RUN FOR YOUR LIVES! THE ALIENS HAVE LANDED! (OR, ESSIE SPEAKS OF ALIENS)

No, no, no. Not the quadrilogy. Ok, not just the quadrilogy. I mean, to be fair, we only have one film left from that lot (I haven't seen Prometheus the prequel as yet so you're safe from that for a while). But I have coupled that last film (which is also pretty damn good like its three siblings) with one of the most amazing alien / alien themed movies I have ever watched. I mean, I always had a feeling this little number (see immediately below) was pretty good, just not quite sure how good. Now I know. And I insist you learn too - trust me, you'll thank me for it. In the meanwhile I apologise for the slightly shorter update today. We are entering a bit of a crazy period of my life now so updates may be a bit shorter (i.e. two films) for the next couple of weeks but never fret. I will not drop below two and I will not miss a single week. So I look forward to meeting you here again next week. In the meanwhile, happy viewing! Essie

TIME TO REVISE YOUR OPINIONS ON ALIENS : "K-PAX"

Ok, as you can see I have finally got a semi-decent theme going this week. And it’s aliens! Not just the Sigourney Weaver variety but some that are a little more, well… Shall we say understated? I saw the trailer for K-Pax a good many years ago and it really, really seemed interesting but it’s only almost literally ten years later that I got the chance to see it. Oh I do so love using our school library. A word from the wise, if you have some establishment providing you with free books and dvds (a university library for example) make the best of it. It’s definitely what I am doing. Now, K-Pax is not a person / alien but a planet. It is the planet Prot (Kevin Spacey) comes from. He appears one day in Grand Central Station in New York, and his calm explanations that he is, in fact, an alien lands him quite quickly in the Manhattan Psychiatric Institute. Here, the head doctor is Dr. Mark Fuller (Jeff Bridges) and he along with a lot of his eminent colleagues is finding it difficult to understand why this mysterious man’s delusions seem to be so persistent. But there is something else strange about Prot. He has a unexplainable sensitivity to light, seems to know a lot about astro-physics that not only makes perfect sense but baffles leading experts in the field and seems to be having a very bizarre effect on his fellow patients. Dr. Fuller is an eminently sensible man, a man of science but even he begins to seriously wonder… Could Prot possibly, actually come from another planet? Rarely, if ever, have I seen such a film for twists and turns. There were a good few times throughout the film when I was pretty sure I had “got” which way the story was going. Then there was a twist. “Oh” says I and I adapt my approach. Nope. There’s another twist. And not one of those “forced” twists either. The film really, really flows, everything develops really organically. The one thing you probably expect and will ultimately find is the “extraordinary character bursts into the everyday reality and changes the lives of everyone he comes into contact with” line. Yes, there is that. But even that is done with sensitivity and come on, it is a Hollywood film. Kevin Spacey and Jeff Bridges more than make up for that with their acting alone. The story is, basically, a detective story. We are trying to piece together Prot’s past. Along with Dr. Fuller we are try to find out who Prot really is – and what he is – and like every good detective story nothing is quite what it seems right to the very end. Believe me. Whatever you think this film is at the moment, it probably isn’t. You’re just going to have to give it a whirl and see what I mean for your selves.

OK, THE LAST ONE, FOR NOW : "ALIEN: RESURRECTION"

