ESSIE SPEAKS OF NOSTALGIA IN A MIXED BAG

Ok, honestly, I am not quite sure how to classify this week's update. But as I have to call it something, I have decided to go out on a limb and call it a "nostalgic mixed bag".

Now, all the films today are of a different era; we span the '50s, '70s and '80s with some success and using very, very different styles. Mike Leigh's Vera Drake is very much a period piece while John Cassavetes's Woman Under the Influence a bit more... Well a bit different. Then there is the legendary (in my time anyway)Breakfast Club, a gem of the '80s and a proper little time capsule on many levels.

As you can see from all the name dropping though, we have good quality stuff here. Good directors. And fascinting films. Come on you know you're interested. I mean, who needs a time machine when you have cinema, right?

happy viewing,
Essie

ONE TO MAKE YOU THINK : "VERA DRAKE"

Ok, so in this week’s updates I use nostalgia in the broadest terms possible. I wanted to put this film in here though because Mike Leigh’s work Vera Drake is such a successful and realistic portrayal of 1950’s London. The cast is wonderful and thus the acting is all absolutely first class; it is almost as if we are peering back in time through a magical window. And although nostalgia does often tend to tint whatever we see with a slightly rosy hue, this film is an apt reminder that roses have very real thrones…
Vera Drake (played superbly by Imelda Staunton) is a mother of two living in 1950’s London. She cleans houses, her husband works in his brother’s car-repair shop. They have two grown children who both have jobs themselves – but still live at home as yet, this is the ‘50s you remember! – All in all they have a modest life. But Vera, with a cheerfulness and kind-heartedness that is legendary to all around her is an expert at making the house a real home. No one who sees this happy home from the outside (or even the inside) could guess that the maker of this home harbors a secret. Vera has a sideline that she works in; for no extra remuneration, purely out of the kindness of her heart, she helps young girls have “abortions”, a thing that is illegal back in the day. This has gone on for many, many years without even her family knowing the truth of it, but like all secrets the truth will, eventually, out. And as it is with secrets that have been kept hidden for a long time, the consequences will be very, very painful indeed…
The great thing about this film is that since it is not a spectacle but a very down to earth story; we do not watch with the certain sense of awe that surrounds films like The Last Samurai (review coming soon to this blog!) but with a sense of engagement and reality, with genuine concern as opposed to “excitement”. ???s portrayal of the warm, loving mother Vera Drake is so brilliant that within the first five minutes of the film you have warmed to her, the family feels as if they are part of your extended family. There is nothing original in the structure of what is being portrayed; the modest, good hearted family contrasted in various ways (and in some cases rather ham-handedly I must say in this film) with richer, more unhappy families is not exactly the invention of the wheel. But the cast of the Drake family is simply so good that you enjoy it anyway. Think of it as a really well-cooked cottage pie. It’s no Michelin-star worthy fare, but if it is well cooked, in can be a lot better than a lot of more expensive food. Same story here. I’m not sure why I felt the comparisons didn’t work. I think it’s not so much the acting but the storyline; the way the two “items” have been compared; there are, for example, two very obviously parallel storylines that actually barely intercut – and the way they do intercut is stilted and rather too heavily based on coincidence for my liking – and it is very, very obvious that the only raison d’être of that line is comparative. This in itself I could let slide if Leigh hadn’t then pushed in a second, better integrated but still a little caricaturized “parallel” line. Still the film is very enjoyable for the Drake family’s performance alone. If only Leigh had cut out one of the parallels and left them to shine in their own right; I think it would have been greatly improved. Not that it needs much improving mind you. Credit where it’s due, it deserves every single award it got…

THE '80s, HIGHSCHOOL AND "THE BREAKFAST CLUB"

