ESSIE SPEAKS OF POWER AND PASSION - AND BLOOD

I'm in the mood for "raaah" films this week. I'm not sure why. Maybe the weather. Maybe I'm taking out other frustrations in my life. But the one thing I know is, no matter how bad things are going, I can count on watching a Quentin Tarantino film to set me back on my feet, in a full state of catharsis and ready to face the world. If you're a fan, you know what I mean. If you're not... Well firstly, you really may be at the wrong blog. Or maybe you want a bit of a change of perspective on matters? In that case, my mistake, you're at the right blog, scroll down.

Now, my second film is not as cathartic. But it is brilliant. Our theme here I guess is power and passion. Or passion for power. And everything that goes with it. You get the picture. These two films aren't "new" films as such. They are a pair of particular oldies that are very, very close to my own heart. The aim of this weeks' blog is to hoefully make them a bit closer to your heart too. Let's see if I succeed :)

happy viewing peeps - and happy Easter!
Essie

ESSIE'S GUSHING CONTINUES - ONE OF THE BEST ENTRANCES EVER : "RESERVOIR DOGS"

I have a sneaking suspicion that over the course of the next couple of weeks, Quentin Tarantino’s entire filmography may well creep its way into the blog. Yes there is a “because I say so” element to this creeping.  What can I tell you. I love the guy. I gush and gush about his films.  People who know me in offline life have learnt to deal with it. I’m sure you will too. Why only the other day a colleague at work was saying how Quentin Tarantino was “this weird guy who never even finished school”. I spent the next fifteen minutes verbally crushing her about that statement. Yes, he never went to film school. Despite this fact, his first feature film? RESERVOIR DOGS. Beat that as far as entrances go, I mean seriously. I do agree that the most important thing is watching movies as opposed to film school. If you love it enough, it will creep into your bones. If you have sh.tloads of talent to go with it, you’ll make a film like Reservoir Dogs.  I can report (with some pride) that other colleagues present ended up agreeing with me and the colleague who initially made the observation was silent and then changed the topic (although that may have been due to the sentences pouring out of me ever louder and quicker, accompanied by sweeping gestures with hands and arms). Now, being an Aries, I am at the very least amused by fighting off such objections with posture and tone of voice alone (admit it you guys – we are a zodiac sign that is especially partial to grandeur). But you know, there is logic behind this argument. Queue, this post.  Let’s talk about Quentin Tarantino and Reservoir Dogs. Not like it’s one of my favourite movies by my favourite director or anything…

The story itself is easily told and is, in truth, as old as the hills. It is a gangster movie. A heist movie to be exact. A major crime boss of the area, Joe Cabot (Lawrence Tierney), puts together a group of criminals he trusts (to varying degrees, it should be said, but it is pretty clear they are all “cool”) to pull off a jewellery heist. It seems like a very basic, easy job for a group of seasoned criminals such as we have here, however things do not go according to plan. The whole affair is carnage from beginning to end. As the survivors make their way back to the rendezvous point, one thing is clear: there is a rat in their midst.  How else would the police have appeared on the scene so quickly and so well prepared? Thing is, the criminals don’t know anything about each other, for security reasons they are not even allowed to exchange first names. Thus begin the mind games. Who is the rat, how to find him and how to deal with him when they do? And oh by the way, where have the diamonds they managed to grab got to? 

Ok, right off the bat, this is vintage Tarantino. This is another reason I respect the guy so much, like a lot of great directors, he had a style from the word go, and although it has been “added to” as years went by, the basic tenets have never changed. Here we have a heist / gangster movie – a favourite genre of the director as we know rather well – with a vintage soundtrack  and a storyline which is both simple and at the same time fuller of surprises than you could possibly imagine. Stylistically, Tarantino starts on something he will elaborate on further later on with Pulp Fiction – non-linear narration. And while in Pulp Fiction, the narration tends to go in larger chunks – that is to say the “morsels” of story we see out of order are larger / longer, here that length is a great deal shorter. This is mainly due to the fact that there is only one story line here.  So as you watch, a bit like the characters, you are piecing the story together, trying to figure out what the heck happened. As the film progresses – and we are, as viewers, blessed with multiple points of view, and hence info the characters don’t all possess, the suspense grows. Because, in a bizarre kind of way, the more we know, the less sure we are how the whole thing is going to end. Expect plot twists. Like, a barrel load or two. This film includes one of my favourite “raaaah” moments in a film. I would call this moment the precise incarnation of why I like Tarantino’s films so much. I’m obviously not going to describe it here but ask me in real life and I’ll be happy to tell you.

