Robin Hood (Longstride)

This film, to many people's surprise was not really a film about Robin Hood at all - at least not the Robin Hood we know. This is his backstory, the time before he became the outlaw we all know and love him for. This is the run up to his rejection of the law, the film finishing on his decision - a sure promise of a sequel I would think.

The film has its flaws - it did not do as well as was predicted at the box office, critics complained that Russell Crowe (as Robin Longstride) looked 'far too fat and old' to play the legendary character, and the most infamous flaw of all, the Irish accented Northern Englishman - Indeed, Crowe did not agree, exploding when interviewer Mark Lawson suggested on BBC Radio - not surprisingly this clip hit youtube in about 3 minutes (or the time it takes to upload a video) after it was broadcast.

However, contrary to the last paragraph, I really enjoyed the film - it was the perfect boys action movie. Crowe was accompanied by a tremendous supporting cast - the likes of Cate Blanchett (as Marion Loxley) and Danny Huston (as King Richard the Lionheart). It sported lots of blood and sword fights and it was a beautiful film to watch. The colours, I felt, really gave a sense of the period, and the mood of the time without seeming unrealistic.

Now one would expect, on a film of this scale, to find many a spectacular, epic, arial battle shot featuring tens of thousands of soldiers fighting to the death - this was not the case. Ridley Scott held off using these shots until towards the end, during the film's climactic battle - this resulted in these shots being a treat to watch and held a sense of power and drama which they would lack had they frequented the movie.

Only one issue I would like to bring up personally was the lack of light-hearted moments - even a few would have kept the pace moving and not made the film feel quite so depressing. Admittedly, depressing works for the story however I feel it would not have been as heavy if it had included some...... smiles perhaps? (Crowe maintains his trademark frown throughout the entire movie).

All in all, it was an entertaining movie - definitely one to see before it leaves cinemas - its not the Robin Hood you will expect - however I suppose that really is a good thing, given the thirty-odd classic Robin Hood movie that preceded this one.

This film, the characters and the story, truly stand alone.

Election 2010 coverage

This is the time that most of us 'just turned 18 year olds' have been waiting for - our first chance to vote... and I hope you all will be voting!

Now, as Andy stated in his brief for this assignment - television's function in the election should be to inform the electorate and therefore allow them to cast a sensible, logical and well informed vote on May 6th.

Now, there is no doubt there has been quantity of coverage, but the real questions is, is it quality or merely style over substance.

The usual coverage has been there, many tv news debates, a mass of party political broadcasts, coverage of the leaders visiting the public - including the recent 'scandal' involving Gordon Brown where he was caught off camera calling a women from Rochdale a 'bigot' - here is an example of where the press have made a huge fuss out of nothing, this one minor incident has reeled in far more press coverage than any other serious discussions about the election - this is a real example of how shallow our understanding of politics is - why are our television broadcasters, including the BBC (who appear to be becoming more pro Tory as every minute passes) are focussing on such a minor issue involving the Prime Minister making, in what my opinion was a very accurate judgement.

Anyway, before I was side tracked I was listing the usual tv coverage of an election - however this year saw something, up until now, unseen - a leaders debate - where the leader of each of the three leading political parties came together and debated their policies in front of a live studio audience. I believe Gordon Brown should be commended as he is the first ever Prime Minister who has agreed to do this.

I feel these debates were covered well on the most part, the host giving each leader a fair chance to speak. There was, however, an element of style over substance, with a lot of the audience being distracted from Nick Clegg's wishy-washy policies by his clear and concise delivery, people favouring David Cameron for his short, ill informed statements, refuting every word that came out of the Prime Minister's mouth, and people not hearing the substance behind a lot of Brown's arguments because of his stilted and slightly awkward delivery.

The parties have also got celebrities on board for their campaigns - the Conservatives being supported by Gary Barlow from 'Take That' and the Labour party being supported by our very own David Tennant, who I think made a sensible point when he was quoted saying - "I would rather have a Prime Minister who is the cleverest man in the room than a Prime Minister who looks good in a suit".

All in all, I think the television coverage of the election has been okay - however I think a lot of television stations have shown some biases. I know I have shown a bias throughout this blog but realistically this is how all viewers will approach and take from the coverage - taking from it what they want.