Like I said, this one was touch and go for me at first. I mean logically. I don’t want to give too much away about the third one in case you haven’t quite got round to it yet but… Hang on a minute. I’m not going to be able to say a thing about this film unless I give that away. Err… Ok this is awkward but seeing as I’m one of a mere handful of people who hasn’t watched this thing yet, and seeing that, well, we are so far evolved in our taste in films that, honestly, you don’t mind a tiny spoiler, right? I mean, it’s on the back of the Alien 4 DVD for God’s sake. Ok I’ll cut to the chase. So. You may (or may not) recall that at the end of Alien3 , Ripley had found out that she had a Queen alien embedded in her chest and had killed herself to save the human race. At this point, especially with big words like “Resurrection” being thrown about I had my doubt as to how realistic / good the film was going to be. But, and I may have mentioned this, the film had one redeeming feature in my eyes in the form of director Jean –Pierre Jeunet. The man is a little mad as far as I’m concerned (and anyone who doubts it should watch masterpieces like Delicatessen and Cite des Enfants Perdus) but this is a good thing in this particular case. I personally love the man’s style and thought that this alone was a recommendation for the film. Plus of course, this was the third “sequel” after all, if thing got a little doodah here and there, frankly, who could blame them? Wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. The film is brilliant. The resurrection is totally justified. And Jeunet works brilliantly with the entire combination. Allow me to explain. It is 200 years later. Technology has advanced tremendously even since Ripley’s time. And even though the aliens seem to be abandoned to the dusty vaults of history, there are still determined men and women out there who want to get their greedy paws on the aliens to use them as the ultimate weapon. In the end, a long series of experiments finally have a result: Ripley is cloned, using blood samples she gave while she was alive. And she is cloned with the Alien Queen inside of her. Now, the Queen is surgically removed and set to the task of breeding “warriors” but then there is the matter of Ripley. She is, thanks to her new genetic coding, a alien – human hybrid who, having been born in her early to mid-thirties is finding the world a slightly challenging place. Add onto this the crew of bounty hunters that have just come on board ship for shady business and already we have an interesting concoction. And as we all know only too well by now, if there are aliens in the mix, things are pretty much bound to get deadly… The film does something very, very intelligent here. They take something that could have been just used to “bring Ripley back” and glossed over and make it into a serious commentary. There is quite a serious, thought-provoking section on cloning in the film. I assume the date coincides with first arguments on the topic, but of course the arguments are just as relevant today. The other good thing is, the “argument” is not presented via long and somewhat stilted dialogue, but mainly through visuals and events, ergo it is emotionally engaging as opposed to being long, erudite words that have kinda been said before. There are, naturally, the pre-requisite chases through corridors and grizzly deaths but the whole thing carries the clear mark of Jeunet’s original style and quality so they are, all in all, a pleasure to watch. Plus, there are a few serious surprises in store. I mean one in particular made me go “Oh God, why didn’t I think of that!!” – out loud. It’s so obvious and yet so well-hidden. I did also spot a few comments on religion and its place in society, but that is possibly the topic of a longer, more serious write-up / essay (for those who aren’t sure what I’m talking about, surely you noticed that the omnipresent main computer in the spaceship is called “Father”?). I don’t necessarily agree with what the film is saying about religion, but I just wanted to point it out, if only to prove that Alien is really, really not like “any old” sci-fi movie. As someone who has actually studied film, it is my personal opinion that it merits multiple-viewings and serious consideration. And I mean, it’s a riot to watch, even if you watch it just the once… 

ALIENS UP THE TREE OF LIFE LURED BY THE SWEET SMELL OF SUCCESS / ESSIE SPEAKS OF MIXED BAGS!

I think it's my whole working on the dissertation, tying concepts together etc. tendency these last days that is making me come up with weirder and weirder post titles these days. But there it is. At least I cannot be accused of being boring. Or ordinary. Howdy folks. Over here in the UK summer is finally threatening to arrive. I'm waiting with baited breath along with the rest of the nation but nothing seems to be happening as yet. It's funny, I was talking to another foreign friend and living here long term does something to one. One suddenly becomes able to talk about the weather, non-stop. Not as small talk either. Literal, serious conversation. I think there's a thesis in there somewhere for budding psychologists but I'm not 100% sure... I have yet another eclectic bag of films for you this week, but fear not, I'm going to try and put some order to my viewing habits as of next week. I may fail. But the effort will be there. Anyhoo, this week may be viewed as me following up various long running projects. We have our last Terrance Malik (until Mr. Malik makes a new film that is), our third Alien film (because I'm hooked on it now) and a classy little number from back in the '50s that I think you'll enjoy the "smell" of. happy viewing, Essie

