OF DEMONS AND MONSTERS - OF (TECHNO) GODS AND MEN... "THE SARAGOSA MANUSCRIPT"

I was warned when I got given this DVD. I was told that it contained stories within stories, within stories and that soon I would have no idea what the f.ck I was watching. That stark (ehm) warning and the fact that Bunuel declared it one of his favorite films meant that I went in for it prepared. I often stopped in my head and retraced my steps in the plot to make sure I wasn’t completely lost. I strongly advise you do the same because yes, in places the story does get as convoluted as you currently imagine it does. I mean come on. Bunuel liked it. That has to tell you something (if you have seen any of Bunuel’s works that is. If not, he is one of the surrealist masters of the 20^th century).

The story starts off simply enough. We start with two enemy soldiers fighting in Saragosa finding an old manuscript. The presence of the manuscript seems to enchant them, political and military divides are put to one side and they begin to read. The manuscript seems to be the story of a Walloon Captain during the Napoleonic wars, Alfonse van Worden (coincidentally one of the ancestors of our two initial narrators but little is made of this plot turn. Well, the number of loose threads that DO get tied up, I reckon I can allow them one). He passes through Saragosa and, crucially, a little place called Venta Quemada on his way to Madrid on an important mission. His local guides beg and plead with him against going through Venta Quemada. Ever since two prominent bandits were hung there, ghosts and demons have been regulars there every night. Alfonse, however, is a soldier with no time for this nonsense, so he just ploughs on through. This, he quickly finds, may have been a serious mistake.

We are plunged into a surrealist adventure populated with mystics, ghosts  and demons. We meet fellow travelers on the way and exchange stories, we exchange stories of stories and dart down little paths that seem to lead into darkness or nowhere in particular until… Oh yes. The Saragosa Manuscript is not quite like anything you have witnesses.

Now before you get further please be warned. This is a 3 hour long film, with a convoluted surrealist plot, in Polish. As you can see, it truly presents a plethora of potential problems for the casual viewer. This little film (well, I say little but actually… ) does, however, present a true treasure trove for those who brave it. I personally was prepared and pre-warned so, like I pointed out, I was keeping good track of who was telling who, what. But even so, the film does offer the occasional moment to recap, where the very confused van Worden simply has to stop and retrace his own steps. Van Worden (Zbgniew Cybulski) is the typical everyman. He starts off as a typical young soldier, brave and ambitious and with an eye for beautiful women. All these, however, turn on their heads and become his downfall. For, as we all know, the ambition and hotheadedness of youth are among the things most easily used and abused by the wily. Especially if the wily happen to be demons and evil spirits. I mean not that I would personally know this but yeah. Ok. Moving on.

I love the way the delicate way the storytelling is organized in this film. And I mean, this is a film made in 1965 with all the technological means of the time; it fills me with inspiration as to how you could, with more advanced special effects and such like, make a so much more intricate pattern than that drawn out in the Saragosa Manuscripts. But then again, we don’t have films like that anymore. Because, quite honestly, who these days has the time to watch a three hour film in the first place much less one with intricate multiple stories within a story that you actually have to make a considerable personal effort to follow (at one point the story is 5 levels down. As in the manuscript tells the story told by Alfonse who heard it from a third, who heard it from a fourth who heard it from a fifth and we change locations to watch the story “live” at every single change of narrator)?  I mean, I’m not going on about the fact that this structure is rare in the first place, it naturally is. The problem is that you couldn’t get that kind of project even the vague hope of a green light these days. Then we have things like the “short shorts” offered by a popular tv network in the UK. Four – five minute versions of daytime TV programs for “those with limited time”. Err… What? I mean, only a decade ago we were lamenting that TV was limiting attention spans and killing old fashioned story telling. Now TV is suffering lethal blows from its very own machination. And I mean, can we blame JUST TV? It’s the way we live today. Smartphones are a big one. We are constantly “turned on” to the goings on online, constantly in the firing line from our bosses or the “pushy” social media networks. Even if we have the resolve to turn off the phones or put them on silent we can’t really concentrate. We know there are “things” happening whether we are looking or not. And FOMO (fear of missing out) slowly invades our concentration and our daily life. We no longer “naturally” have the time to meander through the labyrinths of the Saragosa Manuscript, we need to get out our GPS and find the quickest way out because we have urgent emails to reply to, and cat pictures to “like”.  

