Interview with actor Aidan Whytock

To mix things up a little, I've got South African actor Aidan Whytock in the hot seat today. Not only has he regularly collaborated with my husband on assorted film projects, but he's a familiar face in many of the locally produced films and series. Some of you may have seen him in Black Sails and Warrior, among quite a few productions.

Nerine Dorman: So, the first time we crossed paths, this was quite a few years back with one of the BlackMilk Productions short films. I don’t even remember which. And it’s just occurred to me that in all of those productions, there’s only been one where we’ve actually seen your face.

Aidan Whytock

Aidan Whytock: That’s a great point! The lovely, dark and twisty people at BlackMilk seem to never want to show my face. We’ve had a good few laughs about it on set. Perhaps I have a face for radio?

ND: Yet there was Alone – now that I think of it. That one was pretty freaky, and I remember we filmed that in the dead of winter. So, we got to know you quite a while back. What were some of the projects you got started with? It would seem now that embarking on a career in the film industry in South Africa has a lot more potential than it did a decade or two ago.

AW: I was starting out and looking for opportunities to explore and experiment. I was elated when I met you guys and the BlackMilk family. You gave me a wonderful platform to do just that; explore and grow. The SA film industry has definitely grown and there are a lot more studio projects and indie filmmakers. It’s a good time to be in the game.

ND: What have been some of your highlights over the past decade or so?

AW: I’ve died in a lot of interesting ways. Hooked, decapitated, blown up, fallen (in space – oh the irony). Black Sails was a brilliant experience. I worked with some superb actors and directors. It was an honour to be directed into and out of the show by the one and only Alik Sarkharov (Game of Thrones). I’ve recently finished up on Warrior. It’s definitely worth checking out – a wild west martial arts series with a cheek sense of humour.

Aidan in Black Sails

ND: Warrior is something so special, a definite clash of cultures, and it seems almost impossible to believe that it was filmed in its entirety here in Cape Town. Everything from the styling through to the character arcs is detailed and well thought out. You play Philip Coleman – a somewhat alcoholic lawyer. What were some of your memorable experiences on set? And you didn’t die in this one, for a change ;-)

AW: You’re right – for a change I’m still alive! It was probably some of the most enjoyable work I’ve done, for a few reasons: the cast are all exceptionally talented. On top of that they’re so friendly – they treat the cast and crew as their family. They know they’re in for the long haul so it makes sense to look after each other. But what really made it special was the writing. Jonathan Tropper has created such a layered, subtextual show that it’s hard to not do something vaguely interesting, even though I tried my damnedest to mess it up.

Aidan as Philip Coleman in Warrior

ND: You’ve also tried your hand at producing feature-length movies – most notably The Actor. And you had quite a wicked time frame in which to film it. The process itself must’ve been quite a learning curve too. Can you tell us a little more about that particular journey?

AW: We set ourselves the challenge of making a feature film on a shoestring budget, and it certainly was that. The Actor was our master class in filmmaking. We worked hard and fast, shot the film in 9 days with just USD3,500 and made something strong enough for a theatrical release. Our big learning: if you want to make a film, nothing is stopping you. Work with great people who like spending time with, find a story you want to tell and make it happen.

ND: And what’s on the cards for you currently?

AW: I’ve just wrapped a post apocalyptic sci-fi in Romania. I’m sworn to secrecy but it’s a novel take on the genre; one in alignment with some topical global challenges. Tonally it echoes some of the genre greats while being its own beast. As soon as the trailer is done I’ll let you know!

Check out Aidan's showreel or visit him over at IMDB.

Jim Henson's Labyrinth by ACH Smith

I go into reading novelisations of films rather warily, and unfortunately I was not exactly blown out of the water by ACH Smith's novelisation of the Jim Henson film Labyrinth. To give a little background, this film was hugely influential on me when I was younger – it ranked among productions such as The Neverending Story, Willow, and their ilk, that occupied a large part of my imagination.

I revisited the film Labyrinth quite recently, but because I'm the special kind of fantasy fan who wants to eke out the full experience over multiple media platforms, I had to get the book too.

I wish I could say that Smith's writing does the film justice, but it doesn't. At least not for me. I've always felt there's something a little deeper, grittier in Labyrinth, that the book kinda skates past. On the surface, it may appear a bog-standard quest, and with a strong female protagonist as well (which for its time was quite unusual). But Henson goes a lot deeper, especially pitting a young teen girl, Sarah, against the plotting Goblin King Jareth.

There is something uncomfortable in this May-December pairing, verging on the forbidden. Jareth is both creepy and sensual at the same time, and I could go all Freudian and Jungian at the same time, and spend reams and reams of pages unpicking the archetype and frothing about a young woman's awakening sexuality expressed in her opposition to her animus. But I'm not going to, and it's beyond the scope of this review, which is supposed to focus on Smith's writing.

