My Top Ten: Wall.E

Upon looking over my Top Ten this film sticks out. It does not make sense. The rest of my favourite films are dark, occasionally darkly funny, and often rather nihilistic. Pulp Fiction ends in the knowledge that its lead character will die. In The Usual Suspects the villain escapes. Et cetera and so on. Each film ends either tragically or ironically (see Fight Club) but Wall.E is different.

For starters it is a happy film. It is one marketed for children. It is animated. It is genius.

Well actually that is something of a misconception. It is actually very dark. It is not really suitable for children. It reaches for a far more intelligent viewer than a child with a short attention span. It is animated. Wall.E is from its beginning remarkably bleak. We are presented with a world in which no people inhabit it anymore. The only traces that humans ever really existed are in the adverts that still occasionally play throughout the city telling people to buy. The visuals are stunning from the off as the camera smashes through the detritus that orbits the planet before revealing a desert wasteland is all that remains of a once sprawling urban metropolis. The planet is earth. The sepia tones of the animation draining life from every startling image we encounter. It reminds us of a decaying, hollow rock. Yet Wall.E (our hero) brings everything to life. I won't begin to meditate on the silent opening 45 minutes except to say that it is as if Charlie Chaplin had a Macbook when he was on the scene. Just beautiful, universal comedy plays out before us. If you aren't laughing you are not watching Wall.E.

Upon the arrival of EVA the film transforms again from a silent comedy into a love story. This is the first Sci-fi rom-com ever...not only that it is by Pixar. So Wall.E has also created a hybrid genre in the process. The film is just as romantic as it is funny. The early scenes showing us Wall.E trying to explain to EVA what all his treasured possessions are is amazing. It is like two children discovering toys for the first time.

The crowning achievement of the film though is the way the filmmakers have managed to overcome what could have been their biggest folly. In creating the character of Wall.E and refusing to provide the character with any form of expositional dialogue or recognisable facial features the team set themselves the challenge of having to still try and convey emotion without the usual script possibilities. Merely through sound and tiny movements they accomplish this task splendidly. Not only that the emotions they enable Wall.E to convey end up having the audience empathising with the hero also instantly.

The romance as well is shockingly heartwarming. In particular a scene featuring the two robots dancing around a spaceship is pure movie magic. It is such a beautifully done moment that the film itself could be summarised by those two brief minutes of film. The unsung hero of this masterpiece is Thomas Newman, the composer of the film's music. His best known work being on American Beauty and The Shawshank Redemption but his work here is his most unsung. He is one of those incredibly talented people within the industry whose work is second to none but rarely rewarded. Wall.E saw Newman nominated twice for his work on this film, and his contribution to the film may make those utterly spellbinding two minutes nowhere near as impacting as they were. Without Newman this film may lack its heart. It's a good thing then that he is present and correct providing the romance with the perfect level of aural accompaniment.

If Toy Story was that next leap into animation in 1995, then Wall.E is the next one. Not with regards animation itself but instead the content of what animated films had to offer. In a decade in which the two chief global concerns have been terrorism and the environment Wall.E tries to address the environmental issue (Pixar will probably never try to address terrorism and rightfully so) by attacking American consumer culture, portraying the future of humanity to be bed ridden and obese. Unable to do anything for themselves Wall.E slams the heightened trend of the world's demographic and its lifestyle.

It is interesting how following Wall.E Pixar felt comfortable enough to show a woman learning that she could not have children in a real world setting (a fertility clinic) with Wall.E's successor Up.

You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll feel like you know why you go to the movies. Wall.E is that treat that seems to transcend all ages and make the experience feel universal. To be blunt, it is the best animated film ever. To be even blunter, it is a masterpiece.

The Golden Rules of Illegal Downloads

I strongly oppose people my age downloading films for free off various piracy sites. The same goes for music, although I am more sympathetic to TV shows being illegally downloaded. Why the double standard you ask?

