EdwardBrereton

Hollywood’s Uncovered Gems?

There is a rowdy queue of merits associated with the serene art of cinema; perhaps one of the strongest advantages lies in its powerful sense of evocation. For some very privileged people, cinema is able to paint more than just a pretty picture and is fully able to rip into its audience’s soul and juggle with their emotions, their thoughts and feelings. Let me throw some names at you:

Nolan. Tarantino. Spielberg.

Household names; ground-breaking directors who have caused more than a mere stir during their renowned careers and all thanks to one endearing trait: their pure love of cinema. Their contribution has helped make cinema a dominant art form, one which truly caters for everybody with its eclectic style and creative prowess. So it’s really no surprise that the deaths of Tony Scott and Michael Clarke Duncan have packed such a brutal punch.

Tony Scott lived his life in the shadow of his more-critically accepted brother, Ridley (Alien, Blade Runner) yet thankfully, the overwhelmingly positive tributes that have flooded in for the late and certainly great director have focused solely on his aesthetically pleasing body of work. Many will recall the likes of Top Gun, an undoubtedly popular addition to the macho-men volume of Hollywood cinema and far superior to the likes of Charlie Sheen’s Navy SEALS and oh, yes…Iron Eagle.

What Scott lacked in critical backing, he made up for at the box-office. However, unlike film-makers who experience similar critical contrast such as Michael Bay, Scott was a true master of his craft. His ‘on-the-fence’ reviews would usually pin-point a lack of dramatic and narrative resonance (that was attributed so highly to Ridley) yet a picture made to pure perfection. In Poker terms, he was always the Full House opposed to the Royal Flush. His knowledge and dexterous touch as well as sublime craftsmanship were second-to-none and his flicks provided audiences with endless hours of thrills and spills. A truly remarkable, yet severely underrated film-maker.

Michael Clarke Duncan was a unique screen presence. Big Mike stood at 6’ 5” and his muscular frame, imposing stature and deep, booming voice were bizarrely contrasted by his kind, caring nature; or at least that was the way he consistently came across as.

Like many others, the role I’ll always associate him with was that of the (wrongly) convicted child-murderer in Frank Darabont’s The Green Mile. Strongly considered one of the best movies made in the last 20-years or so, The Green Mile was an adaption from Stephen King’s novel of the same name. Duncan portrayed John Coffey (“like the drink, only not spelled the same”), a seemingly uneducated simpleton who had been sentenced to death after being discovered with two dead girls. As the audience learns more about the character in Darabont’s majestic and emotionally charged movie, Duncan himself is a revelation. Never looking like a fish-out-of-water next to co-star Tom Hanks, Duncan was rightly nominated for an Oscar that year for his portrayal which will be remembered for a long time to come.

The point I wish to make is one that rings a beneficial bell in terms of Hollywood. Tributes poured in from all over when the shocking announcements were first made. It quickly became apparent that though neither was considered a household name, both were respected by those who cherish the art of cinema as well as those who perhaps consider themselves casual acquaintances with their local movie theatre. I think it’s a testament to the power of movies and the much-maligned Hollywood that these two figures are being celebrated so much. Scott’s True Romance defined the hyper-stylised and violent movies of the 90s (written by Pulp Fiction’s Tarantino of course) and contemporary film fans hold recent efforts such as Unstoppable starring Chris Pine and Denzel Washington and Man On Fire, again starring Scott-favoured Washington, in such high-esteem.

Duncan also had a varied career; The Green Mile will go down as his magnum opus due to his Oscar nom, but he also starred in many a-blockbuster such as Armageddon, The Whole Nine Yards and Daredevil. He was appreciated by the industry he loved so much and by the fans who flocked to the cinema, even if they couldn’t quite recall his name.

Hollywood is damn-near impossible to break and once you’ve made it, it can knock you back down from whence you came within a matter of seconds. That’s what they say anyway but I believe the likes of Michael Clarke Duncan and Tony Scott oppose that theory. Consistent, efficient, hard-working and reliable; they weren’t stars that shone the brightest and perhaps didn’t always get the recognition they deserved but when it came down to the final haul, both got the rousing send-off they deserved and the industry has suffered a great loss. The beauty of film is that they will always be remembered through their art and cemented within the rich history of cinema forever more.

Tony Scott (21^st June, 1944 – 19^th August, 2012)

Michael Clarke Duncan (10^th December, 1957 – 3^rd September, 2012)

The Dark Knight Rises; Better Late Than Never

There’s little doubt in my mind that by the end of the year, Christopher Nolan’s epic conclusion to his Dark Knight series will be top in box-office takings. I’m not a skilled mathematician in any way, shape or form but I believe if you deduct the extra earnings that The Avengers ripped off took from its 3D advantages (you know, an extra £1.50 for a tainted experience and over-sized glasses), then The Dark Knight Rises comes out on top. I’m sure far cleverer and wiser people than myself will tell you this is not the case though*

*it is.

