ESSIE SPEAKS OF THE END OF THE WORLD!

Haha, don't worry, the blog hasn't changed subjects suddenly - just a canny ploy to get your attention =) However, it isn't exactly a lie either, because the theme of the week this week is dystopias. Now, a dystopia is a film about the future, usually the end of the world also comes into play at some point. It can be art-house or crammed with special effects or a combination of both and speaks of a rather gloomy outcome for us all. They also provide food for thought in a lot of cases and make some damn good films...
I mean, Johnny Mnemonic, though comparatively primitive technically, was a pioneer of the genre. Michael Hanneke's Time of the Wolf uses the context of an apocalyptic event to explore the darker sides of the human psyche - in true Hanneke style of course. And last of all, a more modern cousin of these two, the canny British dystopia Children Of Men. I really, really got into this one as you can see from the length of the post - I hope you enjoy my ruminations.

I know it's rather a depressing topic guys, but I tried to do it with a bit of class as it were, you know, not so much blood and destruction but rather some serious considerations on the matter... I hope you enjoy...

Essie

THE END OF THE WORLD WEEK FOR THE CHILDREN OF MEN

I have to admit, there was a lot of hype about this particular dystopia. I mean, it was praised to the skies, nominated for three Oscars ® and miscellaneous awards, over half the people I know watched and said it was one of the best films they ever watched. So I thought it would be only fitting to put it in here. It is, after all, the most recent dystopia out of the three and has the added bonus of being, in my mind, the most realistic. That is partly due to the fact of it being so recent, so we can draw clear ties with the problems we have today. The film presents what could (unfortunately) logically be “worst outcome” scenarios involving things that happen today. I mean, yes I grant you, given the vagueness in “Time Of The Wolf”, we can’t really say that isn’t realistic either, but the difference between this film and Time of The Wolf is that Time of The Wolf has the people and the effects of the disaster on the people in the foreground; it is a psychological dystopia if you will. Children of Men is all about the disaster and, in true Hollywood style (it is a British film but all the same), “fixing” the disaster. Of course in Time of the Wolf people aren’t trying to fix anything just trying to survive, and that is what makes the film so tough to watch; it’s bleak, there is no end in sight. Children of Men, however, does provide “a cure”. And unfortunately, for that reason, a film that starts out with one heck of a lot of promise and originality, spirals down into something quite cliché – with a few Biblical references thrown in for good measure. But I’m getting ahead of myself, let me give you a lowdown of the story first…
The year is 2027 and we are in London. The world has, basically, gone to pot. An “infertility” pandemic has taken over; no human beings have been born for the last 18 years. All the doctors in all the lands are powerless; the human race is, for all intents and purposes, dying out. Chaos, in the meanwhile, has taken over. Governments like Britain crack down on illegal immigrants, refugee camps have sprung up all over the country where the “fugees” live in ghettos and are shipped out of the country. Anti-government activism is rife, bombings and raids a day to day occurrence, pollution is everywhere, you get the general picture… Theo is separated from his wife Julia. Julia has gone underground and has joined the anti-government fight. Theo has lost faith and just gets on with his life. Until, that is, Julia contacts him and asks for his help. A girl needs to be escorted to meet the mysterious “Human Project” and he is the only one she trusts to obtain the necessary papers to travel through the country. Theo is dubious at first but it becomes obvious that bigger things are at stake, because this girl may well be the key to the salvation of humanity… The problem is, she is a refugee and must be kept safe from the government. But it will not take Theo long to understand that the government aren’t the only ones trying to get their hands on this woman… The future of humanity is, for all intents and purposes, in their hands…