I don’t own a smartphone. But I am finding I spend more and more time glued to my laptop. Wifi is becoming a serious “need” – my mother’s house does not have wifi and sufficet to say that my three week visit here is turning out to be… well interesting from that perspective. No doubt, when I finally join the smartphone bandwagon, I will be as glued to it as everyone else. But as someone who has a genuine old fashioned slice of “life offline” still in their hands, all I can say is that something is really and truly changing. It is inexorable and like most change, it is not necessarily bad, it is just the way things are now. But still… I think we’re going to miss old fashioned storytelling if it actually vanishes completely. If we actually notice it’s gone, that is. 

OUT OF THIS WORLD WITH "INKHEART"

Now, I know. It may not make sense to some. Brendan Fraser is not everyone’s idea of a leading man. I kind of understand why. But this film kinda got me. It may be because I am such a book worm and simply love the idea of characters coming out of books. It may be just that I found the idea original. And to be fair, there have been plenty of films about people going into books but not that many in the way of people going into books. And let’s be fair. We all love a good story. If the effects are good and the stroryline half-way decent and original, it gets forgiven most things in my book. (In my book – see what I did there? Oh never mind...)

Ok, so our hero is Mo (Brendan Fraser). He has a very good relationship with his daughter Meggie who he raises single handed. He restores books for a living and is passionate about books, but there is one especially that he has been looking for, for a very long time. Until today. The book is rare, this is true, but not particularly valuable or popular. But the book has a different kind of value to Mo. Unbeknown to his daughter, Mo has a talent. He can bring characters in books out into real life, simply by reading the book. And of course what has gone out, must go in and that is precisely what has happened to his wife Resa – Meggie’s mother. Mo’s only hope, all these years, has been to find another copy of the book and confront the villains that had emerged from it all those years ago, in the hope of getting his wife back... But with all his talents and now with his daughter to think of, can Mo really beat some villains that are truly out of this world?

Now, as you can guess from the general tone and actors, this is definitely not a film that will change your world and your perception of cinema. However, it has a lot going for it. First and foremost, with its graphics, monsters, dragons and magic, it is EXACTLY what I needed to watch at that particular time, on the evening of a tiring weeknight. It all comes down to my argument about entertainment at the end of the day. You can look down your nose at this kind of thing all you like. You can claim “oh but you knew the end all along” etc. But at the end of the day, the film claims to be no more than a tall yarn that will transport you to another universe for a couple of hours. It succeeded with me. Brandon Fraser may not be the future King Lear, however he is brilliant in his role here. It is not completely unsimilar to his previous roles in the Mummy franchise if you think about it. You know, the typical “good man” battling supernatural forces of evil... You know that has made me think how really subtle the phenomenon of typecasting can be... I mean, the Mummy and Inkheart have virtually nothing to do with eachother subject and genre-wise and yet... I don’t know. Maybe it’s a strong face like Brendan Fraser connecting them that connected the dots in my head... It’s a funny old world, eh? 

"HANCOCK" - A SUPERHERO WITH ATTITUDE

Ok, so this is another one I meant to watch for a while and forgot to get round to. That’s what happens if one lives one’s life surrounded by films. I live in a perpetual state of “what should I watch next”. I did not expect Hancock to be anything but an amusing fantastic /action movie that I would watch of an evening and forget. And to be absolutely fair, I highly doubt that Hancock is going to change anyone’s life. However, neither is it quite the soap bubble I thought it would be. I believe the character originated in some form of graphic art, this wasn’t something I’m aware of, but I do intend to “get round to it” sharpish. But let me tell you the story first.

Hancock is a super-hero. And you know what super-heroes are like, right? All honour, good manners and eat all your greens. Very nice in their place (say if aliens are attacking or, I don’t know, there’s a fire or an earthquake) but a little annoying in day to day life. I mean, that’s kinda what I think of old school super-heroes. This is why I loved the concept of Hancock. Because this super-hero has a serious attitude problem. He’s rude, he’s obnoxious, he’s a bum – as in he’s literally homeless – and he has a serious drinking problem. And yet he goes around the city, saving people as best he can. Now, Hancock is good enough at saving people. The thing is, it’s not only what you do, but the way you do it as well. So, as you can guess, Hancock is NOT  a very popular guy. Until, randomly, he saves a PR executive (Jason Bateman) from what is almost a fatal train accident. The PR executive decides to return the favour by doing some work on Hancock’s rep. This, as you can imagine, is the start of an amazing set of adventures in itself. But then, to add to all of that, there is the Exec’s wife, Mary, (Charlize Theron) who appears to hate Hancock with all her soul. But that’s another story all together.

