Social Spectrum are made up of three opinionated individuals who share a desire to let everyone else know what they think about films and film-making. Therefor, we bring to you our reviews on the latest films, old flicks or just some burning topic we really want to express our views on.
20/04/08REC
I have to admit it; I’m not much of a horror fan. When friends suggest we should turn the light out and the sound up for something like ’13 ghosts’, I get incredibly tense, and fidgety, looking around the room at intervals to remind myself that I cant get hurt. So how did I cope when confronted with the realistic feel and altogether larger cinematic experience of REC, the joint Spanish effort of PacoPlaza and Juame Balaguero?
To tell the truth, I was scared. Adopting the Blair Witch style cinematography that has once again become popular, the film makes you feel like you are part of the action.
The film gets quickly to work. We are introduced to Angela and Manu, a TV reporter and her cameraman, covering a late night slot in which they investigate the interesting working lives of a squad of firemen. Wasting no time, we are introduced to the firemen and their station, punctuated by the intrusive alarm. Instantaneously, the whole station is up in arms, and we are swiftly taken to what is seemingly an ordinary call. But of course, it isn’t. Police and firemen investigate a room upstairs which strangely contains what looks like a confused old woman. Until violently, she plunges her teeth into the assisting police officer. Yes, this is a zombie movie, and from this point on, there is no turning back. Relentlessly, the virus is spread through an increasing body count, with the buildings residents, the police and firemen providing plenty of flesh for the zombs to munch on.
Despite the vicious and energetic zombies roaming the building, it really doesn’t start to get gory until the final half an hour. And much of the remaining 60 minutes is spent trying figure a way out, bar a five minute ‘meeting’ of the surviving members. The real drama is created by the outside world that quarantines the unlucky folks inside when they learn about the presence of a killer virus.
The character of Angela is excellently created and very well exploited. Throughout the film, she doesn’t just play the reporter, but she is almost the conductor of the theatre, displaying the same emotions that filter through magnetically to the audience. Her complaints of boredom in the introductory scenes are a message to the viewer; “this is why we’re here, now we’re going to show you something exciting”. Her wild commentary when approaching the incident say, “brace yourself, this isn’t an ordinary call”. Her curiosity when poking the camera round corners and tight spaces tell you, “I’m too scared to put my own head in there”. Her inability to get out of the quarantined building conveys, “We’re going to get eaten”.
Manu is similarly instrumental, his quivering POV camerawork and desire to protect his own skin as well as film the incident, mounts fear and uncertainty upon the audience. Naturally, the camerawork gets increasingly erratic as the intensity rises, forcing you to lean from side to side on the occasions he teasingly shows you only glimpses of what is happening.
I think there are very few weaknesses in this film. It does its job. It’s scary, it’s tense, and it’s inventive, especially when considering that it was shot on such a low budget. And despite a few minor discrepancies, this is a film well worth seeing, one that will please loyal zombie flick lovers and one that other low budget directors can aspire to.
MJS
The Frames
15/03/2008 Be Kind Rewind.
Be Kind Rewind has been, I think, the most commercialised features of director Michel Gondry’s work so far, including many radio/TV spots and billboard ads. Although unusual, it was refreshing to see more attention aimed at gondry picture.
As I sat nestled in the seats of the consuming audience, it began a strange little thing to behold. As with previous films, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and The Science of Sleep, the feeling of character isolation felt absent this time around, instead set up, was a very offbeat comic pairing with our entrepreneurs of the story, Jack Black and Mos Def, of which seemed to produce little chemistry, but none the less, made for an intriguing and entertaining feast.
Set in a luscious backdrop of a worn down New York suburb, the story takes place in a beat video store by the title of the film, and run by the story’s patriarch, Danny Glover, who’s aging shop owner was intent on keeping VHS format on the shelves and refusing to be seduced by the demand of DVD transfer. As I stepped into the store for the first time, there was no ignoring the feeling of nostalgia that dispersed itself back to the day when VHS was king! It was something that immediately grabbed my attention, as did the familiar, bored, and unchallenged look on the face of customer service.
