AHS: Freak Show

The fourth season of anthology series American Horror Story is subtitled Freak Show, and takes place in the town of Jupiter, Florida, where an aging German ex-patriot is attempting to keep one of the last freak-shows in America afloat. Jessica Lange plays Elsa Mars, secretly an amputee who tries to keep her show in business. Starring alongside Lange is a diverse cast of AHS regulars and new actors, who play the sideshow's various 'freaks'.

Sarah Paulson plays both Bette and Dot Tattler, a pair of conjoined twins who become embroiled in murder after their mother is found dead in their kitchen, they are visited by Mars in the hospital, who takes them in, and who protects them from the authorities. Kathy Bates also returns to the show playing Ethel, the shows resident bearded lady and Evan Peters plays her son, a man with fused fingers who performs as 'the lobster boy'. Amazon Eve is played by trans actress Erika Ervin, a woman who is abnormally large.

The show is visually very different to other iterations of the show, whereas both Coven and Asylum were cold, dark and stylish, Freak Show is much softer, the camera is less focused, less sharp giving the whole show a 1950's movie style. Overall the show feels a lot warmer than previous versions, both Coven and Asylum were set in highly hostile environments, the atmosphere of Freak Show is warmer, with the show actually being a place of safety for most of these 'freaks'.

Despite this change in atmosphere, the show is actually the scariest version yet, the antagonist of this season is a terrifying clown, who wears the bottom half of a mask featuring a horrific wide smile, which contrasts with his dead eyes, the clown is responsible for a number of murders which have rocked the small town, leaving four dead. The opening of the first episode is atmospheric and dark, and the entire episode is one of the most chilling the show has yet seen.

The entire cast, many of whom were used in previous seasons is superb, Jessica Lange is fantastic, in what will be her final season on the show and the entire cast is excellent, many of them are favourites, and it is fantastic to see them back on the small screen, albeit playing different characters. Rating: A-

Ten Years Of Mean Girls

Is it really possible? The seminal high school comedy written by Tina Fey and directed by Mark Waters was released a decade ago today. I don't think i need to explain the plot to you, but in case some of you have been living under a rock for the past ten years, i will. Cady Heron who was previously home schooled arrives in a new school after moving from africa to the united states. She makes friends with two art students, and they convince her to infiltrate a group of popular girls, named The Plastics and usurp their status. The film was written by SNL alumnus Tina Fey, who also played Mrs Norburry, in her feature film debut.

The film starred a young and talented cast, who have gone on to manage their careers with differing success. Lindsay Lohan starred as Cady Heron, and has gone on to crash and burn, entering rehab six times, and has recently starring in a reality show docu-series on OWN. Rachel McAdams went on to star in many films such as About Time, Morning Glory and To The Wonder. Lizzy Caplan disappeared from public consciousness for a while, and recently resurfaced, starring in showtime's Masters Of Sex, while Daniel Franzese, Lacey Chabert and Jonathan Bennett all slipped from the public eye and have yet to resurface. Meanwhile Tina Fey herself went on to parody Sarah Palin and won the public's heart, finally Amanda Seyfried went on to star in Mamma Mia, Les Miserables and Lovelace.

The film quickly garnered a strong cult following around people of my generation, and is infinitely quotable. Mariah Carey wrote the song "Obsessed", inspired by this movie, and Jennifer Lawrence referenced the film at the People's Choice Awards. The film inspired many a meme, You Go Glen Coco perhaps being the most iconic. Fetch sort of did happen for a while, on social media anyway, and the film even spawned a semi-sequel released direct to dvd that no-one saw or cared about.

Ten years on the film is as current as ever, it's depiction of female friendship and rivalry is as accurate and uncanny as ever. This Tina Fey penned comedy serves not only as a reminder of how talented Lindsay Lohan really is, but also how irreverent and funny Tina Fey is as a screenwriter. So to commemorate 10 years of mean, lets really make fetch happen shall we?

