Summer Movies!

.

This summer is when movie studios bring out the big guns (apart from Oscar season) and some of the best movies of the year come out.















These are the movies I'm looking forward to:

Snow White and the Huntsman

When I heard that there were two directors making live action versions of Snow White, I was not impressed. Then I saw the trailers and they may have slightly changed my mind. The two interpretations have been very different and the huntsman version makes Snow White into a bad ass! Doesn't that bark creature look cute?



The Amazing Spiderman

I thought that rebooting/remaking, whatever it is they're doing with this character was stupid. The Maguire version isn't even a decade old and it just felt like a money grab. But at the same time, Andrew Garfield's character looks and seems far more suited to the Peter Parker role than Tobey Maguire who looked like a 30 year old (which he is) trying to play a teenager when he was in the role. It will be interesting to see how this film differs from the 'original'.



The Dark Knight Rises

The Dark Knight was an amazing film and I have no idea if Nolan can actually top it. The trailer is amazing-looking though so we'll see. I have serious doubts about Catwoman so let's hope Hathaway proves me wrong just like Ledger did. I can't wait!



Frankenstein

Why is it that the Brits are always making awesome stuff all the time? Johnny Lee Miller and Benedict Cumberbatch star in this theatre production, streamed live with them switching roles between Dr. Frankenstein and the monster every other night!



Prometheus

I still haven't seen any of the movies in the Aliens series but this looks interesting! I love sci-fi movies if they're done well and Ridley Scott has a good track record. So I may have to cave and watch those creepy Alien movies. Ah darn it!



And for a bonus, the teaser for Skyfall, the new James Bond movie just came out and I couldn't resist adding it! Quantum of Solace was seriously disappointing so here's hoping the new film meet expectations.



The Great Gatsby

Okay just one more. This isn't out until Christmas but I love me some Art Deco and the whole feel of the 20s. I can't wait to see this. I only hope that it's good as adaptations have more baggage than regular films.



Are there any summer movies you're looking forward to?

"Went the Day Well" (1942)

"Obey my orders and you will not be harmed. Any person who attempts to escape or communicate with the outside world will be shot!"

The sleepy English village of Bramley End has the unfortunate distinction to be the headquarters selected for a German invasion of Great Britain. German soldiers posing as their British counterparts arrive and begin to scout out the town and settle themselves into every house in town as billets. The villagers have no idea their world is about to be turned upside down. What follows is a brutal lesson on the horrors of war brought to the home front. With no hope of outside help, the villagers alone must take on the Germans and win or die trying.

The only reason I even found this film was thanks to the Preakness, a thoroughbred horse race and Movies over Matter who made a post about the movie. I’m always up for a WWII propaganda film so I decided to watch this one and I am so happy I did! In my opinion this is a forgotten gem of a film. Set in flashback, we see a man speaking in a churchyard after the war and telling the viewer the tale of when Bramley End was invaded by Germans. The film was only made in 1942 though so it’s predicting a future possibility of what the world would be like. The outcome is essentially part of the propaganda for moral on the home front.

One of the great things about the movie is that they let the audience in on the con near the beginning. These kinds of films are always nerve-wracking as the viewer knows more than the characters. A great example would be ”Rope” and this movie does have a Hitchcock feel to it. One of the villagers is a Nazi spy, foiling the other villagers at every turn and yet only the viewer and German soldiers know they exist. You can only wait for the other shoe to drop. I did find it somewhat unbelievable that the spy managed to keep getting away with what they were doing. There’s a war on and these people aren’t more observant and diligent? Wasn’t the War Office going into overdrive on the whole “loose lips sink ships” and being on the lookout for suspicious activity? I also found it highly improbably that the German soldiers would have perfect British accents. Though I did like how some of the soldiers didn’t speak as they didn’t know any English and would give themselves away.

The best aspect of the movie was when the Director Cavalcanti played a stick and carrot game with the audience. We’re shown one opportunity after another that the villagers create to get word out about the Nazis and every single one is taken away from them and us, the audience. Every time I held my breath and hoped that this they would stop the Nazis. No one in this film is safe, just as in war and that's what makes the film so exciting.

