The Butler

With my first day at Ruby Films tomorrow, I thought there would be nothing better to get me in the mood than a trip to the cinema to see 'The Butler'. With Alison Owen's 'The Power of Story' keynote speech, still in recent memory, I felt as though a 'story' (and a true one at that) was exactly what the doctor ordered.

The Butler, vaguely echoes the life of real man Eugene Allen, who served as butler to eight presidents from Truman to Reagan at the White House. In the film, Eugene's echo Cecil Gaines is born and raised in the South where racial hatred was strong. Cecil works collecting cotton with his fellow black workers until one day, when a white man rapes his mother as she screams (Mariah Carey) and shoots his father (David Banner) through the head in front of his very eyes. The lady of the house then tells him she is going to train him to be a 'house nigga' and this, is to shape his future. We follow Cecil as he leaves his injured mother's mind behind, and travels to find work. After breaking into a small hotel for food he finds work by appealing to the butler's kindness, before then being offered a job in Washington DC at a larger hotel, visited by men of greater stature than he could ever have imagined to walk among. That is of course, before he became butler at the White House itself.

This isn't just a story where we want the little man to win. This is a story about pain, about fighting, about over-coming and about justice. It's about hope and love and every other emotion that exists as part of human nature. This is what makes films based on slavery, or the civil war, or on any fight for equality so compelling, so endearing. The fact that only 50yrs ago, black men and women were segregated on buses, in cafes, in education and in the wage that they received for doing the same job as their white equals. A world where it was deemed ok to be violent to blacks because they 'were not equal'. It seems almost impossible that in fifty years (albeit not everywhere) we now live in a world where black and white men and women are free to walk anywhere they wish. It seems completely inconceivable that fifty years ago in the US, myself and Kamal could have been arrested, attacked or even killed for walking hand in hand down the street.

Forest Whitaker, plays the endearing man himself 'Cecil Gaines'. His soulful eyes alone give us the impression of a past filled with unimaginable things. However, Whitaker delivers his lines as though they were flowing directly from his heart, particularly when we watch as his son boasts about the fight for equality and challenges his father's position as butler. We have seen some of the painful past that Cecil overcame to create a future for his children and for that we have a great respect for him. We judge his gentle nature and kindness throughout the entire film, particularly with the arrival of the Kennedy's into the white House when young Caroline drops her doll and Cecil bends to pick it up for her. His relationship with Caroline breaks down a racial divide in a single hit. When he snaps and shouts louder than we have heard the whole film at his (entirely fictional) son to get out, we believe it. We even believe his ability to make the room silent when he's in it. We listen for the politics in the room he finds himself in, forgetting he is there at all. We watch as he bites his tongue for eight presidents, watch as he grieves for John F Kennedy's life after he told him that his son Lewis had changed his heart, watch as he closes the door on the guards that come to tell of his youngest son's death, watch as he finally overcomes the final hurdle in his life - the hurdle to no longer be a butler at the White House and instead, just be a father. His performance is exemplary, supported by a cast, script and indeed truth that only accelerates the rate in which we too feel every emotion that Cecil Gaines feels.

The cast boasts many stars that really makes the film worth a watch. Oprah Winfrey plays a brilliant Gloria Gaines, mother to Lewis and Charlie and wife to the butler himself. Oprah seems to have the alcoholic traits down to a tee, as she prances around rooms dancing, and puts on her make-up even as she goes to bed. We long to see some intimacy or affection between the two parents and when it finally comes, in the form of two ridiculous outfits and a birthday cake, we find ourselves smiling. Until the knock on the door tells of the death of Charlie Gaines, their youngest son. The relationship between the two parents who have witnessed a shift in racial divide, who have fought over the views of their son Lewis and who have lived to see more than eight presidents really hits home when finally, the US elects its first black president, Barrack Obama. Whitaker's shock at hearing the news brings tears to his eyes, and ours, as does the death of his wife and strength, Gloria.

With appearances from Alex Pettyfer, Vanessa Redgrave, Isaac White, David Oyelowo, Cuba Gooding Jr, Robin Williams, John Cusack and the Kidulthood star, Ami Ameen, we see a talented ensemble of British and American actors, set on making this film one of the most memorable of the year. It may not be entirely factual or accurate in reflecting Eugene Allen's life. The family within the film are almost entirely fictional. However, it's accuracy in recreating events and moments of history within the Civil Rights movement is better. For example, the attack on the 'Freedom Riders' bus within the film, acted as a mirror image of old newspaper pictures of the event. Along with demonstrations in cafes, and attacks with water hoses on the street, the film brought to light the unpresidented violence of the Civil Rights movement and what it meant for black families in the US.

'The Butler' has been one of my favourite films so far this year. The 132min production allows time to explore multiple plot-lines and relationships that span the length and breadth of 1960s America. The script is beautifully crafted to reflect Cecil's aptitude at being silent and non-confrontational among a world where violence between races are escalating. As a friend of his son points out, the butlers of the era were the ones fighting the silent battle, breaking down the racial divide by providing an etiquette of hard work and trust among the most powerful institutes of America. 'The Butler' does just that. The film is a credit to its cast, and although it may not be entirely accurate to Eugene Allen and his life, is still a credit to his time at the White House. The script was developed brilliantly with its multiple plot-lines, the score was directed to match the many varying emotions of those onscreen and the cast shine through to hit the home run for this Civil Rights great.