It is simple really. The hard work of hundreds, if not, sometimes thousands, of people is essentially put under threat every time someone downloads a movie or a song. The $20 million fee for the star of the film will remain unaffected, but what about the grip, the teamsters, the caterers, the effects department, the make-up, costumes, et cetera?

The simple fact is everytime you download a film illegally someone who has put nine months of their life into something, looking at half a year without work, you are taking a couple of thousand pounds out of their paycheck. The simple fact is the large blockbusters are the ones most affected and in the last year and a half their boxoffice receipts seem to have been unaffected by illegal downloads.

But smaller films with limited releases, like Moon, infinitely suffer more. As people curiously look at smaller, intellectually challenging films their viewing could compromise that film's success. Its eventual release on DVD means that some who viewed it online might buy it, feeling it is worth their hard-earned money, others will have felt confused by it and steer well away from giving it their money. Independant filmmakers do struggle to have their work seen and the internet inadvertantly can kill them dead in the water.

Similarly, music suffers. Paul McCartney is never going to feel a ding in his album sales, but what about an up and coming band that have just started out. Their fans will undoubtedly be far more likely to illegally download their songs than purchase them. some bands as a result of this never really make it out the gate. The next Beatles may never come to be under that kind of structure.

TV is my exception to the rule. Or rather American TV. This is not some defiant assault upon network TV to try and rob them of their royalties, however, throughout the world it is often far harder for a product to reach out and snare more fans. Shows like Firefly, Twin Peaks, What About Brian?, Huff all died before ever reaching our shores and if somehow an audience member in the U.K. or Australia hears about this then how do they get hold of it?

Some other wildly popular shows such as How I Met Your Mother, Mad Men, Entourage and Californication are on second tier channels that their respective audiences are never going to be aware of. Thus the internet comes in. Only a few great U.S. shows ever receive the time slots and channels they deserve. The Sopranos, Sex and the City, The OC (okay it was wildly popular) and Lost had decent time slots that respective audiences were aware of.

Truly great shows like The West Wing, The Shield and the almighty The Wire were hidden away for only die hard fans with satellite or cable could find. If they were to find a wider audience then maybe even then they wouldn't have to illegally download.

Here endeth the lesson people. Think about this crusade and the people you are inadvertantly affecting before clicking on the download button. Unless the new episode of One Tree Hill is up, then, I am like, totally going to watch it anyway...eurgh...have some self respect at least and watch something that has a lasting impact upon your lives.

Can people question conspiracy?

I have recently for the first time watched Oliver Stone's Nixon (1995) and I am at a loss. I have more than a passing interest in the era. Essentially the period starting from 1958 to about 1978, basically the era covered by James Ellroy in his Underworld U.S.A. trilogy.

The film is grand, albeit somewhat too long and the structure at time feels rather linear but has idea where it is trying to go, featuring magnificent performances across the board and scenes that weirdly enough recalled, for me anyway, Cronenberg's The Dead Zone (1983) in that idea that the power the president holds is terrifying and ultimately useless. But the reason I write this blog now, seeing as my 100 Favourite Films list is consuming my life and I haven't blogged in a week or so is my research into the film.

The response by critics was mostly positive, but the film was damned by several political figures, Nixon's family and strangely enough Walt Disney's wife. But as I surveyed Oliver Stone's career and subsequent filmography I learned about John F. Kennedy.

JFK (1991) is one of the greatest films ever made. It is Stone's Godfather, his opus, and immediately damned as historically inaccurate and therefore utterly unreliable. But people are missing the point.

You cannot watch films like Nixon or JFK and expect the truth. For starters, a filmmaker never has the facts to honestly tell you the complete truth. Especially in an era wrapped in espionage and distrust. But it should make one think. Can you honestly tell me that there isn't a single impulse in your brain that doesn't say after watching JFK that maybe the truth is not the one that we as a planet have been told?