Now, some people do not think much of Will Smith in general. Err, I do. I mean, I’m not a massive fan of his music, let’s be honest. And I highly doubt we will ever see him on a stage as King Lear or some such. However, in the movies he has acted in, his performance has always been brilliant. He is, in my view, especially good at comedies, and I mean honestly, I could not even imagine a better drunk and disorderly super-hero. What is more, in his numerous previous roles he has proved himself as an action star as well. So all in all, he is very, very successful in every single twist and turn of this film. I also think Jason Bateman and Charlize Theron are excellent choices as the PR exec and his wife too.

As I said, this film will not change your life. It is not, however, yet another badly put together action movie. It’s creators have taken some time to craft an original story in a genre that has all but been “done” completely.  And studios have invested the money it takes to give the story the technical backing it deserves to make rather spectacular special effects. In short, this is good quality entertainment folks. I can really think of worse films to turn my brain off to of a Friday night. Definitely recommended. 

ANIMATED EXTRAVAGANZA 1 : OK LET'S START WITH A FUTURE CLASSIC - "WALL-E"!

I’m now going to let you in on a little secret. I am a very VERY big softie indeed, so much so that I was slightly nervous about watching Wall-e. No, I can explain. I just skimmed the beginning of the synopsis you see. Dead planet. Cute little robot all by himself. He doesn’t know where anyone else is. I shuddered long and hard, decided it would probably make me cry, pushed it way back to the bottom of my “to watch” pile and actively ignored it, if you see what I mean. My friends ranted and raved about it, it won an Oscar ®, heck it won a whole host of awards, I still didn’t care. Well “Requiem For A Dream” is also a brilliant movie but you may well need a course of anti-depressants or a few sessions of counseling after watching it. So there I was, happily pretending “Wall-e” never happened when this years’ Oscar® nominations were announced. I had stumbled across Wall-e a couple of days earlier. I stuffed it back to the bottom of the pile of course but the argument that the fact that you might need counseling or anti-depressants is NOT a valid argument for not watching Requiem For A Dream had occurred to me. And I was sadly behind on watching this year’s nominations, so there really didn’t seem to be much of an excuse anymore… I sighed deeply, armed myself with a mug of tea (the British cure for shock) and plenty of tissues and hunkered down in front of the television set. Feel free to call me an idiot. What can I tell you, I should have trusted Pixar Studios.
Now, let’s get our story straight. Wall-e is indeed a cute little robot living on a dead planet earth. He lives on Planet Earth, 800 years from now. He has a happy if rather monotonous existence; his only friend is a little beetle and Wall-e goes around by himself tidying up New York City. Well there is a lot of city to tidy up, mountains of trash and discarded objects everywhere but at least all the human beings have left (all though God only knows where to and how). Wall-e trundles around collecting objects that seem interesting to him and watching old musicals (Hello Dolly to be exact) when he is off duty. Wall-e would like to fall in love, just like in the movie but he is all alone (except the beetle) so that is very much that. Until… One day a loud, noisy and rather scary spaceship leaves behind another robot. She is called EVE, she is white and she is nothing like anything Wall-e has ever seen… It’s love at first sight for Wall-e, Eve is slightly more dubious but it seems to be going well, until… Eve is stricken by a mysterious disease, shuts down and is taken back by the giant spaceship. Now, having found true love, wall-e is darned if he’s going to lose it that quickly so he stows away on the spaceship to “save” Eve. He soon finds himself in the middle of something quite epic. The future of mankind depends on Wall-e and Eve; they must save the humans from what probably is their most dangerous enemy. Themselves…
You probably know or have guessed that the undertones of the film (none too subtle at that…) the environment, saving the planet and being pro-active about it. As in getting off your backside and actually doing something (you’ll see EXACTLY what I mean when you watch the film). There have been many films of many different genres on the topic. Indeed it is a topic that cannot grow old or stale until we actually DO something to save our poor planet but that is beside the point. The point is, there have been VERY few films as good as Wall-e. The characters are sweet to “t”. The new worlds created… Well, it’s Pixar, vintage Pixar… I always admired that corporation now I know why some people are out and out fans of it. I SHOULD know I’m now officially one of those fans! It will stretch your imagination to the limits and it will make you think about what we very well may become in 800 years if we go on like this. Heck, it might even push you into trying and doing something to stop it. Personally I would much prefer this to be forever thought of as a wonderful tribute to human imagination as opposed to a film “full of foresight”… If you see what I mean…

ANIMATED EXTRAVAGANZA 2 : UP!