I thought long and hard about what to include in “nostalgia” week. I have quite a few – cinematically very important – period pieces lying around just waiting to be reviewed (I am, it must be said, shamefully behind on my review-writing. This is particularly sad because I am by no means behind on my viewing so some projects have had to be abandoned because I couldn’t remember them with sufficient clarity. I feel guilty, you can probably tell. It won’t happen again.) Then I thought, which is the one period that we all remember, think about and discuss be it with fond or not so fond memories… High school. And I have, close to hand the high school movie that almost single handedly started the genre up. It is a cornerstone in any case and a wonderful little time-capsule from the ‘80s. Its name has been sort of forgotten but when you watch it you realize that so many films after it have been modeled round it that its spirit definitely lives on. I am talking about The Breakfast Club.
In every high school – or most of them anyway – there is at least one teacher that is hot stuff on discipline and this school is no exception. Saturday morning, 7.00 a.m. sees five students seated in the library for detention. They seem to be a cross-cut of the school, one of them is slightly mad, one is the school “jock” from the wrestling team, one of the geeks, one of the popular girls and the school trouble-maker. Trapped in school together for nine hours on a weekend is no fun, not least because these five are from completely different “worlds” in high school terms. By the end of the day however, a lot will have changed and the five “criminals” may have learned more than they ever expected to…
Yes, I know the whole trope of unlikely characters coming together and figuring out they are not so different after all isn’t exactly new. The thing is though; this film is one of the first “high school films” that explored this. It’s other major advantage over its copies is the fact that thanks to good directing and strong acting from the young cast, the film is able to explore the whole high-school world with greater honesty bordering on brutality. It’s like I say about nostalgia, we mostly look back at high school with memories that are sometimes a lot fonder than they actually deserve to be. This film does an excellent job of reminding us of the cliques, the “boundaries” and how important it all was back then. It also has a peculiar spectacular quality that means it is very much a performance we are watching. I don’t mean this in the sense that it is difficult to form emotional bonds with the film, it isn’t at all but it is also an excellent reminder of the fact that we can never go back to high school. We can only look back in, from the outside. Whether we would actually want to go back in there or shudder at the thought is irrelevant, the point is that it is an excellent portrayal of time gone by. Think of it as a brilliant moving snapshot. With no Photoshop to smooth out the pain and the fear though…

AND LASTLY, SOMETHING A BIT DIFFERENT: "A WOMAN UNDER THE INFLUENCE"

Hats off to John Cassavetes and the cast for this one. This is an intensely psychological film and it very much hinges on performances and speech, and not much else, so this 140 minute beauty could have been an unmitigated disaster. Cassavetes being the pioneering and talented man that he is however; it very rightfully takes its place among the great and innovative films of our time. This doesn’t mean that you will find the film easy to watch. Oh no. It may actually be far from it, and I couldn’t blame you. But what Cassavetes was trying to do you see, was to find an alternative, both in technique and in subject matter, to what we have come to know as “classic Hollywood” cinema with its classic tales with “moral” endings and it’s continuity editing that is so easy on the eye. So you have to be up for a challenge if you’re going to watch this one… And you’re up for a challenge, right? I mean, why else would you be here?
The Longhetti family are a normal Italian – American family. Nick, the husband (Peter Falk who we know better as Inspector Columbo!) , works at the water-works, Mabel his wife (Gena Rowlands looks after their three children. They are a typical family in that Mabel is very much left to cope on her own and since Nick is generally at work, no one is around to notice that in fact, she is not coping very well. Her husband, of course, has always known she was a bit er… Sensitive. But the point is, he loves her just the way she is, besides, that’s their business, not anyone else’s. So it takes a long time for anyone to notice, much less accept what has happened when Mabel finally goes “over the edge”. As Mabel is packed off to the um… Institution, Nick is left to cope with the situation and the children. As to what will happen once M. gets back home, well, that’s anyone’s guess…
To those of us more used to the guiding hand of the typical Hollywood director, this film will be a bit of a strain to watch. I was especially struck by the way Cassavetes used the camera; it doesn’t feel like a feature film, it is almost as if we are watching a documentary. I’ll give you an example; in the second half of the story, while Nick is at work – Mabel has been institutionalized at this point – one of his colleagues has rather a bad accident. However, we only see this seconds after it happens as at the moment of the accident the camera is focused on Nick and another co-worker having an argument. It is as if the cameraman was simply wandering around the place, just as unaware as to what is going to happen next as we are and simply missed the moment of the accident because he had no idea it was coming up. This is also a rather good way to sum up the whole style of the film. It’s very fly on the wall, no frills whatsoever; what matters is the story itself and it’s a very human story, very common place. It is, as literally as it can be, the life of ordinary people set on screen, and that is what made Cassavetes stand out from the crowd back in his day. Watch this one when you’re in the mood for something different folks. It is good and it is gripping, but it is NOT your average Saturday night entertainment either…

ESSIE SPEAKS OF QUEER MOVIES - PART 2

Hello readers!