POTENTIALLY LIFE CHANGING : "THE TREE OF LIFE"

Right boys and girls, I gave you a bit of a break, but now I have to review this. I must. But, as I said, take heart, it’s the last Terrance Malik you’ll hear of for a while. Besides, chances are you have tried out a few of his films and you are now as excited about these films as I am. Well, I can dream… I mean, yes, I do realise that Terrance Malik is not by any definition of the word the easiest director to indulge in. But if you take the time to get used to his style and his work, the films will end up taking you to places you never even imagined going. I read a review of the film saying that Malik is the proof that cinema can aspire to art. I feel I have to agree… Now, I have had a few friends and relations that have watched this film. I have eagerly asked them what it is about. They have had great difficulty explaining. “You should watch it. It’s about a family and… Oh it’s complicated.” This intrigues me rather than putting me off so I went ahead and watched it anyway. The thing is, I tend to agree. It is rather hard to explain what this one is about. But let me give it a shot anyway. The film is basically about struggling to find answers in the modern world. It is about religion, God, ethics. But not in a stuffy and philosophical way. We follow the lives of a family in Texas, in the 1950s, thought the flashbacks of the family’s eldest son (Sean Penn). The mother is gentle and kind, the father (Brad Pitt), though not a bad man, is a very strict and very difficult to live with. His approach to life is very, very different from his wife’s and their two drastically different approaches to life struggle to this day in their adult son who is feeling lost and trying to find answers in the modern world. Now, I respect any opinions you may have on Malik’s style. You might find it pretentious or a little heavy. But first of all, I mean, you simply HAVE to concede the fact that his cinematography and imagery are nothing short of stunning. There are entire sequences where you can just randomly stop the film at some point and any frame you land on could be considered a work of art. Plus, given the subject matter of the film, it would be very difficult to undertake the discussion in a very concrete way without somehow looking… False. Corny. You know what I mean. This is the trouble with this kind of thing though; when emotions are so deeply involved drawing an accurate picture of them is so hard… Malik succeeds in this, drawing beautiful pictures that are completely alive, full of pieces of actual real life. I even saw some instances, small but stunning in their realism, that reminded me of my own childhood. I told my mother about these and asked her what she thought; I have to say she was both surprised and impressed. So, be ready to find be surprised. To find something in the film you never expected to see with your two eyes. And don’t rush as you watch it. Just go with the flow, let the emotion slowly build up and take you over. It is not so much a film but an experience. An experience that has the potential to be mind - blowing.

ANALYSIS OF A QUADRILOGY NOT QUITE LIKE ANY OTHER : "ALIEN3"

In for a penny, in for a pound. I might as well do the whole quadrilogy while I’m about it. Like I said last week though, to be fair the Alien series (it turns out) is the exception to the rule. “The rule” being that usually, even if a first film is potentially brilliant, the more sequels are made of it, the worse they turn out. But with such great directors and actors on board, really, the room for failure drops significantly. And David Fincher is, categorically, one of my favourite directors ever. Hence, I really, really, had to watch this. And review it. So, last time we abandoned Ripley, she was once again in cryosleep, crossing the galaxy with the survivors of the previous calamity. It seemed as if her troubles were over, but in fact they may, in a sense, only just be beginning. When a mysterious malfunction forces the ship to crash land, Ripley is the sole survivor. She is now officially the only woman on Fiorina 161, once a maximum security prison, now almost abandoned inhabited by the inmates who have “found religion”. Ripley has one single fear in this whole unfortunate turn of events: that an alien had snuck on board her ship and could have not found its way onto the planet. Pretty soon the bodies of the inmates begin to pile up… Her fears seem to have been confirmed… Now, I have to say we’re at an interesting point in the quadrilogy. I mean, this film is brilliant. There is a brilliant plot-twist at the end, which, the problem is, seems to bring the story to its natural end. I have the DVD for the fourth film and will review it next week, but the premise for it seems a little… Well, I do know it’s meant to be sci-fi but even so… We’ll have to wait and see if Jean-Pierre Jeunet can make it work. In the meanwhile, what of David Fincher? Stylistically the film is Fincher through and through and through, i.e. dark, gothic with a slightly apocalyptic feel about it. Fincher once again goes down the route of suspense rather than jump-scares. There are a few classical tropes employed, such as chase scenes down long, dark corridors, with the added stylistic renovation of our first p.o.v .shot from an alien. I mean, true, it doesn’t turn out to be anything mind-blowing but still, three films in, it needed to be done… It’s good quality adventure entertainment basically. It’s not an art piece, it will not change your world but hey. Not all films are meant to… And this one is perfect the way it is…

