Search Results

Director Phil Sheerin Film "North" Interview by Chris Olson UKFR: Who are you and what do you do? PS: My name is Phil Sheerin and I’m a writer director. UKFR: Can you tell us about your new short film, North? PS: The synopsis of the film is “Isolated on a farm and fighting against his family, Aaron struggles to be heard as he watches his mother willingly die.” The film was my first year project at the NFTS as part of my MA. It’s a simple and contained story about a young lad struggling to come to terms with his sick mother's decision to stop fighting. Oh and we shot it on 16mm…keeping it old school. UKFR: Why is the movie called North? PS: Ha. The title has tripped a few people up alright. It’s not a literal title, well it’s literally the title but its meaning isn’t. Basically it’s about what the word evokes or at least what it evokes in me. The word “north” summons images of being alone, of struggle but also of a kind of rebirth in the same way that winter holds the seeds of spring. UKFR: Ah, we see. With such heavy themes, what was the overall aim of making the movie? Was there a singular intent? PS: At its heart and its simplest it is a coming of age family drama cantered around the themes of death and of letting go. Everybody wants to hold onto those they love, every child wants their parents to live forever, but unfortunately growing up means letting them go. And that is sort of what happened to me, when I left Ireland to come to England to study, my mother was suffering a lot from her cancer treatment. I was scared and felt immensely guilty for leaving her - the film came from how helpless I felt. Fortunately though film and reality separate as my mother made a full recovery. UKFR: The performances are stunning. How was it working with the cast and were you happy with their portrayals of these characters? PS: Yeah the entire cast were amazing. Everybody was in sympathy with the film and they all loved Barry Keoghan who played central character Aaron. I am delighted still with the results as we had no rehearsal, only what we were able to do on the day. They were great. UKFR: Were there any inspirations you were drawing on during the process? PS: The inspiration for the film and the characters all come from my life, I have fictionalised elements and stuck a narrative in there but so much of it is real to me. On a dramatization front and how we captured it I drew heavily on Sidney Lumet and Robert Altman. The way they deal with drama in families and groups is amazing; it is always honest, without sentimentality, which is what I was after. UKFR: If you were a dolphin, what would you say? PS: If I was a speaking dolphin I would keep my mouth shut! I have seen too many films, they would cut my ass up to figure out what was going on inside. Short film North is currently on the film festival circuit, and has won several prizes already. To read our film review click here. #Interview #ChrisOlson #Britishfilmmaking #Shortfilm #SupportIndieFilms

Directed by Paul Murphy Starring Greg Haiste & Marie Lawrence Short film review by Monica Jowett Coming across germs and dirt is part of everyday life, which makes it difficult for a man with an Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. However, even he can find happiness in the form of a jogger who passes him by in the park, and so he makes it his mission to get her to notice him, in this short silent comedy Wipeout from director Paul Murphy. This silent comedy short film follows George (Greg Haiste) who has OCD, dodging pieces of rubbish that litter the ground as he walks along the path, who becomes attracted to jogger Amanda (Marie Lawrence) as she runs past him, unfazed by the rubbish on the ground. He then makes many attempts to get her to notice him, trying to offer a rose or alternatively a bottle of juice for her run, or show off his stretching exercises. Over a period of weeks, he becomes closer, but will she ever notice him and appreciate his efforts? Due to a lack of dialogue, the structure of the script uses title cards to signal the change in his progress. This technique, like a lot of silent films, produces a time frame with the pivotal moments happening every few weeks and shows Amanda didn’t fall for George quickly and it took energy and work and he tries to overcome his quirks. Reminiscent of Harold Lloyd’s black and white silent comedies, Wipeout is similar in that Lloyd was a simple man with a lot of charm and drive to get the girls who featured in his films. This short also makes use of some physical comedy. George is very precise about his OCD, yet when he starts jogging he seems to be a bit clumsy, too busy looking at Amanda to notice a sign in front of him that creates quite a goofy character. The music from composer Richard Keyworth is in the same vein as the comedy of the silent era and is parallel to the on screen action, as it rises and falls at certain times, and keeps a constant upbeat tune that matches George’s attitude to getting the girl. Wipeout is a quirky silent comedy, which completely makes up for the absence of dialogue in the goofy and instantly likable character of George and the action and music fill up this enjoyable short film. #shortfilmreviews #MonicaJowett #silentfilm #supportindiefilms #Britishfilmmaking

Directed by John Landis Starring David Naughton, Jenny Agutter, & Joe Belcher #ThrowbackThursday film review by Joseph Banham Continuing our look back at classic horror during October, this week examines a film that set the benchmark for horror comedy. Like the vampires in last week’s review of Dracula (1931), this week’s film takes a look at another creature firmly grounded in horror lore- werewolves. So join me as I take a retrospective look at John Landis’s An American Werewolf In London (1981). The plot of the film sees two young American backpackers, David (David Naughton) and Jack (Griffin Dunne), arrive in cold, wet North Yorkshire, as part of what is presumably a trip around Europe. Stopping off at a pub, it soon becomes apparent that the locals live in fear of something sinister that lurks around the moors whenever there is a full moon. Brushing off the perturbed villagers’ behaviour as simply looney eccentricity, David and Jack set off across the moors. They soon find themselves, however, having a nasty encounter with the fearsome beast, which leaves Jack mortally wounded and David badly mauled. If, like David, you have seen The Wolf Man (1941), you are no doubt well aware of what a bite