#and screen vs theatrical acting are very different. but also even if you were in your friend's student film for funzies that's not the same

[somnianus]

On Eastern dramas vs Western dramas

Part 2: On Theatricality and how it transfers into Chinese/Eastern Dramas and Cinema

Part 1   Part 2

Here, I reference a fantastic article from the Asian Theatre Journal, 2008.

So to recap, the problem I’m exploring is this: Why do some East Asian dramas/movies look so over the top? Overacted? Overemotional? Why is it not more realistic?

My answer is in part 1, on the concept of mo, which is the traditional Chinese thought that emotional revelation is more important than accurate realistic depictions in art. Western audiences are more used to plot-heavy, realistic depictions of dramas, whereas traditional Chinese audiences are used to the opposite. They find the plot not so important, but focus more on the content of the work, the spirit of it, how it makes you feel.

1. How traditional Chinese drama translate into cinema/screens?

Making the jump from Beijing/Peking opera stages, or jingju, to cinema screens caused a lot of trouble.

a. Production-wise, early 1900s

It was difficult to adapt the very open, 3d stage into a “realist flat screen,” which was much more advantageous to Western eyes because the camera lens was invented based on “Renaissance principles of fixed point perspectives and foreshortening.”

b. 1950s-60s

Many still tried to adopt the Beijing opera style into film, but it was still very hard because the two mediums were so contradictory. Beijing opera relied on live, grand aesthetics along with the knowledge that the important aspect of drama was emotion and internal struggle, vs film at the time was very focused on accurate “mimesis,” or imitations of real life. One such example was critics actually laughing about the adaptations because the opera actors mimicked riding a horse in the traditional style - that is, minus the horse. Film would have them ride a prop or real horses.

Eventually, many changes were made to the style to better incorporate it into film, and it still kept a lot of its original roots (i.e. makeup/grandiosity in costume, emotions, etc). Western concepts of a limited stage, and emphasis on plot and tragedy were expounded upon. And eventually you have the modern-day dramas (1970s+).

2. Japanese Noh  能 theater - Kurosawa’s Ran

Noh is a Japanese form of theater that is a dance-based dramatic work. It tells stories of supernatural beings transformed into humans and etc. One of its major notes is its very stylized conventional use of specific gestures to portray emotions. Iconic, specific masks are used to portray the roles of the actors such as the ghosts, women, deities, and demons.

Akira Kurosawa’s Ran is lauded as one of the greatest films ever made. It’s a Japanese-French production heavily inspired by Shakespeare’s King Lear. There are many many detailed videos on YouTube about his precise filming methods and movement aesthetics. The body language can be seen as “over-acted” if you come from a Western background. Why? Because it takes from traditional Noh theatre:

Long periods of static motion and silence, followed by an abrupt, sometimes violent change in stance. Heavy ghost-like Makeup. Highly emotive gestures, sometimes repetitive to emphasize the characteristic of a character. All very unrealistic, but that’s not the point, right? Because this also displays mo, it takes the emotive expression, the revelation of fear/action/hope to the front of the stage.

3. Japanese Kabuki theatre - acting style is also larger than life

Kabuki actors also make great effort to express themselves in highly stylzed gestures (i.e. the men play women’s roles and over-act their femininity). 

One major difference between Kabuki and much of Western theatre is that kabuki actors make less of an attempt to hide the “performance” aspect of the work. They’re fully aware that they’re performing, and the audience isn’t there to get “lost in the moment.” Everything -- actors, costumes, dialogue, is larger than life. Realism is far less emphasized, the form generally favoring what is often referred to as “formalized beauty.”

One example of this is the highlight of an aragato kabuki performance: the famous mie. The mie is a dramatic pose adopted by the main (oftentimes male) character during moments of emotional intensity. (The proper phrase for this action is mie o kiru, or to "cut a mie.") Announced by the beating of wooden clappers, the actor freezes in a statuesque pose and crosses one or both eyes. Often it's preceded by a head roll. The idea is to capture the highest moments of tension into one physical gesture and to more or less hold the actor and the audience in a breathless trance. After a few seconds, the actor relaxes and the play continues. A mie can be cut in various specified positions, depending on the character and the moment. When exiting, an aragoto character may perform a roppo exit, which combines several of these poses in rapid succession, before leaving the stage.

The mie pose

This is not to say that modern Japanese dramas and works directly descend from Kabuki or Noh or other theatrical traditions. But like the Chinese beijing opera, the concept of aesthetic beauty/mo, emotional revelation, these ideas all combined with Western influence and modern Western perceptions of good story-telling/acting to make up the modern Eastern dramas of today.

4. How do all of these things combine into the supposed “cheesy/corny/over-acting” of modern Eastern dramatic works?

All of these cultural roots combined with Western depictions of a modern story (i.e. Shakespearean tragedy in five parts: Exposition, Rising action, climax, falling action, and denouement, ofc there are other ones but this is the one I learned in school), I believe make up what we see today in modern Eastern dramas. 

A. Acting Comedy: My specific examples are first, comedic examples from the famous 1986 Journey to the West

Comedy and the feeling of happiness and joy are also very important aspects of emotional revelation. Journey to the West depicts one of the most beloved comedic characters, Sun Wukong, who goes on a journey with Tan Sanzang, a Buddhist priest, to find the sacred Buddhist texts. His exploits are highly unrealistic and highly comedic. It is one of the epitomes of the “spirit” over the “form,” the internal emotional journey over the actual realism (or unrealism) of the journey. Many of the characters exhibit over-the-top facial expressions, some expressions too subdued, and the plot can be very winding and haphazard, but that’s not the point! If you’ve been reading this far, you’ll know why. It’s about how his adventures make you, the audience, the reader, feel. 

B. Acting Villainy: More modern Chinese dramas i.e. The Untamed & Word of Honor

I cannot attest to the quality of the acting nowadays, but it’s a common idea that the supporting cast of the international hit, The Untamed, was a bit weak in terms of acting. If I were to step into my Western lens, I would agree that yes, many characters over-act (i.e. Xue Yang, below):

And Wen Kexing, Word of Honor:

And Journey to the West, Underworld Lord:

However, now with all that cultural context, I can see this choice of acting in a different light. The over-acting and depiction of villainy is over-the-top because it’s meant to inspire that emotion of (this guy is whack, like really). It’s not supposed to be realistic villainy, like how a real person would look if they were these people in real life. To judge it by a completely Western lens is doing a disservice to them I think. You could say that maybe they just can’t act well, but in a Chinese/Japanese/Eastern cultural theatrical context, their acting is actually par for course. It’s even more subdued than the traditional roots of Eastern theatrical performances actually.

This goes for many other C-dramas / Eastern dramas that have these instances of highly emotive performance. It’s a product of hundreds of years of Eastern cultural theatrical/artistic production combined with Western acting styles and cinematography. 

Is it cheesy? Maybe. Is it over-acting? Could be, but what is “over-acting” vs what is “enough?” Is that not the distinction between mo and Western realistic imitation? For me, as someone who’s very used to this uniquely different style of dramatic production, I’m not too bothered by it. It, after all, makes me feel such an incredible range of emotions that the acting is just a fun, interesting perk. 

Thinking that these dramatic productions were originally seen as extensions of poetry, I can see why the exaggeration is necessary to fulfill what mo means:

If I feel some intent, I must write it - it becomes a poem.

If that’s not enough, I must sing it - it becomes a song.

If even singing isn’t enough, then I sigh, and have to express by dancing - it becomes a performance.

Part 1

[bonestructureandcontempt]

Well, there's a new Justice League coming out and it's got me thinking about the DCEU movies that have come before it and Tiermaker is my new favorite way to waste time online so I decided to rank the movies. My opinions of some of these have changed over time, probably BvS being the biggest example, but just running them down:

Birds of Prey: The pinnacle. A movie I would recommend even to non comic book/superhero fans. Just a great movie.

Aquaman: A movie I absolutely adore. You know, a lot of superhero movies these days like to play with genre and break outside of their normal conventions and Aquaman I feel does it the most successfully. It feels a little bit like a Stephen Sommers adventure flick in the vein of The Mummy. This and Wonder Woman also do a great job at taking the sort of aesthetic and film language of Zack Snyder's films and sorta doing their own spin on it.

Wonder Woman: I love this movie for a lot of the same reaons I love Aquaman. It breaks out of the normal conventions of a superhero movie with its WWI setting, Gal Gadot and Chris Pine just have infectious chemistry, and there's really spectacular set pieces. Patty Jenkins really knocked it out of the park directing her second ever feature film.

Batman Vs Superman: Yeah, this is probably gonna be the part that surprises people. It's taken me years to come to this, but I don't think BvS is a bad movie. In fact, I think it's actually a pretty decent movie AS LONG AS YOU'RE WATCHING THE ULTIMATE EDITION. Do not under any circumstances watch the theatrical cut, it removes actual vital context for why things are happening as well as whole scenes that humanize Clark Kent or remove him saving people as Superman at a critical moment. Batman killing people doesn't bother me anymore, it makes sense in the story they were trying to tell even if Snyder's bombast kinda cranks it up to absurd levels. He is a villain, a fallen hero. Superman not being the most cheerful guy also makes a lot of sense in context. You have to understand, this movie serves not only as a sequel to Man of Steel, but a means to address some of the criticisms people had with it within the fiction of the movie itself. And by george, I think it does a good job of it. The Knightmare scene is still a very awkard interlude. I realize it's supposed to be a sequel hook but in the middle of the movie, Zack?

Shazam: Very fun and funny, I appreciate seeing the same universe as some of the darker movies but through a child's eyes. And of course it would be more lighthearted in tone. Also appreciate it embracing some of the weirder aspects of the DC universe as shown in Shazam's early comics. I mean for heaven's sake, Mister Mind shows up. A literal sentient caterpillar.

Wonder Woman 1984: You know this movie caught a lot of flack for some very valid reasons, but I know that Patty Jenkins wanted to make a sort of throwback to the Richard Donner style and I think she succeeded and I enjoyed watching it. Once again, Gal Gadot and Chris Pine's chemistry shines through, Kristen Wiig is great and Pedro Pascal alone is worth watching the movie for. I thought it was funny how the first quarter of the movie could easily be mistaken for a movie about sweet nerdy Barbara Minerva falling in love with the classy, confident Diana Prince. Almost wish that was the movie instead.

Man of Steel: So you know how I said how Batman killing people doesn't bother me because it makes sense in the context of the story? I'm just gonna go ahead and say the same about the thing everyone thinks about when it comes to this movie. It makes sense in context. He clearly doesn't want to, but he feels like there's no other option so he just acts. Anyway, my biggest problem with this movie is the editing. By which I mean the sequencing of scenes doesn't make a lot of sense and it makes the movie seem really disjointed and like it's being played out of order, particularly in the scenes where Clark Kent and Lois Lane interact. I don't think Henry Cavill is a bad actor and I've warmed up to him as Superman for this cinematic universe. However, the face he makes when he takes flight for the first time haunts me to this day and I just wanna know what his direction was when they shot it. And just as a sidenote, Henry Cavill's hair is the best in this movie. I hate that it's slicked in BvS, It makes him look scary and mean. I also like how weird and alien Krypton looks. Russell Crowe is a great Jor-El and Michael Shannon is a great Zod. But overall this movie is pretty mid to me, a stepping stone to the vastly improved BvS: Ultimate Edition

Justice League: I almost didn't include this because I wanted to wait for the Snyder Cut but I figure what the hell, I'll grade the theatrical cut on its own merits because I've seen it a couple times. It's probably not a good thing that I only found the CGI tolerable on a TV screen. It really does look like a PS3 game in its big action set pieces. The differences between the material shot by Zack Snyder and Joss Whedon is like night and day and I'll tell you I have had my fill of Whedonisms. You can just keep that shit in the early Avenger flicks. The only reason I can say it kinda sorta works is the cast of the League have great chemistry that sells it.

Suicide Squad: An irredeemably bad movie. The absolute worst. Looks like shit, badly edited, story makes zero sense. Much like I consider MoS to be a stepping stone to the vastly superior BvS, this is that to BoP, but like, MORE. Which is a shame because it has a talented ensemble cast but it does not save this one.

[fe8meta]

The War’s Legacy

As a volunteer archivist at a local historical site, I’ve worked closely with books and documents largely between 150~250 years old. (If you’re curious, mostly regarding the period between the American Revolution to the Civil War, plus the anti-slavery movement. There’s also more “domestic” stuff like agriculture, science, mathematics, and religion.)

It got me thinking: In Magvel, how will the war, and the people who participated in it, be remembered? Most characters have a good portion of their lives left to live after the war too, but for those who are remembered down the line, their participation in the war will probably be their biggest accomplishment.

To start things off: more likely than not, anyone who wasn’t royalty or an important military figure is probably going to get forgotten, especially if fighting in the war was their only achievement.

(From my experience as an archivist, I’ve noticed that a great deal of people who were seen as the big movers and thinkers during their time have been lowered to one-note and forgettable in some 150-ish years of history. That’s not a lot of time!)

I think the list of characters who are remembered decades after their deaths on a continental scale (some characters may remain important figures in their own communities) would be the royals, the generals (Seth plus the Imperial Generals), and the Demon King (plus his cult).

The Royals

Ephraim: Regarding the war, Ephraim will probably get his war strategies and accomplishments written about. I expect a great deal of historians (particularly Renaian ones) debating his decision to abandon his homeland and bring the fight into Grado, though his later decisions will probably receive praise.

Eirika: Honestly? I think she’ll largely receive praise from future historians. Despite getting tricked at Renvall and the blunder of losing the Sacred Stone (on her route), I think historians would agree that her calculations were solid based on the information she knew at the time. Even if she had Seth advising her, she had no formal training in tactics or the art of war, making her achievements even more impressive.

~ / ~ / ~

Innes: Like Eirika, I think he’d be validated by historians, particularly for being the only one to actually predict and prepare for a wartime scenario. Of course, hindsight is 20/20, but based on what we know of him story-wise, he probably would go down as one of the best leaders of his time.

Tana: She’s gutsy and I think she’ll at least become a popular figure for young women. Some historians may lambast her earlier captures attributable to her inexperience, but hey, if she got out alive than it’s not too bad. I think later in life, being largely free to do whatever she wants (within reason), she’d continue onto a path of public service, which she can probably gather great acclaim for.

