Monday, 17 October 2016

Weekly Witch Hunt: K.Flay 'Blood in the Cut' & Seven Guns For Timothy

We decide what artistic endeavour passed approval to earn the Scorcher label from the past seven days & what also had the dishonour of being that week's Torture...

I was going to put Green Room for this week's Scorcher but I have had two films already take out that mantle; so I thought I would go for a musical number instead.  But I do highly recommend seeing Green Room; it is a terrific thriller with some top notch performances.  While it does hint at following some movie conventions; instead it does manage to throw in a surprise or two which is always welcome.

The Scorcher

I have had Blood in the Cut by K.Flay stuck in my head since I first heard it.  It isn't particularly ground-breaking; in fact it follows a very simple formula.  What it does do though, is follow that formula very well to create a very catchy tune.
You have the simple slow start to the song as the instruments introduce themselves.  Then it goes into the faster tempo of the chorus before bringing the tone down again for the next verse.  You then get the lift as the chorus comes back in; then just past the halfway point it enters into a clap &chant combination.  Finally it ends on another faster, louder rendition of the chorus to close out the tune.
It is the type of song that you get quite often but once it gets you going; you will find that you are humming it or singing along too.  I love discovering songs like this; ones that get me excited to hear what else the artist has in their repertoire.  I was also pleasantly surprised to find out that K.Flay already has one album to her name which I will no doubt be perusing very soon.
In the meantime I will just have to content myself with repeat listens of this awesome tune.

The Torture
 
With the release of the remake of The Magnificent Seven I decided to watch another version of the story; the 1966 spaghetti western Seven Guns For Timothy.  Italy and Spain had a reputation throughout most of the 60's and early 70's of remaking any hit western and adding their own spin on the story.
This is of course the Italian version of the Yul Brynner movie which was in turn a western version of Akira Kurosawa's Seven Samurai.  In typical spaghetti western tradition we get a much shoddier acted, staged, filmed and directed version.
I think it is safe to say that this film is terrible.  For starters there aren't even seven guns for Timothy when it comes to gathering the troops; there are six and that includes Timothy himself.  Plus one of the five recruits doesn't actually join the group until very late in proceedings.
A lot of what takes place is done with a nod and a wink to the audience and played very much for cheap laughs.  This is especially true when Timothy is being trained by the men who have come to his aid.  While this is not exactly a bad thing it does mean tonally the film goes all over the place.
There are also some very weird shots that last too long and then there are shots of quick edits from one person to another.  This direction also does nothing to give the film an even flow.  One particular scene has the character Slim show up at Timothy's residence on his horse.  He hitches his horse to the rail and runs inside the home.  Normally your view would switch to the interior to see the conversation that then takes place.  Not here, the director thought it would be far more entertaining to linger on the shot of the horse eating hay outside; while we can hear the dialogue between Slim and Timothy.  This scene goes for at least a minute of just a shot of a horse!
Timothy is played by Sean Flynn, the son of Errol Flynn.  He is passable in the role, a bit wooden, but he does look the part.  What was worth my time; was further investigating the tragic end to this young man's life.  His career as a photojournalist would make a pretty good movie of its own.
The ever reliable Fernando Sancho plays the villain of the piece, as he did in many spaghetti westerns.  I make no apologies for spoiling the end of the film here; but it isn't even Timothy who gets to be the hero of his own film when it comes to the final showdown.  That was a big letdown and just about sums up my whole feeling towards this poor remake.  Hunt out one of the better versions instead.

Monday, 10 October 2016

Weekly Witch Hunt: Battle Royale & Money Monster

We decide what artistic endeavour passed approval to earn the Scorcher label from the past seven days & what also had the dishonour of being that week's Torture...

I spent most of last week with my head buried in a couple of books after I decided to continue with the adventures of Miss Peregrine's peculiar children.  I still managed to watch a few films as well as continue my re-watch of Buffy and Angel; something which inspired my previous trial.  Without any further ado here are the items for this week's witch hunt.

The Scorcher

I loved this film.  I have wanted to see Kinji Fukasaku's final movie for a number of years and finally had the chance to view it.  I can understand why people say The Hunger Games copied the template set out in Battle Royale to a certain degree.
Apart from pitting young adults against one another and supplying them with weapons they both then move in different directions.  I have to say The Hunger Games movies are definitely light entertainment in comparison to the visceral bloodletting that happens in Battle Royale.
What I enjoyed the most was how nearly every child competing has their moment of death play out on screen.  Now that I have written that as a sentence it feels so wrong!  But, regardless of morality, I was highly entertained.  When you have over 40 people competing it would be easy to miss a few but we do see everyone's death scene or at least their body after they have been slaughtered.  The death tally appearing was a cool notion too.
There are so many varied ways they kill off the unwilling contestants and the brutal instinct of kill or be killed comes out in the most unlikely people.  I particularly enjoyed the scene where some of the girls have teamed up together.  Then when the wrong person takes a sip of poisoned soup suddenly all hell breaks loose as trust goes out the window and the survival instinct kicks in for every one of them.
Beat Takeshi is excellent as the teacher who has had enough of these unruly pupils.  You get a real sense from him early on that he has been beaten down and knows that no matter what methods he tries; nothing will get these students to learn and become contributing members of society.
If you are after some bloodthirsty action with a reasonable story and some decent acting then this will not disappoint.  There are also social messages hidden amongst the violence but, hey, I just came to see a bunch of teenagers chop one another to pieces!