And this goes much further than that era! I am not one to stir the pot or throw petrol on the flames but in a current day climate of illegal war and terrorist actions, why can't people read a little more into the truth of things?

I leave this thought to you good people!

Scorsese

For a long time I have counted Martin Scorsese as an influence of mine. His backcatalogue makes most other directors cry out in misery at the realisation that everything they accomplish in their lifetime wsill probably not come close to a single one of his films. Many are considered masterpieces. others are outright classics. His use of colour and the way he commands every frame and every performance is just astonishing. The world of cinema would be a far less interesting place without him. One of the greatest directors of all time and one of my favourite and yet nothing he had done particularly charts highly on my favourite lists. At least that is I mean my Top Ten list.

He is also one of the very few directors whose work hasn't really dwindled in his later years. While many would argue his best films are behind him. Scorsese manages to continue to deliver varied fascinating films that cover various genres and subject matters phenomenally well without ever falling into the pitfalls many other directors in their respective genres do. He continues to be phenomenal, he's just no longer supposedly god-like. I disagree. See The Departed for god's sake. The man took the cop versus criminal genre and made it utterly compelling.

But my own problem is. What are my favourite films of his. Of course always remember that this is my own opinion. I worship the man and his craft. Raging Bull just didn't connect with me on the level it seems to with everyone else. So there are going to be detractors from this list. But here, in my limited wisdom, are my favourite Scorsese films.

1. Goodfellas (1990)


2. Taxi Driver (1976)


3. The Departed (2006)


4. Casino (1995)


5. Mean Streets (1973)

Obviously the list is biased. It's basically entirely crime films but Scorsese does it so well. He completely can go from genre to genre in a way that only he and the Coen Brothers can. But the Coens, like Scorsese, in my opinion, are at their best when dealing in crime films. The King of Comedy is magnificent. Gangs of New York is truly original. The King of Comedy one of the most underrated films ever made.

Soon, Scorsese will release his latest film, Shutter Island, which once more will have me running to the cinema to see. There are my favourites of his. What are yours? You obviously have an opinion if you read to the end of this page!

The problem with big lists

Just now...I was reading James Gunn's blog. Who is he you may wonder? He is a writer/director who has produced one of my favourite debut films Slither. A mixture of dry, crass humour and gag inducing gore, with fine lead work from Nathan Fillion and Elizabeth Banks, and one of the greatest scene-stealers around - Gregg Henry.

But his work as a director is not up for discussion today. If so, Scooby Doo should probably be addressed. No his blog interests me. More importantly his Top 50 films of all time. It's a fine list. Not one that I particularly agree with, nor is it one where every title is one that I can immediately comment on knowingly despite the fact I am something of a sponge. But it got me thinking beyond my own sacred Top Ten films.

I love my top ten films. I think that if I could only watch ten films for the rest of my life those ten would be it (although I often question American Beauty's place on that list and hang onto it perhaps through nostalgia rather than absolute love). However let's expand that list for a minute.

It is easy enough to immediately have another twelve to fifteen names off the top of your head that you wish could have been in that sacred top ten. I found myself struggling to provide more range than just crime films when I first tried to compile a list.

So now you might have 25 favourite films. Try putting that to 50...suddenly not so easy. Then there's the ordering itself. Is Mad Max 2 a better film than JFK? If I had to choose between the two which one would I take....oh....so hard....erm....JFK....no wait! Where do they chart? Do I like Chasing Amy more than Raiders of the Lost Ark?

I think if you have to put a cap on a list like this that is meant to be so expansive then 100 is pretty much your limit. After a while it becomes more of a study than anything else...it feels clinical and needs explanation. Some titles will make it in that even you yourself will tell yourself you don't like that much. Devotion and affection dwindle and you are left with films you merely enjoy rather than lord over with worrying love.

I might try and complete a Top 50. I might go for a 100 some day. After that I'll write a book. Leave the blogging to people with more time than me. That said this post is taking longer than some coursework I have done...no names will be mentioned.