~ / ~ / ~

L’Arachel: I think a lot of attention will go towards her theatrics. If you go with the idea that L’Arachel doesn’t actually lead her country (see the Solo Endings JP vs. EN post for details), I think her relationship with the other royals and how she’s involved in continental politics will be the primary focus in biographies. (She also, perhaps not coincidentally, has supports with all the other ruling royals, discounting Tana as she canonically never lands in a leadership position.)

Joshua: Joshua’s reputation will be very, very mixed down the line. He’s still has wanderlust and a gambling addiction, and regardless of his accomplishments as a king and Jehanna’s glorious revival, neither of those traits are a particularly good look. Not to mention that he abandoned his duty as prince for a solid 10 years, and then left Jehanna to its own devices again while going to stop the Demon King.

Even in Joshua’s dialogue after the final battle, he talks about returning to Jehanna in an almost resigned manner; no doubt he knows full well that he might not be received with open arms.

~ / ~ / ~

Lyon: Oh boy, what to say about Lyon. There are a lot of different ways this can go, branching from 3 options: Lyon’s involvement in the war is revealed in full, Lyon’s involvement is revealed but doctored to paint him in a more sympathetic light, or it gets entirely covered up/omitted and he goes down in history as an unfortunate casualty of the war.

No matter how you slice the first two options, Lyon’s legacy would definitely be extremely mixed, leaning towards the negative side. Not only is he on the wrong side of history, he’s also forced basically half the continent into the wrong side of history and ruined their military and did some very amoral things (reviving his father to use as a puppet, and by extension lying to the public, etc). Even the best doctoring can probably only redeem Lyon’s reputation from “the deepest depths of the sewers” to “neck-deep in the sewers.”

In the case where Lyon’s involvement in the war is covered up, it’s still only a matter of time before someone figures out the truth. With enough time, it can be relegated to a highly plausible and hotly-debated theory, but even so, it’s simply a matter of time. For an additional dose of irony, in this scenario, perhaps Grado nationalists down the line twist Lyon’s war into something “assertive” and depict it as the “correct” thing to do, when it was really anything but.

Vigarde: He’s in the same boat as Lyon. It really hinges on how the royals choose to depict Lyon’s situation to the public, because that will directly affect how Vigarde is seen. There’s little doubt that puppet!Vigarde’s actions probably destroyed popular opinion of him during the War. Whether he is redeemed on account of his situation or not is up for debate.

(Because the game doesn’t delve into Fado, Hayden, or Mansel much, I don’t have enough input to say how they’ll be seen by future historians.)

The Generals

Seth: He’s going to go down in history as a badass, let’s be real here. Took an attack from Valter himself to protect Eirika, didn’t let the injury debilitate him from fighting on the frontlines, mentored Eirika in the art of war during life-or-death battles, guided the twins on their journey, and continued helping them after the war’s end. Guy got things done, regardless of his personal sentiment about failing to protect King Fado.

Syrene: Technically a commander and not a general, but close enough that I’ll consider her. She... honestly doesn’t do that much on-screen. Doubtlessly she’ll be best remembered (on the battlefield) for being overpowered by the remnant of Grado’s forces, but at least she lived and (by the player’s discretion) kept all the villagers safe, so that’s something. At the very least, a coward she is not.

Carlyle: He’s going down in infamy. Like, his story can be crudely summed up as “I was loyal to Queen Ismaire partially because I wanted to bang her.” Yeah, that is not a good look. There isn’t even any interesting speculation or interpretations to make of his situation. He probably ruined the reputation of the Jehannan Army while he was at it.

Honestly, the only thing that would salvage his reputation is the fact that everyone who heard his confession is dead by the end of that battle. (Technically the map was a Seize Throne and not a Rout, but let’s be real -- we killed those guards.)

~ / ~ / ~

Duessel: The only Grado general to make it out alive. He’ll probably get a mixed reaction; those who praise him argue that he made the morally correct choice and had the nation’s best interests at heart. Some may criticize him for not acting sooner, while others may very well despise him as a traitor to the nation.

Selena: Another set of mixed reactions, though inverse from Duessel’s. She remained loyal to Vigarde to the very end, but people will debate where a knight’s loyalty should lie. It would also invite much debate over the ethics of Vigarde’s recruitment methods and whether it was a thinly-veiled manipulation tactic that citizens from poorer areas will fall for because it’s the only way to improve their livelihoods.

Glen: He’s like Syrene, except he died without doing much. If someone is interested in finding out more about him before his death, at least they have Cormag to interview. Depending on whether his two adjutants survived against Valter’s goons, if someone tracked them down, they might get a story out of them as well. That said, his history with Valter would probably be of great interest to Valter’s biographers.

~ / ~ / ~ 

Valter: Historians, psychologists, and scholars will have a field day with him and his circumstances. From his upbringing to his descent into madness and subsequent exile, to his reinstatement and brutality during the war before his ultimate death, there is a lot to unpack with him. People tend to have morbid curiosities and oh, will Valter sate that appetite.

Caellach: Caellach will probably be praised for being good at what he did even if he was ultimately on the wrong side of history. Since he started off as a mercenary, I feel like people won’t judge him too harshly. His potential betrayal and murder of Aias will be an interesting chapter to write about, though, since historians may have access to more knowledge on their pre-war relationship that we players don’t have.

Riev: He’s ugly, a Demon King cultist, and directly responsible for Lyon’s (and by extension, Grado’s) downfall. He’s going to be reviled for sure, though he will spark some interesting discussion relating to his history with the Rausten Church. A lot of speculation on how he came to became an adherent of the Demon King... or not, depending how whether that kind of talk is suppressed.

After all, if a former bishop converted, it not only challenges the legitimacy of the Rausten Church, it would also pique the interest of those who want to see what made Riev change his mind. And should someone also adopt his ideology, the continent can’t take another Demon King revival attempt.

Which leads me to...

The Demon King

Now, this will be a little game called “How many generations will it take before the Demon King gets relegated to a legend that no one believes in again.”

It’s also pretty important that the Demon King is not completely destroyed; he just no longer has his huge menacing body to use and will have to make do with those fragile human flesh sacks. But his soul is still intact, and if nothing is done to get rid of it for good, it’s setting up for a Part 3.

Like with Lyon, how information about the Demon King is handled by the characters after the world will probably have a huge impact. Not to mention the many implications the circumstances around his possession of Lyon has. Dark/ancient magic will most certainly face a resurgent wave of discrimination, far more than seen before. (Magvel was, from what we could see, largely apathetic about dark magic before Lyon’s attempts to redeem its name. Ironically, his actions will rekindle hatred towards it.)

As aforementioned, educating people on the Demon King and how dangerous he is may help ensure that nobody tries to mess with him again. On the other hand, it may inspire copycats who for whatever reason want the Demon King to be revived. (The game also never followed up on the implication that there’s a cult that worships the Demon King; we killed Riev and Novala, and destroyed Fomortiis’ body, but there may still be more members lurking in the dark.)

Meanwhile, trying to bury information about Fomortiis can also backfire down the line, especially if people don’t learn what the Sacred Stone is for and one day crack the seal open for one reason or another. (And we saw how well keeping the true Stone hidden behind trinkets while keeping its wearer in the dark of its true purpose went.)

This is making me imagine Demon King apologists down the line that provide an “alternative history” about the war and how it’s all some ancient conspiracy to lock him away and he “isn’t actually bad, just misunderstood”...

Oh hey, isn’t that the direction Dragalia Lost’s main story is going in?

[philiie]

Interactive Introverts London highlights

MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD PROCEED AT YOUR OWN PERIL

This is also the most extra shit like I spent hours writing everything up lol

Go check out @danfanciesphil post here of the Brighton show which inspired me to do this :))

- When they first came it was the coolest thing ever. They were standing on the podium thing and the screen at the back lifted to reveal them in a cloud of smoke and they were silhouettes until the spotlight shined on them. Holy shit it was the best thing ever it doesn't even seem real.

- They were quite close to their apartment as well so Phil said they were considering bringing their sofa and "sitting in our browsing position".

- Dan mentioned how Phil's old videos from 2008 were very different from now (lots of audience approval) and how they were kind of really creepy and weird and honesty it probably isn't a good thing (I disagree but sure whatever). Phil talked about 'snokoplasm' and how it was literally just him rubbing slime over himself shirtless pretending to be futuristic (lots of audience approval for that lol) but he doesn't make videos like that anymore because he wants to make things that are actually entertaining and things he WANTS to make.

- Montage of everything they aren't gonna do in the show just so our expectations are levelled.

- They went backstage to get a silver box (Dan literally Naruto ran for no apparent reason) from which they were acting out the things using props from it in the centre while a voice narrated. In between each one the lights went darker so you could only see their silhouettes as they grabbed props. It was all very pantomime like which was really cool and theatrical.

- The things included: 24 hour livestream of them doing domestic home things (recording of dan on the toilet and Phil munching on crunchy nut appeared on the screen lmao), Erotic roleplay (Phil was in a policeman hat and had a baton thing while dan was in handcuffs. The recording of dan saying please be gentle, I have sensitive skin played), Stripping on stage... they started acting like they were going to actually take their tops off and they actually ripped them off to reveal an exact copy of the top underneath except Phil was now in a half sleeved shirt instead of full sleeved (I now understand Louise's joke)

- Phil stumbled and almost tripped on the step when going into the centre and was like "I almost forgot there was a step there" and was walking really strangely into the middle like elongating his legs after every time he lifted them and Dan made fun of it being like who tf walks like that. "Does anyone ever feel like Phil is actually an alien learning how humans work?" Later on in the show Phil says something about removing his lizard face and Dan says THAT would explain the weird walking. He also imitates Phil going up into the centre and says "I'm doing a Phil walk" v v cute :))

- For the Dan vs Phil segment they talked about the electric shock machines and for each round the pointer moved up one level of electric shock. The first time it moved into the yellow area and Phil said "Finger in the yellow" which elicited a massive audience reaction and dan stopped and was like oh god and Phil was giggling in his 'oops shouldn't have said that' way, somehow he made that adorable.

- The first round was seeing how well they know each other and Dan made the comment saying "don't worry guys I'm Phil trash #1 and all"

- Phil's question was: What did Dan swap alcohol with in ISG10?

Phil answered green tea correctly but the electric shock sound effect came up anyways. Dan was like no you answered that correctly it should have been a ding but the ding didn't come up anyways (lol tech crew nice one)

- Dan expressed extreme discomfort with 'x rated lester' "in any interpretation"

- Dan's bad thing was 'spoilers' and he tried to say that it's better to not be surprised. (I'm pretty sure this is the bit where he said "otherwise I'd be like 'Phil... Phil I don't feel so good'" reaching his arm out to him (infinity war reference for those who don't know,,, I could have killed him in that moment can he not) "Too soon? Yeah probably too soon."

- Phil's good thing that he had to make bad "getting unlimited money" Dan found that hilarious. His way of making it bad was that it gives you too much power- he would strap two planes together and stand on top of and ride them which would probably make them explode.

- They used the Isle of Man pic of Dan for the Dan, Phil or a rat segment (you guys know the one where he's smiling super happy) that just made me feel very warm :)

- The picture for Dan was just a really pale cream colour and Dan made the joke that it might be translucent enough to be Phil's skin but he said no I bet it's a troll and guessed rat. Turns out Dan was right and it actually was Phil's skin lmao from the picture of Phil with the silver hair dye.

- When Dan got electrocuted he fully hit his shin on one of the benches and basically died on stage. He fully snorted and turned away in shame and pain and it was the most hilarious thing ever. "Who designed this stupid set" LMAO

- Phil asks us to clap on the count of 3 after which some people immediately clap and Dan's like omg no on the count of 3. But then people start clapping for the people that clapped "are you seriously clapping for the people that just clapped" and then basically everyone started clapping and oh my gosh it was the best moment ever I've never felt more collectively part of something in that moment it was so funny and Dan looked so done with us all. A great moment.

- Someone asked in the getting deep part that there's a guy she likes but all she does is makes vine references. Phil's response to that is if he doesn't appreciate your vine references he's not worth it. Dan: "there's your dating advice from Phil"

- Phil was cleaning in 'Dan's' room (dan says "like you've ever done a chore") Phil's indignantly says he vacuums doing the hand movement. Apparently he found 'something weird' under 'Dan's' bed so he brought out a silver box that was locked saying it was heavy and handed it to Dan. [yes I'm putting that all in quotation marks fight me]

- He wanted the audience to guess what they thought was inside the box and the things that people said were: A single piece of Phil's hair, A fursuit and a Dildo(ll) rip they kept emphasising DOLL it was too funny nice one whoever that was lmao

- Phil was asking the audience if anyone had a key to open the box and Nora (what a legend) threw some plastic keys onto the stage and Phil fully tried to unlock the box using them lmao what a cutie. When Dan came back with the actual key Phil was like someone had plastic keys and dan was like wtf it was too funny.

- Do you really know Dan and Phil? 1% of people said 'who are Dan and Phil?' Lol they wouldn't stop bringing that up. 47% (?) of people said they don't really know Dan and Phil and Dan was like wow Phil why are you so shady? (He said this twice in the show when addressing the idea that their personalities are different online)

- They did a pie chart to show fave video series which apparently they were really excited about seeing as they hyped that up for a solid 2 minutes,,, "90% of the budget of the show was for this pie chart"

- Dan got sacrificed attached to the wheel of death comes out yelling with no warning so everyone is just screaming because it was so unexpected so i couldn't actually hear anything he said but the basic gist of it was fuck you all lmao.

- When Phil tried hitting him with a slinky it was a couple inches away from "the danger zone" I.e. Dan's crotch. Phil repeats the phrase danger zone two more times after that lmao.

- Dan says "almost hit my balls" w o w.

- The last time is some massive intense bazooka that Phil started stroking and then dan was like "stop stroking it- especially with those gloves on".

- Phil hits him the last time with the bazooka literally almost at his crotch and Dan screams. They say how it's all our fault and that we should feel bad. Phil is like "I don't think they feel guilty" lol I mean he's not wrong

- At the end dan was like "Phil help unstrap me" clearly looking for Phil to unstrap him around the waist but Phil went for his feet instead lmao (Dan just wanted a reaction from us Phil lmao well done). Phil finally got the memo though and helped and then dan stumbled out being like okay get away from me don't touch me and Phil just giggled.