The Torture

I will start by saying that this is not a terrible film I just found a certain plot point to be totally unrealistic which made the whole premise fall to pieces before it had a chance to get going.
Jack O'Connell's Kyle Budwell takes money advisor Lee Gates, played by George Clooney, hostage during a live broadcast of Lee's show Money Monster which is where we get the film's title.  Julia Roberts plays the shows director Patty Fenn.
As soon as Kyle comes in waving a gun around Patty rightfully shuts down the broadcast.  This infuriates Kyle and he forces them to put the show back on the air, which Patty then does.  Now I am sure that in reality this would never happen.
What could have taken place is the studio monitors should have still been able to stream the camera feed.  This would give Kyle the impression that his message is being broadcast.  They could have kept the tension level just as high if both Kyle and Lee thought that they were streaming live to millions of viewers but in reality it was only seen by those present in the studio.  Neither would be any the wiser.  It would have made the futility of Kyle's attempt to make these big corporations accountable for their errors, have more of an impact once you get the reveal at the end that no one in the outside world saw what unravelled.
After all one of the messages that I got as the film concludes was that it didn't make much difference what action Kyle took; it would be business as usual come the morning.  Once they started showing the hostage situation live, and the constant switching to people watching events unfold, it lost something for me and this happens reasonable early on in the film. 
The other plot point that infuriated me was how Lee and Kyle were allowed to leave the studio.  The police have managed to clear all but a few people from danger and yet they allow this terrorist to then leave an isolated building.  They don't know where he is going, or why, or what he intends to do; thus endangering far more civilians than were originally taken as hostage in the first place.  It just wouldn't be allowed to happen.  They would have shot him as soon as he stepped outside and taken the subsequent death of Lee as collateral damage rather than put all those other people at risk.
Those two flaws in the plot took away from my overall enjoyment.  There is definitely a half decent story to be told here, it just isn't portrayed very well overall.

Friday, 7 October 2016

Television: Buffy the Vampire Slayer

The Witch Trial:
"Into every generation there is a chosen one.  One girl in all the world.  She alone will wield the strength and skill to stand against the vampires, the demons and the forces of darkness; to stop the spread of their evil and the swell of their number.  She is the Slayer."
Well surely we can't leave one girl to fight on her own; we must ride to her aid and offer our assistance...

Who:
Director: Joss Whedon, Bruce Seth Green and others
Starring: Sarah Michelle Gellar, Nicholas Brendon, Alyson Hannigan, David Boreanaz, Anthony Stewart Head, Charisma Carpenter
What:
Horror/Drama
Why:
Season 2
When:
Released 1997/98
Where:
Set in Sunnydale...on the Hellmouth!


