I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating: sometimes companies will commission short films, but that doesn’t be default make them cash grabs. It’s about the finished product watch Asia Argento’s short for a jewelry line and tell me there isn’t artistry to it.
When you dig around through international releases long enough it becomes quite interesting to discover what films, books, shows, music, etc. register abroad that may not have quite such an impact in your home culture. Such is the case of The Famous Five series.
Prior to discovering this current incarnation of these cinematic adaptations I was unfamiliar with the series and author Enid Blyton both. As it turns out both this series and her works continue to be very popular both in her abroad and in her native England. Though she died in 1968 she was one of the top 10 selling authors in the UK during the first 10 years of the 21st century. Her film adaptations to date have been all overseas. The first two were serials in 1957 and 1964 in the UK. Then in 1969 and 1970 there were two adaptations in Denmark. The current German series is the most prolific and most profitable at the box office to date.
I went into part three blind to all these facts, as well as to the cinematic backstory that accompanied these films. Therefore, I backtracked to be better able to appraise these films on their own merits, including how this particular film worked in conjunction with the other two.
The Famous Five feature a familiar formula of smart kids who get embroiled in mysterious capers by chance or insistence and save the day. The fact that there are two boys, two girls and an extra-smart dog make the best of The Hardy Boys, Nancy Drew and Rin Tin Tin rolled into one.
In this particular installment the villainous foils that go up against our intrepid heroes are perhaps the least successful in the series to date Nick (Michael Kessler) and Cassi (Nora van Waldstätten) don’t successfully balance over-the-top humor and actual menace.
As is the case with these, and many other sequels in franchises the world over, the obligatory new character, Joe (Davina Weber), works here and the love interest plot is not so much of an issue as it can be. Also, the updating of the character from the books making her Thai rather than Romany, is an appropriate modernization.
An interesting thing about the progression of this series is that in each it has seemed to be the turn of one of the four leads to shine. Considering the first film was all the kids meeting George (Valeria Eisenbart) that was very much her breakout, in the second film circumstances pushed Dick (Justus Schlingensiepen) to the fore. In the third installment Julian (Quirin Oettl) emerges with the key, dramatic scenes and mostly acquits himself very well.
Ultimately, The Famous Five 3 is an agreeable third installment to the series that is fairly enjoyable. It doesn’t quite reach the level that the first two films did in terms of balancing peril, adventure and humor; however, it doesn’t completely derail the series. It also has some good reversals of fortune and could easily segue into another installment.
Sometime the conventions of fiction can blind us to the fact that there are at least as many stories as there are people in the world. However, upon viewing them presented as fiction we can become obsessed with how realistic it seems. That’s not to say that The Amazing Catfish is the most unique tale in the world, but it does have its quirks.
The Amazing Catfish concerns itself with the lives of a young woman who had an appendectomy and a mother fighting AIDS intertwining. However, the film begins with following the life of Claudia (Ximena Ayala) for about the first ten minutes. We only meet Martha (Lisa Owen) and her family when in the hospital. After her procedure Martha, and her family offer Claudia a ride and a meal. She tries to conceal herself and tries to pry herself away but Martha’s clan persists in being in her life and she then seeks chances to be there as well away from her apartment, her job and reality as she had known it.
There is a subdued nature to the film that allows these events, as unorthodox as they may be, to flow naturally, eventually the language of the tale starts to seep in such that you begin to connect and speak it rather than it translating itself to you.
This subdued nature makes the flow of the tale an odd one as well but not a disagreeable or slow one just one that’s bit out of the ordinary. Perhaps it has a bit to do with the fact that Claudia is still sorting out her past, and Martha is dealing with her future (or rather her family’s) and both are ever-stuck in the present whether they like it or not. As such the flow is not unnatural but proper just and unusual one.
As circumstances make for the makeshift creation of a new family dynamic each of the members must deal with how they feel they fit in the new arrangement and assert themselves. This allows for each of the actors to have their moments. Sonia Franco, Wendy Guillén, Andrea Baeza and Alejandro Ramírez-Muñoz each work such that they all feel like real-life siblings and very naturally embody very different personalities and the roles they play in the family.
While this film doesn’t quite earn the ending it seems to seek it does work in structural, mechanical terms but just may not connect in the visceral way it may be seeking as the final act progresses.
