ESSIE SPEAKS OF ESCAPISM

Oh I am SO sorry. But you haven't abandoned me yet, right? Please? I'll be back on track next week. We're back to updating on Thursdays. I've got a plan and a schedule and everything. Please don't go. It's going to be fun.

I wasn't entirely sure how to "group" this week's posts. I ended up calling it escapism, but honestly, it is more than your average "movie experience". I mean come on. We have all played cops and robbers. We have all played cowboys and indians. They have been magicking us away from our daily worries since we were tiny. And guess what, this week we have all four!

So whether you want to go back in time to a period when life was simpler (but then again was life ever really that simple?) or get lost in the cut throat world of crime and punishment today (but can we really forget about our daily troubles while watching something so close to home?) we have something for you. Both to help you forget, and for you to chew on, depending on what your "thing" is.

I hope you enjoy.

Essie

"A FEW DOLLARS MORE" - COULD BE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIFE AND DEATH!

I’m getting slightly hooked on these westerns. I really am. I totally see why there is a whole bunch of people out there who watch the old classics ad nauseam. Oh don’t worry; I won’t be subjecting you guys to the same treatment. But a few of the good ones will crop up in the blog now and again. The ones that are good, cinematically relevant you know… I kinda started watching Sergio Leone movies mainly because Quentin Tarantino is a fan (yes, I’m sad. But you see, Quentin Tarantino is a guy I am a MASSIVE fan of so I was curious. Plus Sergio Leone isn’t exactly an obscure character no one has heard of so I wanted to see what the fuss was about). Anyway. I now know what the fuss is about. I will attempt to convey said reasons.

We are, once again in the Wild West. When men were men and only those with sharp wits but even sharper shooting skills could survive. There are many ways you could use your wits and gun to live, and one of them is bounty hunting. And the bounty hunting stakes sky-rocket one fine day, when an infamous bandit and gang leader, Indio, escapes from prison. Munco (Clint Eastwood) and Colonel Douglas Mortimer ( Lee Van Cleef) cross paths and swords (well, guns) when they both start chasing the same man so an uneasy truce is formed between these two lone wolves. But as the chase continues deep into the heart of the desert and loyalties are tested over and over again, one thing begins to become painfully clear: Only one of the bounty hunters is actually after the bounty. The other one has a slightly different agenda ready for Indio.

I am actually pleasantly surprised by these films over and over again. We are – or at least I am – slightly prejudiced into thinking these “old” films are rather simplistic. They don’t have any special effects – but this we already knew – and they don’t have any “depth” in the story. You know, black vs white. Goodies vs Baddies. It HAS to be boring, right? Well, no. Not really.

I mean yes, it’s true, a lot of these films are “black and white”, but this is still often an occurrence, especially in mainstream cinema. It is a plain and simple fact that, for all our snobbery on the matter, we enjoy it. We want to cheer the good guys and boo the bad guys, get all worked up, but deep down know that the goodies WILL prevail in the end. When worded like that, that just sounds like an incredibly boring idea.       But this film appeals straight for our heart strings so cleverly, you just… Get sucked up. Besides, it is not a simple matter of good overcoming bad”. Firstly, this is the Wild West. Everyone is CONSTANTLY double crossing everyone else. You have to be constantly on your toes to follow the shifting alliances and you can never quite guess which way the plot is going to swerve next… Plus, there is the matter of the definition of “good” and “bad”. In this instance, Indio is as bad as bad can be. But the “good”… Well… I mean, to my mind, Clint Eastwood is automatically “good” but is he, here, in this instance? He is, basically, killing people for money. Ok I grant you, they are “bad” people but still. He is dangerously close to being a hired killer. And then there is the fact that he is very clearly quite selfish – in that he is out to protect number one – and ONLY number one. I mean, this being Clint Eastwood, his charisma carries him but still. Oh and by the way, you have NO idea how impressive Clint Eastwood is in a western role until you have seen it. No wonder he never quite drops the act (I mean I’m sorry but it IS true). As for Lee Van Cleef – the archetypal western villain – he seriously gives Mr Eastwood a run for his money as far as charisma goes. And that is really, REALLY saying something.