And if nothing else, people, here is a thriller that actually needs you to use your noggin as you watch. A rarer and rarer breed of movies these days  as I am sure you have observed. Oh and the cast : Tim Roth, Harvey Keitel, Michael Madsden and Steve Buscemi to name but a few. Come on. Admit it. You’re tempted… 

ARE YOU READY TO PAY THE PRICE OF POWER? : "THERE WILL BE BLOOD"

I have no idea why I waited so long to review this film. I distinctly remember loving it the first time I saw it. What I then should have done is review the darn thing ASAP while all the details were fresh in my mind. This is important because the film is round about 2,5 hours long. Well, no matter, I’m doing it now – better late than never and all that jazz. Because, seriously, you need to know about this film. Don’t even let the fact that it is 2,5 hours long bother you. Even if you’re a purist, like me, in the sense that you have to watch something from beginning to end without leaving any for next day, it goes quickly. And stop sniggering, no I do not have OCD. I have principles. Not the same thing at all…

My Mom’s favourite actor Daniel Day Lewis stars as Daniel Plainview, a prospector living at the turn of the 19^th century. Daniel has a single, solitary passion in life: power. Power and riches. And he will stop at literally nothing to achieve it. Whether it takes back-breaking manual labour or manipulation of his own son, show Daniel the way to power, he will go for it. This is why he reckons it’s his lucky day when, quite out of the blue, a young man appears on his doorstep informing him of a large quantity of oil on his family ranch – and demanding only a measly sum of money for the information. Mr Plainview and co find themselves in a small town in rural California, a town that both progress and good fortune seem to have passed by. At first, all seems to go well for Mr Plainview, he is a rich prospector with a reputation, and buying land relatively cheaply from the impoverished villagers is easy. However, the more he stays, the more Mr Plainview begins to be confronted with problems and foes he cannot buy his way away from. And the most notable of all these will in time become his nemesis: the charismatic evangelical preacher Eli Sunday (Paul Dano) who has a bone to pick with Daniel – and I don’t just mean on the ethical front…

There are so many things I love about this film I barely know where to begin. First of all – conversely you might think – the length. Now, it is quite common to set films over a period of time, years, and decades even. However, as this period cannot realistically be portrayed in real time, it is common practice to “imply” the passage of time. The film is usually around 1.5 hours to 2 hours long, so the events are “condensed” accordingly. Now, in this little (well, maybe not so little) masterpiece, what director Paul Thomas Anderson does is concentrate on a few key events and really draw them out in a way that allows us to see the details in these key events. None of your Hollywood style quick exchanges or “superfluous” events to provide insight into the characters here. You watch lives and events unfold at as realistic a pace as cinema technology of today will allow. This is great on many levels, not least because it really, really lets you get to know our two main characters, Daniel Plainview and Eli Sunday. Neither of these men are particularly likable, however, as you get to know them in depth you begin to, if not sympathise, see where they’re coming from too. And that you see is a clear sign of good character construction, more specifically the construction of a good villain. The key is, no one is just evil. That would make a flat, two-dimensional character and nothing more. Here, Daniel Plainview and Eli Sunday are so real, you almost believe they exist. Speaking of believing people exist, I want to address this fact that Paul Dano has been, apparently, criticised about his performance in this film. Can someone please explain what is supposed to be wrong with it, because I can’t find a single flaw. I mean yes, if you expect him to act like a “typical” preacher, you will be disappointed – especially if you expect him to do so in all areas of his life. But what is typical anyway? And the whole point is that, despite being a man of the cloth, he is just as bad as Daniel Plainview in so many ways… Which is specifically why the two have so much trouble getting along. As for Daniel Day Lewis, he makes a wonderful villain and his performance is as astounding as always. Writing a  complex character like Daniel Plainview is hard enough in itself, on top of that, you need the acting talent to actually pull it off and Daniel Day Lewis is more than up to the task.