The Case For:
Next year will see the 20th anniversary of Buffy the Vampire Slayer first airing on television.  Who would have thought a show about a teenage girl battling all sorts of things that go bump in the night would have such a massive impact.  It is a show that not only had a wide group of loyal followers but also showed the way to make a successful television show that many others have tried to copy.  While some have reached the same heights; there are far more examples of others who have failed to capture the same lightning in a bottle.
I was a bit late in coming to the party as I started watching partway through season two.  I admit that the premise had turned me off originally; a girl in high school fighting vampires didn't really inspire me.  Considering season two was my first experience of the Buffyverse I felt it my duty to put this particular season of the demon hunter in the dock and see how well she and the Scooby gang pass cross examination.
My first experience of actually giving the show a go came when I watched Inca Mummy Girl.  Without the knowledge of what had occurred in the earlier episodes I didn't get the reference that Xander was attracted to yet another bad choice for a potential girlfriend; but I would rectify that in the future.  From viewing that first episode I was hooked and didn't miss a show after it; whilst also going back and watching season one when I managed to get my hands on it.
My first impressions were that Buffy was a badass kicking vampire and demon butt and helping people and her friends out of dangerous situations.  Those friends were privy to her true nature and rallied around her helping out where they could.  They had to do research about who they were coming up against and find a way to eliminate the threat rather than just resorting to brute force, although in a lot of cases that still worked.
This wasn't just some teenager tripe only there for mild entertainment.  Buffy dealt with issues that kids growing up all over the world come across every day.  I don't mean zombies attacking your home; but dealing with emotions, handling relationships, making and losing friendships, coping with the loss of loved ones and many, many others.
After a few episodes I started to take note of these things and realized that I was really invested in these characters and could relate to them on so many levels.  There were many traits in more than one person that I could see were a reflection of my own persona.  I may not have been in school at the time but those memories of what they were going through were still fresh in my mind.  Who hasn't experienced rejection or come across a bully in school?  The situations and the way they handled them in most cases felt real.
It is the reality of the show that resonates most with audiences.  You can empathize with the characters because their experiences in everyday life are normal occurrences.  The fantastical element of the show only helps to enhance or place more emphasis on those experiences.
Take Angel for instance.  He appears to be the perfect boyfriend but turns out to be a monster.  They literally turn Buffy's ex-boyfriend into a monster and I bet there are plenty of girls who have felt that way about their ex.  The pain Buffy goes through during this breakup is heartbreaking to witness.  It is helped by the reactions of her friends too.  Willow is the shoulder to cry on; Xander is the one saying I told you he was no good.  Again these reactions are ones you would see in the real world and therefore have more impact for the viewer.
You only get this invested in characters when they are developed to a high degree and because the writing of Whedon and his team is so good; each and every one of the main cast have their personality presented to us as fully fleshed out people.  The decisions they make have consequences and as the show progresses we get to view how their choices affect not only themselves but the people around them.
Having good heroes is one thing, but they would be nothing without developing some terrific villains and in season two we get two of the best the show has to offer in Spike and Drusilla.  One thing they do very well at the start of the season is have you think that the Anointed One, who is carried over from season one, is going to be the main antagonist.  However he proves to be just a MacGuffin once Spike and Dru appear on the scene.
Straight from the off you know Spike is going to be a vampire different in appearance and mannerisms to The Master; her previous main foe.  You know he means business as soon as he is introduced and he does not disappoint when it comes to terrorizing Buffy and her friends.
His beau Drusilla is another thing entirely.  At first she appears to be totally unhinged and extremely weak.  You get the impression that she is going to be Spike's Achilles heel.  As the story unfolds though she comes into her own and is equally, if not more of a scary proposition for our protagonists.  Juliet Landau plays her perfectly, giving her childlike qualities when she appears at her most vulnerable and then transforming into a she-devil to truly be feared once she regains her strength.  Likewise James Marsters plays off her so well and the two of them together are a formidable duo.
Of course their nastiness pales into the background once Angelus makes an appearance.  It says a lot for the writing and acting again; what David Boreanaz is able to achieve in just nineteen episode appearances.  For much of season one he is little more than a supporting character right up until the episode Angel and he only appears twice more in that season.  He becomes a regular cast member for season two and so it is really only fourteen episodes in which we establish he is a vampire with a soul who falls in love before losing said soul and reverting to his evil alter-ego: Angelus.
The trials and tribulations that Buffy and Angel go through before the series climax really helps to build the tension and boost the emotional gut punch that occurs once Buffy is faced with the ultimate decision in the season finale.  There is real beauty and sadness on display and again I can only applaud the actors and the script they were working from.
They truly nail the relationships between the characters and their love interests and this is not only true of our two leads but the wider cast too.  We get the most unromantic, incompatible of couples in Xander and Cordelia and while it is presented in an amusing way; it also resonates as not out of the realms of possibility as these two opposites attract.
The sweetest coupling by far is that between Willow and Oz.  For Willow the whole romantic relationship is a brand new experience and she fumbles her way through it with all the excitement and nervousness that comes with starting to date someone.  Oz proves to be a perfect gentleman and the way he nurtures Willow through her awkwardness would have plenty of ladies swooning wanting to take her place.  His self effacing nature goes a long way to putting Willow at ease as she comes to realize that what truly matters is only what concerns herself and Oz and not how others view them.
Not only are the teenage relationships presented well but also those of the adult variety.  Spike and Dru might have a rather tempestuous relationship but it is one built on an (undead) lifetime together; both knowing what buttons to push to get the reaction they are looking for.  You can see the understanding of each other they have developed which only comes from a long term relationship.
Giles' feelings towards Jenny Calendar; and the way she is onto him from the beginning; and the way she playfully toys with his romantic bumbling is handled in a lovely manner.  She reciprocates those same feelings but doesn't play easy to get.  This only adds to the affection you feel towards them as the viewer, once they do finally get together.  It also adds greatly to the emotional impact when tragedy befalls them later on.
There is a respect shown to all the age groups of the characters by the writers and it is no wonder that the scripts are one of the shows main strengths.  It also comes as no surprise that most of the writers for Buffy have gone on to other shows with some acclaim.
One of the things that I do notice now more than ever is how much foreshadowing and set up the writers incorporate as the season progresses.  There are some things that come to fruition in a couple of episodes but then there are others which won't truly see the light of day until future seasons.
For example the word passion is used a couple of times in the earlier episodes and it just seems like a throwaway line when it crops up; that is until we get to the episode Passion and then it takes on an entirely new sinister meaning.  I have to say it is one of my most favorite episodes from the show as a whole; the narration that opens and closes the episode and the way the cameraman shoots Angelus at the end fit perfectly together.
I didn't realize that it was this early on that Willow would start to show an interest and aptitude for magic.  This is something that will grow and become more prevalent as season's progress culminating in one of the most powerful foes the show produced in season six.  Whether this was planned from the beginning who knows, but they definitely started laying the groundwork here.  We also see Giles question Willow on a couple of occasions and warn her of the dangers about dabbling with the mystical arts; as we come to learn about Giles own history with abusing magical forces.
When we start to get a bit of back-story for Giles in Halloween we also are introduced to another great villain in Ethan Rayne.  He proves to be a terrific little nemesis; or a more accurate description would be an annoying stone in the shoe of Buffy and the Scooby gang.  His appearances in later seasons were always much welcomed by myself.
Ethan isn't the only minor character whose part in the Buffyverse is established here.  Other people who would go on to become more involved as the story continues such as Jonathan Levinson, Harmony Kendall and Amy Madison would start to make more appearances.  It is those repeat appearances which help strengthen the show and helped coin the term Buffyverse.  This is a show intent on world building and having characters constantly interacting with each other; in much the same way as people do in superhero comics.
There are a couple of bottle episodes that really stand out as favorites of mine.  Xander Harris gets to be the main focus of Bewitched, Bothered and Bewildered and it is one of the funniest from the whole canon.  Killed By Death has a creepier tone to it and one of the scariest demons in Der Kindestod.  I can't help but wonder if the makers of The Babadook took inspiration from this design as there are some similarities between the two.
Overall I consider season two to be the strongest, most consistently entertaining of all seven seasons.  I might have a bit of nostalgia related to that opinion with it being my first; but I don't think I would be alone in that assessment.  It is the season that saw me fall in love with this universe; whose inhabitants would go on to provide me with hours of emotional roller coasters of entertainment.


