“...I'M JUST HERE FOR THE GASOLINE.”

Max (Mad Max, The Road Warrior)

"Miffed Max" doesn't have the right ring to it...

So, the trailer for Mad Max Fury Road has just been released. Have to say, looks pretty awesome. I like the reliance on actual physical effects rather than CGI (although I’m sure there will be more than a little CGI enhancement involved).

A few thoughts? Why not?

Tom Hardy is the new Mad Max. Not the worst choice, but can’t help but feel this is more about man-of-the-moment stunt casting rather than actual suitability. I remember a few years back they were kicking around the idea of Sam Worthington and Jeremy Renner, either option I feel may have been better (Worthington himself also being Australian). Still, Hardy at least never disappoints; he has acting chops, a suitably sombre scowl and makes a convincing action hero.

The villains are pretty menacing, a cross between Humongous’ marauders from the second film and the ‘bad’ tribe from Mel Gibson’s Apocalypto. Although, how they all manage to look so anemic in the desert heat I’m not sure- must have a poor diet.

On the subject of villains, Immortan Joe, one of Thunder Road’s bad guy roster (and possibly the lead villain), is played by none other than Hugh Keays-Byrne, who played lead antagonist Toecutter in the first Mad Max. Toecutter ended up under the wheels of a truck in that film’s climax, and what’s very apparent with Immortan Joe is his severe facial injuries… This is only conjecture, but is Keays-Byrne playing the same character by a new alias, or is this just a nice nod to the original franchise, a way of keeping that’s films DNA? Let’s wait and see.

Depech Mode re-imagined by H.R Giger

It’s nice to see they’ve kept the same grungy and gritty trash-can aesthetic, especially prevalent in the vehicle designs. 

We also see Charlize Theron, another ‘proper’ thesb. She’s playing the absurdly named Imperator Furiosa, who believes that she can “save the world” if only she can make it back to her home town. What she really needs is a heroic-someone to help reach her goal…

The set up would seem to have Max captured by a vicious road gang, forcibly tattooed (pause the trailer and take a peek- they’re donor details- nice touch) and strapped up onto the front of a vehicle ala’ The Road Warrior’s memorable hostages. No doubt Max witnesses some truly heinous crimes while he’s helpless to intervene, and I’m sure that gets him pretty ‘mad’.

With names such as “Immortan” and “Furiosa” it’s good the film has retained some of the bizarreness that helped make the previous movies such cult-classics. I mean, come on? “Word burgers” is a phrase that ‘Clock Work Orange’s Anthony Burgess would be proud of. In one scene, barely audible but still very much present, Humungus calls forth his “smegma crazies” and “gayboy berserkers”. That’s not forgetting  the touches of visual surealnesss, such as the tango-dancing bikers or the popping-eyes before Toecutter’s head-on collision. 

I don’t own the first 2 Mad Max films, although as a teenager I had them on VHS. I watched the second a lot more than the first as it was more of a typical action film. To refresh my memory, and relive some nostalgic moments, I Youtube’d some of the scenes. To be honest, I’m blown away by how spectacularly nasty some of it is. It’s not necessarily gory or explicit, but just really, really nasty. I doubt the new film will be anywhere near so rough-edged.

Case and point; remember the tanker chase in Mad Max 2? 

Mad Max 2's center-piece chase scene.

Firstly, one of the defenders on the tanker is hit with that grappling hook- it punctures his leg, causing the jeep that fired it to flip. His leg is then pulling the weight of the flipped jeep before finally tearing him out of his barricade, only for him to be rolled on by the blazing jeep. Ouch. And that’s one of the ‘heroes’.

The woman with the crossbow defending the top of the tanker is shot by the marauders, collapsing into the barbed wire. As if that’s not bad enough, the villains then try to reclaim her body- no doubt for some dodgy sexual practices. Her friend, the cripple, tries in vain to keep her body- only to find himself pulled from the tanker and hurled under the wheels of pursuing cars. His murderers drive away with the woman’s body, unhindered.

In the world of Mad Max, death is never glamorous. There are no brave speeches, no meaningful last glances. Death is unromantic, brutal, callous, sudden and often meaningless. I’m not sure if this is entirely to be applauded, seeing as the violence is pretty much the sole aim of these films this gives off very mixed messages (“hey kids, violence is terrible, let’s take a look at some really grim stuff”), but it makes for a nihilistic antidote to the sanitized action of most Hollywood fare. 