Well, we started this week off with Pixar studios I don’t see why we shouldn’t go on with them =) No interesting story as to why I never watched this though. Nope, sheer negligence I’m afraid. But, it was the day after I watched Wall-e, and I was searching for something to watch for the day (during my sabbatical, I have adopted a “one film a day” policy. Unless something very exceptional happens, I try and definitely watch one film every day). And now since I’m hot on my new “themes” line, Up literally bounced out at me (for those of you who watched it, it was a bit like Russell “me, me, me!” =) ). It made me laugh, it made me cry… A beautiful film. Just goes to show there is a lot more to cartoons than meets the eye. So much so, I’m actually planning on doing a second week of them, studying the more unusual ones, but more on that later. It won’t be next week anyway ;)
Now, Up. Unless you moved to the moon recently, even if you don’t know the full story of the film, you will know that Up is about a flying house. Yes, an old man who ties tons of balloons to the flying house and makes it fly. It’s all over the posters and the teaser shown in cinemas. Now, let’s put that into context shall we? The old man is Carl Frederickson. He is one of the lucky ones who was blessed with true love. His wife Ellie and he were childhood sweethearts. They never had kids – not for lack of trying – but they truly loved each other and were happy. They had many things that united them and one of them was a childhood hero; the great explorer Charles Munson. When she was a child, Ellie wanted to move her house to Paradise Falls in Venezuela. Once grown up, the dream seemed slightly more improbable of course but they do their darndest to get there. They don’t manage however, and then Ellie passes away leaving Carl on his own and completely lacking in… Well many things, but above all a meaning to his existence. Then he remembers something: the promise he made to Ellie all those years ago. He was going to take her to Paradise Falls, and the house with them. As he is facing eviction and a forced trip to the retirement village, Carl decides the only sensible thing to do is to tie balloons to the house and make off. So he does just that. However, nothing in life is straightforward and the best made plans come unstitched at the seams. Carl’s begin when he realizes he has inadvertently brought someone with him on his porch… Then a pack of talking dogs, a strange bird and Charles Munson get mixed up in the whole thing. At the age of eighty-something, Carl is about to embark on one of the greatest adventured of his life…
I was once again struck by the power of animation as I watched this film. And the distance it has come since “Steamboat Willy” (that, in case you didn’t know, was the first name of the character we now know as “Mickey Mouse”). Cartoons were seen merely as children’s entertainment before whereas now, they can be used both to create new and wonderful worlds and characters and to convey very complicated sentiments. Take Up for instance. Without and dialogue and with the use of a very neat yet deep and meaningful sequence, we learn that Ellie has a miscarriage and thus Carl and Ellie are unable to have children. Ellie is heartbroken but Carl nurses her back to life, and reminds her of their dream of going to Paradise Falls, giving her a new lease of life. All this in a couple of minutes, touchingly put with all the appropriate sentiment. Then of course there’s the comedy factor. I mean not every actor in show bizz is good at mimics and accents; everyone has their own specific talent. With animation however, a host of caricatures and features become real – well pretty close to real anyway! This doesn’t mean serious topics cannot be undertaken, I mean I was so touched at one point I actually burst into tears and they were by NO means tears of joy or laughter… Love in its many forms is ever present in the film as is an INCREDIBLE adventure… Not to be missed…

ANIMATED EXTRAVAGANZA 3 : DICK TRACY!