Be warned, this film will leave you feeling as if you have been hit by a freight train. In a good way though. I mean come on, I live for that “freight train” feeling I sometimes get after watching a film and it seems to me it’s getting a rarer and rarer occurrence these day – but anyway. That’s the topic of another article I guess… In the meanwhile, do watch this. It’s a real cracker. 

ESSIE SPEAKS FROM THE HEART

I mean yeah, I know, all my entries come from the heart.

But one of the reviews this week may have come from a place that is tad-bit deeper, if you get my drift. And the other entry, to be fair, is so full of heart, emotion and love (of a romantic sort but also of life) that I really couldn't come up with a better title for this week.

Ok, so I wrote about my favorite movie. People often asked me what it was and I often (as you well may know) just gabbled in response. I can think of a hundred movies I adore and would watch over and over again without a hint of boredom. But going through old classics this week, I hit upon this beauty, and you know what? I got that "it was you all along" feeling they talk about in the movies... Besides... I like a good opinion piece from time to time. I think about movies non-stop although I don't always get the chance to talk about them. Except here that is. Besides, who knows, you might like my mini opinion piece. And if you do, again, not making any promises but you may be seing more of them on an irregular basis :)

In the meanwhile, happy viewing!
Essie

A RATHER BELATED (EHM) REVIEW OF A TRULY ORIGINAL WORK : "THE ARTIST"

I know. You noticed. I’m really, really late with this one. Don’t get mad at me though, I WANTED to see it, it’s just… Circumstances. You know what I mean, right? Life happens. I was overjoyed when I finally got round to watching it though. I hope you’re not too mad at me. I’m a little mad at me to be honest, but come on. Admit it. I have been better about “keeping up to date” with the big films of the year so far. One little delay from oh so long ago… Not worth talking about, right?

Well, it’s funny you should agree with that, as The Artist doesn’t think anything is “worth talking about” (haha, see what I did there? You know, it’s a black and white silent film, no talking and… Oh never mind…). But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t have anything to say. It is about that historical time in the life of cinema, when “movies” became “talkies”.  And everything changed. Careers were made and destroyed. But we, the public, loved it – and there has been no turning back ever since. In Hollywood – and all around the world – it was adapt or die for the actors. In The Artist, we follow the story of George Valentin (Jean DuJardin – Do you know something, I almost admire the man more every time I see him in something. Remember 99 cents? Amazing stuff…). The year is 1927, it is the heyday of the silent movie, and George Valentin is king. Until, that is, he is asked to speak. A true old-school star, George refuses to adapt. He is adamant this is just a passing craze and sticks to his old ways. In the meanwhile however, the ones who choose to adapt, like the beautiful Peppy Miller ( Berence Bejo) soar past him to the spotlight… Will George be able to regain his place in the sun – possibly alongside Peppy, to whom he is secretly attracted? Or will his pride mean that ultimately, George Valentin loses everything…

There, you see, I do like romantic films. And just on the level of the romantic – comedy side of it, the film is adorable. Bojo and Dujardin make a lovely couple. Plus, their love story rings quite true for modern times as George Valentin is actually married. So first up, it ticks an important box for me. The one thing I cannot abide in a film is the heroes being too perfect. I am not, of course, in anyway advocating that people go out and cheat on their partners and spouses, but you have to agree it’s more realistic this way. Sometimes, relationships end while you are still in them; you just have trouble accepting it. Then new ones begin. And rest assured, Peppy and George are the real deal – if George can overcome his pride of course.  Both George and Peppy are very real, very realistic and very likable and you get genuinely invested in their futures. I mean, I did anyway – and judging by the film’s success, so did millions of other people.