NOTHING CAN BEAT ITS LURE : "SWEET SMELL OF SUCCESS"

The other night, one of my flatmates decided we should see a nostalgic film, film noir more specifically. The film, I have to admit was selected pretty much at random but turned out to be a classic funnily enough. So there you have it, you can trust the internet in your quest for knowledge – sometimes  This blog however, as you may already know, is more about opinions and less about knowledge and my opinion of the film was so high that I reckoned I should share it with the rest of you all. You know, in case any of you guys were in the mood for a good, old-fashioned classic. This is the dark and twisted tale of JJ. Hunsecker (played by veteran actor Burt Lancaster). He is a successful columnist in LA, which makes him a popular man among those of the industry. It also means he has an immense amount of power should he choose to wield it. It is this power specifically that he uses when he finds out that his sister has “got involved” with a jazz musician. Deciding that a penniless musician is no suitable match for his beloved sister, he uses the greed and hunger of unscrupulous press agent Sidney Falco(Tony Curtis) to break the couple up once and for all. The plan is dark and convoluted but Sydney doesn’t mind getting his hands a bit dirty as long as he gets his reward at the end. The only problem is, what seems to start off as something relatively simple slowly begins to backfire… Those who try dirty deeds as means to the ends they crave, should in all fairness be ready to suffer the consequences… I loved this film because it was completely and utterly everything you expect and want a film noir to be. It has beautiful innocent dames, handsome beaus trying to overcome circumstances and dastardly bad guys getting up to unthinkable tricks to achieve their dastardly ends. It is, in short, a complete and utter classic. Now, there is always the argument that this has something we have seen before. And as you know I am very, very far from averse to original and artistic work in the cinema. Heck, I’m a Terrance Malik fan. That should say it all. But then again, if cinema is art, it is also entertainment. I think quite frankly that most art forms, if not all, have this dual side to them. They are artistic, creative but must also at some level appeal to the public, entertain or force people to think. This is why being an artist is so tough really, striking a balance between the two – if indeed a balance is what you’re going for - is so difficult. Then again, it ain’t so easy if you’re going for one extreme or the other. If you’re going for entertainment value – as most film noirs tend to – you have to either “perform” exquisitely and fulfil all the conventions of your genre with quality and class or risk looking very cheesy and done a hundred times before. Like I said in my review of Alien3 , there is nothing wrong with doing stuff we’ve seen before. The Sweet Smell of Success is a very classy example of its genre, successfully combining the classic with the original. And it goes very well with pizza. Just saying.

JARHEADS, ALIENS AND A KNIFE IN THE WATER! ESSIE SPEAKS OF GREAT DIRECTORS

Hey there! I hope your summer is treating you well. Over here in the UK we appear to be having one of the wettest summers on record (yay!), so the weather is bipolar at best. Glaring sunshine one minute, pouring with rain the next, sometimes - quite often actually - both at once!! I wish it would just do one or the other. I do not get the both at once bit. Oh look, I've gone all British. An entire paragraph, just about the weather... Anyhoo, I have a sizzlin hot collection for you as always. I hope you're proud of me, as you can see I have managed a theme! It is great directors once again. Quite disparate in style and content (so almost a mixed bag) but united by the fact that they are the creations of the really famous ones; Polanski, Cameron and Mendes. From adventures in outer space to more sobering considerations on life on earth, we have something to tickle every fancy as always, so come one, come all... happy viewing! Essie

