Final Reflection

After being tasked with writing reviews after my initial media diary, I decided to explore two films that I hadn’t seen before to review. As a big fan of Brian De Palma’s work, I sought out an earlier film of his that I hadn’t watched before, Phantom of the Paradise and chose this as one of the films I was to review. This inspired me to check out even more of De Palma’s earlier work, and to look in to films that this had been compared to. As well as Phantom of The Paradise, I also bought Punishment Park, a psuedo-documentary from 1971. I enjoyed the former mentioned film a lot more than the latter, though Punishment Park did leave me feeling a greater emotional response to it and encouraged me to check out The War Game, a film in a similar style by the same director, Peter Watkins. Buying these two films on blu-ray inspired me to look into more of the “Masters of Cinema” collection and has helped broaden my horizons when it comes to future film purchases.

 

After my media diary reflection and the conclusion that I had not seen enough films at the cinema, I was inspired to seek out Amazing Spider-man 2 and Godzilla in order to review them for my blog. I could have branched out into some different films to do this, but I felt their blockbuster nature contrasted with the other two films that I had reviewed.

 

For my last review, I chose to review the latest (at the time of writing) episode of Game of Thrones. This proved difficult as it was a single episode within a season, and the brunt of the challenge came from assuming my audience already knew previous details of what had happened but to also attempt to give brief reminders.

 

The cinema screenings with the unit helped me to see some much anticipated films, including two of my favourites of the year in Captain America 2 and Grand Budapest Hotel. The interesting ones for myself were Long Way Down and Need for Speed, as these forced me to step not so much outside of my comfort zone, but to give two films a chance that I would not have watched otherwise. Although I did not enjoy these films, I was glad to have the experience of watching them and writing personal reviews for them helped me write a negative review, as I had previously only written positive ones for myself.

 

The unit also helped to influence me in my review writing, and I have started reviewing films briefly to myself as soon as I have watched them and then a day later. This has greatly helped me learn not only about film as a whole, but on my own personal cinematic preferences.

The Laws of Gods and Men

 

As a die-hard fan of Game of Thrones, hairs were raised when Braavos was featured on the opening title sequence for Episode 6 of season 4. The opening shot featuring the Titan of Braavos fills the entire screen, this is our first look at Braavos in the show, though it feels as if it won’t be the last. The show opens with book-reader’s fan-favourite (and the one true King of Westeros) Stannis Baratheon waiting in the Iron Bank’s lobby. The Iron Bank are seldom mentioned but there is also a sense of awe when they are. They are the central hub of finance in the Game of Thrones world and possibly the most powerful institution, even viewed above the realm as shown in Tywin Lannister’s fear of them in the previous episode.

 

Despite being a bank and purportedly neutral, we see that the Iron Bank are engaging in some politicking with Stannis Baratheon, making even this self-proclaimed King wait in a lobby until somebody is ready for him. This power-play already shows the intentions of the Iron Bank, they will not be pushed around by any Lord or King. Through Davos Seaworth’s brilliant speech Stannis manages to get the Bank to fund his endeavours in order for them to regain back their Lannister-sunken wealth. Everything is looking a bit bad for the Lannister’s right now, whose own gold supplies are currently dwindling after Joffrey’s extravagant “Purple Wedding”.

 

In Meereen we see several sides to Daenerys Targaeryan. At first she has a child-like eagerness and self-satisfaction to her royal duties. She overlooks the first with pride but her face soon changes when she realises the scope of what she has gotten herself in for here and possibly how much more work she has if she ever actually managed to get over to Westeros. Despite her just-but-fair ruling of Meereen, we see a sympathetic side to her as she allows a Meereen resident’s father to be taken down from his crucifix. The scenes are slow paced enough without Daenerys’ titles taking up a fair chunk of them.

 

The scenes at the Dreadfort were the highlight of the episode until the finale, a broken Theon Greyjoy attacking his sister when she tried to rescue him, a sister who had just travelled weeks by boat and gathered many of the best soldiers the Iron Islands had to offer. I see this as the first true look into “Reek”, and just how broken he is. Previously he was just obeying Ramsay’s orders, but they could simply be interpreted as nothing more than him not wanting to lose any more body parts. In these scenes we see that he would rather attack his own sister than risk the wrath of Ramsay Snow that he knows all too well.

 

The highlight of the episode, however, is none other than Peter Dinklage as Tyrion Lannister. Some may say a tad overacted but Dinklage’s caricature of a mad-man on the edge of snapping fits perfectly within the Game of Thrones universe, where nothing is ever on a small scale. The most heartbreaking moment is not his screaming at the highborns in the crowd or Tyrion’s own admittance of his “crimes”, it is the whimper in which he pleads with Shae. Tyrion had cast her away for her own good, and she was just too stupid to see it. The calls for an Emmy for Peter Dinklage may by some be called premature, but if the next few episodes are as good as the last 10 of this one, he might as well be given it now.