The great Spielberg films

Just now while writing up my love of Saving Private Ryan I got thinking about Steven Spielberg. To many he is one of the greatest directors around. He is the only director, bar Quentin Tarantino, who can sell a film with his name alone, regardless of the stars that may be present in it. So many people argue over what his best films are. He has so many great ones.

So I give to you my favourite Spielberg films. This isn't writing off his other works, especially Schindler's List and The Color Purple, but if you need his best work seek out these films:

1. Saving Private Ryan (1998)


2. Jaws (1975)


3. Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)


4. Minority Report (2002)


5. Jurassic Park (1993)

My Top Ten Films: Saving Private Ryan

Some write off Saving Private Ryan as a film with an incredible opening thirty minutes. It is so much than that it is criminal for people to leave their critique of the film at that. For the uninitiated I will explain why Saving Private Ryan is so much more and why it is one of the best films ever made.

For starters there's the rather simple plot: a group of men after landing in France during the Second World War are put on a detail - to find one soldier who has the right to return home to see his mother because his brothers have all died and never will be able to. As we follow these men the film transforms into what it means to be a soldier and rather amazingly given the film was made 42 years after the Second World War ended it is the first time that I can think of where American GIs are portrayed in a rather unlikeable state.

While Vietnam War films already gave us the disillusioned soldier (see Platoon) this was the first time that a WWII film showed the allied soldiers in a negative light. There are brief snippets of Allied horrors; a surrendering Nazi is shot and mocked; they are told to just let the Nazis burn and some moments of heroism can be easily interpreted as cold-blooded murder. Amongst the main cast (Tom Hanks, Tom Sizemore, Ed Burns, Jeremy Davies, Barry Pepper, Vin Diesel, Giovanni Ribisi and Adam Goldberg) we learn they are dissenters and are bullish towards newcomers.

The cast all give the performances of their careers, including Hanks who often portrays sympathetic characters but here portrays a soldier who not only dislikes their mission but also is conflicted over his whole status as a leader within the military machine. When one of their group is killed he walks away from his men to plot their next course of action before breaking down (the only time in the film) realising it was his orders that got one of his men killed. Not only that but you can see as he removes the dog tags of his dead soldiers and pockets them the guilt weighs on him. If Hanks won for Forrest Gump, it is criminal that he didn't here. If only for the scene where he tells his men what he does for a living, outside of wartime, and his cold military personality is shattered instantly.

Naturally there's the statement that Saving Private Ryan is a film about the horrors of war, but it's about more than that. It's about cowardice, heroism, perceptions of heroism, the moral outcomes during moments of weakness. The film is also, most importantly, about lives. The old adage about the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few is flipped when eight men's lives are put under threat in order to secure the safety of one. Not only that but is the saved life worth it?

Unlike Spielberg's other big war film: Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan sets out to say more than, this is what happened. He puts you right there in the midst of battle with the explosions and bullets flying all around you. People are blown apart before your eyes, a tank rolls overhead, the imagery of the film is at times terrifying, and at other moments beautiful.

The film is shot with a rather interesting style. Most scenes drained of colour as if to suggest there is nothing worth admiring in a world supposed clear cut and filled with motivated killing.

The Omaha beach sequence is for many an audience the highpoint of the film with horrifying imagery and thrilling battle sequences that throw you straight into what battle was like in a way never shown before. The audience is emotionally engaged from the off, and cleverly no music is used to heighten the tension. The scene is already brilliant and intense enough that nothing needs to be done to heighten the action.

The big crime with this film is that it lost out to its deserved Best Picture Oscar to Shakespeare in Love, a pleasant but utterly slight piece of romantic work. This film has the guts. The emotional weight.

Think outside of the Omaha beach sequence to other heartbreaking, and occasionally funny, moments. The team are forced to lay dormant as one of their men dies before their very eyes. The newcomer to the team trying to figure out what FUBAR means. Another re-writing a dead soldier's letter to his father so that it does not have blood on it. Wade (Ribisi) demanding the morphine that will kill him, and calling out for his mother. A look of horror as one of the team realises he's about to die.