But then of course, there is the film’s signature move – the fact that it is “silent”. To be fair, I have not watched enough silent films to be able to compare it to the originals. I personally liked it a lot though. You may find that you need a bit more imagination than usually required to follow what is going on, as although the major dialogue is, of course, intertitled, the minor stuff is not. You just have to rely on your ability to follow what is going on. The ever- present music and the lack of sound effects (even minor things like doors closing etc.) may also prove disconcerting at the beginning, but honestly, I didn’t have trouble adapting at all – in fact it sucked me right in. It may have been the reason the film is relatively short at 90 minutes. I mean, I say that because these days all the “majors” seem to be over 2 hours long. I am beginning to wonder why to be honest, I mean, I’m not complaining but it’s a strange phenomenon… Anyhow, mustn’t get side-tracked. The Artist. Darn good film. Watch it J

ESSIE SPEAKS OF HER FAVORITE FILM EVER : "PULP FICTION"

I have made a momentous discovery. I have discovered my favourite film. As someone so engaged in films of all kinds, I am hard pressed to pick one. It will always be a close contest. I will always rattle off a couple in close succession, as opposed to one single one. But if you press me for a single one, I am now sure this is IT. Now, you guys know I don’t really write that much about the big classics. I like talking about the “hot” stuff out there along with the ones you may have missed along the way. But come on. This is my favourite film. I have a sneaking feeling it always has been. I want to gush about it for a second. And who knows, maybe I can somehow convince you Tarantino-haters out there (and I really don’t know what to do with you guys but anyhow) to give this a spin. I have a feeling you guys have the impression that all Tarantino films are just jumped-up slasher flicks, you know, with the emphasis on the blood as opposed to any actual content. You are SO WRONG. Ok, let’s get right to it.

There is no one single story here. Actually, there are three. Two of these stories revolve around the gang boss Marsellus Wallace (Ving Rhames). See, Mr Wallace likes his sports. He likes to watch, for example, a good boxing match. He is also a betting man – and like the rest of us, he likes to win his bets. But he has an advantage over the rest of us in that field. See if, for example, he feels unsure how things will go, he can take precautions. Like taking Butch (Bruce Willis), a good pro boxer who is a tad bit past his prime for example, and explain to him if he should win or lose and at which round. Butch gets paid handsomely for his trouble, and Mr Wallace is happy. If Butch does not comply however, Mr Wallace is not amused. And I think we all know by now that an unamused gang boss is never a good thing. Then there are his two right hand men – Vincent Vega (John Travolta) and Jules Winnfield ( Samuel L. Jackson). They do things gang bosses do not condescend to tire themselves with. You know, extortion, debt collecting, murder and the like. But Vincent  especially is a little nervous of late  - he has an extra job you see. He has to take Mr Wallace’s dashing young wife (Uma Thurman) out to dinner while Mr Wallace is not in town. He must show her a good time, not offend her in any way, yet not cross any boundaries. I.e., he is on VERY thin ice indeed until the dinner date is up. And then there are two small time robbers. Pumpkin and Honey Bunny. They are planning their last couple of hits before they retire to some exotic location together. And they hit on an idea – why not rob a restaurant? And how do all these people come together you say? You will have to watch the film and see. But trust me when I say, regardless of what you’re thinking the answer is… You’re probably wrong…

Now, take these three stories. Cut them all into a few large chunks and jumble them up. And tell them in completely non-linear order with seemingly no rhyme or reason. Welcome to Pulp Fiction. As you can well imagine, in the wrong hands the formula is an unqualified disaster. But these, you see, are not the wrong hands. The puzzle is constructed in such a way that, although between Mr Tarantino’s penchant for surprises and the way the story is told you have no way of knowing what “comes next” until the last minute, it is, at the same time, clearly done so that you don’t actually have to research the film online later to clearly understand what is going on . On a side note, some people see this “incomprehensible” quality as a major asset – I don’t get it quite honestly. A film is something you should be able to understand as you watch it. Or a bit later, when you think about it. It shouldn’t take research. But at the same time, especially if you watch a lot of films, you want to be surprised. You want to not be able to tell what is coming next. I can categorically promise you that in this film, be it in terms of plot twists or actual pieces of the plot, you will rarely know what is coming next. This is one of the things I truly love about this film. 