As you can see I am back on track again with a triple-bill of hopefully brilliant films for you. Now I may have mentioned a few weeks ago that my studies have brought me into contact with a lot of films from the "queer cinema" movement. There were good ones and bad ones, ones suitable for the blog and not, as with any genre. But the main problem was that there were so many good ones that I simply couldn't fit them into the a single blog entry. So here are some more - of only the best of course!

This week the films are based around one particular topic; trans-gender and cross dressing. I am sure a lot of you have heard of the tragic true story Boys Don't Cry. Ma Vie en Rose / My Lif in Pink you may not have heard of - but it may well be a surprising discovery! - and Breakfast on Pluto... Well, we all need something to make us laugh a bit right? Life is a serious matter but not all doom and gloom...

I hope you enjoy!
Essie

LOVE AND TRAGEDGY, BUT "BOYS DON’T CRY"

This intensely sad little number (well it isn’t actually little really but that’s the way the saying goes, right?) is one of the more famous examples of “queer cinema”. It won awards and Oscars all over the place ten or something years back when it first hit the screens and rightly so. Hilary Swank shines as Brandon Teena – whom she apparently modeled on James Dean, two tough calls at once for an actress! – and the story is so emotionally charged that you cannot help by feeling deeply saddened by the prejudice and hatred revealed by this film. It is possibly all the more sad because this is a true story; the true story of a young life cut down by prejudice.
So, meet Brandon Teena. He arrives in a small town in the mid-west in the United States, looking for work and planning on starting a new life. He soon gets in with the young bucks of the neighborhood and even starts a passionate affair with local problem child Lana. However, Brandon has a secret… Brandon Teena’s real name is Teena Brandon and anatomically speaking he is a woman. He is, however, saving up every penny he can get his hands on for a sex-change operation and in the meanwhile doing his best to hide his “anatomical” differences as he doesn’t feel comfortable in a woman’s body. Things seem to go really, really well for him for a while. However, like almost every secret, Brandon’s secret will out in the end… And people do not like secrets like that in small towns…
I see no harm in giving a bit of a spoiler here. Not least because the story back in the day was all over the news. After being “outed” as a transsexual, Brandon is raped and murdered by two local men (one of them Lana’s ex) at age 21. Ironically the two men who murdered him were known as good friends of his before, or seemed to be good friends at any rate… This is the advantage of starting off with a good story; this was director Kimberley Pierce’s first feature film if memory serves and so long as you have a decent cast (don’t get me wrong Hilary Swank is waay more than decent, I’m just talking in general here) and stick to the story, you have a winner. And although the hate portrayed in the film is sad, at least it brings the topic to the table to be discussed. This is especially important in a world where homosexuality in general and female homosexuality in particular is still a tough topic to discuss in certain quarters.
However, there are a few points about the film that show us that sadly, it still isn’t as easy as one might first think to talk about these things. One thing you will notice (and so did critics) about the film is that we almost never see Brandon as he was before he changed his name and appearance. There are hints and a ten-second clip hinting at his life back in the day and that’s it. The whole issue of transsexuality and the difficulties, the transformation are all ignored. Brandon leaps onto the screen fully formed, as a man – or almost at any rate. The probable cause for this is that Pierce, the director, who by the way is also gay, wanted to make the film as “palatable” as possible for general audiences; a story of doomed love will always go down well, there is no real reason to throw in complicated discussions if the aim is commercial success. In all of her interviews Pierce points out that she wanted the story to be about the love between Brandon and Lana, about their very real passion for eachother . And I mean, fair enough; love is love at the end of the day. There is a valid argument for saying that we should be able to view love stories as just that, regardless of whether the couple is “gay” or “straight”, placing the two on an equal footing as it were. And just because a director is gay, is he / she obliged to make every single piece of his / her work a source of activism? Of course not. However, with Brandon’s story a chance to have an in-depth discussion about things that are still difficult to talk about in our enlightened times. This is an admirable and deeply emotional film that grips the viewer by the heartstrings and forces them to take a good hard look at society today. The thing is though, if it had just stepped out of its own shell it could have been so much more…