Regina: Gretchen, stop trying to make fetch happen! It's not going to happen!

Tom Ford's A Single Man Reviewed.

Well my favorite author is Christopher Isherwood, i read Goodbye To Berlin one summer many years ago and got hooked, reading one new one a year since then, i was recently given My Guru and His Disciple for christmas, I will read it when schedule permits! A single Man is an american drama film released in 2009 directed by fashion designer Tom Ford. The film is an adaptation of Isherwood's 1962 novel of the same name and stars Colin Firth and Julianne Moore.

The film depicts a day in the life of an english professor, struggling to come to terms with the death of his lover, eight months earlier. In the film, George decides to commit suicide, and thus the events of his day and the people he meets are peppered with a special importance. The film was directed by Tom Ford, and thus it is no surprise that the film is supremely beautiful. What is perhaps more surprising than the visuals is the script, which is also fantastic, written by Ford himself with David Scearce, the script gives us real insight into the character of George, what makes him tick, the relationship he had with Jim and that he has with Charlie. The film uses voice over sparingly, allowing us to see inside Georges head, without the film becoming a hokey copy and paste from page to screen.

The films leading performances are fantastic, Colin Firth is utterly compelling in the leading role, and we believe in his resounding heartbreak. Also fantastic is Julianne Moore, who plays George's friend Charlie, a former party-girl and divorcee who is coming to terms with her fading beauty and now pointless existence. The character could easily become camp or two dimensional, but Moore is extraordinary as the slightly wild and rather unpredictable Charlie, a character we all think we know.

The story, like much of Isherwood's work is quite heavily autobiographical, A Single Man is one of Isherwood's later works, and the relationship between George and Jim is heavily inspired by his relationship with Don Bachardy. Isherwood was thirty years Bachardy's senior, and he surely knew that Bachardy was going to outlive him, the book is essentially Isherwood's exploration of heartbreak and loneliness. The visuals of the film are explained by the fact that George has decided to kill himself, and thus he sees the world with a special eye, and he sees the beauty in things previously thought of as dull or bland. Also present in the film is the threat of nuclear annihilation, George gives little thought to the idea of destruction, and feels that the desolation nuclear warfare would bring could perhaps not be such a bad thing. The film is visceral in the sense that, at certain moments, mostly when there is no dialogue, the audience is able to feel George's pain, and completely understand the emotional despair that he is feeling.

The music of the film is also fantastic, and Abel Korzeniowski's score is subtly but elegantly used. A Single Man is thought provoking, elegant and beautiful, featuring a top notch performance by Colin Firth and impeccable direction from Tom Ford. Rating: A-

George: the silence drowns out the noise, and I can feel rather than think,

Film Stock Vs Digital

This is a tetchy subject, last night i participated in a screening of Once Upon a Time… the Revolution, on 35mm film stock. The film looks fantastic and has been beautifully restored by Martin Scorsese's World Cinema Foundation. Scorsese, previously a huge proponent of shooting on film, announced his plans to abandon film stock for shooting digitally, and has not filmed on stock since 2011's Hugo. Film stock has a romantic, faded look, a beautiful cinematic look, whereas digital cinematography tends to look overly sharp, too crisp and poorely focused. WALL-E, an animated film even attempted to capture the look of film stock, with beautifully faded backgrounds. Watching film on 35mm stock has become a privilege, and most cinema's have now converted to digital projection. The cinema group of which i am a member, the cinéfac, is on the cusp of purchasing a digital projector, and i was intrigued to consider the differences between digital and film projection.