You may have, on reading the plotline, wondered what was so “original” about the film. I mean, you don’t have to be a genius to guess why the woman holds the key to human survival, right? Yes, yes, she’s pregnant (you still don’t know whether they get her to safety or not though, so I technically didn’t tell you the end). But there are lovely little touches about the possible future world that are given out within the first 15 “introduction” minutes of the film that draws one straight in. For example, now the government distributes “suicide kits” for people in depression, allowing you to take your own life in the comfort of your own home, with no mess. What else? In the first 10 minutes again, we learn the youngest person in the world, an 18 year-old, has just died. The entire world is in mourning (don’t worry, this is not integral to the storyline AT ALL J ) Remember when Lady Diana died? Heck, any celebrity? Nice dystopic poke at the phenomenon there, Theo uses the excuse to get off work early because “he is distraught” J Oh and there are these funny little “rickshaws” made up with motorbikes all over the roads. There still are cars and busses but obviously they have been stopped at some point, the cars are quite old. And the whole theme itself is also good, I mean, we are responsible for entire species dying out, why not humans? Especially with this “aging population” all around Europe and the developed world, it isn’t unthinkable at all, scary but true.
But the clichés bleed through straight away. The anti-government stance of the film is a given of course. There is the unavoidable old hippy acquaintance of Theo’s that gets them out of a scrape or two (the inimitable Michael Cane, the only possible excuse for this characters existence is the fact that he is played by such a great actor). And of course the reason why Theo and his ex-wife went their separate ways (yes, yes again you got me; their son died). And then, completely out of the blue, there are the Biblical references. I mean, putting aside the obvious one of a baby whose very existence is a miracle bringing hope and salvation to the human race (note here that the reference is made obvious by the mother herself joking about it, teasing Theo who asks who the father was by saying “there is no father I was a virgin” and then bursting out laughing). There is the activist that helps Theo and Kee (oh yes, the mother’s name is Kee. As in key. Get it?) to escape Miriam (Miriam is the name of the sister of Moses and leader of the Hebrew women during the Exodus) who just so happens to be a midwife. She is leading her out of an oppressive and scary state (Egypt reconstructed as Great Britain) to, wait for it, the Human Project that will pick her up on a… Boat. (Moses in the reeds anyone?) And then there is one scene, right at the end, where the crowds admire and “adore” the baby. Now, I have seen this being interpreted as a throwback to Rosemary’s Baby, but I am not too darn sure about that. And of course the very name of the film. (Children of Man / Children Of Israel – there is the second connection with the children two of course, but such things are rarely coincidental in this business). Unfortunately, that is where the philosophical “similes” end. I do wish the director had gone deeper with the theme, I mean why not, but if there was any further depth to the film I missed it. And yet the presence of the previous parallels are so obvious that their presence without any further basis is confusing – they confused me at any rate… The director then mixes in various parallels with the Iraq war (some parallels with the infamous Abu Ghraib prison cannot escape even the most undiscerning viewer). And of course these make sense seeing as this is an anti-government film but… I don’t know, too many themes spoil the broth if you ask me…
In short, I admire what director Alfonso Cuaron Has set out to do. Unfortunately, I feel he hasn’t quite finished the job. I do understand that there is a lot to say on these things but why, oh why did he feel he needed to say the whole lot at once? Fewer “messages” would have salvaged the original themes that are present in the beginning of the film, making it a whole lot better than it is. Wasted potential. Watch it. You will like it. I’m just saying you could like it one heck of a lot more…

