Dreamgirls

Forgive me if this post seems a little bitter, the VMA’s of Sunday night burned a bleeding hole in my soul so deep it will take months to heal, but I will soldier on regardless. Dreamgirls is a 2006 movie musical directed by Bill Condon and featuring an ensemble cast starring Jennifer Hudson, Beyoncé Knowles, Jamie Foxx, Eddie Murphy and Anika Noni Rose. The film remains the most expensive film ever made with an all-black cast, and one of the highest grossing musicals. Based on the Broadway musical, the film is essentially a film a clef about The Supremes, with the film being a story about a three part girl group from Detroit, who find fame and stardom, despite being entirely controlled by the group’s manager and lead singer.

Many of the characters in the film are partially based upon real life individuals, Jamie Foxx’s character; Curtis Taylor Jr. is strongly based upon Berry Gordy, the real life owner of Motown Records and the manager and producer of The Supremes. Knowles’ character is strongly based on Diana Ross, like Deena Jones, Diana Ross was neither the strongest or best singer of The Supremes, nor was she the original lead singer of the group. Jennifer Hudson’s character mirrors the story of Florence Ballard, the original lead singer of The Supremes who was later fired by their manager and replaced.

The film succeeds largely due to the performances of its talented and charismatic cast. Knowles, despite easily being the weakest singer of the group, is perfectly suited for the part, and despite her film performances in the past and since having been savaged, this role perfectly suits her, although her voice is weak and often thin, she comes into her own during Listen, when she isn’t forced to compete with stronger singers, and when her voice really soars. Jamie Foxx is also great as Curtis Taylor Jr., despite Taylor Jr. being the obvious villain of the piece; Foxx plays him with a complexity and a sense of malice that keeps the character from becoming two dimensional or camp. Eddie Murphy’s performance is unusually restrained, and he imbues the character with a comic tragedy. Anika Noni Rose, despite not being given a huge amount to do gives a fine performance, and her scenes with Eddie Murphy in addition to the characters emotional evolution throughout the film are a highlight

The standout performance of the film is that of Jennifer Hudson, who, in her feature film debut, who was awarded an Oscar for her performance. She is superb in this film, she has one of the best voices recoded since Aretha Franklin, and her voice is strong, clear and powerful, she infuses it with a heartbreaking sense of tragedy. Her performance of And I Am Telling You is now the definitive recording, and she portrays Effie as someone fragile and gentle, who is hurt easily, and who has her heart broken by a man attracted to mere beauty, and who has her career stolen by a woman far less talented than she.

Dreamgirls succeeds as an adaptation of the hit show and as a standalone movie; the film is a fascinating look at the Motown music scene of the sixties, and the history of the Supremes. It is also slightly validating to see Beyoncé out sung in every scene by an American idol alumni (who didn’t even win). Dreamgirls is fun, visceral and energetic. A perfect movie musical featuring perfect performances.

The Order of the Phoenix

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is the fifth film in the Harry Potter saga, and this film marks my renewed commitment to reviewing all the films in this series by the end of the summer, or at least before i have to go back to university in september. The Order of the Phoenix represents Harry's fifth school year at Hogwarts, and his first since the rebirth of Voldemort (sorry, spoiler) and the death of Cedric Diggory (sorry, more spoilers).

The landscape of The Order of the Phoenix is significantly darker than that of previous Potter films, the wizarding world is gripped by a possible threat from Lord Voldemort, the press is attempting to smear Harry Potter and Dumbledore at the request of the ministry and the ministry in interfering at Hogwarts, making Dolores Jane Umbridge Hogwarts high inquisitor, and later headmistress. The film introduces the Order of the Phoenix, a secret organization headquarter at 12 Grimmauld Place, Sirius' family home. The film shows the characters' evolution, and them finding their independence.

The visual landscape of the film is also darker, the film continues the trend of each film becoming lass and lass saturated, with less and less colour, showing the growing bleakness overtaking the world of the films, and the darkness that seeps into the stories. The world of Hagwarts becomes equally bleak, Harry describes him feeling alone, Dumbledore ignores him and Umbridge makes his life a misery. Starring the same cast as the other movies, this film adds Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix Lestrange, despite not having many lines, her presence in the film is unmatched, and her performance is note perfect. Imelda Staunton stars as Dolores Umbridge, imbuing the part with such malice and evil that she is almost, if not more hated than Voldemort. and finally Evanna Lynch plays Loona Lovegood, a kooky character that treads a fine line between endearingly queer and just plain wierd.