- The white protection suit lab coat thing got stuck on dans shoe so he was hopping around and Phil was like do you need a hand there and Dan said "no Phil I don't need your help to get me undressed" and everyone screamed and Dan was like okay okay shut up (idk if that was an intentional line or not I couldn't actually tell but... nice)

- Phil's diss track happened and if you're reading this you've probably seen a transcript of it already but damn hearing him say bitch live was the best thing ever lmao. Also when he said the line about not wanting to get demonetised he did the making it rain hand gesture (thanks anon) which was hilarious

- There was a point where Dan was like no Phil you can't swear on stage and Phil was like aw why not I wanted to say "what the (fuck)" mouthing it and that's more than I could have ever hoped for

- They did the song and it was v cute and got stuck in my head. When Phil got up and sat on the piano he was swaying one leg back and forth and it was adorable.

- They ended the show bowing and went back behind the black screen that they came out from and were waving the whole way through and Phil was bending down to wave as the screen was going down and it was v lovely :))

And then I died the end.

[vintage1981]

#FlashbackFriday to Jess Franco’s Faceless/Gorezone Issue 6

Toward the end of the decade of decadence (aka the 80s) exploitation auteur Jess Franco attempted to break into the commercial horror market. Faceless is the most notable production, with a cast that brings together ex-porn actress (and Jean Rollin regular) Brigitte Lahaie, British genre icon Caroline Munro, German character actor Anton Diffring, Luchino Visconti muse Helmut Berger, and seventies US TV and film superstar, Telly Savalas! Although still a low budget affair, this Rene Chateau production does offer a slick and glamourous look, unlike anything typically seen in a Jess Franco production.

Dr Frank Flamand (Helmut Berger) runs a posh clinic that specialises in expensive beauty treatments and quack "youth-enhancing" therapies for the excessively rich and vain. What his pampered clients do not know though is that many of their treatments are developed at the expense of kidnapped experimental subjects who are kept prisoner in the soundproof padded cells behind a locked door deep within the labyrinthine corridors of the clinic!

When a dissatisfied patient (who was horribly scarred during bungled plastic surgery) attempts to gain revenge by throwing acid in Flamand's face, she instead hits his beautiful sister, Ingrid (Christiane Jean) and badly disfigures her. Flamand vows to restore the beauty of his beloved sister and, together with his ice-cold assistant (and lover) Nathalie (Brigitte Lahaie), organises the kidnapping of coke-addicted model Barbara Hallen (Caroline Munro) with the intention of using her in a new face-transplant operation he intends to develop for his sisters benefit. Barbara is the daughter of wealthy industrialist Terry Hallen (Telly Savalas) and after his daughter's disappearance, Hallen hires American private detective Sam Morgan (Chris Mitchum) to find her. Meanwhile, Flamand and Nathalie consult Dr. Karl Heinz Mozer (Anton Diffring), an ex-Nazi associate of Flamand's mentor Dr Orloff (Howard Vernon), and employ him to help them experiment on more kidnapped victims in their attempts to perfect the complicated operation.

Gorezone Issue 6: Caroline Does Splatter by Steve Swires

Fantasy films’ first lady has been systematically subjected to an onslaught of cinematic indignities — stalked by slashers, menaced by madmen and terrorized by tormentors. Rarely, however, has she been asked to exercise her acting ability; usually, she is merely required to look helpless, scream her lungs out and defer to the heroics of her male co-stars.

Finally, after two decades of dramatic dues-paying in such creatively constrained circumstances, Caroline Munro feels confident enough to test her talent. A veteran of 13 consecutive genre excursions— including Dracula A.D. 1972, Captain Kronos: Vampire Hunter, Maniac and The Last Horror Film — she recently ended her involuntary screen hiatus by starring in two new English-language European horror movies, Paul Naschy’s Spanish-lensed The Howl of the Devil and Jess Franco’s French Faceless. Reaching beyond the limitations of her cult status, she also made her first non-genre appearance in 20 years, in the British TV movie Maigret.

Selected by her Slaughter High collaborators Peter Litten and George Dugdale to play the female lead in their proposed big-budget production of Dr. Who: The Movie as well as the title role in their unorthodox multimedia creation Roxscene, Munro grew increasingly restless as both major projects were delayed by a lengthy development process. Anxious to resume her acting career after four years as hostess of the popular British TV game/variety series 3-2-1, she gratefully accepted the unexpected offers of overseas employment.

“The more I’m on camera, the better it is for me,” the British actress reasons, relaxing one morning in her London flat. “As with an athlete or a dancer, an actor must keep training. Since Doctor Who and Roxscene have yet to reach fruition. The Howl of the Devil, Faceless and Maigret gave me an opportunity to get out and do a bit of work. Frankly, I become very bored when I’m not working.”

There were few occasions for boredom on the rugged Spanish locations of The Howl of the Devil (a.k.a. El Aullido del Diablo). Shot in Madrid and the quaint mountain village of Loyzoya— complete with cobbled streets and an 11th-century monastery — during July and August of 1987, the film was written, directed by and stars Paul Naschy. A short, toupeed, barrel-chested John Belushi look-alike whose real name is Jacinto Molina, Naschy has appeared in more than 75 Spanish movies bearing such luridly Anglicized titles as Frankenstein’s Bloody Terror, The Werewolf vs. the Vampire Woman, Count Dracula’s Great Love and Night of the Howling Beast, earning him the crown of Spain’s King of Horror.

Designed as an ambitious showcase for his performing abilities, Howl presents Naschy in 10 different roles, reflecting his affection for the classic Hollywood movie monsters of his youth. A demented retired actor named Hector lives with his young nephew Adrian in an ominous chalet, where he dresses up as Fu Manchu, Rasputin and Bluebeard to torture nubile female victims procured by his loyal manservant Erik, portrayed by Howard Vernon. A horror fan himself, Adrian (played by Naschy’s 12-year-old son, Sergio Molina) fantasizes visits from his favorite celluloid creatures, recreated in elaborate prosthetic makeup by Fernando Florido and embodied by the ubiquitous Naschy: the Frankenstein Monster, the Phantom of the Opera, Quasimodo, Mr. Hyde and — inevitably— Naschy’s best-known character, the melancholy werewolf Waldemar Daninsky. This Happy home life is eventually interrupted by the reappearance of Adrian’s dead father, Hector’s twin brother Alex, a rotting corpse also essayed by the resilient Naschy.

Cast by novice producer Juan Gomez after he spotted her photo in David Quinlan’s book The Illustrated Directory of Film Stars, Munro plays a poor Spanish maid named Carmen, relentlessly pursued by the homicidally horny Hector. Unfamiliar with Naschy or his work, Munro asked her solicitor father to read the clumsily translated screenplay, which was filled with guilt and retribution, sexual repression and religious obsession. “Obviously, he didn’t think it was brilliant,” she admits. “But he said, ‘It’s certainly no worse than some others you’ve done, and it might be an interesting part for you.’ I thought it could be a mistake for me to do it, but because I liked my part, I decided to take a chance. Besides, if my dad thought it was all right, then it must be OK.”

Burdened by an unwanted glamor image as a perennial sex symbol, Munro enthusiastically donned plain-looking clothes, flat shoes and an apron, and pinned back her long dark hair to* convincingly portray her earthy character. Likewise, Munro actually scrubbed floors and even chopped the head off a real dead chicken on camera. “I wasn’t very keen on that,” she concedes. “Paul gave me a whacking great knife — twice the size of Crocodile’ Dundee’s, knife— and said, ‘Cut the head off the chicken.’ I told him, I can’t do that.’ I just cut it gently down the middle. He said, ‘That’s no good. You must look like you’ve done it all your life.’ So I finally did cut the head off. It was a touch of the Tom Savini there.” A popular genre figure in Europe and Japan, Naschy has yet to conquer the more demanding American market, his voice will subsequently be dubbed by an American actor. This unusual production problem created an awkward acting situation for Munro, who performed her part with her normal British accent, at Naschy’s instruction. “It was a bit more difficult than I was used to, but that made it more of a challenge,” she notes. "Most of the master shots were done over Paul’s shoulder, showing me speaking. Some of the time, he was actually speaking Spanish. Because I understand Spanish fairly well and I knew the intention of the scenes, I could tell what he was saying and when it was time for me to speak. “I was nervous at first, because Paul is a foreboding-looking fellow with a great deal of energy. He is very intense in his work, very European in his approach, with extraordinarily piercing eyes. But he was exactly right for his character. Once we began working together, I found him quite easy to get on with.” Naschy even allowed Munro to rewrite her own dialogue. “I’m hopeless at writing,” she maintains. “But the script left something to be desired, because it was translated too literally from Spanish to though three of his films were released here theatrically in the mid- 1970s by Sam Sherman’s Independent-International Pictures and several of his other movies are currently available on home video. To facilitate American distribution, Naschy shot The Howl of the Devil since he doesn’t speak the language, he delivered his dialogue phonetically, and English. Many of the lines were archaic and ungrammatical. So I rewrote my dialogue to make it more conversational. I offered to help rewrite the rest of the dialogue as well, but Paul didn’t want to confuse the other actors.” Adding her creative input in such a manner is a new occurrence for Munro, who previously would passively accept her scenes as written, regardless of any misgivings. “That comes with experience,” she observes. “You learn what you will or won’t do in a scene. There are certain things I won’t do. Generally, there isn’t much substance to the characters in most genre movies, unless you create some for yourself. Now, I feel I’m in a position — at my age — to be thinking more about characterization.” Munro, satisfied with her Spanish sojourn, believes The Howl of the Devil will spotlight a more self-confident side of her acting personality. “I won’t say I enjoyed every minute,” she acknowledges, “but I was certainly kept on my toes. I hope people will see more range from me as an actress than they’ve seen before. I had to extend myself more in the role. I had some initial reservations, but everything felt right while we were making it. There was nothing about my scenes that offended me. Of course, I don’t know how the finished film will turn out, but for my part, I’m really pleased I did it.” Completing her Howl of the Devil role in 12 shooting days over a three-week period, Munro next flew to Geneva, Switzerland to star in the unusual industrial show The New Travels of Marco Polo. While in Geneva, she was contacted by director Jess Franco, offering her a leading role in his latest thriller Faceless. Filmed in and around Paris during November and December of 1987, Faceless (a.k.a. Les Predators de la Nuit) revives the moribund subgenre of surgical atrocity movies initiated in 1959 by Georges Franju’s classic Eyes Without A Face (a.k.a. The Horror Chamber of Dr. Faustus) and imitated by Franco’s own The Awful Dr. Orloff in 1961. The first feature produced by Rene Chateau, France’s leading video distributor, Faceless boasts an impressive international cast including Helmut Berger, Telly Savalas, Anton Diffring, Chris Mitchum and 79-year-old Howard Vernon , reprising his tireless Dr. Orloff persona. Jacques (Lifeforce) Gastineau provides graphic makeup FX. Doubling as screenwriter under the pseudonym “Fred Castle,” Chateau personally chose Munro, having seen her work in Starcrash and Maniac, which he released on video in France. In a resonant bit of casting, she plays jet-set American model Barbara Hallen, whose mysterious disappearance motivates the entire storyline. Kidnapped from a modeling session by actress Brigitte Lahaie (France’s most notorious porno queen in a rare mainstream role), Barbara is brought to a fashionable health farm run by sinister plastic surgeon Doctor Flamand (Berger), who constantly requires fresh blood and organs with which to rejuvenate his chic clientele. 

Aided by ex-Nazi scientist Juan Moser (Diffring), Flamand plans to graft Barbara’s exquisite face onto his horribly disfigured sister, until a savage assault renders her skin unusable. Meanwhile, alarmed by his daughter’s inexplicable absence, New York millionaire Terry Hallen (Savalas) sends Vietnam-veteran-turned-private-detective Morgan (Mitchum) to Paris to discover her whereabouts. As Morgan’s investigation draws him closer to the truth, Flamand and his sadistic henchman Gordon sharpen their chainsaws and drills for the inevitably gruesome final confrontation.

Chiefly confined to a padded cell in an actual clinic undergoing renovation, Munro spends most of her screen time in a short white hospital smock. As her character recovers from her brutal attack, she is repeatedly injected with debilitating drugs, hastening her mental and physical deterioration. Abdicating her reluctant glamor image with a vengeance, Munro had no qualms about appearing progressively more disheveled. “I wanted to look as extreme as I could get,” she insists. “In fact, I encouraged them to make me look worse. It actually helped me as an actress. The worse I looked and felt, the better my performance.

When I was crying, my tears were real. I didn’t need glycerine, because I felt truly degraded. It had to be that way, it was so important to see the change in Barbara— to show the glamorous, confident, attractive woman at the beginning, and the poor, sad, pathetic creature at the end. Otherwise, the film wouldn’t work.”

Responsive to the actress’ concerns. Franco thoughtfully decided to shoot Munro’s unpleasant scenes in reverse order. “That way, I could look forward to feeling clean,” she points out. “It was a good method, because I hated being so dirty. I had grease in my hair. I really looked a mess. But it felt absolutely right for the part. “In fact, I looked almost too convincing,” Munro smiles. “At one point, I was walking down the back stairs at the clinic, wearing only a little white smock. I was made up with a bloody cut on my face. One of the real nurses saw me and exclaimed, ‘Oh, mon Dieu! What happened?’ She thought I had really been injured. Many of the actual patients gave me very funny looks. I should think it put them off going back to that clinic.”

Jess Franco, according to Munro, proved to be a surprisingly careful and considerate filmmaker. “I had never heard of Jess before, but I enjoyed working with him very much,” Munro remarks. “I trusted him and felt confident with him. He speaks very good English. I could ask him questions, and he would help me. He has a great sensitivity with actors. He understood how we felt and gave us encouragement.”

A former model herself, Munro easily mastered the American accent she delivers in Faceless. “It’s better than the American accent I did in Slaughter High,” she comments, “because I’ve had more experience at it. But it’s still quite a soft American accent, since the character has been living and working in Europe, and that has affected the way she speaks. I suppose it’s more of a mid-Atlantic accent. I just hope people won’t assume I’ve been dubbed by an American actress again.”

Finishing her Faceless fright fest after three hectic weeks in France, Munro next appeared in her first TV movie, Maigret. Directed by Paul (Prom Night) Lynch, the film is based on a popular series of mystery novels by Georges Simenon. Munro portrays Carolyn Pace, power hungry secretary to scheming American millionaire Patrick O’Neal.