But it doesn’t matter; at the end of the day people aren’t going to clamber home and divulge their full feelings and thoughts on the movie based on how much money it raked in. The age-old saying about quality and quantity comes into play massively here. Box-office success has never and will never equal critical acclaim – just ask Michael Bay.

Again, it doesn’t matter; no one is going to clamber home at the end of the day and sa—oh, I’ve done this part. Well, forgive my sanctimonious ramblings about film politics. The movie itself is wonderful. It’s a wonderful movie. It’s fantastically ambitious in scope and executed with the deft precision we’ve come to expect from Nolan’s skilled hands. It also brings up an interesting question:

Is it a good Batman movie?

Was The Dark Knight? As far as I’m concerned, Batman Begins represented the character of Batman as I, a comic-book virgin, would expect him to be portrayed. It felt like it jumped right out of the murky pages of a traditionally dark graphic novel with its steam-soaked streets, colourfully off-beat characters and, well…a guy dressed as a bat. Then The Dark Knight came along and, perhaps juiced up by Heath Ledger’s tragic death, the fan-boy community was given a sudden jolt of excitement; anticipation for this movie was sky-high and it delivered on all the right notes. I’m going to shamelessly quote famed movie-critic Roger Ebert on this one because he says it better than most:

“Christopher Nolan’s “The Dark Knight” is a haunted film that leaps beyond its origins and becomes an engrossing tragedy”.

So that’s what Roger says and I agree whole-heartedly. It took Batman to a new level (for me at least) and gave us all a healthy dose of entertainment along the way. In a way it’s raised the bar for what many believe a good Batman movie should be (to be straight, I don’t quite agree with this as I really enjoyed Tim Burton’s gothic-inspired effort in 1989).

The Dark Knight Rises tries so hard to do this again and upon my second viewing, I noted the scope of the film; what Nolan tried to achieve was amazing; an entire city is ripped apart from inside, both politically and socially, and then stapled together precariously whilst awaiting the heart-pounding climax. It’s what Nolan loves to do and though I don’t think he truly achieved the successes he had with The Dark Knight, you have to stand up and applaud the guy. It’s no easy task and I doubt I could do it*

*I couldn’t.

That being said, I’d hardly label the movie a ‘failure’; its undertones and themes are convoluted and many plot-points are far too convenient and far-fetched. I’ve read thousands of plot-holes related to the movie and though I agree many of them raise an eyebrow or two, I would suggest that Nolan’s movies are perhaps slightly more exposed to quizzical wonderings from the online community due to the director’s stature which has truly polarised some as well as captivated others. I admit I’m a big fan; I wrote my university dissertation on the guy and the way in which he’s crossed the boundary between Indie and Mainstream without as much as a scratch on him. He’s a remarkable film-maker and whilst I will never be as arrogant and pompous to label him one of the greats, his contribution to Hollywood has left a significant mark.

Also, stop asking:

“How does Bane eat?”

Did you ever ask how Darth Vader ate? Perhaps he was a big fan of the suffragette era and took to consuming his daily meals through a narrowly worked straw.

I liked Bane. I liked the music (I like to imagine someone following Bane down the street, beating enthusiastically on a pair of drums slung over their chest). I liked Catwoman. I liked her outfit. I liked Michael Caine crying. I liked the special effects. I liked Joseph Gordon-Levitt being called *SPOILER* Robin and I liked Bane beating people up with a bike-helmet.

There’s a whole collection of great things to like about this movie, but I think love is perhaps an expression too far. The movie goes places that it perhaps needs to go but I don’t know how much it sacrifices audience entertainment for; the fight scenes are very well orchestrated with Bane matching Batman for physical strength with interest. Tom Hardy has a good time as the muscular and intimidating figure of Bane and his presence is felt throughout the movie, even when he’s sadly not on screen. Elsewhere, Anne Hathaway shoves her previous critics away with a flawless, confident and humorous performance as Selina Kyle (Catwoman is never once uttered) and her role is used well by Nolan as is the role of John Blake, played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt. A lot of characters, a lot of balancing; I admit I was surprised at the lack of Christian Bale as the Batman. He has quite a journey of discovery in this movie and Bale probably puts in his best performance of the trilogy as a Bruce Wayne completely devoid of hope.