The other thing I like about the film – and all of Tarantino’s films as it happens – is his own particularly dark brand of humour. This is what puts a twist on this little number too. Because, by Tarantino’s own admission, the three basic plot lines that are interwoven are as old as the hills. That is precisely the point. You take a classic and you put your own twist on it. How far you can twist it largely depends on your personal talent. I think you see where I’m going with this…

I mean yes, there is blood – people die. But newsflash – it’s a gangster flick.  If nobody died and there was no blood, you’d complain about it being unrealistic. This is something for you cats who want something both truly entertaining and truly original as entertainment.          Just take the plunge man. There is a reason every single person on the planet calls this film a classic. Time you found out why. 

ESSIE SPEAKS OF A PAUSE FOR THOUGHT

Is it me or is spring finally trying to arrive? Over in my part of the world, schizophrenia - as far as the weather is concerned - has well and truly set in. One moment, it's a bright, sunny yet cool day with that distinctive feel of early spring about it. The next moment (and I literally do mean the next moment) it's actually snowing. Then it goes cloudy for half an hour. The the sun comes out. You get the picture. Through all that confusion, I'm rooting for spring. It's doing it's best to press through. And I do live in Northern Europe. Hang in their spring! You can beat them!

Ehm.

As you can imagine, the weather being as unpredictable as it is, whenever possible my days are spent curled up in warm jammies with a mug of something. It may be getting to me. Just a tad. I think I am in serious need of mental exercise. Hence the films this week.

As you know, I am all for entertainment for entertainment's sake. Heck, I truly reckon we'd be lost without it. However, this does not mean that we shouldn't have time for films with more serious messages. In fact, it is the ease with which one can use cinema to blend a serious message with entertaiment, giving it all manner of different forms that makes it such an important tool. This week I offer two films that will entertain, but also offer an opportunity to pause and think about big things. I watched both with baited breath and was truly moved... I hope you enjoy them as much as I did!

happy viewing,
Ess,e

THE STORIES THAT WERE BRUSHED UNDER THE CARPET : "THE HELP"

I have been waiting to see this film for so long… I remember a time when it was the only thing everyone was ever talking about. I try to keep up with current developments and watch the new films AS they come up and not a year later, but I mean, come on… I’m human. I occasionally slip up and this was one of those occasions. When I “ran into it” sometime later, I made it a priority to sit myself down and watch it. This really and truly is one of the most thought-provoking films I have watched in a long time and on SO many levels…  Let me tell you about the story first. Then I’ll tell you what I thought. As it were.

If you were to judge the small town of Jackson, Mississippi, on outside appearances alone back in 1962, you would have nothing but praise for it. Everything and everyone is, ordered, pretty, decent and polite. However, underneath it all, things are neither pretty, nor decent. And I could be talking about the subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) in-fighting going on amongst the town’s perfectly groomed ladies, but I am not. I am talking about a group of people who were treated little better than furniture – and sometimes not even that well, “the help”, the coloured women who for years have been looking after the southern families’ every need with little recognition and less than minimum wage.  The situation has been going on like this for so long that no one can even dream of it being any other way, and this is despite the civil rights movement spreading through the country like a wave. But one of the town’s inhabitants has had more than enough. Skeeter has always been considered slightly odd. Never as interested as the other town girls in dating and finding a husband and all these aspirations to become a writer. She has to be content, for now, with writing the cleaning advice column in the local newspaper but she has her eye on bigger things. And she is so fed up with the town’s attitude, she knows what she is going to write about. She is going to interview the maids and give voice to their stories for the whole country to hear. Trouble is, in a small town where racism is rife and the political atmosphere means that her actions could even be considered illegal, this is NOT going to be easy…