THE END OF THE WORLD WEEK - IT'S THE TIME OF THE WOLF

Ok, as we said we are going to do this “end of the world movie” thing with a touch of class. And the point of this post - and in fact this film - is that there is more to the world ending than fire-balls and dinosours. This, of course, is Michael Haneke’s classic film “The Time Of The Wolf”. No special effects here. No actual apocalypse to speak of either. Haneke has focused on something that is probably more important. The catastrophe has come and gone, leaving devastation in its wake. How will the survivors cope?
As far as we can gather, we are in France. A family of four are journeying towards their summer house. An unnamed catastrophe has shaken the county (perhaps the whole world, who knows…) and they hope that they will be safer outside the city in the countryside. The moment they arrive they realize how wrong they were to think that. Lack of provisions has plunged the entire countryside into desperation. Money has no value anymore; people are reduced to “exchanging goods”. Men on horses with guns sell water at exorbitant prices instead of moonshine liquor. You might be robbed at any time, disease is everywhere and survival is a very, VERY tough game indeed…
The aim of the film (as we can confirm from the interviews with the director and cast as well) is to bring a sense of devastation and desperation to people who live in comfort most of their lives while wars and famine ravage three quarters of the globe. A lot of the characters we meet, including our heroes, are as far as we can tell normal middle class people who led very ordinary lives until this nameless crisis occurred. They struggle to cope, they break down from time to time, and they try to hold on. In the end, they figure out ways of surviving, and in the process revert to ancient practices, exchanging goods being just one of them. Stealing has become common practice. If a murder occurs, you need to provide hard evidence or deal with it yourself, rule of law and justice have all become ancient luxuries. The camera in the film is more of a spectator. It doesn’t narrate per se. Or rather, it doesn’t put the viewer in an “omnipotent” position. You know what I mean, that whole breed of films where the viewer always knows a lot more of the whole picture as opposed to the characters. In this film we nearly always know less. I mean, it’s very basic, we don’t even know what this apocalyptic crisis is. There are various hints in the film that it could be connected to water. We notice the lack of animals and birdsong in the woods. In fact, animals seem to be dying left and right. But apart from that nothing. Another thing you can’t help feeling is distinct alienation as we watch people coping somehow, often doing things we couldn’t imagine ourselves doing. And yet we see it happen, well dressed middle class women who could be your neighbor, selling their bodies for food. Stealing. Killing horses and roasting them on open fires.
Yes, it’s nasty, but the whole point of the film is to make you stop and think. You have to remember that this is the day to day reality of some people. And that, dear friends, merits one heck of a lot of thinking about…

THE END OF THE WORLD WEEK WITH JOHNNY MNEMONIC

This is one of those late ‘80s early ‘90s films that everyone remembers with a kind of… Nostalgia? Disdain? I don’t know. Sci-fi films of that era (in fact any era gone by) suffer greatly these days, don’t you find? I mean, technology has come on in gigantic leaps and bounds, with films like the Matrix (trilogy), Lord of the Rings and what have you on our hands, any previous and feeble attempt is well… Sneered at. If you like the genre, I can’t blame you. I mean, most of us watched the Matrix for example, right? I mean at least the first one if not all three (I honestly wouldn’t have watched all three unless it was kind of necessary for my self-education but there you go). Remember the effects there? Wow. So I get why you might pat Johnny Mnemonic on the head and let it pass… But it was when I actually saw the film advertised on TV when it hit me… The slogan they used can be roughly translated to English as “Before the Matrix… There was Johnny Mnemonic.” I took one look at it and thought “Damn right”. The topic, the casting (Keanu Reeves leads in both – heck of a coincidence, no?) in every respect. In a lot of respects Johnny is a kinda prequel to the Matrix. As you know, the story of the Matrix opens in a time where machines have taken over the world (I’m putting it very basically, don’t jump down my throat). Here, it is sort of just before that happens. Machines are getting more developed, fusing with humans, big corporations are pushing them on, getting greedier and greedier…
In this dark world exist people like Johnny (Keanu Reeves). He is what is called a “Mnemonic courier”. What that means is that he has a computer implant in his brain (mechanic and computerized implants and chips in the body are apparently common in 2021). The implant is a sort of storage device. Think of it as a hard drive stuck in your brain. He uses the device to courier information back and forth. He earns well but he wants out. He has had to give up a lot of his long term memory to be able to have the implant – he no longer thinks it is worth it and wants his life back… Trouble is, he has to do one last job… But in this last job something goes wrong. Johnny, eager to just get it over with, takes on way more data than his implant can take. It’s no sweat really; he easily has 2 or 3 days before the data seeps out and kills him. Problem is, getting to his destination is going to be a bit of a problem. The yakuza that have been hired by a mega company are out to kill him… The information Johnny has in his head is extremely valuable… Unwittingly, he has in fact taken on something that could change the destiny of the planet for ever…
Now, I have to admit even the story line makes you smile. “One last job” – but something goes wrong… How many times did we hear that one eh? There is a girl involved of course. And a resistance group who fights the corporations that have almost literally taken over the world. All the clichés of the 20th century are there. Thing is, so are a lot of things that we see time and time again afterwards. I mean, from the smallest to the biggest thing… From the touch screen computers (well very early interpretations of – I’m not talking about tablets by the way but the stuff you see on Minority Report or CSI these days) to the whole concept of people being hooked up to computers and the internet (now what does that remind you of, hm?) come to the screen for just about the first time here. There is even a direct reference to the famous sci-fi anime “Ghost In The Shell” (a fascinating work that also takes place in a world were humans can fuse with machines. The whole question of machines with souls thus arises and one of the characters – her soul that is – is uploaded into cyber space, highly recommended if you haven’t seen it). And you will see that a lot of mediocre sci – fis have copied and referenced Johnny since then.
I know that this film can be considered “quaint” at best by some standards, and I’d have to agree with you. But it is also kind of an historic film, the first time a lot of things happened. Not to mention the whole thing with machines and humans – a topic we may well have to actually tackle in the future… A “must-watch” by my standards.