By the end you’ll appreciate the action that has unfolded; as always, it’s second-to-none and the urgency of the film’s events is felt throughout. Nolan has his pacing covered and it’s definitely a movie that you could see more than once without feeling like you need to stealthily check the time on your phone.

The story is rather insignificant at the end – I don’t think many will care for the ‘Save The World’ idea that is thrown about rather lethargically towards the beginning of the film and plot-points seem to follow suit, being branded about left, right and centre until dropped completely for the explosive ending. It’s a movie that deserves its plaudits and the money earned but it never quite reaches the heights set by its predecessor and perhaps even Whedon’s Avengers, but it’s worth-watching as always and paints a beautiful picture thanks to the sublime efforts of cinematographer Wally Pfister.

Film Review: The Avengers

Note: Spoilers assemble…

A Shakespearean God from the realm of Asgard blasts his way through a top-secret facility, using an oddly shaped sceptre to brain-warp those he decides will be of some use in his scheming plans, and steals a bright blue cube of immense energy and power. This bright blue cube of immense energy and power will destroy our entire world if utilised in the incorrect fashion, and that’s all you really need to know in order to enjoy this film, which, for a movie with a running time of over two hours, is remarkably fresh and breezy.

The god in question is Loki (Tom Hiddleston), primary antagonist from last year’s comic-caper Thor, one of several antecedents for the combined delight that is The Avengers (or if you’ll humour me, Marvel’s Avengers Assemble). It all began in 2008 when Robert Downey Jr’s revitalised career mirrored the start of something new, something exciting. The result is a well-tuned, well-acted, exceptionally-scripted blockbuster that has issued a strong, robust, and loud message, not just to its flocking audiences, but to a certain Chris Nolan: “Your move, Mr. Wayne…”

The task of bringing the outlandish egos of Iron Man (Downey Jr.), Thor (Chris Hemsworth), Captain America (Chris Evans), and The Incredible Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) together to form one cohesive narrative has fallen kindly at the feet of cult-hero (and god) Joss Whedon. You’ll have to forgive me at this point; I grew up on a healthy diet of American pop culture, of which Whedon’s Buffy The Vampire Slayer was a strong contributor, and to this day, I would gladly give up my first born child for this man. I try to avoid inane bias in my reviews, but sometimes there is too great a force, and this is one such occasion. I shall reliably inform you that the man is a genius. An underrated, relentless, wit-tastic genius.

That being said, this movie should not work. It just shouldn’t. There is so much going on at any one moment in time that it’s very hard to comprehend what one character just said before you’re whisked away on another matter. Take the scene aboard the heli-boat-copter for instance; they’re trying to figure Loki out, what he wants, what he plans to do etc, then all of a sudden, we’re thrust into a brand new world where S.H.I.E.L.D, led by the one-eyed Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson), are suddenly the enemies, planning on utilising that bright blue cube of immense energy and power in their favour by constructing weapons of mass destruction. However, Fury isn’t exactly up to date on this plan. I know – confusing, right? It’s a comic book film in every sense, and it’s superior to every other comic book film that has taken to our screens (I don’t include The Dark Knight in this instance as it transcends the genre) and if you don’t walk into the screening with your disbelief well and truly suspended…then what’s the point, may I ask?

Don’t compare this film to The Dark Knight Rises – it’ll be like comparing American Beauty to Pan’s Labyrinth – because these are two differently dexterous directors who have engaged in two differently dexterous styles of film. With The Avengers, you will have fun; sublime fun. There are a lot of explosions, but the on-screen action is directed with aplomb and swiftness – Whedon never forgets his constraints on time and space, and is able to move our attention to where it truly matters, delivering one hell of a final act that is brash, loud, and utterly brilliant.

I could talk forever about the script, which is full to the brim with witty one-liners and dripping with banterous dialogue. Fans of Whedon will know how strong a writer he is, and his style has not been diluted by the money-starved executives behind the scenes. The film is really quite hilarious, and one of the only negatives I could come up with for the film is that you may occasionally struggle to hear the dialogue through the raucous laughter sounding out around you.

Take a film like Inception – I know I said not to compare to Nolan, but I’m not comparing styles – it doesn’t utilise all its characters, it fits them into the story well enough, but we never get a true sense of who they are. Why on earth is Ariadne helping out Cobb? What does she stand to gain? Eames? Is he in it for the money? The Avengers’ main strength is its character moments, even the smallest nuance of a smile or gesture – it gets it absolutely spot on, and is what makes the film so enjoyable. A film about characters that will never exist in our world suddenly become so relatable, so easy to connect with, that we root for them to the very end, part with our well-earned money, and eagerly anticipate the inevitable sequel.

I can’t stress enough how good this movie is; for fans of Joss Whedon’s existing works, I’d be stunned if you hadn’t already seen it, and for those who have little idea of who he is, get ready to have your minds completely, whole-heartedly, unequivocally…blown.

The Most Technologically Advanced Hotels in the World

In a world full of technological advances and innovation, it’s no surprise that this level of hi-tech mastery would find great use in the wonderful world of customer service. Paying a premium these days really does find you great value in the amenities on offer; the following gadgets are all found in hotels around the world, and truly are some of the most unique, bizarre, craziest, yet brilliant, inventions created in a world obsessed with digital.

The Yobot Yotel

Situated in New York City, the most innovative new customer service assistant around is actively working around the clock, entertaining and aiding customers of the New York City ‘Yotel’. A large mechanic arm attached to the wall, the Yobot allows customers to safely store their baggage in the compartments located in the lobby for a timid price of $2. The best thing about this glorified bellhop? No tips…ever (well, $2, I suppose – hardly a dent).

Designed as the most courteous and efficient way of handling your baggage, the Yobot is designed with a high-tech system that encourages the user to input their own personal pin code and card device, impressively allowing the robot to identify each separate piece of baggage corresponding to the specific customer. In a world making social interaction secondary to technological innovation, this certainly ranks high up at the top, and is no doubt an impressive feat.

The ‘Grace’ App

A saving grace, indeed; this nifty little app is basically a feature that you can download to your iPhone and watch as it creates your packing list for you. Let’s face it, when it comes to going on holiday, the packing is the bit you fear most, and for good reason. Last minute decisions can cause excessive and unnecessary panicking, but with the saving Grace app, you need not worry. Not only does it act as a generic checklist (including information on where to change your money, and reminding you to get travel insurance), it also packs in different scenarios.

Say you’re going skiing, what exactly do you need to pack? Say you’re going to Barbados for a week – well what then? The technology caters for different holidays based on the user’s preference and is incredibly interactive, allowing you to personalise it to your liking, deleting the appropriate topics and even adding your own if you don’t see it there; a must-have for any globe-setting fanatic.

iPads and Apple Macs

What better way to stay in luxury than to bring along your iPad or your laptop computer? Well, no need; certain hotels situated around the world actually provide their own iPad service in your room. Some, such as The Weinmesiter in Berlin, even include an Apple Mac for guests. Not only are you allowed to peruse the Internet from the comfort of your hotel room, rather than band about for a small, dingy Internet café, but it also gives you the option of checking flights, ordering room service, and finding the best places to dine out in town.

theWit, Chicago

Resembling something found in any old sci-fi film from the ’90s, theWit hotel in Chicago is one of the most forward-thinking hotel services on the globe.

The hotel is wired in every aspect with an IP Network that spans the entire building, from room to elevator, making it technologically complete. Every little aspect can be controlled, interacted with, and fitted to the customers’ needs. All lines are connected to the front help desk, and there is a remarkable little function that calculates body heat within a hotel room, based on pre-installed heat sensors, and changes the temperature accordingly to suit the customer.

In addition to all this, the rooms come complete with NEC VoIP phones, which act in a similar fashion to the iPads already discussed, and allow the user to take advantage of the hotel’s many services, as well as checking updated flight times and adjust their wake-up calls.

Do Not Disturb

One of the biggest problems customers have whilst staying in a hotel is the room service; it’s not that it’s particularly bad, but no one wants to have the maid abruptly walk in on them at 10.30AM whilst they’re having a well-deserved lie-in. In certain hotels, this problem has been rectified in a plethora of different and unique ways.

With the press of a button, you are able to illuminate a Do Not Disturb sign that is situated outside the door, doing away with those old cardboard pieces, and saying hello to a bright new future. In contrast, if you wish to ensure your room is cleaned by the time you return, you can choose the ‘Make Up Room’ option and encourage the maid to enter.

Elsewhere in the world, hotels have started to use infra-red sensors, which actually scan the room for the maid or clerk, to check if anyone is still in the room. If nothing is detected, the maids are given the all clear and are allowed to enter. Pretty sweet, right…?

Paving the way for a complete reboot of how we view customer service, these innovations have stunned and awed the masses, leaving one question fixed firmly in their minds – whatever next?

The Dark Knight Rises — Coming Soon

There are a particular group of movies that evoke a strong sense of anticipation within an audience, and 2012 sees the release of a whole plethora of them in fact. It’s difficult to explain, but this aspect of universal yearning is becoming more apparent in today’s cinema. It’s not hyperbole to label The Dark Knight Rises as perhaps the biggest movie of the decade.

Continue reading The Dark Knight Rises — Coming Soon

Film Review: “The Hunger Games”

The Hunger Games is not another Twilight Saga, not in any way, shape, or form. For one thing, the female lead is a strong, resilient character who doesn’t lust after the stoic aid of a glitterball ‘vampire’, nor do her adolescent affections drive the franchise forward.

Based on the first young-adult novel of Suzanne Collins’s 2008 best-selling trilogy, The Hunger Games isn’t particularly new in concept, but manages to create a wonderfully vibrant pastiche, featuring strong imagery and effective satire of a world obsessed with violence and the impact of reality TV.

For those that have read the novel, many will find the movie, directed by Gary Ross of Seabiscuit fame, to be remarkably faithful, capturing the beauty of the coveted ‘Capitol’ city, displaying a kaleidoscope of quirky designs, colourful arrangements, and grandiose, towering structures. On the other side of the spectrum, there is the unfaltering brutality of the war-torn nation, which annually watches as 24 children, or ‘tributes’ (aged 12-18), are flung into a computerised arena and forced to murder each other until just one stands victorious.

For those new to this post-apocalyptic dystopia that Collins has created, the plot revolves around 16 year old Katniss Everdeen (played by the sublime Jennifer Lawrence, channeling every aspect of her Oscar-nominated turn in Winter’s Bone), a resident in District 12 of the nation of Panem (a menacing futuristic vision of North America post-war). Each year, the ‘Reaping’ will take place and one boy and one girl from all 12 Districts will be chosen to compete in that year’s Hunger Games. After Katniss’s sister, Primrose, is reaped, our heroine takes centre stage, fiercely volunteering in the place of her younger sibling, and she and the male tribute, Peeta (played by Josh Hutcherson, a performance that hits back at his critics) are quickly whisked off to the Capitol to begin their training.

There is nothing bland about The Hunger Games, and each second of screentime is used to great effect, whether it be the scene meticulously depicting Katniss’s supreme hunting ability, or the pure, unadulterated joy and intent on the faces of those who reside in the Capitol, free from the terrifying apprehension of the Reaping. Exposition is never spoon-fed; Ross respects the intellect of the audience, efficiently allowing us to piece together his jigsaw by showing us, rather than telling us (for the most part).

The Hunger Games may be taken as a literal understanding that outside the gluttonous Capitol, each District is repressed by poverty and despair, an image certainly fitting to District 12, a place completely devoid of colour, and where food such as bread is a rare and wonderful treat. Though neither Collins nor Ross go into much detail about the Capitol in this outing, its self-degradation from consumerism and over-indulgence in a life of lavish luxuries are hinted at on occasions, painted in the inhabitants’ faces, prevalent in their need for mindless entertainment. In a world dominated by Big Brother, artificial thrills are generated from behind the scenes by head gamemaker, Seneca Crane (an ignorant, yet assured, Wes Bentley) and whilst teenagers slaughter each other, those outside the arena view it as nothing but a mere game on which they are able to bet on, invest in competitors, alter the Games to their liking, and care little about mundane topics such as ethics and morality. There is no line to cross here.

Though the novel sticks closely to Katniss (it’s written in first person), the film doesn’t waste its talented supporting cast, each of whom embrace their role wildly, bringing the words to life with zest, ambition, and strong individuality. Woody Harrelson as District 12 mentor Haymitch is particularly memorable, playing his character with slightly more warmth and humour than his literary counterpart, but his affection for Katniss when he recognises her ability and her gutsy intent is never downplayed. Elsewhere, Elizabeth Banks is blissfully unaware and bubbly as Capitol appointed District 12 representative, Effie Trinkett. Lenny Kravitz is the kind-hearted stylist, Cinna, whose goal is to help Katniss in making an ‘impression’, and Donald Sutherland shows hints of his ruthless leadership as the nation’s leader, President Snow, a role that, as the final scene suggests, will loom larger in the following films.

The Hunger Games is an intense affair, dominated by raw emotion and brutal action. The violence is toned down through quick-fire cuts and editing, perhaps to accommodate a larger audience, but the movie is resoundingly bloody, particularly the first scene inside the arena where blades, swords, knives and arrows are wielded, culminating in disturbing shots of lifeless children lying bloodied and battered whilst others rush around, no time to think about what’s right and what’s wrong. It caters to those going in fresh-minded and will satisfy those with high expectations. It’s a film unlike any other, and though it borrows heavily from other works, it’s a postmodern success, kept fresh by creatively minded architects, bright performances, and dazzling displays of refined popcorn-entertainment. A must see.