I was really excited by this film, not least because I thought it was a real story. Especially since, you know, there is an actual book it was adapted from. Thing is, a bit of research showed me, the book is a work of fiction. I mean, it is and it isn’t. The book “The Help” never existed as such (the character of Skeeter for example is completely fictional) however, this doesn’t mean that the stories it portrays didn’t really happen. It’s just that they had no “up and coming author” to give them a voice.  The film – and the book it was based on I take it – contains two different stories. One of them is your typical story of “coming of age. Small town girl, much bigger and better person than her surroundings, overcomes difficulties and injustices, jets off into the sunset leaving the small town and the small-minded people behind… Yes, we have seen it before. But credit where it’s due, it’s well executed. I like, for example, the take the film has on being single or attached. I mean,  since “getting married” is one of the top requirements of a Jackson belle of the era, it is refreshing to see that Skeeter’s happy ending does not contain a dashing beau almost magicked out of thin air. I mean ok, this is a bit of a spoiler. Because one small slap on the wrist: I like what they did about the boyfriend. I think the way they disposed of him was “clunky”.  I mean yes I get it, but it was possibly an afterthought, tagged on the last day of shooting, I honestly don’t know. Or maybe some of the dialogue got cut… I don’t know I digress. Not least because this is, by no stretch of the imagination, the story that matters.

This is the story of the ladies who suffered years of abuse and ingratitude.  It is the story of entire generations who had to live without, and fight, sometimes with their very lives at stake, for their most basic civil rights. And don’t think, just because it is such a serious matter, it cannot come in a beautiful “presentable” package, because it can. The story itself is quiet and dignified, you can be touched by it as part and parcel of the “coming of age” tale of the perfectly likable Skeeter, or, you can just put Skeeter and the fictional maids to one side and reflect on the real people who in some form or another suffered through this. I think this film is a beautiful way of forcing us to think and talk about a time that is in the past now, and that we may well prefer to just forget. It is an opportunity to reflect on stories that really, really need to be told. I sincerely hope it is an opportunity you take. 

TWO WOMEN VS A MASS KILLER : "MARY AND MARTHA"

It’s funny, do you ever get the feeling some films actively WANT you to watch them? I’m not talking about advertising or some such, I mean some films (or it could be books or anything else I suppose) that just keep popping out at you at odd places? Take this one. I barely noticed and acknowledged its existence at first. It elbowed its way into my line of vision. I commended its activism but thought I would find it too sad and possibly a tiny bit saccharine to my taste, so I passed. Much like the characters in the film however, the film WOULD NOT go away. It was not being “pushed” per se, but in every random collection of films my eye spied, there it would be. I mean, in the end I just gave up, pure and simple. And I “bought” what it was saying, as it were.  I know, there are many, many terrible things in the world. Malaria is only one of them. And while we cannot hope to solve “everything”, why not try and do something about malaria, which is preventable. In our lifetime. And thus save millions of lives. I mean, you have to admit, it’s a pretty cool idea…

Mary and Martha is the story of two mothers. But the story doesn’t start with them. It starts with George and Ben. Their sons. On the surface of it, the two could not be further apart. Ben, Martha’s son, from the UK, is 24 years old and is working as a volunteer teacher in an orphanage in Mozambique. George, the son of Mary, is only 12, he is on an extended “road trip” with his mother, Mary, who has taken him out of school to home school him and show him the real world. Mary and Martha’s worlds collide through tragedy: both their sons fall victim to malaria, and die. Coincidence brings them together, and their unspeakable shared suffering makes them friends. Their coping mechanisms are different – but parallel: both feel the need to “do” something. They are unable to go back to their old lives and their old homes. Martha chooses to stay on at the orphanage to “replace” Ben for a while looking after the children. Mary heads back home. But she is a woman on a mission. She is going to do whatever it takes to eradicate this disease that took her son. And she plans to start with a letter to the White House.

It would be wonderful if Mary and Martha were a true story.  I don’t of course mean that it would be great for two young men to die. My point is that many, many more than two already are dying. It would be great if we really could eradicate this disease completely. What the film basically does is show us exactly what malaria does. It brings pain and suffering. And not just to its victims. To millions more people, the families of the victims. Through Mary and Martha, we take a good, hard look at one of the greatest pains in this world, the pain of losing a child. We can then imagine this pain multiplied to an entire continent, millions of people. Then, maybe, we can understand what is truly at stake here and start doing something to stop it.