The Case Against:
After all that praise I guess you are wondering if there is anything that I do not like about the second series.  While there is very little that I have against it; there are still some moments that particularly irk me.
I loved the idea that Buffy would be dealing with some post traumatic stress disorder after her ordeal with The Master; but it was dealt with during the first episode.  They could have drawn this out a bit more to cover a couple of episodes and delved deeper into what it means to have come so close to dying - permanently, I realize Buffy was technically dead for a short period of time.
The episode I hate the most appears during this season and taking that mantle is: Ted.  I don't know what it is about this in particular, but I don't find anything about this story enjoyable.  I am not a fan at all of John Ritter so that might have something to do with it.  His appearance feels like a "special guest starring" role which annoys me in any show where they use gimmick casting to try and draw in a particular audience or demographic.
While I have said how much I enjoy the main villains in Angelus, Spike, Drusilla and a couple of the lesser ones like Ethan Rayne and Der Kindestod; there are some duds present too and not just the aforementioned Ted.  Top of that list are the assassins sent from the Order of Taraka.  If these are supposed to be members of an order of the most deadly assassins ever, then there must have been a shortage of skilled applicants when they inducted these three.
Each one is dealt with very easily; the first one in particular.  Patrice, the assassin who has disguised herself as a police woman, acts like the T1000; she even does the role-call in a deadpan voice "Buffy Summers" then KAPOW she starts blazing away!  She has no regard for stealth or a facial disguise so she can continue operating once the contract has been fulfilled on Buffy.  I am sure she would have had her face plastered everywhere and headlines reading: "Woman impersonates officer, goes on shooting rampage in school".
For what is essentially the midway point of the season and a double episode to boot; I just felt that these antagonists were a bit weak.  Even Norman Pfister, the Bug Man, whilst having a cool ability is just squished to death.  Overall they are poorly presented assailants if ever there were some.
I do get a bit confused as to the conflicting logic of Spike.  He appears to go along with the idea to use The Judge to destroy humanity in Surprise and Innocence; which would affect his "happy meals on legs" philosophy.  Later on however he turns against Angelus when he wants to use Acathla for the similar purpose of ending the world as we know it.
Is it because he has regained his strength so feels like he can now go against Angelus and Drusilla which in turn would allow him to escape to continue his existence with Dru?  Whereas previously he wasn't at his full power when they had The Judge.  If so then that does make sense; but it still seems like he is doing a bit of a back flip later on with the Acathla plan.
The romance between Buffy and Angel can be a little melodramatic at times.  I get the impression this is on purpose to try and portray the emotional turmoil both are feeling; Angel because of his age and vampirism; and Buffy because she is just starting to mature.  It isn't a major gripe but can feel a little overdone shall we say at times.
I am going to say it: I think Joyce Summers is a bitch who rides her daughter way too much.  That felt good!
Buffy has been taken from her home town and has made some nice new friends who don't seem to have any major social or violent behavior issues.  She is shown to be studying and seeking help when she needs it.  Her principal obviously has it in for her as Snyder is always trying to catch her out and label her, unjustly in most cases, as a troublemaker.  Giles has spoken highly to Joyce about Buffy which you would think should carry some weight and help her cause.
So why does Joyce always give her such a hard time?  Out of all the characters in the show I don't think they ever got Joyce right.  I understand Buffy had issues at her old school and Joyce thought that the change of scenery would improve matters.  From what we are presented with that seems to be the case.  Joyce rarely sees the dangers Buffy faces from her encounters or sees her acting out in a violent manner; so I just don't get her logic for being so unreasonable with her daughter.
The other main character who I take umbrage with is Xander Harris.  Some of his actions and decisions make him appear to be one of the most selfish people in the show.  His constant pining for Buffy's affections is so irritating and at times makes him out to be a little bit of a stalker.  There are times during this season where I wonder why Buffy and Willow remain friends with him.  I still like him but if I was Buffy I would have to restrain myself from hitting him on occasion.
Some of his actions I do feel come from his own insecurity and sense of feeling inferior to these powerful women in his life.  That is all well and good but he can act like a total douche bag from time to time!
As you would expect with a show set in a high school location you do get the usual stereotypes appearing.  From the recurring cast there is the nerdy Jonathan who is a prime example.  Harmony as a vacuous bimbo is another one.  A number of the episodes feature others, such as the jocks from Go Fish and the beefed up (undead) quarterback in Some Assembly Required.  It is an understandable trait and makes the characters relatable; but is that only because we see these tropes so often, is it a true reflection of what school life is like?  They are easy characters to knock out during the writing process and I do think sometimes it can be a bit lazy on the writer's behalf.
I would like to finish off with a slight moan about another bit of poor scripting.  At the start of Becoming Part 2 Buffy flees from the police after striking the officer holding her.  As she runs away - unarmed and with her back to the officers, one of them tells her to freeze before OPENING FIRE ON HER!
Now I know American law enforcement have a bit of a reputation for shoot first ask questions later; but it feels far too excessive to shoot at an unarmed teenage girl just because she is fleeing the scene of a crime!  I would have loved to see Joyce Summers in court the following season seeking damages for the traumatic experience the police put her poor daughter through.
I might seem like I am wailing on about the writers as I close out here, but trust me I am not.  I mentioned in 'The Case For' how much I admire the tautness of the script writing for Buffy.  Overall the writing team does a superb job for a twenty two episode season.  However when there are parts that don't quite gel, and there are bound to be one or two dud moments, I do feel I have to point them out for 'The Case Against'.