I was impressed with how the violence and suspense was amped up with every attempt and how it made the plot unpredictable and nervewracking. The pacing was perfect. Too often with action films the plot either paints characters into a corner and only deus ex machine can save them or the plot is so predictable that I can literally guess what one liners characters will shout out. As for the action, I was shocked by the violent brutality. I never expected a movie from the 40s, let alone now, to take some of the risks it does. I can only wonder how audiences reacted when it was first released. Movies over Matter mentions that the US would never have been able to make a propaganda movie like this and they’re right. I don’t think American audiences would have been able to stomach some of the things on screen. I believe this is because in most areas of the US, the war felt so far away. They were essentially removed from the theatres of war. This is only because of the physical distance between the home front and the war front though. Invasion was a real issue for Britain, as they only separated from the rest of Europe by the English Channel. In fact, the Channel Islands, part of the British Commonwealth, were actually occupied during the war.

Usually in war movies, all the audience sees are brave soldiers taking on the enemy. In this film we get to see civilians in action. This always seems more brave to me. They usually have little to no training and if anyone knows how to fire a gun it’s usually because they hunt small game like rabbit. Usually no one has ever killed another human being or looked death in the face before. In this situation they have to put all of that aside and reach deep inside themselves and find the courage to defend their homes, their neighbours and themselves. In fact, I was more proud of their actions than I would have been if they had been soldiers. Class divide is extremely apparent in the movie but is a transparent barrier that has little to no affect on the film. Everyone is united in their efforts to purge Bramley End of the enemy. As well, I was very pleased to see how active women were in this movie. They took part in the action, voiced their opinion to help and instead of being left behind as you would normally expect of a movie like this, they were encouraged to go along.

I loved this movie. It’s a forgotten little gem and was a joy to watch. I would highly recommend it!

Rating: 4.5/5

Macbeth - William Shakespeare

"Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn and cauldron bubble. "

A Scottish lord named Macbeth has won a great victory for his king, Duncan. On his return he encounters three witches who prophesize that he will be King of Scotland. He demands an explanation as Scotland still has a king in Duncan who is still living but the witches vanish. Macbeth informs his wife of this strange encounter and things quickly spiral out of control. The result is madness, murder and civil war.

"Macbeth" is one of Shakespeare's more well known tragedies. The plot is fast moving and propelled by ambition while characters are trapped by guilt and destiny. The initial catalyst that propels Macbeth on his headlong course isn’t fleshed out as much as I would like as we really only get the description that he’s despatched one of the rebels, Macdonald, in a most gruesome manner to hint at the reasoning for his future decisions. In defeating the rebels, Duncan makes him Thane of Glamis though it should be noted the last Thane was stripped of his title and executed for committing treason. Foreshadowing much? My only real issue with the beginning was I felt I was dumped into the story in medias res. At this point I didn’t know if Duncan was a good king or if Macbeth was a loyal subject and I thought it was strange how quickly and easily Macbeth accepted the idea that he would be king even though the witches offered no explanation to him. What is interesting is the course Macbeth chooses because he decides to make his prophecy come true by going after Duncan. He makes his own destiny while also falling in line with the fate set out for him by the witches. Imagine what would have happened if he hadn’t listened to them? And come to think of it, why did they decide to appear to him in the first place and mess with his head? Was this their idea of joyriding, running roughshod over someone else’s future?

The characters of Macbeth and Lady Macbeth I found to be the most interesting because they were more evil than everyone else. I always find villains more intriguing than heroes because their motivations are always so widespread and varied. I liked that once reality set in, Macbeth had a crises of conscience about his decision and we saw that Lady Macbeth was the cold fish of the duo. She calls him a coward and she is the one that thinks clearly to keep them from being discovered. I loved that she was the instigator for action against Duncan! She said Macbeth was ”too full o' the milk of human kindness” to commit the act and had to urge him towards it. Even though he told her about the prophecy she is the one that has to drive him to it. It’s not often that we see a strong female villain taking such a central role in a story, especially over a male villain. Some might call the duo tragic anti-heroes but for me, their original actions colour their characters for the rest of the play.

The language as always was gorgeous. My favourite parts were definitely the soliloquies.

Here's one of my favourites from the play:

"Be innocent of the knowledge, dearest chuck,
Till thou applaud the deed - Come, seeling night,
Scarf up the tender eye of pitiful day,
And with thy bloody and invisible hand
Cancel and tear to pieces that great bond
Which keeps me pale. Light thickens,
And the crow makes wing to th' rooky wood;
Good things of day begin to droop and drowse,
Whiles night's black agents to their preys do rouse.
- Thou marvell'st at my words; but hold thee still,
Things bad begun make strong themselves by ill -
So prithee go with me."