Every moment is brief but remains etched in your mind for life. Whatever you bring to this film it will reward back to you tenfold. There are some that will disagree with my decision based solely on Spielberg's own back catalogue. Though no other film of his will leave you with such an experience, even his supposed masterpiece Schindler's List, throwing you through a whirlwind of emotions as the events unfold.

Not only is this the best work everyone involved has ever done (bar Matt Damon and John Williams). Not only is the best war/combat/ WWII film ever made. Not only is it one of my Top Ten films. Not only is it already a bonafide classic but it is a film that is far more important than its reputation gives it credit for. Seek it out. It's brilliant!

What's with Tom Cruise bashing?

Tom Cruise gets a lot of flack these days. His supposed breakdown and frequent outbursts declaring a love of his religion have lost him favour with the public. His last film was not the great film it should have been. He's shorter than he appears on screen. There's talk that he's gay.

Get over yourselves people. The world of cinema would be a far less interesting place without Tom Cruise. Consider for a minute that with the exception of the Mission: Impossible franchise that this a man who has always gone after interesting roles over trying to be just a pin-up. Born on the Fourth of July, Jerry Maguire, Minority Report, Magnolia, The Last Samurai, The Color of Money, Collateral and A Few Good Men are films that need to be viewed if you have any taste in films.

Not only that but more often than not he is the reason to watch them.

Often he is complemented well by other actors and strong directors but without Cruise's magnificent range as an actor would we care as much about other actors' reactions. Often when actors are paired next to him they bring to the table career-best work that is rarely bettered (Jamie Foxx, Dustin Hoffman, Cuba Gooding Jr., Ken Watanabe, Demi Moore).

Not only that but he is not afraid of going ugly and reverting against his image. He can do ugly, selfish, downright unlikeable and mean. He has three oscar nominations under his belt and on at least two occasions deserved to win over the actual recipient, and on other occasions deserved nominations where there were none.

I hope Tom Cruise does return to his once rightful place as a strong leading man because without him would people swarm to see military courtroom dramas, ensemble cast pieces, samurai epics? Like George Clooney, Cruise is a man who will often do important films that people should see rather than films they want to.

What about scientology? So what? Views are entitled. Free-speech is a given. Let the man talk. If I want to talk about atheism I hope people won't ignore me because they have a different opinion.

Give him a break. Maybe one day I will get a call from him...I certainly will not turn him down.

Halloween: The National Holiday for Pick-Up Artists

I was watching The Culture Show earlier this evening when a comment was made by Mark Kermode, whose opinion I always respect inherently above everyone else's although often disagree with, regarding the nature of Halloween:


"Halloween is no longer about horror, but about carnival"



What I deduced from this is that it is about spectacle. About getting people's attention. I look forward briefly into the future and realise there is an enormous amount of truth to this. Tomorrow night is Halloween itself. I am going out to a Halloween themed party where everyone will dress up accordingly but will it be to shock or seduce. Don't get me wrong. If you are under the age of fifteen this blog means nothing...in fact if you are under fifteen you shouldn't be reading this, stay innocent for at least a little while longer before reality kicks you in the groin. But to anyone older they will know this to be true.



How many males and females tomorrow night will dress up to genuinely scare anyone or will they find an excuse to dress up rather sluttily to flaunt their features?



The answer is most of them. The ones that don't and genuinely consider the night to be about horror will be left alone and given weird looks.



It's a night for peacocking and getting people's attention, in the hope of getting a girl's number or more than that..her body. If you female and reading this vice versa applies.



This is a horrific generalisation. Some out for a good time with friends not trying to get their ends away but will dress up to look nice?

Almost certainly yes.

You want a real Halloween...watch Halloween!