Ok, ok I know. Technically, this is NOT an animated film. But even if it’s not actually a cartoon, it was part of a cartoon strip. Heck, it was adapted from a cartoon strip! Come on be honest, anyone who was familiar with Dick Tracy before Warren Beatty brought him to life knew him in cartoon form. (I should have specified of course, out of the many incarnations of the cartoon detective, we are interested today in the 1990 incarnation vie Warren Beatty – another example of someone directing a film and playing the lead in it… However, since this is Dick Tracy we’re talking about, he naturally gets the limelight so there’s nothing much to complain about… Humph… ). And besides, have you actually seen the movie? Remember all the villains? Big Boy, Mumbles and the rest of the mob? They were all made up to look like cartoons for crying out loud, the films won an Oscar® for its’ art direction! By the way ,if you watch this one, please note how sometimes the shots of the town look like cutouts or drawings… The brightly colored costumes too… I loved it, LOVED it… But less of my rambling on and on, you want to hear about the film.
Dick Tracy… You all know him, out on the streets, fearlessly fighting the bad guys, saving the day, putting the mobsters in jail… Well, things turn a bit nasty for him when the notorious Big Boy Spaldoni (played by a very made up and superbly “over acting” Al Pacino) takes over the underworld making himself the boss of a very powerful, dark empire. He is preparing to hold the entire city to ransom and Tracy is the only one who can stop him! Tracy has problems however. His long term girl friend Tess Trueheart wants to settle down and for him to take a nice, safe desk job. There’s “the kid” a nameless orphan he has rescued from the street but who he can’t seem to get rid of. Then there’s a rather stunning gangster’s Moll (played by an equally stunning Madonna) who is desperately trying to get him… Not in the “gangster” sense though. Will Tracy save the day? Or has he finally met his match in Big Boy Spaldoni?
You can take this movie in a number of ways and one of them is almost definitely a spoof gangster film. I mean yes, it has all the classic marks of Dick Tracy, heck, Warren Beatty is a pretty good choice for Tracy; he even looks like him. But one can’t help seeing the irony in Al Pacino playing Big Boy Spaldoni. He splutters, he is bad tempered he is one of the funniest mafia bosses ever to hit the screen and all this portrayed by the guy who played Toni Montana and Michael Corleone… I roared with laughter. Dustin Hoffmann has a nice little part as Mumbles – caricature of another kind of gangster, you will see what I mean when you watch it. As for Madonna and the songs well… Combine her voice and the talent of the famous score writer Dany Elfman small wonder the film won the Oscar ® for best song… What else can I tell you? Good guys vs bad guys, car chases, beautiful dames, big guns… The 50’s, best of the 50’s… You will LOVE it…

FIND OUT HOW ALL THE FUSS BEGAN : "INTERVIEW WITH A VAMPIRE"

Now, I don’t know what your stance on this matter is, but I am personally glad the whole “Edward” craze is finally subsiding. I don’t particularly dig vampires, and although Robert Pattinson is an admirable young man I don’t find him drop dead gorgeous. Well, when I say I don’t dig vampires, that isn’t strictly true – I just don’t dig those particular vampires. And before you say anything, nor am I a fan of Buffy the Vampire slayer or Angel – I don’t dig those vampires either. But there are a group of vampires that were particularly cool. Old school stuff, with real classic actors playing them. You surely remember Interview with a Vampire? Now, Old Moon, New Moon; Second Hand Moon - not my thing. Anne Rice? Interview with a Vampire Trilogy? (Yep, THREE books, Interview with a Vampire, The Vampire Lestat and Queen of the Damned) NOW you’re talking. The classic movie I want to talk about today (I assume you have at least heard of it!) is based on the first book. Rather a good adaptation I may add. There was also an adaptation of the third book, Queen of the Damned a TOTAL disaster as far as being faithful to the story is concerned… (just possibly because they skipped the second book and moved to the third because there was a sexy lady (the afore mentioned Queen of the Damned played by the late Aaliyah) in the story and they thought it would be a better crowd pleaser). Now, my view, stay away from that one, but watch Interview With A Vampire. Then read the book – there are a lot of details in the book that are overlooked in the film – an understandable situation, the book is a tad long – but I say do both. It is a classic in its own genre and I would hate you all to think Edward and Bella are the best modern fiction has to offer as far as vampires are concerned…
Louis de Pointe Du Lac (Brad Pitt by the way) was 24 in 1791. He is the owner of a large plantation but having lost both his beloved wife and newborn baby in childbirth he has lost the will to live. One night, as he is sharing this predicament with a chance drinking companion, he is faced with a bizarre choice. His companion – Lestat De Lioncourt (Tom Cruise just incidentally) is a vampire. A vampire who has not had his dinner yet and would be only too glad to kill him and put him out of his misery. However, Lestat has taken a liking to Louis; therefore he will give him a choice, for Lestat can turn Louis into a vampire. A new life as a creature of the night leaving all mortal toil behind him is tempting to Louis and he accepts. The new life is good. It is complicated, as Louis finds it almost impossible to kill people even though that means being almost starved or living off rats but it is good. Heightened senses, immortality and Claudia (a pint sized Kirsten Dunst), a little girl Lestat “turns” for Louis to assuage his loneliness… Louis and his new family are happy; the sky seems to be the limit… Unfortunately, Louis is about to discover that there are other things that don’t have limits: the darkness in Lestat’s heart and his greed…
Now, this is indeed a vampire film. It is not, however, merely a silly time filler either. Authorities back in the 90’s took this film so seriously they nominated it for not one but two Oscars ® and although the big names in the movie are admirable it wasn’t for the acting but for the score (music) and art direction. So this, my children is a “bona fide” film no moony nonsense here; new or otherwise, (sorry Mom – and any other fans - I know you love the series but they just GET ON MY NERVES!!). And the whole story itself is wonderfully constructed. It’s like a good romantic novel, will just sweep you off your feet, back to the 18th century, you will live with vampires for 200 years then be back in time to get the supper ready and the dishes washed. The acting is good, as you might well expect and the film is seriously good quality. Oh and by the way, the director of the movie is Neil Jordan, Oscar ® winning director of “The Crying Game”… We are, as you can imagine, in the domain of good quality entertainment. Your life won’t be changed by this, but then again I assume you don’t expect your life to be changed by a movie about vampires. I recommend this film to all vampire lovers despite my scathing words about the series. Think of it this way, if you like this genre so much, you might as well know a bit more about its “history” and classic examples. And who knows, after you watch it, maybe you’ll see what I mean even if you don’t agree.

