Tag Archives: film

American Heroes and the British Men Who Play Them

Everyone’s talking about this “Asian Invasion” of basketball, but general interest due to someone of my ethnicity garnering fame aside that’s not what I want to write about today. I’m writing about a British Invasion. And no, I don’t mean the influx of musician from the UK that occurred during the mid-sixties. I mean the fact that this summer the British are coming. To the big screen. As superheroes.

There’s no solid argument when it comes down to naming the three most well-known superheroes out there. From a purely global standpoint, SupermanBatman, and Spider-Man top the list. Two have feature films that will be hitting theatres this summer, with the third being released next year. As coincidence would have it, all three films have their headlining roles cast with British actors.

Coming out this July 3rd, The Amazing Spider-Man stars Andrew Garfield in the Marc Webb-directed reboot of the franchise. Garfield made an international name for himself starring opposite Jesse Eisenberg in The Social Network. In it he portrays Brazilian Harvard student Eduardo Saverin, though with a clean-cut American accent. The other side of the mask he will be putting on is Peter Parker, teenage outcast and all-around grittier-looking-than-Tobey-Maguire.

The next month brings us The Dark Knight Rises, the third and final piece in Christopher Nolan’s Batman Trilogy. Christian Bale is not new to the big screen or American roles, playing one in American Psycho, The Machinist, 3:10 to Yuma, and many others. His command of his accent is such that when he freaked out while filming Terminator Salvation, he actually switched back and forth between American and British. When not growling underneath the cowl he portrays seemingly mild-mannered billionaire Bruce Wayne.


In 2013 we finally get that Superman movie we’ve been waiting for, which takes the form of Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel. Suiting up in the red and blue tights is relative newcomer Henry Cavill, who exercised both his muscles and his British accent in Immortals, which came out last year. For the most part he hasn’t done much in the way of portraying Americans, which may be a challenge when asked to take on the mantle of a hero as American as apple pie. When not rocking the spit curl Cavill will be Kansan journalist Clark Kent, a character who may be a little more mild-mannered than Bruce.

With those summaries out of the way, what exactly does this mean? I’m no expert on the trends in Hollywood, but I can’t imagine that casting British actors in American roles is anything new or something to be strongly desired. If casting directors are doing their jobs correctly, then they’re accepting whoever is most qualified for the role, regardless of nationality. As a Canadian and someone who believes that the most talented actors deserve the spotlight this is something I cannot disagree with.

In regards to culturally American icons being portrayed by actors of other nationalities, well, why not? If they bring the energy and commitment to a role and portray it as best they can, then they will do a better job than, say, George Clooney, who portrayed the Caped Crusader as a homosexual. If any actor respects the character they’re given than they will do as much as they can to ensure that he or she is depicted well.

It is an interesting coincidence, but hopefully one that can, in its own way, push forward the idea that superheroes don’t always have to be White Americans. That if Spider-Man can be black in the comics then maybe it can happen on the big screen as well.

Media in 2011

This past year I had a resolution, of sorts. It was to log, day by day, the amount of media that I experienced. For the sake of convenience, music, YouTube videos, and comic books were all exempt from being logged. TV shows, movies, and books were the main focus here.

In picking a month to show you, I chose September in that it was a month entirely spent at school, without any breaks. All media was experienced in the free time I had outside of classes and schoolwork. Breaks tend to severely skew the average amount; an example of this is my watching five seasons of 30 Rock in January during the Christmas break.

Media in September

Television

  • 8 episodes of Deadliest Warrior [40 minutes each]
  • 1 episode of Futurama [20 minutes]
  • 1 episode of The IT Crowd [20 minutes]
  • 5 episodes of Cromartie High School [10 minutes each]
  • 2 episodes of Regular Show [10 minutes each]
  • 2 episode of Adventure Time [10 minutes each]
  • 7 episodes of Breaking Bad [45 minutes each]
  • 4 episodes of How I Met Your Mother [20 minutes each]
  • 1 episode of The Office [20 minutes]
  • 1 episode of Community [20 minutes]
  • 2 episodes of The Big Bang Theory [20 minutes each]
  • 2 episodes of New Girl [20 minutes each]