In short, if you need a whirlwind of cathartic emotion to whisk you away from your day to day troubles, Sergio Leone is your man, again. Highly recommended.               

REAL LIFE ONLY NOT QUITE... "THE MAN WHO SMILED"

You will have figured out by now, I imagine, that as a family we are rather partial to our crime dramas. This is why detectives of many different nationalities, ages and time periods parade regularly on our screens no matter where we are in the world. Well, I was indulging in this particular piece of “police work” the other evening when I realised, to my dismay, that I have not yet introduced you to Wallander.

I mean, maybe he needs no introduction as far as you’re concerned. But the thing is, I do enjoy the Wallander films/series so much that it is quite shameful he has not made an appearance here before. And I enjoyed this particular example of Wallender so much that I thought, you know what? I have to give him a spot this week. Because EVERYONE likes a good session of cops and robbers, right? Right?

In this particular episode, it all starts off pretty much like a routine if rather tragic accident that kills an old friend of Inspector Wallander’s.  Wallander is saddened by this, but to be fair they hadn’t been in touch for a while and there seems to be nothing “wrong” with the death so he is ready to move on. The victim’s son, however, is most definitely not. He is insistent that there is more to the death than would appear and implores Wallander to look into it, to no avail. Things start to hot up  (or cool down, depending on which way you look at it) when the son also turns up dead – and this time it is VERY clearly not an accident. It will quickly transpire, however, that this double murder is only the tip of a rather large and particularly unpleasant iceberg. Wallander is going to need all of his wits about him to truly take this case on. Which is why it is a crying shame his personal life – that seemed to be going so well -  is also taking up a rather large portion of his mind…

First of all, one footnote. This particular film is the Swedish adaptation of Wallander. This makes sense to my mind, because to the best of my knowledge the original series itself is also in Swedish and set in Sweden. I have always had the deepest respect for Scandinavian art and cinema (much to the horror of a lot of my friends and acquaintances, who find it insufferably sad). But my appreciation of their ability to write /film crime dramas has gone up recently. I mean think of “The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo”. I mean I grant you, the rest of the series didn’t, to my mind, match up with the first book but still, what a storyline, eh?

Anyway. To return more specifically to Wallander himself, I love this series – especially the Swedish version – simply because all the characters are so… Real. I mean you know there are two “basic” cop types. Either the cop is the charismatic if slightly dysfunctional hero, handsome and almost impossible to trick. Or he is a good, old-fashioned copper whose private life is an utter mess and is almost unable to function outside the walls of the precinct (think Dalziel for Dalziel and Pascoe). Wallander is something in between. And this is why I find him a lot easier to sympathise with. He is very much a real man, with real feelings and real issues. He acts like a fool, he makes mistakes but he can apologise and make amends too – or at least he can try. I think it is the Scandinavian penchant to keep things a lot closer to real life that makes me enjoy Scandinavian art so much. I mean, they don’t say the truth is stranger than fiction for nothing. Sometimes we are so busy escaping life that we don’t really make the time to truly observe and / or enjoy it. There is, of course, a subtle irony to the fact that I am writing these words under the review of a crime drama film which is one of my prime modes of escape from my day’s troubles…  But see, the film has a double function. It helps us escape our lives for a bit – but helps us think about it too. A non-escapist form of escapism, if you will. That’s my story anyway, and I’m sticking to it. Now, pass the popcorn.  