Verdict:
Buffy has to be set free to continue her one girl in all the world prophecy against the denizens of evil.  It would be a dereliction of duty to imprison a fellow Witch Hunter.

Evidence:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffy_the_Vampire_Slayer_(season_2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffy_the_Vampire_Slayer
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118276/

Monday, 3 October 2016

Weekly Witch Hunt: Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children & Klan: Killing America

We decide what artistic endeavour passed approval to earn the Scorcher label from the past seven days & what also had the dishonour of being that week's Torture...

There was very little that I managed to watch on the television this week, apart from starting a re-watch of Stranger Things but that exceptional show is getting an article all to itself.  I did however finish reading two books.  One of them had me turning the pages in anticipation, the other one I couldn't wait to get to the end of and be done with it.  Let us see why...

The Scorcher


I have had Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children on my Kindle for a couple of years now and hadn't got around to reading it.  With Tim Burton's film adaptation hitting the screen this week I thought it was high time I gave it a go.  What an entertaining read it was indeed.
Jacob, our hero, is a very likeable character as are the peculiar children he meets.  I wasn't keen on his parents but they are peripheral figures anyway.  The island setting gives it an extra air of mysterious intrigue.
The story overall is not an edge of your seat thriller; nor are there many scares.  The characterisation as well as the stories depth and detail are enough on its own though to keep up interest levels.  While there are very few surprises as the story unfolds; about a boy who might have a secret power he hasn't yet realised; it is told in such a way that it keeps you engaged throughout.
Ransom Riggs developed this tale around a bunch of old unusual photographs from different collections he viewed over a period of time.  The photos themselves are sprinkled throughout the book and provide a nice addition to the narrative.  I enjoyed this enough to go straight into Hollow City the second part in the trilogy.
All in all I am now eagerly waiting for some free time to go to the cinema and see how well Mr Burton adapts this material.  I tend to enjoy his work a lot and the subject matter seems to be right up his alley.  I would not be too surprised to find a future article coming up on my thoughts regarding the film version.

The Torture


Before I started Klan: Killing America I was well aware that it was not an analysis of the Ku Klux Klan but a collection of news articles from the late 1800's when the Klan were first formed up until the early 1920's at the point of their greatest power.  I wasn't expecting anything other than reading what amounts to newspaper clippings and in that respect the book does not disappoint as it is full of snippets.
What did annoy me was the blurb on Amazon and Goodreads proved to be quite misleading.  It made the book sound like it focussed on the lynching's and attacks the KKK meted out throughout these turbulent years.  Whilst there are articles detailing events of this nature; overall they make up a very small percentage of the book.
Mostly you get articles which break down the number of lynching's that occurred during a year or in a state; without getting into any detail of the actual crime.  I can appreciate that those details probably weren't covered in any great depth by the papers but it means you aren't getting the overall picture that the author was possibly aiming for.
To make matters worse the editing and spell checking on the Kindle version I had was atrocious.  Considering I wasn't happy with what I was being presented with anyway; the fact that Ken Rossignol or whoever was responsible for the editing, couldn't be bothered to make sure correct words were used made it even more frustrating.  On top of the grammatical errors; there are an awful lot of articles that repeat information.  Rossignol would have been better served cherry picking the better ones and leaving out others that repeat the same details.
If like me you want to learn more about this terrorist organisation that attained such an enormous influence and following throughout America then I suggest you avoid this one and look for another piece of work instead.

Sunday, 25 September 2016

Weekly Witch Hunt: The Conjuring 2 & Orange is the New Black season 4

We decide what artistic endeavour passed approval to earn the Scorcher label from the past seven days & what also had the dishonour of being that week's Torture...

So as of late it seems that life has been getting in the way of me performing my duties as The Inquisitor.  I haven't had enough spare time to devote to berating or exonerating my recent visual and aural experiences.
With that in mind I thought it best to create a new category that I hope to release each week (hence the title) where I can quickly and succinctly review the previous weeks entertainment.  This won't be a detailed analysis but a brief rundown of one thing that caught my attention and one thing I wish I hadn't wasted my time on.
So without further ado why did these two nominations have the honour of taking out our Scorcher/Torture places for this week?