The film also presents several new environments, the climax of the film takes place in the department of mysteries, a series of rooms beneath the ministry of magic with an unknown purpose where prophecies are kept. The department has an unnatural blue tinge, and one of the first battles takes place in the hall of prophecy, an expansive room in which glass spheres line the walls containing prophecies which can only be taken by the keeper of the prophecy. The climactic battle takes place in the Death Chamber, a circular room featuring a stone arch in the center, at the top of a small hill is a stone archway, featuring a veil through which the dead can be heard. The environment of the department of mysteries remains elusive, and the large amount of CGI used to bring this environment to life works to it's advantage, giving the department a lack of lucidity.

The Order of the Phoenix is the most complete of the Harry Potter film yet, the tone is dark and mysterious, and the new additions to the cast are perfectly chosen, and Imelda Staunton gives a near perfect performance as Dolores Jane Umbridge. The way the cast and the tone of the series has matured is impressive, and The Order of the Phoenix is an impressive film. Rating: B+

Lord Voldemort: You've lost, old man.

Prizefight: MARVEL vs DC

Both these comic book companies have had huge success in the field of cinema, and both are still producing films, this post will analyze the differences between the ways these companies have adapted their universes to film, the completeness of their franchises and how coherent their film universes are.

DC have been making films for significantly longer than Marvel, DC first created a franchise with the release of the original superman film in 1978, which spawned four sequels and a semi reboot. The first batman film was released in 1989, directed by Tim Burton and starring Michael Keaton, the film became a blueprint for superhero movies released over the next decade, being dark and brooding, featuring graphic imagery and being unabashedly violent, and influencing the way superhero films were marketed and promoted. These films were both released by Warner Brothers, and to date the whole of the DC universe has been produced exclusively by Warner, giving the franchise a sense of cohesion not present in the more fragmented Marvel franchises.

Marvel Comics properties have had a significantly more tortured road to the big screen, the first movie produced was X-Men, which was released in 1999, to great critical acclaim, and which to date has spawned five sequels and two spin offs. This film was released by 20th Century Fox, as was The Fantastic Four, which itself spawned a sequel. The next property to be adapted was Spider-Man, released by Sony in 2002, spawning a trilogy of films and a rebooted franchise. In 2009 Disney purchased Marvel entertainment, and thus set up Marvel studios, which started producing it's own films financed and distributed by Disney, this gave birth to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, a shared world which some Marvel characters inhabit, notably the avengers.

Although the DC Universe may seem to be the least fragmented and the most complete, their films have all been based around only a handful of characters, and they still have not successfully created a shared universe, despite all efforts. The Marvel Cinematic Universe is the most complete shared universe ever seen on film, and Marvel remain the only studio that has managed to unite it's heroes in a single film. The universe has been hugely influential, and DC and Sony are now attempting to piece together universes, with Dawn of Justice being a clear attempt to replicate Marvels success.

The way Marvel franchises have been portrayed on film feels more complete than DC's attempts, despite the films being spread over various studios, more characters have been adapted to film, and the Marvel Cinematic Universe feels incredibly cohesive and a very impressive undertaking. Whereas the DC universe, while once great now feels tired and in need of rebuilding, and their attempts to create a shared universe between the Batman and Superman franchises feels rushed and forced.

Five Favorite Meryl Streep Performances

I am a little obsessed, i've been a fan of this woman for many years, and after 18 Oscar Nominations and 60 roles, it is time to rank my favorite Meryl Streep performances. It is only possible to do this with a few actors, and Streep is one of these. Most actors have too sparse a filmography for this to be possible, but Streep has incarnated so many iconic characters that it would be a travesty not to compile this list.

• Sister Beauvier: Doubt

Doubt is one of Meryl Streep's best movies, she plays Sister Aloysius Beauvier, the head of a nunnery and school, who is struggling to juggle her commitment to god and to justice, with her commitment to her leader, a priest who she suspects may be a pedophile.This is a role which requires tremendous gravitas, and Streep gives the part huge weight, playing the sister as intimidating and dour. Sister Beauvier is a hugely conflicted character, she struggles with her responsibilities and the doubt she has as to whether the priest truly is a pedophile, conveying this struggle with huge success.