It did take forever to actually read the play though because I was so far removed from when the source material was written that the archaic diction and phrases interrupted the flow of the story. I had to keep referring to footnotes and the introduction to understand everything that was going on. This was my first time reading the play in more than ten years now I feel that I understand the plot, who the characters are and the general gist of the language. If you haven’t read Shakespeare before or not in a long time I would suggest reading a version with annotations and then watch one of the many movie versions of the plays. I felt this really helped as I had a good idea of the plot going into the film and then listening to the dialogue and watching the action made everything far more understandable.

I was hoping to see Banquo’s story play out. I liked the parallel prophecies for him and Macbeth but we never get to see his fulfilled it’s never addressed again after Macbeth goes after him. The play ends abruptly and I wondered if this was deliberate or not. In any case, it’s one of Shakespeare’s best and I highly recommend it.

Rating: 4/5

"Macbeth" (1948)

"Macbeth! Be bold, bloody, and resolute; laugh to scorn the power of man; for none of woman born shall harm Macbeth."

In my ocd stupor over the play "Macbeth", I decided to check out some of the film adapatations including this one and the Ian McKellan/Judi Dench version. I expect both to be extremely different.

In this adaptation, Welles has a stipped down set, with aspects of expressionist architecture. The costumes and props indicate a more primitive culture than one would expect to find in Scotland in 1040. Also, Welles provides a powerful performance with a modified script that was not well accepted at the time.

Made for $700 000 and shot in 23 days, the fact that Welles managed to pull this together at all, is amazing. The sets are a little strange and look like a combination between paper mache and the Batcave. As well, Welles cut and pasted the dialogue, giving lines to different people, introducing new characters and aspects not in the play. When it debuted, the public did not take well to the changes, resulting in a box office disaster. Today, there are a variety of adaptations of Macbeth, not all strictly following stage directions and settings put out by Shakespeare and I think they're the better for it. I love the fact that Welles was willing to experiment with the source material and make it his own.

One of the weirder aspects I encountered was some of the costuming. This is especially true of Welles. At the beginning his hat seemed more suited to a film set in the Far East. It felt out of place for Scotland but that wasn't the first or the last strange piece of headgear seen in the film. Look out for Welles with two strange-looking crowns and one on Lady Macbeth played by Jeanette Nolan.

Another aspect changed in the film was the introduction of Christianity alongside the witches. Modern religion played no part in the play, instead reaching back into the shadows of time for paganistic riturals. Here, it provided a counterpoint to the supernatural aspects of the film but it felt a little stilted. The holy man takes many of Ross' lines, a nobleman who accompanies Lennox in the play, as well as the lines of the Old Man. Welles shows Macduff and Malcolm united behind a sea of crosses against Macbeth and his prophesying witches. The march of progress dictates that Macbeth should lose, even without the proclamation of the haggish trio. Note: One of the witches is actually a man. Look out for a voice that sounds more masculine than feminine.

After reading the play and becoming extremely familiar with all the soliloquies and archaic diction, I knew immediately that Welles had messed with the script. I flipped through my copy of the play, as dialogue jumped back and forth, was assigned to different people and skipped whole sections altogther. The uncut version of the film ran only 107 minutes and was another complaint voiced by Welles' critics. After settling into the movie I found I actually didn't mind his changes. They cut out some of the other less important sections of dialogue and I was very impressed that Welles managed to make everything fit together so well. He essentially managed to create dialogue that still made sense, was entertaining and tightly woven. He kept all the important aspects of the play and cutting all the excess speech pumped up the action. It must have taken forever for Welles to make the dialogue work which just speaks to his genius as a film maker.

My main complaint about the film was the acting. Welles always was a scene chewer but Jeanette Nolan also goes overboard in the DRAMATIC EMOTIONS! department, especially her spot soliloquy. This, tied in with the fact that the film has a very static feel (ie, it's based off of a play), hurts the film. Just watch the feast/ghost scene and you'll understand what I mean. Welles literally flips a table over!

I enjoyed the film, despite some of its deterrants and thought that Welles did an amazing job with the limited time and budget he had access to. If you're looking for a slightly different interpretation of the play than please check out this film.

Rating: 3.5/5

Macbeth Progress

The first time I read "Macbeth" I was in high school where I basically skimmed the play, racing to the end.

I remember the gist of the story through osmosis of pop culture and literature but I really wanted to re-read this, partly for personal reasons and partly because of the Reading Shakespeare project from Breadcrumb Reads. I currently happen to be four months behind but I'm doing things at my own pace.

The play is taking forever to get through, mainly because I have to check on the definition and use of every second word. But reading this way I feel that I get more out of the story and I'm understanding everything rather than skipping over what I don't.