See article 'How true is the Butler?' : http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2013/08/15/the_butler_movie_true_story_eugene_allen_vs_cecil_gaines_lee_daniels_fictional.html

I give the film a 8/10 - it's only not a 10 as there are holes in my memory and I find it hard to pick out the moments that shone like I do usually with films I love. I always wanted Cecil to have his moment with a president and be the one to fight and change things underhand, and that did not happen. I was left wanting: I wanted to see Cecil find happiness with his wife and sons, but of course that is taken away from him. However, as Cecil walks through the White House that final time, we see a man with more pride and honour than we ever could have imagined from that little cotton boy from the South. That was satisfying enough.

Don Jon

Don John, labelled Shakespeare's most passive villain... who knew that his new reputation would stray towards being a long-suffering obsessive masturbator? Of course, the name bears no link to the Shakespearean character but in terms of Jon's 'problem', it seems to fit neatly among teenage males' belief that such an obsession with porn is in fact, a whole lot of 'Much Ado About Nothing'.

Written and directed by the beautifully moulded mind of Inception's Joseph Gordon-Levitt, it was rather a shock to see him take on such a potentially provocative role. In fact, it was maybe the darker and more twisted Levitt as seen during his early years in 'Mysterious Skin' and 'Brick'.

The film is rated as an 18 and it only takes us 30secs to work out why. Heavy panting, bouncing
breasts, breathless blondes and seductive sweaty faces staring into the camera lens with their mouths wide open - swiftly followed by Jon's confession of loving porn as part of his daily routine. He is, as he says, referred to as 'the Don' by pals and wingmen Danny & Bobby. I have to say I love the introduction of the porn sequence highlighting just how much it is a part of Jon's life, with the sound effect of a macbook turning on every time. You know it's coming, it becomes a symbol of what follows so much so that by midway through the film you don't always see the images onscreen but because you've heard the sound, you know Jon's done it again.


Jon is a religious man and has more sexual encounters (both with himself and a computer screen, as well as with women out of wedlock) to confess for. Perhaps instead he should pray to the porn Gods to show him a thing or two about real women, rather than the shameless acts of the 'ladies' onscreen. As Jon opens up his mind to real sex with the arrival of Barbara we see a change in the way that porn is viewed, bringing on an underlying derogatory view to the sound effect of the electronic porn-hub being turned on. With the arrival of Esther, we are not lectured that porn is bad, merely given the opportunity to introduce ourselves to the art of 'love-making' over a 'quick one' forcing us into all kinds of undesirable positions.

For example, Jon seems to be obsessed that real women do not match up to the porn personas of the female form. He insists that you expect a real woman to go down on you and enjoy a good twenty minutes - when in fact real women don't do that. No Jon, real women don't do that - believe or not boys it isn't your divine right, we like you to do some work too!

Esther, from Jon's night class is a character that doesn't hold back from making jokes about Jon's 'problem' to his face and for this we love her. She is unpredictable and strange, which seems a perfect match for our fantasy fanatic, Jon. Perhaps men just do spend too much time in a fantasy of porn induced expectation and fantasy football when they should really be focussed on what lies OUTSIDE of their computer screen.

Jon isn't all bad though, what with his road rage outbursts, mis-timed attempts at singing and ridiculous club-wear.  It reminded me that Jon was a normal guy - not to mention the likeness I have to him when angered by other drivers who fail to indicate! I enjoyed the release that these comedic moments gave me from a man I should really loathe for his expectation of the female role. Don't get me wrong, a woman can be as explorative and adventurous as she likes and enjoy it. I'm not suggesting that they should sit still and do absolutely nothing but when it is expected that a woman should act a certain way and anything else is just deemed a disappointment - well boys, disappointment it's always gonna be!

Leave the tank-tops at home Jon!

Credit where credit's due however, the storyline was fascinating and cast chosen perfectly. Scarlett Johansson, plays the perfect New York wonder woman, what with her exemplary talent of fluttering her eye-lashes and landing those seductive smiles. Well-endowed and full of attitude, we too are drawn to her red dress in a  dark club and drawn in further by the fact she turns Jon away. We are kept interested by the existence of a past that seems to have perhaps tamed her wild-side. Although, with cheeky fumbles leading Jon over-the-edge an left to fend for himself on the way home with some rather damp trousers... perhaps not. It is funny until we realise that with Jon's sister's only line, she is actually a crazy selfish woman who wants Jon to change for her when she won't for him. Well done sis!

Like Father - Like Son

The father, played by Tony Danza, was also perfect. There was enough likeness between him and Jon for it to be believable, as well as the inevitable father/son tension that seems to always surround football. The mother similarly casted to fit the persona of Barbara - they do say you search for partners like your parents!

So, for the most part, we are willing Jon to get over his addiction to online 'entertainment'. When he meets Esther, we suddenly will him to learn. She is laid back, she does not force things onto Jon, or us as an audience - she eases us in. She opens Jon's mind to the idea that 'love-mkaing' is where the satisfaction lies, not in the positions of a seemingly elastic female. It begins as an unlikely friendship that we wish that Jon would accept earlier. It grows, especially with the reveal that Barbara is in fact a bit of a cock-tease, into a relationship we want Jon to learn from. We see a gentler side, a submissive side that before he was not aware of. Jon is exploring, not Esther, and this makes it a newer and more satisfying encounter than it has ever been for him (and us).

It was not the ending we all expected. We expected Jon to get back with the busty blonde and somehow manage to open her mind to getting more adventurous. Instead, the film tames Jon beautifully. And who could play this beauty better than Levitt? Although I do think that perhaps even for me, there was a little too much focus on the fact that Levitt has a good body.