• Jill: Manhattan

One of Streep's early roles, here she plays Woody Allen's lesbian ex-wife, an independent woman with whom Allen shares a child. Although this is a small character, and Streep was relatively unexperienced at the time, she infuses the role with the perfect amount of cool, and the character is relatively unfazed by Allen's neuroses. Again Streep shows us her extraordinary gift with accents, and the character has a light new york accent, that is subtle and blended, without being cartoonish.

• Miranda Priestly: Devil Wears Prada

I have oft spoken of my love for this movie, Streep plays Miranda Priestly, a fiercely professional and demanding magazine editor, this film is essentially a roman a clef about Anna Wintour, the current editor in chief of american Vogue, however rather than playing Priestly as a caricature or parody of the much feared Vogue editor, Streep instead crafts an entirely new character, taking choice components from Wintour, such as her unchanging hairstyle and her poised accent, and crafting a new person with them.

• Clarissa Vaughan: The Hours

I love this movie, and all three women are fantastic in this film. Streep plays a woman struggling to cope with the impending death of her best friend from AIDS. Already grieving for the loss of her friend, Vaughan attempts to understand the reasons for his death, whilst planning a party with her partner, Sally. The film analyzes the effect that the novel Mrs Dalloway has on her life, and Clarissa's life mirrors Mrs Dalloway's in many ways. Streep's performance is pensive, subtle, and, a word i'm sure we will hear a lot of in this post, poised.

• Julia Child: Julie & Julia

It is no secret that Streep is a master with accents, but Julia Child's accent is iconic, and the late TV personality and author was a much beloved figure. Streep walks a fine line between parody and imitation, finding a balance between making her performance to one note, and becoming a saturday night live skit. Streep's performance is loving and admiratory, and her command of Child's accent is hugely impressive.

The Michael Bay Apology

Of all the filmmakers who are too often unfairly criticized, Michael Bay is very often the most hated on, i previously described how i try to make this blog a celebration of the cinema and a positive experience, and thus i don't review or even watch films that i know i will hate, thus there is no Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles or Transformers 4 review, however Michael Bay holds an important place in today's film industry. Tentpole movies are a huge part of today's summer movie schedule, and studios now spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a single picture, normally a film that is certain to make money.

Many directors croak when given too much money, the production nightmares of John Carter and The Lone Ranger, both of which went hugely over budget, and both of which cost in excess of 200 million dollars to make show that although it is hard to make a film on a tight budget, it is often harder to make one with a huge budget. With Pain and Gain being a slight exception, costing only 26 million dollars, most of Bay's films cost in excess of 100 million to produce, and his films have grossed in excess of 5 billion dollars worldwide.Bay has consistantly shown that he is capable of handling huge productions, his films rarely run over budget, and they always make money.

Michael Bay's films have a target audience, mainly teenage boys, and although most film critics loathe his films, audiences love them, and his box office returns are proof of that. Although i love smaller film productions like Lost in Translation and The Hours, these are not projects that are huge runaway successes, and they don't make hundreds of millions of dollars at the box office. It is films like Transformers that are the reason these projects are green-lit in the first place, tentpole movies are named as such because that are able to prop up other, less successful films, so whilst it is great that risky films like Gravity can get made, it is only because of films like Transformers, that money is available to finance a 100 million dollar art film.

Critically i will also apologise, unlike other filmmakers, Michael Bay has his own aesthetic, he tries to make good film, and he at least shows a mere level of respect for his audience that is not seen in other filmmakers. The was a definite improvement between Transformers 2 and 3, and Pain and Gain was actually, sort of good! Despite being critically reviled, Bay has also show a level of nonchalance, and he is great at making films that appeal to his target audience, so while giant robot porn might not be to everyone's taste, Bay at least has his own aesthetic, and while his films are not to my taste, Michael Bay has at least shown himself to be a highly consistent filmmaker, critically and commercially.

"I make movies for teenage boys. Oh, dear, what a crime." - Michael Bay

Prizefight: Leonardo Vs Redford

Anyone who knows me, or who reads my blog on a regular basis will tell you that i am a huge fan of The Great Gatsby, and all derivative works, including the films and even the soundtracks. This post represents the first in a new series called prizefights, in which i will pit competitors together, and decide which one is better, in this case i am comparing two performers who played Jay Gatsby, Leonardo DiCaprio in the 2013 film, and Robert Redford in the 1974 version. In this case the two will be compared on their acting, closeness to the source material, fashion and how iconic their performances have become.

