Filth or How Poor Sound Design can Ruin a Perfectly Good Asphyxiaphilia Scene

It should be clear now that the twisted tapeworm fuelling Irvine Welsh’s creativity is a tumultuous beast to adapt. After the success of Trainspotting subsequent adaptations like The Acid House and Ecstasy have failed to meet their predecessor’s standard. Not to mention Trainspotting follow-up Porno still languishing in development hell. Filth however hopes to be the one to break this slump using the considerable star power of its lead James McAvoy.

To his credit McAvoy’s performance is the razor-sharp centrepiece from which the rest of the film hangs. His sullen, bloodshot eyes alone are enough to tell you the distain, the decadence and demented mind-set of Detective Sergeant Bruce Robinson. A man hell-bent on rising through the ranks of the police if only to cheat, bully and humiliate his colleges out of the running. Yet through it all you never feel the urge to abandon Bruce, partially due to the tragic loneliness that results from his antics but more partially due to said antics being so entertaining to watch.

This however transpires to be both a blessing and curse. Make no mistake; McAvoy sells the hell out of Bruce’s more vulnerable moments. But these moments only show how Filth is taking great pains to make its leading man sympathetic, saddling him with childhood traumas and misplaced wives and children. When the sad fact is no amount of personal tragedy can truly make us empathise with such a monster. The result is that while we stay with Bruce his genuine moments of despair fail to hit home and only undermine our vicarious enjoyment in his antics. Filth wavers between pitch-black humour and dramatic descent into madness but never commits to either, a crisis of identity which proves to be the films biggest weakness.

Quite possibly this indecision is what has led to the films other great failing; immersion. It’s hard to describe how poor sound design can ruin a perfectly good asphyxiaphilia scene, something to do with the straining of the rope probably, but it keeps you out of the room. Just as bad editing can kill a funny line or poor lighting can suck the tension out of a bad drugs trip. In Trainspotting (and how long could we really go before drawing comparisons?) Danny Boyle made you feel like dirt was being forcibly injected into your veins. All Filth can manage is a dull feeling of intoxication.
In the end Filth is proof that the little things can make all the difference. Not a bad film by any estimation but one that keeps the experience at arm’s length. There’s a feeling that the humour could land stronger, the violence feel more immediate, that we could be truly swept up into Bruce’s insanity. Instead we can only see it, the fourth wall an impenetrable pane of glass, keeping us from the possibility of a greater film than this.
Liam Macleod

Elysium: A World Away From the Next Best Blockbuster

Little has been heard of Neill Blompkamp since his debut with 2009’s District 9. Unlike similar breakout Duncan Jones who followed his thoughtful character piece Moon with a much more adrenaline-fueled flick in the form of Source Code before apparently being headhunted for the long-awaited Warcraft film. But Blompkamp has evidentially only been in seclusion so that he could dedicate the thought and hard work into making a film worthy of the respect he now commands. So, what exactly is the follow up to his high-octane apartheid allegory? A high-octane immigration allegory, naturally.

The year is 2154 and most of Earth has been reduced to over-polluted and overpopulated favelas where the citizens live in squalor and struggle to live day to day. The wealthiest citizens having long-since left Earth behind for the space station Elysium, a picture perfect recreation of suburban Beverly Hills. Transport into Elysium is rigorously monitored by the coldly authoritarian Delacourt, who shoots down attempting immigrants without hesitation, even against the orders of her (slightly) more moderate superiors. This is all despite the fact that Earthlings are trying to desperately enter Elysium just the access their space-age medical bay, capable of curing any disease and healing any injury.

One such would-be immigrant is Max (Matt Damon), a master criminal gone straight who more or less embodies the working class schmo in a way both completely transparent yet extremely effective. After a workplace accident leaves Max with only days to live he calls upon his former crime boss Spider (Wagner Moura) to smuggle his into Elysium. Spider can do it but the plan involves and outfitting Max with a spindly but durable exoskeleton to go up against not only the security drones of Earth but Kruger (Sharlto Copley), a similarly suped-up psychopath who acts as Delacourt’s enforcer.  Complications also arise when Max’s plan interrupts a political coup on Elysium and his former love Frey (Alice Braga) gets taken hostage along with her (what else) terminally sick daughter.