Film

  • Scott Pilgrim vs. The World [112 minutes]
  • Helvetica [80 minutes]
  • Paul [104 minutes]
  • Batman & Robin [125 minutes]
  • Hot Rod [88 minutes]
  • Ironclad [121 minutes]
  • Terminator Salvation [115 minutes]

Books

  • Part of The Odyssey
  • Most of The Aeneid
Totaled, that’s (if Google didn’t fail me on the math part), 965 minutes of television, 745 minutes of television, and about 3 or four hours of reading. After some fancy addition, that’s 28.5 hours spent watching in the month of September. A month I also partially picked because it had significantly less than others.
As an English/Writing Major, this is very unsettling to think about. Over a day of September was spent staring at a screen [not including YouTube or daily browsing], and even though comics were omitted my reading total still pales greatly in comparison. I justify my excessive viewing in a way, citing the study of plots and character progression in both television and film as a way of improving myself as a writer. Apart from this blog, however, I did little to no personal writing whatsoever in that time period.

The average American [which I am not, being neither] watches more than 151 hours of TV a month. With that in mind, I feel strangely validated. We don’t have a television in our house, and instead hook our laptops up to a monitor in the living room. This means that there is no casual turning on of the TV, no languid channel surfing. Apparently this has contributed greatly to my watching 80% less than most people.

I began this blog post with the intent to depict exactly how much media I consume in a given month, and hold that up as a shocking example of a 21-year old’s usage of his time. Contrary to that, I’ve discovered that I’m not doing too badly compared to America. At 28.5 hours per month, I’m actually doing really great.

Does this mean that I should continue to do what I’ve been doing? My answer is no. As I’ve mentioned, September was actually a low month in regards to media viewed. The month after I watched easily twice as many shows. The fact that this still ranks me as watching 40% as much as most has inspired me not to watch the same amount, but less. I’m doing better than average, but better doesn’t equal good. As someone who says he cares for literature, I need to at least pretend that that’s true in my actions. And that’s as good a resolution as any.

Les Miserables Movie 2012 (?): Mostly Exciting

LES MIS – it’s one of those things about which people who are familiar with it are very excited, and the rest of the world has no idea what it is or what is going on.

Info has been trickling into the internet for the past few months, and with any movie like this, people almost immediately get pretty rabid about the casting, so let’s muse over that for a while.

Hugh Jackman and Russel Crowe are to play Jean Valjean and Javert, respectively. This is so perfect that I have no snarky comment to make about it. I am so excited it makes me feel ill.

Geoffrey Rush will play Thenardier in the new Les Mis movie. Bizarrely, both of these pictures are of him.

Another illness-level-of-excitement-inducing thing: Geoffrey Rush will play Thenardier and will be terrifyingly perfect for the role. Rush was actually already in the crappily adapted 1998 movie(the one with Liam Neeson and Uma Thurman) as Javert, and he did a fine job (as he is a fine actor), but will be more impressive in a borderline caricature role like Thenardier, I think.

Mme. Thenardier will be played by Helena Bonham Carter. All right. Obviously. There is the risk that her in the role will be too similar to her Mrs. Lovett in Sweeney Todd.

Helena Bonham Carter: beautiful enough for Hollywood, strange-looking enough for caricatures.

It already seems like all her as Mrs. Lovett would need to become Mme. Thenardier is a little less goth and worse teeth. She will be terrifying and beautiful, to be sure, but I don’t know if that’ll be super interesting at this point, weirdly. Helena Bonham Carter in The King’s Speech interests me more than another Helena Bonham Carter with eyeshadow sinking her cheekbones.
 
Anne Hathaway will be Fantine. This will make some people mad – especially considering the unexcited response to Alice in Wonderland. Amy Adams was purportedly also considered for the role, and it’s sort of surprising that she didn’t get it – she seems to be the new Anne Hathaway-type character, with more popular movies (to the younger crowd) lately. This could be good for Hathaway. It could also be bad for the movie. Maybe that’s just because I still define Anne Hathaway by The Princess Diaries.
 