“They've got you wrong. You're not a coward. STUPID, maybe. But not a coward.”

The Gyro Captain

Will this new Mad Max stay true to its cold-blooded roots with an 18 / R certificate, or will it bend cap-in-hand to the alter of mainstream cinema with a top-end 15, or worse, a diluted 12a? I wait with baited breath.

But, one thing’s for sure: the trailer sets the bench-mark pretty high. Check it out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46ir8Xd5QyE

“…And the Road Warrior... He Lives now, only in my memories.”

The Narrator

“SCREENWRITING IS THE MOST PRIZED OF ALL THE CINEMATIC ARTS. ACTUALLY, IT ISN'T, BUT IT SHOULD BE.”

Hugh Laurie

Not that it matters but I've been trying to post this for about a week now but my connection has been appalling…



This week, now that my life has attained some small measure of stability, I've commenced screenwriting full-time. That means I have less to do with this blogging lark now. I thought “what better way to draw a line under previous posts than by talking a little about what I’ll be doing.” It’s relevant (perhaps), interesting (to some), helpful (to me) and (shouldn’t) offend anybody.

From here on, 3 or 4 days a week, 8+ hours each day (that’s full time in most jobs) I’ll be cracking on with my writing. I hope to knock out a new script every 5 weeks or so, and while I appreciate creativity is no production line, it’s probably good practice to, as most experienced writers will tell you, “keep pumping it out”. I also have a lot of ideas I’m eager to start on, cultivated from the past 15 years of brain storming.

Weeks 1 & 2; ‘Preparation’.

I’ll work on the premise of the story, and at this point I’ll also structure the plot points, work out who the characters are, and how they impact on the story. By the time I’m done I’ll know the story from start to finish, and if I can't explain my story in a simple sentence then I probably don't understand it well enough.

“I became a script writer with absolutely no idea of how to write a script whatsoever. I still feel a bit of an outsider in that regard. If I can maintain that approach to screenwriting, it can continue to be enjoyable.” 

Nick Cave

Week 3 & 4; ‘First Pass’.

Now I’ll actually sit down and write the screenplay, all in the correct format. Even if something’s wrong, or may need changing, the trick here is to press on and finish the 1st draft. It’s at this point that any large problems with the story will begin to emerge. I’ll break my back trying to keep it under 120 pages- if my writing serves neither character nor story then it shouldn’t be in the final script.

“There is nothing to writing. All you do is sit down at a typewriter and bleed.”

Ernest Hemmingway

Week 5; ‘Spit & Polish’.

This is the time I’ll spend going back over the 1st draft and fixing the big issues, as well as tweaking it in places and reworking the dialogue to achieve the best results possible. Then, on the 2nd or 3rd draft, it should be ready for sending away.

“Screenwriting is like ironing. You move forward a little bit and go back and smooth things out.”

Paul Thomas Anderson

That’s the plan anyway. Now it’s on the blog it feels pretty final. I'm hoping my first script is finished approximately 3 weeks from now.




The chance to try this is a dream-come-true for me, and I intend on giving it my all... And if I don’t succeed? Then at least I can say I gave it a damn good try, no harm done. Better to have tried and failed than to never have tried at all, right? Everyone’s got something they know, deep down, they can do well- as for me, that’s always been writing and drawing...
I’m a better writer than I am a drawer.

I'll end on this note, a quote I've lifted straight from Syd Field's book 'The Definitive Guide To Screen Writing'. Truly, this book is the Bible for any aspiring screen writer- be sure to get yourself a copy if you’re interested.

"Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence.
Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent.
Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb.
Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts.
Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent."

I'm nothing if not persistent...





Further reading? 'Psychology for Screenwriters', William Indick, Ph.D.

SUNSHINE; Carlisle's Final Word

“At the end of time, a moment will come when just one man remains. Then the moment will pass. Man will be gone. There will be nothing to show that we were ever here... but stardust.”

Pinbacker

If you can't stand the heat... What was that last part?