As much as I can deride Elysium for its more clichéd elements, the hammering home of its ideology and the cheesy attempts to endear us to Frey’s daughter, it cannot be denied that it works. All the elements push Max on a journey to realise the selfishness in his aspiration for a life of ease of Elysium. Culminated in a satisfactory character arc that feels real and informed by the weight of the situation around him and the consequences of the people he cares about. It’s one of the most endearing and true-to-life performances of Damon’s career, even as he punches robots in the face.

Speaking of true-to-life Blompkamp may have constructed the most believable vision of the future seen in years, a crowded dusty landfill, with crumbling blocks of flats reaching to the sky. A place where, at any minute you expect Wall-E to wheel through and start cleaning. The technology is little more than high-powered mods of our own AK-47 and Nissan’s, covered in dirt and scratches. Even the design on Max’s exoskeleton looks like something weathered with use, in short it’s a future that’s been lived in, perhaps more so than it can take.  By contrast Elysium looks like the epitome of privilege; lush green lawns with perfectly cut grass, vast houses of squeaky clean glass and marble. All of it as hollow and artificial as the superiority of the people populating it.

It’s probably for this reason that few of Elysium’s residents are characterised. From the militant authoritarianism of Delacourt, played to chilling perfection by Jodie Foster, to the frustrated apathy of Max’s boss Carlyle (William Fichtner) who is so disdainful of the lower classes he literally has the word ‘rich’ branded on his face (technically ‘riche’). While this feels like a consequence of the films breakneck rush through Elysium, much to its fault, it’s hard to see how they could top the cast of characters stranded on Earth. Alice Braga’s Frey may be the epitome of the blockbuster love interest, right down to getting kidnapped, but provides a sympathetic example of how even the best of the have-nots are left behind in this broken society. Meanwhile Wagner Moura pulls a surprising turn as crime boss Spider, introduced as a heartless profiteer slowly transforming into determined freedom fighter. Arguably it is he who is allowed the most complexity of character and Moura sells the hell out of it.At the end of the day though the real scene stealer is Copley whose Kruger is the ultimate extreme of the psychotic henchman.  Erratic and brutal with joyous cruelty dripping from every line of dialogue, the best kind of stock character with never a dull moment in his presence. Especially jarring as a follow up to the spineless bureaucrat we saw him as in District 9, demonstrating Copely’s considerable range. 

If one has to pick a flaw with Elysium it’s that it rarely gives itself time to breathe and perhaps do something more creative with the world it’s built. So much is offered of Earth, the sense of community, the criminal underclass, the oppression of the droids. But it’s a shame it can’t offer the same of the Disneyland that hovers above it, what its people are like, how it would deal with Delacourt’s rule. Nor can it offer more creativity with its action beats which largely consist of the same misty body splatters and fistfights from District 9. Thankfully though because of the empathetic characters and fleshed out world the film remains the most engaging and thoughtful rides I’ve had all summer. The easiest to recommend by worlds apart.

Miyazaki Spirited Away to Retirement

I was going to use today, one day before the DVD release of Star Trek: Into Darkness, to discuss my opinion of the film which has evolved somewhat since its release. However this story takes prescedent as it will easily have the most significant impact on film as a whole. The story in question? Today, September 1st 2013, it was announced that Hayao Miyazaki, co-founder of the seminal Studio Ghibli and the director of some the most popular and endearing children's films of the last decade is to retire.

The news which came from Studio Ghibli head Koji Hoshino was met with stunned silence when revealed at the Venice Film Festival. The festival is to screen Miyazaki's eleventh, and now I guess final, film The Wind Rises. It's fitting then that the film neatly encapsulates the two subjects which most fuel  Miyazaki's passion and which have been woven throughout his work, for better or for worse. His love for flight and aviation and his hatred of war. 