Many fillmmakers have argued that each has their place, and that while film stock cinematography might be more appropriate for Oscar winning drama's, digital film is probably more appropriate for high octane action films. This is crap. One really should note that all three Dark Knight movies were filmed on film stock and in IMAX, and that Inception and the first two transformers films were shot on film also. Additionally, the producers of the upcoming Amazing Spider-man 2 announced that the film was to be shot on film stock instead of digitally. Christopher Nolan attempted to partially shoot his 2010 film Inception digitally, but ended up abandoning the use of the digital format for film, as digital cameras were too unreliable. Michael Bay also stated that film stock was used for much of Transformer's 2's action sequences, as digital cameras strobed much of the time.

Digital film is also of inferior quality to 35mm film stock, the original Lord Of The Rings Trilogy was shot on film, and thus has a fantastic cinematographic look, and a fantastic tonal quality. Skyfall, was additionally shot on film, by legendary  cinematographer Roger Deakins, and has a fantastic sepia quality. The Hobbit trilogy by comparison, despite looking fantastic, was shot digitally, and thus it lacks the soft tones and beautiful focus of the original trilogy, and the way the film is shot means that with some different editing, the film could look very similar to a music video.

There are of course some advantages to shooting digitally, the primary reason for shooting digitally would be for 3D films, The Great Gatsby, Hugo and Life of Pi were all shot digitally, and the past three years mark the first time that the best cinematography Oscar has gone for digital cinematography. 3D movies can only be filmed digitally, and it is far preferential to shoot films in 3D than to convert them (clash of the titans anyone?), so in this case i will concede, digital cinematography is far preferential to film stock in this case, because generally converted 3D movies look awful.

The other big advantage is cost, Christopher Nolan's directorial debut was filmed for a tiny budget, and is commonly referred to as a 'no-budget movie'. The actors rehearsed films extensively, so that only one or two takes would be needed, as buying the film stock was by far the most expensive part of the budget. Shooting digitally allows filmmakers to shoot for a much lower cost, and allows directors to film over redundant takes, impossible on film. Projection is also much cheaper, projecting a 35mm is expensive, it costs a lot, it is much more work and the film stock has to be shipped, which can be expensive for long films, which may be on up to six reels or more, digital films are much easier to transport, as longer films do not take up more space, and the film doesn't need to be mounted. Digital camera's are also much lighter and more manouverable, and RED EPIC cameras are particularly deft. This effect however is effectively annulled when filming in 3D, as 3D camera rigs are heavy and unweildy, and can cause many a shoulder ache. 

Overall despite all the advantages of shooting and projecting digitally, there is simply nothing like 35mm film reel, watching the reels turn, marking the breaks and mounting the film, smelling the old reels and watching the beautiful flickering, faded image. That's reel cinema! (sorry)

Return To Oz

Return to Oz is a 1985 dark fantasy film from Disney and is a half sequel to the 1939 film The Wizard of Oz, and an adaptation of the second and third Oz books. Although receiving mixed to negative reviews upon its release, the film has now become something of a cult movie. The film featured a cast of largely unknown actors. The films is considered by its fans and by fans of the books to be a much more faithful adaptation of the novels than the MGM film. Part of the success of this film is in its refusal to sink so low as to attempt to replicate what made the 1939 film so iconic, this film has been compared in recent years to Oz The Great And Powerful, however what makes this film so much better than 'Oz' is the fact that it is much less reductive and less referential, the film is in full color, the opening included (unlike Oz the Great and Powerful). The film actually makes more use of intellectual property created for the 1939 film, such as the ruby slippers, however is actually much less derivative.