THERE IS ONE IN ALL OF US - COME "WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE"

We all read this one right? I don’t think it’s that old as a book – my Mom doesn’t remember it - but I most definitely had a copy and I LOVED it… I was intrigued when I heard it was being adapted to film as well – the book is only about 15 – 20 pages long if I remember correctly! However with Oscar® nominated director Spike Jonze at the helm (director of “Adaptation” and the rather surreal classic “Being John Malkovich”) I was excited aswell. Then I saw the trailer and was desperate to watch it. Then I finally got my grubby paws on the film. I’m in love with it. I’ll go as far as saying I shed a little itty-bitty tear at the end…

Meet Max. He’s I would say around 10, he lives with his mother and older sister. He’s a bit of a loner and tends to throw tantrums and “act up” from time to time. He also has a very active imagination to make up for the loneliness… One day he runs away from home (his mother has a new boyfriend and his father is not around – I seem to have assumed the father was dead but there are no real indications in that direction) . Well, he runs and runs and runs, jumps into a little boat and crosses oceans and arrives at a mysterious island. This island is inhabited by monsters – big huge monsters with fur and horns and tails… They usually eat people but they don’t eat Max, in fact they end up making him their king… Max is a good king for a while and makes his subjects very happy. He becomes particularly close to one of the monsters – Carol (Carol’s a boy by the way – don’t question it, so was “Winne” the Pooh) the others are nice too though… However as we all know with that with great power comes responsibility and soon Max’s kingdom starts to unravel…

This categorically the MOST touching film I have ever watched – almost anyway… It is a children’s book it’s adapted from of course but I have a hard time classifying it as “fit for the whole family” – I mean you CAN show this to the little ones but a lot of subtleties of the film will be lost on the younger audiences… There is Judith and Ira – a monster couple, Alexander who no one ever listens to and who is the smallest, then Carol who tends to break things when he’s upset and who is pining for his “special friend” K.W (a girl in case you’re getting confused). In case my explanation was ambiguous this is very obviously a land of Max’s imagining – and the little details (I’ll leave you to discover them yourself) are endearing. The way Max and Carol learn to cope with life, the way they both “grow up”… And the cast doing the voiceovers is ASTOUNDING : James Gandolfini is Carol (I racked my brains as to who the very familiar voice was all through the film and had to check imdb), Lauren Ambrose (from Six Feet Under) is K.W. , Forest Whitaker is Ira and Oscar® winning actor Chris Cooper is another one of the monsters I didn’t mention (Douglas for those who watch – by the way don’t you ADORE their names). This is the story of a very imaginative little boy (The talented Max Records – who is 12 in the movie apparently – I got the age right!) thrashing out life and the whole “growing up” thing. Highly recommended to anyone with an imagination…

ALICE IN WONDERLAND

Ok, on with our weekly dose of escapism! And surely when it comes to the fantastical and magical there is no master who could truly compete with Mr. Tim Burton… And anyone who is a fan (and anyone who has a liking for fantastic films, is I find) had their eyes out on stalks when news that he was filming Alice in Wonderland surfaced… I (and indeed a goodly portion of my office) was counting the days to release, although by some twist of fate, I missed the 3-D or IMAX version and had to watch it on DVD. I am not a massive technophile (as you may have noticed) but I really would have liked to have given this a spin in 3-D. Oh well… So, I purchased the DVD, waited for an opportune moment gathered the family round the TV set when said moment arrived and then “went for it”. And yes, it was naturally phenomenal even in 2-D.