from such a beast means. David is taken to a hospital in London where he forms a relationship with a kind young nurse, Alex Price (Jenny Agutter), all the while experiencing foreboding signs of his savage fate. A sense of apprehensive dread fills the first half of the film, first over David and Jack being sitting ducks for the werewolf, and then over David inevitably becoming the monster himself. One of the most chilling factors of the film is the sound of the wolf’s ferocious screech; as David and Jack hurriedly scurry across the moors, the howl’s increasing volume evokes a wonderful sense of dread. The initial setting of the bitter cold, foggy moors screams classic horror, taking inspiration from Arthur Conan-Doyle’s Hound of the Baskervilles. The film is not so much about the attacks of a werewolf as much as it's about the build-up to the transformation. The gory attacks do come, but not until much later in the film’s last act. Instead, Landis is more intent on showing the audience David’s nightmarish after-effects from the initial encounter, as he becomes the next unlucky bearer of the curse. This approach leads to the inventive staging of some very strange, as well as shocking, dream sequences. The most disturbing of which involves mutant werewolf soldiers attacking a pleasant family home, which is so audaciously unexpected that its rapid violence is over before the viewer even has a chance to fathom what exactly is going on. Landis doesn’t shy away from orchestrating several jump scares either, having fun twisting the audience's expectations with the dream sequences. He even pulls off an effective double-whammy (you’ll know it when it happens). As well as having moments of terror, the film can also be quite funny. Director John Landis is often celebrated for his comedy films, such as Trading Places (1983) and The Blues Brothers (1980). It makes sense, therefore, that American Werewolf has many humorous scenes, albeit ones that are very dark. The film doesn’t exactly produce side-splitting laughs, but it does have a comic undercurrent where the macabre elements are mixed with the more lighthearted tone. The film features scenes where the gory nature of death is presented more of a casual annoyance, primarily through the necrotized Jack returning to warn David, still conversing with him in a relatively jovial manner. It turns out that since he was killed by a werewolf, the unfortunate Jack is doomed to walk the earth in limbo until the beast is destroyed for good- meaning that he constantly shows up urging David to commit suicide. The same goes for the later victims of London, who show up, all bloodied, to beg David to end his life while trying to keep their politeness and composure. The most impressive attribute that the film has to offer is its makeup and special effects, marking the first notable work of effects wizard Rick Baker. It’s not just the design of the werewolf, which I’ll come to in a minute, that is commendable; there is also the sight of the progressively decomposing cadaver of Jack. Actor Griffin Dunne was submerged in gruesome prosthetics to create a believable walking corpse, and it still looks marvellous. Baker clearly worked hard to come up with all the different detailed textures for the three stages of deterioration we see Jack in, from freshly massacred to rotting skeleton. The film's centerpiece is, of course, the horrific transformation scene. The scene, finally coming after about an hour of build up, turns out to be worth the wait. When it comes to cinematic scenes of grisly metamorphosis, there is none better. Landis and Baker make ingenious use of the practical effects, which bring a sense of brutal realism to David's excruciating pain, as the camera focuses on every stretch of skin and bone. It remains one of the most visually impressive scenes of horror cinema, managing to be much more convincing than any similar scenes before or since. It was this scene that was largely responsible for the film being awarded the first ever Academy Award for best makeup in 1981. The success led to Landis and Baker teaming up several more times in the future, including for the iconic music video for Michael Jackson’s Thriller (1982). The wolf is only seen in its full form in a few brief shots throughout the film, mostly giving the audience just short glimpses of its horrendous teeth and claws. It's achieved through puppetry and animatronics, which, while admittedly look slightly dated, still have a menacing appearance. I absolutely love this era of prosthetics, puppets, and animatronics, creating monsters that felt a lot more organic, as opposed to the more recent practice of using CGI. I’ve always felt that there is a lot more wonder involved whenever the creature is physically created and present on set. The film’s one major flaw is in its climactic sequence, in that it wraps up before it even has a chance to get started. The finale feels very haphazard and is sorely missing a proper conclusion. The first time I watched the film, the abrupt ending took me completely by surprise and left me with the unsatisfied feeling of wanting more. It does seem as though, maybe for either time or budget constraints, the ending was cut short from what was originally planned. It also means that the relationship formed between David and Alex never really reaches an emotional apex, leaving the romantic subplot to feel completely abandoned. Rushed ending aside, however, and we are still left with a thoroughly enjoyable film. It may be a lot more memorable for its practical effects than its story, but it is still one of the best examples of a horror comedy getting the tricky balance between the two contrasting genres just right. #ThrowbackThursday #JosephBanham #JohnLandis #Horror #ClassicFilm