I'm hot

Have you seen my pecs?

Maybe this gives you a better view?

OK JON - WE GET THE POINT!

With it's unexpected ending, the storyline took us towards a climax we did not guess which actually made the film more satisfying. Perhaps we too, had failed to recognise that love-making was not necessarily going to be possible with the blonde. We are proud that Jon has travelled from this...

to this....

I give it a 6/10, purely as the content was not particularly my cup of tea but casting and storyline were good - And I got bored of seeing Levitt's torso!

Mojo the Play

With endless good reviews boasting an all-star cast, a classic script by Jez Butterworth and a charismatic venue, 'Mojo' was a play I was extremely excited to go and see. I can say, for the sake of at least 3 of the cast members reputation in my head, I wish I hadn't.

It takes a lot for me to walk away from a play with bad feeling or disappointment. 'Mojo' was this play for me. Perhaps it was the 50s era that neither me nor my boyfriend have ever experienced. Or maybe it was the high expectation that came with the all-star cast I have learned to love on screen. Or possibly it could be the fact I felt a little under the weather and bought standing tickets for £10 - OR it could just have been awful. It's disappointing that a cast of such talent is selling out night after night, when I feel that they don't really deserve it.

Regardless of whether it was down to tiredness from the earlier matinee, or the fact it may have just been an 'off-day' I began to steadily wonder at the wisdom of all the critics. The characters seemed not to have any genuine rapport either as actors, nor as the off-your-face so-called gangsters they were supposed to be. The 'Cockney' accents were at some times forced and lines often a little expressionless for a group of rock-n-roll bandits that would surely bound together in a crisis such as the one they find themselves in.

So who really has their Mojo?

The play is set in a dodgy drug-filledclub in 1950s Soho and begins on a very important night for the business - with owner of the club, Ezra in a meeting with the terrifying Mr Ross to barter for the young new talent of Silver Johnny. Although we never meet either Ezra or Mr Ross, Sid (Daniel Mays) and Sweets (Rupert Grint) let their gurning cockney jaws loose in an attempt to reveal the status and fear that these men are held in. I have to say, that the attempt at helping us out with the invisible men was useful as the automated telephone options on the line to HMRC - useless. Although it was comedic to see Sid run around stretching his legs too far from his body, I still couldn't work out which one between Ezra and Ross, was the owner of the club, amidst the drug-fuelled nonsense they were speaking. The whole play takes a horrid turn when the body of Ezra is discovered by second-in-command Mickey (Brendan Coyle) in two separate dustbins out-back. Ezra's son 'Baby' then goes (more) off-the-rails, seeks out Mr Ross who is keeping Johnny Silver hidden and uncovers that in fact, Mickey killed Ezra to get ownership of the club. Baby then strings up Silver by his feet, shoots 'Skinny' and we watch as Sid and Sweets escape out back and Mickey...falls over?

Subtle physicality just doesn't work!
PHOTO: Alastair Muir: 

It sounds eventful, but truly, the events were so staggered, or more accurately (the actors staggered through it), that I failed to even care that Skinny died. Perhaps it was after a short break in the performance due to a technical hitch that I assume was to do with the mechanism holding Silver upside down? (Although looking back it might have added entertainment). I applaud the fact that I barely remember this break due to the professionalism of the actors however, soon it was overshadowed by the fact I failed to understand exactly what happened to Mickey, after he took a kick to the stomach from Sid, fell to the floor and never got up. Did he die, did he pass out or was it just some feeble attempt at a symbolic still image?

Mickey was an all round disappointment for me. It's hard for me to come to terms with the fact that perhaps Downton's 'Mr Bates' is adept for the screen but quite frankly, god-awful onstage. His subtle facial expressions may work when a camera is inches from his face but will never conquer an audience sitting three balconies away. He also seemed a little miscast. His character boasted the need for physical presence, for inducing fear and presenting a confidence and status that shakes an audience. Brendan Coyle is not this person. He is more adept at playing the silent and strong type with a quivering lip than he is as a terrifying gangster with weight. If he had sat down and whispered his lines whilst reading them directly from the script he would have been just as convincing. In fact, in terms of his performance, the image below is a great example. He is so wooden and rigid he looks as though a large pole has just infiltrated his nether regions. Ben Whishaw as 'Baby' carries him along the final scenes whilst the other characters represent the perplexed expression I held on my face for most of the performance.

Does Bates have a pole up there or something?

Moving on to Rupert Grint's character, 'Sweets' was carried slightly by his saviour of a companion Sid. Grint struggled to always uphold the energy needed for stage whereas Daniel Mays took it all in his stride. For his stage debut, Grint wasn't all bad but I feel that perhaps without the energy of Sid, we may as well have treated ourselves to some misdirected nativity play for free at the local church. Sweets also has many lines which are written to be interrupted. At these times, it is exceedingly unnatural to hear a character stop abruptly without cause and I only wish he had been directed to fill in the gaps in case he is not interrupted immediately - or at least gone the extra mile t figure that out for himself. Homework won't happen magically anymore Ron! Joking aside, we  enjoy the fact that he has now emerged from the cobwebs of Hogwarts into a world where bad language and illegal substances exist. He seems to thrive upon it too. I just wish that he'd notice he no longer has to hide in Harry Potter's shadow and that he is an actor in his own right. I fear he will only ever be a side-kick.