ESSIE PLAYS CATCH UP

See what I did there? It's what they call a "double entendre". I'm playing catch up because I am so habitually late updating the blog that the unofficial update day has kinda  moved to saturday (but it IS moving back to wednesday don't you fret) AND this week's theme is cinematic history.
Ok, that may be a tad bit grand as far as statements go. Naturally this is an ongoing project and "cinematic history" cannot really be reduced to 2 films, no matter how brilliant they are (and they both are rather brilliant). Still, as far as the '60s go, these two are two very important works by two very important directors that I personally feel film buffs should know about. I SHOULD have known about them ages go - that is my opinion anyway. And well, I am so glad that I do know about them now, I simply MUST share them with you :)

Happy viewing!
Essie

"ROSEMARY’S BABY" A GOOD PLACE TO START REVISITING CINEMATIC HISTORY

I have been in a bit of a wilderness as far as catching up with cinematic history goes. Oh I know. It’s an impossible endeavour – or very close to being so anyway. But the simple fact is, I have not watched nowhere near as many of the classics as I would have liked to have by now. That’s why I have decided to really make it a priority. There is a certain place in my head that I would really like to reach, now I don’t know how realistic it is, but we shall see. And I mean, you lot get quite a lot of film reviews out of it so… Not such a bad thing, is it?

Now having a rather active imagination that really enjoyed taking slightly bizarre angles on even everyday life (To give but one example, as a young child I was adamant that when you got into an elevator, the elevator stood still and the building moved…  As you can imagine my Mother was subjected to a whole series of very bizarre questions as I grew up) I was fascinated by horror films and yet tried to avoid them. Knowing that my watching even one would mean nightmares for weeks and a whole new universe of bizarre questions, Mom was incredibly strict about my not watching anything even vaguely horror. Understandably. This is probably why I got a weird sensation of guilty excitement when I came across Rosemary’s Baby the other day. I had to watch it. It was like, I don’t know… That “forbidden pleasure” kind of excitement. I mean obviously Mom doesn’t have a say in what I watch any more (although she shudders at the very mention of Quentin Tarantino – she gets faint at the mere idea of blood you see, much less large quantities of it on her TV screen) but still. You know. It’s that kind of film. It has the reputation. It led to people firmly believing Polanski was into spells and witchcraft himself (How else could he have known? Asked people, momentarily forgetting this little thing called research). Anyway, at 30 years of age I just about felt ready for the experience. I dived (dove?) right in…

So Rosemary (Mia Farrow) and Guy, a newlywed couple move into their brand new home. Guy is an actor looking for his big break, Rosemary is a homemaker and they are madly in love. And although the new flat seems like a dream home to the young couple, soon the peculiar occurrences begin. Rosemary initially explains it all away. Their neighbours are a bit eccentric but they seem ok – if a little nosey. But surely this is to be expected from an old couple with no children of their own? Things take on a slightly sinister turn when Rosemary finds herself pregnant. As her pregnancy advances Rosemary gets more and more sure that her unborn child’s life is in danger… But with Guy seemingly in cahoots with the neighbours who can she trust?

If there is one thing that annoys me above all others when it comes to horror films, it is over-reliance on monsters and jump-scares. A good jump-scare from time to time is a fine thing, however, it should NOT form the backbone of a horror film. A film is not a film if it isn’t playing with your mind. As is the want of Mr Polanski, in this film he DEFINITELY plays with your mind. In fact mind games – with you and poor Rosemary – is mainly what the film is all about. Every filmmaker has a “thing” you may have noticed. In fact I think this is true of books as well, this thing can be a theme, a place, a character, just something that every single one of their artworks share. For some it’s more obvious, for others less so. For Mr Polanski, it’s very clearly flats. In many of his works the flat itself becomes the enemy, turning on its inhabitant. You would have thought with various different films along the same theme, “one more” wouldn’t be anything too special. But this one is. This film is the granddaddy of all the films that came after it, irrespective of the genre, that built themselves up on that feeling of eyes constantly on you, a sense of constantly mounting dread and the complete inability to find a place to turn.     It starts small and slowly grows into an all-engulfing monster which is the heart of this cinematic classic. In fact I believe this film should be watched if only JUST to see how that sense of being completely surrounded, constantly watched and engulfed SHOULD be done on film. And as I write these lines it has only just occurred to me that one of the main reasons Mr Polanski is so good at it has to be his own experience of the feeling.  It is an opportune moment to remember that Mr Polanski is a Holocaust survivor. Couple this fact with Rosemary in the latter part of the film with her shortly cropped hair… Oh I’m not saying it’s an allegory or anything but I think the feeling, the emotion portrayed must surely have its roots in that particular historical moment. I mean yes, her haircut is purportedly Vidal Sassoon but is the prison-style close crop not there to give a message? At the very least it tells us that Rosemary is the prisoner of her circumstances, the house and everyone that surrounds her.