Enter Mos Def, who plays Glover’s bumbling shop assistant. We then later on have Jack Black as the loitering slacker and best friend.
The story unfolds when Def is left with the key responsibility of taking care of the shop, and the problems ensure when accident prone Black, after being exposed to radiation, wipes all of the tapes in the store and replaces them with nothing but static visual. Realising their situation, they form a plan of amendment. Armed with a super-8 video camera and very little time, they set about remaking the store’s entire library at only 20 minutes in duration, per film!
As always, Gondry has been recognised for his striking imagination and worlds full of dreamy set pieces and surreal undertones.
Be Kind Rewind has just that, perhaps a signature move with Gondry. There is definitely more on offer here to play to a broader audience, one being the presence of Black’s comic touch, others being the more accessible humour with the duo’s hilarious retakes on films such as Ghostbusters, Driving Miss Daisy, Robocop, and Rush Hour 2 etc, (which, by the way, features the most hilarious, interesting use of a children’s’ climbing frame you are ever likely to see). These in-movies have their own freshness, and something of complete wonder and joy bestowed to them. Through layers upon layers of sheer visceral visuals and a delicious grainy feel to every frame, you can see the sheer imagination of Gondry’s world come to life.
As narrative progresses, the pair start a cult following with the surrounding neighbourhood who visit the store. Unfortunately for the duo, this also attracts attention from copyright infringement authorities, intent on shutting them down.
What starts as a comic farce, develops into a very touching story when the public/the neighbourhood decide to make their own film together, revealing their sheer love for story telling and being involved in the magical world of movie making, an idea after any films buff’s own heart. Although at first, there seemed a clichéd aura about it, a buzzing of the fingertips started to ignite, and present before me, was a world where anything is possible if you believe in it enough and I couldn’t help but smile as I watched this all come together for what became a rite off passage for these people through their own love of a world they had created.
Happiness comes in small packages.
It was the perfect afternoon’s escape.
MG
The Frames
19/02/2008 The diving bell and the butterfly.
From the cynical cinephile to the passive popcorn muncher, cinema, in all of it’s forms, should always strive to affect the spectator. Be it to make them laugh, cry, empathise or hate; to have any kind of effect is a compliment to any film. It goes without saying that The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (2008) is an effective film.
In brief, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (2008) is an adaptation of a memoir of the same name. It centres around Jean-Dominique Bauby (played by Mathieu Amalric) as he comes to terms with the after effects of a massive stroke, leaving him with “locked in Syndrome”, a state of paralysis whereby the mind is fully functional, but the body is not.
As the credits rolled on The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (2008), I stood slowly, quite shell-shocked. I felt as if I’d had the privilege of witnessing something that I shouldn’t have. I wondered why, and how, this film had affected me. The 'why' became clear just after the embarrassingly human sense of appreciation had left my system. It was pretty straightforward. Firstly, the superbly crafted direction of Julian Schnabel and the dreamy cinematography of Janusz Kaminski. The 'how' is as follows; the masterful use of point of view shots, focus changes and Bauby’s internal dialogue (heard only by you, the spectator) that make you feel just as Bauby would, uncomfortable, claustrophobic, and frustrated.
It is a testament to all involved that the film is so gripping, when we never leave the confines of the hospital grounds. Just Like the man himself, we can only escape into the mind of Bauby, and the film spends a majority of its time there too, jumping from recollection to recollection in order to build a complex man in ‘Jean Do’. We leave his mind only to display the ignorance of two electricians and to witness the heartbreaking reaction of Bauby’s bedridden father, Papinou, as he has his first telephone conversation with his son after the episode. Amazingly, with only two scenes in the whole film, Max Von Sydow manages to steal the film from the rest of the support cast, with his astounding portrayal of a helpless father, forced to deal with, not only his, but his sons condition.