THE TIMES ARE GOING TOO FAST - TRUE STORY - "JARHEAD"

Ok, I think I told you a couple of weeks back that I was doing my dissertation on war films. And that said war films would crop up on the blog from time to time. Honestly, Jarhead was kinda scheduled right from the start; Sam Mendes is one of my favourite directors of all times. I think his great success lies in his ability to portray very dramatic emotions with honesty, in all their brutality and drama but without exaggeration. This is why, when you watch one of his films, you will very probably be turned on your head – metaphorically. But you can’t take refuge in the excuse that “oh that’s not realistic at all”. Combine this quality with war; you get something quite extraordinary and unforgettable. Jarhead is a beautiful commentary on modern warfare and all the different tragic stories it entails. “Swoff” (Jake Gyllenhaal) is a jarhead. A jarhead is slang for a U.S. marine. He goes through boot camp, trains as a sniper and then… War breaks out. The first Gulf War. Swoff and his fellow snipers are among the first to land in Iraq, trained to the teeth, ready for anything. They are quick to discover that all their classical army training has not prepared them for the realities of war, especially the First Gulf War. The main enemies the soldiers have to fight is heat, boredom and the constant suspense provided by the threat of actual warfare. Just when they have adapted to this set of conditions however, war breaks out. And the snipers have to face the realities of war, a reality that they could not have imagined, no, not even in their worst nightmares. Now, you know that there are one heck of a lot of “war is hell” type films about. You also know that I have a bit of a soft spot for them. This, ladies and gents, is not one of those films. The film is set in war and is about war, this much is true. But if you dig a little way under the face value of the whole affair, you will find there are greater philosophical concerns. This film is largely about the fast changing world today. Technology, modern life, you will have noticed everything changes. Everything changes very, very quickly. It is about the sense of disorientation you get face to face with the computers dominating our lives today; and I’m not talking about your grandmother’s generation trying to make sense of a tablet computer. I’m talking about all the computers, in areas you never even thought they were. The marines, Swoff and his friends have their ideals, their dreams, yet the life they have built is already mutating by itself, passing them by. It is interesting, philosophical and in a sense tragic. But most impressive of all is the very understated “based on the book by anthony swofford” nestled among the credits. Yes people, scarily enough, it’s a true story. About stuff that is really happening / has happened”. All told in Mendes’s hard-hitting, emotional style. It will give you a lot to think about. It will grab you by the heartstrings and not let go for a good, long while. Please don’t miss it…

IT'S A SEQUEL - BUT DON'T HOLD THAT AGAINST IT! "ALIENS"