The Wind Rises is about Jiro a young Japanese boy who dreams of flight and goes on to be a flight designer during World War Two. Refreshingly for a film about realising ones dreams the central conflict comes from losing out to simple competition not from external influences that hinder the path to being the best. And like Oppenheimer, like even Orville Wright himself, Jiro lives a life of regret at the suffering his works brought.

As mentioned the theme of war has permeated many of Miyazaki's films at Studio Ghibli. Ashitaka's quest against the weapons manufacturer Lady Eboshi in Princess Mononoke to Porco Rosso's past as a fighter pilot. Sometimes I feel this is a detriment to his work, like in Howl's Moving Castle where the war serves as little more than set dressing. Presented without cause or distinction of the two sides crippling our ability to empathise with Howl for doing what he can to protect the innocent. Though this is far from my sole problem with the film.

Whether Miyzaki's legacy will be to encourage universal pacifism or the preservation of the natural world remains to be seen. What is indisputable is that his contribution to Japanese Animation has not only produced some of its most compelling works but burst it onto mainstream western culture. Walt Disney releasing Princess Mononoke paved the way for future Ghibli films now released and arthouse cinema's and children's screenings across the west. That last point I think is one component of Ghibli's success, for all the depth added by theme and mythology they still work remarkably well as children's film.

My Neighbour Totoro is, for me, the best example of this. Led by two, incredibly sympathetic leads and set across the beauty of Akita Prefecture serving as the backdrop. The story is almost nonexistent as two young sisters try to come to terms with their mother suffering a severe sickness, finding respite in Totoro, the playful spirit of the forest. It's the profound sadness that makes the joy in their adventures with Totoro so palpable and the simple but distinct visual design of the spirit is what has made him a cult icon.

If I'm being honest though my favourite is and now always will be Laputa: Castle in the Sky. What can I say, I'm a sucker for adventure and similar to Miyazaki I've always has a fascination with airships. Airplanes may be the statistically safest way to fly but that doesn't stop your heart racing on takeoff. And that's what Laputa does, it whisks you away at high velocity then settles to let you get comfortable before taking its turns. It's a unique, funny and thrilling adventure that I can watch time and time again.

Studio Ghibli will not end with Miyazaki. That has never been a prospect. Recent addition to the team Hiromasa Yonebayashi debuted with The Secret World of Arietty which neatly embodies everything great about a Studio Ghibli film. Isao Takahata, who directed the heartbreaking Grave of the Fireflies continues to work with the studio. With his 5th Ghibli film The Story of Princess Kaguya currently in production. And of course there is Miyazaki's son Goro. Yes, his freshman outing Tales of Earthsea was met with a mixed critical reception, harshly earning his the Japanese equivalent of the Razzies. But From Up On Poppy Hill has fared much better with its plot closer to Ghibli films outside the fantasy genre like Only Yesterday.

Yes Ghibli will continue without Hayao Miyazaki's contribution but there is a sense that film will be poorer for it. He opened the west up to not only Japanese animation, which already had a dedicated albeit fringe following, but to worlds of splendor and hope. For the last year I have considered becoming an English language teacher in Japan. It is a desire brought about by the beauty the Ghibli films have shown me. Because of Miyazaki I want to walk up the Tama hills and along the safflower fields of Yamagata. And if I do I'll keep an eye out for Totoro.
    

High Rise Expectations of Ben Wheatley’s New Film

Ben Wheatley is to adapt a work by JG Ballard? This can only end disastrously. I mean who the hell is this Wheatley guy anyway? Unless he’s somehow managed to direct some of the most unique and subversive works of British cinema in the last deca-oh wait he totally has. Yes, perhaps the most exciting filmmaker in the country is getting his chance to bust onto the mainstream with an adaptation of new wave science fiction novel High Rise.

                For full disclosure I haven’t read the novel myself or indeed any of Ballard’s work. As a sci-fi author he’s certainly been on my radar but I’ve never got round to checking out anything he’s written and presently I’m still working through my long-ass reading list. If I feel an itch for some Hard SF I’ll get started on the Culture Series out of respect for its recently deceased author. Plus I’ve always got plenty of Dick to fall back on.