I defy anyone to watch this film and then be able to instantly shrug off the sense of dread it fills you with. These are the kinds of monsters that do not melt away in the sunlight. I know horror is not everyone’s thing… But if monsters do float your boat… This is one film NOT to be missed… 

THE THINGS WE GET UP TO TO MAKE A LIVING... "A FISTFULL OF DOLLARS"

I have, I believe, recently mentioned that I do not watch as many westerns as I should. It is of course up for discussion what “should” and “shouldn’t” be watched, but I pride myself in having more than just a passing interest in cinema. This is why I feel it’s a tad bit shameful I don’t know more about a genre that was the backbone of the entire art form at one time, not to mention the creator of so many sub-genres and cinematic traditions later on.  Hence, I have been a good girl, and have begun to properly research the subject. Now, am I influenced by the fact that Quentin Tarantino (yes, yes, him again) is such a fan of Sergio Leone in my choice? Yes. Unquestionably so. His films, starring Clint Eastwood and giving us so many moments and conventions that became cinematic staples later on are cinematic classics that should be watched though. Mind you there is a lot more than just duty that attracts me to this film. I know I moan on and on about originality and thinking outside the box but still. There is something very comforting about a simpler world, goodies vs baddies – both very clearly black and white, with the goodie winning out in the end. Mind you, in a fistful of dollars we can’t exactly call our goodie “white as snow” ethically speaking but hey…  At least there’s nothing complicated about who you’re meant to back… ;)

The beginning of the story is familiar to all, even to those of us who are complete foreigners to the genre. A nameless, sharp-shooting stranger rides into a little town close to the Mexican border. It is high noon and the town is shrouded in a deadly quiet, all but the coffin maker who always seems to have his hands full… The town is torn apart by the in-fighting of two rival families, both planted firmly on the wrong side of the law and both hell-bent on becoming the one and only masters of the town. The rivalry is all-consuming and the two gangs have no consideration for the consequences of this fight to the town. Our hero (Clint Eastwood), has other plans. He will play double agent, playing one family against another to make himself a wad of cash… And maybe, just maybe he might be able to do some good for the good folk of the town too. The stranger must be careful though. He walks a very dangerous path where one wrong step could cost him his life…

Well, first and foremost we are very much in the domain of comfort films ladies and gents. But you knew that already. It’s Clint Eastwood. It’s a western. You know how things are going to go down. It is a brilliant combination of “raah” moments and adventure, peopled with some of the badest baddies  you could possibly imagine. And, even though you may not be a huge fan of Clint Eastwood’s style – some are and some aren’t you know – you have to admit, here, it’s brilliant. The stranger has to keep his cards very close to his chest and not give a single shred of thought and emotion away as he negotiates the minefield that is the gang relations. But the true mark of a good director comes through here too because in with all the stuff we “know and love” is mixed a truly nail-biting story. We get caught up in it so very easily, and credit where it’s due, you have to admire the stranger’s shrewdness in playing the two families against each other (or in this case, the shrewdness of the scriptwriter). The story takes such twists and turns that it you never fall into the lethargy of knowing the “goodies will win in the end”, simply because you are never %100 sure what our hero is exactly up to. Well that and the fact that he does not really seem to be your common or garden “good guy”.  I mean, are we %100 sure  he “wins in the end”? You’re in for a jolly good adventure with this one, fellas. It’s the kind of film that makes you understand why kids were so obsessed with playing cowboys in the heyday of these films… If you’re looking to get away from your day to day life for an hour or two and go on an adventure from your front room, this is the fella to go for ladies and gents. And given the almost desert-like quality to the British weather at the moment, a rather fitting adventure at that. 