I’m pretty sure you’re surprised to see this title here. For those who aren’t familiar, this is the sequel to Alien, a film I reviewed last week. Looking back, I have to admit that sequels have been rather a rare occurrence on this blog. Not quite sure why. The fact that I have very, very little faith in sequels may be one reason though. It tends to mean that one formula struck gold and the production company is trying to milk this fact as much as possible. Usually however, it ends up just re-hashing the story, if the original director was someone particularly famous they tend to want to move on, the director of the sequel may not be up to the same standard… You get the picture. Of course the Alien quadrilogy (well that's what it says on the box set!) is an exception to this rule, not least because all four films were directed by quite extraordinary directors; Ridley Scott, James Cameron, David Fincher and Jean-Pierre Jeunet. Our director in the spotlight this week is James Cameron, one of the auteurs of the modern classic Hollywood style (you know what I mean. Right?). The main reason I decided to review Aliens after all is, surprisingly, I liked it a lot better than the first Alien film. No offense to Ridley Scott, I usually like his work a lot, but yeah… So, if you recall we had left Ripley “suspended” in her pod floating in outer space, safe in the knowledge she would be picked up soon. She is. The thing is, 57 years have gone by in the meanwhile and quite a bit has changed. For example, the planet she had her final battle with the “alien”(s) is now colonised. Ripley desperately tries to warn her bosses – or in fact anyone who will actually listen to her – of the danger that lays on the planet, but of course no one listens to her. But then, when all contact with the colony is lost, the authorities have to concede that something strange is going on. A band of marines are sent to investigate and “take out” anything that is lurking there and Ripley is taken along as a consultant. This is either going to help her face and overcome her recurring nightmares, or alternately “end” her nightmares… Along with her life. Right. Now, as you can imagine, there is nothing wildly original here. Which may be a strange thing to say but hear me out. I’ve said this about Ridley Scott, I will also say of James Cameron that, more often than not, their cinematic structure very rarely strays from the mainstream. This may be conceived as a lack of originality; however this is not necessarily the case. It is matter of doing something and doing it well. You may not be strong on composing, for example, but may be excellent at playing other people’s compositions. Same here. Cameron takes what we may know, but makes a work of art out of it. Unlike Scott in the first Alien, there isn’t such a heavy reliance on jump scares here, the buzz word here is suspense. I think this style works a lot better with the genre too, there are a lot of tense chases for example when the hero / heroine gets away just in the nick of time. Now, here actually is my point. Thinking rationally, you know that the hero /heroine will get away. Especially if it’s early on in the film. The point is though, that Cameron is capable of creating the suspense in such a way that you actually get excited about it. You actually are tense. Hence, as far as Cameron is concerned, mission accomplished. And you’ve enjoyed a good, exciting movie. Aliens shines with this classic brilliance. Do not be put off by the fact that it’s a sequel if you have that sort of prejudice (I know I do), it is what you might call the exception to this particular rule.

AND LAST OF ALL, THE HUMAN MIND : "KNIFE IN THE WATER"

You will have noticed I have a bit of a soft spot for Roman Polanski. As a director I mean. He is one of the most successful directors I know in portraying human psychology. Well, the common wisdom goes that there is nothing as queer as folk, and this is undoubtedly true. In fact, why venture into fantasy lands (don’t get me wrong I am absolutely hooked on fantasy as a genre) when some of the most unbelievable things are going on right inside our own heads? This first film by Polanski returns to a theme he takes up in Carnage (reviewed a couple of weeks back), his latest film. Power struggles. Andrzrej and Kristina are a couple. He is a sports reporter, a rather vain man who needs to be right at absolutely everything. She is his pretty young wife. They are headed out for a day’s sailing on their boat one Sunday morning when they run into (almost literally) a hitchhiker. One thing leads to another and although Andrzej is clearly rather annoyed with the young man, they decide to take him along, not only in the car, but also in the boat, to sail. With the three people crammed in this rather limited space a power struggle begins between the two men. At first it is purely psychological but more and more it begins to border on the physical. The young hitchhiker is seemingly obsessed with his knife but the older man has some tricks up his sleeve too. How will the struggle end? Who will get the upper hand and more to the point, what will become of the looser? I have small criticism of the DVD I watched. It is the school copy so there is really very little I could do about the choice but still. The subtitles. There were holes. Many holes. Which is a problem if you don’t speak Polish. Which I don’t. However the good thing is that, from what I was able to grasp, the bits missing weren’t exactly the vital bits. And you could, from the context, guess what’s going on. I mean, it didn’t affect my grasp of the story but you know what I mean. As to the story, it is another exercise in suspense and subtlety by Polanski. At first you might find the film a bit boring. Mundane. No big action, not much dramatic dialogue. But if you continue watching it, you see the tension building between the two men. You slowly become involved. Without realising how, you’re taking sides, getting annoyed with one character or the other. And then of course, the film’s climax. Again, Polanski is a master of surprise endings and he seems to have started off as he meant to continue, if you feel a bit confused and mind blown at the end of it, trust me, the characters feel much worse. Plus, add to all this, the fact that the film has a total cast of three. Shot mostly on an actual boat. That is a whole barrage of technical difficulties if there ever was one and yet out of it emerges an Oscar ®nominated masterpiece. I know, it is an acquired taste. But do give it a whirl. Or a paddle.