                One thing I do know is that Ballard is a heavily respected figure in the genre. Even if he’s not as prominent as the likes of Phillip K. Dick he’s certainly contributed as much to cyberpunk and futuristic dystopia. This is where we find ourselves in High Rise, set in a luxury high-rise apartment building where affluence gives rise to all manner of depravity. It’s Lord of the Flies starring Gideon Osborne’s Family and absolutely perfect material for Wheatley.

                The thing about Ben Wheatley, the thing that has made his most recent work the hits that they have been, has been his ability to manage shifts in tone. Kill List for example is one part domestic drama, one part hitman thriller and one part The Wicker Man. And while I feel the third act is too desultory to be effective the transition from kitchen sink to claw hammer execution is seamless. Leading man Jay (played by Utopia’s brilliant Neil Maskell) seethes with impotent aggression in every scene leaving no doubt that the discontent family man could be a hardened hitman.

                Similarly Sightseers feels like a jovial character comedy, merely disrupted by the odd murder. True this owes much to the writing and acting talents of Alice Lowe and Steve Oram. However it’s Wheatley’s direction that gives many of the deaths a slapstick feel punctuated by a complete drop in tone. It’s a sign of the man’s understanding of comic time and ability to convey the effect on screen. All of this results in Sightseers being one of the funniest films of last year and nowhere near as jarring as the premise would suggest.

                The prospect of Wheatley mixing the soft tones of an elegant gathering with the brutality and blood that represents how low humans can sink has a lot of promise. Like this year’s The Purge  it has the chance to say something about the isolationist attitude of some of the wealthy, hopefully without becoming preachy. It also represents the potential for a turning point in Wheatley’s career. A film by Ben Wheatley with the marketability of ‘based on a book by JG Ballard’ could see a much wider release than his previous films. A big hit could propel Wheatley into the mainstream with the money and creative freedom to achieve a larger passion project.

                This is all speculation of course. The reason Wheatley’s work exists of the fringes, beloved mostly by cinephiles, is because that’s the audience they play best to. And like Ken Loach, there’s no indication that the director of A Field in England would even want to enter the mainstream. That might not even be the best place for High Rise given that previous adaptations of Ballards work have either been the infamous, under-the-radar psychosexual thriller Crash or the comparatively conventional Empire of the Sun.  Either way with the substantial pedigree of Ballard and Wheatley combined; High Rise might be one of the most interesting British films for a long time.  

Not So Beautiful Creatures

 Ok, let’s get this out of the way. Yes, I know Beautiful Creatures came out months ago and nobody gave a shit about it then. The reason this is so badly delayed is because this review was originally intended as a video review but that got stalled due to demands on time and eventually my laptop getting bricked. Now everyone who was in a position to review the film has reviewed it and so doing a video seems pointless. Thankfully most critics have been reviewing Beautiful Creatures in a favourable light in contrast to my own views. So if say, you were made curious on the premise alone and wanted to check it out consider me present to direct you elsewhere. Seriously if you want some witch-related stuff to chew on there’s Tiffany Aching, Roald Dahl’s The Witches, hell even The Craft is a better bet.

In fact on the subject of Witches it’s notable that over the last year the TV industry has been working to make Witches the new supernatural thing with The Secret Circle and over here Switch and while none of them have amounted to more than okay, the move overall makes sense. Witches are just about the best way of capitalising on the success of Hollywood’s various young adult franchises while breaking away from said franchises undertones of romanticised subjugation. It empowers the women as both the narrative driving force and the supernatural creatures in question. And on the surface Beautiful Creatures seems to want to accomplish this.

The plot is something of a gender-inverted Twilight. It revolves around Ethan Wate a high-schooler in the rural county of Gaitlin who falls for new girl Lena Duchannes. Lena however is a Caster, a race gifted with various supernatural powers, so-called because this is mainstream and the word witch is just goofy. The problem with Casters is that on their sixteenth birthday their powers are claimed by the quirky outfitted forces of light or the Wilson’s disease afflicted forces of darkness. And things don’t exactly look light for Lena though with Gaitlin’s community turning against her as part of a plot orchestrated by Dark Caster Seraphine as well as a family curse involving Ethan’s own ancestry.