So what’s the plot? Surely, I hear you cry; surely we all know the story of Alice! Cut to the chase – get to the gossip! Well actually no, it’s not exactly the Alice story you’re thinking of. (This is Tim Burton boys and girls, have some respect, WOULD he do a dry old re-make?!) It’s Alice a good many years later. Alice is 19(and is acted by Mia Wasikowska - of whom I am pretty sure we'll be hearing more) and on the verge of getting married to Hamish, her father’s old business partners (old because her father has passed on and the partner has now taken over the business leaving Alice and her family in a very “difficult” position.). She has strange dreams about falling and rabbits in waistcoats but on the whole, dismisses them as dreams. She is rather unlike young ladies her own age – but that people think is largely the fault of her rather eccentric upbringing. She has, on the whole, a normal life until she is tracked down by her old acquaintance the White Rabbit and is swept back to Wonderland – for a mission awaits her there. The Red Queen (Helena Bonham-Carter – who is fast becoming an obligatory fixture in Mr. Burton’s works. But they do love each other and she is the mother of his children so I can sort of understand I guess… Besides she does make a rather scary Red Queen), anyway the Red Queen rules Wonderland with an iron fist and the “rebels” such as the Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp – another obligatory fixture in Mr. Burton’s works. Not that anybody’s complaining, I mean, Champagne and strawberries, coffee and cigarettes, Depp and Burton – some things were meant to be together… Who, me biased?!!), the March Hare, the Door mouse and the Cheshire Cat (who is voiced over – or voice overed - by Stephen Fry and is my favourite animated character in the film) need Alice’s help to defeat the Jabberwocky (‘Twas brillig and the slithy toes jired and gimbled in the wabe… Oh come on now, I know you haven’t forgotten really!) and help get the good White Queen (Ann Hathaway) back on the throne… But can Alice adapt to Wonderland again and save the day?

Now, on reading this, you can actually be forgiven for crying “Blasphemy!”. In all honesty it can’t be more different from the original Alice story – the children’s classic beloved by anyone worth knowing (my own humble opinion). In fact, it actually sounds like a rather bad sequel, or something hurriedly adapted off another classic Hook. Try and look beyond it though. Think of this particular version of Alice in wonderland as the combining of two great imaginations – Lewis Carroll and Tim Burton. Mr. Burton takes the characters invented so very many years ago by Lewis Carroll, and uses extraordinary actors and modern technology to take them one step further, to make them bigger and better and more colorful… I mean, you may say that technology has its limits while the imagination does not; however, when Tim Burton’s imagination is the hand using the technology, let me tell you the limits are pretty damn blurry. In this context, even the fact that the film blends the characters from two separate books (Alice in Wonderland and Alice through the Looking Glass) doesn’t really bother one. It’s a magical, wonderful, colorful world full to the brim with delightful details. Speaking of details – not that these really count as details but they are not things you notice at once either – the cast doing the voiceovers for the animated characters are BRILLIANT. I’m on IMDB as I write this, checking the list and dear God, Michael Sheen, Alan Rickman (Snape from the Harry Potter movies), Barbara Windsor (Peggy from Eastenders), Paul Whitehouse (a comedian I’m particularly fond of but probably will mean very little to anyone outside the U.K) and Timothy Spall (whose name you won’t recognize but face you immediately will, especially if you watch British T.V).
In short, you will simply get carried away by it. I mean, I watched the film with my 87 year-old grandmother for God’s sake, and even SHE adored it!