ESSIE SPEAKS OF MIXED BAGS

Right. I know. I should really get my life in order and start rolling out the themes again. I do realise. And appologise. But trust me, my life is very hard to order at the moment and this is really starting to show in my viewing habits as well... To be fair, this week's films have a sort of slow, philosophical air to them, Kiarostami and Malik (yes, again. but I have a good reason - trust me) kind of match on a level. My third choice of film categorically does not. But then again, it's one of the funniest things I have watched in a long time so I think you'll forgive me for slipping it in :) happy viewing! Essie

OLD FASIONED BEAUTY : "TASTE OF CHERRY"

I don’t know nearly as much about Persian cinema as I should. I privately think this goes for a large part of the rest of the world as well, but anyway. I need to educate myself before making plans of world education (hohoho). Thus, with the added aid of our school library – both massive and free to use! – I have started with the best known and the classics. You will remember that I have spoken of Abbas Kiarostami here before. Taste of Cherry is one of his better known works. I picked it out of the library on this reference alone, but… Yes, you guessed it. There was a god reason for it. The story in itself is quite simple – or at least it seems so. Mr. Badii, about whom we know very little, has had enough of life. He is evidently well read and well-spoken and seems to be able to live in comfort but these things don’t seem to be enough for him. He has decided once and for all to kill himself. But the thing is, he cannot do it alone. He needs an accomplice to finish the job, namely, someone to bury him in his chosen spot after he has done the deed. As you can imagine, no matter how much money is on offer in return, finding the accomplice is no easy task. Will Mr. Badii find the right person to help him? Or will one of the many random characters he meets on the way convince him that life is yet worth living?... What I love the most about Kiarostami’s films is that the beauty of it is hidden in the details. True, the film doesn’t look very “exciting” at the offset, especially when you factor in the filming conditions in Iran, the lack of special effects and the like. It is basically a guy driving around and around in a car, in a desolate – albeit beautifully so – landscape looking for someone to help kill him. Sad and thought-provoking yes, but I never actually thought I would be as excited about it as I later became. You see, this film is an old fashioned film. It doesn’t become all “familiar” with you in the first 15 minutes as it were, full of special effects, big explosions, beautiful babes /beaus and all that jazz. It takes time. Really lets you get to know it. Actually get into the details. Thus, when you get “into” Kiarostami’s films, it is generally not because you are swept away on adrenaline. It is because, thanks to the mastery of the director, you have really got to know the character. You are interested, involved in what happens to him. As the story develops you start taking sides, getting het up… But in the end, Kiarostami doesn’t hesitate to remind us, life is something completely ephemeral. Like a dream as it were… I didn’t expect to get so into this film gentle reader but it grew on me as I watched it. By the end of the 90-odd minutes, it had become yet another cherished favourite. I hope you take the plunge, watch and agree…

MY WEEKLY DOSE OF MALIK: "THE THIN RED LINE"