Synopsis;

50 years into the future, a team comprised of both astronauts and scientists undergo a mission to reignite the dying sun. Having with them the last of Earth’s resources to carry out this mission they represent mankind’s last chance of survival. However, complications lead them on a detour revealing the fate of the previous ship which seemingly vanished while attempting the same mission 7 years ago…

In the words of Capa, the ships lead scientific adviser and the film's main protagonist;

“Our sun is dying. Mankind faces extinction. Seven years ago the Icarus project sent a mission to restart the sun but that mission was lost before it reached the star. Sixteen months ago, I, Robert Capa, and a crew of seven left earth frozen in a solar winter. Our payload a stellar bomb with a mass equivalent to Manhattan Island. Our purpose to create a star within a star.”

The film marks another collaboration between Danny  Boyle (of 28 Days Later fame) and screenwriter Alex Garland (also the screen writer for the aforementioned 28 Weeks Later, and also the recent Dredd reboot).

Script Logic; 1/2

My review could almost be written in two different parts, because almost all my concerns for the film stem from a plot development (spoilers ahead) 73 minutes in… 

Up until this point the script works hard to establish logic and credibility for the unfolding events, and character’s motivations and consequently (for better or worse) feel as though they come from a real-place.
Much has been made (by more academic types than myself) concerning the scientific theory in the film, and a great many cries of “that’s not correct” and “it wouldn’t happen like that” can be heard from the scientific community- but I can overlook this if it serves either plot or character- after all, this is very advanced theory we’re talking about here, nothing that should shatter the illusion of disbelief for most audiences. I mean, if the film had renowned physicist Brian Cox as an adviser it can’t be all that wrong, can it? In Cox’s own words “"Sunshine is not a documentary.”

Then we reach minute 73, and things undergo something of a radical change...

After a verbal exchange between Capa and the ships on-board computer we discover that Pinbacker, the captain of the previous mission who had succumb to madness and slaughtered his own crew, is alive and causing havoc on the second ship. That’s all fine, but the film falls apart from this point onwards; not because this was a plot-point too far (I actually really liked this sudden tonal shift), but simply because everybody begins to act in that typical ‘horror-film-moron’ type way that undermines much of the films slow-build realism. By way of example, rather than announce to the crew over the loudspeaker system that Pinbacker is possibly alive and on board the ship causing havoc, Capa decides to head to this maniac’s suspected vicinity to confront him (needless to say this doesn’t end too well).

Pinbacker himself (who realistically should have died of his sun-induced burns long, long ago, but which I can overlook as his burns are a good aesthetic choice) suddenly becomes the typical ‘unstoppable-appears-everywhere-slasher-killer’ and so the film begins a poorly misjudged downward spiral into what's best described as 'Event Horizon' territory*. And to make matters worse, whenever Pinbacker does appear, the focus becomes very blurred and jerky, almost entirely obscuring his features. I think this was supposed to give the impression of heat and insanity, and to make him an almost inhuman on-screen presence, but it just came across like the camera man was suffering some sort of seizure. To be honest, I thought my copy of the film was damaged, it took me a while to realise this was all intentional.

Pace; 1/2

While it never felt a labour to watch, the pace did feel a little over-reflective in parts, especially in relation to the chaotic final, which felt like what should have been an hour’s worth of material was crammed into just 20 minutes. Having said that, none of the time the film spent moving forward was ever wasted, and (most of) the characters were given sufficient space to become more than just two-dimensional fodder- the characters themselves being this film's hidden Ace.

Acting; 2/2

One of the film's real strengths are it's characterisations, and everybody here gives solid and heartfelt performances. Even the characters intended to be prickly are never less than believable. Not since the first Alien have a crew in space felt more real, more vulnerable or more alone.
Cillian Murphy gives a performance more than a little reminiscent of Brian Cox (no accident I'm certain), a scientist in complete awe of his surroundings but in over-his head when it comes to any real hands-on work, and Michelle Yeoh excels as the ship's soulful botanist.
The very beautiful Rose Byrne plays the ships affable pilot- her heart is very clearly on her sleeve and she's probably the film's most humane character. Resident hunk Chris Evans, who'd I'd never really considered an acting talent before now, plays the role of the no-nonsense pragmatist perfectly, and turns what could have been the role of "crew dick head" into an oddly sympathetic character, while Mark Strong (ever watchable) does what he can with the role of Pinbaker- the burnt fundamentalist who believes he is doing the Will of God, and despite the climax's intangible surreality manages to still give a chilling performance.
However (and I've left him till last as my favorite of all these stand-out performances), Hiroyuki Sanada steals his scenes as the empathetic and heroic captain of the crew- just a shame that he exits the story so early; his presence is so strong and assured that you can't help but believe that with him still around the mission may have gone a lot smoother...