My Top Ten Films

This list is not by any means a definitive list. I am not saying that these ten films are the ten best films ever made. I am well aware that they are not. I know that films like Citizen Kane, The Godfather, Goodfellas and The Shawshank Redemption are always going to be held in far higher esteem by far more people, of both weight and common opinion, than myself.

Hopefully in the coming weeks I will argue their deserved places as classics. Although I am well aware that some people will never be able to accept my choices no matter how well I construct an argument.

1. Pulp Fiction

2. Once Upon a Time in America

3. Heat

4. The Fellowship of the Ring

5. The Usual Suspects

6. The Good, The Bad and the Ugly

7. Wall.E

8. Saving Private Ryan

9. L.A. Confidential

10. Fight Club

There are other honorable mentions and a time will come for their own blogs on why they are masterpieces but for now I simply state my beliefs. The time will come for me to back them up.

The Almighty Decade

In under three months the first decade of the new millennia will come to a close. Has cinema left a lasting impression in the last ten years? While memories of both tragedy and sucess still linger in our minds over films like The Dark Knight if you take into account that that film is little over a year old, can you think out further than that and think what has grabbed your attention in the last ten years?

What truly sticks out when looking at what previous decades have given us?

Bourne made Bond look like an outdated concept. Bond rebuked that by transforming into a human being for the first time since...well in cinematic terms, ever. Tarantino started the millennium with Kill Bill, and has arguably fallen from his pedestal as the greatest talent cinema has to offer to a 'has-been'. Scorsese finally scored Oscar success but was it for one of his masterpieces or second-tier work? A little-known New Zealand filmmaker created the most successful trilogy since Star Wars, and became the most successful filmmaker in history overnight. Spielberg continued to do basically what he has always done. Sell popcorn. Lucas returned with a new trilogy that lost more old fans than it gained new ones. Kevin Smith returned to his roots and essentially repeated a successful formula. Coppola remained dormant throughout most of the period, as did Brian De Palma, Sidney Lumet, Peter Bogdanovich, James Cameron, Frank Darabont.

The supposed great directors of yesteryear have died out essentially to be replaced by a new wave of movie-brat directors. Will they be remembered in thirty years? My gut says the likes of Wes Anderson probably will do. However this decade has also seen the rise of some true geniuses of the silver screen.

Guillermo Del Toro has arguably gone from strength to strength transforming any genre he chooses to inhabit and also creating a foreign language film that grabbed the attention of the xenophobic western audience with Pan's Labyrinth. P.T. Anderson created a new form of filmmaking in There Will Be Blood. Edgar Wright made British comedy cinema cool again with Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz. Paul Greengrass made the Bourne films a heady, sensual adventure. Brett Ratner became a millionaire making very bad films. Matthew Vaughn stepped away from the producer's office to direct the first respectable British gangster film for decades with Layer Cake. And then there's Christopher Nolan transforming the way genre cinema can tell stories.

Will these directors be remembered in years to come? Some I hope will. Others will only disappoint again and again until their once promising careers are completely forgotten.

Think of the stars! Has the last decade produced a new crop of talent that will one day be uttered in the same breath as Robert DeNiro, Al Pacino, Gene Hackman, Clint Eastwood or Jack Nicholson? I somehow cannot begin to imagine one day reading a critic's review of the latest Robert Pattinson film declaring it "his Raging Bull" nor do I think this decade has been good to actresses. How many films over the last ten years recall a fantastic female presence on the screen, especially one from a newcomer? Meryl Streep will not live forever. Am I supposed to believe that Megan Fox or Miley Cyrus can take her place?

Does my generation have a Brando? Mortensen maybe although he might be too old for that category to be appropriate.

This post is not to state favourites or attack others. Those posts will follow. For now I am content to just lay down the ground works and ask you...has the decade yielded anything other than an advertisement for gloss? Have the blockbusters transformed our movie experience? Have stars literally become picturesque beauty to be ogled rather than talent to admire?

Ciao for now!