Mays & Grint in action

Mays (Sid) truly shone amongst the all-star cast. He took over the stage with physicality and enthusiasm, demanding our attention at all times with both actions and words - A particular favourite phrase: 'polite young ladies come their cocoa in public'. He brought the no-shame, jabbering, uninhibited thoughts of Sid to light as though they were his own filthy realisations. His characterisation seemed more fulfilling than the others alongside him. Almost as if he was the only character to have actually done his homework into how to make an audience laugh. 

Whishaw Showing His Moves

It is unfair to say that Mays was the only success. Ben Whishaw not only drew attention to the fact he has a bloody good singing voice, nor to the fact he works out - a lot but also to the reason I fell in love with him in 'The Hour'. He is another actor set to go far. He dominated the stage even when we weren't entirely sure what he was talking about. His unpredictable nature became one of the only things to keep me interested beyond holding my own eyelids open. It truly reflected how his character 'Baby' was unhinged both by the amount of amphetamines in his system and the death of his father. For example, the scene pictured left shows him dancing around insanely. The next scene sees him hold a gun to his friends' faces and hang a boy in silver trousers upside down!

The set provided a little interest with the upstairs of the club represented for the first half of the performance and the lower sequinned walls of the downstairs dance-floor and bar in the second. Perhaps it was better that I got to sit down from my standing position in the second half as I wasn't entirely sure if the rest of the production was making me queasy, or whether it was the height we were stood at. The production sets out to represent an era of amphetamines and rock n roll. I suppose it succeeds because I am still not entirely sure what the characters were talking about for the majority of the time what with their mockney accents and - surprisingly - scripted nonsense. The actors themselves need no introduction, but perhaps they need a little more rehearsal. Character workshops, physicality, expression: all things they would have benefited from (Mays and Whishaw aside). 

I was thoroughly excited for the show, being both a fan of theatre and of the cast but I came out never having been so happy that I only spent a tenner! It was just empty of character. Utterly bursting with weary worn-away words and halted movement. It took most of my energy to just stay awake, feeling slightly under the weather, which meant that any hope of following the whole play was impossible. To conclude, I've no idea which play all the other critics are watching, but it most certainly isn't the same one we saw. There was nothing that stood out for me. I pick out Mays performance as the class-act, but there was nothing to compete. It's been a long time since I felt nothing for a production, but on this freezing cold November night, I would rather have spent time strolling around icy London squares eating ice-cream to elongate the icicles on my nose and contemplating a possible relationship break-down, than attempt to fathom entertainment from Mojo's so-called all-star cast.

Mojo? - they most certainly did not have. 

4/10
I advise you not to spend more than the £10-15 tickets available. I don't know how they will ever justify the tickets they sell for £85!


Take a look at these misguided reviews for another opinion:
http://londonist.com/2013/11/mojo-gripping-from-start-to-finish.php?showpage=2#gallery-1
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/theatre/theatre-reviews/10446422/Mojo-Harold-Pinter-Theatre-review.html

and the only review that I believe has any remaining sanity: http://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/theatre/442988/Mojo-at-the-Harold-Pinter-Theatre-review

Children of the Sun

I share with you a post I wrote back in July. Sorry it's so short, it was a busy time!

At 5:30pm, after a day of work at tuesday's Child TV in July, off I went to meet Kamal at Southbank. After a ridiculously hefty fight to get on the overcrowded tube in the hot weather, I managed to squeeze myself into a carriage. 15mins and I was with Kamal, drinking a well deserved pepsi at the National - living dangerously.

We soon went in, took our 5th row stalls seats (for £5 once again!), and admired the wonderful set. I have to say, I was glad I read the programme during the wait for the curtain. Because I don't feel that I would have appreciated any of the symbolism as much as I did without it. It is fair to say that the playwright Maxim Gorky, truly did not ever appreciate the accuracy of his predictions of people living in cars and the advancement of science in the modern world.

The opening was extremely clever, beginning with a workman trying to open the rusty iron door and then the set flipping round to see the inside of an upper class home. (Pictured).

The main cast represented higher society, the landowner representing the Russian Tsar, the workers representing the lower classes and Gulag workers and Protasov representing the 'improvement of society' that - as we learn later - comes at a great cost.

The story builds, bringing us some truly wonderful characters (and some annoying ones) with the ever-anxious and pessimistic Lisa, being                           the one to represent the desperation of the situation. We watch as innocents from the village are taken ill, as new maids to the house set out to find love and as many tales of poverty and financial division in a society that it surely set for civil war...or at least a fight back to take the upper class down a peg or two.

We arrive at the finale, after a barrage of misread and misdirected emotions and priorities. The scientist, through all his experiments has accidentally poisoned the water supply for the lower classes and now they are fighting back. Representing the storm on the Winter Palace, the civilians storm the grounds, as Lisa goes mad with grief for the loss of her love's life. It ends with Protasov being the only one left inside, with covered rioters entering his home with a flaming beacon. Tied to a chair, Protasov is unable to act when his home (yes, the entire set pictured left) goes up in flames!

Now that, I did not expect! But, what great set design and special effects! I certainly felt the heat, no pun intended.

After some long discussions about the meaning of the piece, going from class divides, to socialism, to education and improvement of society and debating whether it is it always detrimental, Kamal and I travelled home and slept, only to spend the weekend doing something that many would never expect of us....NOTHING! This piece had a tremendous cast, particularly the Nanny and the Doctor and I wish I could see it again as I feel there were many more hidden referrals to history that i could appreciate given the opportunity. A clever piece and one that spoke for society far more than the writer could ever have imagined. I wonder what he would think if he saw our world now!