A shortlist for the role of Eponine has been released, which includes Scarlett Johansson, Taylor Swift, Evan Rachel Wood, and Lea Michele. This is mildly worrisome – some of my reasons might be petty but still, worrisome. Eponine is about 15; Scarlett Johansson is 27 – and wouldn’t easily or believably look much younger (she’s usually made to look older than she is) (look at the woman’s body, for goodness’ sake). At the thought of Taylor Swift, a blonde country singer, being cast as the neglected and not-as-pretty-as-Cosette Eponine, rabid teenage musical theater buffs will gnash their teeth. Lea Michele reportedly “knocked it out of the park” at her audition – but I can’t see how Lea Michele could escape her role as the obnoxious and talented belting alto from Glee. Eponine being such a classic role does nothing to help that – it’s a role that Rachel from Glee would play. I do prefer Lea Michele in terms of her capability for annoyingness over the other 3; Eponine’s role is supposed to be tragic and self-pitying, not demure and victimized.
 

Eddie Redmayne in The Pillars of the Earth miniseries

Eddie Redmayne (Jack in the Pillars of the Earth Series) will be Marius; he will be appropriately annoyingly earnest and attractive.

 

 

They’re actually holding an open casting call for the role of Cosette in NYC. In the context of the rest of the cast, this obviously indicates the young, ingenue quality that the casting directors are looking for – an unknown talent (a la Robin Wright in The Princess Bride) in between Russell Crowe and Geoffrey Rush. It’s a pretty common take on Cosette – it might idealize the character a little too much, but that’s a large part of the novel itself.

Theater geeks are on the prowl as information comes out. There are rumors that the movie might be released in 2013, not 2012, as filming is expected to last through the summer.

What I’m nerdily looking forward to is seeing what they’re going to do with the accents – even though the film is set in France, the theater community is kind of used to hearing everything in cockney (as they all have the original London cast CD) – will they speak with an American accent? With a French accent (like the Russians speaking English with a Russian accent in K-19)? Or will they just throw some British accents in there to make it more foreign-seeming (like in the 1998 Les Miserables, The Prince of Persia, all of the Star Wars movies, Gladiator…)? So we’ll see what choice they make with that. One just hopes the singing will be good.

Hugo: Scorsese Tells a Story and is Awesome at it

source: alualuna.wordpress.comHugo was another demonstration that a large part of Scorsese is dedicated to documentary. His movie plots rarely rely only on a simple story structure, but draw at truth about some world or society or person – in The Aviator, it was the telling of the life of Howard Hughes; in Kundun it was the exile of Dalai Lama Tenzin Gyatzo from India; In Shutter Island it was the mechanics of early 20th century mental health treatment. Scorsese has also made a fair share of documentaries, on topics like Italian cinema, The Rolling Stones, and Bob Dylan.

source: typofile.com

The film tells the story of early and revolutionary filmmaker Georges Melies

In Hugo, Scorsese tells the story of Georges Méliès and the beginning of filmmaking in general. At points the movie goes very far into documentary-land, like in the flashback/exposition which serves as the emotional denoument of the story, which rather adorably self-consciously begins with a full-on direct shot of Ben Kingsley’s face, and involves long clips of Méliès’ original film.

Scorsese uses archetype expertly well, wielding it like a tool and using structure as a support, not a creative hindrance. The plot devices are intentional, elegant, and familiar enough to be pleasant but done well enough to avoid the negative aspects of cliche: the plucky, adorable girl, the awkward side love story, the child-who-is-the-exception-to-the-rule, and the ultimately relatable and flawed authority figure whose villiany is centered on the fact that he does not notice that the child is the exception-to-the-rule [complete with semi-frightening animal companion, physical deformity, past pain, awkward love interest…].

source: hollywoodreporter.com

Hugo and his father, who is briefly and attractively played by Jude Law

The aesthetic themes of the film, too, are constructed elegantly. Hugo is a boy who only sees the world through cracks and holes – through the numbers in the station clocks, through the holes in the vent windows, and through the metal grid of the automaton’s chest. He ultimately enters the world through these cracks, too, when he slips out of the vents or climbs out of the clock face to hang outside. Hugo’s relation to cracks and holes and small spaces mirrors Méliès’ relationship with the camera lens: he sees the world through a lens and ultimately enters it through the lens as well.

