction could still be serious. The terrific production design goes some way to giving it an identity of its own, and there are several arresting images, not least of which is that of a disintegrated moon, its remnants still mournfully orbiting the Earth as though it hadn’t quite realised it had been blown apart.
Oblivion also represents the closest melding of film with the computer game and graphic novel we’ve seen yet. Based on a comic book that was never published, it almost feels like it might have existed in any or all of those media, and which format you chose hardly mattered. Perhaps this is the most interesting aspect of the film, pointing to a growing trend of technological convergence.
The cast are all solid enough, with Andrea Riseborough the standout among the supporting players. As reliable as he is, the casting of Cruise only hampers the attempt to inject real drama in to the story, because his screen persona is by now one of invulnerability and Oblivion does little to examine or subvert that. It’s a little slow in parts, but otherwise worth a trip to see on the big screen.
[xrr rating=3/5]
The late Michael Grigsby’s final film is a follow-up to his 1970 documentary I WAS A SOLDIER, which examined the effects of the Vietnam war on three young men who had returned home. WE WENT TO WAR catches up with the same veterans over 40 years later to see how the passage of time has affected them. It is an outstanding and immensely moving portrait, examining how the burden of war is passed down through generations, affecting not only the soldiers themselves but also their families and communities for years after the event. This toxic pain is shown to manifest itself through an inability to communicate with loved ones and many other depressingly familiar traits: battles with alcohol, drugs, crime, depression and violence. All are alluded to here in a very understated way.
Full review: TAKE ONE | We Went To War | TakeOneCFF.com
Bringing new meaning to the word ‘dumb’, G.I. Joe: Retaliation is as much of a disappointment as its predecessor, though in a completely different way. Where Stephen Sommers’s CGI-orgy of futuristic action provided plenty of visual razzle-dazzle but little excitement, director Jon M. Chu’s sequel changes tack by ditching the gadgets and technology, replacing them with old school pyrotechnics and patriotic flag-waving. And while this approach does raise the pulse a little more, the laughably lazy plot and dialogue make it impossible to enjoy even on a superficial level of escapism. Maybe it will be a case of third time’s the charm.
Full review: G.I. Joe: Retaliation | Cinema Review | Film @ The Digital Fix
Britain’s Hammer film studio didn’t just make gothic horrors and dodgy sitcom spin-offs. In 1960 Val Guest directed his own adaptation of Maurice Proctor’s crime novel HELL IS A CITY, a fast-paced and gritty noir set on the streets of 1950s Manchester. Its lead detective may be a cop rather than a private eye, but this is a lean and mean yarn nonetheless, with two men on either side of the law battling it out ‘up north’.
Full review: Hell Is a City | TakeOneCFF.com
Bryan Singer fee-fi-fo-fumbles the ball with Jack the Giant Slayer, a lifeless CGI-soaked fantasy adventure that manages to make an invasion by giants seem an entirely pedestrian event. One of those projects that was probably misconceived from the very beginning (how DO you make an epic adventure out of what is essentially a silly fairy tale?), the various ingredients fail to gel into a satisfying whole. A weak script, miscast stars and uneven tone result in a stodgy pudding with too little excitement to sustain its high concept. With any luck this is a brief misstep in the careers of all involved, who are capable of far, far better than this.
Full review: Jack the Giant Slayer | Cinema Review | Film @ The Digital Fix
Disney’s return trip to the wondrous world of L. Frank Baum’s Oz, as laid out in MGM’s classic 1939 adaptation of The Wizard of Oz, is a well-judged one, and certainly a lot more commercially sound than its ill-fated 1985 attempt, Return to Oz. In Sam Raimi’s hands, the tale of a circus magician who inadvertently precipitates a civil war in a magical land somewhere over a rainbow delivers a ravishing and emotionally satisfying adventure. This is a prequel of course, which means there’s little doubt over what the outcome will be, but the journey is sufficiently different from – and faithful in spirit to – its illustrious predecessor as to feel quite fresh. All things considered, it just about manages to have its cake and eat it.
Full review: Oz the Great and Powerful | Cinema Review | Film @ The Digital Fix