Author: bernardovillela

Review- Keyhole

Posted on by bernardovillela

Keyhole is a film by Guy Maddin. If one knows Guy Maddin then one knows precisely what this means. If one is not familiar with him then you will soon find out precisely what this means. To begin to get some sort of grasp of the significance of that statement you can visit either of the aforelinked posts. Now what precisely is Guy Maddin’s latest like?

Keyhole is a black & white, horror/comedy melodrama, which is a widening gyre that goes from a very cloistered, guarded tale and unwinds into one that is a rather effective and is nearly pantomime. The loop that the world revolves in and the roles these characters play, the unusual ways the characters behave in soon make themselves evident and as they do a seemingly fragmentary tale begins to tell other tales and history by implications.

With a film such as this, which is so unorthodox, the pacing thereof will be a precarious balancing act and a difficult thing to navigate, however, while not brisk the film does manage to move at a relatively steady pace. The incremental repetition of certain visual motifs and snatches of dialogue don’t bog the story down and serve as markers to an extent. One must also acknowledge that there will be a certain amount of disorientation that will need to be surmounted that also affects the speed of mental processing that this film requires.

Key to establishing the surreal and other-worldly tone that Maddin seeks in this film is the scoring, which is wonderful in this film. The score provides an anchor which keeps the film grounded in some sense of constancy and gravitas as the dialogue, images and scenes get all the more wilder as they are slowly unfurled and deciphered.

Another aspect that gives the film a sense of tempo is the edit. This is a film where you can almost predict the cuts by metronome. Here is where Maddin imbues the film with much of its frenetic energy. Surely, the pace of the cuts frequently belies the flow of the narrative, but it reaches a rather constant speed that pulls the story along with it. While such a discordant bit of technique may seem a distraction it mostly serves the film well as another steadying force.

The guardians of this arcane world that is partially occluded are the actors as they must do something very difficult, which is to play rather broad types but still resonate with the audience as people, transmit that they too are trying to uncover mysteries and/or not seem as they are obviously hiding something. With such affectations in the making of the film and stylizing in the narrative it can be most difficult for an actor to convey true emotions but the cast throughout manages quite well.

I find it important to seek reasons to justify the usage of color, even if the choice between color and black and white is a rather anachronistic one in this day and age, however, I hold the inverse true: if a film is shooting in black & white is it truly exploiting that choice; is it seeing and portraying a world that can only be conveyed monochromatically? Here I say the answer is an emphatic yes. There are tableaus and mise-en-scène designed the way they are because they fit a black & white landscape similarly many of the actors look like they were born to be shot in black & white.

Keyhole is not the most accessible film in the world but it is a nut that can be cracked with patience and focus, whether you know Maddin or not. Clearly, if you are familiar with him you’ll know what to expect better than most and your appreciation of it may be greater.

8/10

Review- Chernobyl Diaries

Posted on by bernardovillela

The nuclear incident in Chernobyl is one of the most unfortunate events in modern human history. It’s effects are far-reaching in terms of both distance and time, as the illnesses caused by radiation spread far and wide. Lest you confuse this with a Wikipedia entry that’s about as much as I need to say up front save that the Chernobyl incident is one I learned a great deal about and have a tremendous amount of sympathy for. Therefore, despite the fact that it’s rare, this was a film I was likely to be sensitive to in the horror genre. However, I went in hopefully, as horror cannot play it safe and I was rather surprised that this angle hadn’t yet been taken.

One of the few things I can happily report is that the film is not overly-exploitative. The deliberate pacing of it, the restraint it shows and the fact that it takes the point of view of a group of American tourists looking for an extreme locale make it much more palatable.

However, that is not to say it works entirely. The film works to about its midway point and then it starts to seriously degenerate into typically silly, dumb tropes that are only half-baked and highly illogical. Granted Hitchcock had a very valid point about feasibility, and it usually doesn’t come into play in horror, but what I mean is it seems the consequences of the exploration could’ve been greater and more logical simultaneously, so why not do that?

The set-up works very well and what’s more the acting is quite good. I speak frequently of acting when it comes to horror films because quite often it is not a prerequisite for this kind of film, or many actually, to have exceptional thespians to work on a narrative and technical level. However, this film has no weak-link that stands out in that regard. Particularly effective is Jesse McCartney, who not only plays the requisite Doubting Thomas but also spends a good deal of time injured. He is a talented actor who should be getting many more chances to show what he can do aside from being my favorite Chipmunk.

The film thankfully doesn’t take the found footage approach but there are a few unusual decisions visually. Some of them work well, some of them not so well. When the tour group is first threatened we watch the first search part go out from afar, see muzzle flashes, hear off screen noises but we eventually lose them. In a vacuum it’s an effective tactic, however, combining it with how minimal the rest of the film is it’s regrettable in hindsight. Towards the end there looks like there’s an incredible fight and struggle. The shame of it is I can’t see it because of the crazy handheld swish-pans and frenetic editing. The handheld camera in modern cinema is perhaps the biggest double-edged sword. Much vitality is added to action shots with the jostling that goes on, with the proximity that we get to the subject, but the pace of the edit needn’t be as frantic as the framing if we need to see something.

The climax of the film and the conclusion is so unsatisfying it nearly taints all that preceded it. Now, it’s is by no means The Devil Inside but perhaps this would’ve been a case where a few more incidents and a little less explanation would’ve made a bigger impact. The film falls close to over-explication than under and perhaps less truly would’ve been more here.

The Chernobyl Diaries simmers for a while and never really comes to a full boil, which in the end leaves it tepid and a bad taste in your mouth.

4/10

Review- A Bag of Hammers

Posted on by bernardovillela

A Bag of Hammers is a comedy, which follows two men in their 20s who make a living stealing cars and suddenly find that responsibility falls into their laps when a neighboring child loses his mother. The film, as some have noted, fits a bit to the mold of About A Boy. The main difference being that here its a pair of men and they are somewhat less reticent to assume responsibility.

The film is quite funny but it does mix in its themes rather well because of that fact. There are comments on child rearing and social services being made with out being too on the head about either of them. Also, considering that this pair of leads can be seen as beyond imperfect role models and quintessential slackers it does underline the points that are being made. These same points are further underlined by the fact that their background is not dissimilar to that of the young boy’s.

One thing the film is to be commended for is its handling of quirkiness. The temptation to be quirky in pursuit of originality is a strong one, especially in an indie film, especially in a comedy. However, quirkiness for quirkiness’ sake can be a disturbance to the progression of a film. What this film does well is makes the idiosyncrasies seeming necessities, and builds them through the characters and not as plot devices.

The pace of a film is a significant boon to it. The film doesn’t run long but I think that we all know that running time is not necessarily a fair gauge of pace. The pace is positively breezy throughout and the film really flows well for the most part.

The lone exception to the pacing brilliance is the fact that the third act is a bit abrupt. I can’t say it’s the handling that’s poor, it’s just that there’s a certain disproportion to the structure and a bit of acceleration through the end that could require a little more time than it gets.

However, what does need to be said is that the film is propelled to said end by a brilliantly framed and beautifully rendered wish-fulfillment montage, the likes of which you rarely see in this day and age. It truly is the coup de grace of the entire film and it’s rather breathtaking and should serve as an instructional as to how to construct a montage.

One thing that’s interesting to note is that the film, despite some it’s comedy being rather broad and it’s dramatic question being very much up front, it does handle thing with a certain bit of restraint. Namely after the film myself and the two friends I viewed it with were debating the sexuality of the two friends. It’s something that’s never addressed directly but certainly gives food for thought.

The performances in this film are wonderful. Jason Ritter, the spitting image of his father John, plays his character sincerely with great comedic timing and dramatic aplomb. He even carries the film through it’s most difficult patch where his character is resistant to taking care of the boy. Jake Sandvig is comedically deadpan and very sensitive as the character who reaches out to the child. The child, of course, plays a crucial role and Chandler Canterbury who is a very talented, as of yet underrated young talent, is very good in this role. He retains innocence while emoting the browbeaten posture of a child in an inadequate home situation and also shows great restraint emotionally. The scenes between him and his mother feature some of the best writing in the film.

A Bag of Hammers is by no means perfect but it does deserve to be seen and sought out if you have not heard of it yet. It’s both funny and moving and gets the manic depressive seal of approval: you’ll laugh, you’ll cry. Be on the lookout for it.

8/10

Book Review- Through a Glass Darkly by Jenny Worton

Posted on by bernardovillela

With book reviews I will typically limit myself to books that are about a film, filmmaking or filmmakers. However, there will be the occasional tangential exception and this is one of them. Through a Glass Darkly is one of the most famous films by Ingmar Bergman, but many of his films are very adaptable to the stage, and already have been either while Bergman was living or through the Ingmar Bergman Foundation.

Bergman himself was also every bit as much a man of the theatre as he was of the cinema. As for the adaptation it is written by Jenny Worton and the first thing of note is that it is easier to recommend for fans of Bergman and the piece. I picked up this brisk 72-page play at The Drama Book Shop for $18, which is not cheap so that’s the first grain of salt with which to take the play.

However, for the most part the play does manage to translate the palpable drama of the tale from screen to stage. There are a few head scratching decisions though; the story is neither moved in time or locale but there are I believe three profanities, only one of which really rings true given the situation. There is also the occasional awkward piece of dialogue, but for the most part it reads like Bergman’s tale. It must also be stated that the edition I read has a disclaimer within it that states dialogue may have altered between rehearsal process and debut.

There’s also the double-edged sword of sparse scene description, which gives productions a bit of freedom but also can at times catch the reader unawares as certain scenes perhaps seemed more minimalist at first and then developed.

Another pet peeve of minimal importance is that the biblical quote that inspired the title is nowhere to be found. In the film there is a title card at the start, but here there’s no textual allusion to it at all. No food for thought, only an assumption that we may know it. Now, this may be the playwright not wishing to impose some sort of multimedia aspect on anyone seeking to produce it. However, that is becoming more common in the theatre and might be a nice touch.

Granted it’s not Bergman adapting himself, which would be ideal, but it is a very good take on the tale. If you’re a fan of Bergman or the theatre it is worth looking into indeed in spite of a steep price.

Hero Whipped: The Double Life of Archie Andrews

Posted on by bernardovillela

It’s about time to do one these again, as other ideas in the vain are coming to the fore, and I want this one focused and not as scatter-brained.

As you may or may not know, Archie Comics have been shaking things up over the past few years. The introduction of Kevin Keller, the first openly gay character in this comics universe, was a big step and perhaps the most significant of all such recent stories. I think many comics fans cut their teeth on the Archie tales, I know I did. What makes them a good stating place is that they’re usually humorous tales about the commonplace. That’s why Keller is significant, he’s been folded into a world that just accepts him.

Kevin Keller, however, was the second bold initiative from Archie recently. The first was the Life with Archie series that plays out two different realities: Archie marries Betty and Archie Marries Veronica. Each issues is double-sized in page count and magazine-sized in proportion at a standard comics rate, less if you subscribe like I do.

The stories, now several arcs deep, have always mirrored each other and it got me to thinking about the doppleganger phenomenon in certain realms of fiction. I haven’t had extensive experience with such phenomena with it but what it ultimately lead me to conclude is that this series could be great preparation for more involved and less direct, nonlinear storytelling modes kids may encounter as they grow older.

The first example that came to mind was the film The Double Life of Veronique. This film aside from having a signature and extremely memorable theme plays with the notion that we all have a double in rather dramatic and no frills kind of way. Here you also have slightly different interpretations of established characters, which is not only a staple of comics but occurs in other media too. One for instance would be Stephen King who, via his pseudonym Richard Bachman, treated his characters from Desperation almost like they were actors and recast and re-purposed them in The Regulators.

The story also has a soap opera like feel in the best sense of the word. I think of these as my stories; the tension is palpable and is delivered in drips and drabs. Each storyline and subplot is touched on just enough to keep you coming back for more. Each character’s plot runs about 2-3 pages per issues, thus they have about an issue (two counting both tales) per arc of their plot. Just enough to incrementally move things along.

Another thing the series does which is crucial to breeding comics readership and is applicable to certain films as well, is that it plays with the parallel dimension/multiverse concept in a stripped-down dramatic sense. The lack of grandiosity and superhero tropes introduces a fundamental of the medium in a much more conventional, comprehensible tale for the neophyte and rewards long-time readers with glimpses of old favorites and puts new spins on old tales.

It’s a series that can still relate to teens but what it’s doing is making strides to stay somewhat in step with the times, which I think many will admit it hadn’t until recently. The aesthetic benefits of laying a foundation of more complicated story structures and approaches can be easily understood is what is really exciting; and the pedagogical abilities of comics, even in fiction ought never be overlooked. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, comics essentially taught me Portuguese and organizations like Reading With Pictures know of this power too.

Not to say that Archie’s social forwardness combined with its pushing its own aesthetic boundaries while staying true to its characters and style isn’t exciting too; but it’s this added element and depth that this series has that separates it, and makes it a great gateway to comics, more involved narratives and is the best fodder for cinematic adaptation they’ve likely ever had.

It’s brilliant on so many levels.

Short Film Saturday: A Therapy (2012)

Posted on by bernardovillela

Helena Bonham Carter and Ben Kingsley in A Therapy (Prada)

At the time of his arrest I wrote an editorial on Roman Polanski. It’s not really topical unless there’s a new development with regards to his status so I don’t foresee reporting it any time soon. I will merely state that I watch films and the works of filmmakers. I do not confuse the artist and the man, nor do I allow my perception of creative persona to color what my thoughts are on a person and vice versa. After all, Woody Allen still releases a film a year on average and his scandalous divorce from Mia Farrow is barely mentioned anymore.

Having said all that, here are some interesting things to note about this very short film Polanski has made for Prada. First, it’s a short film commissioned by a corporation, which is back en vogue since BMW started making a few for web consumption. The second thing is the film is completely about the performance of Ben Kingsley and is a great example of a flashback not taken. You can see in his face there’s a reverie, a remembrance but we see it only in his face and not in actuality. It’s great stuff.

A Therapy (2012)

The Drive-In Movie Experience

Posted on by bernardovillela

Today as I surfed around, I discovered that it was the anniversary of the first drive-in theater opening. The first theater opened in Camden, New Jersey. There are several places covering that angle, and Google even had their daily doodle reflect the date.

What struck me as fortuitous timing was the fact that I’ve been anxiously anticipating emails of schedules from a drive-in recently. I’m getting that itch to go again soon. What’s more surprising is that not so long ago I’d never gone at all.

Drive-ins may be a dying breed but they’re by no means extinct. If you’d like to experience one you can go here to find the one closest to you. This is the site I use to find the one I trek to. The interest was kindled by realizing that when vacationing in Central PA, I was not that far removed from some. Therefore, I found the one closest to me, which is a hike.

However, it’s a great time and something a movie buff must try. My recommendation would be to go see something you’ve seen already the first time around. This isn’t that hard to do as the schedules are usually a bit staggered on major releases and they will bring back older films.

For example, my most recent trip was around Halloween to see Paranormal Activity 3 followed by The Exorcist. My initial trip was to see the more family friendly slate of the weekend Dolphin Tale and Real Steel. Those were encore viewings to get my feet wet and used to the experience, which is surprisingly good.

The theatre I go to has two dedicated radio frequencies by which the sound is played in your car. Therefore, if you have good sound system the aural experience is rather good. The visual is not the greatest, which is why it’d behoove you to arrive a little early for a good spot. However, considering some projection snafus I’ve seen and heard about, it’s not the worst experience either.

The admission per person is about equivalent to one ticket at a multiplex. Example, The Delsea Drive-In is $9 per adult, $4 per child; for the double feature. The concession selection is extensive, and like a conventional theater this is where they make their money, but you can buy an outside food permit, if you wish.

So there are the basics regarding the drive-in experience, I suggest you look for one close to you and make a trip of it.

Short Film Saturday: Bye Bye Inkhead

Posted on by bernardovillela

As is the case with many of the shorts I’ve been posting I found this one on twitter. One way or another most of them surface from there.

This one was posted by Patrick Gibson, a young actor most recently seen on SyFy’s mini-series Neverland, who posted here his first role.

Here is the information provided with the YouTube upload:

Directed by Adrienne Michel-Long. Featuring Kathy Downes, Pauge Behan and Patrick Gibson.



Rita’s relationship with husband Michael is in difficulty: she is tired of looking after her two small children and just wants to get back to work. An au pair seems like the solution to all her problems….or is it?



Adrienne Michel-Long works as a film director and writer. She has directed two short films. Her first was an RTÉ and Irish Film Board Short Cuts International award winning short film, which was called Bye Bye Inkhead (2001). Luka her second award winning short film, which she also wrote, was also an Irish Film Board funded “Short Short” (2004).

Cast and Crew: http://imdb.to/Inkhead

It’s a humorous string of situations, which while it doesn’t follow a rule of three it does complete its tale and rather visually also. It also differentiates itself in as much as its not a classic nanny tale, wherein the perfect nanny is found but best not to say more than that. Enjoy!

When Is It Time To Stop a Movie?

Posted on by bernardovillela

This is a topic I was thinking about just recently. It was likely inspired by some godawful Netflix or the like. There are many schools of thought on this but essentially it’s something I’ve never been consistent with and it’s also an emotional visceral decision rather than an intellectual one, so I thought it was worth some examination. Without further prelude: Do you have a hard and fast rule regarding when to just stop watching a movie?

Clearly the environment one finds themselves in will impact how heavily you debate it. I’ve only theatrically ever walked out of one film, Jumanji. While I don’t necessarily regret the decision, the thought of “I’d rather be home and I should be leaving” did factor in. Either way, that’s the only precedent and while I’ve been tempted I’ve not done it again.

The stop or move on question comes into play a lot more when dealing with home video, more specifically on Netflix.

Some films, such as the one referenced in the picture Satan’s Little Helper, have the Train Crash Effect on you as a viewer, which is to say no matter how bad it is you have to keep watching. Regardless of the fact that I never even grew an ironic fondness of the film it was good fodder for joking.

Some films, of course, are so terrible they actually hurt your eyesight. The prime example of this would be Dollman, a film that’s the antithesis of Demonic Toys inasmuch as its so bad it’s offensive. That film I turned off within 10 minutes.

Which brings us to the argument of time; Syd Field’s theory that you typically know if you like a film within the first 10 minutes has some basis in fact but isn’t gospel. It’s more a guideline emphasizing the importance of a strong start to screenwriters. Few, if any, endings have ever salvaged a film in my mind. Many endings have ruined films. Usually, the cut-off is the mid-point. One film I saw recently really started to collapse around that point and few improve beyond it.

Is the 50% rule set in stone in my mind? Sadly, it’s not that easy. I’ve rarely stopped a movie past that point, but I have found redeemable qualities or scenes beyond it in the past when all that had preceded said point had been irredeemable.

I’m given further pause by films I nearly quit on very early on but I stuck with and eventually loved. The most notable example being Dogville. Eventually I got past my resistance and really started to appreciate what was happening. That does complicate things and is a case against ever turning anything off.

While I certainly understand the philosophy behind not wasting one’s time any further the allure of the unknown and the possibility of something to latch on to is compelling.

When watching a film as a group it’s easy to make it a democratic process. The question can be raised: “Are we done with this?” If there’s no consensus you can tune out in some fashion, which is an option when viewing solo but then why even keep the movie playing?

I suppose this is a roundabout way of putting my thoughts down and hoping for some insight from without that will lead me to a conclusion but in all likelihood it will remain an instinctual decision. If I think there’s something I can glean or catch from continuing I shall, if it’s pointless I shan’t. What are your thoughts?

Book Review- The Film Sense by Sergei Eisenstein

Posted on by bernardovillela

Eisenstein’s The Film Sense is a book I had never even seen in print anywhere before. I happened to find it when I was in Brazil searching through a rather large bookstore’s film section. You know a bookstore is good when you find many foreign language offerings, and I was able to pick up quite a few film texts in English there.

Sergei Eisenstein is likely the only filmmaker whose work as a theorist is of equal importance. Aside from spear-heading montage as the defining element of film, he wrote extensively about it and it’s all brilliant stuff. His angle in this book is tremendous. In it he seeks to create a “film sense” by drawing on elements of other art forms. Much of the writing actually does have to do with music as he is discussing how incorporating sound and music will co-exist with picture cutting.

There are many brilliant talking points. First, he touches on word and image, which is similar to a touched upon topic in Film Form, here he examines examples of montage in other artforms. Then he talks about synchronization of the senses, which is how film can, will and should play on all our senses, especially given this new development. In a perhaps revolutionary way he also discusses color in literature and in music and relates it to film, even though at this writing color was an abstract concept seen in shades of gray.

The writing flows beautifully and is just brilliant in terms of observation and the sources from which he draws. He illustrates how cinema must be the culmination of all other artforms and draw from them. I will admit it gets a bit dense with the both the in depth musical discussion, as I am more intuitive rather than well-versed there, and a bit with the montage flow diagrams and shots, having seen some of the films helps but the point does usually come across regardless.

Also, this is a rare book where the appendices are not only a must read but brilliant. They include: shot sheets, treatment sections of un-produced works, outlines and a very detailed bibliography for further reading.

All in all this is a fantastic book that is worth seeking out for serious aestheticians, filmmakers and film students. I found it endlessly fascinating such that I made many notes and underlined significantly and considered further analysis of the text but will leave it as this brief recommendation instead.