The Custody, original title La Garde, is a film that proves that a straightforward simple premise that opens an avenue to examine characters in the tensest circumstances possible can be highly effective. It’s a low concept that’s high on drama, character studying and features two tremendous performances by Paul Doucet and Antoine L’Écuyer.
The premise is as follows: Luc (Doucet) is frustrated with the restrictions that have been placed on his custody rights. His disobeyed court orders about visitation have lead to restraining orders and the like. Risking jail time he has continued to follow his son and resolves to take him hunting so they can be closer whether Samuel (L’Écuyer) wants to go or not.
In seeing the trailer or reading the synopsis you know certain things are givens. However, the foreboding that’s built in through the edit and the low-angle shots and urban color palette of the early shots really carries the film until there is a shift both in the tone and setting.
However, with the more traditional thriller template somewhat out the window once the backdrop is sylvan there is a fascinating shift, as despite the high stakes circumstances that come to the fore the characters continue to prod one another and seek answers. In certain ways they are still duty-bound as father and son, but the estrangement and conflict continues to influence proceedings. There are no facile resolutions, no epiphanies where unrealistic understanding can be achieved.
With all the givens in place be they character- or narrative-driven there could be a great temptation to expand the world and cutaway, to raise the stakes and detract from the central focus of the narrative: the father/son conflict. This temptation is wisely resisted and the world stays small.
Much of the storytelling in this film is visual and that is appreciated. However, to reach the heights this film does it needs superlative performances. It gets those in spades. Doucet carries himself as a man who is clearly flawed but not cartoonishly evil, a man whose motivations can be clearly understood even if his actions can’t always be condoned. When he fills in those blanks with backstory the film, and his performance just becomes richer.
It’s so unique to find two performances by an actor at such different ages in development as a child performer being released in the same year. When I saw It’s Not Me, I Swear recently I saw that L’Écuyer had tremendous potential. With that film waiting so long to see American distribution I did not realize that I had seen him in a music video before. In this part he’s about four years older than he was when he showed such promise in It’s Not Me, I Swear. That promise is followed through with tremendous alacrity and poise. His presence on film, this one especially, is a forceful one indeed.
I’ve been quite careful to try and preserve much of the surprise in this tale. Rest assured that what you now know of this film is only the very beginning where things set-up. There are changes afoot throughout and it is a tremendously engaging drama that is worth seeking out.
This article is a partially fictitious account wherein I imagine myself in conversation with two of the greatest minds in cinema: Truffaut and Hitchcock. This work was inspired by the series of interviews the two conducted which was later turned into a book. The quotes from the two are real though the context isn’t always. If you are interested in the book it can be purchased here. If this alternate history premise insults your sensitivities please move on.
This is part three of a series which started here.
When we began discussing Stage Fright Hitch asked:
A.H. Why is it we can’t tell a lie in a flashback? (189).
François had no answer, but I speculated.
B.V.: Well the nature of a flashback is slippery to begin with. When we’re taking an audience back in time it is implied that necessary information is going to be conveyed. Film is a continuous art-form as opposed to literature and television where there are breaks, so if we interrupt the forward progress of the story we must have good reason and we must also be truthful for then the audience will feel we have wasted their time even if for only 30 seconds.
B.V.: What did you think of the acting in Strangers on a Train?
A.H.: I wasn’t too pleased with Farley Granger; He’s a good actor but I would’ve liked to see William Holden in the part because he’s stronger (190).
B.V.: That’s a very good choice, Hitch.
B.V.: You’ve made reference in that past to the fact that French films and films in general seem to be moving away from plots. Yet you’ve always seemed more interested in situations than plots, is that correct?
A.H.: Yes, I’d prefer to build a film around a situation rather than a plot (203).
B.V.: You’ve had reservations about I Confess, especially the fact that priests are not to divulge what they are told in a confessional. Is the fact that this is not universal information the cause of your reservations?
A.H.: Putting a situation in a film simply because you yourself can vouch for its authenticity, either because you’ve experienced it or heard about it simply isn’t good enough (203). That’s the trouble with I Confess. We Catholics know that a priest cannot disclose the secrets of the confessional but the Protestants, the atheists and agnostics all say, “Ridiculous! No man would remain silent and sacrifice his life for such a thing”(204).
F.T.: Then would you say that the basic concept of the film is wrong? (204).
A.H.: That’s right; we shouldn’t have made the picture (204).
B.V.: I absolutely disagree with you. I don’t think the concept is wrong. If any of your concepts was flawed it was that of The Birds because of the niggling wonder I get about the birds and why they act the way they do, even knowing that nature is unpredictable hasn’t helped me embrace that film. I Confess, however, has a great scenario.
To Be Continued
Introduction
This is a post that is a repurposing of an old-school Mini-Review Round-Up post. As stated here I am essentially done with running multi-film review posts. Each film deserves its own review. Therefore I will repost, and at times add to, old reviews periodically. Enjoy!
The Suite Life Movie(2011)
A funny and silly sci-fi tale wherein twin brothers face off against a mad scientist.
I believe in judging everything on what it is and what its goals are. Therefore, a DCOM (Disney Channel Original Movie for the uninitiated) cannot be judged against Citizen Kane. Each are doing very disparate things. Another caveat for those who will point out that this is a TV movie I’ve allowed them to be eligible before both for the good and the bad in my awards (Note: Only winners are linked to) therefore I should try and see a few each year or bar them and essentially the aesthetics are the same, the commercial break on streaming merely turns into a fade to black and then fade in.
Having said all that this film really works for what it’s trying to do and I was surprised that I enjoyed it quite a bit. Both Cole and Dylan Sprouse, who are no strangers to film acting, have far more naturalistic interpretations of their characters in this film than they do in a typical episode of the show. The film also manages to be rather self-contained and doesn’t require one to be overly-familiar with the show to enjoy and appreciate what’s going on. The mad scientist involvement is one not seen much these days but can definitely still be employed to great affect.
It’s funny, silly and even gets emotional with a point to be made. I’m not saying it’ll be in the year end fray but I was pleasantly surprised by it as it is one of the most enjoyable DCOMs I’ve seen in some time.
Introduction
When I had to decide on what to write about for the British Invaders blogathon the choice was a blissfully simple one. Time Bandits came to mind almost right away, and thankfully was available. It’s a film I’ve seen quite a few times, that I find quite funny and does not seem to be discussed often enough. It’s also, when thinking of British cinema one that comes instantly to my mind.
So, the what to write about selection was easy. How I chose to write about a film that quite easily fits the theme as it does deal with a band of invading time-traveling thieves was another question. Seeing as how the story flows in a series of vignettes that coalesce to have a centralized conflict, I think a more free-form examination of the film from a number of different angles would be highly appropriate.
Remake Haters
When you look at Gilliam’s filmography (one I’m not as familiar with as I should be) you see that Time Bandits kind of falls directorially towards the end of the Monty Python films and before Brazil, which may be why it’s at times under-discussed.
In fact, I had not seen much professed love for it until it was reported that it was being developed as a remake/reboot that would become a children’s fantasy/adventure film series.
I was kind of disappointed to hear that as well, but I have since then reached a sort of peace with remakes. I can dislike something conceptually, and grumble about its happening, but can judge the film on its own merits. Similarly, why is it in an ever-changing medium that stories cannot be revisited it seems? In theater there are remakes, but they are respected and referred to as revivals. All popular artforms are commercialized, conglomerated and globalized new packages on old ideas are nothing new.
However, in the ever unpredictable world of film development nothing has come of it as of yet, But it does have an In Development IMDb listing.
Up with Streaming and Film Preservation
It may have been misplaced (but that’s highly unlikely) but when I went to revisit this film I did not find the DVD of it on my shelves. But I had to see it again to be able to say anything meaningful. Sure enough it was available on Amazon Prime. With all the talk of what streaming or membership options there always seems to be a myopia. I take advantage of Prime as many ways as I can. I should do a study at some point to see what I’m getting out of my $99/year fee.
As I re-watched it struck me that the film wasn’t in the greatest shape. I’m unsure if its just degradation over time that could be restored or if a bad print was used like the original DVD of The Neverending Story. Regardless, it’s a film that I will nominate for enrollment in the National Film Registry this year.
The Vignettes and Time Travel
One thing that struck me as I rewatched this film is that it’s another case of time traveling and vignettes really working for me; including once in a play I wrote. It’s not the most commonly used trope, but it is one I’ve seen a few times and one I enjoy quite a bit. Another example that comes instantly to mind was The Annunciation, the first film adaptation of the classic Hungarian stageplay The Tragedy of Man. It came to mind because of that fact and some of the time periods visited are the same also.
The differences aside from language are the approaches to the tale, the comedy styles (there is some in both) and the order. The time bandits do not always go in the same order and Gilliam even fashions one non-historic time period.
The precise order is: Napoleonic Wars, Middle Ages, Ancient Greece, Titanic, Time of Legends which leads into the climactic showdowns.
The Napoleon segment had me hearkening back to Love and Death, which is Woody Allen’s take on Napoleon’s invasion of Russia amongst other things.
The Middle Ages section incorporates Robin Hood and his Merry Band of thieves in a way I never quite saw before. I love the story of Robin Hood but even I can’t help but laugh at a Robin who can say little else but “Jolly good.”
In Ancient Greece our young protagonist, Kevin (Craig Warnock), finds a new father figure in Agamemnon and some of the more dazzlingly surreal images come forth but there are quite a few.
Their brief stint on the ill-fated Titanic is a reappearance of the underrated Shelley Duvall, and it continues a gag of her character being referred to as Pansy. It’s also one of many instances where Kevin shows his knowledge of past events as the Bandits are clueless.
Due to the tone, narrative and structure of the film there is a natural ability to just forget about the notion of time-traveling paradoxes. There are any number of means to accomplish time travel in narrative devices from the most realistic, in theoretical terms, to fanciful. This film certainly comes out on the more fanciful end of things, which is fine by me because a map to the holes in the fabric of time is just really creative stuff.
Supreme Being and Evil
The aforementioned battle that comes to the fore is one between good and evil over possession of the map. In another interesting turn in this tale there is a God-versus-Satan battle that takes out denominational specifics and instead opts for more archetypal nomenclature and different approaches to visual representation of the two. The Supreme Being (i.e. God) is often seen as an Oz-like floating head and at the end appears as an old man in three-piece suit.
Evil (i.e. the Devil) is kind of a steampunk/Giger hybrid. And they fight over both the map, and Evil discusses mastering technologies, which at the time of this film’s making are the latest (and some of it is kind of prophetic), to get the upper hand.
Miscellanea
There can be quite a bit dedicated to miscellanea for this film: its one of several ’80s films to prominently feature many little people; there are many visual instances to drool over like the reversed negative images, or the negative fill (two motifs I love), or the giant underneath the boat; there are great lines like “Dear Benson, you are so mercifully free of the ravages of intelligence.”
Perhaps the two pieces of miscellanea that most demand some looking at are the Moderna Products that feature as a subplot, and the very ending. The Moderna Products are interesting because they play into commentary of consumerism and conglomeration that pervade not just the present day setting of the tale, but also play into the reveal of Evil when Kevin and the Bandits first run into him. There’s an omnipresence of these products on TV and even in Evil’s wheelhouse. It’s one of the pieces of the film that seems more apropos now than then.
As for the ending, this film has perhaps the most hilarious closing line in any film. It’s a quote I’ve used quite a bit in real life. The ending with the re-emergence of images and mementos (Polaroids and Connery in another part) also make the veracity of the daydream theory dubious and leaves events open to interpretation, and adds another layer to the comedy.
Conclusion
So in the five prior sections I looked at some different aspects of the film, and likely could’ve done more. Clearly, this a film that has stuck with me, though I didn’t discover it as early as I could have. This is also five aspects without examining the film in a traditional review mold. It is a film that finds an orderliness in its self-created chaos and keeps the levels of wonder, creativity and hilarity fairly consistent throughout, and paces itself well such that the two-hour running time doesn’t feel extraneous.
Whether or not the remake does happen I know we’d probably all prefer something new that’s all Gilliam. However, whether or not said remake does happen, the original is still here, stands the test of time and needs a bit more love in the ways described above.
If this short is eligible for the Oscars this year it has the potential to blow the field out of the water. Less than four minutes in length and I was moved to tears. This is Glen Keane’s first project for Google/Motorola’s Advanced Technology and Projects Group, Keane has worked as a supervising animator on many Disney films – if you didn’t know that going in it would be evident as you watch the spacial freedom, the journey through time and the metamorphic traditional animation at play.
There are quite a few reasons to include this short. First, James Franco reads this version of Ginsberg’s “Howl” in this film. As Entertainer of the Year last year things he’s involved with get y attention. However, there’s also the fact that a poem is being artistically rendered as an animated piece in several small sections. The other sections, this is merely part one, and more information on the film can be found here.
I decided that with the plethora of BAM Awards-related post towards the end of 2013 and the start of this year it was best to wait to the end of this month before officially recommencing the process.
I will post these lists towards the end of the month to allow for minimal updates. By creating a new post monthly, and creating massive combo files offline, it should make the process easier for me and more user-friendly for you, the esteemed reader. Enjoy.
Eligible Titles
Earth to Echo
Deliver Us From Evil
The Myth of Garrincha
The Amazing Catfish
Tammy
The Famous Five 3
The Way He Looks
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
Boyhood
Lucy
The Empty Hours
The Fluffy Movie
Son of Batman
Tormented
Bicycling with Molière
The Purge: Anarchy
White, Blue and White
Hercules
Wish I Was Here
The Way He Looks
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
Boyhood
Bicycling with Molière
Wish I Was Here
The Amazing Catfish
The Way He Looks
The Famous Five 3
The Myth of Garrincha
White, Blue and White
Most Overlooked Film
As intimated in my Most Underrated announcement this year, I’ve decided to make a change here. Rather than get caught up in me vs. the world nonsense and what a film’s rating is on an aggregate site, the IMDb or anywhere else, I want to champion smaller, lesser-known films. In 2011 with the selection of Toast this move was really in the offing. The nominees from this past year echo that fact. So here, regardless of how well-received something is by those who’ve seen it, I’ll be championing indies and foreign films, and the occasional financial flop from a bigger entity.
Earth to Echo
The Way He Looks
The Famous Five 3
Bicycling with Molière
Deliver Us From Evil
The Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
Boyhood
Bicycling with Molière
Lisa Owen The Amazing Catfish
Eric Bana Deliver Us From Evil
Ghilherme Lobo The Way He Looks
Fabrice Luchini Bicycling with Molière
Lambert Wilson Bicycling with Molière
Dwayne Johnson Hercules
Olivia Munn Deliver Us From Evil
Ximena Ayala The Amazing Catfish
Patricia Arquette Boyhood
Adriana Paz The Empty Hours
Maya Sansa Bicycling with Molière
Kate Hudson Wish I Was Here
Ingrid Bolsø Berdal Wish I Was Here
Edgar Ramirez Deliver Us From Evil
Fabio Audi The Way He Looks
Ethan Hawke Boyhood
Frank Grillo The Purge: Anarchy
Mandy Patinkin Wish I Was Here
John Hurt Hercules
Best Performance by a Young Actress in a Leading Role
Valeria Eisenbart The Famous Five 3
Joey King Wish I Was Here
Best Performance by a Young Actor in a Leading Role
Teo Halm Earth to Echo
Quirin Oettl The Famous Five 3
Ellar Coltrane Boyhood
Best Performance by a Young Actress in a Supporting Role
Lulu Wilson Deliver Us From Evil
Andrea Baeza The Amazing Catfish
Neele-Marie Nickel The Famous Five 3
Lorelei Linklater Boyhood
Best Performance by a Young Actor in a Supporting Role
Aidan Gemme Deliver Us From Evil
Brian ‘Astro’ Bradley Earth to Echo
Reese Hartwig Earth to Echo
Alejandro Ramirez-Munoz The Amazing Catfish
Kodi Smit-McPhee The Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
Justus Schlingensiepen The Famous Five 3
Peter DaCunha Tormented
Pierce Gagnon Wish I Was Here
Isaac Andrews Hercules
Earth to Echo
Deliver Us From Evil
The Amazing Catfish
The Way He Looks
The Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
Boyhood
Bicycling with Molière
Wish I Was Here
Earth to Echo
The Famous Five 3
Boyhood
Wish I Was Here
Hercules
Earth to Echo
The Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
Boyhood
Bicycling with Molière
Wish I Was Here
Deliver Us From Evil
Son of Batman
The Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
Bicycling with Molière
Deliver Us From Evil
The Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
The Way He Looks
Boyhood
Hercules
Earth to Echo
The Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
Boyhood
Lucy
Son of Batman
The Purge: Anarchy
Hercules
The Way He Looks
Boyhood
Lucy
The Empty Hours
Bicycling with Molière
Wish I Was Here
Deliver Us From Evil
Earth to Echo
Boyhood
Lucy
The Empty Hours
Bicycling with Molière
The Purge: Anarchy
The Famous Five 3
Boyhood
Lucy
Bicycling with Molière
Hercules
The Way He Looks
The Purge: Anarchy
Earth to Echo
The Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
Hercules
The Way He Looks
The Movie Rat 