GROWING PAINS OF A QUEER KIND : "MA VIE EN ROSE"

As far as queer films go, this is just about as queer as it gets folks. Because not only is it definitely a part of “queer” cinema, it is “queer” in the sense of peculiar as well. It’ peculiarity stems principally from its subject matter, it broaches a topic that is particularly difficult to talk about: the sexuality of children. In day to day life, children are largely considered completely a-sexual. While the innocence of the young is not up for discussion here, it is also without a doubt that children do have sexual instincts and feelings, just not activated yet. And sometimes, these instincts manifest themselves, confusing everyone around and the child as well. So what does happen if you have a little one in the family that is “not quite like the rest”?
The Fabre family has just taken a very great leap. Mr. Fabre has just changed jobs, accepting a high ranking position in a company. This has allowed him and his family to move to an affluent suburb of Paris, a “nice” house with “nice” neighbors; it is an exciting time for everyone. The Fabres are a delightful couple with four lovely children as far as the neighbors are concerned. But there is, shall we say, a small quirk. Their youngest, and seven year-old son Ludovic, insists on dressing up as a girl. The family try and pay no heed to it at first, but when Ludovic shows interest in the neighbors son Jerôme, insists on taking his “Pam and Ben” dolls to the show and tell at school and explaining to everyone who will listen that his second x chromosome has been mislaid but that God will send him another one so he can become a girl and marry Jerôme, the neighbors start to give them funny looks. The Fabres now face a tough decision. Will they support their son in his quest for self-discovery or quash the quest for fear of what the neighbors will say?
Most of this film is absolutely brilliant. It gives a brilliant portrait of all the societal pressure placed on gay identities. Especially in the suburbs and similar small communities “what will the neighbors think?” is less of a rhetorical question and more a matter of life or death, especially if one of those neighbors just happen to be your boss. Parents love their children and want what is best for them, but how easy is it to accept that what you consider “best” for them may in fact not be best for them after all? Although these questions are posed and discussed in the harshest manner possible, the film then turns around and does something rather peculiar. It wraps up rather suddenly, throwing in a couple of huge coincidences and with a very, very ambiguous finale indeed. All I can think of as an explanation is that the director stopped and looked back at his work, lost courage, and without pursuing the story to its natural, and possibly grittier end, made it a bit easier to stomach for the general public. And the film – originally a Belgian film – won the Golden Globe for Best Foreign Film, so Alan Berliner, the director, seems to have gaged the public pulse right at least… However, with growing globalization and with more and more films and artists elbowing each other for their own five – or hopefully more – minutes of fame, this is precisely what we see. Less of a tendency to ask the really tough questions and more of a leaning towards “palatable” films; popularity is all after all; if not in the terms of ego a popular film guarantees funding and possibly fame and fortune. It’s really a shame about the end of Ma Vie En Rose, but the remaining two thirds are just so good that it is definitely worth your attention…

DOES LOVE CONQUER ALL ? "BREAKFAST ON PLUTO"