I do find that it is sad that we only have the option of voting for two parties, possibly three this year, as I would probably vote for smaller party but we do not get the coverage for these smaller parties in the media - we are only told about the mainstream parties.

I will stop here and we will soon see how the coverage of the actual election on Thursday May 6th will play out.

Cemetery Junction

My first visit to the cinema during the Easter break was just last night - one day before we returned to school, and having seen the trailer for Ricky Gervais' third film - I thought I'd better check it out.

I know what a flop Gervais' first two features were - 'Ghost Town' was terrible, plot was unoriginal and any good jokes were stuffed into the trailer (therefore there were absolutely no surprises left), and The Invention of Lying was really not much better.

However, 'Cemetery Junction' had a different feel about it, plus with Stephen Merchant on board, perhaps the award winning comedy duo would create something great. I was right.

'Cemetery Junction', set in 1970s England, follows the story of three young guys living in a small town. Freddie aspires to become rich and successful, to leave his working class life behind, while Bruce, struggles to leave his youth behind, rebelling and constantly in and out of jail, he is happy with his life and wishes everything to stay the same. Snork, (the film's comic relief) a socially awkward loveable loser, is the third member of the group - he just wants to get on with his life, meet a girl and settle down.

The film is funny and extremely touching, and although I didn't live through the 70s it also has a strong feeling of authenticity. The character's seem real and believeable and I think the majority of the audience will be able to relate to one, if not all of the characters in some way. It is a classic coming of age movie dealing with the relationships between the three main characters, their relationships with their families, especially Bruce and his father's turbulant relationship, and Freddie's love for the leading lady.

The perfomances were excellent, perhaps becuase Gervais and Merchant did not take leading roles. The three young leads delivered powerful and totally believeable performances as did the supporting cast which included Ralph Fiennes as Freddie's boss, a harsh and cold business man, Gervais, as Freddie's layabout father and for a brief one line, Merchant, as a dinner party guest.

The film could be related to the likes of 'Billy Elliot' and 'The Full Monty' in terms of setting and style, it makes full use of the 1970s backdrop in a subtle and effective manner.

All in all I feel it was a film definitely worth seeing, an enjoyable coming of age movie and certainly Ricky Gervais' best feature film so far!

Now this is not a film I had heard very much about... perhaps passed it on the odd shelf in HMV or Virgin or flicked past it on TCM or Movies4Men... but hearing that it starred none other that John Wayne - the king of the western, I went straight to my grandfather (a devoted John Wayne follower).

I said (Grandson to Grandfather) - "we are to watch Stagecoach and blog about it for school" - and after requesting the definition of 'blog' he immediately went and retrieved the shiny DVD boxset that was the entire John Wayne collection - hence how I came about watching 'Stagecoach'.

'Stagecoach' was not exactly what I expected - I did not expect to enjoy it (not being a fan of old westerns) however I was pleasantly surprised. I also expected it to open on John Wayne's heroic entrance although I was surprised to find that he did not appear until much later in the film. The film is essentially an action road movie which follows a disparate bunch of people in a 'stagecoach' as they embark on a perilous journay accross Apache territory. I thought Wayne's performance as Ringo Kid was excellent, subtle and very human. The same can also be said of the supporting cast who were all equally convincing. Every character is unique (although they appear as stereotypes on the surface) - none of them turn out to be as they first appeared.

The direction by John Ford was magnificent (our film tutor Andy Dougan is constantly praising him - and now I can agree). I thought the film was paced very nicely - heart-pounding action as well as some very touching and emotional pieces - e.g the final battle near the end really focusses more on the character interaction rather than the battle itself.



All in all I think this was a wonderful piece of movie-making and with two Oscar wins and whole host of other awards - it can most definitely be considered a classic!

Casablanca

All you need to do is mention the words 'classic film' and immediately 'Casablanca' springs to mind - admittedly I had not seen it before now, however I can most definitely appreciate why it is considered so.