Aesthetic; 2/2

The film obviously owes a great debt to the likes of Alien and 2001, but which science-fiction films don't? While not a large budget film (in evidence with some of the CGI) the film does well with what it has; and what it may lack in finance for computer trickery it more than compensates with in set and costume design. Everything feels like it has a function, a purpose for being in place- and that kind of detail only heightens the drama, the sense of realism and the central performances.

Originality & Intention; 1/2

An interesting idea is at the heart of this film, and it's execution is very solid. While not entirely original, this film is not simply content to stand on the shoulders of established classics and works hard to be taken seriously on it's own merits. While never being too 'preachy', it addresses themes of spirituality and of global warming, and the core conceit of a dying sun to bring these elements together is striking in it's simplicity but also very intriguing.

Final Score; 7/10 

Apart from the gear-shift climax the film is almost a perfect score. Again, I wasn't opposed to the 'idea' of Pinbacker boarding the ship (I think that's an exciting development), but it should have been handled more like Se7en and less like a bizarre dream-sequence. That one criticism aside, Sunshine is a very decent film- with a thoughtful premise, thrilling scenes of near-catastrophe, a suitably somber tone and very strong performances all-round. Even if it leaves itself a little 'untied' by the climax it doesn't really take much away from the experience, but being the film's only real flaw it was bound to get some attention in this review. 
Well worth seeing, but I do honestly believe Danny Boyle is an often over rated director who's more a slave to his own pretensions than he is the function of story, as was also the case with the decent but flawed 28 Days Later (similarly hampered by a poor third act).



* My earlier comparison to Event Horizon almost sounded like a criticism of the later, which was unintended. Event Horizon's final worked because the film itself was a gothic-space-fantasy, it's roots firmly in the Hellraiser tradition of gore and unapologetic, unsubtle horror. For those same reasons this didn't work for Sunshine, which up till this point was a thoughtful and realistic physiological drama.

OLDBOY (2013); Carlisle's Final Word.

“Heaven make me free of it. The rest is silence.”

Adrian.

Work was murder.

It's been a while, but here's another film review... 

Synopsis;

Well, most people know the story by now; a selfish and reckless ‘nobody’ (this time by the name of  Joe Doucett) is snatched from the streets and imprisoned, seemingly without reason,  in solitary confinement- only to be mysteriously released 20 years later.  Fuelled by a burning lust for vengeance, and to free his daughter from the clutches of an evil mastermind, Joe goes in search of answers- and blood.

Most people felt a remake of the original was unnecessary, and much has been made of the fact Spike Lee, the films very outspoken director, has all but disowned it (the credits tellingly allude to this with "A Spike Lee Film" rather than his usual "A Spike Lee Joint"). Despite this, and it may come as a surprise to some, I kept an open mind (as always) and hoped to find something positive about the film- despite its poor box-office figures and critical mauling.

The following review contains spoilers and assumes you’ve already seen the original Oldboy.

Script Logic; 1/2

While this American remake makes some noble attempts to legitimize the original’s more surreal aspects, it does make a few missteps in the process.

Now, instead of a main character who’s all but forgotten he even had a family, this time round Joe’s motivations clearly relate to his daughter’s safety and the brutal rape and murder of his ex-wife (for which he was framed). That’s a very good move, and the character arc of ‘absentee father’ to ‘protective avenger’ instantly lends the once reprehensible Joe some much needed kudos.

Of course, anyone who’s ever seen the original Oldboy knows of the film’s tragic revelation, so the explanation of the daughter’s abduction (a new plot-point for this remake) is another nice touch- sure to fool more than a few new viewers.

On the flip side, the “shocking reasons” behind the new villain’s motivations are, to say the least, a wash-out, and the reason for their alteration remains a mystery to me, if it’s not broke why fix it? With the original, one could almost understand how the villain came to direct his hate at the protagonist, all be it his revenge was extreme and misplaced, but this time round it feels more of a stretch.