Directed by Phil Sheerin Starring Barry Keoghan, Emer McCourt, Janie Booth, & Des McAleer Short film review by Chris Olson Intensely emotional and gripping, Phil Sheerin’s short film, North, is a beautifully crafted drama about a young man called Aaron (Barry Keoghan) who is having to witness the devastating effects of his mother’s (Janie Booth) illness as it ravages her health. To add further distress to this poor lad, he also has to stomach the seemingly jovial attitude of his family around him, as they attempt to put a light spin on this dark situation. The setting is a rural farm, isolated and stark, much like the experience of Aaron as he tries to cope with his mother’s failing health. Everyday life seems to be continuing around him, but this now seems terribly alien. Aaron’s numerous attempts to convince his mother to take her medication are met with stoic refusals, leaving him a boiling pot of rage and fear. He lashes out at those around him, even kicking a dog in one particularly shocking sequence. Family members make jokes and engage in light-hearted banter at the kitchen table, which enrages Aaron further. There is an emotional depth to Sheerin’s film which comes across wonderfully in the delicate framing of many scenes. There is a tenderness to the way that Aaron is portrayed, a character whom the audience will instantly sympathise with. Whilst his emotions get the better of him at times, no one can deny the cruel hand he has been dealt and the frustration he must be feeling at not being able to express it to those around him. One terrific scene has the camera slowly zooming out on him sitting in an armchair in the corner of the room, revealing the rest of his family laughing merrily together. When Aaron does engage with his family members, it is filled with coarse language and aggression. Des McAleer who plays Uncle Richard, delivers a powerful speech as he challenges Aaron’s behaviour, commenting on the hopelessness of the illness which is taking Aaron’s mother. All performances in this short film are of a high standard, especially Keoghan who tackles the emotional depth of Aaron with fierce dedication. The sombre tone and affecting nature of North may not suit all audiences, especially given Sheerin’s penchant for maintaining an isolating atmosphere throughout. But for those film lovers who enjoy breathtaking filmmaking and gritty storylines, North is a short film to be reckoned with. It will also feature at this year's Cork Film Festival! Watch the Trailer for North below, or read our interview with Phil Sheerin... #ChrisOlson #shortfilmreviews #Britishfilmmaking #Supportindiefilms #PhilSheerin #CorkFilmFestival

Directed by Aaron Bevan-Bailey Starring Jamie Pigott Short film review by Kira McPherson Although set in 2097, there is something distinctly retro about “Populace”, a short film directed by Aaron Bevan-Bailey and adapted from Dan Horrigan’s play Still I See My Baby. It isn’t just the film’s depiction of a Brave New World-style caste system or the way that this system reduces women to a purely reproductive role, as in The Handmaid’s Tale. From Aldous Huxley to Margaret Atwood, George Orwell to The Hunger Games, there are common threads that we have come to expect from our dystopian futures, just as in romantic comedies and action epics. And it’s not a crime to borrow from the genre (although one can imagine some authoritarian artsnob regime where it is). “Populace” still mounts an intriguing exploration of some familiar dystopian ideas. Environmental threats are pitted against scientific ones, with overpopulation giving rise to genetic engineering, and society has been transformed into a corporatocracy run by the eugenics research firm Populace. We see the technology of the future welded to the values of an earlier era. And this is what dystopian art does best: dislodge our sense of time and place, glossing everything with a foreboding strangeness. This is the retrospective glance of “Populace” – an odd sense that both our past and future are on show in a single timeframe. One of the film’s pivotal scenes illustrates this idea nicely. John (Jamie Pigott, who plays all the male clones) and his wife, Helen, receive the verdict on whether or not they will qualify to raise their own child. Behind them, teak furniture is set with silverware and an old record croons off-screen. Right down to the envelope that they tentatively open (it’s one of those hyper-tech societies marked by the absence of personal technology), we could be in the 1950s – not 2097. In keeping with this idea, it makes sense that a domestic site and the subject of childbirth provide the catalyst for John and Helen’s rebellion. But unfortunately you can only get so far away from the past before you stumble into the trappings of the present. “Populace” isn’t so much a feminist tract on women’s reproductive rights as a look at what masculine individualism can do to itself. These two halves never really reconcile into something deeper. It is the men, all dexterously and distinctly played by Pigott, who must reckon with the consequences of a state that denies individual identity. This is dramatised explicitly in a memorable scene where John is interrogated by an enforcer from Populace who shares his exact appearance: the self in opposition to itself. This visual trick of cloning Pigott is perhaps its best aspect and its most unwieldy. It creates tension and uncertainty throughout the beginning, which keeps the film’s more familiar elements from being turgid. But, in parts, it risks a sort of navel gazing, as the men contemplate their own existence as embodied by one another. Think Fight Club meets 1984. Meanwhile the women, those who suffer most directly from the brutal population control measures disappear as swiftly from the film’s awareness as they do from the society it depicts. “Populace” is a polished short film, but one that could have taken a more daring look at some of the issues it raises. #shortfilmreviews #KiraMcPherson #supportindiefilms

Directed by Stephen Gaffney Starring Ciaran McCabe, Aaron Blake & Aislinn Ni Uallacháin Film review by Monica Jowett ★★★ Being bullied can never be a pleasant experience and the consequences are rarely considered by those who carry it out. In Stephen Gaffney’s Bully, which he wrote and directed, a teenage boy is facing torment from a variety of people which causes an outcome you wouldn’t expect. Bully follows Karl (Ciaran McCabe), a student preparing for leaving school and trying to decide what to do next. He has become a target of a gang of bullies, led by Jason (Aaron Blake) and he struggles with home life due to an abusive father. With a lack of support he becomes victim to manipulation from a teacher and turns to a friendship online with a mysterious woman Ruby (Aislinn Ní Uallacháin) to help overcome his bullying and subsequent depression. A strong start to the film, the script carefully outlines the torment Karl faces, and how he self-harms as a result; the opening scene has Karl cutting his wrist with a razor blade, blood dropping into the sink. At home, his father mocks and berates him constantly yet his mother, who also suffers abuse from his father, does little to help. At school the bullies physically shove him to the ground, kicking him as he lays there and then post videos of it online, continuing the attack on a different platform. One teacher, Fallon (Kieran O’Reilly) notices and seems to care and offers help, though he too has underlying motives that does nothing to help Karl as he becomes too close and makes sexual advances on the confused teenager. It is easy to pity Karl, and the cruelty is uncomfortable to watch. However, the script takes a turn in the third act. Karl is becoming more unstable made worse by his parents and Christina (Chelsea O’Connor) a girl who dumps him after finding out about Ruby, the mysterious girl online. Ruby, who has become a friend after seeing videos of Karl being kicked by Jason and continues to reach out as a friend to see if he is OK. An act of kindness, Ruby becomes close to Karl and possibly a negative influence, whose actions become uncharacteristic and erratic compared to how we see him at the start. From a solid beginning of a film about bullying, Bully unwinds turning into a thriller like film, as Karl starts to fight back against his bullies and possibly take revenge. The characters are given minimal definition. His parents are shown as unambitious, his father also drinks a lot, yet they are constantly telling off Karl to keep him in school. Fallon is portrayed as creepy, especially when he talking to Karl one on one, the inappropriate relationship is clear to see. Even Karl, who primarily appears to be timid, almost spineless then changes into being angry and manipulative, never shows another layer to his character. Gaffney, having previously directed short films may have left his first feature length film run on a bit, making the plot stumble in the last half. Nevertheless, it is a strong effort that provides a stark comment on the consequences of bullying. Read more film reviews here. #IndieFilm #SupportIndieFilms #MonicaJowett

Directed by Rubén Rojo Aura Documentary review by Amaliah S. Marmon-Halm This is the story of Mexican singer Chavela Vargas and the Spanish poet Federico Garcia Lorca. Poetry and music are their meeting points. Chavela´s gut-wrenching renditions of Mexican popular classics, poetry and revolutionary ballads, combined with her unique and aching vocals, ensured she lived her own legend to the fullest. The film by Rubén Rojo Aura follows this ninety year old woman as she pushes herself to fulfil her final wish in her last year of life: to return to Madrid in order to pay tribute to Lorca and also finally, to meet once again, her beloved friend in death. Through a series of interviews with those that knew her, as well as Chavela herself, this is a documentary that details the transition of Chavela from life in Madrid to death, her union with Federico and how she managed to tear down the barriers between reality and dreams. Even in her frail state, Chavela commands the screen and her interviews with all the passion of a person half her age. From her days in the Student’s Residence in Madrid, to her rise and her fall to alcoholism, we learn the true source of her gift which, like most artists, stems from a very painful and lonely place. Initially, the rough manner in which the documentary is filmed adds the similar sort of charm to that of Chavela’s husky and aching voice when she sings. In order to highlight the beauty in the poetry and how wonderfully it interlinks with the softness of the guitar, hand-painted interludes carry the film and keep the audience trapped within Chavela’s dream world. This documentary is a beautiful tribute to not only Lorca’s work and the influence that he had on Spanish culture, but also how Chavela took his influence and made her stamp in the Spanish art world. Her final performance at the end of the film serves as the perfect finale, as it is just as wonderful as it is heart wrenching as it becomes obvious that this was her final goodbye. The Nightingale and the Night screened at this year's Doc'n Roll Film Festival. Watch the trailer below: You can watch more movie trailers here. #Documentary #WorldCinema #FilmFestival #amaliahsaramarmonhalm

Directed by Justin Kurzel Starring Michael Fassbender, Marion Cotillard & David Thewlis Film review by Chris Olson ★★★★★ William Shakespeare, literary behemoth and scourge to schoolchildren for centuries, has one of his most beloved plays, Macbeth, resurrected in this new film adaptation from director Justin Kurzel. Michael Fassbender plays the title roll, an ambitious Scottish Thane whose world becomes a bloody hell after being given a prophecy from three witches that he will one day become King. When reading film reviews going into the movie, it was difficult to find out about the language, so first off: Macbeth (2015) is in Shakespearean dialect. The script has not been adapted into modern English, so any moviegoers who shudder at the thought of all those “thou” and “thees” should probably stay at home. That being said, if you are willing to throw yourself into the dialect, or are a fan of the sumptuous script, there are plenty of monologues to feast on. Opening with a Zack Snyder-esque 300 (2006) battle scene, with some pretty jarring stop-start slow motion, Macbeth makes an bewildering promise to viewers that this will be a brutal and bloody affair, riddled with intense action and ferocious emotion. The remainder of the film, however, is rather different. Completely leaning on Fassbender to deliver endless monologues and bat-shit crazy breakdowns, Macbeth becomes almost a one-man show. Marion Cotillard, who plays an unnerving Lady Macbeth, is on fine form as per usual, given some of her own monologues and intense scenes. But, for the most part, the audience are there as spectators to this royal madness. Begging the question, why make this film at all?, Kurzel’s modern adaptation seems to be little more than a stage play, rarely utilising the devices at his disposal as a filmmaker. Aside from the breathtaking landscape shots, commendably provided by cinematographer Adam Arkapaw, the movie is mostly made up of slow zooms on inside shots that languish until the lines have been delivered before moving on to another sequence made up of the same aesthetic, characters (mainly Macbeth) and droning score. The music, by Jed Kurzel, brother to Justin (make of that what you will), is morosely intense throughout, capturing the foreboding tone that seems to have been the only dramatic choice for most of the film’s elements. Stylistically and emotionally, the film is just too drab. Yes the play is a tragedy, and yes it is about how absolute power corrupts absolutely, but surely a little more fun could have been had! A variety of scenes could have been interspersed delivering the tongue in cheek nature of Shakespeare’s writing that highlighted the insanity of Macbeth’s mindset, utilising the superb supporting cast. Instead, we are offered a cocktail made up of one ingredient - Michael Fassbender. This is the first time that Fassbender seems to be out of his depth, delivering a performance that was pretty linear and shaky. The film is so heavily reliant on the text that he is unable to move away from it at all, rendering most of his scenes very samey. Hats off to Sean Harris who plays Macduff, sadly underused but enigmatic in the scenes he appears in, as is David Thewlis. Whilst a lot of the film has some very strong elements, its main flaw is a lack of bravery, a reluctance to bring anything new to the table. Audiences were wowed with Baz Luhrmann’s vivid and bold adaptation of Rome + Juliet (1996), which dared to throw in a whole host of exploitative changes whilst still delivering the same essence found in the play. Kurzel’s Macbeth rarely deviates from the well-trodden path, and audiences may find themselves wondering why they didn’t just go see this as a live theatre production. The themes of power, ambition and human weakness are well explored, and the film’s setting of Macbeth’s personal hell has some visually stunning moments, but the ceaseless downbeat tone and monotonous sequences will not attract larger audiences. Instead, William Shakespeare receives a cinematic setback, and audiences will probably have to await a more daring director. Watch a clip from the movie Macbeth below... You can watch more UK movie trailers here. #TheatricalReleases #MichaelFassbender #MarionCotillard #DavidThewlis #Chrisolson

Directed by Fernando Coimbra Starring Fabíula Nascimento, Milhem Cortaz, & Leandra Leal Film review by Amaliah S. Marmon-Halm Wolf at the Door follows the chilling tale of a kidnapped little girl and the torment of her parents in the events that follow. What starts off as a clear cut case of kidnap set in Rio de Janeiro soon turns into a wicked story of love, jealousy and revenge. When Sylvia (Fabíula Nascimento) finds out that her 6 year old daughter has been picked up from school by a stranger, police start to question everyone involved including herself, the girl’s school teacher and her husband Bernardo (Milhem Cortaz). Interesting revelations do come to light, including the details of Bernardo’s secret affair with a young woman called Rosa (Leandra Leal), who detectives believe to be the number one suspect. But who is responsible? In order to conceal the twist and the true culprit, the film seems to be split into two parts - the lie that the main suspect, Rosa, wants us to believe and what actually happened. Intertwining all these suspects is a no-nonsense detective. It is as if the first section is indeed much more light-hearted and comical in comparison to the latter half. It is as if the director meant to make the audience feel sorry for the suspects and by doing this, viewers are meant to be more shocked by the events that unfold. It is also during the latter half that Leal gives her best performance. To think that this film is based on true events just makes for an even more chilling experience, as you witness abuse, betrayal, forced abortions and a chilling homicide. Brazilian filmmaker Fernando Coimbra's debut feature definitely captures your attention. Coimbra has masterfully created a thriller using a rather simple but intense idea, a very smart move for a winning debut. The moments that were unnervingly peculiar were when one minute you would be laughing at the sarcastic quips from the frustrated inspector, to another minute where you are left horrified by what you’ve just watched. Proof of directing talent, and an absorbing viewing experience for audiences. Wolf at the Door was screened as part of the Barbican Centre's "Rio + Film Festival 2015", which highlights the city’s major contribution to Brazilian cinema with a season of contemporary and classic film productions from Rio de Janeiro, highlighting the richness of the Brazilian film landscape. For more information about the Barbican Centre - Click Here #FilmFestival #filmmaking #WorldCinema #BarbicanCentre #amaliahsaramarmonhalm

Directed by Oscar Nobi Starring Dave MacRae, Catherine Rowney & Scarlett Clifford Short film review by Monica Jowett A Saturday afternoon soiree with friends finds some of them accidentally opening up about one another’s creative businesses, but honesty between friends might not always be the best course of action, as Oscar Nobi’s short film Liars discovers. Filmed in one single take the camera acts as the fourth person in the conversation, panning between the characters as they talk to one another, and conversations are still happening off screen. It is only discovered that Bailey (Dave MacRae) is not alone after he finishes his outburst and turns around, the camera follows his line of sight to reveal the rest of the party. From this moment the story unfolds. Bailey awakes on a rooftop to answer a call, yelling into the phone about a friend Frances’ (Catherine Rowney) terrible business idea that hasn’t gone anywhere. Unaware that he is not alone, he turns to find that it is not the morning after, but he is still at the party surrounded by friends, including Frances. Everyone looks offended and moves to leave, as Bailey woefully calls after Frances to try to explain. Aubrey (Scarlett Clifford) stays seated; berating him at his callousness and calls Bailey out about his own failed work. The situation takes a turn as Frances returns to eat some of Aubrey’s not that great cake. Following a simple but comical script, each character accidentally reveals their true feelings about the other person, such as Frances asking where Aubrey got her cake, stating it was ‘disgusting’. Aubrey quietly reveals she made it and the three characters are thrown into upset. The script places us immediately into fully formed relationships between Bailey, Aubrey and Frances and it is naturalistically performed, as though they are really uncomfortable to expose their thoughts and cutting across one another to right themselves with their friend who they previously had fully supported. As Bailey comments towards the end, ‘Suppose we could all get jobs’ suggests how their relationships were built on a trust that each other believed in their own creative projects, be it a novel, painting or baking, and were fragile to begin with. Nevertheless, he reaches out to console his friend at the end, ready to make amends. This short film Liars proves how honesty may not always work when supporting friends and a white lie can’t hurt. Watch a clip from short film Liars below: #shortfilmreviews #MonicaJowett #supportindiefilms #Britishfilmmaking

Spike Jonze - Film by Film Filmmaker Feature by Joseph Banham You may know him as the eccentric visionary behind offbeat music videos for artists such as Fatboy Slim and the Beastie Boys, you may also know him from being submerged in prosthetics as the bad grandma in his co-created TV series Jackass. Most reputably, however, Spike Jonze (born Adam Spiegel) is known as the director behind some of the most critically acclaimed independent films in recent memory, including Being John Malkovich (1999) and Her (2013). Despite only helming four main features to date (he does a lot more commercials, music videos and producing work) Jonze has managed to establish one certainty: whenever he is behind the camera, the end product is to be an ambitious, daring film rich with imagination and intelligence. His synthesis of gloomy realism and fantastical elements give his worlds a unique ambience that feels entirely original and yet incredibly familiar; his work is always heavily grounded in the true emotions of his characters, be they exotic monsters or an operating software. The following is an overview, a sort of brief guide, of Jonze’s small but significant contribution to cinema, looking at all the four features. So get ready to journey through a hidden portal into the mind of an unremittingly creative genius (if you didn’t get that reference, bear with me, it will make sense in a few seconds). Being John Malkovich (1999) On paper, the synopsis for Being John Malkovich is one of the most unusual you could ever expect to read- a struggling puppeteer gets a job in a corporate building where he discovers a small portal which leads into the actor John Malkovich’s mind- it’s certainly a far cry from your conventional Hollywood comedy. Everything about the film strives to be as offbeat as possible, almost to a recalcitrant degree. The film’s visual style opts for low lighting and handheld camera, bearing a resemblance to the guerilla style filmmaking Jonze exhibits in several of his music videos, which exudes a dismal tone matching the malcontented depression of the main character Craig Schwartz (John Cusack). Then there is also the appearance of Cusack as well as his co-star Cameron Diaz, playing his animal-enthusiast wife Lotte. These are two stars who, especially in the late 90’s, were known for being stylish, hip and beautiful (just look at Grosse Pointe Blank (1997) for Cusack and There’s Something About Mary (1998) for Diaz). In this film, their characters have been placed at the opposite end of the glamour spectrum; Craig sports a weary unshaven look with a scruffy ponytail whilst Lotte’s face is enveloped by a wild mop of frizzy hair. Then there was the choice of who to use as the eponymous star, who himself was quite an odd pick. Though John Malkovich is no doubt a recognised and critically-acclaimed actor, he is more well known among the niche audiences of art-house cinema rather than general movie-goers, thus limiting the film’s appeal. These may all sound like negative criticisms, but they’re not in the slightest. They simply demonstrate a key feature of Jonze’s filmmaking: his penchant for taking bold risks with his storytelling. His unorthodox style beautifully compliments the ideas present in the script. Being John Malkovich is a film that is built on strong foundations of absurdism, which are evident as soon as Craig applies for a job as a file clerk. Jonze infuses the most boring place imaginable, a lifeless office block, with a magnitude of ridiculous humour; the company Craig is applying to is actually situated on floor 7 and a half, uncomfortably squeezed between the 7th and 8th floor leaving very little headroom. Then there is his new boss who is constantly apologetic over his “indecipherable” speech impediment, despite seeming perfectly articulate. The characters just seem to accept the farcical events and locations without much question, and in turn so does the audience, allowing the film to run with its peculiar premise without having to worry about over-explaining its logic to the viewer. As you may expect with a film that is about jumping into the mind of another person, the film explores many themes of identity crisis. In many ways the film is extraordinarily tragic; focusing on an angry, self-loathing individual (Craig) who leaps at the chance when he realises he can be someone else- someone better. His discontent for his own being slowly drives him into a mad obsessiveness. When Lotte has a turn at being John Malkovich, she experiences a sexual reawakening; she realises she wants to be a man, and soon starts an affair with Craig’s attractive co-worker (Catherine Keener), using Malkovich as a surrogate body. When Craig starts up a business allowing people to pay to be John Malkovich for 15 minutes, the office is soon full of similarly dejected individuals who are unhappy with themselves and wanting some form of release from their own bodies, even if the body they are entering is doing something completely mundane such as showering or eating breakfast. The fact that the person they become is a famous film actor ends up being near irrelevant; the characters aren’t concerned with being John Malkovich, they are just concerned with being somebody- anybody- else. The issues of loneliness, confusion of identity and gender dysphoria make the film profound but also very dark in its ending, which eerily lingers in the memory. Jonze’s flare for inventive directing paid off, earning the film three academy award nominations, including best director for Jonze. Within his debut, he had already set down a trademark style and themes which he would go on to revisit in his later work. Adaptation (2002) In order to talk about Adaptation, we must first discuss its writer Charlie Kaufman, who also wrote Being John Malkovich. Kaufman’s whole persona is so imbued into every aspect of Adaptation to the point where it feels more accurate to associate the film with him more than with Jonze. The film is basically meta to the absolute max. It’s based on Kaufman’s own struggle to adapt the book The Orchid Thief into a screenplay, which was to be his next script after writing Being John Malkovich. After becoming so frustrated with trying to adapt the novel into a structured film, he gave up and instead started writing a film about himself trying to write the film. On screen Kaufman is played by Nicolas Cage, who gives him a socially anxious, dysfunctional disposition. The film also features the events of The Orchid Thief as a subplot, with Meryl Streep playing author Susan Orlean, focusing on her own encounters with the orchid poacher John Laroche, which served as the basis for writing the book. So, in short, it’s a self-referential film on the writing process, the sort of cinematic equivalent to a video feedback loop. Kaufman’s writing is the perfect source material for Jonze, it’s no wonder the two chose to collaborate for a second time. The nature of the film allows for a lot of blurring between fact and fiction, fabricating relationships and whole characters, such as the jovial Donald, Kaufman’s fictional twin brother who is also a screenwriter. The result is a surreal mixture with the same level of absurdity and bleakness as Being John Malkovich. It’s interesting how the film examines the idea of standard story structure and conventional ideas about writing, mostly through Donald’s devotion to the teachings of real life screenplay guru Robert Mckee (played by Brian Cox). Mckee’s principles of script writing are legendary among the industry, and seem to be exactly what the defiant Kaufman wants to avoid; he doesn’t want to end up with another cliched blockbuster movie that follows a template. As a consequence of sticking to his guns and following his own rules, however, he is left with insurmountable writer’s block as he tries to adapt an unadaptable book- one in which “nothing much happens”. Donald, on the other hand, attends one of Mckee’s seminars and treats his words like gospel, leisurely knocking out a trashy, unoriginal crime thriller that he sells for a hefty sum. A distraught Kaufman gives up and agrees to attend one of Mckee’s seminars and lets his brother help him finish the script. It’s at this point that the film itself morphs into more of a generic action thriller, delivering a frenetic third act; it matches what Donald’s idea for a finale would be, liberating itself from any restraints of fact and diving off into the realm of ludicrousness. At first the ending may seem entirely melodramatic and even a little bit flippant, until repeat viewings bring you to realise that that was kind of the point. I believe that the film is representative of the entire ethos of not just Kaufman but of Jonze as well, who purposefully aim to create work that is outside the norm regardless of what mainstream studios may want them to make for the sake of mass appeal; even if the films they make are less commercially successful they still are brimming with originality. Moreover, the film is an intelligent look inside the frantic head of a talented writer cracking under pressure. Where the Wild Things Are (2009) Jonze was attached to this live-action version of Maurice Sendak’s classic children’s book for almost a decade before it was finally released. The very short original story concerns a young disobedient boy named Max who ventures into his own chaotic imagination where he encounters an island of wild beasts. Jonze’s vision of the story led to concerns from studios, causing the original distributor, Universal, to drop the film where it was then picked up by Warner Bros, who themselves delayed the film, which was speculated to be due to their unhappiness with the footage. Whilst watching the film, it’s easy to see why the studios felt trepidation over the project; this is not a children’s film, it is a Spike Jonze film. The wild thing’s do not inhabit a brightly coloured, vibrant world; they are instead painted in murky colours and dim lighting, with a sombre tone pervading every frame of the film. It was a film that polarized audiences, as well as some critics, on its initial release. I have to admit, I can understand why some viewers may have felt averse to it. This is mostly due to the expectations audiences have with a PG rated film about large, furry, talking animals. Where the Wild Things Are sees Jonze once again not compromising his visual style for the sake of appealing to a broader audience, creating a film which is just as dark and sophisticated with communicating its central ideas as his first two. It’s as if Jonze made a list of all the conventional family film tropes and deliberately tried to eschew them as much as possible. This unyielding creativity was probably what drew author Maurice Sendak to him in the first place, who personally picked Jonze for director after meeting with him, praising his energy and ambition. The two remained friends until Sendak’s death in 2012. The film is really about all the joy, fear, excitement and frustration of childhood. The wild things can be seen to embody all different aspects of Max’s personality, burdened with his angst; there is an air of melancholy that surrounds the exotic island,- it’s a place that feels strangely desolate of humour. Once again, Jonze is exploring a dysfunctional male character, this time in the form of a child, and deconstructing his psyche with thought-provoking results. The island resembles a huge playground full of the same volatile relationships and social hierarchy that causes so much upset and anger during schooldays. The most eruptive character comes in the form of Carol (voiced by James Gandolfini). Best known for playing the troubled mob boss Tony Soprano in HBO’s The Sopranos, Gandolfini brings a similarly mercurial performance to Carol, the leader of the wild things. At times deeply heartfelt, and at others fiercely tumultuous, Carol’s behaviour is reflective of Max’s own, leading the two to form a strong yet unstable bond, giving the film it’s main emotional weight. If you have never seen Where the Wild Things Are, I strongly recommend it, as long as you don’t go into it expecting a fun, light-hearted romp. It remains to be a love/hate film, with some finding its morose tone a little too much. However if you are already a fan of Jonze’s work, chances are you know exactly what you’re going to get. Her (2013) A love story set in the near-future, Her is one of the most honest romance stories to ever hit cinema screens and is arguably Jonze’s finest film. The film is about Theodore Twombly (Joaquin Phoenix), who is in the process of divorcing his wife. Feeling lonely, he finds companionship with a new cognitive operating software that is designed to learn and evolve, as well as appear sentient. Theodore names the OS Samantha (voiced by Scarlett Johansson), and soon begins to dote on her sweet, understanding personality. What may on the surface appear to be a futuristic satire on the reliance we have on technology, actually turns out to be more of a sincere study on relationships. Even though it has its fair share of heartache, Her manages to be Jonze’s most uplifting film, partly due to it having the biggest sense of emotional gratification at the end. This is echoed in the film’s brighter cinematography and colour scheme, led by Theodore’s choice of vivid red shirts. The film boasts beautiful scenes of its urban setting, especially at night time, where the skyline is illuminated by dots of city lights creating an idyllic surrounding. It still features the same handheld indie rawness of Jonze’s earlier work, but this time, aptly so, it’s much more romanticised. The mood is further emphasised with a soothing piano-based soundtrack by Owen Pallett and William Butler, serenading the viewer with soft, gentle melodies. It’s ironic that a film dealing with a relationship between a man and technology feels way more human than the majority of romance films in recent memory. The film is very performance driven, and both the leads are at their impassioned best. Johansson gives a mesmerising performance as the charmingly funny Samantha, probably causing the audience to feel as much as they could possibly ever feel for a disembodied voice. Phoenix is equally brilliant as Theodore, fitting the awkward, meek male type who so often take the spotlight in Jonze’s work. The film also fortunately has a very strong supporting cast in the form of Amy Adams, playing Theodore’s long term friend Amy, and Rooney Mara, playing his soon to be ex-wife Catherine. The wonderful chemistry between the actors allows for some truly real, intimate scenes; flashbacks of Theodore and Catherine’s relationship are overwhelmingly poignant, especially as the audience knows the relationship is doomed. Jonze’s script, his first sole writing credit on a film, features monologues and montages about love without coming off as schmaltzy or pompous; it all flows naturally and feels innate to the story. It’s one of the most insightful films I have ever seen on a universal subject that has been around as long as there have been stories. Her remains Spike Jonze’s most critically successful film, winning him his first oscar for best original screenplay at the 2014 Academy Awards. This feature has only looked at Spike Jonze’s contributions to cinema, which is only a percentage of his overall work. I would recommend seeking out his music videos and shorts across the web, including the fantastic half-hour short I’m Here (2010), which acts as a sort of prelude to Her, in that it involves a love story in a technological world. It’s hard to think of another filmmaker who presents their ideas in such an imaginatively effective way as Jonze, making him one of the most unique talents in the film industry. He is proof that sometimes the best ideas come from thinking outside the box. #FilmmakerFeatures #SpikeJonze #JosephBanham #filmmaking

Directed by Alfonso Gomez-Rejon Starring Thomas Mann, RJ Cyler, & Olivia Cooke Film review by Chris Olson ★★★★ Cancer is a funny thing. Not a line you could usually throw about during a film review, but Me and Earl and the Dying Girl is one of the most subversive, and funny, teen dramas to have emerged that it seems to fit like a pink wig (a reference to the movie). The film, from director Alfonso Gomez-Rejon, takes a punt at blurring the delicate lines between a cancer story and a coming-of-age comedy, with ebullient results. Thomas Mann plays Greg - an island with many allies, he has managed to cultivate a school life existing on the outer edge of nearly all the social cliques, without ever venturing in and planting his flag in any one in particular. This aloofness, as well as a quick comedic tongue, are his survival superpowers. These begin to crumble, though, when a classmate called Rachel (Olivia Cooke) is diagnosed with cancer, and Greg’s mum forces him to be her friend. Not your typical terminal treatment, though, Me and Earl and the Dying Girl manages to tread a path less trudged, subverting any sense of normality - capturing the unbalancing effect that a situation like this would inevitably create. From the isolated framing of mid-range character shots, to completely upending the scene, Gomez-Rejon never lets the audience feel completely safe, ensuring they stay within the story. Olivia Cooke delivers a nuanced and subtle performance in a role which could otherwise have been overblown tear-jerking. The film is as much about Greg’s coming to terms with his own shallow existence, as it is about Rachel’s looming leukaemia. And whilst these two cinematic tropes have been dished out separately on numerous occasions in different films, they fit together perfectly within the body of one movie, directly linking between the themes that are raised. Mann’s performance is the glue, a wonderfully charismatic display of huge emotions - whilst trying to remain unemotional. Another reason to love this movie is its beautiful cinematic touchstones which arise through Greg and his “business partner” Earl (RJ Cyler). The two create spoof movies that pretty much just turn the title of a classic movie into a joke, like “Eyes Wide Butt” or “A Sockwork Orange”, as well as spending a lot of their time in an indie-cinema store. The relationship between these two unlikely friends is as tenuous as their films, providing for a fresh alternative to the typical spew that comes from bro bonds. What makes a film like Me and Earl and the Dying Girl work is not a one-pill cure-all factor like story or performances. It is an array of coalescing contributions, a cocktail of flavours brought on by a massively talented cast, well chosen music, delicate framing, and an enduring tenderness that manages to avoid being saccharine. That and the fact that Nick Offerman plays Greg’s dad who constantly cuddles their cat called Cat Stevens - that’s enough for anyone to forget about their own mortality. Watch the movie trailer for Me and Earl and the Dying Girl below... #MeandEarlandtheDyingGirl #TheatricalReleases #AlfonsoGomezRejon #ThomasMann #OliviaCooke #ChrisOlson