A TRIP BACK IN TIME WITH PERIOD PIECES!

Ok folks, here I am, back again, how are you doing?

Well, where I live you can feel the effects of Global Warming in every vain, it is so darn hot! But I don't let that stop me from watching my beloved movies. Especially since leaving the house and facing the heat and humidity has become a bit of a challange atm :)

So what have I got for you this week? Well, I know a person cannot live in the past but a visit n ow and then cannot hurt - that is why we all love period dramas so much! I have a goodly selection for you this week; first Maurice. Oscar nominee, wonderful love story, one of my favorite movies ever. Please like it - I'll get upset if you don't :S Secondly, Mrs. Dalloway, again a love story but... Not of the same kind. Watch it and see. And then, for those of us who fancy a cold chill down our spines (chance would be a fine thing in this climate!) we have Turning of the screw.

I hope you enjoy! Have a cool week (in all senses of the word!)

Essie

PERIOD PIECES : A VOYAGE OF DISCOVERY - "MAURICE"

I feel very strongly about this film. To the point that I would be seriously upset if people I care about professed a dislike to the film. True enough one of the leads in it is Rupert Graves, one of my favorite actors ever of all times, but even that is only part of the story. See, I try to view a film more as the characters not actors – if you see what I mean. In this film for instance it’s more about Alec Scudder (the character) than Rupert Graves, the actor who plays him. The story (more power to E. M. Forster) is one of the most profound love stories I have ever witnessed, it touched me to the core, it is without a doubt one of those few films I will go back to over and over again as the years go by, just for the pleasure of re-viewing it (and I hardly EVER re-watch films I have already watched just for fun. Unless I am being polite or something like that, that is…). It is not as well known as Brokeback Mountain, but it did get nominated for Oscars® and the two leads Hugh Grant and James Wilby shared the Best Actor award in the Venice film festival back in the day, so I have quite a few strong voices backing me up…
Maurice Hall (James Wilby) is a young man growing up at the turn of the century. He is an orphan and lives with his mother and two sisters, life is not easy but the family does its best to provide him with a good education. They manage quite well – he gets to Cambridge. And there he falls in love. With Clive Durham (Hugh Grant). This comes as a bit of shock to Maurice but that is only half the trouble. The year is 1910 and in England homosexuality is punishable with prison, flogging, hard labor and absolute public disgrace. Clive and Maurice have to keep their feelings for each other an absolute secret. Their relationship endures the years but soon after graduation a friend an acquaintance is publicly disgraced and imprisoned for “the unspeakable vice of the Greeks” throwing Clive, now well on his way to inheriting a large estate and becoming a successful public figure into inner turmoil. Is his love for Maurice so strong he can risk losing everything and almost everyone he has ever known? Clive’s inner turmoil upsets and destabilizes Maurice whose love for Clive is unwavering. And then, Alec Scudder (Rupert Graves) enters the scene… But if you want to see where he fits in, you’re just going to have to sit down and watch the film.
I am not gay. But as I have gone through life and observed other people around me I have never been able to tell the difference between the love between a man and a woman and the love between two men or two women. If you have such a prejudice, pray leave it at the door of the cinema for this one. If there ever was a story about true love and following your heart in the face of the world, this is THE ONE. Heck, it might even be the film to help you shift that prejudice slightly. James Wilby absolutely shines as Maurice, come the middle of the film you cannot help but becoming well and truly embroiled in the whole thing and seriously worried about his general well being. Hugh Grant, so very young here– it’s rather an old film you know! – is also brilliant. Although you can actually see that he is beginning, even at that early age, to act all “Hugh Grant-ish”. I have endless respect for the man, but like Nicole Kidman and Clint Eastwood I get the feeling he doesn’t do that much acting per se, it’s always “Hugh Grant acting” that you see and not a character (I know this is a HORRIBLE thing to say to/about an actor but that’s my humble opinion. So there you are). He’s pretty damn good here though, hats off to him… I wish I could say more about Rupert Graves as Alec Scudder (apart from the fact that he has considerably fewer lines than Wilby and Grant and therefore cannot share in any award) but his part is a crucial one. And Graves’ performance is brilliant. The thing is you see, the whole tension of the story rather hinges on not being sure what Scudder is up to until the end. To the point that I got quite cross when I picked up the DVD and realized that it summarized the whole story – talk about spoilers! So, don’t read the back of the DVD. Just buy it and watch it.