And if you are a bit concerned, like me at the beginning, that this will turn out to be little more than a very thinly veiled anti-malaria campaign, well, you’re wrong. I mean yes, the film makes no pretences about what it is trying to say, but the presentation is good. Hilary Swank is on top form as Mary, and double Oscar® nominee Brenda Blethin is an absolutely adorable Martha. It’s a good film. And if it makes you feel bad, you know what, possibly, all the better. Who knows, you might be the person to actually end up killing this disease off… Now wouldn’t that be something…

ESSIE SPEAKS OF WAR - PERSPECTIVES

War is a terrible thing. I don't think any of us can deny this fact. Yet, every time I turn on the news, there seems to be fighting going on somewhere. I am, of course, completely aware of the politics and the ways and reasons wars begin. But still, the old hippy deep down within me is greatly saddened by the fact that we can't seem to be able to leave eachother alone and live in peace on this big and beautiful planet of ours. 

Anyway, it is pretty clear we are not achieving world peace any time soon, so the only other thing I believe we can do is to take some time to listen to its stories. The stories of all the suffering it has caused. Maybe that will soften our hearts a tad bit.This is precisely where the films this week come in. They present stories of war, but not from common perspectives. They are sad, they are funny, they don't always say things we haven't heard before, but this doesn't mean these are not things we need to hear again. You will definitely watch them with baited breath, and have a lot to think about. I'm not sure if  "enjoy" is always the right word for them but hey... You get the picture. 

happy viewing,

Essie

A FOUR-FOOTED PERSPECTIVE ON THE HORRORS OF WAR: "WAR HORSE"

Ok, hand on heart. You have to admit it, in the scheme of things; these fellas often get missed out. Heck, they sometimes don’t even get a mention. Especially if we’re talking about war.  War is horrible, no one wants it, and no matter which way you look at things, a lot of people end up getting hurt and it is an absolute tragedy. Thing is, some of the “people” getting hurt are actually animals. I was on Facebook the other day and saw a very touching picture. A marine and his dog were standing in front of a memorial for all the marine dogs that had lost their lives in battle. The caption read “some heroes have four paws and fur”. I think it’s especially heroic, not least because these animals don’t actually understand what they are fighting for. They trust us. They go along with it. They do their best, sometimes to the bitter end. I think this is the reason films like War Horse is important. Let’s remember our animal friends. Let’s remember their sacrifices too…

Albert Naracott leads a tough life. He lives on a poor farm with his mother and his father, a rather embittered veteran of the Boer wars. His pride and joy is Joey, a beautiful thoroughbred horse his father purchased more on a whim than anything else. At the time, nobody thought anyone could get a day’s farm work out of Joey. But Albert knows he’s special, and so is their friendship. The couple are inseparable, that is, until the First World War Breaks out. The army needs everything, and “everything” includes horses. The family needs money. Albert is heartbroken but Joey is sold to the army. So begins the adventure of Joey. We follow him all through the horrors of the First World War, and thanks to him and the people whose lives he enters; we witness human stories on both sides of the trenches. The horror and fear in the Germans and the British as they prepare to fight each other to the death. The French civilians as they desperately try to survive the horrors ravaging their country. And the animals who are clinging on to dear life just as firmly as the humans…

Now, there are two ways of looking at this film. I could, potentially, be quite mean about it if I wanted to. I mean, this film is the latest incarnation of a genre that my generation has grown up with and lovingly giggled at later on in life. I am talking about films like Lassie, or Skippy the Bush Kangaroo. Joey is wonderful, his antics, the way he interacts with other horses and his ever varying tirade of owners brings tears to the eyes… However… I mean I have never owned a horse but seriously… It gets to the point that you begin to expect him to rise up on his hind legs and speak English. Or eat his hay with a knife and fork. I don’t know. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying the film isn’t adorable. (I mean heck, I loved Skippy the bush kangaroo so much, I WANTED a pet kangaroo, just ask my mom if you don’t believe me). But realistic, it definitely ain’t… And I mean, while we’re on the subject of realism, every single filmic cliché is successfully crammed into one film through Joey’s constant changing of hands. I mean, again, since we are talking about a master like Spielberg here, it is all very tastefully done and very well blended but still… A touch of originality now and then would not have hurt. At all.