The film is much darker than its predecessor, the film begins with Dorothy in Kansas, unable to sleep and having hallucinations about Oz, her mother sends her to an institution, where she escapes on a stormy night, in a chicken coop, and finally washes up on the shores of Oz, where she discovers a world torn apart, and destroyed by the Nome King. The yellow brick road has been destroyed, and munchkinland is in ruins and the world is observed by the rocks, who relay information back to the Nome King. All of the citizens of Oz have been turned to stone, including the Tin Man and the Cowardly Lion. Dorothy makes two friends in Oz who are essentially horrific industrial versions of her previous friends, she encounters a man named Tic-Toc, an industrial tin man who has to be constantly wound up in order to move and think, and who is not alive, and who has no soul. Her other friend is Jack Pumpkinhead, a scarecrow with a pumpkin for a head, who was created in order to scare off the wheelers, and who was brought to life using Mombi's powder of life. The trio use the powder of life to bring to life a flying sofa they have patched together. The trio travel to the Nome Kings cavern where they discover that he has the emerald slippers, and that he destroyed Oz and turned the scarecrow into an ornament, the group must reclaim the slippers, and save the wonderful land of Oz.

The film makes fantastic use of practical effects, at a time when Star Wars and 2001 A Space Odessey had already been released, and huge advancements were being made in the field of CGI and computer animation, this film uses claymation to animate the Nome King and his minions. Billina is animated using audio animatronics, a technique sadly rarely used on film anymore, being really only used on theme park rides, and a technique for which the Walt Disney Company is known. (Animatronics were also used in The Chronicles of Narnia, also a disney movie) The tone of this film is rather dark, scenes involving the destruction of Oz, may be actually traumatic for some viewers! The film is well acted, and Fairuza Balk does a fine job as Dorothy Gale, holding up the entire movie, and she really is a good actor for a child star. For the record the film is not perfect, it does have some issues, there are occasional tonal inconsistencies, the film suffers from poor pacing and at times seems to lack story and substances, and seems to not have quite enough to fill a feature length film which is longer than the prerequisite one hour thirty.

Overall I really liked Return to Oz, the film is dark and brooding, nicely low budget and organic, and actually adds something to the source material rather than trying to replicate the success of the MGM film, the film feels much less reductive than other Oz movies, and has a nice mature tone and dazzling visual style, and despite some tonal inconsistencies and pacing problems, I can see why this has become a cult film.
Rating: B+

Dorothy: Because I can't sleep, and I talk about a place that I've been to, but nobody believes that it exists.

Evolution of a cult classic

Most bloggers would probably call this a 'fan suggestion', 99% of the people of the people who read this blog i know, thus i will call it a 'friend suggestion'. My first inclination was to compare this particular film to another cult slassic, however seing as the only cult classics i could think of were The Rocky Horror Picture Show and Priscilla Queen of the Desert, i thought it might be more prudent to discuss the film alone, lets leave the camp classics for another time. The film and the book on which it is based are essentially critiques of commercialism and our culture of advertising, these are carried over into the film, as shown by scenes such as the trashing of the new VW Beetle, IKEA furniture and the destruction of the coffee shop. Norton himself spoke of the Beetle, saying that the original Beetle stood for freedom, and emancipation and yet the new Beetle stood for commercialism and capitalism.

The film is ludicrously intelligent, and shows strong performances from its 5 leads, particularly the two main characters, however i feel the true star turn is Bonham-Carter as Marla, who manages to on one hand play a sexy voluptuous femme fatale, and yet also manages to show a great amount of depth in a character that if played by a lesser actress could become 2-dimensionnel and superficial.

Another intriguing theme of the film is its view on masculinity, in some ways the character of Bob Paulson, played by Meatloaf, is the embodiment of the crisis of masculinity, and the way patriarchy is being lost in a modern society, the character was a former bodybuilder, and testicular cancer survivor, who without his testicles, grows man boobs (or bitch tits as he describes him) and becomes more than a little flabby. Bob's appearance in the film is essentially a metaphor for society, and the how something can only become stretched so far before it snaps, the was his body has from years of abuse.

Aside from the film containing a series of metaphors, the film is also supremely entertaining, and uses a unique visual style and narrative which makes the film complex and distinguished, many gags in the film will get a laugh, especially the infamous glove scene (i guess Kathy Griffin was right, people really do love fisting) Rating: A+

"Narrator: I felt like destroying something beautiful." 

https://twitter.com/jossemovies