You have, undoubtedly, heard of Neil Jordan, director of such classics as “The Crying Game” and “The End Of The Affair”. Breakfast on Pluto was another one of his major classics. Was nominated for a Golden Globes and everything. Cillian Murphy was absolutely stellar as the leading actor. And the film is, I have to admit, pretty darn awesome on a lot of counts. I have a bit of a bad taste at the back of my mouth, in that I sense a goodly dollop of unused potential going on here, but we’ll get to that in a second. Let’s get on with the story first.
Patrick “Kitten” Brady was born and grew up in a small Irish town in the ‘70s. He does not fit in to his rather traditional surroundings on a number of counts, not less because, in the words of Ed Wood, “he likes wearing women’s clothes”. Unlike Ed Wood however, he is transsexual – as opposed to just a cross-dresser - and this is rarely well accepted in small villages as you have probably worked out for yourselves. To add to his already considerable troubles, Patrick is an orphan. His mother left for London a long while ago and never came back, “swallowed up by the town”. And one day, Patrick gets sick of the continual hurdles his life has thrown at him and decides to go London – the big city – find his mother and start again from scratch. And of course, like a lot of people who travel to London to make their fortunes, things do NOT go according to plan. Love, adventures and some danger all combine and invite us all on a surreal and heart-warming adventure.
I loved this movie. But the thing is, I have both good and bad things to say about it. My main problem with it is this : There are a lot of films, in fact I am pretty sure film theory will have called them a “genre” and given them a name by now, that portray original, misunderstood, sassy characters overcoming difficulties and dealing with small-mindedness with the flick of a wrist (basically). While this can be a realistic portrayal, I have found in time that dealing with small-mindedness is a bit tougher than that. At the very least it takes one heck of a lot out of you. So if not really well done – and if they show no weakness at all – characters like Patrick (or Kitten as he prefers to be called in the film) end up looking a tad unrealistic. That is sort of – sort of mind you – the feeling I got with this film. I mean yes, Kitten suffers, bad things happen and he doesn’t make all the right decisions and doesn’t cope with the whole thing ideally all the time, and yet… Yet it’s a little, just a little too bouncy. A lot of people in that kind of situation get good at hiding their emotions, and maybe director Neil Jordan was playing on that. And it has to be admitted the performance of Cillian Murphy as Kitten is nothing short of outstanding so maybe that was what it was but… I mean I don’t know. A bit too subtle. A tad unrealistic. But good fun. I mean, I preferred the Crying Game myself, but this is a nice, fun movie that will give you a good couple of giggles of an evening. And possibly make you think a bit too. I mean, I feel the need to add, this film tends to aim to amuse rather than to make you think or feel anything of any great depth, but naturally, if you know where to look, you shall find as well…

ESSIE SPEAKS OF HORROR!

Ok, horror is not a genre that graces these pages that often. And I am not a great fan of the whole slasher / monster under the bed genre. But occasionally, when we come across something truly original and different, I cannot help but deeply respect it. And share it with you.

So, Lars von Trier's The Kinengdom is definately different. It is true that this particular director's creations tend to make people's hair stand on end for more than one reason but hey, if you want a really good scare, this is a good place to start. And John Landis's cult classic An American Werewolf in London... I mean if you haven't watched it already, you should have. Hence it is here, to remind you of this fact.

enjoy the chills movie-lovers, see you next week!
Essie

SPOOKY AND THEN SOME : "THE KINGDOM"

Ok, so, technically The Kingdom is not a film but a series. In fact back in the day Lars von Trier made it as a series for Danish television. Ah yes, him. Von Trier is one of those directors you basically either love or hate. I personally love him. I mean, with his films there is always an ounce of sadomasochism going on; the films make one cringe, get uncomfortable and downright emotional and distressed. Yet they are of such good quality and so gripping that you always end up going back to them. The Kingdom is, I assure you, no different.
The Kingdom is the name of a hospital. On the outside it seems like a very ordinary hospital, with its usual dose of hypochondriac patients, well-meaning directors and surgeons who basically believe they should be ruling the world… However, look closely at The Kingdom and nothing is quite what it seems. The hospital is built on a dark secret no one is aware of and the secret is slowly seeping out of the foundations and through the walls into the hospital itself… Is Miss Drugge the hospital hypochondriac justified in her hunt for ghosts around the hospital? What is the strange and sinister masons lodge formed of the hospital staff actually up to? And what is the mystery of the empty ambulance that arrives at the hospital doors every night and vanishes again? Miss Drugge claims that these are all linked to the world of ghosts and spirits? Is she as mad as everyone claims? Or are there really spirits roaming The Kingdom that need to be put to rest?
Watching but the first five minutes of The Kingdom shows you clearly that this is not a film like many others you have seen. If von Trier wanted to make for an uncomfortable viewing experience – and he did incidentally – he has succeeded with flying colors. Said colors are used in conjunction with heavy sepia and the picture is very grainy. The camera movements are jerky, often obviously hand or shoulder cameras without resorting to a steadycam , heck or even a tripod. The cuts bounce from one to the other in crowded scenes making the viewer quite dizzy at times. Yes, it is fair to say that this was an experiment as far as the technical side of it went. Yet, as von Trier was trying to point out, even this technique serves a purpose. As we watch the series (miniseries to be fair, it is concerned of five episodes each about an hour long) we feel on edge and alienated. Our adrenalin is constantly ready to gush; we are not sure what shot will come from where next. You might be tempted to argue that you don’t know where shots will come from anyway, but see, you do. Conventional films are filmed by a set of very predictable rules, (shot – reaction shot and all that jazz) you do know unconsciously. And when a director openly and insistently defies it; it is confusing, even though you may not be sure what you’re confused about. Add to this, the storyline. Imaginative, unpredictable and very, very spooky, The Kingdom’s storyline is one of the most successful ghost stories I have seen and believe me I have seen my fair share of the little monkeys. Yes, watching this series may not be “enjoyable” in the classic sense. But you will like it. And you will learn. If nothing else it will be an experience you will not forget in a hurry…