The Scorcher
 
I was pleasantly surprised to find The Conjuring 2 just as entertaining as the original movie.  Horror sequels are always a tricky proposition due mainly to the cash grabbing reasons most are churned out.
This franchise is helped immensely by the acting talents and chemistry of its two leads: Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson.  Both are very engaging and their characters are further developed from where we left off the first time around.  It also has a good supporting cast too.
The story itself is once again based on a real haunting that was investigated by the Warren's; although not to the extent shown on screen; but we can forgive the storytellers for that minor indiscretion.
James Wan has quite a good record when it comes to horror films that hit the right notes.  In what can be one of the most unforgiving genres, he often has a new angle or interesting twist to keep the audience on their toes.
Don't get me wrong, there are tropes aplenty on display and there aren't as many scares as I would normally hope for; plus there is some cheesy dialogue at the end that made my eyes roll.  Even with these drawbacks he still managed to tell a story that kept me engaged.
I wouldn't put Wan in the same class as Dario Argento or Wes Craven at the moment.  I do feel however that in a few years to come his screen credits will be considered quite impressive.


The Torture

Why did I put myself through this after including season 3 amongst last year's Tortures?  I should have known better but I decided to give Orange is the New Black another go.  There are a couple of things that I did like from the season; such as the murder of the prison guard and the cover up that goes with it.
There is so much fat that could do with being trimmed to allow them to focus more on the interesting storylines.  Sticking to the thirteen episodes a season format I feel is hurting the show.  If they condensed the season by getting rid of the chaff it would be all the better for it.
I also have a hard time believing that the guards, in the majority of cases, can be such despicable people.  I know I haven't actually been incarcerated in a women's prison but in this day and age of political correctness; surely some of the guard's actions would be impossible for them to get away with.  This show paints them as the true villains instead of the criminals which is done deliberately but also doesn't feel realistic in some cases.
There are also a lot of half-baked ideas that only go so far and are then suddenly dropped without any further development.  One example is the branding of Alex which is very traumatic at first but by the next episode is not mentioned again.  I found this aspect of the season infuriating.
Knowing the sucker I am though, I am sure I will come back again next season for even more punishment.  Maybe I am the one who needs flogging...

Wednesday, 17 August 2016

Film: "Kill Your Friends"

The Witch Trial:
A person doing anything and everything to stay at the top of his field; does this seem all too familiar?

Who:
Director: Owen Harris
Starring: Nicholas Hoult, James Corden, Ed Skrein, Craig Roberts
What:
Comedy/Thriller
Why:
Adaptation of the book "Kill Your Friends"
When:
Released 2015
Where:
England during the 90's

The Case For:
Kill Your Friends takes place at the height of Cool Britannia that swept the United Kingdom in the mid 90's.  It follows the actions of a hedonistic record company A&R man named Steven Stelfox played by Nicholas Hoult; who is vying to become the top A&R rep for his firm.
To achieve this goal he will take any means necessary to get there; including blackmail and murder.  Along the way we get to see the entire drunken, drug fuelled debauchery that goes hand in hand with the Rock & Roll lifestyle Stelfox leads.  Amidst these shenanigans he is trying to sign the next big act to hit the airwaves.  No one will be allowed to get in his way.
That little succinct synopsis is pretty much the premise in a nutshell.  Stelfox is a smooth talking bullshit artist out to impress his prospective clientele as well as his fellow co-workers.  Everything about him is style; whether that's the clothes he wears, the venues he frequents or the home he inhabits.
It is all an act to cover for his total lack of real credibility in this cut throat industry where everyone is looking for the next musical act they can use and abuse before moving onto the next best thing.  The other members of staff at the record label who have the same role are just as shallow and unlikeable.  It is a telling comment on the industry that the only person who is able to actually identify a talented act is the put upon, generally ignored secretary.
The films script drips with satire as it pokes fun at the music industry and the cash grabbing record labels who manipulate the talent of the artists attached to them for massive financial gain.  The musicians themselves also come into the firing line as we are presented with some typical stereotypes such as a talentless girl band and gangsta rappers.  Some of these interpretations are quite hilarious, especially the scene where Stelfox is invited to listen/endure the new song from one of the electronic artists he has signed to his label.
Most of these comic moments are staged quite well.  Along with the quick pace that the movie rolls with, makes it flow along nicely.  There is a lot of breaking of the fourth wall, coupled with some narration from Stelfox to help propel the story forward.  I felt this choice worked well alongside the musical selections and this style helped compliment both in terms of direction.  There are faults with the narration too but we will come to that.
The soundtrack is amazing.  For anyone who was a fan of the music scene at the time of Britpop then this is basically a who's who of that era.  Without these songs the film definitely would have struggled to keep my interest and was a massive influence on my enjoyment overall.
The acting in general is alright.  A lot of the responsibility rests on the shoulders of Hoult's performance as he is central to the whole story and he does an admirable job.  This is yet another different role for Hoult to take on, in what is becoming quite a varied career to date.  He is definitely displaying a fair range and I will be only too happy to follow his future appearances with interest.
Amongst the supporting cast James Corden does particularly well as Roger; a rival of Stelfox and a chronic drug user.  Corden doesn't have to rely on his comic abilities here and instead relies more on his actions and appearance to carry his performance.  I also enjoyed seeing Craig Roberts who portrays Darren the office lackey and dogsbody for Stelfox.  He has the perfect look to play someone who gets walked all over by the more overbearing, egotistical members of staff.
As a black comedy with some satirical comments about the era; the industry and the people that inhabit this realm; the film does an adequate job of keeping the viewer entertained.  Combine this with the selection of songs littered throughout and there are much worse films you could be watching.