ESSİE SPEAKS OF FEEL GOOD MOVIES

Let's be clear. This is Essie-style feel good movies.

Now don't be alarmed, I know for a fact that my taste in films is very ecclectic indeed, however trust me, even I break away from minimalist cinema with deep undertones sometimes. In fact, as a massive fan of all things animation I often indulge my inner 8-year old and this week she felt like Wallace and Grommit. I was more than happy to oblige, so see the results below :)

But I also have an "uplifting story/overcoming the odds/make you think" kind of feel good movie in there. And guess what, it has the added benefit of being a true strory to boot.

Go on, indulge yourself. It's summer. We're even having a heat-wave in the UK so the sun IS shining. Life doesn't always go our way, but with a bit of a tuck and lift of the morale (as it were) things should soon start looking better...

happy viewing my dears,
Essie

WHEN YOU FEEL HARD DONE BY, TAKE A LOOK AT "THIS BOY’S LIFE"

Oh look. A true story. We haven’t had one of those in a while… I stumbled onto this film after a particularly tough day at work. Apart from it being that wonderful combination of tense yet uplifting – it’s an early 90’s film, based on the autobiography of the hero so obviously he overcame his difficulties, it really did set me thinking. I am a great fan of watching films or reading books like this. It is always educational to see the lives of those who have had it tougher than you and put your life into perspective. Even if you are of the mentality that says “oh that will never happen to me” (and believe me I AM one of those people), it does help to know that it occasionally happens to somebody. I don’t really agree with people who are too against “rosy endings” and “false hope” even though I have ranted about unrealistic solutions to onscreen problems more than once. I think, so long as it is realistic or, as in this case, an actual real story, hope is vital. It is, literally, what keeps us alive. It isn’t really something you can have “too much” of. That’s why it’s good to hear the stories of people who “made it” despite the odds. People like Tobias Wolff.

Tobias (Leonardo Di Caprio) and his mother Caroline (Ellen Barkin) live a rather erratic life. Caroline is vivacious and full of life. True, their finances never quite stack up and they do have the unsettling habit of upping sticks at a moment’s notice and embarking on Caroline’s madcap ideas to get rich, but Tobias enjoys it. It’s sad that his father who has divorced his mother and moved to the East Coast with his older brother never calls but hey. They have their own fun too. What Tobey doesn’t quite realise of course is that deep down, despite her lack of organisation, his mother is worried, worried about his future, about her future and about how much longer this lifestyle can continue. That is why, when a particularly eligible looking beau, Dwight (Robert DeNiro) comes along, Caroline seizes the chance. Seemingly it’s all perfect, Dwight is also divorced, has children of his own of a close age to Tobey and a steady job. Caroline takes the plunge and accepts his proposal so the couple is married. This, it turns out very quickly, is a mistake. With the two families merged, Dwight’s true nature comes to light, however this is the 50’s so divorce is not the easy option it is today. Tobey who has a tendency to get bad grades and make unsuitable friends must use all his wits and courage to stay sane and make it out of that house. ..

Now it was strange watching this one. And I am not usually so unspecific with my commentary but the first half has something wrong with it. I’m not entirely sure what. It improves drastically with Robert DeNiro entering the story. I don’t know what it is about the character of Caroline but something about her doesn’t scan for me. It’s not Ellen Barkin – she is a fantastic, talented actress who I have admired in many other films. I thought for a while it was the dialogue – but then again… I don’t have a problem to that degree (I mean OK, I have seen dialogue that is better written than this but still ) with the other characters in the film. I don’t know, she’s a wonderful character, but she was a little too… Generic? She is not, as you may have noticed, a typical mother figure. But then again characters like Caroline are two-a-penny out there. The dreamers, the ones who refuse to settle into being sensible. I think it’s a tad odd to make a character like that generic, as one of these people, I can vouch for the fact that we tend to be a rather eclectic bunch. I don’t know if it was the way she was written (and I suspect this was a large factor) or Ellen Barkin having an off-day (week/month) but… I don’t know I watched her with a constant sense of deja-vu… Robert DeNiro is brilliant, as he always is as Dwight, and by that I mean down-right scary and unpleasant. As for Leonardo DiCaprio, I did a double take when I saw his age in the film and unless I have got my maths incredibly wrong he is 19. He looks A LOT younger, I really need to look into this. I mean he is brilliant but he looks 13 -14 to me… I have always been terrible at guessing ages, but still…

For all the faults I find in it, this is a great little number, and above and beyond anything an incredible story. I found the film to drag a little in places which makes me think the dialogue could have been better written but hey. I’m not saying it’s going to change your world – and this film is not trying to do that. It is just trying to tell its story in its own voice – and it’s being spectacularly good at it.

Oh and watch out for an equally young looking Tobey Maguire in a teeny-tiny part in the second half! 

THESE FELLAS NEED NO INTRODUCTION : "WALLACE AND GROMMIT – THE CURSE OF THE WERE-RABBIT"

I do not know a single person in the UK who doesn’t let out an exclamation of delight at the mere mention of Wallace and Grommit. I’m not entirely sure how well they travel but here they are almost universally adored. I mean, I’m sure there are some “haters” out there somewhere, stop-motion animation is not everyone’s cup of tea (or so I am told. I don’t see how this is possible but you know… It takes all sorts…). But the humour, the characters, the sheer imagination involved in the series combined with the decidedly British sense of humour… You can’t beat it. You really can’t. Not in this neck of the woods anyway. That’s why I have always thought a proper “film” (as in feature length) of the series was long overdue. Now, I know that this one has been around for quite some time, but just never got round to watching it until recently. I was later surprised to discover a few friends of mine who hadn’t heard of it at all. Hence, here is my review of it ASAP. This is definitely one you NEED to know about.

We return to the world of Wallace and Grommit, in their same old house in the same sleepy little town. As we all know by now, the professions of this gruesome twosome tend to change from episode to episode however, and the flavour of the week is humane pest control. You see, this particular little town is very much into its gardening but as it so happens it also has a big problem with rabbits – who aren’t, as you probably know, very conducive to gardening. But never fear, Wallace and Grommit will not only safeguard your garden, they guarantee that no fluffy bunnies are harmed in the process. You may, at this point, be asking yourself what exactly they do with the bunnies once they are caught. That, my friends, is the 64 million dollar question. Wallace and Grommit do not, as such, quite know what to do with them either. But they are under a tad bit of pressure to figure something out fast, not least because the annual giant vegetable competition is approaching. The entire town will be participating, as usual, and the last thing anyone wants is an outbreak of rabbits. Wallace, always the inventor, does not despair and continues trying to work something out. It is during these endeavours that the duo unwittingly unleash “the curse of the were rabbit”. As if normal rabbits were not causing enough trouble…

What I like the most about Wallace and Grommit is that it is, to my mind, one of the best examples of family-friendly fun. And having, alongside the brilliant Peter Sallis, a constant of the show, names like Helena Bonham Carter and Ralph Fiennes lending their voices to the characters only improves matters – if that were at all possible.  I know what everyone is always saying these days about children growing up so fast and not being as “naïve” as we were when we were their age but still. Given half a decent chance, audiences of literally ALL ages could enjoy Wallace and Grommit. Like a lot of good animations, the adult “in-jokes” are there, kept at a “decent” level, but providing not a few giggles along the way as you go. Besides, it is really what Wallace and Grommit is all about. It’s almost a sort of return to a more innocent time a bit pastoral, small town life and all that.  A return, brought rather smartly up to date with the fact that Wallace is the archetypal “absent-minded inventor” along with your typical country bumpkin. How do these two co-exist? If you don’t already know, it’s high time you found out…

For the fans, I’m delighted to tell you that this film is everything we know and love about Wallace and Grommit. I believe it was last week that I was mentioning how it’s good to have some “comfort films” close to hand where you know exactly what you’re about to see and in fact are watching it BECAUSE you know what you are about to see as it were. And this film is filled to the brim with the Wallace and Grommit type humour we all know and love by the bucked load. I don’t want to give too much in the way of the storyline away, simply because I was completely blindsided by, shall we say, a development in the story, providing the perfect surprise mid-way.

In short, if you’re a Wallace and Grommit fan, you will love it. And if you’re not a fan, well, this might be the day you become one. I promise you, you won’t regret it.  

ESSIE SPEAKS OF COMFORT FILMS

Oh you know what I mean. I went into this in detail in my second post. But basically it's the old classics, the "fish and chips" or "sticky toffee pudding" of films. You have eaten them a thousand times before. You know exactly what you are getting. THAT is why you are back for more.

And it is rather befitting that the genres we have this week are as old as the hills - or at least as old as cinema itself; the musical and the western. I seem to have gone for true "something old and something new" style this week as our western is about as classic a western as you can begin to imagine starring John Wayne, and our musical is about as modern and inventive a twist on the genre as you could begin to concieve of. I mean, you and I may not be able to concieve of it at all, thankfully however, Tim Burton can. So there we are.

So roll on up and pile your plate up high. Serve with actual comfort food. Preferbly chocolate.

happy viewing,
Essie

A STEP INTO THE PAST AND OUT OF THIS WORLD : "CORPSE BRIDE"

I know. I can’t quite believe I missed this one either. I mean, it’s Tim Burton, it’s an animation, it’s a musical… What more can one want from a film?  I mean, fair enough I didn’t know it was a musical until I actually started watching it so I might as well give you a heads up too. But for me, that kind of thing is more of a pleasant surprise. And of course Johnny Depp is, as always, there in the foreground along with Helena Bonham-Carter - so, the usual suspects. Not to say that Tim Burton is getting cliché (because he is not), you know what elements usually come up in a Burton movie by now – and I don’t just mean the actors. It’s the atmos, it’ s the wonderfully imaginative storyline it’s the brilliant animations… If all these things aren’t as “superlative” for you as they are for me, well, you have a problem. If, however, you know what to expect and can’t wait to get your grubby paws on it, well, step right on in.

Back in Victorian England marriage was just as much a matter of business as it was a matter of love. In some situations this state of affairs remains today. But our story today is particularly interested in one such “business” marriage in a small village in Victorian England. Victor (Johnny Depp), the son of the newest “nouveau riche”s in town is to be wed to Victoria ( Emily Watson) , the daughter of an old aristocratic family who is very down on their funds. However, when nervously practicing his wedding vows in the seclusion of the forest, he inadvertently marries a corpse. Now, while this doesn’t seem like the easiest of mistakes to make, it is a lot tougher to actually undo what has been done. The Corpse Bride (Helena Bonham Carter) has long been waiting for her true love to come along when she got jilted by her lover when she was alive and she is determined not to let Victor go. Thus whisked down to the underworld Victor now faces a rather novel set of problems. Not least how to get back, as his “living world” wedding is supposed to be taking place in a matter of hours…

First of all, fans rejoice. This is, as I said at the beginning, everything a Tim Burton film should be. And despite great talent, it can be touch and go. Take for example, a later burton, “The Demon Barber of Fleet Street”, yet another musical starring Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter. It has all the ingredients, and yet… I don’t know. Was it my moo when I watched it? Was it something else? Something was missing. There wasn’t that “va-va-voum” we’re used to. But this one has it. If you feel like dropping out of the real world for a few hours and taking a wild journey into the imagination of one of the most creative minds of our generation, this is the fella for you. You will laugh until you cry. And in bits, you might cry when you’re not laughing. I must admit, yes there were tissues involved in my experience. But then again, that subtle play on the heartstrings is the other reason I like Burton so frigging much.