For me, Gatsby is something of a fashion icon, and the 1974 defined the throback twenties fashion of the decade, the film propelled designer Ralph Lauren to international stardom, and was able to rewrite history, and retrospectively altered the way most people defined fashion in the twenties. The 2013 version takes a similar approach, and modernizes the fashion of the era, with the men wearing boots, trousers being more tailored and slim, and jackets no longer being belted, but featuring slim waistcoats and tie pins. Although the fashion of the 1974 film is arguably more iconic, and had more of an influence of the fashion of the era, the fashion of the 2013 version of Gatsby is more true to the era, more imaginative, and personally, i find it more chic.

Both Redford and DiCaprio are tremendous actors, and it is very hard to compare their performances, as they are both spectacular, Redford portrays Gatsby as being very smooth, as a slick buisnessman, and as a man who never looses his cool, and a man who is stable in his belief that Daisy will always love him, DiCaprio's Gatsby is more loose, he does loose his cool, we start to see the man behind the character, the inner being behind the facade that he has created, and we begin to see his true colours. The 2013 Gatsby is also far more forthcoming about his past than the 1974 version was, he openly tells Nick about his past and he is unashamed of all that he has done, so whilst the portrayals are different, neither is really better than the other, and these are both fine actors at the absolute top of their game.

The 2013 film is certainly more faithful to the source material than the 1974 version, in the novel, Jay Gatsby is pitiful and childish, he has a naive belief that he can change the past, that he can wipe out Daisy's history with Tom, and that they can recapture what they once had, DiCaprio's Gatsby is similar to this, he is whiney and churlish, he throws a tantrum when he doesn't get his way and he becomes violent when Daisy won't obey him, this is in complete contrast to his character earlier in the film, when he is more slick and polished. There is something pathetic about the character in the film, as there is in the book, whereas Redford's Gatsby is too cool and slick, and doesn't have the ragged edges that the character in the book does.

In terms of iconography, there is little competition. Redford for a long time was the ultimate Gatsby, his performance redefined the way the novel was read and imagined, his performance is strong, iconic and powerful, and he defines not just the character or film, but the whole of the seventies in some ways, his portrayal of the character, the way the character dress and his hairstyle are iconic images. Overall, it's a tough call, both actors have factors in their favour, however Leonardo DiCaprio's performance, the way the character dresses, his smooth yet rough around the edges performance is a fantastic adaptation of the novel, and, for me, he represents the character as i imagine him from the source material.

Five Favorite CGI Visual Worlds

Computers are now more important in cinema than celluloid, and binary code is replacing real sets, some films eschew sets all together and use actors in front of a green screen preferring to create the visuals of the film in a computer, i don't resent this change, and i think it brings a fun visual flair to modern movies that used to be missing. Films made in this way are often visually stunning, eccentric and artistic. I am here listing my five favorite CGI environments, excluding animated films, because that's a post for another time.

• Gravity: This is a film which was created almost entirely in a computer, and yet it is almost impossible to believe that this film wasn't actually shot in space, the film's vision of outer space is so complete and detailed, and the CGI environment matches so perfectly to the lighting and cinematography used on the film, that the film is a seamless blend of live action and a visual environment. Gravity is a film created as much in a computer as on a sound stage, and the film is visually striking and highly detailed.

• 300: Another adaptation of a Frank Miller classic, this film was again shot on a digital backlot, and the film goes so far as to replicate various cells from the comic book frame for frame, the film creates a visual world that is highly defined, the geography of the battle field is strongly located, and the film is stronger because of this. The film uses a highly unique colour processing and the color red is used as a marker in the film, 300 is a film which is visually highly unique and which has inspired many other Hollywood productions.
  

• Mary Poppins: true, this is a film which is significantly older than the others on this list, and it is the only to use the sodium screen technique, Disney was a pioneer in this method, and this was one of the first films to use any kind of superimposition, and the film allows the characters to jump into Bert's street paintings, and for the characters to interact with the environment, the scene is iconic, and differs from the other selections shown here in that it was created without the use of a computer, and in that it's use was pioneering.
  

• Alice in Wonderland: This film differs significantly from the others on this list, as it incorporates the films characters into the environment, the film features some characters who are entirely animated, and others who are live action, but altered or colored with CGI. The film is visually a treat, and the production used sets covered with green screen, allowing the characters to interact with their environments. The environments used in this film are dark yet colorful, and the film uses the CGI to it's full extent, and created a world impossible without the use of a computer.
  