HORROR - AND A LITTLE EXTRA : "AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON"

John Landis’s classic horror / comedy film is a cult film in its own right. But it must be remembered at this point that it is originally a throwback from a true early classic of the horror genre, The Wolfman, filmed in 1946 and directed by George Waggner. Over the years the basic story of The Wolfman has been taken, hashed and re-hashed and re-presented, the latest incarnation being in 2010 starring Anthony Hopkins and Benicio del Toro. If we are just a tad sick of werewolf films in our modern times, An American Werewolf in London is a treat to watch, if only because it did something brave and original with the storyline and combined comedy in horror so successfully.
Jack and David are two American backpackers trekking across the Yorkshire moors. Nightfall brings them to a little Yorkshire village and they head to the local pub, The Slaughtered Lamb. The welcome they get is quite strange, the villagers are surly, they evidently don’t like strangers and the pub is “decorated” with animal heads and pentacles. Feeling uneasy the two friends head back out in to the night, only to be attacked by a mysterious creature. David is caught; Jack tries to run away at first but then turns back to rescue him. Not only does he fail to save his friend who dies, but is also attacked by the creature. This seems all very well and good, however there is a small catch even Jack himself has a bit of trouble getting his head around. The creature that attacked them was the local werewolf. And well, we all know what happens to people who get attacked by werewolves… Will Jack be able to come to terms with his fate – and convince the people around him in the modern world of 1970’s London that he is, in fact a werewolf? You will have to watch and see…
In an interview in the extras of the version I own of the DVD, director John Landis remembers with a smile how much difficulty he had actually getting the film funded. Horror-comedies as a genre are not that rare in themselves but the “problem” with this script is that it is a very, very successful combination. Horror-comedies will inevitably tend to be either one or the other really; most often they will end up being comedy films with integrated monsters. Landis however, doesn’t spare the horses as far as the horror goes. In fact we see Jack’s transformation into a werewolf a couple of times with no “hints” or cutaways, just full on special effects made to look as realistic and painful as possible. The same goes for the killings that inevitably take place all through the film. At the same time we have the character of Jack, who is really a very normal and nice teenager just getting along with his life having to battle this “curse” he never even knew existed just because he tried to save his friend. Then, there is a TON of comedy tropes that I will not disclose as yet, but they involve a ton of very successful special-effects and imaginative twists to the original story. So, ladies and gents you will literally be laughing out loud one minute and screaming with terror the next. It’s a real rollercoaster ride and a classic for a reason…

ESSIE SPEAKS OF ROAD TRIPS

Ok, I live in the Northern hempisphere. Hence it is winter - and freezing. My new semester in uni is going full swing, assignments looming lectures crawling out of the woodwork... I just want a break. And Christmas break is barely over.
This is probably why this week's fare is dedicated to road trips. Often featuring exotic locations - well we can dream - these movies are far from being mere documentaries, ooh no. Voyage and you will discover, your past, your present or maybe your future...
Here are as varied a bunch as I could get on the theme dear readers. I hope you enjoy...