But, on the other hand, as I said at the beginning of this post, this film makes an excellent point. Animals fought – and still fight – just as much as humans in the wars. They suffered and they died. They changed hands as if they were furniture (which is another subtle point made in the story of Joey) without any consideration for their feelings at all. If nothing else, this story helps us remember them. So go ahead. Watch it. Add some chocolate. Or a glass of wine. And tissues. This film will probably not change your world, it is more goo than anything else, but as they say, a little goo now and then is cherished by the wisest men… I think that’s how that quote went anyway… J

OUT OF THE MOUTHS OF INFANTS : "THE BOY IN THE STRIPED PIJAMAS"

I had heard SO much about this film. I guess you will have figured this out about me right now; I don’t do films that are “immensely popular”. If I feel a film is becoming a fad, I do have a certain tendency to steer clear from it. Not because I don’t trust public opinion, I just… I don’t know, it’s my inner artist or something “not wanting to follow the crowd” I guess. That’s one thing. The other thing is, I guess I’m a little wary around holocaust films. I mean, there are SO many of them. I’m not saying there shouldn’t be a lot, but the inevitable result of a large number of people crowding around a single topic is a lot of rather mediocre artwork. I mean , I’m sorry, but it’s true. Now, it has to be said that The Boy in the Striped Pijamas is not %100 original, in that all the themes it uses we actually have seen before. You might argue it was done better. But then again, this film takes it and uses it, adds on and adapts very, very well. And that is what artistry is largely about is it not? The adaptation and adding is just as important as coming up with an original story – especially in this world where truly original stories are becoming tougher and tougher to come by.

The Boy in the Striped Pijamas is the story of eight year-old Bruno (Asa Butterfield, who, it seems, is well on his way to becoming the acing phenomenon of the next generation. I didn't actually recoginse him at first but do the reasearch. He has been around. In a good way). He is the son of a high ranking SS official. He doesn’t quite understand what that means, but it seems that his father, along with other soldiers, is working hard to make the world they live in a better place. And that can’t be a bad thing. Bruno is very sad when his parents inform him that they will have to move out of Berlin. Bruno is very sad to leave his friends and his familiar routine behind, but the countryside soon begins to afford other occupations for him. One thing  that piques his interest more than anything is the “farm” they can see from the top bedroom windows. Some of the “farmers” who work there come to the house to run errands sometimes. Bruno thinks they’re a little odd, especially since they seem to wear pyjamas the whole time… His parents tell him he is strictly not allowed to talk to these people, but kids will be kids. Bruno strikes up friendship with a little boy his age called Shmuel. Bruno just wants a good friend to play with, and pass the time. Their friendship, however, will have consequences far beyond even his active imaginations wildest imaginings…

Of course you got the film I was talking about : Life is Beautiful. The classic that “made” Roberto Begnini. And my goodness, what a classic. It is so important to return to the innocence and sense of discovery innate in the soul of a child to take a fresh look at what we’re doing from time to time. Especially in the face of horror such as the Holocaust, not least because we are all pretty much in the face of something we have never seen before amazed and horrified. The thing about Bruno is though, his family do their level best to keep the evil from him. To prolong his and his sister Gretel’s innocence, they use every single trick they know but in the end, to no avail.

The film is touching in so many ways. It shows how the different family members do their best to cope with what is in effect a very stressful and upsetting situation. I mean even the father, who is the default “bad guy” by the end of the film can be understood. I honestly don’t know how I would react in his shoes either to be fair. But we should keep that discussion for after you have watched the film. The Boy in the Striped Pijamas is another striking testament to how miserable war really makes every single one of us. And that no matter how hard we try to escape it or block it out, it will come crawling through to our lives. The only way to stop it is to stop war completely, but well… That seems to be a lesson this planet isn’t quite ready to learn yet…