“I just want to be a working actress,” she says, then pauses to reflect on her future plans. “Frankly, I never thought of myself any other way. I’ve never wanted the huge success that other people have wanted for me. I’m very happy doing smaller films. “Without shouting to the whole world, I can push myself quite far within these roles and not be looked at too critically,” Munro decides. “The success or failure of these movies is not on my shoulders. Each one’s just another acting experience for me. And I find I get better with each new experience; I’m still learning my craft all the time.”

[ladyeomine-blog]

Let’s analyse : That’s Not How the Story Goes

As the Hideous Hiatus looms above us, let’s take a look at the parting song of A Series of Unfortunate Events. It is now well known that this story tends to expose the “behind the scenes”, hence theatricality being a core aspect of the whole series, especially through the character of Olaf. He may be a very bad actor but he still is an actor. The TV show really captures and enhances this feature, take for example the song It's the Count or all for Olaf’s disguises. The links with drama and theater are numerous : Beatrice is said to have been an actress, Lemony a theater critic and at the end of the show, a long zooming in shot really emphasized the appearance of Lemony and Olaf on the photo of the drama club. This theatrical feature resonates with the choice to end the season on a song : it is like the whole cast is back on the stage to perform the finale, as if they were addressing a moral just like in plays or operas. The chorus really has this “moral” feature : That’s not how the story goes,  which is enhanced by the change at the end That’s just how the story goes. The fact that they sing it together makes it very communicative, like a melody you would repeat after them. And this purpose is well achieved since a lot of people probably still have this song stuck in their heads. The lyrics themselves follow the theatrical logic as illustrated by this central line : The curtain rings down on the stage. Indeed, the play, or rather this act, is over. The symbolism of the curtain ringing down is conveyed through the eye closing at the end of each episode. Here again, the link between eye and theater is very strong. The viewer really is put in the position of the spectator. Lemony’s and Olaf’s asides follow this idea too. And indeed this song is primarly addressed to the viewer. The construction of the lyrics involves the viewer : You may think that the Baudelaires ought to prevail etc. All the propositions involving the viewer are made on the same principle : the happy ending the viewer would like for the characters VS the reality of the bad ending :

You may think that three children would live pleasant lives but that’s not how the story goes.

The conjunction “but”, which is everywhere in the song, always is the word of rupture and an open door for tragedy. If we make a parallel with drama, a tragedy, particularly the ones ancient Greeks wrote, is a play where the audience is aware since the beginning that the story will not go well and that everything is already written. As I mentionned in my previous post, since Lemony tells us this story, it has already reached its conclusion when we hear it. The idea of the story following its way without anything that can be done to stop it is transparent with the chorus : That's not how the story goes The story cannot move away from its path no matter how much the characters and the viewer would like it. The entire song is a very good summary of the show’s themes : Sorrows and woes / Gloom and despair. But also humor thanks to Mr. Poe. The chorus’s shift from That’s not how the story goes to That’s just how the story goes conveys the whole symbolization of the show through the ending song. It is also interesting to see that unfortunate events not only happen to the good characters but also to the villains, think about Dr. Orwell’s fate. The looming presence of tragic and inevitable fate is underlined by the symbolism of the place where they are : the Austere Academy, which is shaped just like a graveyard but is also revealed to be the place where Olaf and Lemony studied together so in a way, where it all begun.

This song is a moment of suspension which summarizes all the characters and their role. What they sing is strongly linked to who they are. Lemony starts the song because he is our guide. His towering posture mirrors his role as narrator : a narrator lays out a story in front of your eyes. Since he also is a character, he is affected by the tragic tone of the whole song : I once loved a girl and she thought well of me, we thought we’d be happy together but now I’m alone as you can well see and she’s cold in her grave forever. His intervention is constructed in the same manner as the ones concerning the Baudelaires : two propositions cut down by the “but”. Even our narrator has a unfortunate backstory which is the motive for his story telling in the first place. The Baudelaire children have a very specific way of singing. They have a rather neutral face and this echoes the fact that they endure the events without a real possibility of fighting back. They look resigned in front of all the bad things that keep happening to them. Their position is similar to tragic heroes harassed by Fate. They were named Baudelaire after the French poet Charles Baudelaire, a major representative of the « poètes maudits » (cursed poets), appeared in the 19th century. A poète maudit usually feels resent towards society because it doesn't accept him for who he is, which leads to a tragic life. The theme of sorrows and woes is linked to this aesthetic. As if they were led by their name, the Baudelaires cannot escape their tragic fate. Poe's appearance in the song also mirrors his role. He is the bearer of ill news, his name being linked to the raven : “I'm sad to say I have bad news for you, the curtain rings down on the stage.” This line is a reference to his first appearance but also indicates to the viewer the bad news of them : season one ends now. As a character, Poe always listens to the song of despair and stays perfectly oblivious to it. He listens to this song on the radio and just sings along, like an outsider, much like in the actual story. He is not mainly concerned by it. Poe is a comic character and he is here to counterbalanced the tragic with humor : But to me there’s nothing but gloom and despair ! It allows the viewer to be relieved of the tragic tension. Finally, Olaf's depiction in the song is quite paradoxical. He appears in a dressing-room which is literally the place where an actor goes from themselves to a character and vice versa. Thus, Olaf is « in-between » : the large shot allows you to see his wigs and costumes around him.

At this moment, he is not playing a character, not even his Count Olaf character. Olaf is aware of the eyes of other characters constantly being on him when we see him on screen so he plays his “Count Olaf” part. But here, we see him in a slightly different position, it is as if he was almost vulnerable. This song made Olaf's personnality even more interesting. Since he is « himself », he reveals yet another side of his psyche. In the second shot in which we see him, we actually see his reflection in the mirror.

Olaf sings to his reflection which symbolises the way he sees himself. The staging on these shots is very reminescent of a theatrical soliloquy, the villain pondering on himself. (I am strongly thinking of Richard III’s soliloquies here). Pay attention to the lyrics he sings : he is the one to first introduce the chorus and all its tragic impact. Now you may think that they chose these words for him because after all he is the villain and responsible for all the sorrows and woes the Baudelaires have gone through and will encounter. It is of course the first meaning. But if you listen closely to the way he sings, you hear a very melancholic voice. And the sentence the world is a pair of ill-fitting pants and other dire hideous clothes highlights a particularly salty vision of life. This casts a very different light on this character : he also is a tragic character. The climax of this idea is reached with this line : Some people laugh I suppose. If there is a character who could laugh because of the mess he makes, it’s him. But here he clearly states that he is not part of “some people”. If he cannot laugh, it means he leans towards tragedy. It is not rare that the characters who make you laugh - in ASOUE, Olaf being so theatrical - are actually the most tragic ones. Olaf has a tragic side because he never gets want his wants, his plans to steal the Baudelaires’ fortune always fail. Beyond that, he has an entire backstory full of unfortunate events. The book readers may remember a very particular scene towards the end of the series where the Baudelaires understand all the tragedy behind Olaf. If you cannot wait for season two, you might want to read the whole book series to know more ! It is a clever thing that they already introduce this side of Olaf early on in the TV adaptation. Overall, this song delivers a bittersweet ending, especially because of the  melancholic melody highlighted by the humming and whistling at the end. The all tone may be very tragic but hope shines too : “Some people smile at the end of the day !”, Lemony sings.  And if “there’s no happy ending not here and not now”, there may be later. Don’t be shy and come ask me if you have questions !

[weekendwarriorblog]

The Weekend Warrior 4/30/21: SEPARATION, LIMBO, THE OUTSIDE STORY, WITHOUT REMORSE, ABOUT ENDLESSNESS and More

Everyone recovering from the Oscars? I’m certainly not, but trying hard, especially cause I gotta jump RIGHT into the Emmys cause the nomination process begins in just six weeks… WTF?! Well, if it’s any consolation, I plan on continuing to include my thoughts on box office as things seem to be slowly getting back to some semblance of normalcy.

There aren’t a ton of new wide theatrical releases this week, at least not many particularly high-profile ones. Open Road/Briarcliff, one of the first studios to begin releasing movies during the pandemic with Liam Neeson’s Honest Thief and The Marksman, neither which grossed more than $15 million domestically, is the only studio taking on the 2nd weekends of Mortal Kombat and Demon Slayer.

eThis week, they release William Brent Bell's supernatural thriller SEPARATION (Open Road/Briarcliff), which stars Rupert Friend as Jeff, a failed comic book artist, whose wife Maggie (Mamie Gummer) wants a divorce and is fighting for custody of their daughter Jenny (Violet McGraw) in said divorce, before she's killed in a hit and run. That leaves Jeff and Jenny alone in their brownstone with Maggie’s father (Brian Cox) wanting to take Jenny away, and...oh, yeah, the vengeful ghost of Maggie causing all sorts of trouble.

Before we get to my review, which I wasn’t able to run until Thursday anyway, let’s talk about box office. We’re coming off one of the best weekends at the box office since the pandemic hit with both Mortal Kombat and Demon Slayer opening with over $21 million each. While I don’t expect Separation to have much of an effect on either, there’s no denying that both movies are very likely to be frontloaded, and I would be surprised if either of the movies has less than 55% drop-of from opening, but I think Mortal Kombat may stay ahead for a second weekend at #1 with around $10 million. I’d put Demon Slayer at closer than $9.5 million.

I’m not sure how many theaters Open Road will get for Separation, although theaters chains should be grateful to them for taking a chance on movies back in the fall when New York and L.A. were yet to reopen. I think it may be able to swing close to 2,000 theaters and that should be enough for it to do around $4 million this weekend, which would be better than Screen Gems’ The Unholy a few weeks back. I wouldn’t expect good reviews or a CinemaScore above a C-, so it’ll act like most horror movies and will probably will end up in the $12 million total domestic gross.

So let’s get to that review of Separation, which looks like your typical cliché-ridden horror movie, because guess what? It is!! Bell is a perfectly capable filmmaker, but somehow, he keeps directing complete horror schlock like last year’s very bad Brahms: The Boy 2. I have to assume his Orphan prequel next year isn’t going to be much better. It’s another classic case of white male filmmaker failing upwards, because he keeps getting movies to direct after every bad previous movie.

We meet young Jenny as she's talking to her creepy dolls while her parents fight, and when Jenny falls, it’s the last straw for Maggie who files for divorce with her lawyer father really putting the screws to Jeff. To be honest, Maggie is such a bitch that you don’t really feel much sympathy when she’s suddenly dead. Her father has no sympathy for Jeff and just wants to get Jenny away from him. During this time, Jeff starts getting work as a comic book artist, and while references to the Eisners and Maus are certainly entertaining, there’s another part of the movie that just gets the whole “comic book artist lifestyle” pretty wrong.

The thing is no one will come into Separation for most of that stuff, which is why one wonders why Bell would spend so much time on the family drama aspect of the movie while throwing in a few occasional scares, mostly of the variety we’re used to seeing in “ghost movies” these days, complete with the “bendy bone” apparition, in this case with a creepy clown face.

Even though the cast is good, especially the adorable Violet McGraw, who is constantly stealing scenes from her more experienced co-stars, there is just too much about the movie that makes you laugh, and not deliberately. Besides the odd overall portrayal of the comic book business, there’s also Jeff’s adoring babysitter Samantha (Madeline Brewer from A Handmaid’s Tale), who starts making overtures towards him despite their obvious age difference.

Then every once in a while, we get a creepy scene like Jeff’s experience on a subway or we see a black robed ghost that represents Jeff’s angry wife, and the whole way through this, you can’t help but think, “Boy, Mamie Gummer was lucky to get hit by a car early on, so she wouldn't have to be here for the rest of the movie.”

It all leads to a last act where the movie suddenly starts to get good then throws an absolutely horrible twist at the viewer that just doesn’t work. That and all of the many horror clichés that pervade the movie just makes this an awkward and disjointed mess that never really manages to define itself from dozens of similarly bad horror movies.

Another movie getting some sort of of moderate to wide-ish release is Ben Sharrock’s LIMBO (Focus Features), which was recently nominated for a couple BAFTA film awards. It stars Amir El-Masry as Omar, a Turkish refugee in a dreary Scottish seaside farming village, who is just trying to make his way surrounded by other refugees.

Every once in a while -- like every other movie -- Focus Features releases a movie that I just don’t get why they’re bothering with, and here is one of those quirky movies that I feel will appeal to a very small niche audience. I have no idea how many theaters Focus might get this into, but this would be a platform New York and L.A. platform release at best in the “before times,” so trying to put this into more than 100 theaters is just asking for a lot of near empty rooms. Facts are facts.

I guess I can say a few words about this, even though I don’t have much to say. It’s certainly strange -- not necessarily witty or even laugh-out-loud funny -- and that doesn’t exactly make it very good. The main actor has the charisma of a piece of cardboard, so he struggles to get the audience really behind him. Most of the time he spends interacting with other characters and talking on a remote payphone in the middle of nowhere to his mother and father back in Turkey.

Oddly, this movie reminded me of the movie Lemon for some reason -- maybe the four letters in common?-- and as “luck” would have it, two of the actors appear in ANOTHER movie opening this week -- how’s that for a strange coincidence? It might be due to the couple of Helga and Boris who are teaching the refugees on Western ways, including an opening dance sequence that’s actually a class titled “Sex: Is A Smile An Invitation?” (Spoiler: It’s not.) They are generally more interesting than any of the refugee characters, which probably wasn’t Sharrock’s intention. The refugee performances are just kind of dry and non-dynamic, and that’s a real hindrance in getting the audience to empathize with them.

To Sharrock’s credit, Limbo never goes to some of the more obvious places in terms of putting Omar in a romance, and it only starts paying off in the last act when we get an emotional moment between Omar and his brother, and we finally get to see him playing the “oud” (a Turkish lute, of sorts), which he’s supposed to be a master of. Otherwise, the movie just seems to drive home the obvious, that life sucks for refugees, and that’s about it.

Limbo isn’t a terrible movie, but it’s just so bland and disjointed and even somewhat generic for so much of it that even the eventual payoff doesn’t necessarily win you over.

Also getting a theatrical release this weekend is Chinese auteur Zhang Yimou’s latest film, CLIFF WALKERS (CMC Pictures), which I tried to get a screener for but sadly, too late to review it. It’s a spy thriller about four Chinese special agents who embark on a secret mission to the puppet state of Manchukuo in the ‘30s. It stars Zhang Yi, Yu Hewei, Qin Hailu and Zhu Yawen, and I wouldn’t be surprised if CMC gets this into 200 or 300 screens. With very little promotion here in the States, I don’t expect this to make much of a mark here.

Apparently, Terrence Howard also has a new movie out this week called TRIUMPH, in which he co-stars with RJ Mitte from Breaking Bad and is directed by Brett Leonard. Apparently it’s only in Cinemark Theaters, and it’s inspired by Michael D. Coffey’s true story with Mitte playing a high school senior who tries to be a wrestler despite having cerebral palsy.

Also if you’re looking for something to see in theaters, Edgar Wright’s Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is finally getting its 10th anniversary re-release in theaters this weekend, including Dolby Theaters for the first time. That’s what I’m doing on Sunday with my movie pals, Erica and Mike Streeter.

Another movie getting a limited theatrical release is Roy Andersson’s ABOUT ENDLESSNESS (Magnet), the latest from the auteur king of Swedish existentialism, which will also be available via virtual cinema as well as in those select theaters.

I’m not quite sure what to say about Andersson’s latest, because I’ve never really understood the appeal even as other film critics rave about movies like A Pigeon Sat on a Branch Reflecting on Existence and You, The Living and others. Like those, Andersson seems to specialize in disparate episodic segments about random characters that seem to have absolutely no connection. In this case, there’s a priest who has lost his faith who is first shown dragging a cross up a hill as onlookers barely batting an eye that turns out to be a nightmare.

If you think the movie is going to spend any time following this priest’s struggle, you obviously don’t know Andersson, because instead, we keep being introduced to different characters from a bored woman’s voice-over, every once in a while cutting to a couple floating over the city for no apparent reason. Every once in a while, a few words are spoken but then we’re off to the next vignette.

Sorry, but I have very little time to watch a movie that doesn’t seem to have any interest in plot or story, two of the most important things for any movie in my book, and believe me, this is not the first time I’ve tried to give Andersson a chance because a few hundred cinephiles can’t be wrong, can they?

Yes, in fact, they can and they are, because the almost-80-year-old Andersson is the type of filmmaker who will continue along with this super-niche audience enjoying his quirky non-sequiturs that I just find super dull and pointless.

The latest movie based on a Tom Clancy novel is TOM CLANCY’S WITHOUT REMORSE, which begins streaming via Amazon Prime Video starting Friday. It stars Michael B. Jordan as Navy Seal John Kelly, who has a mission go South in Aleppo, Syria, and when he comes home, he becomes a target for Russian Nationalist soldiers who end up killing his wife. In order to find those responsible, Kelly is pulled into a mission by CIA Agent Robert Ritter (Jamie Bell) and fellow Seal Karen Greer (Jodie Turner-Smith from Queen and Slim) to go after those responsible for his wife’s death only to discover a plot to try to put America and Russia back at war.

Before you get to my review, you can read my interview with director Stefano Sollima over at Below the Line.

So let’s get in this. I’m by no means any sort of Tom Clancy fan, neither of the books nor the movies, not that I haven’t tried, at least with the movies, as I haven’t read any of the books, nor have I gotten around to watching John Krasinski’s Jack Ryan yet, but other than the Harrison Ford movies, nothing has really gotten me very interested in the “Ryanverse”... so WIthout Remorse and join the list of not-particularly-interesting movies based on Clancy books.

It’s certainly not Michael B. Jordan’s fault, since he’s a great lead, and I even thought Sollima did a decent job particularly with the bigger action set pieces that would have been great to see on the big screen rather than on a television set.

I guess part of it is that I really didn’t have any particular interest in knowing more about the John Clark character from the Clancy movies I have seen to see his origins modernized and pulled out of the ‘80s Cold War in which Clancy very deliberately set them vs. the modern political world with everything happening overseas.

Part of my problem is that I just didn’t really care for Jodie Turner-Smith as a soldier with her beautiful hair shaved off, as I just didn’t think she could pull off the toughness that one expects from a soldier of Greer’s status, especially after seeing her in Queen and Slim. I know I’ve seen Jamie Bell in things I’ve liked and better than he is in this movie, which seems to be him basically phoning it in as a character who should have far more layers.

I guess when it comes down to it, we do have to blame Sollina for not working from a stronger script, even though this movie has been in development for over a decade, but it’s also not too surprising after watching it why Paramount Pictures figured it would make more money selling it off to Amazon than releasing it theatrically.

Essentially, Without Remorse is another action-thriller with lots of bullets and explosions that still comes across as exceedingly dull and bland. Surely, Clancy’s books must be better than this to have built such a fanbase over the years.

Opening digitally and for download is Casimir Nozkowski’s THE OUTSIDE STORY (Samuel Goldwyn Films), starring the great Brian Tyree Henry, recently seen in Godzilla Vs. Kong, as editor and filmmaker Charles Young, who is getting over his break-up with his girlfriend Isha (Sonequa Martin-Greents) when he gets locked out of his apartment building. As he tries to get back in, he (and we) meet all sorts of strange and funny characters who may or may not help him.

I ended up really liking this movie a lot, because as with most of his characters, Henry creates a really likeable hero for us, and Nozkowski gives him a great story to really explore a lot more areas of humor than we get to see him do in most movies. This is pretty much a straight up comedy of errors, but it also offers quite a bit of poignancy through Charles’ interactions with various neighbors and them commenting on how he misses his girlfriend. (He broke up with her because she confessed to making out with another woman.) Oddly, I can relate to a lot of what Charles goes through, which definitely helped me connect more with his character.

Nozkowski’s fun script managed not only to get Henry on board, but also the likes of the great Sunita Mani as a beat cop writing up cars whose meters have expired and Matthew Maher, who you’ve seen in everything. The only real weak link as far as the ensemble was young Olivia Edward, who just isn’t up to the other actors in terms of the humor. I can understand why Nozkowski would want to include a young girl in the movie as one of Charles’ neighbors but that was my least favorite part of the film.

Otherwise, The Outside Story is a wonderful and lovely indie, showing off Brian Tyree Henry’s terrific range as a genuinely likable character, and I guess that makes it my favorite movie of this particular week.

Another movie opening this via streaming this week is Dave Grohl’s WHAT DRIVES US, which will be available via something called “The Coda Collection,” which I really have no idea what that is, and unfortunately, I also didn’t get to see this, because I’m sure I would have liked it as much as Grohl’s previous docs and the HBO series Sonic Highways. If I do find time to watch it, maybe I’ll add a few thoughts in an upcoming column.

Hitting Disney+ on Friday is the Soul prequel short, 22 Vs. EARTH, directed by Pixar editor Kevin Nolting, who I also interviewed. It features Tina Fey voicing her lead character from Soul, 22, and it takes place before she meets Joe Gardner as she’s trying to find a few young souls to help her in her boycott of going to Earth rather than remaining in the Great Before. It’s fun and quick (just six minutes) but it’s cute, and something obviously only meant for those who want to know more about her Soul character.

A movie I missed when it was released back in late February but will be available on DVD this week is Nicholas Jarecki’s CRISIS, a tense ensemble thriller about a different pandemic, the rise in opioid addiction and the huge criminal (and legal pharmaceutical) industry that feeds that addiction to the tune of billions of dollars a year. It features an impressive cast that includes Gary Oldman, Armie Hammer, Greg Kinnear, Evangeline Lilly, Lily-Rose Depp, and Michelle Rodriguez, and it’s a really strong dramatic thriller that reminded me a bit of Steven Soderbergh’s Traffic.

I have a feeling that all the issues Hammer was facing around the time (and still) may have prevented Jarecki’s movie from getting much publicity, but Hammer plays one of the three main characters, so if his presence bothers you, I can’t really do much about that. Hopefully that doesn’t put you off learning about a very serious situation facing many families, and Jarecki takes a tough situation and manages to explore it with a decent and entertaining movie. I also thought Lilly was fantastic as a mother trying to get over her own addiction when her son dies seemingly of an opiate overdose. She doesn’t believe it, so she starts her own investigation.(Hammer's federal agent also deals with a family member addicted to opiates, in this case his sister played by Lily Rose-Depp. Of course, Oldman is always great, and that’s the case here, too. It’s just another intense drama from the director of 2012’s Arbitrage that goes as far and deep into the topic of opioid addiction as that movie did with the stock market.

Also on digital this week is Michael Loven’s dark comedy-thriller MURDER BURY WIN (Gravitas Ventures) about three close friends trying to make a game, and it’s quite witty and entertaining. Also out digitally this week is Michael Parks Randa and Lauren Smitelli’s inclusive summer musical, BEST SUMMER EVER (Freestyle Digital Media), which is also kicking off this week’s ReelAbilities Film Festival on Thursday.

The new Apple TV+ series THE MOSQUITO COAST will also debut on that streamer service on Friday, while the very entertaining animated feature THE MITCHELLS VS. THE MACHINES, which I reviewed last week will stream on Netflix starting on Friday, as well.

This week also sees the start of the 50th Anniversary New Directors New Films at Film and Lincoln Center and MOMA (Museum of Modern Art), which I wrote about a few weeks ago, but unfortunately, there really isn’t much in there that interests me, so I haven’t seen anything.

Movies that I just wasn’t able to get to this week, mostly available digitally:

DUTY FREE (This is actually opening for a one week preview at New York’s reopened IFC Center)

WILDCAT (Saban Films)

THE RESORT (Vertical)

PERCY vs. GOLIATH (Saban Films/Paramount)

THE VIRTUOSO (Lionsgate)

FOUR GOOD DAYS (Vertical Entertainment)

GOLDEN ARM (Utopia Films)

That’s it for this week. I always feel a sigh of relief when I actually get to sit down and write this column, and I’m actually able to finish it. It feels like a bit of a pyrrhic victory, but I’m still not quite up to where I was last year in terms of watching and reviewing. We’ll see if things improve this summer. The next few weeks are absolutely slammed with new movies, too, because even though Black Widow has been delayed until July, there are a ton of movies still being released. Next week, the latest from Guy Ritchies, Wrath of Man, reuniting him with Jason Statham.

[leighleighpresents-blog]

Conversations With A Rock

GenQ: Hey Rocky, how are you?  How’s the lead-up to Christmas going for you? 

Rocky: It’s actually going really well.  My parents are coming down from Michigan, and they’re going to come out to Los Angeles, and we’re going to go to the Rowboat Parade, the first time there, so I’m pretty excited for that.  I won’t be going home to the snow this year. 

 GenQ: We don’t even get snow over here … 

Rocky: Are you serious? 

 GenQ: It’s summer over here now. 

Rocky: Oh wow.  That’s insane … it’s freezing here!  It’s 50 degrees in California, and we’re freezing here. 

 GenQ: That’s crazy, haha!  So, your new movie, Tunnel Rats, is coming out here in Australia on DVD in January ’09.  Was it released theatrically anywhere? 

Rocky: We have the world premiere this Thursday, December 18th, in downtown Los Angeles at the Independent Theatre, and then it’s going to be showing in Los Angeles, and I believe New York, but I’m not sure about that one.  I know it’s going to be released in Germany, and around the world on different dates, but it will be coming out on DVD, and there is a video game that’s going to go with it. 

 GenQ: Oooh!  Are you going to be doing any voiceovers for that? 

Rocky: I’m not.  I don’t think there’s any type of voice in it. 

 GenQ: Damn, that sucks!  Well, you could still do your own little “Red vs. Blue” Halo type thing with it! 

Rocky: Hahaha, that’s crazy! 

 GenQ: Uwe Boll is the director of Tunnel Rats.  What was he like to work with? 

Rocky: Uwe’s an interesting character.  He’s a really good director, he’s one of those directors that really cares about the actors, so he gives you a lot of leeway with what you want to do with your character.  In Tunnel Rats, the entire movie was based on a treatment, and it was improvised, so it was up to us to come up with our own character background, and then we sat down, and had a cast table-read, and we each represented our characters to Uwe, and producers, and it was beautiful with what happened, it fit perfectly with all the characters. 

 GenQ: Wow!  I don’t think I’ve ever heard of that happening before! 

Rocky: I know, and, you know what?  We were all a little nervous at first, because yeah, they have improv’d comedy, but I’ve never seen an improv’d dramatic motion picture, so this is one of the first I’ve seen, and I got to participate in it, so it was a unique experience. 

 GenQ: I guess you could say it was written by the entire cast, couldn’t you? 

Rocky: Yeah, but the story’s based on Daniel Clarke’s story. 

 GenQ: Cool.  And Michael Paré’s in it too, he’s been in some great movies too … 

Rocky: He’s actually in a lot of Uwe’s films, they’ve got a close working relationship, so it was good to work with him, cos he’s worked with Uwe before, so he could give us a heads-up on what to expect and everything, and he’s a great guy, and a great actor, and he did a very good job on the film. 

 GenQ: I’ve read a lot of comments from other people who said they normally don’t like war movies, but they can’t wait to see Tunnel Rats.  I have to admit, I’m the same, I hate war movies, but there’s something about Tunnel Rats that just seems really intriguing …  

Rocky: The great thing about this one is that, usually with war movies, you have someone that you’re rooting for, and, in this film, you’re not sure who to root for, because, I think, the main message is that we’re all human, and that the true reason behind war is absolutely insane.  You’re not rooting for the Americans, you’re not rooting for the Vietnamese, you actually see the real humanity behind the people. War is the people.  It’s a very, very emotional movie. 

 GenQ: Your father was in the Vietnam War, wasn’t he? 

Rocky: Yes, he was.  He was a Marine there. 

 GenQ: Has he seen Tunnel Rats? 

Rocky: He has, we had a screening of it in February for cast and crew, and distributors, and he flew up to California to see the film, and he loved it, absolutely loved it, which was important to Uwe, because my Dad was there, he was a Vietnam Vet, he was a Marine, he was actually down in the tunnels at one point … so it was an emotional experience for him.  That’s why I auditioned, I wanted this role so bad, it was kind of a way for me to pay respects to my Dad, cos he actually fought there, so when I was in the auditions, I actually called him, and asked him questions, like “what was the lingo that you used”, that kind of stuff, and it really helped me out in the audition, cos the audition itself, we had one scene, and the producers had us improv the scene on the spot right there, so it was important to know that sort of stuff. 

 GenQ: Yeah, for sure!  How long did it take to make? 

Rocky: We were out there for a little over a month.  We had boot camp for a week near Port Edward, and some filming in South Africa, and then for two weeks over in Eastern Africa, and then we went down to Capetown and filmed the rest on a soundstage. 

 GenQ: I can’t even imagine what it’s like to do what you do.  Being an actor is something I’ve always dreamed of, and it must be so amazing! 

Rocky: Well, this one was unique because the cast members were put through a week-long boot camp.  We actually had South African missionaries that were our instructors, and me thinking, you know, “this is just going to be an actors boot camp, piece of cake, push-ups, nothing big” but we spent like 12-, 13-hour days, we would have PT training, we would have rifle training, just certain things, and one day, we had wet socks, and we had to march in them all day, and was the point when it really clicked in my head, because, one of the instructors said, “you get to go home and put dry socks on, and the real soldiers had to keep those wet socks on”, so it was when it clicked in my mind that it was more than just worrying about just staying alive, there were certain things that nature created that even they had to worry about.  It was pretty cool. 

 GenQ: So, after this, what other projects do you have coming up at the moment? 

Rocky: Right now, it’s pretty quiet in Hollywood, I’m sure you’ve heard all about the Writers Strike that went on, WGA, the Writers Guild Of America … and then there was the Directors Guild Of America that was in limbo about whether to strike or not strike, and they ended up settling.  The American Federation of Radio And Television Artists settled, but WGA, which is my union, has not settled yet, so we’ll have a vote on January 2nd about what we want to do, so what that means is not a lot of independent films are happening right now.  The main movies that are happening are huge studio films, which usually have known actors attached to them, the big names, and the television shows which are already in production, so we might not even have a pilot season out here if they stay on strike, which I’m hoping we do not.  We have good reason to, but with the American Economy so bad, I’m not so sure that we should at this time.  So yeah, that’s my answer, I keep myself occupied working on Barack Obama campaigns, as a Deputy Field Organiser for Burbank/Pasadena area in California, which was a neat experience.   I believe that the best acting tool is getting out and getting experience, learning new things, so it was a great experience working on Barack Obama’s campaign.  I’ve learned a lot from it. 

 GenQ: Did you get to meet him? 

Rocky: No, I didn’t meet Barack Obama.  I met Bill Clinton …  

 GenQ: What was he like? 

Rocky: Oh, he was … haha! … Bill Clinton’s Bill Clinton … he just looked at me funny, then he gave me that smirk, that charming smirk that he always makes.  He was a great president … 

 GenQ: Yeah … more human, from what I can tell. 

Rocky: Yeah.   But I’m really excited for what Barack Obama’s going to do for our country.  That’s why I worked so hard. 

 GenQ: When you and I were chatting the other day, you mentioned that you play piano, trombone, sax and drums.  Can you sing as well? 

Rocky: I’ve taken voice lessons before, and I’ve done some community theatre back in Michigan, some musical theatre … I’m not the best singer, but I can carry a tune. 

 GenQ: Fair enough.  The reason I ask is there’s so many of Broadway’s biggest musicals being taken to the big screen now, such as Hairspray, Dreamgirls, etc.  I was just thinking, a lot of them (especially Hairspray) got unknowns to be in the movie, and I was just thinking that could be the perfect way to get you to become a household name … if you could sing! 

Rocky: Right … I really don’t dance, which I think is a huge part of it … I mean, I can club dance, but not musical theatre dance. 

 GenQ: You could learn … 

Rocky: Yeah, I could learn … I SHOULD learn …  

 GenQ: You should do like a Hairspray audition on Youtube …  

Rocky: Right … haha! 

 GenQ: Do “Good Morning Baltimore” or something … 

Rocky: Haha! (still laughing from before) 

 GenQ: There was something else I was going to ask, but that mental image just cleared my brain …  

Rocky: Well, there’s something else that’s keeping me occupied at the moment is that I’m starting to write, cos when I went to college, or university, one of my top subjects was Shakespeare, and Writing, so I’ve started with writing screenplays.  Currently, I’m working on two screenplays, one horror/thriller, and the other one is a comedy/dramatic piece. 

 GenQ: Oooh!  Sounds interesting! 

Rocky: Yeah!  Rocky the actor/writer/muso! 

 GenQ: Haha!  Multi-talented!  Well, make sure you film them in Australia if they get turned into films, and do them in Melbourne so I can be in them. 

Rocky: Ok, sounds good to me! 

 GenQ: So you also studied Shakespeare at College? 

Rocky: Yeah, I went to Grand Valley State University, which is in Michigan, and I was actually on a Shakespeare scholarship to go there, so I was in some of the Shakespeare plays, all the Shakespeare classes, and all that.  I absolutely think it’s important for every single actor to study Shakespeare. 

 GenQ: Yeah, absolutely.  I was thinking the same thing.  So many actors that would not be able to do Shakespeare, and so many people don’t understand it, and, to be a great actor, you need to be able to do Shakespeare, for sure! 

Rocky: Absolutely. 

 GenQ: Well, let’s finish off on some random questions.  You up for that? 

Rocky: Absolutely. 

 GenQ: Who would be your dream actor and actress to work with? 

Rocky: I would LOVE to act with Cate Blanchett.  She my all-time favourite actress.  She didn’t start until she was a little bit older, but every single movie I’ve seen her in, she absolutely engulfs herself in the role.  To work with someone who can dive into a role that much, that makes you an even better actor, and makes you want to dive deeper into your role as well.  I’d LOVE to work with her.  Actor-wise, I’d have to say my top actor right now is Leonardo diCaprio.  I grew up with him, watching him, ever since Growing Pains, every single movie he does, I absolutely love him in.  Some of my favourite movies, like of course, Gilbert Grape, but there’s this one movie that’s not very well-known called Total Eclipse, which I thought he was brilliant in, absolutely brilliant. 

 GenQ: I haven’t even heard of that, I’ll have to check it out!  What about Johnny Depp?  Is he another favourite? 

Rocky: Oh, of course!  Who doesn’t love Johnny Depp?  Every single role he’s done, he’s so amazing.  I actually had this discussion with my manager, where, the type of role I want to be doing are not the Brad Pitt, Tom Cruise type of role.  It’s going to be more along the lines of Johnny Depp or Steve Buscemi, where it’s that very quirky type of role. 

 GenQ: I guess like you did in Triloquist? 

Rocky: Yeah, exactly!  Triloquist is BEYOND quirky, haha!!!  It’s from the director of Leprechaun, which is a very quirky goofy-movie-slash-horror, and this one just went over the top.  I think it was meant to be more comical than a horror film.  

GenQ: Yeah, definitely.  Especially the lines that the Dummy had.  That movie’s not even out here yet … actually, the only ones I know that are out at this stage are Shallow Ground, and Mortuary! 

Rocky: Well, Anderson’s Cross, Iowa, The Bondage … I’m sure what’s going on with them at the moment.  I know that Take is coming out on DVD VERY soon.  That was so much fun, working with Minnie Driver, though my scene got cut out. 

 GenQ: Oh really?  That sucks! 

Rocky: Yeah, but … like, you get to see the back of my head, and I say two lines, and that’s about it!  We filmed a whole scene of me with Minnie, but it got cut because we missed filming a few other scenes, and it just didn’t flow, but I’ve got that scene on DVD for myself, so that’s pretty cool. 

 GenQ: True.  Getting back to the last line of questioning, who’s your dream screenwriter or director?  Maybe Stephen King? 

Rocky: Oh yeah, to work with Stephen King would be AMAZING.  I’d say, director wise, Scorsese would be my first choice, I love every single film he does.  They have an interesting quirk to them, they have an atmosphere, a feel to it.  Of course, I’d love to work with ALL directors, haha!  But yeah, I’d love to work with him, Spielberg, I mean, who wouldn’t wanna work with Spielberg?  Besides Scorsese, I’d say Gus Van Sant has to be my favourite director.  I’d also love to work with Larry Clark, who directed Kids, and Bully.  He’s very edgy, very raw with his directing.  Gregg Akari is another, he directed Mysterious Skin.  I’ve actually met him, I went in for Mysterious Skin 3 times, but they didn’t choose me … they chose a great cast, so that’s ok.  I went in to read for the best friend of Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s character, and I can see why they didn’t choose me, there was a similarity between me and him and Joseph, but it just wouldn’t have worked. 

 GenQ: Do you have any messages for our readers? 

Rocky: I just wish everyone happy holidays, and a happy new year, I’m sure 2009 is going to be a great year for everybody, and I appreciate everybody’s support, it really does mean a lot to have fans who love your work and are behind you 100%, that just keeps me motivated.  I always say the key to motivation is to look at how far you’ve come, and not how far you have to go. 

[thecomictape-blog]

Issue 2: Broader Contexts

There have been many books, comic books, films and TV shows and music that I have looking into to further how well I do my project. As concept albums and comic books are not new ideas to the world there was a lot of information for me to obtain so I can make sure this project makes sense when compared to the current formula that these forms of media already have.

Music

When I first started doing the listening for this project I started to take a look at concept albums as well as albums that artist had taken on alter egos in their albums. A key artist I listen to was Janelle Monáe and her Metropolis saga of albums. In these albums Monáe creates a new world called Metropolis with Monáe’s alter ego Cindy Maywhether who is an android who becomes aware of the unfairness she and her fellow robots suffer at the hands of the ruling humans. This series has taken a political stance with Monáe stating that the android is the new other in her world. Monáe states that ‘you can parallel that to the gay community, to the black community, to women - we have so many things in common’ (Sieczkowski, 2013) Monáe’s why of an establishing a new world in her music both through lyrics and with her interludes were a good starting point for me when creating the world in which the narrative of my project will take place.

Another artist that has placed their alter ego in their recording is Beyoncé. In 2008 she released her 3rd solo album, I Am…Sasha Fierce, which was released as a double album. Disc 1, I Am…, represented Beyoncé. It was filled with ballads, mid-tempo songs, vulnerable and more emotional lyrics whereas disc 2, Sasha Fierce, represented Sasha Fierce, Beyoncé’s stage persona. This disc had uptempo, attitude, bolder and uptempo tracks. Although one could argue that this disc was the Beyoncé we were use to as she had released these type of songs before and this wouldn’t be totally wrong to say as Beyoncé states that Sasha Fierce was born in 2003 on the set of her video for her debut solo single, Crazy in Love. Rather than introducing us to her alter ego it could be argued that this album introduced us to Beyoncé as her ballads were noticeably more prominent and personal to her and according to the other writers on the album Beyoncé would often rewrite the songs with something more personal to her such as Ave Maria, Satellites and That’s Why You’re Beautiful. Beyoncé also sung slightly different on each disc. For the first disc, Beyoncé sung gentler and with a lighter tone than she did on the second disc. Her voice was stronger and with more grit employing more growls, even had a slight rapper’s flair on some songs such as Diva and Video Phone. This way of making a distinction between herself and her alter ego helped me in figuring out a way to make there be a more obvious difference between that will represent the character closer to me and my stage persona.

Beyoncé also released her 6th solo album, Lemonade, in 2016. Although this album wasn’t so much about her alter ego Lemonade had a running narrative running through the album, which was also accompanied by its own film. Lemonade’s ongoing narrative is of a black woman who has realised that her husband has cheated on her and all the emotions she goes through after finding this out. Although this narrative isn’t close to mine, however looking at how Beyoncé managed to string these songs together with a running theme makes this a good listening point for my project.

Another concept album with an alter ego I listened to was Melanie Martinez’s Cry Baby album. In this album Martinez tells narratives from the view of Martinez’s alter ego of the same name. Cry Baby is a fantasy version of Martinez when she was a child. Martinez describe Cry Baby as a child who experiences adult things. She also claims that things that happened to Cry Baby are similar to things Melanie have gone through herself besides the part when Cry Baby is kidnapped and then goes on to kill her kidnapper. All the song titles on the album are metaphors on childhood related things but the song lyrics contain deeper messages such as Dollhouse and Mrs. Potato Head.

Other albums I listened to weren’t explicitly about an artist’s alter ego or even concept albums but albums like Michael Jackson’s Bad and Bruno Mars’ 24K Magic show a lot of characterisation in the songs. In songs such as Bad and The Way You Make Me Feel, Jackson takes on a persona which is filled with more bravado and could be considered stereotypically masculine. This can also be seen in a lot of the songs on Mars’ album in songs such as 24K Magic, That’s What I Like and Calling All My Lovelies. Songs like these helped me figure out the bravado I wanted to make my alter ego have in his lyrical content.

TV Shows/Films

Superheroes are now often in live action films or tv series. What these films and shows do is put the heroes that were created in the early, mid and late 20th century and puts them in modern day society. For example Spider-Man was created in the 1960s and has had years of adventures since then growing from a teenager to a now married man. What the movies have done is reimagined what Spider-Man would be like growing up in the 21st century. The films have touched on many issues. Captain America: Civil War was a very good movie to study in regards to my project as the topic of morality is brought up. The superheroes are deemed as dangerous as the damage they cause while saving people is high. It’s also argued that if the heroes never showed up there would be no villains in the first place. This begins the Superhero Registration Act which wants the superheroes to sign on so they can be seen as legitimate heroes and then the government can use them. Any hero who didn’t sign would be seen as a threat. This now brings the story of justice vs. law. The law states that the heroes must do this so they and their damage can be controlled however signing this act will mean the heroes would not be able to jump into action when they see injustice they would always have to wait for the government to send them out. This could also do more harm than good. Another reason why I saw Captain America: Civil War as a good point of study is because it was the on-screen debut of Black Panther, arguably the most popular black superhero. Although the Marvel Cinematic Universe has heroes of colour such as Falcon and War Machine these characters are both seen as allies and/or sidekicks to Captain America and Iron Man. Black Panther however is his own stand alone hero with his own backstory that isn’t connected to any of the previous heroes introduced. Series 2 of the Netflix series, Daredevil, also follow a justice vs. law narrative. The introduction of The Punisher in the Marvel live action lore brought about this story. Instead of handing criminals over to the hands of the law, The Punisher decides to take matters into his own hands and kill criminals himself. Daredevil argues that this is wrong but The Punisher argues that to really rid the world of evil you have to take it out. Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice also shows a story the fear of superheroes becoming to powerful and the element of fear people can have of the unknown. The Luke Cage Netflix series was also a good point for me. A lot of things that are included in the series such as the music, themes and language are things that are coded as black. Many people have stated that Luke Cage could be seen as a modern day blaxploitation film (in a tv series format). One of the most powerful scenes of the show is in episode 9 where Luke Cage, wearing a hoodie, is stopped by two police officers. Luke Cage resists arrests and the officers shoot at him however Cage is bulletproof so the bullets bounce off at him. This is a direct commentary of the police brutality and targeting that black people face.

These superhero narratives were very helpful when trying to figure out the running plot of my project. One thing what the tv shows and films of superheroes do is focus on strong stories for the comics. The comics have hundreds (if not thousands) of different story arcs for each character yet the strongest ones are usually brought to life as these are the most engaging and thought provoking. When looking at these different narratives I tried to bring out notions that were not alien to comics however putting my own twist on it so I’d not only have an engaging story but also a thought provoking one.

Another type of film I decided to investigate is concert films. The one’s I truly studied were Beyoncé’s I Am…World Tour, Michael Jackson’s Live at Wembley July 16, 1988 and Live in Bucharest - The Dangerous Tour. One of the reason’s I choose these two artist in particular is because they are very known for their theatrical stage shows and high energy performing. In Beyoncé’s case this was the tour where she performed as herself and Sasha Fierce as she carried on her concept of the the I Am…Sasha Fierce album and drove it further with the show even having the two meet each other in the video interludes of the show. Beyoncé showed the difference in performing styles, vocal styling and costumes. When performing as herself Beyoncé’s costumes were usually a lighter colour such as when performing Smash into You she wears a white leotard with a long white cape, in Ave Maria she wears a wedding dress and in Listen she wears a long sparking white/silver dress. These costumes seem to show a sense of purity and vulnerability. They are more understated when compared to her normal stage wear. During the Beyoncé sections (which usually contained the ballads of her setlist) Beyoncé moved very little, occasionally walking from one side of the stage to the other and the emphasis was put on the vocal performance. Beyoncé being a singer known for her live high belting capabilities, growling and slightly chestier style of singing swapped this in these sections for mainly lower belts, head voice usage, more subtle vocal runs and more of a head placement when singing. However when the uptempo were Sasha Fierce. The costumes were usually a variation on a leotard with bright, flashy colours, her costume during Diva had her dressed as a superhero. The Sasha Fierce sections of the show contained a high level of movement with Beyoncé performing intense choreography, running from one side of the stage to the other, head banging and even flying to a smaller stage at one point. The vocals were the Beyoncé we had become use to, strong belts, growling, full of attitude and more flashy vocals. It seemed like her the distinction between the two characters were more defined in the live show compared to the element where some of the lines seemed like they blurred. Maybe this is because Beyoncé seems to use Sasha Fierce as more of a stage than as a whole other person. To see how Beyoncé was able to switch characters mid-show through just doing things subtly different in the different segments of the show. Michael Jackson’s shows are mostly on the theatrical side until he performs songs like She’s Out Of My Life, Will You Be There and Man In The Mirror. When not performing these songs, Jackson’s larger than life stage persona was out on full force with high choreography, demanding stage presence, dynamic vocal performances and elaborate staging.

Watching both DVDs gave me an idea of how to bring a stage persona to a recorded format. There different approaches towards different songs and different sections of their shows show that there doesn’t need to be a dramatic change to represent yourself as another persona. Sometimes subtly can make the biggest changes.

Books

There were two main books that I read when going into this topic are Super Black: American Pop Culture And Black Superheroes (Nama, 2011) and Black Comics: Politics Of Race And Representation (edited by Howard and Jackson II, 2013). Super Black talks about the appearance of black superheroes and how they are links with the trends in America in political sense as well as in a pop culture sense in it’s first chapter, Color Them Black. In chapter two, Birth of the Cool, examines Black Panther and Luke Cage and how they connected to the Black Power movement. This chapter also looks at blaxploitation films and their characters. The third chapter, Friends and Lovers, is about black superheroes relationships with white characters whether be the friendship and partnership between Captain America/Falcon and Iron Man/War Machine or the relationship between characters Cloak and Dagger. Chapter four, Attack of the Clones, is about how white superheroes have been changed to black however I found that this chapter wasn’t as useful to me as the others were. The final chapter of the book, For Reel?: Black Superheroes Come To Life, explores the black characters from comics that have been on television and film such as when Eartha Kitt played Catwoman in the Batman tv series from the 60s and films like Blade.

Black Comics is a book that explores the ways which black comic artists have grappled with themes like the black experience, gender identity, politics and social media. The first entry in the book is, Brief History of the black comic strip: Past and present (Howard, 2013), which talks about the origins of the black comic starting with comic strips in the 1920s. The next chapter I found useful is, Black comics and social media economics: New media, new production models (Lacklaff and Sales, 2013) which touched on how the comic book industry changed from releasing comic strips, then comic books, to graphic novels and how web comics and digital distribution of comics could be the future. The final section that was really helpful at this point in time was Gender, Race and the Boondocks (Howard, 2013). The last few paragraphs of this section are titled, The search for pride and manhood, which talk about how pride and ‘being cool’ plays apart in a black male’s life. Howard states that ‘playing it cool’ serves as a behavioural performance used when under pressure like when a black male is confronted by a white authority figure such as a police officer. Howard also states the this pressure to keep cool at all times could have negative effects on the black male’s life as he may lose touch with his feelings in interpersonal relationships, such as romantic and familial relationships.

Both these books deal with the identity of black people and how that then intern effects black superheroes. I found this useful as writing a black superhero without doing much investigation can lead to unintentionally writing the character into some harmful and outdated stereotypes. Although my character falls into some of the stereotypes about black men this is a part of the story and apart of the character’s development.

Personal discussions

This part was very important for me as I am writing a female character who has gone through sexism and also decided to turn against the law because of how gender inequality treated men accused of sexual assault and abuse. For me to truly write this character correctly I decided to ask several women I know about there feelings on gender inequality, experiences they’ve gone through, how it’s made them feel and how they have dealt with. I will leave a few quotes on what these women have said and I will keep them anonymous.

(Trigger Warning: Swearing, sexual assault, violence, rape, mental assault)

Wearing certain things men see you as a thing

You’re stupid cos your girly

When you’re on the street surrounded by men you end up laughing it off because you don’t feel safe

I was once told, when I was a virgin, by a guy who was attracted to me, who lied about his age, don’t give it all away at once

I’ve been called hard to please, why am I yours to please? Why am I something to conquer?

All the women I know feel insecure about their bodies

Pitting women against one another is another way of controlling them

What men make in music is considered more valuable

If they don’t get feminism, I don’t wanna be around you

There’s a stereotype of pretty girls to have big boobs

If I went out without make up everyone would think I was a monster

I’m happy to be sexual with some men but I choose that. I don’t have to be sexual with anyone I don’t please to

A lot of people think rape is men in dark alleys who are strangers, it does happen but most rape is not spoken about and it between people who know each other

People don’t talk about harassment that happen in relationships

I consent to being sexual with someone just cos you see me doing it does it mean I want to do it with you

Patriarchy is such an insured thing in society that I sometimes don’t see it

I don’t think I’m conventionally pretty

As a producer I’m not seen the same as a male producer

When my hair was long I got twice the amount of attention, I guess cos it’s short it’s deemed edgier?

I was playing the guitar and my friends said ‘you’re actually good, I didn’t think you’d be that good cos you’re so girly’

I was trying to talk in the rehearsal and I was belittles and I just couldn’t take it anymore

I have a strong opinion on this watered down version of feminism

When you lose your virginity, if you’re young, no says anything to the guy but they treated me like I did this awful thing, like I ruined my life and was going off the rails

Stop staring at me!

Men are encouraged to do things that women aren’t

What’s wrong with girly? Why is girly an insult?

We have a right to be angry!? Why can’t I be?

They kept talking to me about protection like he was the one in control of me

Male privilege is obviously shit, they just piss me off really

When I cut my hair I did it so I wouldn’t be deemed as girly and I shouldn’t have to feel like that

You don’t have big boobs but you’re still pretty

All I’m supposedly good for is sex

Its annoying when a women represents her sexuality she has to be shamed for it

Being sexual isn’t a free for all

There shouldn’t be a tax on period pads

Women not feeling okay in their natural bodies, feeling that they have to change their bodies, faces and appearance

When we were out it was commented that I drink beer, can we not drink what we want?

I’m always blamed when your in a situation with a guy. It’s always the girl who’s to blame rather than the guy even if both parties are wrong

If I drink wine and champagne I’m too girly, when I drink beer I’m trying to be one of the guys, WHY CAN’T I JUST LIKE BEER!?

Why are you only talking about how I look?

‘You’re prettier when you look like this rather than that’

Women have to fight harder to be taken seriously

You grow up thinking like sex is wrong and if you do it you’re a less version of yourself

No one says to women if you smile more you’d be attractive, instead its ‘wear more make up’ it’s never about being happy, funny, or engaged with life

Women that put nudes up… Men think ‘it’s on display for me to have

The moment guys realise I’m not interested sexually… they cut me off

I thought if I cut my hair my boyfriend would break up with me

It’s always our fault when we get abused

They don’t want women to compete with men so they pit women against one another

My sister didn’t know you couldn’t flush pads down the toilet!

I didn’t understand sexual assault, even when I was assaulted

The hypocrisy of it all!

One of the guys made a comment and I literally broke down, all the male teachers didn’t say anything except the one woman teacher. She explained this is what sexism is

I’m pretty fiesty, I’ll start a fight if you try to grope me

Every time they talk about a wave of feminism they only talk about white women

Theres so many things I didn’t realise were sexual harassment until recently

It’s easier to block out of your memory then deal with it

They don’t tell UTIs! It’s very difficult for boys to get it but for women it’s easy

If they guys had sex they were popular and worth having

There’s a difference between appreciation and objectification

Every woman I know has been some type of sexual harassment or assault

These guys felt like they could shout things at me and put me down and tell me I was shit. I know they wouldn’t do it if I was a man and I fought back. They hated it, they wanted me to stay down.

If I listen to rock and heavy metal I’ll be like one of the guys and suddenly I was cool cos I wasn’t girly

Women don’t come out the womb thinking that they aren’t good

I want to get ready but they want to have sex… it’s easy for them to pick me up and put me on the bed even though I don’t want to…

I have a family history of depression and the fact until 2016 there wasn’t a study connecting the link between mental illness, health and contraception!

Her mum and dad wouldn’t care if her brother had a girlfriend over but she wasn’t allowed a boy in her room

Meghan Trainor’s songs… I get what they try to do but it made me feel shit about myself

You don’t learn about the clitoris in sex or the spot because for men it doesn’t matter

When guys say I don’t like condoms… If you wanna deal with STIs and pregnancy you deal with it! I don’t want it!

As queer woman I’ve noticed a different in how I look at women and how straight men do

I’ve had sexism in school, our skirt lengths were checked in front of the class

The burden of carrying of child is on women and so is the burden of not having one!

A woman TV presenter can never be heavy, you’ve never seen it! Look at Holly Willoughby

Men are always commenting on women profiles and feel like they can say anything they want… they feel like you’re asking for it

A man is always praised for having multiple partners

The attitude towards at girls… they think feminism is burning bras and hating men!

You didn’t even look at her face, just her body

I don’t have time for assholes who say ‘I don’t want to use a condom’

She had a group of guys following her but because she didn’t want them they got angry and made it out that she led them own!

I was scared of being label

They randomly switched me to another pill

Women are always asked what are you wearing, what did you do?

Guys are allowed to lose their virginity when they want!

I love not shaving cos it’s like, fuck you!

If she doesn’t want you, deal with it!

Teachers always go ‘I need a strong boy to carry something’ why not I need a strong student

Having friends who are not willing to acknowledge that the physical relationship they’ve had with someone is rape

I do have another choice! The choice is my boyfriend wearing a condom!

They spiked her drink and they had sex with her and now she has a life long STD! That’s fucked up!

I know how it feels to be looked at so when I look at a woman I know how it feels to be objectified

Why is consent not discussed in secondary schools

Don’t grope me!

Girls were labeled ‘slags’ for the rest of school’s duration because they wanted to have sex!

Male pleasure is discussed but female pleasure isn’t

In catholic school we didn’t really have sexual education

It made me feel so gross… they felt like they could do it to anyone

They just throw you on the pill! They literally don’t communicate with you properly, you’d think with doctors they would. I know they give a leaflet but when you’re 15 to 16 you just trust the doctor they’re meant to be health

God forbid I’d have to get an abortion because it’s shamed so much!

There’s complexity in intersectionality

You never realise how much guys don’t ask for consent until you meet someone who does

I often have to keep reminding myself ‘I don’t have to look nice’

We deserve to be angry, I’m not making myself seem nice and acceptable for someone else

My best friend’s boyfriend came home drunk and raped her and she didn’t report it, she just took it, she never accepted it was rape because they were in a relationship

There’s no space for sexism!

In the past feminist wave movements didn’t include black women

Because I’m skinny it’s a little different because society makes you feel like you have to be skinny but it wasn’t a choice for me, it’s just my body, it makes you feel like other girls think you try to look skinny

Slut shaming is not progressive!

This guy pulled up my skirt, tried to pull my pants down and grabbed my area

They only just started making the male contraceptive pill but stopped it because it gives the same effects as it gives women

Our bodies are treated different by medics, it’s strange

A sense of entitlement to bash down your opinions and tell you to calm down

Be progressive in your statements

No that’s not sexist, you could ruin this guy’s career saying that

I don’t like the fact I have to be sexual for everyone or not at all

How dare you feel entitled to say I’m disgusting for not shaving

In school we were told girls couldn’t wear coloured bras because it distracted the male staff

We had a teacher that use to drop a pencil and look up girls’ skirt, baring in mind he was 60!

From a guys perspective they feel like they can’t cry, my boyfriend kept apologising for crying… why? It’s ingrained that girls are emotional and guys aren’t. It’s okay for me to be emotional cos I’m weak

It’s not just a bunch of abortion rights, It’s a global thing

We can’t take about periods! Its a thing all women have! It’s important!

I’m either hyper sexualised or asexualised

You’re kinky it’s a bad thing

I didn’t understand sexual assault, even when I was assaulted

If i make a point on why I think something is sexist then male privilege kicks in and they think they can say I’m wrong cos they haven’t experienced this

Men they get up and go outside feeling like… they deserve to be walking down that street, going anywhere, whereas women walk out with a hand bag of sheet so we have all bases covered, its kinda like anxiety, we have this notion that we don’t deserve to be there, people our gonna judge us… theres just this uncertainty about our position

Unrealistic body images are plastered everywhere!

You don’t get in GQ magazine, ‘how to give her great head’

This isn’t male privilege but in my job… It makes me laugh because the managers say the girls should do table cloths but the guys should lift the chairs. The girls get told to wipe and iron

Its pleasure shaming rather than having sex

A lot of women are hurt all the time for saying no

Boys feel like they’re entitled to sex

Why are we taxed for tampons?

I can be oblivious when I’m having a good time… My friend had to keep fighting random people from trying to touch me on a night out

For some strange reason the male gaze wants us to look like little girls… so that we’re so tiny and petite with big eyes… very skinny… no boobs… It’s kinda gross

Small minded people telling me I’m having too much sex

People think I’m vulnerable because I’m small

Society dictates I should do things that society thinks is the perfect aesthetic for a woman

If you still have women who want to bleach their skin… There’s a problem!

If you’re gonna make a statement it needs to be progressive

I’m small so guys have just taken advantage for that

They would just pin me to walls and keep me there as long as they wanted

Even today a guy beeped at me to get my attention

These pants for women that have button that you can lock them... They say it’s good but why the fuck would society create these? We should be teaching people not rape

A woman who is white feels better about herself than a woman of colour

I thought that I brought it on myself

If I’m happy with what I naturally look like why would I damage myself to look like what people think I should

Do you think women are being self destructive by being a ‘slut’ or not shaving?

When I use to be in college all the teachers were male except one, all the guys in my band would look down on us

Women in pop music… everything they do has to have a purposed they’re over analysed

I was told by the guy who ran a gig ‘you can take your top off’

We don’t say enough about our sisters of colour!

Society makes male think sex is so important, it’s dangerous

When women take control it’s seen as threatening cos sex is power

However even with all that the charts are still dominated by men

You can’t say you want equality for all women and forget women of colour

I’m angry, I’m pissed off but I don’t care if people are threatened by my feminism!

Characters in TV don’t really help. The male who sleeps with everyone is considered so cool

As I woman I feel like my hair is apart of my womanhood, if I cut it I will lose my femininity

Even though we know these things… we still do it because of society

Thank you to all the women are contributed thoughts and feelings!

[shepgeek]

Film Review of 2016

Disappointments

Since everyone seems so keen to dispatch 2016 asap, let’s start on the downers!

2016 has definitely had its occasional moments but we seem to be fast converging on a generic blockbuster soup. The year was littered with blockbusters which had both impressive visuals and charismatic performances but also had nothing new to say, beyond sticking a franchise marker in the ground (Doctor Strange, Fantastic Beasts, Ghostbusters, Kung Fu Panda 3, Warcraft, Jason Bourne, The Magnificent Seven & even the largely over-praised Civil War). Whilst all of these films passed the time well & were basically enjoyable, there is the ever-increasing whiff of missed opportunity around the primary Hollywood fare. Less successful were Independence Day: Resurgence (distracting but pointless) and X-Men Apocalypse - an uneven, florid and unexpected misfire, although nowhere near as far behind Civil War as was generally made out.

Meanwhile, over in the DC Universe, Warner Brothers kept fumbling what should be their easiest win. From a low start, Batman vs Superman fades badly on repeat viewings (even the ballyhooed Special edition). There are definitely no problems in their casting department and I remain a fan of Cavill; his mournful look in the courtroom is played magnificently. Ben Affleck’s Batman was expertly portrayed but bore almost no resemblance to the essence of the character that I for one love, delivering in his place a psychopathic fascistic jackass who was a far cry from the world’s greatest detective. How we’re supposed to root for him then or in the future is a mystery - I would honestly take Clooney’s portrayal over this. Poor Affleck - he delivers what he is given magnificently; blame the architects and not the builder. Gal Godot’s cameo keeps me hopeful that Patty Jenkins may just save the whole damned thing with Wonder Woman next year, but Warners are certainly running out of strikes. The idiotic shambles of Suicide Squad was only barely saved from one-star dreck by the huge charisma of Will Smith & Margot Robbie, and whatever spark the concept started with seemed produced and edited into manufactured oblivion. To make it worse, DC’s TV shows remain such charming and silly fun: I wonder how much appetite standard audiences still have for the upcoming JLA films.

Arrival came trumpeted with massive critical heraldry but I was greatly disappointed.  I found it derivative (Torchwood: Children of Men with the pilot & finale of DS9) and, as with The Martian and Interstellar, flirted with scientific ideas (which film reviewers mistake for “intelligence”) only to discard them for woolly sentimentalism. Only Zemeckis’ Contact reigns supreme in this expanding genre of science storytelling and, even though the performances in Arrival were compelling, the film (albeit decent) left me greatly frustrated.

Another smash hit that I did not care for was the Secret Life of Pets, a tedious and rambling Toy Story knock-off (though my daughter loved it so what do I know?) but nothing compares to the real disappointment of the year- Swiss Army Man.  My take was this: a smug, cold, flimsy and empty experience, it became the first film I’ve walked out of.  Ever.  In fact I did so about 5 minutes before the end, since I knew exactly where it was going and was so disengaged that it was only going to annoy me. I should add that I do like very much that the film exists and I could imagine friends and reviewers whom I respect loving it (as many did) but it bounced off me completely and ultimately left me irritated and even a little angry.

  Moments

In the midst of an uninspiring year for cinema, there were still a few moments which blazed through the repetitive fug & reminded me how joyous cinematic storytelling can be. Spielberg’s BFG had many such notes, from the visual poetry of the Giant silently twirling through the shadows of London to the childish joy of the whizzpopping Queen. Other moments of delight included the moment of “Hang on - are they doing this? - oh Yes They Are!” when the Beastie Boys’ bassline kicks in during the final act of Star Trek Beyond and, whilst The Revenant may have been a tad indulgent, the bear attack had me yelling at the screen.  Any scene featuring Flash the Sloth in Zootropolis was laced with comedic genius whilst our arrival in the city, combining Shakira’s perfect pop with gorgeous animated depth and colour, was magical. Ryan Gosling’s masterclass of toilet gunplay clowning in The Nice Guys was only topped comedically by the rampant and prolonged genius of the game of “Would that it were so simple” tennis in Hail Caesar! But narrowly pipping that for my cinematic moment of the year though, was Lord Vader himself.

I feel conflicted over Rogue One as ultimately it is yet another film which exists because it can, not because it needed to. To note the lack of comment about the unsettling fake Peter Cushing (squarely in the uncanny valley) after the shrieking which greeted the prequel trilogy’s “Dodgy CGI!” headlines perpetuates the accepted myth that those films are disasters to discard  but I see little difference.  Rogue One is another three star entry to the saga; I’d put it on a level with Attack of the Clones in terms of quality, ahead of Phantom Menace. Disney have a whole Galaxy to explore but choose to sustain the increasingly weird trend of aping preceding classics with an echo instead of trying out a new voice. Quite what Joss Whedon made of the final act is anyone’s guess: “the feisty rebels fight their way past a space armada (losing comedy relief Alan Tudyk along the way) to climb a radio antenna so they can send out the message to topple the evil empire” rang a few bells with me anyway. Rogue One also felt choppily re-edited (what was with the psychic space octopus?) whilst the new characters didn’t really land at all.  Indeed directly after leaving the cinema I (and all of my party) struggled to name any of the characters (Erm…. Jinn, the moustache guy, the blind guy, his mate, the pilot, Forest Whitaker, the funny droid, the small thing that looked like a testicle…).  Despite this problematic emotional deficit we were treated to some glorious set pieces and nicely pitched beats, but when Darth Vader’s lightsaber illuminates his terrifying visage we are treated to a moment of cinema as resplendent in its awesomeness as it was shamelessly gratuitous.  After my considerable mithering about not being able to share Star Wars with my children last year it was almost a relief to see such a grim conclusion (No Way is it suitable for under 10s) but it makes me return to my wondering of who Disney are making these films for.  Episode VII is rumoured to be “darker” still; where is the cheerful space-fairy-tale where we all started?  Eventually they’ll stray too far from Lucas’ indelible first film (still the finest of the lot, for me) and step back cinematically but they run the risk of increasingly diluting the specialness of the whole thing. The fun “Star Wars Rebels” TV show fills a bit of this gap but even that has clouds of doom in the background (although seeing Chopper & The Ghost in Rogue 1 was a nice touch). Maybe after the sad loss of Carrie Fisher last week now isn’t the time to whinge about gloom in the Star Wars Universe, but I feel that my love for the franchise is certainly starting to be tested.

The year in numbers

Number of films seen: 93

Way down on other years- I blame box sets).

Number of ***** films released in 2016 : 0

This happened in 2011 too, but I’d normally expect at least 3.

Number of 2016 releases seen: 32

 About par for the course.

Number of cinema trips:29

Again about my average: I’ve been to the cinema 188 times in the past 6 years.

Number of new films seen:51

I’m improving here, which pleases me.

 Most anticipated for 2017

Baby Driver

Edgar Wright’s films are ace (except that one which I don’t mention since people shout at me).

 La La Land

This looks gorgeous and I thought Whiplash was sensational.

 Logan

I like everything about how this looks.

 A Monster Calls

Original storytelling! Yes!

 Paddington 2

Obvs.

 Star Wars Episode VIII

A New Hope?

 T2: Trainspotting

Hugely exciting- these film makers have only grown more talented in the past 20 years.

20 years.

Gods I’m old.

 Thor: Ragnarok

My favourite Marvel franchise goes comedy-space loopy. Has the potential to be my favourite of them all.

 Wonder Woman

I love this character and I want my daughter to as well. Get this right DC. Please.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Missed during 2016 but would like to have seen:

Allied, the Big Short, Finding Dory, Midnight Special, Money Monster & Passengers. I also did not see either Room or Spotlight, because I was never in the mood for the grimness of either.  Look, I’m busy and I’ve turned 40. Can you tell?!

  Top 10 films of 2016

Bubbling Under: The charming and colourful Moana and also Kubo and the Two Strings were superior family fare whilst The Jungle Book was an immersive treat.

 10        The Revenant

Technically stupendous but also oddly emotionally detatched and often needlessly arty- truly great cinema puts storytelling before craft and allegory with the latter drawn from the former (if it can) and I felt that, despite the stupendous cinematography and artistry on display, that beauty was sacrificed for emotional or narrative strength- certainly for plausibility. I’ve had these issues with Iñárritu before, but there is no denying the fact that this remains a remarkable piece of cinema.

9          Deadpool

Actually a bit more sharp than I’d first realised and a clever piece of programming, but still not what it could be if it halved the budget and really cut loose.

#driveby

8          10 Cloverfield Lane

The main problem is the name (It has nothing to do with the 2008 film and I was always waiting for them to tie together), but the claustrophobia and paranoia are immersive, shocking and unpleasantly tense.

7          The Hateful 8

A trifle indulgent at times, but a terrific theatrical experience.

6          The BFG

Not as comedic as you’d think, with a pervasive melancholy vibe of loneliness, guilt and regret emitting from the screenplay, lead actor and the director. It takes a while to get going and doesn’t aim for huge emotional sweeps, but the patient craft of Spielberg is clear to see. The BFG is lovely filmmaking with a real gentleness at its core and it will only grow in reputation over time. Also features explosively farting Corgis.

5          Star Trek Beyond

The best Blockbuster of the year I was surprised and delighted to see how much it grew on repeat viewings. This warm and witty love letter was assembled at huge pace but it made for a thrilling piece of cinematic escapism. A considerable improvement on its predecessor, the highlights were the pairings of the characters, especially Spock & McCoy. They did fudge the character of Kirk a little in order to both complement the story’s main theme & provide a suitable reflection in the villain and as a result Kirk is, paradoxically, the least convincing part of the piece but, after a terrific and assured finale and beautiful grace note for the 50thAnniversary, the films ends perfectly with the whole crew, as it should.

4          Hail Caesar!

Another film that gets better the more you think about it, Hail Caesar! loves movies almost as much as its protagonist and this feels like one of the Coens’ more personal films. Their goofy wit is littered throughout it and it nods to cinematic tradition constantly, including some wildly unnecessary set pieces which spectacular and as fun as there are knowingly indulgent.

3          The Nice Guys

Quintessential Shane Black it may be, but his voice is so distinct and entertaining that a film with this level of charisma is hard to take against, no matter how familiar the ingredients might be.

2          The Man who Knew Infinity

A truly delightful surprise, I was expected this to be a guilty pleasure (given my love of Maths and knowledge of the subject matter) but instead I was treated to a terrific piece of film making: quiet, earnest, substantial, well acted and gracefully told.  Seek it out! It may appear like a generic biopic but the subtle exploration of Ramaujan’s talent and his faith and the search for absolute truth in both Mathematics and Religion that connects him to Hardy (along with circumstance) is well rendered. It is certainly considerably superior to the Imitation Game.

1          Zootropolis

So Disney has eclipsed Pixar- that Lassiter dude certainly knows what he’s doing.

I’m pretty amazed to see this as my film of the year, as it is a kids’ film, a cartoon. And yet, when I look back on everything I’ve seen over the past 12 months, it is the one film which made me smile the most and it continues to grow on repeat viewings (which my children beg for).  It is kind of expected that incredible colour, imagination, design and wit are de rigueur in these films but not only does Zootropolis get all of these ingredients exactly right, it sneaks in small hints of profundity. After a year in which unsavoury debates have been poisoned by irrationality, this film, without every threatening to be preachy, gently illustrated to my children exactly the message I needed them to see. The core of the film concerns how we can get judged by what we are, not who we are or what we do and even both protagonists, who are wildly different, fall into this trap during the course of the story.  Judging a book by its cover is in our DNA but reflecting on how we process this instinct is something that struck a chord with me, long after my first viewing. Concepts of “Them and Us” are challenged directly but without ever lecturing or straying from the narrative or the wit.  The film is subtly layered both narratively (themes of exclusion and lack of purpose are examined through deft comedy) and visually (a quick rewatch of the final 10 minutes allowed me to spot nods to Speed and The Empire Strikes Back) and the music and humour are hugely pervasive.  It is no masterpiece but is certainly the film I needed in 2016.

This may be a cheesy way to finish the year but the lyrics to the (frighteningly) catchy main song from Zootropolis contains a message for Film Producers (despite being sung by an alarmingly sexy gazelle):

“I want to try everything, I want to try even though I could fail;  I’ll keep on making those new mistakes.”

I’ll take more Swiss Army Men every now and then if it leads to more Whiplashes.  Let’s hope to see cinema trying everything in 2017.

Happy New Year!