happy viewing!
Essie

A ROAD TRIP TO SELF-DISCOVERY : "THE BEACH"

I like road movies. But there is an inherent danger to filming them. I mean if you stick to the very basics of the genre, it is pretty evident what’s going to happen. A character is usually discontent with his life; he starts off on a journey, has many adventures, comes out changed and developed a better and / or happier person at the end. There are of course various things you can do to avoid the whole film getting boring, the characters can be original or very realistic, or even just very, very easy to emphasize with. The adventures that will inevitably happen on the way can be really original and unexpected. Or the ending can be “different” not sad maybe – but usually it ends up having to be – but not what one would commonly expect perhaps. The Beach, based on the best-selling novel, starts off looking as if it is going to be everything we have seen before and less. By the end though, it redeems itself. Oh yes.
Richard (a rather young and gawky looking Leonardo di Caprio) is looking for himself. He is a young American who has set out on the road to find a life less-ordinary, like a lot of travelers tramping the roads out there. And like a goodly number of them his path leads to Asia and more specifically to Thailand. The fates lead him to what seems to be exactly what he is looking for: a life completely of the grid and cut off from modern society. On a paradise island, unknown to but a handful of people a small group of idealistic travelers have come together and formed a commune. They have built everything themselves, they live off the land; they do not leave the island unless they absolutely have to in order to get supplies. Their leader is the matriarch Sal (Tilda Swindon) who is firm when she has to be but has been to all intents and purposes “running the show” for a good couple of years now. Richard fully feels that he has found his new home, the place he will live for ever and ever, but it doesn’t take long for him to realize that human nature is human nature whether in a city or on a tropical island and that his “paradise” has darker things lurking in its waters than he could ever possibly imagine…
Like I said, this film doesn’t come off to an incredibly promising start. I mean, the director here is Danny Boyle for God’s sake, I expected more and I was seriously disappointed. But then, the “adventure” bit of the film starts. And the film really takes the opportunity to delve into human nature, the mind and its psychology. The first half, in this sense, is a necessary evil. And to be completely fair just because we have seen the whole thing before it doesn’t actually mean it isn’t realistic. Things similar to this do happen. I am not of course talking about communes on paradise islands but about people backpacking across the world “looking for themselves”. It is a rather sad footnote to modern life that people are completely unable to “find themselves” within the boundaries of city life and have to set off around the world to do so, but that would be the topic of a completely different film. When all is said and done this film is based on a best-selling book. The character development is a bit sketchy at times and some developments aren’t exactly the biggest surprises to hit the big screen. Yet it has been filmed by an exceptionally talented director, and although I haven’t read the book, I feel that a lesser director may well have churned out a completely “ordinary” road movie. Danny Boyle has succeeded in stepping out of that category. In fact the ways he has chosen to film some sections borders on the experimental but I think, in a funny kind of way, it works really, really well. Basically all us humans living on this planet are looking for a way to be happy. We may or may not be successful in our search. But if we do see a glimmer of success, we will do anything, and I mean anything to hold on to that real sense of happiness. You don’t believe me? Watch the film, think a bit, then answer again…

A ROAD TRIP TO ADULTHOOD : "Y TU MAMA TAMBIEN"