The film uses as sort of wheel spokes Hugo’s various relationships with the people surrounding him. The most obvious one is his father, and the automaton which connects them. There’s also, however, the fact that in a fit of frustration he flings himself into his degenerate uncle’s armchair; there’s the moment when the previously hostile bookseller (given gravitas by being played by Saruman) lends Hugo Robin Hood, and there’s Hugo’s emotional infiltration to Georges via Isabelle and Georges’ wife.

The film is ultimately a demonstration of developed connections and necessary maintenances, without which the characters would remain inoperable, like the broken automaton. The relationship aspect of Hugo includes Scorsese’s relationship with the film itself, and the thing reads like a love letter to filmmaking in general.

Worth noting:

source: aceshowbiz.com

Sacha Baron Cohen in Hugo

Sacha Baron Cohen is absolutely brilliant in his complex portrayal of a character which could very easily be buffooned.His stuttering speech is not quite ridiculous enough for us to laugh at, and it complements the familiar crippling self-consciousness that sort of oozes out of his character’s dialogue. He is a fool, but in a relatable sense. He is terribly awkward, but we cringe instead of laugh at his misfortunes. His air of self-confidence is quite transparent and allows us to see the very real human being underneath. Sacha Baron Cohen does excellently.

It seems kind of moot to point out that Ben Kingsley also does a tremendous job. The part spans a huge amount of time and character development, demanding that Kingsley not just play the secretive, intelligent, and broken older Méliès, but also the pre-war inspired artist, delivering platitudes to young boys while wearing a lobster costume. In Hugo, Ben Kingsley is everything that his part should be.

The aesthetics are another solid part of the film. Hugo is (and it does this wonderfully) a war-era film glazed in steam punk. The aesthetic is wrapped in gears, trains, skeleton keys, and old video cameras, and topped with flower sellers in berets and a reassuring sense of the fantastic – lovers of flim noir, steam punk, cyber punk and any aesthetically-intentional style may drool a little. I am unsure about how I feel about 3D – I am too poor and not interested enough to see the more expensive version of the movie – but the fact that directors like Scorsese and Jackson are using it is making me consider itmore carefully. I can at least see how the aesthetic would work well with the round, polished dimension that 3D movies have.

Hugo is a story and, if you Wikipedia Georges Méliès, a true one at that. Its comments on the changing public reception to fantasy and story telling are especially pertinent: the generation that grew up on ultra-ironic media like Shrek, The Office, and SNL are more often receiving stories told unapologetically, like Hugo and Avatar and Harry Potter, and it is interesting to see how we’ll react.

From Puppetry to Pod Races

I love alliteration. It’s short, it’s snappy, and it has a lot of mental sticking power. I’ve used it in the title of my interview with the Batgirl of San Diego, and when I named my self-indulgent essay comparing StarCraft and Barbara Kingsolver’s literature. This time around, I find it appropriate to utilize this literary technique in bringing attention to Star Wars.

It’s not news to the movie fan or the Star Wars fanatic that there have been quite a few changes made in the rereleases of the classic films, old content packaged in a new format. A few of the alterations seem pretty logical [the Rebels’ computers are looking pretty dated when compared to the holograms of the prequel trilogy], while others are downright upsetting [replacing Sebastian Shaw with Hayden Christensen in the Jedi ghost scene]. With Blu-ray being the new format on the block, a new change has been announced for the rerelease of The Phantom Menace.

Episode I can be remembered as the last of the Star Wars films to feature the diminutive Master Yoda using puppetry. There are no backflips or lightsabre fights with bearded Sith lords that nobody likes, just a short green alien with a penchant for reversing the order of his sentences, sitting down. After The Phantom Menace CGI was used to render the Jedi Grand Master.

On the left, Yoda as he appeared in 2009. On the right, Yoda on Blu-ray.