Overall this is an emotionally draining, but incredible, life affirming film, made all the more realistic, by the fine central performance of Mathieu Amalric.
DH
The Frames
15/01/2008 The Return of the Living Dead.
Written and Directed by Dan O’Bannon (of ‘Alien’ fame) and Set in a world where Night of The Living Dead (1968) is viewed to be a cover-up film that George A Romero was forced to make after discovering a ‘TOP SECRET’ government operation to raise the dead, The Return of The Living Dead (1985) was the original Zom-Com.
Originally written by John A. Russo, the script was bought by an independent producer and given to O’Bannon in 1978. Refusing to challenge Romero and make a straight ‘living dead’ sequel, O’Bannon rewrote the script with more comedy. The script is finely tuned and peppered with knowing humour and referential in jokes relating to all Romero movies.
O’Bannon’s script has an anarchic and highly politicised line running right through it. The zombies, like in Dawn of the Dead (1978) are symbolic of the compliant, consumer and media driven, masses. Using this model, the lead characters can be split into conformists and non-conformists. Firstly we have Frank and Freddy. Both employed, Frank, with a wife who cooks pot roasts, is deemed a true proletariat. Freddy, a member of the punk gang, has decided to play the game and work for the ‘UNEEDA Medial Supplies factory (We got ‘em. You need ‘em). They comply, thus they become undead. Conversely, we have the Punks. A bunch of angry spitting rebels. This group becomes our protagonists and battles the moronic cavalcade of brain-dead cadavers.
The Return of The Living Dead (1985) was the original film to represent zombies as all out, quick paced, decomposing, matter munching maniacs. It also coined the intonation and phrase, “Braaiiinnss!” A line used by any self respecting person who finds themselves covered in green face paint with fake blood and mince meat protruding from a slit in their shirt.
The special effects are outstanding; thanks to Tony Gardner (who later went onto produce amazing work on Chuck Russell’s 1988 remake of ‘The Blob’. See plug-hole death scene).The gore levels are gloriously over the top, giving it the vibrancy and playfulness that make 80’s horror so exciting. The acting is equally hammy as it is hilarious, but all performances serve their purpose. Taking all this in consideration is it not time that Dan O’Bannon’s, tongue-in-cheek, homage to Mr. Romero and the undead is given its rightful place in the cannon of zombie cinema.
DH
The Frames
20/12/2006My Drug
It has always been a characteristic of film to be visually attractive, to push our audio senses to new boundaries, and to interpret stories that no other media is capable of. And while a good book can be provocative, a pretty picture, illuminating, and music, captivating, film combines all of these elements while being able to boast the power to move the mind to the edge of its seat. This is the beauty of film.
I have always been fascinated with creation. From nature to a simple jigsaw, it is a great thing to create and to admire the creations of others. And being the curious type, I always wondered, "How do they make those dragons fly across the screen like that?!" or "I wonder how many times they had to shoot that!", and many other questions.
When I was younger, I used to go to the cinema on a regular basis, with my nan and cousins. It was a great family occasion. I saw it as a getaway from real life, and a gateway into a new world where I could simply get lost in the story and come out feeling energised and excited.
One film that had a great impact on my love for film, was 'Jurassic Park'. I watched numerous interviews and 'making of' programs trying to find out how they managed to get a 30 metre tyrannosaurus-rex to run after a speeding vehicle! This still remains my favourite of Spielbergs films due to its energy and it was the first film that really made my eyes light up.
Two more recent films that really spur me on are 'House of Flying Daggers' and 'Pan's Labyrinth'. The greatest thing about these films is the density and richness of the landscapes and colour in the frame. Such radiance protruding from the wall of the cinema almost took me into a trance. Every time I see pictures of this calibre, I don't only want to jump in and be there, I want my name on the credits! To be able to say "I made that", gives me such satisfaction and a drive to get to the top.