The reason I see this as attempting a more progressive portrayal of women is because of the more decisive role Lena plays. Throughout the story it’s reinforced to her that she has no choice in the matter, she’ll be claimed by either side whether she wants to or not and more likely dark owing to circumstances. Yet through it all Lena remains determined that there is some loophole, some workaround that will allow her to decide her own fate. And when said loophole presents itself it comes at a severe cost to her relationship with Ethan which she reluctantly accepts.  

   

Honestly I’d be all for this if it wasn’t for one minor detail that the film establishes about Caster Mythology which is that male Casters can choose to go light or dark while women can’t. This is a deviation from the book-incidentally yes I read the fucking book get over it-that I’m tempted to say was changed because it hints at plot points explored in the later novels and this film is really hesitant to hint at making sequels. But I really think it undermines the idea of Beautiful Creatures being the feminist counter-point to Twilight, that plus y’know it just not being very good.

Now I don’t want this to become adaptation 101 but one of the things I liked about the book was that the relationship between Ethan and Lena actually bothered to pace itself. Ethan is infatuated with her from the start ,as is par for the course, but his attraction is grounded in his characterisation.  Not only is Lena set apart from the citizens of Gaitlin but also she reminds him of how much he fits in with the community he longs to escape from.

Crucially it’s only a third of the way into the book before they become mutually romantic with time spent up to that point getting to know each other, gradually revealing Lena’s powers and exploring Caster mythos. This provides a way of drip-feeding exposition while at the same time providing context for Lena and Ethan spending time together which makes their eventual hookup more credible.

By contrast the film completely rushes things, going from antagonistic bitching to making out in a matter of minutes.  As a result there just seems something artificial about the whole thing, it proceeds far too quickly to feel genuine. In fact the pacing as a whole is a mess, scenes from the book are copied word for word and feel as limp and lifeless as reciting lines is. But then entirely new scenes are contrived simply to infodump exposition, like they know the central love story has no meat to it and are spacing out the Caster mythology just to fill out screen time.

Using an existing work is a tricky business where sometimes it’s best to stay faithful and other times it’s best to use the source as a jumping off point for an original story. But Beautiful Creatures combines the worst of both worlds, throwing aside interesting plot points with one hand and forcing us through verbatim sequences with the other.

Another problem is the narrative voice of Ethan, not the most original frustrated young American but at least when he was narrating the book I could imagine his southern drawl was tolerable to listen to. Alden Ehrenreich’s accent is just so grating and he has to detail everything when we should be able to just take in the visuals. What’s worse is that it’s needless, Ethan isn’t sole narrative perspective of the film and without spoiling anything he’s completely removed from the final act.

On top of that it’s really hard to follow all the different threads the story hints at, is Ethan’s mom an important character or not, can Lena choose her fate or can’t she, and why do we introduce all these different Casters but never establish who they are or what powers they have. I mean one of them is an illusionist which turns out to be a big deal in the final act but they never mention his powers or show him using them until that moment. Sure Jeremy Irons, Emma Thompson and Emmy Rossum are all fun as the older Casters but then why isn’t the rest of the film?

I wish I could say that the visual style or fantastical sets made up for all these narrative failing but what’s most shocking about Beautiful Creatures is just how flat and dull it is. Ravenwood manor looks like Tim Burton phoning it in and they have to repaint it every scene to show its supernatural nature on the cheap. The cinematography is so distant you feel like you’re watching every scene through a laboratory window. And the epic confrontation in the finale is shot/reverse shot like Lena and Seraphine are having a fucking dinner date.

It’s sad that Beautiful Creature fails as blisteringly as it does because I don’t want to hate, I want there to be some new supernatural franchise that really shakes up the genre or at least gives a decent role for women. But Beautiful Creatures is not that franchise, it’s not even good enough to be the placeholder till that franchise gets here.