Does anyone else find Lady Macbeth scary? She's murderously ambitious and very pushy when it comes to Macbeth. But she does have some great lines!

"The raven himself is hoarse
That croaks the fatal entrance of Duncan
Under my battlements. Come, you spirits
That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here,
And fill me from the crown to the toe, top-full
Of direst cruelty. Make thick my blood,
Stop up th'access and passage to remorse,
That no compunctious visitings of nature
Shake my fell purpose, nor keep peace between
Th'effect and it. Come to my woman's breasts
And take my milk for gall, you murd'ring ministers,
Wherever, in your sightless substances,
You wait on nature's mischief. Come, thick night,
And pall thee in the dunnest smoke of Hell,
That my keen knife see not the wound it makes,
Nor Heaven peep through the blanket of the dark
To cry, 'Hold, hold'."

Shakespeare consistently leaves me speechless.

Looking through adaptations, people really seem to like making the play into a movie. Also, when looking at some of the actors who've played the title role I'm a bit blown away:

Ian McKellan
Orson Welles
Patrick Stewart

I'm excited to try and watch some of the films though and see how they've decided to shoot the story.

For the moment though, please enjoy these clips!

Blackadder



Orson Welles - Macbeth intro



Animaniacs



Patrick Stewart

Minimalist Book Cover Designs

Rowan Stocks-Moore is a freelance graphic designer with a wonderful eye! His works are beautiful and engaging. My favourite is "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe". It looks simple and yet it isn't. There's so much more going on.

Please check out his tumblr here.

"Black Narcissus" (1947)

"The brothers only stayed five months. Perhaps the sisters won't stay long, either."

Sister Clodagh is an Anglican nun, charged with opening a convent in the high Himalayas, who must preserve her way of life in the face of complications in the form of Kanchi, a young mischievous girl, Mr. Dean, a rough and tumble British agent who tempts Clodagh away from her vows and Sister Ruth, a problem nun with dark intentions. While trying to transform an old seraglio (concubine living quarters) into a school and hospital for the local people, Sister Clodagh struggles to keep the nuns from straying; she alone must hold everyone together.

One of the most interesting characters in this Pressburger and Powell movie is the landscape itself. You'll know what I mean when you see the backgrounds and landscape shots. They are gorgeous and the look was achieved by painting the mountains on large panes of glass. It has a profound influence on the Sisters who aren’t used to such sights, stunning both them and the audience. Sister Philippa touches the heart of the matter when she says: "I think it is this place. You can see too far. I think you either have to give in to it, like Mr. Dean, or leave." No one goes unaffected and their new perspective atop the mountain seems to exert control over them as they begin to act strangely. Sister Philippa plants flowers instead of vegetables, Sister Clodagh dislikes but is drawn to Mr. Dean and Sister Ruth undergoes a sinister transformation, touched by lust and madness.

If you watch this movie for nothing else watch it for the colours! The film practically blooms before your eyes. And it’s not just that the film is more colourful than anything else but it’s more vivid. Co-Director Michael Powell said they shot the whole movie in a studio in order to control the colour on screen though you’ll swear it was shot on location. The lighting and colour palette were inspired by the Dutch painter Vermeer who has some very vivid colours in his paintings. Even a Technicolor corp executive apparently said that the film was the best example of the Technicolor process. Without those striking visuals it’s doubtful the film would be remembered at all. It should be noted though, that the film won Oscars for Best Cinematography and Best Art Direction, well deserved honours I think.

At its heart, this is a woman’s movie. There is first of all Sister Clodagh, played by Deborah Kerr who brings a gravitas and serenity to her role. Then there are the other nuns, including Sister Ruth, as well as Aiyah, the caretaker of the building who once looked after the place for the concubines of the Old General. There is also Kanchi, a young girl who sets her heart on a young prince who has come to be educated at the school and pulls out every stop to get him. Together they form a triumvirate of maiden, mother and crone. The nuns, who have forsaken children of their own, are a mothering influence to the children in the school not just as women but as a symbol of the British Empire mothering her colonies. Significantly, the film was released only months before India gained independence from Britain.

One of the many interesting contrasts in the movie is that it’s about nuns but it seethes with feminine sexuality and eroticism. In fact, Powell said that it was the most erotic film he’d ever made. Consider this, the nuns are establishing a convent in what was originally a house for concubines. Kanchi is a young woman who sees the Young General/prince and uses her body and her brain to attract him. She distracts him at school, dances in front of him and then advocates him to come to her rescue. Sister Ruth is foisted onto Sister Clodagh as a problem nun who may not be suited to the life of a nun. She undergoes the most dramatic change as one night Clodagh comes upon her dressed as a woman, rather than a nun, her hair done up and her lips red with lipstick. She has a crazed look upon her face and what follows is one of the creepiest entrances I have ever seen for any character in any movie. You’ll know it when you see it. To give some context to the relationship between Clodagh and Ruth you should know that Deborah Kerr was the ex-lover of the director while Sister Ruth, played by Kathleen Byron was the director’s current lover. Talk about not having to fake tension!