• The Matrix: The Wachowski's invented a CGI technique called bullet time, using cameras mounted 360° round the performer able to capture from any angle, over a green screen, so that a digital environment can be superimposed onto the action, and the performance can be sped up or slowed down as needed, this technique has been much imitated and copied in the years that have followed, however the technique is best seen in it's original form, and here the effect is used to show the nature of time in this stimulated reality.

66th Primetime Emmy Awards

This post will attempt to strike a balance between prediction and opinion, I'm going to attempt to half heartedly predict the winners of the upcoming Primetime Emmys, whilst also telling you all who i would like to win, i won't predict direction or writing, as this is tedious, but i will predict all the acting and most of the producing categories.

Programs

Outstanding Comedy Series: Since 2010 Modern Family has had this in the can, this past season was significantly less well received than other seasons, however i believe that the academy will still, honor Modern Family this year.

Outstanding Drama Series: Given that this year represents the last year of eligibility for Breaking Bad, and given that the last season was so highly acclaimed, it seems unlikely that this fantastic drama series would miss out on the trophy this year.

Outstanding Miniseries: This is a tough category to predict, as none of the nominees have been nominated before in this category, and many of them are new shows, i think Fargo is probably the most acclaimed and most widely seen of the nominees.

Outstanding Television Movie: Again, this category did not exist last year, and none of the films have been nominated before, the only film that received high acclaim was The Normal Heart, if this film is snubbed, the only entry that could possibly scoop it is Sherlock: His Last Vow, whose entry in this category, is, frankly confusing.

Acting

Outstanding Lead Actor in a Comedy Series: This is almost certainly a two horse race, it is between Jim Parsons for The Big Bang Theory, who has won the award three of the past four years, and Louis C.K. who has never won, and whose show was particularly acclaimed this year.

Outstanding Lead Actress in a Comedy Series: Julia Louis-Dreyfus has won this award for two years straight, and she may clinch it again this year, however the grounded performance of Taylor Schilling is a refreshing change from the usual hijinks in this category, and seeing as this is her first year of eligability, she is untested in this category.

Outstanding Lead Actor in a Drama Series: There is absolutely no question here, Breaking Bad has officially ended and thus this award is Bryan Cranston's from the get-go.

Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series: This is more opinion than prediction, but i really hope that Lizzy Caplan is awarded for her performance in Masters of Sex, Caplan has the kind of natural ability in front of the camera that a young Joan Crawford had, and her performance in this series is stunning.

Starring Scarlett Johansson

Lucy is a 2014 action film starring Scarlett Johansson and directed by Luc Besson. The film is about an american expat living in Taiwan called Lucy, she is kidnapped by drug dealers and has a bag placed in her stomach, when the bag starts leaking, Lucy is able to access more of her mind, over the 10% humans currently use (according to the film), when she is able to access other reaches of her mind she is able to do other things such as telekinesis, telepathy and the ability to change her appearance and metabolism at will.

The film's logic is not infallible, firstly the film's entire premise is based on little more than an urban myth, we now know that we use far more than 10% or our brain's capacity, and that defining it in percentage terms is illogical. Nonetheless the film takes this concept and applies it entirely literally. Secondly the film's ending, whilst poetic and beautiful, is never really explained, and the details of why Lucy's body starts to self destruct make little sense. Despite the film being slightly illogical, Lucy believes so wholeheartedly in it's concept that this matters little.

The film is enthusiastically and almost aggressively silly, currently, thanks in no small part to Christopher Nolan, modern blockbusters always take themselves far too seriously, and it is refreshingly to see a film that, if anything, doesn't take itself seriously enough, the film is content to be no more than a dumb action film, but if anything, it doesn't take itself seriously enough, this is a film that really has something to say about evolution and the future of mankind, but i am grateful that a Luc Besson film didn't try to be anything too paradigmatic.

The main character of Lucy is interesting, and hopefully the films success with Johansson above the marquee will finally convince Marvel Studios to greenlight a Scarlett Widow solo film. As lucy becomes more and more powerful, she becomes less empathetic and less human, this is perhaps intentional, but we reach a point when we can no longer view her as human, Lucy becomes almost invincible in the film's third act, and this is a problem as we the film eventually becomes less and less thrilling, because we are no longer scared about the safety of our heroine, Lucy also never interracts with her enemies, and although it is pretty cool to see Taiwanese gangsters fighting thin air, it would have been nice to have seen a true fist to fist fight scene.