It was four and a half years ago that I plunged myself deep into the black hole of film and TV. I call it the black hole because it was just so easy to get sucked in. As soon as I began to explore the technicalities of production, questions started to be answered thick and fast, and I couldn't get working fast enough.
I found that one of the great things about this industry is that there are no solid rules; there are basic rules switching between genres (eg. documentary to action), but even they might be altered depending upon style of presentation and audience. Generally, film is a very experimental world, which to me is so attractive, because so many industries are bound by rules and regulations that prevent expression and creativity.
Although I have now been involved with film for a while, questions are still abundant and many will probably not be answered for years to come. I have yet to experience the thrill of a live broadcast, the major budget epic and the tension of a high risk Hollywood stunt, but there is lots to keep me occupied until then.
I myself have lots of ideas to put to paper and in good time, the best ones will be converted through the eye of a lens. There are new projects arising all the time, and this particular new venture will without doubt provide new challenges and new ideas.
I look forward to writing more blogs in the future, and to expanding our Frames network. Look out for more updates, news and productions on our myspace, and soon, our website. Please feel free to drop a line via our myspace page or theframe_s@yahoo.co.uk.
MJS The Frames
08/12/2006THE BIG QUESTION. WHY FILM?
"It's the weirdest thing, it feels like I've been in a coma for about twenty years, and I am only just waking up." Lester Burnham.
Film has provided so much inspiration and culture to this day, whether it be dialogue that is endlessly quoted, or factors that stick in your head and offer you something to think about. Film offers so much more than just entertainment and popcorn value, it provides a door to be opened into a whole new world……., if you look close, there is so much more on offer.
What am I talking about, you may be thinking to yourselves. Well, I am divulging on many thoughts of how I interpret film today. There are so many films that are loved, it's hard to select one that is superior! However, there is one little film that I have often referred to and studied for 'brain food'. A film that I can honestly say changed my life. I know it sounds crass but it has had an enormous impact on me! American Beauty. I owe much gratitude to Mr. Mendes.
Film has always allowed me to become incredibly passionate, no, seduced is more like it, since I was very young, an age at which a VHS video was a slice of euphoria for me, way more spectacular that any toy or trip to Disney land could ever offer. Every chance I get, I have always sneaked in a portion of moving image from the cinematic table. It wasn't until I applied myself to a screening of American Beauty in the comfort of my own lounge that I finally realised that film was what I desired to be involved in, it hit me like an 18 stone wet fish that this is where I wanted to be! Of course this may sound a bit pretentious, but I have no other aspiration than to commit myself to the film world.
I guess if I had to explain why I love film so much, I think I would have to become a hermit and hide away in a small room, employing my thoughts to a very large book which would really stand out beside The Never Ending Story Parts 1, 2 and 3!!
I don't limit myself to films borne from the seed 'Film America', I have a little piece of my heart reserved for our very own British and World Cinema industry. I don't want to imply through my love of American Beauty, the suggestion that all things great are from America's film industry. Britain has it's own legacy that no one can ever touch, like Mike Leigh, Alec Guiness, Ealing Studios, Alfred Hitchcock.....
I can't completely define British Cinema from these names but it is merely a taste. This leads me to my favourite areas of film – direction and camera!!!! Although I am fascinated with every area of film, from cinematography to improvisation, from mise-en-scene to character design, and so on, I have my own aspiration. To see a whole life through the lens of a camera gives me great satisfaction, but I don't mean in a voyeuristic way, instead to create and even control the world through a lens.
Someday in the not too distant future, I hope to obtain the opportunity to direct many pictures, to create a world that can tell a story which may have an impact on its viewers the same way American Beauty has done for me. Wow!! That was actually a very strong statement, but hey, I have to dream and nothing in this life worth having comes easy!!! If I can leave something behind and contribute something beautiful, then I will be happy.
We have been left behind the ingredients, now it's our time to cook.
mg The Frames
08/12/2006Welcome Home 007
This being my FIRST myspace article, and our page being all shiny and new, I felt that I should share with you something shiny and new that has recently spawned from the screen and into my celluloid drenched existence.
Casino Royale (2006).
When I think of James Bond, I think of smug actors, predictable dialogue; bank holiday afternoons; easy women with ridiculous names; and 'that CGI sequence' from Die Another Day (2002). So you would forgive me for having a feeling of trepidation as I entered the auditorium of the UGC in Birmingham. Bond 21 was about to commence. I am not a fan of Bond for all of the above reasons. In fact, If it were not for my partner, a true Bondonian or Bondite, I would have waited for the DVD and saved £1.50.
James Bond, a man who can stand in an open space while five men spray him with bullets, not one harming him, only then to fire off five shots and dispose of them all. As an eclectic cinepile I can suspend my belief as willingly as the next man in order to enjoy a great action movie, but after 20 films in which Bond always saves the day , always gets the girl and always has a smart arse comment, Am I not alone in thinking that the heir of invincibility that Bond has developed over the years has led audiences to ask the question Where exactly is the drama? If audiences believe a character is infallible then how do we expect him to surprise us with his macho antics or startle us with his witty banter. The answer is he can't, which is also the reason why over the last 10 years, even though box office revenue has been positive, audiences and critics alike have received bond films as they would a toilet seat in the middle of the night, inevitable and cold.
MGM realised the franchise was basking in the doldrums and that the box office would not stay fruitful forever. So they proceeded to employ a few of their own gadgets. Firstly Martin Campbell, director of the well balanced Goldeneye (1995) was once again at the helm. Secondly, along with the usual scribes (Neil Parvis and Robert Wade) Paul Haggis was thrown into the mix to provide a cliché free shine. Thirdly, the original novel, with its simple yet tense plot and dark undertones, this was a much needed choice and an opportunity to begin again. Fourthly, finally and most integrally, Mr Daniel Craig.
It was only 10 minutes into the film that I realised that he was no ordinary Bond. Whilst pursuing a villain, and also a novice of parquet, through a building site, me and the audience witnessed an act of no holds barred Bond. At one point during the pursuit the villain skilfully jumps and swings through a one foot gap above a wall. Following is Bond. The camera cuts to a shot of the other side of the wall. We expect Bond to repeat his gymnastics, but Craig's Bond is different, he is not experienced in the art of parquet, so with all the ingenuity and zest of ten Brosnans, Craig bursts through the wall without skipping a beat.
No Gadgets, No smarm, No nonsense.
Akin to Daniel Craig's perception before the films release, Bond is an underdog; a British institution in more ways than one. A newly recruited double 00, he is full of hunger but prone to irrationality. He brings to the role a deeper and more human side to Bond that has been lacking for so long. Any man who sat in the audience with me that night was imagining the same thing, Not "I'd like to be Bond" (not that they weren't thinking that as well), but rather, " He'd be there for me in a scrap outside the pub".
All the frivolity of past Bonds are dismissed. This Bond realises that he is dealing with the protection of the free world; with life and death. There is no time to smooch with ladies (he encounters only two, one he seduces; one he falls for); make sure your suit is dapper (he is uncomfortable in the tux); and sip expensive cocktails (When asked if he would like his martini "shaken or stirred" he replies " does it look like I give a damn").
Craig's Bond is not afraid to dissimilate himself from the trademarks that have bookmarked the previous films. This is the Bond that society needs. A post 9/11 Bond that in this atmosphere of uncertainty and terror can show true elements of heroism and most importantly humanism. He can take a punch, a kick and even a bullet realistically and still save the day, without materialistic trinkets clouding his judgement. Though Craig's Bond does make mistakes and he has human imperfections, but doesn't true perfection have to be imperfect. This is the beauty of the new Bond, his frailties make him convincing, the audience actually believe that he may not make it. The drama is back, the realism is back, bust most importantly.