PERIOD PIECES : A TOUCH OF NOSTALGIA - "MRS. DALLOWAY"

The novel Mrs. Dalloway written by Virginia Wolf, is no doubt known to all of you. Well, at least you must have heard of Virginia Wolf. I keep threatening to read one of her novels but somehow never seem to get round to it. Not for a lack of opportunity, my grandmother has a collection of almost all her novels in the house but it just somehow never happened. I thus thought that this British adaptation with rather a stunning cast starring Vanessa Redgrave and my own particular favorite Rupert Graves (to be fair he technically wouldn’t be called starring but he is one of the main attractions as far as I’m concerned!), would motivate me into reading them. I was deeply moved by the film, but somehow also felt it could be done better… Hang on, let me tell you the story I’ll then elaborate on what I mean…
Clarissa Dalloway (Vanessa Redgrave) has had a successful life on the whole. She comes from a good family, she has “married well” to a then up and coming and now current politician. She is a member of high society who is renowned for her parties and grace. On the day we meet her she is preparing for just such a famous party and reminiscing fondly of her stormy youth. She had been quite a beauty with a string of suitors but one of them stands out in her mind, John. She had almost married him once, but that would have entailed going off to India and starting a new life, no, Mrs. Dalloway is better off as Mrs. Dalloway. That is, until John actually turns up at the house to visit on that same day. In the meanwhile, a young soldier Septimus Warren Smith (Rupert Graves) back from the front after the First World War, is suffering terribly from “delayed shell shock”. His young Italian wife is desperate, and Septimus, although quite clear in his own mind as to what he’s thinking , is growing more and more incoherent to others. Mrs. Dalloway’s peripheral brush with him and his desperate efforts to reconnect to a world to which he no longer seems to belong will take her to places in her own soul that Clarissa Dalloway had been trying to forget existed for a very long time…
I have one major problem with this film and it is this. The whole story of Mrs. Dalloway is superbly portrayed and acted. It is, as you have guessed, a story of opting for a safe and cosseted life over a life of discovery, adventure and very possibly true love. I find it quite beautiful that the regrets have arrived later in life; Mrs. Dalloway is in her early fifties. Her emotions, choices of youth and sadness are wonderfully painted and cannot help but touch you. Then there is the story of Septimus Warren Smith. Now this one rests chiefly on the shoulders of Rupert Graves and I must say his portrayal of the shell-shocked young man shakes one to the roots of one’s boots. He desperately tries to explain how he feels and why he has left his previous therapist to his new doctor but his metaphors have become so roundabout and his mostly negative emotions are so ready to boil to the surface, the doctor simply glazes over as he listens and pays no heed at all to the contents of his rather long speech. Both stories are stunningly emotional, but the way they connect is… I mean, they hardly connect at all. Only barely. Mrs. Dalloway barely is conscious of Septimus and his story – she doesn’t even know his name – and yet the little she knows almost upturns her… I mean, one could argue that with the visit from John in the morning and all the reminiscing and wondering about her own life has made her emotional but still… I found it contrived. And I strongly suspect bits have been “cut out” for the sake of the length of the film – the problem is that I haven’t actually read the book. I felt the film was rather untidily sown together, almost as if one had to choose one of the two stories, didn’t have the heart to discard either, and sort of hacked bits out of both for the sake of fitting both in… But it is a wonderful film, full of beauty and deep thought, a combination that one rarely finds these days…