I hesitated, for like 5 minutes before I decided to put this one in this week. I do get it, it’s beginning to look a tad ridiculous. There’s almost a “weekly Terrance Malik” now in the blog. I know, I know… Well the good thing is, there is just one more to go – and you can revel in the fact that I haven’t actually found the film yet – and then that’s it until Mr. Malik makes another film. For, as some of you know, the great director goes for quality over quantity. Thus, once I get my grubby paws on Tree of Life, that will, for all intents and purposes be all for a while. As you may or may not know Mr Malik has directed a total of 5 films to date, his sixth film, the internet informs us, is finished and due to be released end of 2012 – beginning of 2013 (insert howl of anguish – how will I wait that long?). The fact that, with a total of five films, he has been nominated, among other things, for 3 Oscars ® should tell us something though… Anyhoo, moving on to specifics – although I’m pretty sure Mr. Malik is in no way averse to a little meandering here and there – but seriously. Let’s get back to the Thin Red Line. “What was the film about?” is rarely as complicated a question as when we are talking about a Malik film. The Thin Red Line is no exception to this. Set in the Pacific during WWII, we follow a company of American Soldiers making their way through the jungle. Through them we explore not only the horrors of war but the various different facets of war, the tragedies, the difficulties and all the sides of war we probably never really considered in depth. We ponder what makes men fight, the place of love for your fellow man on the battlefield, all the different things that motivate men to fight, make decisions and sometimes, in this case, die. We wonder if another world, another kind of life where everything is simpler, more peaceful and beautiful is possible. Or maybe all that is just a fanciful dream that cannot survive in what we call the real world. I get why people may criticise the film. It is deeply poetic and philosophical; you might say this has no place on the battlefield, or maybe that this is not a realistic depiction of battle. As the film progresses, and by the way Malik by no means shies away from gory deaths and realities of the battlefield, the film is interspersed with Malik’s hallmark breath-taking photography that presents a truly beautiful background to the inner ponderings of various characters. It is very true, it is not a “typical” depiction of a battlefield, but I don’t think it’s any less realistic. It is just that, through sheer cinematic genius, Malik has found and magnified facets and snapshots others would have overlooked. Yes, war is truly horrific, and like I said the film portrays that, but this horror also leads to deeper thought. Platoon famously asked the question “WHY?”, Malik, I feel, attempts to answer. Or maybe just to set out a train of thought for the viewer to follow. And besides, personally never having been on the battlefield I could not swear to the fact that the men on the ground do not stop for more philosophical thoughts brought on by the very out of the ordinary circumstances they are living in, if only for a couple of moments… This multiple Oscar® nominee (seven to be precise)is hard to watch on many levels, not least because it is three hours long, but I felt I truly learnt something from it. You’ll know what I mean once you watch it…

A BIT - NO A WHOLE LOT - OF LAUGHTER : "IRON SKY"

You know, usually you can classify films. But just occasionally, you come across that one unique gem you cannot quite place. It may be presented to you in the most unlikely wrapping. But once you see through all that, it is quite clearly a life-changing experience. Well, almost. When one of my many neighbours in halls first presented us with the idea of a film about Nazis in space one thing was evident. It was either going to be totally brilliant or a total disaster. With a storyline like that, you literally cannot be mediocre. Now this film has not got the publicity I feel it deserves. Because, to my mind, it is categorically one of the best parodies to hit the screens in a very, very, very long time. But let’s get the storyline first. We all thought that, post-WW2, the Nazis were either caught or killed. Not so. They actually moved to the “dark side of the moon” where they have been living in their own colony, developing their own technology and planning for the day they will take over the planet once again. And the whole process is kicked into action by a pair of American astronauts stumbling on the colony. It is obvious to the heads of the colony that these “earthlings” are part of the great Allied strike that will destroy them; the Nazis pull the date of the plan forward. The question is, is Earth ready? Will good overcome evil? And will James Washington (our surviving astronaut) be able to convince the rest of the world that “the space Nazis are coming?”… Before we started watching this, somewhat obviously, we all had our different views on how the film would turn out. I had my money on the theory that it would be so bad it would be good, you know Ed Wood style. But no. Take all the cheesiest jokes and corny stereotypes you can think of. Then just stuff them all into the same film. Not all willy-nilly of course. But basically that’s what the film felt like. In a good way (Half an hour in we – a room full of post graduate students – were hooting with laughter and in some instances rolling on the ground). Nothing is sacred. Everything is made fun of and I mean everything. Every single Hollywood convention you can think of. And the difficulty of it is of course that if I were to give you any examples it would be a massive spoiler. Which we do not do on this blog. So, don’t be put off by the weird plotline. It’s merely an excuse to bring out one of the funniest films in a long time. I had never actually heard of the scriptwriter/director but I sincerely hope he has more stuff coming. In fact, I honestly can’t wait…