Talking about different types of road-movie and variations on the genre is all well and good in their own way, but what about the “typical” road movie? Young people, drinking, drugs, love and self-discovery… What about all that jazz? Alfonso Cuaron’s Y tu mama tambien is all of this and more. The lesson, as with all road-movies, is that the journey is sometimes just as important as the destination if not more so. There will, undoubtedly, be moments of self-discovery on the way. What we do with the things we discover however, is pretty much up to us…
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves here. Julio (Gael Garcia Bernal) and Tenoch are typical teenagers. They have girlfriends, but will have sex with anyone wherever they can get it, are into drinking, partying and having a good time. So this is exactly what they are getting up to at one of Tenoch’s cousins wedding when their paths cross with the sultry 28 year-old Luisa from Spain. The boys flirt with her openly and shamelessly and in the process invite her to accompany them to Heaven’s Mouth, a secluded tropical paradise of a beach that… Doesn’t exist. So the boys are both shocked and excited when Luisa accepts their invitation. Thus starts an impromptu journey across Mexico to a destination that doesn’t exist. But as the journey progresses, the boys will find there is a lot more to discover on the road than the beauties of Mexico and the sea. What they will actually do with these discoveries however, is a completely different story all together.
I categorically loved this film. It’s a shame, a real shame, that there are some little bits in it that niggle at me to the point of preventing me from calling it perfect. The trouble with working with a genre in this way is that, there are usually a lot of clichés lying around the place. Some of them you take, change, do something innovative and wonderful with – the way Cuaron does. Some however, you might just walk right into, and then actually keep lying around. Unfortunately, Cuaron does this quite a bit too. The result it a touching, original and beautiful film that occasionally throws up a hoary old chestnut or two. Personally I chose to concentrate on the original and the beautiful. I don’t want to say too much about the many discoveries the boys make along the way – not least because the sense of discovery we feel with them is a major part of the film - but the one thing I cannot help but point out is what an excellent job Cuaron has done of using the context to tell us a bit about his country. The road is always a major character in road-movies, but here it actually almost takes on a life of its own, as a voiceover tells us stories of seemingly random things we pass on the road, the realities of Mexico and the tragedies that occur but we may well not have even noticed if we were the ones driving by… A lot of thought is given in this film to the fact that there is always more to things than the eye can see. And reminds us of that those things are there, whether we want to face them or not…

A ROAD TRIP THROUGH TIME AND SPACE : "BROKEN FLOWERS"

You may have figured out at this point that I have a major soft spot, not to say a lot of respect, for Jim Jarmusch. I think he has a particular talent for capturing the small yet important things in life and putting them onto the screen, making films that truly resonate with the important things, the things that really matter in our lives. That’s what I find anyway. I mean, his minimalist style isn’t easy on everyone’s eyes, but I honestly feel that it wouldn’t hurt to familiarize oneself with it, even if it did jar at first. There are massive emotional depths out there you’re missing out on.
But anyway, back to one of the masters’ latest works. Don Johnston (Bill Murray) is what you might call an aging Don Juan. He has done very well for himself from the IT business, lives in a luxury house with his beautiful girlfriend and yet he is at a crisis point in his life. As Don cannot seem to quite let go of his Don Juan-ish instincts and give Sherry, his girlfriend, the attention she deserves, she has walked out on him. Not only that, but days later a mysterious and anonymous letter claiming to be from one of his old flames arrives, telling him that he has a 19 year-old son who he never knew about, that his son is on a road trip and possibly looking for him and that although she is not willing to say who she is, she thought it only fair to let him know. Don is devastated, not least because he has no interest whatsoever in finding long-lost progeny, but then intrigued. With the help of his over-enthusiastic neighbor, he makes a list of all the possible candidates gathers as much info about them as possible and sets off… Thus begins a very bizarre trip down memory lane…
Anyone even remotely interested with the works of Jim Jarmusch will know well that he is quite the master of the road movie. But his brilliance comes from the fact that he can take the road movie as a genre and do something different with it every time. I mean, Permanent Vacation is a road- movie of sorts – all we do is follow Ally drifting around town. In Mystery Train and Night On Earth travel is the main theme, Down By Law and Stranger than Paradise are road movies albeit unconventional ones. It is true that the road movie genre is open to a lot of different experiments and conventions as we can see from this week’s humble update alone, but I think Jarmusch’s brilliance lies in the fact that he can go over and over the same genre and do something different with it every time. Broken Flowers is a unconventional film, a road movie and a “coming of age” film all into one. Graying Don Juan Don Johnston looks back on his past, his mistakes and more importantly where his former lovers (and the cast alone here is quite impressive; Sharon Stone, Tilda Swindon and Jessica Lange to name but a few) are in their lives, and the differences between his life and theirs… The film is funny, touching and thought-provoking all at once. In short, as always with Mr. Jarmusch, a success.