THE IMAGINARIUM OF DOCTOR PARNASSUS

You guys may have noticed that I am a great fan of good, old fashioned escapism. I mean let’s face it, we all need it at times. That’s why adults read comics and watch cartoons; that’s why fiction as a genre exists! This is probably why, when I find a film that well and truly transports me to another world I pounce on it and give it a big (metaphysical) cuddle. The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus is just such a cuddle-worthy film. Springing from the crazy imagination of Terry Gilliam, you would expect nothing less. Plus the film is chock – full of handsome actors (the late great Heath Ledger, Johnny Depp, Jude Law, Colin Farrell…). If that’s not cuddle-worthy, I don’t know what is, right ladies ? ;)

So, what is the Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus about? As with everything Gilliam-related, it’s a little hard to explain and almost impossible to describe but I’ll give it a go. Ok, it’s sort of, kind of a little bit of a take on Dr Faust – but not quite. You see, Dr. Parnassus (Christopher Plummer) was actually born thousands of years ago – but a bet with the devil has given him eternal life. It is not turning out the way he had planned. One day, upon coming across the woman of his dreams, he makes another pact with the devil – youth and the chance to conquer this woman. However, he must give the first child from this union to the devil on its 16th birthday. So we find him, traveling the world with his daughter Valentina (Lily Cole) and his two assistants, as a traveling troupe of performers. This is where the Imaginarium comes in – or where you go into the Imaginarium, an imaginary world commanded by the doctor where all ones wishes come true. They have a happy life minus the fact that Valentina is almost 16 and her father is desperate to find a way out of his bargain. Mr. Nick ( the devil) comes up with just such a plan. The first to seduce five souls in the Imaginarium will win. This sounds easy but is actually no mean feat seeing as the Imaginarium is doing, in a word, dismally. But then, Tony (mostly Heath Ledger) comes along. The troupe rescues him from the jaws of death – he is dazed and has completely lost his memory. His mere presence however, will change the rules of “the game” forever…

Now, what of my impressions of the film? Well, it has no great philosophy, it is Hollywood and special effects at their best. And I mean their best. It is no Avatar of course, but it is instead a wonderful imagination, colorful costumes and fantasy worlds and details that Monty Python fans will recognize and squeal with glee about (not a lot of people know this but it also racked up two Oscar® nominations for Best Art Direction and Best Costume Design. VERY well deserved.) This is good, old-fashioned story-telling folks; done by superb actors too. It is also a good reminder of the powers of the imagination. I would hate to become one of those people who are incapable of imagining, of enjoying a story, of plunging into a fantasy world without 3-D glasses… I am sure that those of you who have watched the film will agree with me when I tell you that it should more accurately be called “The Imaginarium of Terry Gilliam”… Just immerse yourselves. You will emerge re-born. ;)

MEET JOE BLACK (SOONER OR LATER EVERYBODY DOES)

Let’s stick with Hollywood today. Not the bubbles and trash that pours out of it though, the choice morsels the sometimes somewhat older films. Maybe not “life changing” or “cutting edge” but good old yarns. With a couple of super-stars and maybe a sniff-worthy ending… We all pretend to be soo intellectual yet we all have our faves in this camp. I am determined to share one of mine with you today. Meet Joe Black…

William Parrish (Anthony Hopkins) is blessed. He has it all. He is a successful and well-loved businessman, he has a loving family (albeit slightly self-obsessed but well meaning – and that is more than some families!) and a life-style to be envied. He is approaching the age of 65 – and being a media mogul he will celebrate it with style, his older daughter is organizing a giant party for him and all and sundry. But then, quite out of the blue, he is confronted by a young man (Brad Pitt). It takes a moment for Mr. Parrish to absorb the information but this young man is in fact, Death. However, he has taken on a human form because he has become curious about life in the world. He wants Mr. Parrish to be his guide for a few days. In return, Mr. Parrish will get… Time. And the chance to celebrate his birthday with his family and friends for the last time. Mr. Parrish is surprised but has little choice other than accepting. The young man is a little awkward but takes the name “Joe Black” and is somehow able to incorporate himself quite smoothly into “life”. But, as the saying goes, what is life without love? Joe Black discovers how true this is when he falls in love with Susan Parrish (Claire Forlani) William Parrish’s younger daughter, much to the dismay of her father…

I honestly think this film is the epitome of Hollywood at its best. The story, you have to admit, is original. Fantastic, some might say quite unbelievable, but original. Different. The actors ? Two of my favorites. Anthony Hopkins, I ADORE, I have seen most things he’s acted in. Brad Pitt is soo charismatic as Joe Black. And Claire Forlani is one of those people you will recognize when you see. I did a bit of research on her just now; turns out I’ve actually seen her in a bunch of stuff in secondary roles. She’s pretty damn good as well… You know what kind of film this is? The kind you watch with your girlfriends on a Friday night in, with cocoa and marshmallows and/or chocolates. You drool over Brad Pitt, get excited about the story and sentimental about the end. And although I don’t give spoilers on principal, I don’t mind telling you it’s a Hollywood ending. Complete with fireworks.