My only major gripe with the movie was with Kanchi. She was played by Jean Simmons, a white actor who painted her face to appear as a native of the country. This is along the same lines as Mickey Rooney’s offensive caricature of a Chinese man in ”Breakfast at Tiffany’s”. While I'm sure they thought they had good reason to do this, it just detracts from the film.

That being said, if you're a fan of classic movies I would highly recommend this movie. There's so much going on here and a great example of man vs nature with vivid imagery.

Rating: 4.5/5

Thank you, Jeeves - PG Wodehouse

”You know, the longer I live, the more I feel that the great wheeze in life is to be jolly well sure what you want and not let yourself be put off by pals who think they know better than you do."

Bertie Wooster has become enamoured of the banjolele but is getting nothing but grief from his neighbours and his valet Jeeves. After a severe disagreement about the instrument causes Jeeves to leave his service, Bertie departs for the country to practice in peace. He gets caught up in the affairs of his good friend “Chuffy”, current employer of Jeeves, and manages to accidentally get himself engaged to the woman “Chuffy” loves. Madcap hijinks ensue, leaving Bertie to fend for himself without the stalwart advice of his gentleman’s gentleman.

This is the second Wodehouse book I’ve read and the first full-length novel. I had high expectations and to my disappointment found that it didn’t measure up to ”The Inimitable Jeeves”. I don’t know whether it was the fact it was written more than ten years later or that it was a full length story rather than many short stories but I actually found myself getting bored with the story. It wasn’t bad per se, it just wasn’t very good. There were long stretches where I thought the diction and dialogue could have used punching up and the whimsy that I had so enjoyed before was missing. There were several things I found off-putting, not least of which was the continued reference to blackface and racist terms that not only severely date the book but also leave a sour taste after I’d finished the book.

That’s not to say there weren’t enjoyable parts in the book. There were some great lines Bertie spouted off at random, echoing Wodehouse’s genius.

”He uttered a coarse expression which I wouldn't have thought he would have known. It just shows that you can bury yourself in the country and still somehow acquire a vocabulary. No doubt one picks up things from the neighbours -- the vicar, the local doctor, the man who brings the milk, and so on.”

"I hadn't heard the door open, but the man was on the spot once more. My private belief, as I think I have mentioned before, is that Jeeves doesn't have to open doors. He's like one of those birds in India who bung their astral bodies about--the chaps, I mean, who having gone into thin air in Bombay, reassemble the parts and appear two minutes later in Calcutta. Only some such theory will account for the fact that he's not there one moment and is there the next. He just seems to float from Spot A to Spot B like some form of gas.”

I think the main complaint and problem is the Jeeves-Wooster balance is missing. The best part of these books is the back and forth between Bertie and his valet. Usually Bertie’s done something foolish and Jeeves must reel him in to point out the error of his ways. For a large part of this book the two are separated. Granted Bertie sneaks over to ask Jeeves’ opinion on occasion but Bertie is mostly left to fend for himself, therefore creating a very bland story. It’s fries without ketchup, cake without icing, toast without jam, etc. The two of them work best together. I also found the fact that the entire plot hinged on the banjolele being a hated instrument very annoying. Surely there was another way to get Bertie out to the country without ditching Jeeves. Perhaps they could have disagreed with something after reaching the cottage?

Ultimately I think I was spoiled by "The Inimitable Jeeves" which I previously reviewed. It was just better overall so if you are looking to read a Jeeves & Wooster book I would suggest that one.

Rating: 2.5/5

New Pixar Movie!

Who's excited! I'M EXCITED! Okay, maybe a bit exuberant but still I have good reason. Pixar makes great movies with interesting characters , a great plot and amazing visuals. You can depend on them to deliver a a satisfying movie. This summer's Pixar is extra spcial though. Let's check why.

New Pixar movie: Awesome!

Bears: heh heh, bears.

Archery: Hell yes!

Set in medieval times: Count me in!

New Pixar movie set in Scotland: Very cool

New Pixar movie starring their first female protagonist: Super Duper Awesome!

Are you looking forward to "Brave"?