I don’t want to give too much away because imaginative twists and surprises are a staple of this film. But just one small note. If you’re slightly worried, from a feminist point of view that the film boils down to two women fighting over Johnny Depp, fear not. The film has little to do with marriage in fact, as far as its main message goes, and a lot more to do with letting go of your past to be able to move on in life… You’ll have to watch it to see what I mean, but it’s really quite something. Trust me on this. 

STEPPING EVEN FURTHER BACK : "SHE WORE A YELLOW RIBBON"

Ok, slightly dumb question. Does this count as a western? I think it must. There are red Indians in it, and they are pitted against the “white man”, the undoubted good character in the mix. There’s even a damsel in distress or two. And if nothing else, it’s a John Ford movie. It doesn’t get more classic than that. I’m ashamed to say that westerns are my Achilles heel when it comes to cinematic knowledge. As in I must have watched about a total of five in my life. Not counting films like Django Unchained of course – or in fact, the fact that most Tarantino films are somehow offshoots of westerns no matter where and how they are set.  I have just realised the irony of the situation actually. Since I am SUCH a fan of Tarantino, I’d probably love westerns. Hmm. Must set about finding me some. I mean take this one. I enjoyed this one.

Captain Brittles is about to retire from the US Cavalry. He is well loved and respected by his men and with his years of experience he has almost become a father figure to them over the years. He has pretty much devoted his life to the cavalry, especially since his wife and children died when he was quite a young man. Now, at the end of an era, Captain Brittles doesn’t quite know what to do with the rest of his time, however he is trying not to think about that. He is concentrating on the one last remaining mission in hand, because is last mission is going to be a slightly tricky one. He needs to lead a patrol round the territory to quell a native uprising that has been boiling for some time, growing in ferocity by the day. But as if that were not dangerous enough, he must also take the wife and daughter of his commanding officer to safety. Will Captain Brittles leave the cavalry in a blaze of glory befitting his reputation? Or will he fall at the last hurdle and tarnish a so far spotless career?

This film, in fact, achieves something pretty similar to the “thing” The Corpse Bride achieves, even though it’s in a completely different context. Let me try and explain.

You know, we like experiencing different things from time to time. Especially when it comes to matters like art and cinema. We are not after clichés we are mostly after things that excite, surprise and fascinate. But you know? Sometimes you don’t want the latest development fusion cuisine. Sometimes you want comfort food. Bangers and mash. A big slice of chocolate fudge cake. That’s what this film is. Well, that’s what both films are in fact but this one more than others. You know exactly what’s coming, you know what’s what. You know the good guys, the bad guys and you also know the good guys will probably win out at the end of the day. It’s the perfect tonic, I have found, after a long tiring day at work. Captain Brittles is one of the archetype heroes the whole “man’s man” hero has been based on today. Tough, manly… The character has been copied in modern films and tv series down to the absent /deceased family. And do you know something? When you take a big homely bite out of the cathartic experience that is watching the film, you can see exactly why.

I mean there’s a lot more to say about the film. It ranges from the fact that it uses classic Hollywood editing down to the racist treatment the Native Americans get in this film as they did in every “cowboys and Indians” type film of the era. Now, I just want it noted that I strongly believe that there is a lot of very interesting things one can do with a camera without being “Hollywood style”. I also get shocked at the way native Americans were portrayed back in the day  - i.e. either maniacs set out to kill or powerless dunks. I invite you to take the phenomenon as the misconceptions and ignorance of a past age. And to be fair on the film itself, although the portrayals are not ideal – they are definitely slanted – they are not the worst I have ever seen by a very, very long shot. See them as the archetypal “baddies” in your common or garden “goodie vs baddie” type film and you’ll be ok. That is, how I strongly feel the film intended them to be seen anyway.