Pace; 2/2

I can say this much; I was never bored. While the first movie felt occasionally like a choir while it meanders between plot points and tonal shifts with all the grace of a 2-legged bison, at least this remake builds-up momentum nicely and never out stays it’s welcome. Every moment felt like it was moving the story towards its inevitable confrontation.

According to Spike Lee and the film’s star Josh Brolin, the original running length of the film was 140 minutes, and both are resentful that the studio intervened and trimmed it to a brisk 105 minutes. I can understand their bitterness, no artist would like to see something they cherished edited in such a way, but to be fair a film like this doesn’t need another 35 minutes of ‘character building’, the characters here are pretty successfully defined by their actions.

Acting; 1/2

Before I go further into this, I have to say the film feels a little divided by its intentions…

In part, and for the weight of its revelation to fully work, the story needs to be played straight. That is to say, it has to feel “real”, even though it’s obviously pure fiction. That’s one of the reasons why the original film never felt AS grim as it perhaps could have- it had comic book sensitivity. To this end, the likes of the ever reliable (and ever beautiful) Elizabeth Olsen and Michael Imperioli add weight to their meagre roles as love-interest (?!?) and best friend. Elizabeth has the whole sweet-but-troubled thing down-pat, and Michael is never less than concerned with a healthy underpinning of self-preservation.

On the flip side, the violence and the action scenes feel like they’ve stepped right outta Sin City. Hammers break through people’s skulls as though they were over-ripe watermelons, goons are kicked through the air like helium balloons, or spun overhead, only to come crashing down on snapping necks. It was like seeing the Marv fights from the aforementioned Sin City, only without all the high contrast black-and-white. Some of the performances fit more neatly into this later style concession, most crucially that of the lead villains; Adrian Price and Chaney, played (or over-played) by Sharlto Copley and Samuel L “motherfucking” Jackson respectively. Adrian is camp-moustache-twirling evil at its most hammy, and Jackson is, well, Samuel L “motherfucking” Jackson, and both of these characters would feel right at home in (using the same analogy as before) Sin City.

The two strands don’t particularly make for a coherent style, although both are well acted in their own distinct ways. Only Josh Brolin, giving a power-house performance of barely withheld swaggering aggression, is able to straddle both sides of this divide. He would have made a fine casting choice as an older and jaded Batman…

Aesthetic; 2/2

Nothing about the film looks cheap, yet nothing is particularly striking. The violence is suitably brutal, and the film manages some subtle nods to the first film (the angel wings worn by the Chinese street vendor, the octopus in the takeaway tank and the yellow umbrella). Perhaps, in keeping with the source material, and the comic-book nature of the material, a more striking visual style would have gone a long way to giving the film a more individual feel.

Originality & Intention; 0/2

This is where the film loses some real points. The world did not need, nor want, an Oldboy remake, and it’s hard to imagine why or how such a thing came to be. Not similar enough to be a straight remake, nor different enough to be truly original. Perhaps a more interesting idea would be to set a film in the ‘world’ of the first Oldboy, with a different character held in captivity before his release, from the American wing of whatever company it is that confines these victims in their cells? Theirs would be a completely different story, with a different set of twists and revelations... Still, for what it is, it can be called neither original nor inventive, and the only intention I can see for its existence is to spin money.

Final Score; 6/10 

Truth be told, this Oldboy is far from a terrible film, just not as polished or as daring as it needed to be in order to succeed- but if you’re coming to the film ‘fresh’ (or just plain don’t give a shit about it being a remake) then you could easily add another point or two to the score. The end result is a faithful, yet patchy, take on the first story. It deserves to be seen on its own merits, of which it has several, not least a fantastic central performance from the underrated Josh Brolin. I'll finish by saying this; it’s a much easier ride than its predecessor, although they share the same sucker-punch ending, and (dare I admit it) I much preferred this Oldboy’s denouement.

   

Did you know (or care)? Steven Spielberg was, at one point, supposedly attached to direct the Oldboy remake, with none other than Will Smith in the title role. I can’t imagine a worse choice of combination; the Kings of schmaltz and smarm respectively as the creative talents behind a tale of brutal revenge and ‘accidental incest’… The worst pairing for Oldboy, save perhaps for a movie by Michael Bay and starring Adam Sandler…