While this alteration causes the first of the prequels to fit in with the following two films, what it loses is a bit of its connection with the original trilogy. Yoda was voiced by Frank Oz, but he was also controlled by the man, who acted as a puppeteer for the first four films. While he’s certainly more expressive, he lacks a lot of the signature movements that once characterized him.

But what does this say about film? Green screens are being used more than ever before, forcing actors to show fear, confusion, and even awe while standing in front of immense emerald sheets. While technology has been moving ever forward in delivering realistic CGI, it’s apparent that it still has a way to go.

Consider the animatronic dinosaurs in Spielberg’s Jurassic Park. Created in the early 90s,  it featured creatures that looked real because they were. They had actual size and weight and texture and you could have touched them if you were there. Compare Neytiri from James Cameron’s Avatar with Ron Perlman as Hellboy from the eponymous film. The difference from the left to the right is that of computer generated imagery to simple prosthetics and makeup.

In an age when CGI seems to be taking over it’s always a pleasant surprise to see the more traditional techniques, be they puppetry or prosthetics, to help suspend the audience’s disbelief. When Hollywood’s pumping out real-world-meets-animated-characters films like The Smurfs, we can all thank God for Jason Segel.

World War Z Minus the History

In 2006 Max Brooks’ novel World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War hit bookshelves across North America. As a sequel to his previous book, The Zombie Survival Guide, it was guaranteed to acquire cult status, with zombie-lovers all over the world treating its predecessor as a bible for the imminent undead apocalypse. Fans were thrilled when it was announced just the following year that the rights to the film adaptation had been bought by Plan B Entertainment, Brad Pitt’s film production company.¹

Although the film struggled early on financially2, filming finally went underway this summer. It wasn’t until just three days ago, however, that Paramount released their official synopsis for the film, which goes as follows:3

“The story revolves around United Nations employee Gerry Lane (Pitt), who traverses the world in a race against time to stop the Zombie pandemic that is toppling armies and governments and threatening to decimate humanity itself.  Enos plays Gerry’s wife Karen Lane; Kertesz is his comrade in arms, Segen.”

Cue instant uproar from the entire internet.

To be fair, film adaptations of books have often changed substantial plot points to the benefit of the film’s reception, et cetera. Stuart Little was a hit with children because it didn’t feature what is essentially a mouse who acts like a little man who was born of a human womb. Teenagers enjoyed A Walk to Remember because it was set in the 90s and not in the mid-1950s.World War Z, however, is not a novel that required such significant changes.

In reference to the latter part of the title, An Oral History of the Zombie War, the novel consists of a number of interviews conducted just ten years after the last country was officially deemed victorious over the undead hordes. What makes the scope of the novel so grand is who is being interviewed.

Beginning with Chinese doctor Kwang Jingshu and the minor outbreak in New Dachang and reaching as far as Xolelwa Azania of South Africa, reading through World War Z is a global experience. Tying the novel together are several interviews with Todd Wainio, a former U.S. Army infantryman who had taken part in the greatest military defeat of the Zombie Wars.

Pitt’s adaptation with himself as a modern-day Cassandrais not the story that needs to be told. By omitting the latter part of the title the film will ultimately fail to capture what made the novel stand out among the rest: an almost uncomfortable sense of peace after a decade at war and one man questioning why exactly it all happened.

The film will be watched by many because even those who haven’t read the book have heard the title World War Z. They were probably raved to about the novel and how it captured the horrors of a zombie pandemic in a way that was both realistic and emotional. It’s too bad that they won’t realize the film is just another fast-paced action thriller with a bit of zombie thrown in until they’re sitting in their seats.

1. Plan B Entertainment was originally founded by Brad Pitt, Jennifer Aniston, and some other dude. Which had to have been awkward, especially for the other guy.

2. It’s hard to believe the amount of fun these newswriters must be having coming up with these titles. Source: http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2011/03/world_war_z_brad_pitt.html

3. From the reliably titled site, Movies.com: http://www.movies.com/movie-news/world-war-z-movie/3869

4. As well as significant deviations from the plot as well as Shane West as a rebellious badboy, etc etc.

5. King Priam’s daughter, soothsayer of Troy. Warned her countrymen the danger that was the Trojan Horse, to no avail. Just in case you were wondering.