'Casablanca' is a timeless love story, directed by Michael Curtiz, that follows the stories of two men, Humphrey Bogart playing the cynical yet sentimental bar/casino owner, Rick Blaine and Paul Henreid playing the heroic French resistance leader, Victor Laszlo, both fighting for the love of one woman, played beautifully by Ingrid Bergman. The film, made in 1942, is part romantic drama and part intense wartime thriller and I believe will relate to fan's of most genres. It can be enjoyed both politically, deeply rooted in the Second World War, and apolitically, just as a plain love story – either way this film is truly enjoyable. In fact, I read online that the film was written day to day as it was being shot so no one knew how it was going to end!



The entire film was shot on studio sets, which at the time it was made, meant a great deal more freedom with the cinematography. It is shot beautifully and I felt it had a real ‘film noire’ feel to it. Many different elements of the film grasped my attention – the amazing performances (deemed to be Humphrey Bogart’s finest ever) were made with subtle glances and gestures – the tone, poetic, brave and heroic – and the famous score, composed by Max Steiner, adds much of the film’s mysterious and suspenseful atmosphere. ‘Casablanca’ also has a number of famous lines of dialogue - "Here's lookin' at you, kid," and (although this is not exactly said in the film) "Play it again, Sam".

The film has gone down the in the history books as a ‘must-see’ film and I would most definitely agree.

Last week saw our first short film shoot. Our remit was a two minute film based around the theme of 'Home'. To begin with, we met a number of times to brainstorm ideas eventually settling on a sequence of shots and connecting scenarios with a voice-over which illustrated how different people felt about home - what home meant to them? Where they felt most at home?

The first sequence we shot was a ballet dancer - filmed in the RSAMD concert hall - this was pivitol to the rest of the filming as it allowed almost everyone to work together and get to know the kit properly in a time-pressured environment. After much stress and hassle - we managed to get the shot we needed.

The next piece of filming took place in the RSAMD student halls. This was probably the most stressful time of the entire experience. Not only was the time restrictive, but the space was small and cramped - some of the equipment was not working as we wanted, there was a complicated green shot necissary and to top it all off - the fire alarm went off mid-shot, triggering the fastest de-rig any film set has ever seen. However, again, we managed to get the sequence we required.

Thursday began with a very early start and a jolly trip to a very wet and cloudy Loch Lomond. I had recruited almost my entire family for this shoot - from sisters to grandparents to dogs. However, contrary to the previous night's shoot - this day went very smoothly - no technical or time issues - we got all the shots needed and were packed and away for 3:30 - a success!

We will need to wait and see how the edit turns out but if nothing else - then this was a good and collaborative experience for most involved.

King Kong 1933

"Oh no, it wasn't the airplanes. It was beauty killed the beast."

This universally known quote is instantly recognisable and is synonymous with the world's biggest movie star, the terrifying yet compassionate fifty foot ape, Kong.

When it was announced that we would be watching 'King Kong' as our Friday screening, I was really pleased - I had seen the Peter Jackson remake and had enjoyed it - and having watched the majority of the bonus features, I knew that the original version, made in 1933 was Jackson's inspiration for his film. He had always loved the story and claimed that he did not wish to replace the original, but rather he wished to allow a modern audience to witness 'the 8th wonder of the world' in all its glory.

I as not disappointed - I thought it was a well constructed, well written and well acted piece and, although they look dated now, the use of stop-motion animation was ground-breaking for the time the film was released. I foudn myself totally distancing myself from what was evidently a two foot platasine monkey and getting totally emersed in the plot and the action on screen - I was even siginificantly repulsed as Kong, in a successful attempt to save Ann Darrow (played by Fay Wray), ripped open the jaw of a dinosaur and played with its carcus jsut ot make sure it was dead. I was not at all aware of how long the film was, perhaps because in comparison to Jackson's 201 minute epic it was a mere short, but I found myself at the end of the film, having not noticed the time pass. this is probably one of the first times this has happened in a while when watching a film for the first time - it was good, heart-stopping yet touching drama.

As an audience, we are given the opportunity to make up our own mind about Kong, his intentions and awareness - I cannot say how I would feel towards the character had I not been predisposed to the idea that Kong falls in love with Ann (through the 2005 version) - it is definitely up for discussion. This, I suppose is more realistic - whether we read into Kong's emotions or not - he is not going to come straight out and tell us!

I feel, it was most definitely, a worthwhile watch - a landmark film - as Andy said - "1933's Avatar".