The Case Against:
While I have been espousing how good the soundtrack is; at times it does feel like it is padding out the film to feature length.  Something I find really distracting is when a film has to rely on a musical interlude or montage to extend the running time and I certainly got that impression here.
Hoult plays his role well but the actual character of Stelfox is such a despicable human being.  If your protagonist is a power hungry person who will resort to murder to get what he wants then generally he needs to have some redeeming features that are relatable.  In the case of Stelfox he oozes charm but the reality is he is a drug abusing sociopath who does very little that makes you want to root for him.
John Niven is responsible for adapting his novel into this screenplay.  Having not read the book I can only assume that it is a reasonably faithful adaptation.  Some of the material comes from experience as Niven did work in A&R for a record label.
The main issue with the film is that it is all too familiar if you have read or seen American Psycho.  I would assume that Niven's novel invokes the same feelings of familiarity when compared to Bret Easton Ellis' work.
There are so many American Psycho comparisons that leapt off the screen I was wondering if I was viewing a remake set in the next decade and using a different vocation for the insatiable, murderous lead character.
Both are staged in a particular environment at a set time in history with a topical event that was happening in that period playing out as the main theme: Wall Street bankers in the 80's and Britpop breaking out in the 90's.
We have the narration by Stelfox mirroring Patrick Bateman's musings.  This is a first person perspective so it is understandable in a way; however there is an over reliance on this trope to propel the story along and provide exposition.  Using a narrator sometimes is an easy way out of trying to come up with a way of staging a scene and that seems to be the case here.
There are also scenes of Stelfox playing out a scenario in his head that at first appear to be actually occurring but are then shown as the thoughts of his twisted mind.  It begs the question of whether the true atrocities are happening or is it all in the mind of Stelfox; something that is a running theme for Patrick Bateman throughout American Psycho.
Stelfox has a sweet secretary who wants to please her boss; much like Bateman's lovelorn secretary Jean.  In the case of Rebecca though she does have more of a story arc and an interesting twist to her character that I will admit did take me by surprise.
The stories of both films revolve around a person in a privileged position committing terrible crimes and getting away with it.  Neither man seems to do any actual work in their respective jobs either.  The people they work with are oblivious to what is going on as they themselves are too wrapped up in their own agendas of attaining more power and notoriety.  Both men have co-workers who they consider as rivals and proceed to murder or attempt too.
The music plays such an important role for Kill Your Friends which is no surprise with our leading man working in the music industry.  Music played an equally important role in the life of Patrick Bateman too and he displays his appreciation of this art form in the most gruesome fashion.  The music industry itself is played out as a rather gruesome, cut throat world and Stelfox is shown to be one of the worst participants of the kill or be killed nature of showbiz - quite literally.
Bateman had a private investigator on his tail, sniffing around asking questions about a missing person and hinting they suspected Bateman knew more than he was letting on.  Stelfox is in a similar predicament when a detective questions him regarding the disappearance of Roger Waters.  In much the same way you are left thinking this detective suspects more than he is letting on.  Kill Your Friends does cleverly use this thread to play out a scene involving sex and murder well; while American Psycho also had Bateman play out his own sex/murder fantasy.
Finally the ending did feel a little bit too predictable.  Was this because I was expecting it to go a certain way because it felt so similar to American Psycho?  I don't really know; but I did know how it would end probably fifteen minutes after it started which did dampen my overall enthusiasm.
So while none of this is portrayed in a particularly poor way as far as Kill Your Friends goes; it is the fact that it so closely mirrors those in American Psycho that grates on my nerves.  This is not as much of an original concept as first impressions would have you believe.  Coincidentally both books took nearly the same length of time to be adapted for the big screen:  seven years in the case of Kill Your Friends and nine for American Psycho.
Did StudioCanal get the rights to this novel and sit on it till they thought a suitable length of time had passed before opting to go into production?  Cynical old me thinks this film has seen the light of day with the aim of enticing a generation of viewers who will think the retro feel of the 90's music scene involving sex, drugs and murder is cool entertainment.
I am sure StudioCanal would have thought there is enough of an original idea in the script that people wouldn't make the comparisons.  They would have been hoping most of the target audience would be oblivious to the fact this story has been done before in a different setting and in a much better way.

Verdict:
Plagiarism is an offence that can get you a conviction.  I am willing to reduce the sentence however to writing out lines of "I shall not copy the work of better writers and claim it as my own" 1000 times.  I'll admit it; the killer soundtrack helped the defence out considerably.

Evidence:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_Your_Friends_(film)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2474958/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_Your_Friends

Thursday, 4 August 2016

Artistic Integrity in the Dock: TOM HARDY

Artistic Integrity is a study of one particular artist's contribution to the world of entertainment.
Are they worthy of the accolades or should they be sent down...