Not much of a review, but I certainly enjoyed it. 8/10 for sure.

Gravity in 3D

So yesterday I ventured to Cineworld to finally get around to making my own mind up about 'Gravity' in 3D. It followed an endless list of positive reviews including a 96% 5star rating on metacritic and a review for The Independent stating 'Gravity is a fairground thrill ride of a movie, a 3D adventure offering spectacle, scale and a sense of wonder that no planetarium could match.'. 

I for one, am usually against the so-called 'awe' of 3D. I agree with Niki Stevens from JoBlo, 'I don't hate it, nor do I think that it's a completely unusable technique. I just think that we are using it too much for the gimmick factor'. (See more at http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/director-alfonso-cuaron-thinks-most-3d-films-are-crap-technique-is-completely-misused). It is just that - a gimmick. But Facebook exploded with people telling me that Gravity was different. So, I thought I'd see for myself.

It certainly didn't help that the cinema began by projecting the wrong reel, in 2D instead of 3D so we actually watched the first 20mins of the film twice. This was annoying. However, they soon sorted the issue and we watched from the beginning in 3D. The difference...those stars in the distance looked a little bit further away, a little deeper into deep space.

I have to admit, that although my overwhelming conclusion is that the film would have been just as good in 2D for me, there were some nice 3D moments. For example, it did help now and again to portray the disorientating nature of space. Four particular moments stood out in 3D for me. The first, was the debris as it came hurtling through the depth of the screen, just enough to make you blink. The second, the floating objects within the shuttles that added a humanity to these now deserted vehicles.

The third, was the PoV shot from inside Ryan's visor. Here we were treated with yet more disorientating visions (or rather lack of it) as the visor seemed to swell with smudges and the condensation of our own breath. You too felt claustrophobic, as though you were floating around panicking in a restrictive spacesuit with them.

The final moment, was when she cried. So many sic-fi films have got it wrong when it comes to crying. They lazily wave it through post-production as tears are allowed to roll down characters' faces...when of course in space, they wouldn't. Gravity gets it right, as tears fly off into the cabin proving a beautiful reminder of her pain and desolation in an otherwise undisturbed setting. So I guess 3D wasn't completely lost on me. It was a nice touch, but I still think that although I liked them, some still prove a little gimmicky.


So what about the story then? I think it hard for any film that consists of only one or two characters to keep the interest. Gravity's success comes with a backstory of pain and longing and a continuous line of action ensuring we are not given enough time to get completely comfortable anywhere but the edge of our seats. I feel though, that this is mainly to the genius of the sound design which adds tension I did not expect from a story about a place where there is no other life but a nearly naked Sandra Bullock in a ridiculous halloween michelin man outfit. The story is extremely repetitive however, as it becomes the

norm to always do things just in the nick of time. 'Oh no the spaceship is blowing up, to the lifeboat!'...and of course, she locks the door behind her at the very last possible moment every time. And another thing, SHE REALLY NEEDS TO LEARN TO GRAB ONTO THINGS BETTER! The amount of times she was flung towards objects to grab onto or die and ended up hurtling away from them instead, told me that maybe she should have practiced the monkey bars a little more as a child!

Jokes aside, there were yet more moments to cherish. In a story filled with the delayed unveiling of Ryan as a mother, we were presented with some truths we perhaps did not expect. The symbolism of

maternalism became increasingly significant throughout, particularly with one beautiful shot that sticks in my mind. As Ryan enters the shuttle after a close shave with the lack of gravity in outer space (one of many obviously) she strips of in desperation at being free from the confine of her oxygen-less prison and allows herself to float. With the entrails of various shuttle equipment behind her, she floats blissfully into the beautifully symbolic position of a baby in the womb of its mother.
She was safe ... for a moment.


The longing for survival is always a story to keep us hooked, unless its in a broken down car filled with  OTT teenagers that split up and look for help in a dark forest. Then...they quite frankly deserve to die. Gravity, with its use of sound transports us as an audience into space too. I couldn't put it better than Geoffrey Macnab for The Independent 'Space is silent – and this enables the film-makers to play ingenious games with sound editing and music. We hear country music. There are rumblings and reverberations on the soundtrack. Steven Price's electronic soundtrack accentuates the eeriness.'  (read more here: http://tinyurl.com/nbtb26z) The team did a fantastic job in creating all those sounds that prick our hears to the sound of hope at any crackle of a radio. Some awards should most definitely be swinging their way.

The casting was clever. We all know the faces of Sandra Bullock and George Clooney, even when

hidden behind a sweat-smeared visor. We enjoyed the break in panic that came with Clooney's character. It allowed the tension to rise and fall rather than remaining the whole way through so that we fell away from clenched fists and a sweaty brow and got bored. It ensured we stuck with it. Although I have to say, thank God that his return to the lifeboat shuttle was a hallucination/dream! If he had made a miraculous return I don't think any audience would forgive the sci-fi cliche! So, they get a little credit for avoiding that one. We enjoyed his straight-thinking and comedic approach to inevitable death and instead were treated to Eastern radio stations and relentless jokes insisting Ryan was attracted to him.

It was certainly not the best film I have seen this year. It had some 3D that was worth watching, and some that wasn't. It had a story that seemed repetitive yet glowed in moments of sentimentality and drive to get home. It was about longing, about loss and about fighting to overcome it. I think we can all associate with that.

I'd give it an 8/10... although I must say that without the genius and intricacy of the sound design that would certainly drop to 6/10. Give those guys a pat on the back!

(All Images are Owned by Heyday Films & Warner Bros.)

After Lucia

With 'After Lucia' reigning in the good reviews after it's run at Cannes and Chicago and with some beautiful stills online I was sure that both the script and the look of the film would please me. I wasn't necessarily wrong. However, if you're looking for one of those optimistic Studio Canal stories, this most certainly is not one of them.

'After Lucia' is a perfect example of when sometimes, a script is better because of what is not said, rather than what is. It is a strong bearer of the 'silence speaks louder than words' philosophy that a lot of indies take on. It does it with precision, with perfection. We are almost driven mad by silence, as I am sure main character Alejandra is too. We are left alone with our thoughts, our wishes, our anguish... as she is. In this case, silence disconcerted the audience into a feeling of unease and uncertainty. Scenes often go from being subtle and symbolic to quite volatile in seconds. 

For example, the very first shot of the film is shot from a single angle in the back of a car and lasts a good five minutes. We see a man (who we later find out is Alejandra's father and the husband of the late Lucia) as he gets back into the car that killed her once again. We watch him drive for minutes that seem so long we wonder if the shot will ever change at all. Then abruptly he stops in the middle of the road, gets out and walks. Subtle to volatile, example 1. He is clearly a broken man. The silence beautifully left it to a willing audience to decipher the meaning of this act. It was later revealed that without wife Lucia he just does not seem complete. 

The film is mainly based upon the character of Alejandra, the daughter who has taken on her mother's role of cooking and cleaning and has recently moved to a new city with her father. Here she is forced to make new friends, which at first seemed easy for her. Until one night at a party when she has a bit too much to drink and ends up in a dark bathroom fumbling around with a boy she likes on camera...only she is not the only one who likes him. 

In the weeks that follow, the jealous girls that once were her friends circulate teh video, tease her and call her a 'slut'.

They cut her hair, they make her eat cake made from shaving cream or toothpaste or something similarly undesirable. We are screaming for it to stop. For her to go wild and kill them all.

What a dilemma. For a child to care so much about her father who is struggling to find his feet in his new restaurant without his beloved wife, that she holds back telling him of her pain. It's painful to watch as she suffers in silence. Almost too painful.

The final straw for both the audience and Lucia is when all students are told that they must attend a school trip. Of course Lucia is inevitably placed with girls that dislike her. She follows their every command in fear of dealing with the consequences if she doesn't. She goes to change in the toilet where the girls lock her in. 
Not for seconds, 
nor for minutes 
but for hours. 

Here the director's choice to film from one singular angle, truly allows us to grab a hold of time. It seems to stop. It seems she is in there forever. Ignored and insignificant. Still shown from the same angle, her undesirable roommates throw a party and others (who also used to be her friends) even enter the bathroom to urinate and then willingly pull the cupboard back to barricade her in. Then came the thing that saw even my boyfriend rise in anger (he is usually relatively calm during films). After all this, when we were pleading with Alejandra to go mental and kick back... the fat kid whom we have learned to hate during her torment enters the bathroom. With Alejandra curled up trying to sleep in the shower we are made to watch as he unzips his trousers, slides back the shower door and (although we don't see it) rapes her as she struggles and tries to kick out. 

The next shot we see is him doing his flies back up and pushing the cupboard back over the door. Here comes some tremendous character direction in such a simple shot. I remember being drawn to him, watching his face to see if he regretted it. He was proud of it. He was laughing. She is completely alone. She has nothing left. No fight, no dignity, no hope. It was horrible to watch, even if we didn't graphically see what happened. We knew. We knew that that was it for her. She didn't care anymore. This was the point for me that the whole film seemed to mirror it's single-scene volatility. And it continued...

The kids then go to the beach at night where they drink and two of the boys think it's funny to urinate on her by the bonfire. By this point I was beyond noticing the skill of the cinematographer and was simply aching with feeling for this poor broken young girl. They all decide to go swimming because it will seem weird if Alejandra is the only one that comes back soaking wet and smelling of urine. They go into the choppy sea and Alejandra vanishes out of sight. They think she was dragged out to sea. As an audience we are not quite sure either. I didn't know what was better. For her to allow herself to be dragged out to sea or to face more suffering. At this point I realised I had been clenching my boyfriends hand for at least 20mins. 

We then watch as the father is informed of the sex video of his daughter. Another singular static shock as the father sits watching his laptop.                          We watch as he tries to do

everything normal to find his daughter and when that reaps no rewards, he snaps. Out of pure torment and desperation he kidnaps the boy who filmed the video and bundles him into his car. He refuses to talk to him as the boy pleads to go back to his parents. Her father stays silent still. We watch as he then bundles the boy into a boat and drives out to sea. Still silent as the boy cries and pleads that he is sorry and that he wants his parents. With his mouth gagged and arms bound Alejandra's father finally stops the boat. We are not sure what we want him to do.

By this time we have seen that Alejandra is in fact alive. She travelled back to her old house and is tucking in to some snacks on her old bed and curls up to sleep, no longer caring about anything or anyone. 

We return to the boat, where the father stands up, picks up the boy, still whimpering in the otherwise hauntingly silent scene and throws him into the sea before starting the motor and driving away. We are left shocked. To see that this man has gone so far, out of pure desperation and unbearable loss, is traumatising even for us. We want him to be punished, but we are left wanting. Just as Alejandra was.

We want everything to be ok. We want him to find her, or her to find him. We are left pleading this is not the end... the film ends. Her father does not know that she is alive at all. Although, after her experiences, how alive is she really? She is a shell of her former self. 

As the credits rolled both me and Kamal outburst in frustration at the fact no-one helped her and that there was no happy ending. I tell you what, if this film was used in an 'anti-bullying' lesson in secondary schools, no child would ever dare to humiliate another human that way. Not if they reacted the same way we did. We were aghast. I was even more aghast that it was not the fat boy who had raped her that died. I wanted him to suffer. And that is extremely out of character for me. I almost understood Alejandra's Father's mindset as I too was raging at the fact that no-one seemed to be helping. I too wanted him to take matters into his own hands. A tremendous script, not necessarily of words, conquered the morality within me that I hold so highly. The 'Sound of Silence' was truly the focal point of this icy success. 

'After Lucia' left me feeling extremely angry. I was frustrated with the injustice of Alejandra's treatment, at the unfinished story and at the inability I had to change the outcome. The lingering camera shots meant that every facial murmur was picked up and this truly added to the beauty of such a heart-breaking and demoralising film. The sound design was perfect. We waited for that outcry that never came, for that emotive music that will somehow redeem the horrible silence we were witnessing during those harrowing moments we wanted to run into the screen and stop. It seems that the film achieved every reaction from me it set out to achieve and that is testament to some great casting, some minimal camera shots that forced us to focus on the characters, some extremely emotive eyes and a thoroughly personality-thawing production. 

And I thought that Anna's fate in Downton was as bad as it could get this year?!

'The Power of Story' - Alison Owen

On 18th October, nearly a month ago now I sporadicly attended one the London Film Festival's Keynote Speeches. Held in an indie cinema near Leicester Square, film enthusiasts gathered to hear producer Alison Owen speak about 'The Power of Story' in today's industry.

For months I have been telling others that I believe the reason that the industry is failing as many say it is, is because there is less money spent on good scripts every day. Instead it goes to 3D and vfx gimmicks that wear off after an audience has seen it once. I wanted her to tell me it wasn't the end for good stories and that the career I had set my sights on, was all going to be ok.

Her talk was a humorous one, drawing upon comedic anecdotes and comparisons that beguiled us. However, there were some quite personal reveals also. When speaking of the films she has worked on, she revealed that almost every one of them has been linked to something she wanted to take hold of in her life. She believed that new release 'Saving Mr Banks' was about her children but during filming, she took hold of a new meaning for her work. She instead began to email her father. Every day she would write to him and he would read it. During filming, her father fell ill.
She continued on set but suddenly felt a dramatic urge to fly home to him. She arrived by his bedside and laughed with him. Only hours later, he died, in her arms. She revealed that without 'Saving Mr Banks' she would not have said goodbye to her father. In a room filled with these iron-hearted journalists and life-jaded professionals I felt feeble, when all my being was holding me back from tears.

But then, it hit me. That was the reason I wanted to work in film. I remember seeing films and being drawn to tears and learning things. I learned about myself, about others, about the past, about the present. I learned of real things, real events and of things merely a figment of someone else's imagination.

I have never been so glad for attending something. She had inspired me once again and reminded me that stories are still important. I have always believed that stories have been a part of our nature since we were cavemen and will continue to be, until we are cavemen again. As the Hollywood reporter says 'Owen theorized that the internet should not and could not be regarded as an enemy to the movies, describing it simply as a new "container'. 

When so many others fear the internet and that it will strangle the breath from the industry we all love, it was nice to hear someone present it as another container: another cinema, another DVD, another novel - not a nuclear warhead set on destructing the entire film infrastructure. 

I was so inspired that I set about emailing Ruby Films as soon as I arrived home.

I wonder if at all there was any possibility of you passing on this email to Alison Owen. I was at the Keynote Speech 'The Power of Story' and felt that finally someone was transcending the notion of VFX gimmicks and capitalising on existing franchises, into real cinema. I just wanted to thank her personally for that.

I also heard her mention 'The Fury' about the suffragette movement. I am currently developing a script based on a transcript of my great great aunt, who happened to be close friends with Sylvia Pankhurst, suffragette. I wonder if at all there was the possibility of gaining some development experience within the team as my interest in the subject matter is truly great. I love a good story, one with struggle, one with torment and one with passion and reason to fight. I feel that the suffragette movement gives us all of that. I have many ideas I wish to develop, and development experience within the drama genre would give me a greater understanding of exactly how to go about it.

As well that, I too would like to submit my CV to Ruby Films for any upcoming opportunities as a runner. I have had development/research experience in fact and fact/ent. I have had production running experience for live shows and have just returned from Amsterdam where I was employed as a Production Assistant for IBC TV News. I have attached my Cv for you to consider.

Furthermore, I would like to thank Alison for reigniting my faith in the industry. It is nice to know that so many still believe in stories over gimmicks. I would absolutely love to gain some more relevant experience with Ruby Film as drama is truly where I want to steer my career. It is a love and passion of mine and I would love to be considered for any opportunities you may have,

Would you have guessed that a week later I'd be at Ruby Films agreeing to do three weeks work for them in December?! It was obviously meant to be. I only thank Alison for sharing that emotional story with us all, along with a few moments from the film itself.

I can't wait to see 'Saving Mr Banks'. Be sure to check back for my review in a few weeks!

Those at the BFI LFF Premiere of 'Saving Mr Banks'

Rumculls & Ragwater

On 1st November myself and Kamal failed at the romantic evening we should have been having for our second year anniversary. Instead, we postponed to the 2nd November where we treated ourselves to a challenging hangover recovery and an evening of theatre in Greenwich on a cold and gusty evening.

With Blackheath's fireworks lighting up the not-so distant sky we stood hand-in-hand beneath the shadow of the Cutty Sark waiting to go in. After a cheeky beverage of Frulli (strawberry beer - it's amazing) that is.

I was extremely excited as it would be the first time since moving to greenwich, that I would enter the Cutty Sark, and it was to see a performance! Secondly, the performance was by 'The River People'. Now, the reason this is so exciting, is because two years ago, I ventured to the Edinburgh Fringe with some friends of mine to put on a production called 'Last train to Wigan'.
(Check it out here http://edinburghfestival.list.co.uk/event/227597-last-train-to-wigan/ )

Little Matter

During our stay in Edinburgh, we had a little time to indulge in some other performances around the city. It was here we came across 'The River People'. Of all the theatres they could have chosen to perform in, they instead parked a caravan in a hidden courtyard locked with a key and placed their audience on pillows and blankets in the warm and incense filled awning. Here I saw their charming puppeteering and musical genius amidst a folk-tale frenzy of some truly beautiful theatre in, 'Little Matter'. I only wish I could link you to a recording of the performance because it was honestly beautiful! Perhaps even the best I've ever seen.

Anyway, so that is the act they had to follow and I would be lying if I said they had succeeded. I was unsure even when booking, mainly because of the word 'cabaret' existing in its synopsis. However, with the performance that had preceded it, I was sure it would be a hit. With it being in the Cutty Sark too, how could it not be great? However, I was not hit with the same calibre of ammunition I had been hit with in Edinburgh. The puppetry they spoke of and showed in the trailer, was less inspiring and this time only consisted of some items of clothing used to identify different characters. You can view the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMpPcCOKYLQ

It was an evening of song and I for one, really find it difficult to follow a story when it is carried purely by song. Mainly because I become so drawn to the talents of the musicians in this case,
that I forget to listen to the story and therefore find myself a bit lost. I also felt myself listening for faults in vocals rather than focussing on the introduction of the next character. I felt as though I had been left behind whilst the rest of the audience had been captivated. I was a little disappointed.

Don't get me wrong, there were moments of brilliance for me too - even if I was trailing behind the others. The lover's goodbye song was beautifully sung and acted. I had just - or rather - they had just set the bar too high in Edinburgh. I was grateful to finally see the extent of their company and enjoyed the many musical talents of all of the cast. Seeing them all play a least three instruments each, blew me away a little to say the least. A particular favourite character was the owner of the bar, her voice was fantastic and she really had me laughing both with her scripted jokes and those that seemed a little more unpracticed. I just wish I could have grasped the mystery and gusto of the story they were trying to tell!

I give this performance a 6/10. I really hope that the upcoming tour of the show is a success as the company are truly very talented. They are masters at enchanting their audiences by making them feel intimate and comfortable in some sometimes strange venues. This performance was not necessarily the performance for me, but I do look forward to what comes next.

Because be certain - They will be back again - And so will I!

The Company

Until the Night

I do a lot of sporadic spending on play.com when it comes to DVDs. Why wouldn't I buy them if they are under £3? I'd rather spend £3 to watch a film without adverts and in its intended quality than suffer some foreign subtitles and a dodgy stream online, wouldn't you?

Having said that, I thought all of that.... until I bought this film: 'Until the Night'. I still genuinely struggle to be able to tell you what it's even about. The basics are, there are two couples having issues, two of them used to know each other. When things get rocky, they do silly things like sleep with prostitutes, drink and throw things. But that's about as much as I can fathom. On the front of the DVD case, comes a rather fitting one-liner; 'We are all a little bit crazy'. Why yes, we are...because this horrific film was made into a DVD! And the DVD case was clearly made on publisher!

I lost count of the amount of times I saw a boom in shot, when all they were trying to achieve is a two-shot of lovers on a rooftop. There was also the unnecessary use of a jib, tracking back as the scene went on. Normally I would delve into the inner meaning of this camera movement but I think it was more of a 'let's use it coz it's cool', kind of a decision. Would it really have cost them that much more to reshoot that singular scene? Boom in shot... check. Framed completely to the left for no reason... check. Pointless use of equipment... check. Some bad improvisation... check.  In fact, was there even a script at all?

BOOM IN SHOT AT BEGINNING?

Boom at end... I don't even care anymore.

In fact this blog entry was a slight waste of time, I am not telling you anything about the film, as I am not entirely sure there was one. It's like some film student found some left over footage on an SD card and decided to throw them together on a timeline, put some of the stills on a word document and then fell asleep on the keyboard. He woke up, and there he was selling it on Play.com.

Is she - talking to me?

Would be solved by THIS GRAPHIC!

About the only thing I remember, is the use of a video camera at the beginning of the film. A woman speaking utter tripe down the lense, when I wasn't sure if it was even supposed to be a video camera due to the lack of this graphic. When it clicked that it was, it still made no sense in keeping with the rest of the cough 'narrative'. I never did find out what she was talking about. Again, it seemed like a left over take from a youtube video accidentally fell into the timeline of this absolute pile of 4:3 pig balls.






What more can I say? There is a shot of the sea, a shot where they successfully managed to use the dolly and track when walking through a deserted city street (ROUND OF APPLAUSE PLEASE) and then some naked ladies posing for a photographer. If that's your kind of thing, then great. For me though, it's complete lack of script, meaning and well...anything, left me suicidal at the thought I'd wasted A WHOLE £3 ON THIS S**T! THAT'S TWO BUS FARES YOU A**HOLES!