Phantom of The Paradise

Brian DePalma’s eclectic and adventurous career remains amongst the unsung victories in Hollywood, from his horror masterpiece Carrie to the blockbuster franchise starter Mission: Impossible, he remains one of the most underrated American directors of recent memory. For fans however there is one that stands shoulders above the directors work, that of the truly unique, endlessly creative, boisterous and seminal 1974 rock-opera The Phantom of the Paradise.

 

Effortlessly crafting elements of the works of Mary Shelley, glam-pop, greaser culture, Faust, The Cabinet of Dr Caligari and other German expressionist cinema, De Palma revels in the world he has created. An amalgamation of hundreds of years of literature and music, The Phantom of the Paradise often threatens to derail, but the sterling work of Paul Williams and De Palma bring viewers back into this hypnotic tale of lust, musical devotion, and the true cost of success.

 

The remarkably simple story of a musician selling his soul to a record mogul with the hopes of creating the next big thing, Brian De Palma’s script wittily satires the entire music scene of the late sixties and early seventies. His operatic staging of dramatic scenes, his embracing of sixties kitsch and loving tribute to classic horror and science fiction films (including Phantom of the Opera, and the films of Mario Bava) all collide into a film that defies convention to create a wholly unique visual and aural experience.

 

The influence of The Phantom of the Paradise can be felt throughout modern cinema, from the dreamlike, elliptical narrative to the wilfully broad performances from a young Jessica Harper, and the entrancingly maniacal William Finley as the titular Phantom (who bears an uncanny resemblance to William Fitchner). The works of David Lynch, Edgar Wright and Dario Argento all owe a heavy debt to this pitch-perfect example of bold studio filmmaking. The cinematography, courtesy of Larry Pizer, fills the screen with rich, textured images that scream artifice yet thrill and excite. De Palma’s use of splitscreen and multiple character point of view offer a level of effortless cool that Tarantino would later mimic to acclaim in future film Pulp Fiction.

 

The star however remains Paul Williams’ brilliant, emotionally involving, narratively progressive and catchy tunes. From Juicy Fruit opener “Goodnight, Eddie, Goodnight” (a scene that invokes David Lynch at his best, and which he must surely be endebted), to the draining climactic reprise of “Faust”, De Palma and Williams combine to create iconic images of excess and excitement.

 

The Phantom of the Paradise is a forgotten masterpiece of cult filmmaking that defies convention, often thrilling, this hypnotic musical gem deserves its place in American filmmaking. Both as an experiment and a musical The Phantom of the Paradise excels; this is De Palma at his best and boldest.

Godzilla

 

Gareth Edwards established a name for himself with the indie hit Monsters, a love story set in a fictional world of extra-terrestrial invaders who resembles giant squids, and here continues his attempt to reinvigorate the monster movie with this reboot of Toho’s iconic kaiju. Written by Max Borenstein, Godzilla may not re-invent the King of the Monsters entirely successfully, but there are traces of brilliance in this otherwise sleep inducing film.

Following the estranged Brody family as they attempt to uncover the conspiracy that claimed one of their own, disgraced scientist Joe (Bryan Cranston) and bomb-disposal expert son Ford (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) soon find that it was not man, but nature to blame. When faced with the wrath of two science experiments gone wrong, the world must turn to an unlikely protector: Godzilla.

 

Edwards’ reboot of Ishiro Honda’s seminal 1954 Godzilla is neither horrendously made, nor excruciatingly dull, but is far from the excellent standard set by previews, and at its worst makes for the most frustrating time at the cinema since The Return of the King refused to end. For Edwards, the largest problem stems from his own aesthetic and visual sensibilities overshadowing the performances and story, although largely excellent (particularly Seamus McGarvey’s bleak cinematography) his bold choices occasionally frustrate and diminish his good work; namely a vein bursting refusal to show a San Fran punch up in full.

 

His orchestration of action when they do come show a director with a deft hand at showcasing destruction, and serves as an interesting counter to last summer’s Man of Steel. There is destruction, carnage and death, but Edwards never takes these lightly. Showing an awareness of the pain and misery natural events cause millions, thematically it may not be as strong as the anti-nuclear message of the original, but this reboot’s vision of man’s arrogance is intelligent enough to stand out amidst its peers. This darkness hangs over ever scene, and whilst bold has a tendency to drain most action set-pieces of fun, meaning that when Godzilla finally rears his head for what should be a tremendous climactic show-down, we instead get a short, enjoyable bout of action that never reaches the heights of Matt Reeves’ Cloverfield.

 

The cast, unfortunately, do not help proceedings, and often threaten to derail the film entirely. The usually reliable Juliette Binoche and Bryan Cranston are left as nothing more than caricatures of genre tropes, with Cranston in particular struggling to register as anything more than a lunatic in a jumpsuit. Taylor-Johnson is the more engaging of the leads, his character may be bland but Taylor-Johnson plays an every-man well enough to make up for the scripts shortcomings. The supporting cast are an assortment of familiar character actors attempting to make the best of a bad situation, with only Ken Watanabe coming out unscathed as an environmentally conscience scientist.

 

Ultimately, Godzilla’s shortcomings stem from a lack of screen time for its titular monster, and a script that gives an exceptional cast little to work with. Gareth Edwards has made one of the most visually arresting blockbusters of recent times, but more often than not fails to excite. King of the monsters this is not, but there is enough here to satisfy fans. Lower your expectations and you might have a good time.

 

Punishment Park

 

 

Shot with a budget of just $95,000 Punishment Park is a scathing take on the human rights atrocities committed overseas and domestically by the American government that is perhaps just as relevant today as it was in 1971. Punishment Park is one of the most harrowing and gruelling films I have ever endured.. Despite it’s seemingly short 88 minutes runtime, the film drags on from the start, the repetitiveness of the film was perhaps an artistic choice to coincide with the participants journey across the bland desert landscape but it does not come off this time.

 

The film does not rely on gratuitous violence for it’s shock value, the shocks of the film come from the dialogue of both the police there to enforce the rules and the government officials who hand out the sentences. The government are not portrayed in any sort of positive light throughout Punishment Park. Released during the Vietnam War, the film is a scathing attack on both the United States Army and government.

 

Peter Watkins constant referencing to the constitution by the defendants reads like a message to the United States government itself, using this film as a platform to throw his own accusations at them. Despite by prior complaints about the lack of a compelling narrative, I understand that the film never intended to have one, the films purpose is to spark a response against the government and against the War. The film is not totally pro-hippy though, it shows them as the ones to turn violent first, however justified this may seem in the film, at this point they are aware of the supposed chance to escape, however unjust the circumstances that got them here were. The film is used to attack the government’s actions during the Vietnam War and to draw a parallel between the atrocities at Guantanamo Bay and those at Punishment Park.

 

The defendants in Punishment Park throughout believe that they are struggling for freedom and that, concurrent with the American Dream, the belief that you can succeed if you try and get through the hardships. Watkins shows the chance at freedom as nothing more than an illusion of choice, when the defendants were offered imprisonment or the chance at Punishment Park, the real choice was prison or death. This a feeling that represents the feeling of the American people that opposed the Vietnam War. There was never a choice to fight, young American people were forced in to fight supposedly for their “freedom” and for “justice” but neither of these ever truly presented themselves, only the illusion of it. The only true outcome for the American people during this representation of the War is death.

 

 

Amazing Spiderman 2 review

 

After the dismal yet fun Spider-Man 3, one would think Sony Pictures may have learnt the lesson of packing their superhero franchise with too many villains. Alas, with The Amazing Spider-Man 2 director Marc Webb and star Andrew Garfield fail to learn from past failings and deliver a poorly executed attempt to catch up with Disney and Marvel Studios, forcing a rapidly expanding universe on an audience who simply want to see their favourite wall crawler deal with life as a superhero.

 

Amongst the chief problems with this bloated sequel is the decision from director Webb and writers Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci and Jeff Pinkner to focus on the expanded universe of Spidey’s New York, which was no doubt influenced highly by the studio’s newfound plan for a franchise to compete with the world of The Avengers. Superfluous characters such as Felicia Hardy, Alastair Smythe and Rhino all appear, each feeling even more tiresome than the last, dragging down the plot and decreasing the screen time of the lead character in order to offer a wink and nudge to comic fanboys. This fascination with giving pointless characters more screen time than needed, coupled with a downright idiotic sub-plot involving the mystery of Peter Parker’s parents all culminate in a muddled and weak story that detracts from the film’s many strong aspects.

 

As with The Amazing Spider-Man Webb is at his strongest when dealing in character interaction, his central love story is well handled and beautifully played by Stone and Garfield. Both leads do a superb job conveying the desperate longing of our doomed lovers, creating easily the best on screen couple in the superhero genre; eat your heart out Tony Stark and Pepper Potts. Garfield is the star however, his Spider-Man perfectly captures Peter Parker’s joy and heartbreak; his body contorting to create live action representations of Spider-Man’s iconic imagery. In Garfield, Sony have a superstar, and the purest on-screen representation of a comic book character since Tony Stark.

 

Webb has grown into his shoes as the head of a blockbuster franchise, and here offers the best Spidey action since Sam Raimi’s dazzling traintop battle over ten years ago. From a breathtakingly realised Times Square showdown, to a climactic battle sequence involving Dane DeHaan’s disgruntled Harry Osborne, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 brings the visuals and action expected of a million dollar franchise; oftentimes exceeding expectations to craft some of the most perfectly calibrated comic-book imagery since Joss Whedon gave us Ruffa-Hulk.

 

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 frequently astounds with its visuals and action, with Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone excelling in their roles. However, too much ambition and a weak script threaten to derail all of director Marc Webb’s good work. Shy of being amazing, this sequel settles for being merely very good.