The Accused:
TOM HARDY
I imagine that much like a lot of people I only became aware of Tom Hardy after hearing about his role in the movie Bronson and I was intrigued to see what everyone was raving over.  It took me quite a while to get round to viewing this film but I was not disappointed.  Hardy is well known for immersing himself into his characters and he definitely brings Charles Bronson fully to life.  The intense training alone that he put himself through to get the correct physique is a triumph in itself.  That would have been for nothing if his acting wasn't top notch and he doesn't let all that hard work go to waste as you get a full impression of one of Britain's most violent and dangerous criminals.
Prior to this turning point in Hardy's career he does have quite an extensive list of credits, most notably amongst them roles in Black Hawk Down and Layer Cake.  The one that sticks out though is the television show Band of Brothers; which also saw many other early appearances from future stars such as James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender.  This is such a good miniseries and fully deserves your attention.
Hardy also appeared as Handsome Bob in Guy Ritchie's RocknRolla.  While I love most of Ritchie's output I am not enamoured with this one.  Handsome Bob is another tough guy roll but he is secretly gay, allowing Hardy to show a bit more of his acting ability than just being the man with muscles.
In 2010 Hardy would have his first collaboration with Christopher Nolan as Eames in the excellent, mind bending, sci-fi drama Inception.  If Bronson was a turning point for him in his native England, Inception could well be considered the starting point of a wider audience taking note of this new exciting English talent.
The following year he would once again show off his impressive physique in Warrior.  This is a surprisingly compelling story about two brothers and their strained relationship with one another as well as their family.  Both Hardy and Joel Edgerton are terrific as the duelling brothers and you really get to the emotional core of both characters.
He also appeared in Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy alongside Gary Oldman.  While Hardy is again in good form; this movie belongs solely to Oldman.  The portrayal of espionage intrigue without having to resort to Jason Bourne style fighting is captivating.  The film performed admirably for an old time, style thriller and I would welcome another entry from George Smiley.  Proof, if any was needed, that you don't have to rely on big bangs to gather an audience and that good storytelling can simply be enough.
One blemish on Hardy's CV is This Means War a romantic comedy misstep starring alongside Chris Pine and Reese Witherspoon.  There is nothing and I mean nothing to recommend this movie.  The characters share no chemistry, the jokes are poor and the story is a mess - avoid at all costs!
Nolan came calling again when he cast Hardy as Bane in The Dark Knight Rises.  Following on from Heath Ledger's highly praised portrayal of the Joker; playing Batman's next nemesis was always going to be a tough act to follow.  Having Bane sound like he was talking into the bottom of a coffee cup definitely doesn't help.  Some people don't find this annoying; but I find it distracting from what is a decent performance.  Overall it is entertaining, even though it definitely has a lot of flaws, particularly with the script.
John Hillcoat's Lawless was next on the horizon starring as Forrest Bondurant; the leader of a gang of bootleggers.  This is one of those roles where Hardy alters his voice again to help him get into the character.  His next movie would see him adopt another accent to suit his portrayal of Ivan Locke in Locke.  If you are looking for powerful performances then Hardy provides one here.  Set completely and solely in Ivan's car as he drives from Birmingham to London, this is a one man show where the other players are only heard over the phone.  It might not sound intriguing but trust me this is well worth the watch.
The Drop saw Hardy starring alongside the late, great James Gandolfini in his final role.  This crime caper is a little seen gem.  Both Gandolfini and Hardy; as the quiet, reserved Bob, make this worth seeing as they tackle Chechen mobsters.  Sticking with a Russian theme; Hardy would go on to appear in Child 44, reuniting with Oldman.  This interesting story is sadly letdown by everyone putting on their best Russian accents which distracts you from fully immersing yourself into the story.
When Charlize Theron was in the dock I briefly mentioned her appearance in Mad Max: Fury Road and I will do the same here for Tom Hardy as I will be interrogating that film soon.  What I will say about Hardy is that he did such a good job that not many people were clamouring for Mel Gibson after viewing the end product.
2015 also saw Hardy appear in two roles in the same movie as the infamous Kray brothers in the gangster flick Legend.  I can't imagine the logistics that allowed them to pull this off.  Hardy would have to get into character, not once, but twice for each scene he appears onscreen and many of those he is sharing with himself.  He does remarkably well as both Ronnie and Reggie.  However he is let down by a subpar film that over glamorises the story of the Kray's and their London firm.
The Revenant would see Hardy once again appearing alongside Leonardo DiCaprio as the antagonist John Fitzgerald.  Once more we have a hard to decipher accent amongst Hardy's portrayal of this cold-hearted character.  I did in fact find Fitzgerald to be quite reasonable in his assessment of the groups, and Hugh Glass's situation.  The filmmaker's use a bit of poetic licence to turn him into a killer to help the audience understand the need for revenge that Glass wants to bring upon Fitzgerald.  They must have thought the more factual story of survival against the odds wouldn't have been as compelling viewing; although I tend to disagree.
One final role I must mention is Hardy as Alfie Solomons on the television series Peaky Blinders.  Hardy steals every scene he is in portraying this Jewish gangster; no small feat alongside Cillian Murphy's own powerful depiction of Tommy Shelby.  He also provides some much needed humour without losing any of the underlying menace that his character oozes.
On the horizon will be Hardy's third collaboration with Christopher Nolan in Dunkirk which is due for release in 2017.  I am looking forward to this one as it has been sometime since we had an epic World War II film released.

Verdict:
He might not always be the easiest person to understand onscreen but it is very rare that he performs badly.  Tom Hardy is most definitely allowed to mumble his way out of the dock.


Splitting a portion of this persons back catalogue into what I would "go to" and what I would choose to "avoid"; given the choices I would categorise this entertainers output as thus...
The Scorcher's:

The Torture's: