Reasons To Like Twilight

NODON’TSTOPREADING! Give me a chance to persuade.

The Twilight ‘Saga’ became popular in 2008. By popular, I mean girls all over the world, from ages five to eighteen (and in many cases older) became psychotically obsessed with becoming Bella Swan and marrying Robert Pattinson’s Edward Cullen, in a pandemic frenzy that was so widespread there was no way to prevent or incarcerate the – cringe – Twi-Hard’s, as they came to be known.  This behaviour was only worsened by the franchise’s second instalment, New Moon, which added the curveball of Jacob Black. The crazy fans lost all remaining dignity in the derivation of ‘Team Edward’ and ‘Team Jacob’. Who would Bella choose? Became the question to end all questions.

Yeah.

The understandable response to this Twilight induced mainstream frenzy was of course pathological and murderous hatred to everything and everyone associated with the film series. It became indie to hope that Edward would be decapitated by the Volturi (don’t pretend you don’t know who they are), or that Bella would clumsily stumble into a fire or something.

Over time, and with more additions to the saga with Eclipse and last years’ Breaking Dawn: Part One, this hatred became mainstream. Film critics condemned. Facebook groups ridiculed. The franchise’s average percentage on Rotten Tomatoes must be about 1%.

So I’ve decided to be indie and defend Twilight. Here are my reasons to like it:

1.       Hotties. Nobody can deny the fact that the films have assembled one of the hottest male casts of any franchise. Of course there’s Robert Pattinson, but if he’s too effeminate with his big hair and preened eyebrows, the alternative of Taylor Lautner has a – let’s just say - pleasing aesthetic. Personally I think Jackson Rathbone (who plays Jasper) is the dark Texan horse, but there’s also the wolf pack which are, at the least, pleasing to the eye.  But for the guys there’s always Bells, Alice, and Rosemary or whatever her name is.

Jasper Sexy Cullen

2.       Action. Despite what you’ve heard, the entirety of each film does not consist of Bella gazing into Edward’s eyes, then looking at Jacob, then looking sombrely into the distance. There’s some supernatural action going on too. Among the many vampire skirmishes, the battle in Eclipse is cinematically impressive with its involvement of the werewolves kicking some newborn ass.

3.       Despite being emo, the first film in the series, Twilight, is well made. Directed by Catherine Harwicke, who also made the disturbing Thirteen, the film is stylistically gorgeous and very indie-esque. With a limited budget – unlike the proceeding films – the narrative focused on relationships and the mystery and melodrama of the vampire revelation. One addition which I thought was particularly thoughtful was the fact that, when Bella was waking up from being beaten up in hospital, on the TV in the background is footage of her being beaten up by the evil vampire guy from the scene previously. This is meant to represent her thoughts and I think it was an intriguing addition by Hardwicke which really embodies the subjective style of filmmaking in the first film.

I like the blue tint.

4.       The soundtracks. I’m grateful to Twilight for introducing me to Iron and Wine, Lykke Li, The Black Keys among many others. I have to admit though, I do remove the album name from view on my iTunes.

So there you are. And if you still don’t like Twilight...

...YOU MUST BE VICTORIA

Film: Fish Tank

Fish Tank has been out since 2009, but the independent film from British director Andrea Arnold is one of the most critically acclaimed pictures to be produced from England in recent years.

On glancing at the narrative, yes it does seem like a feature-film-length Jeremy Kyle episode. Set in an Essex council estate, the film's focus never strays from the unfortunate, impoverished and often marginalised members of British society - what the unpolitically correct would perhaps label as 'chavs'. From the film's opening we are thrust into the world of teenage Mia who is abrupt, aggressive and excessively angry. Within the first few minutes she headbutts a girl for being a shit dancer.

When it is revealed Mia's dream is to be a dancer, I couldn't help but feel dissappointed, anticipating a typical cliche coming-of-age dance-flic, provided recently by the appalling Step Up franchise, Honey, Fame, and, to an extent because this is a reasonable film, Save the Last Dance. I feel this video epitomizes my expectations of these type of films:

However, my expectations were wrong. What you have in Fish Tank is bold, painful realism. Without wanting to spoil the end, but inadvertently doing so, Mia's dreams are inevitably shattered. Her feelings of entrapment are embodied by the chained horse she finds in a travellers' camp, which she attempts to set free. By the end of the film the horse is pronounced dead, and she breaks down. Needless to say, a similiar consequence is met by Mia's attempts to escape from her situation.

Stylistically the film is gritty and relentless as its protagonist. Any establishing shots are unaesthetic glimpses of the concrete cityscape, while we are often confronted with over the shoulder shots of Mia, increasing the sense of claustrophobia and voyeurism of looking in on her life.

Fish Tank is violent, visceral, loud and rude. But it is also emotive, intriguing and, at some times, tender. Yes, the C word is used more often than the shot changes, but here is something unique, subversive of genre stereotype and all the more refreshing because of this.

Film 2012

'The only people for me are the mad ones, the ones who are mad to live, mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time, the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn, like fabulous yellow roman candles exploding like spiders across the stars'

Jack Kerouac



My reason for using this quote is that I have just found out that Kerouac's quintessential modern American novel On The Road has been made into a film of the same name. Set for release this September, it stars Garret Hedlund (aka Achilles' nephew from Troy who imitates him and subsequently meets a sticky end) and Kristen Stewart. I sincerely hope they do it justice.

This got me thinking about other blockbusters set to release in 2012, which, perhaps persuaded by the questionable apocalyptic omen associated with the date, are cropping up in abundance.



#1. Of course, is The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. Released in the UK on 14th December (cutting it fine for the end of the world, right?) this is the film the Lord of the Rings generation has anticipated since the - numerous, might I add - closing sequences of The Return of the King. I feel reassured by Peter Jackson's proven directorial prowess, from previous films in the epic Tolkein world as well as King Kong (2005), that he will handle the tale of young Bilbo Baggins in an equally respectful fashion.

#2. The Great Gatsby. Again, a book adaptation, this will be out on the 25th December and boasts a ridiculous cast: Leonardo Dicaprio as Gatsby, Carey Mulligan as Daisy (Perfect casting if you've read the book), and Tobey Maguire as Nick Carraway. But what got me most enthralled in this film, besides the promises of decadent 1920s wardrobes, was the fact that Baz Luhrman, the genius behind Romeo + Juliet (1996) and Moulin Rouge (2001), is directing it. Without a doubt this means that Luhrman's hallmark claustrophobic, kaleidoscopic trippy scenes from both films mentioned will be utilised perhaps to express the disorrientation and shallowness of Gatsby's parties.

#3. And third, closely matched are the Sci-Fi/Marvel-esque blockbusters of the spring/summer: The Amazing Spiderman (4th July); Men in Black III (SCREAM - 25th May); The Dark Knight Rises (20th July) and The Avengers/Avengers Assemble  (27th April). Okay, so The Amazing Spiderman  is clearly a re-vamp of the Spider Man comic book hero. What I feel will make this so much better than the 2002 franchise starring an uncharismatic Tobey Maguire is that British actor Andrew Garfield will be stepping up to the Peter Parker role. Most known perhaps for his part in The Social Network (Fincher, 2010) as FB co-founder Eduardo Saverin, I recommend checking him out as he has proved his talent in originally the three part eighties-based cop series Red Riding and also worked with indie director Spike Jonze in the short 'I'm here'.

Men in Black III needs no explanation as to its buzz, and additionally stars Josh Brolin (True Grit, No Country for Old Men) which will enhance the already exceptional cast of Will Smith and Tommy Lee. The Dark Knight Rises is the last installment in this Batman/Nolan collaboration; I'm sure many will miss the chiaroscuric and often Film Noir twist which Christopher Nolan and his team have applied, in contrast to the otherwise camp interpretations (take Batman the Movie, 1966)of the hero. Finally The Avengers mash up of a Norse God, Giant Green Man, Guy in Indestructable Metal Armour, and Patriotic Guy - I'm sorry, I haven't seen Captain America - is a match made in Hollywood heaven, and will be inevitably epic.

With all these films out this year (and many more I haven't included - Skyfall for one) I can't imagine how my bank account will survive. I suppose we'd better splurge before The End Of The World...

Guilty Pleasure

The Crocodile-Horror sub-genre lurked in the background of horror film throughout the 'noughties'; much like the crocodile beasts they present their presence has either been ominous or gone perilously unnoticed.  Quite frankly it's about time the fear was faced.

Firstly and inevitably there is the Lake Placid franchise. Released in 1999, the original was the mother responsible (or guilty, depending on which way you look at it) for the genre.  The larger-than-life croc terrorized the simple minded folks in a Southern American town before being annihilated. You can't really blame Lake Placid for being so awful though, it was part of those cheesy nineties film accidents that people like to ignore

I haven’t seen it but the nasty afterbirth from so-bad-it-shouldn’t-exist Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus (2009), Mega Shark vs. Crocosaurus (2010) looks – although you may not believe it possible - even worse. But, I must admit, in a scopophilic way I am slightly intrigued to see who comes out tops in this epic scenario.

              
Moving on to more serious stuff, Rogue (2007) is a croc-flic with a more plausible storyline and characterisation. Set in Australia, this is no Crocodile Dundee. Like Placid, it’s a giant crocodile. Unlike Placid, it is well made and shot and focuses on themes of human conflict in the desperation to survive. Unfortunately Sam Worthington’s character has limited screen time.

Black Water is my favourite of this scaly genre. Unlike the demand for gigantic elaborate prehistoric fiends met by the aforementioned films, Black Water settles with a real-sized beast.  Also set in Australia, the film centres around three characters whose tour boat crashes and they find themselves trapped in a bayou inhabited by a ravenous crocodile. //                                                                                        The film capitalizes on terror with the monster rarely visible due to the murky, all-encompassing water and the doomed aussies have no option but to risk submerging. Shaky handheld and a naturalistic plot bring this film far too close to realism; I found myself getting extremely jumpy while watching. Much like the original Paranormal Activity, this film proves that you don’t need a Hollywood budget or elaborate special effects to instil terror into our souls.

 

What makes these films so awfully good? Why won't they dissappear? Why don't these psychotic crocs accept defeat and sink back into the dirty depths they emerged from? Whatever. I’m never swimming around in ‘placid’ lakes or getting in a boat to an Australian wilderness after witnessing these specimens. Even if Sam Worthington was aboard.

Special thanks to Sorcha Ingram for the crocodillian inspiration

Confused.

So The Three Musketeers (Paul Anderson, 2011) has an interesting moment when Logan Lernan's D'artagnan rolls into town on his dalmation-pony and is understandably made fun of by the guy with the bleedy eye in Casino Royale. The musketeer wannabe then accuses bleedy of insulting his ride, and challenges him to a duel.

What?

If you haven't seen it already, check out this clip of Eastwood in A Fistful of Dollars (Sergio Leone, 1964) and note the shameless rip off.

Is Sergio cringing in his grave?

My question is this: an ironic intertextual reference, or a blatant fraudulence? I'm not sure, you often find writers like to punch above their project's intelligence. Take the constant attempts to be deep in One Tree Hill.