BBC Blog Network

User Profile

JoWontGo

Listed below are comments made by JoWontGo between Saturday, 30th May 2009 and Wednesday, 28th October 2009.

«Newer
Older»

The ten-second vampire movie 6:10pm on 28 Oct 2009 Gross Mark! Hope we get points for having already seen your two recommendations (Thanks for pointing them out in previous media). Can I suggest that non Whedonites go out and invest in the first season of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. It's very much dated now, but that's sort of cool, because you're watching something from 10 years ago, that pre-empted this post-post-modern fascination with the living impaired. Also, it's still snappy enough to entertain, but with a few retro Gothic setpieces for the Dracula fans.

Don't bother with the Kristy Swanson film though. It's a crapweasel.
Trailer Treachery 3:34pm on 22 Oct 2009 I can think of a couple:

Serenity. Classic example of a trailer that gathers together lots of similar moments, like a squirrel collecting acorns, and plays them one after another. In this case, it was all the funny one-liners, which are nice, but Serenity is a lot more than just a goofy Spaceballs spin-off.

And also, does anyone remember the trailer for The Exorcism of Emily Rose? It made it look really exciting, REALLY demonic and frightening. While in fact, although those bits were in there, the majority of the film was a slightly dry, court-room drama type affair. A little bit of a let-down at the time (but at least they made Requiem afterwards).
The Revisitations of Doctor Kermode 2:29pm on 15 Oct 2009 Holy Gambon, this topic has really taken off! I'm just writing to be a bit of a creep and wish Mark a speedy recovery (is it true it was the pig plague?) Anyway, best from me.
The Revisitations of Doctor Kermode 6:05pm on 13 Oct 2009 Moulin Rouge. Like a lot of the films mentioned here, it was just too fast, too frantically edited, and I couldn't keep track of it in one viewing.

But it's part of an issue that's a bit of an offshoot from this one; that of musicals and the need for several viewings. I guess most of us acknowledge that MOST good songs don't seem amazing at first, they have to settle into your synapses and become part of your history before you can love them. So when seeing a film whose plot is based primarily on music and lyrics, of course there's a lack of connection in the first viewing.

I think the trick is to create songs that USE this progressive apprecation thing. Alan Menken's good at this. In Enchanted, he employs some lovely little melodic quirks to keep one's attention (such as the ah-ah-ah-ah-aahs out of the window). These are short and funny enough to sustain you through the film. It's only when going BACK and watching again, that you start to appreciate his lovely swooping choruses and staggeringly clever arrangement. In short, you like it first, you love it later.

Of course, you can just go the Tarantino route and pile stuff in from your bedroom jukebox. That way you don't have to faddle around borrowing your audience's ears, they were handed over in the previous decade. (This is my long-winded way of saying that scores are better things than soundtracks, at least in general)
Cost report 09:36am on 20 Sep 2009 I think you're right. The cost SHOULDN'T matter. The problem is that so many film makers have an obsession with putting the money up there on screen. It reminds me of the 17th century concept of 'conspicuous consumption' in the royal court (James I was obsessed with it). Basically the more STUFF you can put on display, especially expensive stuff, the better the king you are.

In this scenario, I see George Lucas as a geeky James I. He seems to have an uncontrollable desire to 'fill' the screen, with effects, with gribblies, with stupid floppy characters that everyone hates. I don't need a director to 'show me the money' in this revolting way.

Look at Blade Runner, you never once stop to think 'wow, what must this have cost!' Because the plot and dialogue are so strong that it doesn't matter.

Conversely, a little independant thing like The Descent. Cost next to nothing, but you wouldn't know it, because your brain doesn't dare lose focus in case it's assaulted by a subterranean monster-type-thing.

If movies cared less about their bank balances the world would be a better place. But perhaps I state the obvious.
That's wittertainment 12:27pm on 17 Sep 2009 Phew, that's a relief, I'm not ready to let go yet (perhaps one day you'll have to invent a Wittertainment slow-release patch, when you eventually do want to jack it in).

Please clarify though. If the show's staying on 5 live, will it have a different time slot, so as not to clash with Simon's Radio 2 gig?

Best,

Jo
Review: PUBLIC ENEMIES 1:48pm on 04 Jul 2009 I must say I'm disappointed by your disappointment. And I will see the film anyway, like you say, in relative box office terms it could be like Citizen Kane. Besides, I'm interested to know just what KIND of let-down this is. Is it like Gilliam's Brothers Grimm, where you can plainly see that the project was wrested from his hands, and it's kind of not his fault? Or is it more of a Malick's New World, where all the classic ingredients are there, and it SHOULD be great, but you just feel like the director's lost it a little bit? I must confess, I almost hope it's the former, so I don't have to feel betrayed by Mr Mann.
Kermode Uncut 2.0: Public Service Announcement 1:08pm on 17 Jun 2009 Thanks for that doctor. I'm glad the PTB are turning their attention to us. Personally I think it'd be cool if there could be a dialogue not only between us and you, but between ourselves as a blogtastic group. Perhaps a way for us to reply to each other's comments more simply, or even an email notification system if someone reacts to our post?
Can movies still cause a moral panic? 7:46pm on 15 Jun 2009 Personally I get very stressed out when I start to think too hard about the 'life imitating art or vice versa' question. It's like the edge of the universe or the concept of financial profit, it's too big to think about all at once and it makes my brain fizz. And now we've got this extra layer of the press, complicating it all up till we can't see straight.

So what I like to do is make a nice soothing metaphor out of it all. I have done, and it goes thusly:

If entertainment media are the clouds and the general public are the soil, the rain is the transmission of broadcasts or whatever to the earth. This rain can collect in pools upon the soil, or even penetrate within it, making it change its consistency or appearance. It cannot however, change the nature of the soil. Dirt is essentially the same, whether it's wet or dry. Occasionally though, a shaft of lightning (representing the press in this scenario) appears to draw a connecting line from the clouds to the soil. It makes a smoking crater, and everyone thinks the sky must have DONE something to the mud chemistry, and consequently that the ground deserves to get struck by lightning, because it's always been grubby and dirty at heart, and had it coming. This of course is a fiction cooked up by weather enthusiasts, and an unnecessary complication. Lightning is flashy and entertaining, but ultimately has no permanence. Likewise we can't expect all surface water to run in predictable directions, that's what chaos is all about.

God I think I've made my headache worse!

PS geographers, don't get after me if I've got any of the science wrong. It's a sloppy analogy that I came up with on the fly, we mustn't expect miracles.
Ricky Gervais extra 7:28pm on 30 May 2009 I suppose this is all to do with the issue that Steve Coogan raised on the 5live show the other week; the question of artist integrity within a cameo role.

Can an actor leave a relatively bad film with their quality credentials intact, as long as their bit in the film is good? I cite here people like Omid Djalili in Casanova (funny guy, apPALLing film), or Bruce Campbell in Spiderman 3. Personally I tend to forgive beloved performers the odd raspberry, by saying 'it's OK, the film let THEM down, not the other way around'. But am I just doing this to make myself feel better about people I really like selling out?

Opinions please (from Mark, or my fellow commenters).

Jo

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

JoWontGo