Lucy is an oddly refreshing film, though it is riddled with logical gaps and pseudoscience, it is great to finally see a summer blockbuster that doesn't take itself  too seriously, that powers through it's ridiculousness with fun and thrills, and which is actually rather well made, Johansson provides a suitably gonzo performance in the title role, and despite being highly silly, Lucy is actually a lot of fun, provided one doesn't attempt to take it too seriously. Rating: B-

Lucy: Life was given to us a billion years ago. Now you know what you can do with it.

Mastering the Art of Blogging

I’ve been writing this blog for a little over 18 months, and i am immensely proud of all that I have achieved ith Popcorn@Movies, I started writing this site as a cathartic exploration of cinema, but it has evolved into a celebration of the cinema. Celebration implies positivity, and I have tried to keep this blog a positive experience for you readers, describing it as a positive experience means not that I feel the need to give everything a positive review, but that I don’t unnecessarily criticize things beyond what is fair.

Bloggers have recently received (and rightly so) a rather poor rap, the likes of Perez Hilton and numerous music bloggers have reduced blogging to it’s absolute worst, constant criticism. Blogs are a great way of getting your opinions into the world, it’s free, anyone can do it and no permission is required. Bloggers are described on a unified platform, like what we all do is exactly the same, when it couldn’t be more different, every post I write takes two hours to write (which is a little scary considering I have written over 200 posts) and I try to make them readable and enjoyable for the reader, other blogs are no more that endless pictures of celebrities and media personalities. Others are little more than glorified twitter feeds featuring endless opinion with little substance and no structure.

Popcorn@Movies is intended to be a positive experience, and hopefully, an educational one, I try to make this site a celebration of the cinema, I invite users to journey through current and past films, enjoying and critiquing them. There are people in the film industry that I honestly dislike, I find Adam Sandler to be lazy and unfunny, most Michael Bay films are bloated and unashamedly commercial and modern studio executives, and although I have written posts about Adam Sandler, and I have reviewed Michael Bay films, there are far more positive reviews than negative reviews on this site.

The reason that this site may seem inundated with positive reviews is not because I am uncritical but because I don’t go and see, or waste my time reviewing films that I hated and have little to say about. Whilst liking everything is obviously a sign of a lack of opinion, being fixated on things that you dislike, to the point of starting a blog about how much you hate something is egocentric and weirdly self centred. The film industry is bigger today than it has ever been, there are more and more films to choose from, more studios and more actors than there were fifty years ago, if you really don’t like something, you have plenty of other accessible films to choose from. This accessability is as much a disadvantage as it is an advantage, with so much available and a lot of it free, people think that they are entitled to an opinion on everything, that their opinions matter and that other people should listen to what they have to say. This is why I attempt to make this blog a blend of opinion and information, opinion alone is a little dry.

I feel passionately about this blog, because I feel passionately about cinema, because I love movies more than any other art form and because I love them so much, I attempt to convey this through what I write here. I hope that you enjoy reading this website, and I hope that I convey my enthusiasm through this site, I hope that I inspire you to watch films that you never before considered and I hope that you find my opinions to be truly fair and balanced, and not in a Fox News kind of way.

Feminism: The Discussion

The fact that this is an article that even needs to be written saddens me greatly, but it must. Last weekend, two action films were released, the R rater Lucy featuring the definitely female Scarlett Johansson and the PG-13 rated Hercules, starring the definitely male Dwayne Johnson. These are two fairly similar movies, not thematically but in terms of marketing and quality. Both films were marketed on the strengths of their stars, and both have similar metascores. Dwayne Johnson is an undeniably charismatic actor, this year i proclaimed him to be the only true action hero left, and he was the highest grossing actor of 2013. What was surprising to industry insiders was that Lucy won, it grossed more than Hercules despite having a female lead and being rated R.

