After becoming obsessed with a mysterious key in a vase, he embarks on a journey that takes him around New York and various inhabitants of the city including his mother (Sandra Bullock), a mysterious neighbour (Max Von Sydow) and a divorced woman (Viola Davis).
Given the kind of talent producer Scott Rudin usually assembles for his movies, you might expect this to be an end-of-year Oscar contender furnished with positive reviews and respectable box office.
The twin subjects of autism and 9/11 would prove difficult for even the most talented writers or filmmakers and ultimately proves a stretch too far for Foer and this adaptation.
Some images (especially one towards the climax) are dramatically misjudged and the film falls into the trap of many literary adaptations by being too literal.
Eric Roth’s dialogue is too respectful of Foer’s prose and whilst it may have been tempting to use voiceover to duplicate Oskar’s internal thoughts, over the course of the film it becomes too much.
Ultimately the film never really finds its own way into the material and the considerably weighty themes.
But there are stretches of the film that are undeniably moving, and some of the acting on display is both heartfelt and highly accomplished.
Thomas Horn in the lead role has the hardest part: not only is the film shot almost entirely from his perspective, but essentially rests on his shoulders.
What many have found ‘annoying’ about his performance, seems to me an authentic depiction of a condition that is recognised as being on the spectrum of autism.
Not liking a performance is one thing, but the casual threats of physical violence (even in jest) suggest an ignorance and intolerance that is disquieting.
Although billed above the title, Tom Hanks and Sandra Bullock have supporting roles and nicely play against their usual star personas with performances of quiet dignity.
Max Von Sydow brings his usual gravitas to his role as ‘the Renter’, which bears interesting similarities to Jean Dujardin’s role in The Artist, and is a reminder of his considerable acting skills.
The best performances are Viola Davis and Jeffrey Wright, who demonstrate impeccable emotional precision in their small, but perfectly formed roles.
Even though the narrative is a journey around New York (specifically, an unofficial ‘sixth borough’ Oskar’s father had created for him) much of the drama takes place inside apartments, offices or houses.
Like his British contemporary Sam Mendes I’ve long harboured the suspicion that director Stephen Daldry instinctively prefers theatre to film.
Perhaps that is why so many of his films contain scenes with actors in confined spaces.
Positive side effects of this include powerful performances and the fact that he surrounds himself with talented crew members.
Alexandre Desplat’s musical score is just one of the emotionally affecting elements, even if at times it is almost too rich and smooth for the material.
He has always been a master at lighting and watching the range of images delivered here via 4K digital projection was remarkable.
Along with recent films such as Hugo, Anonymous and Drive it will undoubtedly be used as a demonstration of how far high-end digital cameras have come.
What’s interesting is that this is more of an intimate, character-based drama and not the kind of material that you might benefit from using digital capture over 35mm.
Whilst people debate other aspects of this film, they are overlooking something technically profound: lighter digital
cameras are enabling directors like David Fincher and Stephen Daldry to create new working environments with their actors.
His DP Anthony Dodd Mantle won the Oscar that year, becoming the first cinematographer to win using a digital camera.
It is a sign of how far digital capture has come in that time, that the Alexa has caught on in films like this to the point where directors and cinematographers raised on film can feel comfortable making the jump to digital.
On the subject of ‘Oscar-bait‘ films, there is no doubt that Scott Rudin is the David O’Selznick of his generation, an ‘auteur producer’ of rare taste and talent.
In the current landscape of movies based on toys and boardgames, is aiming for Oscars really such a crime if it gives us movies like No Country for Old Men (2007) or The Social Network (2010)?
As with any prestige film released in the Autumn, it was expected to be in the running for awards contention.
But when the first reviews spilled out, especially the New York Times, it was clear that it wasn’t going to be the heavyweight contender its makers hoped.
The shock that it landed a Best Picture nomination was testament to how far it had fallen short of expectations.
But despite having some awkward moments this isn’t an exploitation movie and I imagine it was a sincere and personal movie for both Daldry and Rudin.
There is much good work here, both in front of and behind the camera.
It doesn’t ‘exploit’ 9/11 anymore than television or news coverage has done since terrorists murdered nearly 3,000 people and scarred a city for a generation.
But it does raise the question that came up in 2006 as the first wave of movies to deal with September 11th hit cinemas.
Although one might think that this is a relatively new category, it actually dates back to the very first Oscar ceremony when the Academy gave an award for ‘Best Engineering Effects’ to the World War I flying drama Wings (1927).
Willis O’Brien‘s animation work in King Kong (1933) raised the profile of visual effects but it wasn’t until 1938 that Spawn of the North was awarded a special achievement award.
From 1938 onwards Special Effects became a category, but until 1962 visual effects were shared with sound effects nominations in a combined category.
From 1964 until 1971, the name of the category was Best Special Visual Effects, but after 1977 was changed to Best Visual Effects.
Despite its title this award recognises the production design of a particular film and the two nominated candidates are often the production designer and art director.
So, why isn’t the category called ‘Production Design’ instead of ‘Art Direction’?
The Academy rules state:
Eligibility for this award shall be limited to the production designer and set decorator primarily responsible for the design of the production and the execution of that concept, as verified by the producer. The Art Directors Branch shall have the discretion to give more weight to design than to execution.
The title of this award has its roots in history as ‘art director’ was used to denote the head of the art department, which is the group of people in charge of the overall look of a film.
But this role has evolved, as from 1927 until 1939 the award was called ‘Interior Decorator’.
This changed when producer David O. Selznick felt that William Cameron Menzies played such a significant role in the look of Gone with the Wind (1939), that he gave him the title of ‘Production Designer’.
However, from 1940 until 1946 the award was still called ‘Interior Decoration’ and was split between colour and black and white.
Then from 1947, the award was given to the art director and set decorator and the colour/black and white split was phased out in 1967.
So, essentially the award keeps the old title, but rewards the production designer and set decorator.
Eligible films must meet certain requirements, including: costumes be ‘conceived’ by a costume designer (might sound obvious, but it is to acknowledge the designing of costumes for their use in a film); designer members of the Art Directors Branch vote in order of preference; eligibility is decided by the costume designer members of that branch at a meeting prior to nominations ballots being mailed; only principal designers can be nominated; and the five films receiving the highest number of votes become the final nominees.
Although in the post-war period (1949 to 1966) many winners of this award were contemporary movies, the trend in recent decades has been to reward period films.
From French studio Folimage, is this tale of a cat who lives a double life – pet by day and skilled thief by night. Notable for being hand-painted, its highly stylized, colour-saturated design makes it unusual in an age of computer animation.
Directed by Fernando Trueba and Javier Mariscal this is the story of a songwriter and singer chasing their dreams set against the backdrops of Havana, New York City, Las Vegas, Hollywood and Paris in the late 1940s and early 1950s.
The sequel to the 2008 blockbuster sees Po and his friends battle to stop a new villain. The strong reviews managed to make this one of the better received sequels of the year and the darker than usual themes may have something to do with executive producer Guillermo del Toro.
A Western filled with references to movies and made like a theatrical production (instead of recording voice parts separately, the actors shared a soundstage) this is currently the hot favourite.
Repo Man (Eureka/Masters of Cinema): Alex Cox’s startling 1984 directorial debut gradually became a cult film with its unusual mix of noir and sci-fi. When an unemployed punk rocker (Emilio Estevez) is hired by a guy named Bud (Harry Dean Stanton) to repossess cars for a living, he soon makes a strange discovery. Fully restored Blu-ray, with bountiful extras including audio commentaries and the network television version (i.e. the one without the swearing). [Buy the Blu-ray from Amazon UK]
Miss Bala (Metrodome): Accomplished crime drama, loosely based on real events, about a young woman (Noe Hernandez) with dreams of becoming a beauty queen who finds herself working for Mexican drug smugglers. Directed by Gerardo Naranjo, it is an unusually absorbing mixture of genres that aren’t combined that often. It has been selected as this year’s Mexican entry for the Academy Awards. [Buy it on DVD from Amazon UK]
Warrior (Lionsgate): Although it didn’t live up to commercial expectations, this drama about two brothers (Tom Hardy and Joel Edgerton) who enter the biggest ‘winner takes all’ Mixed Martial Arts event in history. Directed by Gavin O’Connor and co-starring Nick Nolte as their father (a performance which has earned him an Oscar nomination), it dealt with contemporary issues that maybe cut too close to the bone for mainstream audiences (e.g. war, recession). But the performances and assured direction might see it become a home entertainment favourite. [Buy it on Blu-ray or DVD from Amazon UK]
ALSO OUT
Best Laid Plans (Sony Pictures Home Ent.) Demons Never Die (Exile Media Group) [Blu-ray / Normal] Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark (StudioCanal) [Blu-ray / Normal] Fright Night (Walt Disney Studios Home Ent.) [Blu-ray / Normal] Garden State (Miramax) [Blu-ray / Special Edition] Hollywoodland (Miramax) [Blu-ray / Normal] One More (Odeon Entertainment) [Blu-ray / Normal] Real Steel (Walt Disney Studios Home Ent.) [Blu-ray / Normal] WWII in 3D (Go Entertain) [Blu-ray / 3D Edition]
The story of James Armstrong as he prepares in 2008 for the election of America’s first black President and reflects on his own contribution to the Civil Rights Movement.
Raising questions about democracy and prejudice, it charts the long struggle for racial harmony
An exploration of the notorious deaths in 2007 of two Reuters journalists and several civilians at the hands of U.S. attack helicopters on the streets of Baghdad.
Recounted by US soldier Ethan McCord – one of the first troops on the scene – it has already won awards at the Tribeca and Rhode Island Film Festivals.
Documentary which explores a Pakistani plastic surgeon who returns to his homeland to operate on victims (all women) of acid violence, a grisly and disturbing phenomenon in the country.
It focuses on two survivors of acid attacks and their battle for justice and their journey of healing. Directed by Daniel Junge and Sharmeen Obaid Chinoy.
Usually, only three films are nominated in this category (rather than five).
Previously, make-up artists were only eligible for special achievement awards for their work, but the competitive category was formed in 1981 after complaints that the make-up work in The Elephant Man (1980) was not going to be honoured.
This category has different stages of nominating: a preliminary list of nominees is drawn up by the members of the branch; then a final list of nominees is worked out before the whole Academy votes on the winner.
The foreign language category has been the subject of much debate in recent years.
In particular, critics have wondered why some of the most acclaimed films in world cinema have been repeatedly snubbed and there seems to be confusion about the selection process.
Stephen Galloway and Kim Masters of The Hollywood Reporter sat down with Mark Johnson, Chairman of the Academy’s foreign language film selection committee, for a wide-ranging discussion about the process.
A drama about a Limburgish cattle farmer (Matthias Schoenaerts) who is approached by an unscrupulous veterinarian to make a shady deal with a notorious West-Flemish beef trader.
Iranian drama about a middle-class couple who separate, and the resulting complications which follow when the husband hires a caretaker for his elderly father.
The 2004 book essentially told the story of the modern independent film movement from 1989 until the early 2000s.
Much about the movie landscape has changed since then, notably the economic crash of 2008, the reduction of ‘dependent arms’ and the creative rejuvenation of Sundance from 2009 onwards.
Two large characters dominate the history of modern independent film: Robert Redford, the founder of the Sundance film festival and Harvey Weinstein, who co-ran Miramax Films with his brother Bob.
Both sets of characters seem to embody the ideals, commerciality and contradictions of indie film over the last twenty five years.
He sadly passed away last month during the Sundance festival and Redford’s statement on hearing the news was reflective of the many tributes that poured out at the time:
“He was a valued member of the Sundance family for as long as I can remember, and he is responsible for mentoring countless seminal storytellers and bringing their work to the world.”
A key figure in the indie film world the company he co-founded, October Films, began as a genuine independent, in an ecosystem where the distinctions could get blurry.
Among the directors he championed in his career were Mike Leigh, Lars von Trier, Jim Jarmusch and David Lynch.
As a producer-distributor, Ray was that rare breed who could not only identify talent but package them for critical and commercial success.
After studying at Simpson College in Iowa, he moved to New York where he became manager at the Bleecker Street Cinema in Greenwich Village.
He later worked in marketing and distribution at the Samuel Goldwyn Company and then in the summer of 1987 was hired by Columbia Pictures, which was then under the brief reign of David Putnam.
In 2001 he recounted the story of his brief time there in the late 1980s:
But soon after he really made his mark by forming October Films with fellow indie stalwart Jeff Lipsky.
“I’m not some avant-gardist, I know the difference between something that’s truly experimental and something that’s wholly mainstream, but I’d like to think that somewhere in the middle is a comfort zone where there’s an audience. It might not be the largest, or the most lucrative, but for me the rewards are the greatest.”
The first film they released was Mike Leigh’s Life is Sweet (1990), which appropriately opened in the US during October 1991, and grossed over $2 million – then a considerable sum for an indie release.
After that they released such films as D.A. Pennebaker’s documentary The War Room (1993), Guillermo Del Toro’s debut Cronos (1993) and John Dahl’s The Last Seduction (1994).
Another creative and commercial plateau was to come at the Berlin film festival in 1995.
Ray demonstrated his nose for talent after sitting through five hours of Lars Von Trier’s The Kingdom (1994) – a TV series which screened at festivals – by acquiring it.
He not only added a key European auteur to his already impressive stable of directors, but this relationship led to October acquiring US rights to Von Trier’s next film, Breaking the Waves (1996).
Originally set to star Gerard Depardieu and Helena Bonham Carter, they were ultimately replaced by Stellan Skaarsgard and (a then unknown) Emily Watson.
Ray saw a cut of Breaking the Waves in early 1996, which he said “blew him away”.
Going into Cannes that year he also had a new Mike Leigh film, Secrets & Lies (1996).
It would turn out to be a triumphant festival for October Films as Leigh’s film scooped the Palme d’Or and Best Actress (for Brenda Blethyn) but Von Trier’s film also claimed the Grand Prix.
You can still see him basking in the glow of that Cannes experience on this Charlie Rose appearance alongside Janet Maslin of the New York Times and David Ansen of Newsweek:
[The piece begins at 24:17]
On the surface, the subsequent awards season was dominated by Miramax.
Fuelled with Disney cash from their acquisition in 1993, they redefined the indie world through a combination of marketing genius and clever targeting of Academy voters.
The English Patient represented the high watermark of Miramax movie of that era: a period piece with literary pedigree it went on to win Best Picture and do excellent box office worldwide.
But the wider story that year was how the major studios had been trumped by the independents, as Jerry Maguire was the only Best Picture nominee to come from a big Hollywood studio (Sony).
There was no more remarkable independent that year than October Films.
Secrets & Lies went on to open the New York Film Festival that year, garner great reviews and eventually receive five Academy Award nominations (Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actress, Best Original Screenplay).
Even Breaking the Waves found an audience and a Best Actress nomination for Emily Watson was a sign that they were punching well above their weight.
This MSNBC piece profiling Ray and the company shows the excitement that year as the nominations were announced.
Although they didn’t win any awards on the night, the nominations were a stunning achievement and put October on another level.
I remember watching that ceremony overnight in my first year of college and marvelling at how Mike Leigh and the Coen Brothers were being granted the worldwide TV exposure of the Oscar ceremony.
Their backing of David Lynch’s Lost Highway (1997) and Todd Solondz’s Happiness (1998) was testament to their faith in projects by visionary directors.
Later on when Universal acquired a majority stake in October, that became a point of conflict as Ray clashed with the new corporate owners.
One of the paradoxes of the indie film boom of the 90s was that it was – to varying degrees – supported by corporate dollars.
In the case of Miramax, though they had autonomy, Pulp Fiction was ultimately released by the same corporation that owned Mickey Mouse.
As for October, the trail they blazed to the Oscars in early 1997 was always a tricky – one of the paradoxes of financial success was that it ultimately pushed them towards the safety of a large owner.
But still they pushed the world cinema envelope.
It is remarkable to think that around this time they were releasing Jafar Panahi’s The White Balloon (1995) and Thomas Vinterberg’s Festen (1998) at US cinemas.
The costly flop they were dreading happened to be David Lynch’s brilliant but defiantly uncommercial Lost Highway (1997) – the first half of which still happens to be amongst his greatest work.
October sold a majority stake to Universal and Ray left after a complicated corporate merry go round which saw Universal sell its stake to Barry Diller in 1999.
The combined companies were all merged together as Focus Features, which is still Universal’s indie arm today under James Schamus.
Ray later served on festival juries and after a serious car accident in 2000 he returned to the business at United Artists.
The indie boom during the 1990s saw larger studios try to imitate the Miramax model by starting their own specialty arms.
United Artists were certainly not the creative powerhouse they had been in their heyday and after the disaster of Heaven’s Gate (1980) seemed stuck in an ever more complex relationship with MGM.
But in the 2000s it was rebranded as a specialty studio and Ray was asked to run it.
During his time there he also marshalled the indie sector into opposing the ban on DVD screeners during the 2003 Oscar season.
In what seems like a forerunner to the recent SOPA affair, this was where the seven major studios issued a ban on Oscar voters being sent screener discs at their home.
Although in theory voters should go to see films at a cinema, for many smaller companies it is much more cost effective to send voters a DVD to their homes.
For a specialty film an Oscar nomination – let alone a win – was vital to publicity and box office.
In late 2003 Ray organised a meeting of the then major indie players: UA, Sony Classics, Focus Features, Paramount Classics, Fine Line and Miramax.
The subsequent open letter to MPAA head Jack Valenti (who was representing the big studio view) was drafted on behalf of the indie companies by James Schamus:
“The consumer has a completely cynical attitude towards the companies that make the product, viewing them as gigantic greedy corporations who want to control everything. And stamp out anything of interest that’s unique or individual. You just did that, for the movie business, man. Under the rubric of fighting piracy, in one week, you have created precisely the market conditions that have destroyed the record industry”.
Last summer he featured on an indieWire panel, which was a celebration of the last 15 years of the website and the possible online future.
(The phrase “everything is possible but nothing works” is genius).
Moderated by Dana Harris, the discussion included Richard Abramowitz, Amy Heller, Bob Berney, Ira Deutchman, Mark Urman, Arianna Bocco and Jeanne Berney.
It is a must-watch for anyone interested in film distribution.
But notice what Ray’s answer to the question ‘What do you hope you’ll be doing in another 15 years?’ at 1:02:03:
“I’d like to be celebrating the 30th anniversary of indieWIRE”
It is a real shame he won’t be around to see it.
Recently he took up the position of Executive Director of the San Francisco Film Society and someone has posted a speech he gave just after taking up the role.
One of the features of the current age is just how much of our lives ends up on YouTube.
A lot has changed since 2004 when Biskind’s book came out, but I couldn’t help noticing the final paragraph.
It is actually a quote from Ray and it describes his indie film philosophy perfectly:
“No matter where I go – the only thing consistent is me. I bring out the best and the worst in some of these people. This was all about money, and I still believe that there are decisions that you make that aren’t motivated by financial gain. The independent world isn’t like the Hollywood world. The motives are different, the goals are different, people aren’t necessarily trying to get rich and powerful, they’re trying to push art first whilst thinking everything else will take of itself. That’s the naive part of it, it doesn’t happen that way. You can’t even talk about that with a straight face or people will laugh you off the planet. But there’s a big big part of me that really does believe that. And will always believe that”
This category is notable for seeing the double nomination of John Williams – although an Academy favourite it is very unusual to have two projects compete in the same year.
John Williams has two scores in the race this year and his score for Tin Tin is was his first new film material since Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008).
This is the sixth collaboration between Martin Scorsese and Howard Shore. Like the film, Shore’s score is a love letter both to French culture of the 1930s and to the pioneers of early cinema.
Shore’s music is composed for two ensembles, inside a full symphony orchestra resides a smaller ensemble, a sort of nimble French dance band that includes the ondes Martenot, musette, cimbalom, tack piano, gypsy guitar, upright bass, a 1930s trap-kit, and alto saxophone. “I wanted to match the depth of the sound to the depth of the image” says Shore.
Although probably best known for his work with Pedro Almodovar, Iglesias was recruited by Swedish director Tomas Alfredson for this John Le Carre adaptation.
REAL IN RIO from RIO (Music by Sergio Mendes and Carlinhos Brown / Lyric by Siedah Garrett)
In the film, this song is divided in two parts: the first is played in the opening sequence and the second is sung in the penultimate scene of the film. (On the soundtrack, the song is complete).
Unfortunately, they don’t seem to have made the full track officially available, so I’ve included the promotional 2 minute clip that the studio released on YouTube back in the Spring.
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close (Warner Bros.): A nine-year-old boy (Thomas Horn) searches New York for the lock that matches a mysterious key left by his father (Tom Hanks) when he was killed in the September 11 attacks. Directed by Stepehn Daldry, it co-stars Sandra Bullock, Viola Davis and Max Von Sydow. [Nationwide / 12A]
Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (Sony Pictures): Sequel to the 2007 film which sees Johnny Blaze (Nicolas Cage) hiding out in Eastern Europe, he is called upon to stop the devil, who is trying to take human form. Directed by Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor. [Nationwide / 12A]
The Woman In the Fifth (Artificial Eye): A college lecturer (Ethan Hawke) flees to Paris after a scandal costs him his job. In the City of Lights, he meets a widow (Kristin Scott Thomas) who might be involved in a series of murders. Directed by Pawel Pawlikowski. [Key Cities / 15]
Most of this year’s live action shorts are screening in selected cinemas across the world now and will be available on iTunes Stores in 54 countries across the globe beginning February 21st.
Some of this year’s animated shorts (e.g. The Fantastic Flying Books…, Wild Life) have been made available in full online, but where they haven’t I’ve included a trailer. (Also, be sure to check out the links to interviews.)
Featuring traditional hand-drawn animation, this Canadian short from director Patrick Doyon is about a boy who plays with coins on a train track whilst visiting his grandparents.
Based on an event recounted in Paul Auster’s book ‘True Tales of American Life‘, which tells the story of a New Yorker’s early morning encounter with a chicken.
Already a BAFTA winner for Short film Animation 2012, it also won at Sundance 2012. Find out more at BBC News and the Studio AKA site.
Its obviously one of those large subjects to which a range of people are going to have differing perspectives (feel free to comment below).
However, three words popped into my head when I considered it further: Sundance, digital and distribution.
Sundance: It has been and still is the mecca for indie films for over 30 years, both in their lab programs and festival.
Digital: The seismic revolution that is shaping how all films are shot and projected is also affecting the indie world, especially in reducing costs and potentially raising money.
Distribution: People still need the exposure of festivals and risk-taking distributors but social media (if used correctly for the right film) can be a powerful tool.
Like the term ‘indie music’, ‘indie film’ can be a slippery phrase.
To keep focused, let’s define it as how films are funded, shot and distributed.
But even if we define an independent film as something from outside the major studios, in 2011 that could mean films as diverse an indie ‘inside the system’ such as The Tree of Life or a documentary like The Interrupters.
In the UK, two of the three highest grossing films of 2011 (The King’s Speech and The Inbetweeners Movie) were genuine independents.
Whilst it is often a major studio who distributes these types of films, they seem very reluctant to take on the risk at the beginning of the project.
When they do, mostly because a big star or producer has clout, it leads us to fascinating studio films like Moneyball or The Social Network.
But in the modern movie business they are the exception and not the rule.
The paradox of the term indie is most glaringly apparent at that mecca of indie film, Sundance.
When a genuine low-budget discovery like Another Earth gets acquired and released by Fox Searchlight, can we really call the dependent arm of a major studio ‘independent’?
Yet, it still feels like an indie film.
Just because the film now has a chance at reaching a wider audience doesn’t mean the writers and stars have sold their creative souls.
In most cases the film is the same before the deals had signed.
But to reach a fuller definition for 2012 we have to go back to the origins of Sundance.
That was the end of an era but also the slow beginnings of a new one.
Although there were indie directors during the 1980s like Jim Jarmusch, The Coen Brothers, Sam Raimi that became established during that decade, it wasn’t until 1989 that the notion of what we might inelegantly call the ‘modern indie’ movie developed.
“Independent film brings to mind noble concepts like ‘integrity’, ‘vision’, ‘self-expression’ and ‘sacrifice’. It evokes the image of struggling young filmmakers maxing out their credit cards to pay their actors and crews, who work long hours for little or no compensation because they believe in what they’re doing.”
It is a pretty good attempt to define the kind of films he was writing about, even if – as he discovered – the image didn’t always match the reality.
The term independent can reflect genuine DIY productions like Robert Rodriguez’s El Maricahi (made for $7000), Kevin Smith’s Clerks (made for $7000), Ed Burns’ The Brothers McMullen (made for $23,800) or Christopher Nolan’s Following (made for $6000).
All of those directors are examples of industry outsiders who managed to carve out a career via the independent route.
There are more expensive independent projects which have raised more money and come with known actors and agents attached, but they are still looking for the buzz and artistic kudos that the indie world provides.
Biskind uses the parallel growth of Miramax and Sundance from the late 1970s to the early 2000s to form a sequel of sorts to his book on the New Hollywood, Easy Riders Raging Bulls.
This means it leaves out a few notable gaps, but nonetheless provides a solid framework to looking at the indie movement over the last 25 years.
A watershed moment was Steve Soderbergh’s Sex, Lies and Videotape premiering at Sundance in 1989, then winning at Cannes later that May.
Here was an intelligent film in which characters sit around, talking a lot into video cameras but famously don’t engage in that much sex.
But Miramax – who acquired it – cleverly sold it to multiplexes on the back of a suggestive poster, thus proving that marketing was just as important in this newer indie era.
In some ways it was to indie film what Jaws had been to the major studio – a trailblazer that would prove influential in all sorts of good and bad ways.
Fast forward three years to another watershed Sundance in 1992 and the spectacular arrival of Quentin Tarantino and Reservoir Dogs.
Tarantino’s first film was funded by Live Entertainment, although he later to go on to have a very productive relationship with Miramax and the Weinsteins.
People forget just how appalled some early audiences were by the violence, but it was a canny fusion of Asian and French crime movies sprinkled with his own devilish humour.
It wasn’t the immediate hit it could have been, but its slow-burn cult success was testament to its raw power and style, laying the ground work for Pulp Fiction in 1994.
Although his second feature was the much bigger hit, Reservoir Dogs captured for me the indie ethos of the time.
This was a heist movie in which we never see the heist and the audience is enjoying the dialogue so much they forget they are watching characters talking in a room together.
Like Soderbergh, Tarantino cleverly wrote around its budgetary limitations – people who saw it didn’t talk about it being low budget because there plenty of clever distractions.
In 1994 Kevin Smith arrived with perhaps the ultimate DIY film – an ultra-low budget comedy he shot in the convenience store where he actually worked.
The triumvirate of Soderbergh, Tarantino and Smith probably inspired a generation of filmmakers to give Sundance and indie film a shot.
Obviously this almost certainly inspired a legion of imitators who submitted bad films to Sundance, but it still proved that it was possible.
Is that spirit still alive today?
To a degree it is.
Part of that is down to Redford’s own ethos, forged when he had just become a star and was still struggling trying to get Downhill Racer (1969) made.
In 1990 he said to Premiere magazine:
“I knew what it was like to distribute a film that you produced. In 1969, I carried Downhill Racer under my arm, fighting the battles that most people face. [I came to understand the] filmmaker who spends two years making his film, and then another two years distributing it, only to find out he can’t make any money on it, and four years of his life are gone. I thought, that’s who needs our help.”
After the heady days of the late 1990s when people were overpaying for films like Happy, Texas and post-Lehmann Brothers, it seems Sundance has come full circle back to its original ethos.
It is a spirit that fuels recent Sundance breakouts like Beasts of the Southern Wild, Martha Marcy May Marlene and Winter’s Bone.
Although Miramax is now just a legacy brand, a new generation of distributors like Roadside, IFC along with established ones such as Focus Features, Sony Pictures Classics and Fox Searchlight are hungry for new voices.
THE RISE OF DIGITAL
As filmmakers utilise the emergence of digital cameras, which began in the late 1990s and gradually gathered pace over the coming decade.
The first digital film I saw projected inside a cinema was Gary Winick’s Tadpole in early 2003 in London.
Or rather it was digitally captured on a Sony DSR-PD150 and then projected on 35mm prints, as there was no widespread digital projection at the time.
It looked grainy and although it had been acquired by Miramax a year earlier, the image quality was far from perfect.
Although I’d heard digital cameras were going to make shooting features more affordable to the indie filmmaker, it was very unusual at the time to see a UK release (even an art-house one) shot on digital.
Fast forward several years to the same building and in September 2011 I was watching Another Earth, which was one of the hot titles out of Sundance earlier that year.
Shot on a Sony EX3 camera and projected digitally, it showed how far the cameras had come.
Obviously the fundamentals (script, direction and editing) need to be there, but in just a few years it showed how rapidly technology had lowered the barrier to entry.
Almost twenty years previously Tarantino has shot Reservoir Dogs on 35mm, nearly ten years passed before a digital film could find its way out of Sundance and into regular cinemas in the UK.
Here was Another Earth looking almost identical to any other film at the multiplex.
Experienced cinematographers could still tell the difference, but a general audience couldn’t.
Certainly not in the same way they would’ve noticed the grainy Tadpole back in 2003.
Also that month Drive hit UK cinemas (interestingly a kind of indie movie in itself after a major studio put it into turnaround).
It is probably a compliment to DP Newton Thomas Sigel and the engineers at ARRI that the high-end Alexa camera used to shoot it wasn’t really talked about outside cinematography circles.
Audiences just accepted the images as though they were film.
Many of them probably didn’t know that movie was digitally shot and projected, which is perhaps the ultimate compliment.
The digital dream (or nightmare depending on your view) had become the new reality.
Even a veteran like the late Sidney Lumet was saying digital was superior to film in 1999 and later expanded on this topic at the New York Film Festival in 2007:
I’ve written previously about the transition from celluloid to digital and audiences, studios and distributors are right in the thick of that now.
In the UK and US, by the end of 2013 celluloid projection will essentially be over.
The production of film cameras by Panavision, Arri and Aaton (traditionally the big three) stopped last year.
We are living though a digital film revolution that has already dramatically lowered the barriers to entry.
But whilst there are numerous positives, should critics and audiences be concerned about degradation of the moving image?
In the action genre haven’t we already seen digital tools influence the rise of chaos cinema and lead to visual shortcuts that wouldn’t happen under film?
Obviously digital or celluloid is just a tool for realising a filmmakers vision but maybe there are long term consequences for the seismic shift cinema is currently undergoing.
Preservation is just one pressing issue for ‘digitally native’ films (e.g. Fincher’s The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo) and perhaps the surfeit of viewing choices in the home will also have an effect.
Let’s not forget, earlier this year all the major studios (with the exception of Paramount) were essentially sanctioning a VOD experiment which could have taken audiences further down the road killing the theatrical experience.
Although it ultimately failed it could be a warning of what was to come.
In the future, if there is no window for mainstream releases, where does this leave the indie world?
Let’s imagine like Margin Call came out in the mid-1990s.
Relatively low budget, filled with fine acting talent and a promising director.
I’m pretty sure it would have been showcased and snapped up at Sundance by Miramax or another specialty arm of the major studios.
However, we now live in a different world (ironically, caused in part by the very people Margin Call is about).
Films like this – which simply can’t afford the enormous P+A cost of the major studios – have been forced to innovate.
VOD (Video on Demand) was presumably part of the plan from the beginning – that is in places where it can’t be shown theatrically, it is made available
So does this mean it is a friend for indies as much as it is a foe for studio releases?
I asked Cassian Elwes (one of those closely involved in the film) about the rough percentage of people who saw it on VOD in their homes:
“@filmdetail: Do you know the rough percentage of people who saw it theatrically vs VOD?”/ we think its one to one — cassian elwes (@cassianelwes) November 3, 2011
And later on I asked him if he thought a combination of theatrical and VOD was the future for indie releases:
“@filmdetail:Do you think a combination of theatrical & VOD is the future for indie releases?”/Yes unless you think you can do over 10m b.o.
So, the future for indie films is uncertain, but then maybe it always was.
In a strange way, it could be this very uncertainty that sustains it.
But despite all the enormous changes in technology that have happened since Sundance began, it still comes down to finding the money to tell a story and letting people know about it.
As a term indie can be difficult to define, but maybe that is why it’s so resilient as an ideal.
Year after year, some admittedly better than others, we see a Reservoir Dogs, Catfish or Beasts of the Southern Wild born from this desire to swim against the tide of Hollywood.
The desire to make and see something different from the mainstream is what has fuelled the indie movement up to 2012.
It can’t be measured on a spreadsheet or tailored to fit a demographic.
But whenever someone comes up with a film that blows people’s minds at the Eccles or Egyptian, it keeps the flame burning.
Final polls close on Tuesday 21st, so now seems like a good time to examine this year’s crop of films before the prizes are awarded on Sunday 26th.
Not being a member of the Academy, it can be hard to see all the foreign films or shorts, but when that is the case I’ll do my best to post relevant links.
Over the next few days, I’ll be looking at the following and updating each link when it goes live.
UPDATED 26/02/12 13:16. The links below to all the relevant posts are now live.
Back in 1999 director Sidney Lumet sat down for a three hour interview about his life and career in television.
He later went on to make his name as a film director with such films as 12 Angry Men (1957), Dog Day Afternoon (1975), Network (1976) and The Verdict (1982).
But his background in theatre and television were a big influence on his subsequent work and this lengthy discussion is a fascinating insight into his early career.
The conversation with Ralph Engelmen in 1999 for the Archive of American Television covered his growing up during the Depression, his early work in theater and the pioneering days of television, the era of McCarthyism and his subsequent transition to feature films.
PART 1
His background and early years in Yiddish theatre growing up during the Depression
The American Society of Cinematographers awarded his stunning work on Terrence Malick’s film on Sunday night at the Hollywood and Highland Grand Ballroom in Los Angeles.
The Mexican-born Lubezki had previously won the ASC Award for his groundbreaking work on Alfonso Cuarón’s Children of Men (2006), and has been nominated for five Academy Awards.
“Emmanuel Lubezki outdoes himself with cinematography of almost unimaginable crispness and luminosity. As in The New World, the camera is constantly on the move, forever reframing in search of the moment, which defines the film’s impressionistic manner”
When they first teamed up, Malick and Lubezki created a series of creative constraints that evolved during the making of that film and spilled over into this one.
“In all the movies I’ve done, I always worked with a set of rules — they help me to find the tone and the style of the film. Art is made of constraints. When you don’t have any, you go crazy, because everything is possible.”
“Our dogma is full of contradictions! For example, if you use backlight, you will get flares, or if you go for a deep stop, you will have more grain because you need a faster stock. So you have to make these decisions on the spot: what is better in this case, grain or depth?”
“The most important rule for me is to not underexpose. We want the blacks; we don’t like milky images. Article E does not apply to underexposure!”
One thing that was striking about the film was its amazing use of natural light:
“When you put someone in front of a window, you’re getting the reflection from the blue sky and the clouds and the sun bouncing on the grass and in the room. You’re getting all these colors and a different quality of light. It’s very hard to go back to artificial light in the same movie. It’s like you’re setting a tone, and artificial light feels weird and awkward [after that].”
“Even though anamorphic has more resolution, we decided on 1.85 because the close focus was going to be extreme — we were so close to the kids, their faces, hands and feet. And we didn’t want the grain of Super 35.”
Co-directed with Michael Henry Wilson, it explores Scorsese’s favourite American films grouped according to three different types of directors:
Illusionist: Pioneers such as D.W. Griffith or F. W. Murnau, who helped create new editing techniques among other innovations that created the basic blueprint for film grammar and which laid the groundwork for the later appearance of sound and colour.
His documentaries about cinema are like the best film school you never went to, featuring invaluable insights from a master director and a passionate movie fan.
The best compliment I can pay them is that you should just see them as soon as you possibly can.
All Quiet On the Western Front (Universal Pictures): Lewis Milestone’s classic anti-war film won the Oscar for Best Picture just 9 years before the World War II. Based on Erich Maria Remarque’s novel, it is still one of the most powerful films about the horrors of World War I. Digitally restored as part of Universal’s 100th anniversary. [Buy it on Blu-ray]
To Kill a Mockingbird (Universal Pictures): Another Universal release to get the restoration treatment, is the 1962 film adaptation of Harper Lee’s novel. Directed by Robert Mulligan and produced by Alan J Pakula, it stars Gregory Peck as Atticus Finch, Mary Badham as Scout and Robert Duvall as Boo Radley. Although not technically groundbreaking, it is probably one of the most influential films of the 20th century. [Buy it on Blu-ray]
ALSO OUT
Abduction (Lionsgate UK) [Blu-ray / Normal] Boca (Universal Pictures) [Blu-ray / Normal] Californication: Season 4 (Paramount Home Entertainment) [Blu-ray / Normal] Dawn of the Dragonslayer (Anchor Bay Entertainment UK) [Blu-ray / Normal] Dolphin Tale (Warner Home Video) [Blu-ray / 3D Edition + 2D Edition + DVD + UltraViolet Digital Copy] Hybrid (G2 Pictures) [Blu-ray / 3D Edition with 2D Edition] Johnny English Reborn (Universal Pictures) [Blu-ray / + DVD and Digital Copy – Triple Play] Kung Fu Panda (DreamWorks Animation) [Blu-ray / 3D Edition + 2D Edition + DVD – Triple Play] Kung Fu Panda 2 (DreamWorks Animation) [Blu-ray / 3D Edition + 2D Edition + DVD – Triple Play] The Crow: City of Angels/The Crow: Salvation (Miramax) [Blu-ray / Normal] The Gruffalo’s Child (Entertainment One) [Blu-ray / Normal] The Hurt Locker (Lionsgate UK) [Blu-ray / Steel Book] There Be Dragons (G2 Pictures) [Blu-ray / Normal] Transformers: Dark of the Moon (Paramount Home Entertainment) [Blu-ray / 3D Edition + 2D Edition + DVD + Digital Copy]
This is a combination of a film festival and awards ceremony designed to showcase the best in original online video and judges this year include director Edgar Wright, actor James Franco and Radiohead bassist Colin Greenwood.
Along with YouTube, the site has proved a valuable outlet for filmmakers of all ages and levels from around the world.
Director of the Vimeo Festival + Awards, Jeremy Boxer recently said:
“The aim of the Vimeo Festival + Awards is to become the gold standard for creative online video. We designed the program to focus on discovering the best new talent and to give that talent a platform that will catapult their careers to the next level. We are proud to reveal our new panel of esteemed judges.”
Submissions are not limited to works that have appeared on Vimeo but the original content must have either premiered online or have been created between July 31, 2010 and February 20th 2012.
Vimeo have said that winners in each category will get a $5,000 grant to make a new film.
The overall winner gets an additional $25,000 grant.
Complete rules and restrictions are available at Vimeo’s award site, so be sure to check them out here.
If you haven’t entered already, submissions close on February 20th, 2012.
This visual effects reel shows how green screen can be used to digitally recreate actual locations.
Whilst we’ve got used to CGI-drenched summer blockbusters, a persistent development has been the growth in the use of green screen to augment environments.
This demo from Stargate Studios uses CGI enhancements made to various TV shows filmed or set in New York.
One thing to look out for is the matching of lighting in certain scenes, but some of this is impressive.
The Muppets (Disney): Modern update of the TV show which revolves around The Muppets reuniting for a show to save their old studios in Hollywood, which are in danger of falling into the hands of an evil Texas oil man. Directed by James Bobin, it stars Kermit the Frog, Miss Piggy, Fozzie Bear, Gonzo, Animal, Jason Segel, Amy Adams and Chris Cooper. [Nationwide / U]
The Woman In Black (Momentum): A young lawyer (Daniel Radcliffe) travels to a remote village to organize a recently deceased client’s papers, where he discovers the ghost of a scorned woman set on vengeance. Directed by James Watkins, it co-stars Ciaran Hinds, Janet McTeer and Liz White. [Nationwide / 12A]
A Dangerous Method (Lionsgate UK): A drama which explores how the relationship between Carl Jung (Michael Fassbender) and Sigmund Freud (Viggo Mortensen) gave birth to psychoanalysis. Directed by David Cronenberg, also stars Keira Knightly. [Selected cinemas / London 10th Feb, Nationwide 17th Feb / 15] [Read our full review]
Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace (20th Century Fox): 3D re-release for the 1999 Star Wars prequel. Directed by George Lucas, it stars Natalie Portman, Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor. [Nationwide / U]
The Vow (Sony Pictures): A newlywed couple (Rachel McAdams and Channing Tatum) recover from a car accident that puts the wife in a coma. Waking up with with severe memory loss, her husband endeavors to win her heart again. Directed by Michael Sucsy, it co-stars Sam Neil and Scott Speedman. [Nationwide / 12A]
ALSO OUT
Casablanca (Park Circus): Reissue of the classic 1942 film. Directed by Michael Curtiz, it stars Humphrey Bogart, Ingrid Bergman and Claude Rains. [Key cities / U]
This was the case on October 23rd, when during a game with West London rivals Queens Park Rangers he was involved in an altercation with an opposing player Anton Ferdinand.
One of the factors that may yet influence the case was footage that quickly spread online as people posted links to YouTube videos via Facebook, Twitter and forums.
Here is just one example, captured by Jonny Gould on his iPhone whilst watching the game on television.
He later posted it to YouTube where – as I write this – it currently has 117,119 views:
It shows how a site built for sharing videos has also become something of a social hangout as well as the largest media library ever built.
People can like or dislike and exchange comments on videos that can be seen instantly around the globe.
This is how one gamer and football fan responded, inviting viewer comments to his YouTube channel:
In previous years, when something like this happened organisations or rich individuals could place an injunction, effectively silencing newspapers until everything was public knowledge.
We now live in a digital world where controversial claims can be dissected at dizzying speed before they are even investigated, let alone brought before a court.
In the case of John Terry, how is all the online speculation going to affect his court case?
His defence lawyers might argue that the current videos on the web unfairly prejudice his case, but the prosecution could equally argue they be used as Exhibit A in evidence.
It is a matter for the judge to decide whether or not video from a site currently outside of UK law is admissible in this particular case.
His film 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) managed to have a profound influence on both cinema (e.g. Star Wars, Alien and The Terminator series), technology (e.g. the iPad and Siri) and even US game shows.
Just four months after Kubrick’s death in March 1999, Steven Spielberg spoke of how his friend told him about the profound importance the Internet would have:
“Stanley predicted that the Internet was going to be the next generation of filmmaking and filmmakers …and when I woke up on Sunday morning, I do what I do every morning. I clicked on AOL to get my headlines …and it said ‘Kubrick dead at 70’.
It was only days later that the irony, that that’s how I would discover that Stanley had moved on, was going to come from the technology that Stanley had sort of – both with giddiness, excitement and also with profound caution – told me was going to be the next generation that might change the form of cinema…”
Kubrick was correct about the profound effects of the Internet, not just on cinema (e.g. piracy, distribution and marketing) but about how it has become this vast abyss into which we push and pull information, some highly personal, on a daily basis.
When I saw Jonny’s video of John Terry (which passed from Sky Sports to his iPhone and then on to YouTube) my first thought was of this scene from 2001: A Space Odyssey where the spaceship’s computer HAL 9000 lip reads the astronauts who are discussing him in (what they think) is a private space:
The parallels with the Terry case are striking: he could yet be convicted by a lip reading video in the same way that Kubrick’s two astronauts were rumbled by a supercomputer.
In a broader sense the automated distribution of vast amounts of personal data via sites like Facebook (which currently has 845 million users), may yet have profound effects on our lives and the world we live in, whether we use them or not.
As different forms of social media spread and continue to reshape our lives maybe Kubrick’s sci-fi film will become even more relevant?
On Sunday, the Royal Opera House in Covent Garden will play host to some of the world’s A-list film talent, including Brad Pitt, Martin Scorsese and George Clooney.
It wasn’t always the case.
Growing up watching the awards in the UK could be an odd affair as many of my childhood memories are of BAFTAs being won and the recipient not actually being there.
Until the early 2000s it was held after the Oscars, which frequently meant that A-list talent didn’t turn up as they saw the Academy Awards as the end of awards season.
You could almost hear the agents in LA say to their clients: “why fly all the way to London to be pipped by a Brit?”
But the UK and US have always had a strangely symbiotic relationship when it comes to films – many American productions film over here and utilise British studios and crews (e.g. The Dark Knight, Harry Potter).
The career of Stanley Kubrick almost embodies this duality – he so resented studio interference on Spartacus (1960) that he came to film every one of his subsequent productions in England, utilising our crews to create his extraordinary visions.
At the same time members of the Academy have always had a sweet tooth for English period fare (e.g. Chariots of Fire) and no-one has exploited this more than Harvey Weinstein, both in his days at Miramax and last year with The King’s Speech.
More generally, it is very rare to find a Best Picture winner that isn’t a period film, so the Academy’s tastes naturally align with the British addiction to period costume dramas.
But whilst BAFTA has suffered in the past from a ‘vote-for-their-own’ syndrome, they have also pulled out some corkers.
So, let us salute the worthier winners of the mask designed by Mitzi Cunliffe.
BEST PICTURE
Dr. Strangelove (1964): In the year that the Academy gave Best Picture to My Fair Lady, the members of BAFTA went with Kubrick’s Cold War masterpiece. Ironically, the British set musical was filmed entirely on sound stages in Los Angeles, whilst the War Room in Washington was recreated at Shepperton Studios in England.
Day for Night (1973): Truffaut would have been 80 this week, so its worth remembering that in the year the Academy awarded The Sting Best Picture, BAFTA was rewarding one of cinemas great directors. Given that his comments about British cinema were often misquoted it was perhaps a surprise that BAFTA should salute him in this way.
But then again perhaps not. They were of the filmmaking generation that been affected by The 400 Blows (1959) and Jules et Jim (1962) so Truffaut’s masterful depiction of movie making was probably too much for them to resist. (The parallels with the Academy awarding a French film about movie making this year are interesting to chew on).
DIRECTORS
Stanley Kubrick for Barry Lyndon (1975): The Academy maye have never honoured Kubrick with a Best Director honour but BAFTA did. From Lolita (1962) onwards all of Kubrick’s films were shot in the UK, where he made his home and utilised the various studios just outside of London.
With his 1975 adaptation of Thackeray’s novel, Kubrick utilised the countryside in the UK and Ireland and even used lenses created by NASA for the impeccable interior lighting. No wonder this is Martin Scorsese’s favourite Kubrick film.
The 1970s are often talked of as a golden age for Hollywood, with The French Connection (1971), The Godfather (1972), The Godfather Part II (1974), One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest (1975) and Annie Hall (1977) all winning Best Picture, as well as the many other classics that got nominated.
But check out the BAFTA winners for Best Director during the 1970s – it reads like a slightly more daring version of the Oscars.
(N.B. Butch Cassidy was 1969 but got to the UK a year late, as was the case with some films in the 1970s)
Peter Weir for The Truman Show (1998): The big Oscar battle in 1998 was between Shakespeare in Love and Saving Private Ryan. But BAFTA wisely chose the most prescient film of that year and rewarded a director who is still without an Oscar. It not only predicted the onslaught of reality TV during the 2000s but also managed to showcase Jim Carrey’s considerable acting chops (can someone please get him to do more dramas?).
BEST ACTOR
Peter O’Toole for Lawrence of Arabia (1962): O’Toole still hasn’t won a Best Actor Oscar and there was a minor kerfuffle when he initially wanted to turn down an honorary Oscar in 2003 (so he “could win the bugger outright”) before relenting. BAFTA was awarding them to O’Toole in the early 1960s.
Sigourney Weaver for The Ice Storm (1997): Whilst the Academy went with Kim Basinger for LA Confidential, BAFTA selected one of Weaver’s best performances. Ang Lee has always been a fine director of actors and this bittersweet drama was filled with great acting from Kevin Kline, Joan Allen, Tobey Maguire and Christina Ricci.
Geoffrey Unsworth for 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968): Such was Kubrick’s mastery of all aspects of filmmaking – and so total his control over his productions – that his DPs tend to get overshadowed. But Geoffrey Unsworth’s work in making outer space believable, just as the Apollo program was doing it for real, was fully deserving of a BAFTA.
Jordan Cronenweth for Blade Runner (1982): Its initial commercial failure didn’t deter BAFTA voters from rewarding the pioneering visuals in this sci-fi masterpiece. As Ridley Scott has noted the rainy city look appeared on a regular basis on MTV in the 1980s. Anecdote alert: at a London screening of the film I overheard someone who actually worked on it (almost certainly a BAFTA member) tell editor Terry Rawlings that he still thought there were ‘problems’ with it. Bollocks to that. It continues to dazzle, which is a miracle when you think that the original financiers almost ruined it (at one point they even fired Ridley Scott and producer Michael Deeley). Jordan sadly passed away in 1996, but his son Jeff is nominated this year for David Fincher’s The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (2011).
This surrealist masterpiece has some pretty wild ideas in its script, which are executed brilliantly. The screenplays that the Academy honoured that year were The Sting (Original) and The Exorcist (Adapted).
EDITING
Sam O’Steen for The Graduate (1967): Whilst this was a landmark film and a gigantic hit, it wasn’t justly rewarded at the Oscars that year. Nichols won Best Director, whilst In the Heat of the Night got Best Picture. But it remains a masterclass in editing, with the pool scene being an often quoted highlight.
Steen’s wife Bobbie even wrote a book ‘Cut to the Chase‘ based their on conversations. Incidentally, Nichols’ film was pipped for the editing Oscar that year by In the Heat of the Night, which edited by future director Hal Ashby.
SOUND
Art Rochester, Nat Boxer, Mike Ejve & Walter Murch for The Conversation (1974): In the days when this award was still called ‘Sound Track’, BAFTA recognized one of the most influential of all sound movies. Coppola was on a roll in 1974, managing to squeeze in The Godfather Part II that year, but it was the amazing sound design that was integral to this film’s story and power.
Mark Herbert and Chris Morris for My Wrongs 8245-8249 and 117 (2002): Before he unleashed Four Lions on the UK, Chris Morris made this short starring Paddy Considine as a mentally disturbed man taking care of a friend’s Doberman.
Morris didn’t collect the award as he was – in the words of Herbert – “at home watching 24“.
UNITED NATIONS AWARD
The War Game (1966): Believe it or not, back in the Cold War when there was the persistent threat of nuclear annihilation there was actually an award for films that raised global issues. Although Dr. Strangelove (1964) had won it two years before, Peter Watkins’ The War Game was rewarded two years later for its chilling recreation of what a nuclear strike would like in 1960s Britain.
In fact it was so good, it also won the Oscar that year although it wasn’t shown on British television until 1985.
If you have any BAFTA winning films worthy of note, just leave a comment below.
It was part of the European press tour for War Horse but the length and quality of the conversation made it much more than the usual press junket and red-carpet sound bites (where time is limited).
What made it extra special is that the two guys asking the questions really know their stuff.
Costa-Gavras directed two of the best political dramas ever made in Z (1969) and Missing (1982), whilst Toubiana was was the long time editor of Cahiers du cinéma (1981-1991) and is currently director of La Cinémathèque Française.
“Not since Cannes in ’82 have I been so moved by an audience of lovers. I will never forget today!”
As you can imagine it was a pretty fascinating conversation, which formed part of the Spielberg season they are currently running, which lasts until March 3rd.
Although the questions are asked in French, Spielberg had an earpiece through which quick translations were made, so the conversation flows pretty well.
They never discuss it, but Costa-Gavras’ Z (1968) – one of the great films of the 1960s – was a major influence on Spielberg’s Munich (2005).
The Superbowl commercial which really got people talking this year featured Clint Eastwood …but wasn’t for a movie.
Major studios often pay top dollar for the prestigious half-time spot at the Superbowl.
Independence Day (1996) probably had the most famous one of recent times and the big ones this year included spots for Marvel’s The Avengers, Disney’s John Carter, Paramount’s G.I. Joe: Retaliation and Universal’s Battleship.
The price average price was $3.5 million per thirty-second ad.
He was probably asked to do this because his film Gran Torino (2008) was set and shot in the city.
CNN report that he wrote the lines himself and donated his fee to charity.
The bleak-but-hopeful tone made it feel like some kind of campaign commercial, but it was actually an advert for Chrysler who are now owned by Italian car giant Fiat.
The fact that the world’s largest search engine chose to honour the famous French New Wave director with drawings from The 400 Blows (1959), Jules et Jim (1962) and Bed and Board (1970) is really rather cool.
If we could somehow hop in a DeLeoran time machine and inform him of this current celebration, he probably would have been puzzled just by the words ‘Google Doodle’.
But surely he would have been thrilled to learn not only are they saluting his films but that today many thousands (millions?) of people will be exposed to them for the first time.
“Softer than Godard, warmer than Chabrol, and more meaty than Rohmer, Truffaut was the man who brought the nouvelle-vague to the mainstream; who took cerebral film theory and made it sing”
You know something is up when the sour comments that can lurk beneath posts on The Guardian website suddenly melt into warm appreciation:
“Sometimes it really is nice to read an article about a “luminary” by someone who can, one: write, and two: is a true fan. Xan, this brought a smile to my face on a Monday morning, thank you. When I go home tonight, I think I might mark today by watching one of Truffaut’s films.”
That clip is all the more poignant because it was recorded just months before his untimely death.
The fact that Google and YouTube are currently hosting affectionate and intelligent tributes to his work says a lot about his influence (and the sorry state of arts coverage on UK television).
His published interviews with the master of suspense still stand as one of the best ever documents on the craft of cinema.
Truffaut’s book of interviews with Alfred Hitchcock is still one of the best ever published about cinema amzn.to/vYZajy#truffaut
Both were going through a creative purple patch at the time of recording – Truffaut had just made Jules et Jim (1962) and Hitchcock was making The Birds (1963) after his extraordinary run of films from Rear Window (1954) to Psycho (1960).
If you want to understand or explore the work of Hitchcock it is still the book to beat because of the depths and insights of two master filmmakers in conversation.
One of the many interesting things about listening to them now is how revealing they are of Truffaut. He doesn’t shy away from asking the difficult questions (he admits to not liking Rear Window on first viewing) and the discussion of failures like Under Capricorn (1949) are as illuminating as the success of Psycho (1960).
In an age of where some critics still think there is some nobility in worshipping at the contrarian altar of Pauline Kael, there is something refreshing in Truffaut wanting to understand failure rather than condemn it with a witty one liner.
Although Truffaut was a tough, controversial critic in his days at Cahiers du Cinema – attacking the ‘certain tendencies’ of French cinema – he became perhaps the most humane and heartfelt of filmmakers.
Shoot the Piano Player (1960) followed, a film which was emblematic of the New Wave, with its mix of European style and American genre elements.
But the relative commercial failure was mirrored by mixed reactions in France, including one that would come back to haunt it: that it was too intellectual and boring.
For the generation of audiences and filmmakers that grew up in the shadow of the New Wave, it was a shorthand that French black and white films would become synonymous with a kind of cinema to be either deified or rejected.
Jules et Jim (1962) perhaps became the archetype of this ‘New Wave’ movement of critics turned filmmakers.
A hauntingly beautiful depiction of two friends (Henri Serre and Oskar Werner) in love with a mercurial woman (Jeanne Moreau), it cemented Truffaut’s reputation around the globe and seemed to predict both the sexual and cultural turbulence of the ensuing decade.
Ask any cinephile what the first thing they think of when they hear the phrase “French New Wave”.
Although Jean-Luc Godard’s Breathless might be the film that they see in their head, Jules et Jim is the one they’ll feel in their heart.
His subsequent career was a case study in appealing to as wide an audience as he could whilst never compromising his art.
He once said:
“To make a film is to improve upon life, to arrange it to suit oneself, to prolong the games of childhood, to construct something that is at once a new toy and a vase in which one can arrange in a permanent way the ideas one feels in the morning.”
Like his idol Jean Renoir, Truffaut was able to mine the drama inherent in everyday life without resorting to cheap sentimental tricks.
His following films work never quite had the bombshell impact of The 400 Blows or Jules et Jim, but nearly always contained the emotional heartbeat and creative drive that made his work so special.
A lover of books as well as movies, he created his own personalised version of Balzac’s Human Comedy with a series of autobiographical films stretching over twenty years.
Constructing the alter ego of Antoine Doinel (Jean-Pierre Leaud), The 400 Blows began a cycle which continued with Antoine et Colette (1962), Stolen Kisses (1968), Bed and Board (1970) and Love on the Run (1979).
Perhaps unique in film history – Harry Potter is perhaps the only comparable example of an actor literally growing in a role – this series isn’t just autobiography.
But Truffaut said his on-screen alter-ego:
“The fictional character Antoine Doinel is, therefore, a mixture of two real people, François Truffaut and Jean-Pierre Leaud”.
In making films about himself, he really made them about us, as the viewer has probably gone through the same trials and tribulations as Antoine.
He was also important as a critic in cementing the reputation of Hollywood directors such as Alfred Hitchcock, Howard Hawks and Orson Welles.
It is hard to imagine a time when these icons of cinema weren’t venerated, but look at the damning Observer review of Psycho from 1960 and you’ll see the hostility that greeted the UK release of that film.
Now he is a rightly venerated director, or – to use a phrase that Truffaut advocated as a critic – he was a genuine auteur.
The only difference was that he was an auteur who worked inside the system.
Speaking of the UK’s oldest newspaper, when Day for Night (1973) was re-released last year, their current critic Philip French had an emotional moment watching it again.
One of the greatest movies about filmmaking ever made, it eschews the brilliant darkness of Sunset Boulevard (1950) or satire of The Player (1992).
It is a Pirandellian affair, an elegiac celebration of a dying kind of cinema, a meditation on the connection between film and life by Truffaut, who plays Ferrand, the film’s constantly troubled yet dedicated director, a man much like himself.
Le mépris (Contempt) is arguably a better, more trenchant film and has a commanding performance by Fritz Lang as the director of the film within the film. But Day for Night is the one I love, and among its many delights is the brief appearance as a British insurance adviser of Graham Greene, credited as Henry Graham. His real identity was unknown to Truffaut who cast him for his distinguished appearance, believing him to be a retired English businessman living in the South of France.
The film has a special moment that always makes my heart leap. It occurs when Truffaut receives a parcel of books, which he eagerly cuts open and tosses them one by one on to the table in front of him. They’re monographs on directors, all in French except for two – Robin Wood’s Hitchcock and a symposium on Jean-Luc Godard to which I contributed the chapter on Une femme mariée.
In a way, this sums up the appeal of Truffaut’s films.
They have a playful, but sincere love of humanity in them that often provokes a personal response.
His love of American cinema would find an outlet in a memorable supporting role a French scientist in Steven Spielberg’s Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977).
“He loves movies than anyone I’ve ever met in my life. You can take all this New Hollywood bullshit, get all of us sitting in a room together, and he puts us away. He knows more about movies than any of us ever will.”
He even edited Small Change (1976) on the set of Close Encounters in Mobile, Alabama and its marvellous depiction of childhood and school days was a subsequent influence on Spielberg’s E.T. The Extra Terrestrial (1982).
It was an appropriate passing of the baton from the high priest of the New Wave to the young prodigy of the New Hollywood.
Just before his death from cancer at the age of 52, Truffaut was preparing a variation of The 400 Blows called The Little Thief, which would be completed by his protégé and collaborator Claude Miller.
Although one can only speculate what would films he would have made had he lived, his influence lives on.
It is hard to gauge how many directors have read his interviews with Hitchcock, but given that it subsequently became a text book in film schools, any figure is probably an understatement of its influence.
Citizen Kane (1941) was a film which owes much of its deserved canonisation in the pantheon of cinema to Truffaut and his colleagues at Cahiers du Cinema.
In the same way that younger audiences reject Welles’ film because they have been repeatedly told of its greatness, the New Wave has in a sense become the establishment it sought to tear down.
A newer generation of audiences and directors are sometimes put off by its very impact and influence.
This is an irony as Truffaut’s use of filmmaking technology (real locations, lighter cameras, low budget, natural light and jump cuts) has many parallels to today’s digital revolution.
In an age where cinema is struggling to process enormous technical and social changes, it was heartening to see Google pay such a genuine tribute.
It was a digital salute to a high priest of celluloid.
His optimistic quote about the future of film is perhaps more relevant than ever in today’s uncertain environment:
“The film of tomorrow will not be directed by civil servants of the camera, but by artists for whom shooting a film constitutes a wonderful and thrilling adventure.”
Tyrannosaur (Studiocanal): A stunning directorial debut from actor Paddy Considine, which features some of the best acting you’ll see all year. It explores what happens when an angry widower (Peter Mullan) stikes up a relationship with a Christian charity worker (Olivia Colman), who is married to a stern husband (Eddie Marsan). Don’t listen to anyone that tells you its ‘depressing’ – just see it. [Buy on DVD or Blu-ray] [Read our original review]
Tabloid (Dogwoof): Brilliant documentary about a bizarre tabloid scandal in the 1970s, when a former beauty queen came to Britain in search of the mormon missionary she was obsessed with. Directed by Errol Morris, it might seem to be a lighter subject after his last two films (The Fog of War, Standard Operating Procedure) but is equally brilliant and its probing of UK newspaper culture could not be more timely. [Buy on DVD] [Read our original review]
Legend (20th Century Fox Home Entertainment): One of Ridley Scott’s forgotten films of the 1980s is this fantasy starring a young Tom Cruise as a mystical forest dweller who must rescue a princess (Mia Sara) and defeat the demonic Lord of Darkness (Tim Curry). Cruise has since admitted that the production lasted even longer than Eyes Wide Shut (1999), and it was not well received critically or commercially at the time but is worth revisiting in HD as an example of Scott’s craftsmanship. [Buy on DVD or Blu-ray]
Pleasantville (Warner Home Video): The 1998 directorial debut from Gary Ross (who had written the screenplays for Big and Dave) was inspired and touching comedy about two teenagers (Tobey Maguire and Reese Witherspoon) who end up in the black-and-white TV world of a 1950s sitcom. An inspired mash up of Back to the Future and The Purple Rose of Cairo, it holds up very well indeed, the only downside is that there isn’t a Region 2 Blu-ray. [Buy it on DVD]
Midnight in Paris (Sony Pictures Home Entertainment): Woody Allen’s latest actually lives up to the hype that emanated from Cannes about being his best in years. A charming comedy about a screenwriter (Owen Wilson) who escapes his materialistic partner (Rachel McAdams) and ends up living in his own fantasy. Gorgeously shot by Darius Khondji, it is also one of the best looking films of the year – again, the absence of a Region 2 Blu-ray is bizarre. [Buy on DVD]
ALSO OUT
Footloose (Paramount Home Entertainment) [Blu-ray / Normal] Four Weddings and a Funeral (20th Century Fox Home Ent.) [Blu-ray / Normal] Friends With Benefits (Sony Pictures Home Ent.) [Blu-ray / Normal] I Don’t Know How She Does It (EV) [Blu-ray / Normal] One Day (Universal Pictures) [Blu-ray / Normal] Serendipity (Miramax) [Blu-ray / Normal] Teen Wolf (20th Century Fox Home Ent.) [Blu-ray / Normal] The Sarah Jane Adventures: The Complete Fifth Series (2 Entertain) [Blu-ray / Normal] Thelma and Louise (20th Century Fox Home Ent.) [Blu-ray / Normal] Twilight Zone – The Original Series: Season 5 (Fremantle Home Entertainment) [Blu-ray / Box Set] Urban Warfare (StudioCanal) [Blu-ray / Normal]
Just getting home from a photo-taking expedition in the snow and my neighbour points the camera out to me.
Now, the flash camera has been there for a while, we’ve complained about it before and we’ve been told the objective is to move people on. Seeing as this is our communal garden I’ve never really felt that was an adequate explanation.
There’s no illegal activity here, no anti-social behaviour. The worst it ever gets is the kids running round which, I understand, some people might not like, but frankly kids should run round – it’s their job.
My first thought was of this scene from John Carpenter’s Escape From New York (1981) where Snake Plisskin (Kurt Russell) is ‘processed’ just before he gets the offer of rescuing the President:
But of course, the most infamous robot law enforcer designed by city bureaucrats is ED-209 from Robocop (1987):
To paraphrase The Old Man (played by Dan O’Herlihy): “Camden, I’m VERY disappointed”
It is all a bit different from Detroit, where a Robocop statue is going to get built after a Kickstarter campaign began after someone tweeted the Mayor’s office.
By the way, this Robocop inspired rap by DJ Mayhem & MC Mouthmaster Murf (posted by YouTube user robomayhem) is genius:
On hearing the news, my immediate thought was his riotous appearance on The Dick Cavett Show, promoting Husbands in 1970 with John Cassevetes (a regular collaborator and friend) and Peter Falk.
Here it is and it reminds you of the days when chat show appearances weren’t filled with PR-led soundbites:
Here are some clips from his career, including interviews:
The classic scene from The Big Lebowski can be found by clicking here (I didn’t embed it as it features an annoying autoplay ad, but its worth waiting for).
This short film narrated by Bill Maher points out some salient facts on the eve of the Superbowl.
Using graphics blended against the audio version of a monologue from HBO’s Real Time, it points out a valuable economic lesson in just over 2 minutes.
Notice how the light hearted, comedic vibe is a highly effective tool at communicating serious facts and opinion.
It is an irony that ‘liberal’ Europe’s brand of football hugely favours the rich clubs, whilst ‘capitalist America’ has a much more egalitarian sporting model.
Wouldn’t it be great if this screened during the half-time spot alongside the Ferris Bueller Honda ad?
Young Adult (Paramount): Soon after her divorce, a writer (Charlize Theron) returns to her home in small-town Minnesota, looking to rekindle a romance with her ex-boyfriend (Patrick Wilson), who is now married with kids. Directed by Jason Reitman and written by Diablo Cody, it co-stars Patton Oswalt and J.K. Simmons. [Nationwide /15]
Martha Marcy May Marlene (20th Century Fox): Haunted by painful memories and increasing paranoia, a damaged woman (Elisabeth Olsen) struggles to re-assimilate with her family after fleeing an abusive cult. Directed by Sean Durkin, it co-stars Sarah Paulson, John Hawkes and Hugh Dancy. [Key Cities / 15]
Carnage (Studiocanal): Adapted from Yasmin Reza’s stage play about two sets of parents who decide to have a cordial meeting after their sons are involved in a schoolyard brawl. Directed by Roman Polanski, it stars Kate Winslet, Jodie Foster, John C. Reilly and Christoph Waltz. [Nationwide / 15]
Chronicle (20th Century Fox): Sci-fi drama about Portland teenagers who develop incredible powers after a trip to the woods. Directed by Josh Trank, it stars Dane DeHaan, Michael B. Jordan, Michael Kelly and Alex Russell. [Nationwide / 12A]
Jack and Jill (Sony Pictures): A family man (Adam Sandler) deals with his twin sister (also Adam Sandler) when she visits for Thanksgiving then won’t leave. Directed by Dennis Dugan, it co-stars Al Pacino. [Nationwide / PG]
Journey 2: The Mysterious Island (Warner Bros): The sequel to Journey to the Center of the Earth (2008) which stars Dwayne Johnson, Michael Caine, Josh Hutcherson, Vanessa Hudgens, Luis Guzmán and Kristin Davis. Directed by Brad Peyton. [Nationwide / PG]
Man On A Ledge (E1 Films): An ex-cop turned con (Sam Worthington) threatens to jump to his death from a Manhattan hotel rooftop. Directed by Asger Leth, it co-stars Elizabeth Banks, Anthony Mackie, Jamie Bell
and Ed Harris. [Nationwide / 12A]
ALSO OUT
Bombay Beach (Diva Partnership): Acclaimed documentary about a community living in an area of Southern California. Directed by Alma Har’el. [Selected cinemas]
With the help of cognitive scientist Tim Smith at Birbeck College in London, his eye movement (‘gaze behaviour’) was recorded and the dissected (UK viewers can watch the episode on BBC iPlayer by clicking here – the piece starts around 23:06)
Smith has previously written a guest blog for David Bordwell’s site which accompanied videos showing computers tracking an audience’s eye movement as they watched There Will Be Blood (2007) – a good film for this kind of study with its interesting visual style and editing rhythms.
The article is a fascinating example of science being used to explain how we process art and covered such topics as why we don’t always notice continuity errors, how a viewers gaze can be directed and the importance of motion contrast.
Audience behaviour whilst watching a movie is a key part of how we first process a film.
Yet most reviews don’t actually tell you about the circumstances in which they were first seen.
On the one hand, why should they?
I don’t particularly want to read about the sandwich Peter Bradshaw had before he saw a film at a Soho screening room as that probably has little bearing on the film.
Yet, if critics are honest they are probably influenced by things they never write about.
For example, I once witnessed the late Alexander Walker (film critic for the London Evening Standard) get angry at a PR person right before a screening of Moonlight Mile (“If there’s no press notes, there’s no review!”).
Are you telling me that for at least the first ten minutes of that film, his overall judgement wasn’t affected by this outburst?
The default justification given for a critical verdict on a film is that it is a ‘matter of opinion’, but there are deeper factors that contribute to that opinion in the first place.
The following areas are worth considering:
Bias: Most critics wouldn’t admit to having a bias before seeing a film, but it surely exists to some extent. The latest film from a director they admire is going to excite them more than one they don’t. How much does this bias shape perceptions during the running of the film and our final verdict when its over? With reviews available online immediately after its festival premiere, how much does this reaction shape (even indirectly) what other critics say?
Venue: Most critics (certainly on national newspapers and magazines) see films in screening rooms with dedicated projectionists. Yet the public often have to deal with such distractions as the glow of mobiles and the eating of food. Do these different environments create a disparity between critical opinion and wider audience opinion?
Big Screen: We all know the differences between cinema and home viewing (bigger sound and vision) but how exactly does this manifest in terms of our brain activity? If you go at the right time, cinemas are one of the few darkened rooms where you can escape the distractions of the modern world. Its like a church mixed with a Victorian opium den.
Wide Screen: Widescreen was an innovation of the 1950s as cinema tried to counter the effects of television. But with almost everything in widescreen now does that shape how we view films shot in 2:35 or 1:85? Has it lost its novelty? Do films like Elephant (2003) or Fish Tank (2009) deliberately use the 1:33 aspect ratio to stand out in a world dominated by widescreen?
IMAX: The most extreme form of cinema is natively shot IMAX, projected at 70mm. The Dark Knight (2008) was the first major release to pioneer this. When I saw the opening shot of the film at the IMAX Waterloo the audience gasped and some actually reached towards the screen. A similar thing happened during the Dubai sequence of Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol (also shot and projected on IMAX). Does seeing and hearing films at this gargantuan size and resolution supercharge the already potent effects of cinema?
In 1943, George Orwell wrote about the “drug-like pleasures of cinema and radio” in a book review for The Listener.
In 1968 audiences used the star-gate sequence in 2001: A Space Odyssey as a backdrop to taking LSD (which someone even did for real back in 2010).
Gaspar Noe did the most trippy opening titles for his film Enter the Void – a sequence which Quentin Tarantino described as “one of the greatest in cinema history”:
Compared to painting and theatre, cinema is still a relatively new art form but its unique blend of quasi-religious ritual (the act of watching a film in a darkened room) and the intensity of the very best works do indeed make it drug-like.
The show has been running for so long that when you do a comprehensive list like this it reads like an index to a history of cinema.
A French website (‘The Simpsons Park’) has collected an incredible gallery of screen shots and animated gifs that lays out the original Simpsons episode alongside the particular film.
The range is astonishing: Kubrick, Bergman, Hitchcock, Scorsese, Lumet, Spielberg, Coppola and Truffaut are just some of the many directors referenced.
Just click on the links below to visit the relevant page – they aren’t in English, but the visuals speak for themselves.
Eric Roth’s dialogue is too respectful of Foer’s prose and whilst it may have been tempting to use voiceover to duplicate Oskar’s internal thoughts, over the course of the film it becomes too much.