For years filmmakers have been reticent about making high budget films with female leads. Despite the fact that women make up 52% of the population and, like men, do go and see films, and despite the fact that men also like going to see films with female leads. The figures speak for themselves, Lucy made $44 million at the box office, and was evenly split between men and women. 2013 was also a remarkable year for women in film. For the first time since 1973, the highest grossing film at the US domestic box-office had a lead female character, the film was Catching Fire, starring Jennifer Lawrence. The highest grossing film worldwide was Frozen, an animated adaptation of The Snow Queen featuring not one but two leading female characters, and finally of the films nominated for the best picture Oscar, the highest grossing nominee was Gravity, which was not only a film with a lead female character, but a film with only a female character, in addition, the highest grossing comedy of the year was The Heat, a film, again, featuring two female leads. It seems that people don't mind seeing films starring women, who knew?

Studio executives are notorious cowards, we live in a world where there are plenty of fantastic films, but where most of them are low budget independent films, for instance of the Best Picture nominees, only gravity was a studio financed film, the others were independent's, only distributed by major studio's. The problem is that studio's will only release a film if it can be turned into a franchise, or merchandised, thus many high budget action films featuring women simply never see the light of day. The problem is that studio's, which do so much research and polling, fail to understand and struggle with change. Hollywood is a world, where when something works we just keep doing the same thing, the problem is that films with male leads make money, and so there is no impetus for studios to place women above the marquee.

The biggest problem with the film industry is that it doesn't show any sign of changing, the world is round, women make up half of the western worlds population, and like men, women also like to go and see movies. It is time for studios to wake up and realize that female driven films can be successful, that women are just as funny as men, and that men are not repulsed by the idea of going to see a film with a female lead. Films with women at the helm are some of the most successful films released today, and studio executives must start to realize that.

The Backlash against Blackfish

Well the first thing i can say in this article, is that Blackfish was robbed, despite being the most noteworthy, controversial and current documentary of the year, it failed to pick up an Oscar nomination, Blackfish was the only documentary released this year that had any kind of impact, yet the academy failed to recognize that, to be honest, Blackfish was the only documentary that most people saw or even heard of, shame on you AMPAS.

The film, my review of which can be viewed here, started a backlash against Seaworld the repurcussions of which are still being felt. Visitors at SeaWorld are down six percent from last year, and due to the company going public, they now have a huge amount of debt to contend with, it doesn't look good for BlackStone or for SeaWorld 'Entertainment', it is interesting that despite America now coming out of the recession, visitors are still down, so the decline in visitors is perhaps due to Americans realizing that they have a choice where to spend their vacation dollars. In fact Ondi Timoner, director of Bring Your Own Doc's son didn't want to go ti SeaWorld after seeing the film, proving that Blackfish is a powerful documentary that has the ability to change peoples opinions.

We can also see that even SeaWorld Entertainment knows that the decline in visitors is due to Blackfish, in December 2013, nearly a year after the release of the film, SeaWorld spent a fortune taking out a full page ad in The New York Times, to rebuke the events portrayed in the film, they also used twitter and YouTube to release videos and comments from SeaWorld trainers contradicting the events portrayed in the movie. The fact that they are willing to spend so much money, time and effort to rebuke what is portrayed shows two things, firstly that SeaWorld is scared, they realize the effect that this film has on people, that this film is stopping people coming tho their parks, and that they need to do something to combat the negative publicity against them.

Secondly, by rebuking the events in the film so strongly, they are in a sense validating them, if the film was a complete fantasy, they would just ignore it, but seeing as they are taking notice of this film, and attempting to fight back, it suggests that their is some validity to the films claims. A good parralel to this is the film Escape From Tomorrow, filmed clandestinely at Disney World and Disneyland, the film is less that complimentary about Disneys business practices and ethos, yet Disney didn't just ignore the film, they included it in Disney A to Z: The Official Encyclopedia, and didn't rebuke any of the events of the film or the films agenda. By rejecting so forcefully the concepts put forward by Blackfish, SeaWorld shows their vulnerability and manage to reinforce what this movie promotes. By taking out a full page ad in a national paper, all SeaWorld does is promote the movie and encourage more people to see it, and thus decrease ticket sales.

Whatever you think of Blackfish personally, it is impossible to ignore the powerful images it presents, whether you think that animals are deliberately mistreated at SeaWorld or not, the fact is that three people have been killed by Tilikum, the parks remain the only theme parks where workers are still injured regularly, and the list of incidents involving whales in SeaWorld parks is longer than my arm, the video footage of bleeding whales and rake marks across the whales backs is real, and it is a fact that Orcas die younger in the parks than they do in the wild. I suppose all there's left to say to SeaWorld is: "Karma's a bitch man".