Even if the novelisation of the movie was aimed at a middle grade readership, the writing itself feels simplistic even compared to some of the other books in this age group that I've encountered. Smith himself also takes liberties with the script that I feel are unnecessary deviations that don't progress or enhance the plot in any way. Language usage itself is somewhat twee (hence my thinking it might be aimed at much-younger readers ... but then That Scene in the ballroom between Sarah and Jareth is ... well ... not age appropriate and downright creepy.)

Smith aims for a near-limited third-person point of view, but he skips between characters randomly, which just annoyed me, along with clunky monologues without developing a strong enough voice for the author-narrator. Perhaps the story might work better if read out loud... I don't know. Just that I've enjoyed better YA literature that doesn't feel as if the author is being somewhat patronising to his readers.

(All right, it's my opinion that good YA fiction will appeal to both young and older people.)

Despite my misgivings, this is still a decent read. I'm glad I bought this particular edition because, well, duh, I'm a huge fan of the film, even if it's completely cringe-worthy whenever Bowie breaks into song. And those tights...that leave very little to the imagination.

I digress...

What I like about the book is that they've included some of Brian Froud's concept art as an appendix, along with some of Henson's notes, so for those who're interested in the behind-the-scenes details, these little additions are sweet. Also, it's a pretty hardcover, so will look great on my bookshelf right next to my first-edition English translation of Michael Ende's The Neverending Story... Because that's the sort of fantasy geek I am.

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017)

Robbed of his birthright, Arthur comes up the hard way in the back alleys of the city. But once he pulls the sword from the stone, he is forced to acknowledge his true legacy - whether he likes it or not.

If you came to this movie expecting a slavish reproduction of the timeless classic that's already been done to death, then you're probably one of those farts who're walking away from the film sputtering in self-indignant fury. I went into the cinema today expecting lots of explosions, a killer soundtrack and gratuitous displays of slabs of man meat. I was not disappointed. The only elements that were even remotely related to the legend were the Lady in the Lake, a magic sword, a round table and a castle called Camelot.

But there were ginormous elephant demons, a massive snake that appeared out of nowhere for no apparent reason... Suffice to say, if your evil henchmen are all cosplaying Kylo Ren, they're going to die in droves in the most spectacular fashion (kinda like Stormtroopers, if you think about it). Cue also the awfully flash slo-mo action scenes and distorted sound, and King Arthur (Charlie Hunnam) brooding his way most delightfully through the role of the prince-raised-in-a-brothel-turned-saviour-of-a-kingdom, and this is just oodles of fun to watch. Even the part where he gets carried away by giant vampire bats and fights off oversized rats.

I also really appreciated that there wasn't a gratuitous insta-love sexual attraction by our hero and The Mage (Astrid Bergès-Frisbey) an archetypical the witch of the wilds – who's really absolutely one of the best thing about the film when her eyes roll back and she summons birds animals to do her bidding.

Everything that I absolutely loved about films like Highlander and Lord of the Rings is present (I'm thinking especially of the Boss Fight Scene near the end which made me think of Connor vs. The Kurgan), but only bigger, and way more dramatic, happened in King Arthur: Legend of the Sword. High-brow cinema this is not. King Arthur goes through all the stages of the hero's journey, from denial through to a near-literal romp through the Underworld. Vortigern (Jude Law) is our tragic antagonist, whose lust for power sees him sacrifice everything that he loves to the freaky octopus ladies in exchange for his Boss form as a demon from a Frank Frazetta painting.

The editing and CGI are of the best I've seen in ages, and the world itself feels tactile (and most certainly not the England you'd imagine in history books). Yes, most of the dialogue is just one-liners and doesn't really have any cohesion, but I was not watching this film expecting deep existential answers. And I mean, what was the point of that giant snake? It was cool, but served no purpose other than being super cool.

Switch off your inner critic when you watch King Arthur. It's slick, insane and over the top. Also, it doesn't take itself too seriously. I'm also still ragingly incoherent and jumped up on the salt they put on my popcorn. Don't listen to the haters; just go have a blast. Guy Ritchie raped the legend, and he didn't even need to call it King Arthur, because to say it's based on the legend is a bit of a stretch, but it's still awesome.

Edit: Also, seeing Aidan Gillen was a treat. Some of you may remember him as the devious Petyr "Littlefinger" Baelish from Game of Thrones.

Children Who Chase Lost Voices #review

A coming of age story involving young love and a mysterious music, coming from a crystal radio left as a memento by an absent father, that leads a young heroine deep into a hidden world.

Also know as Journey to Agartha, this film, written and directed by Makoto Shinkai, is one of those that punched me right in the feels. Strongly themed along the lines of Orpheus's decent into the Underworld, this is a story about a young girl, Asuna, who inadvertently stumbles into the secret world of Agartha with its ancient, crumbling mysteries.

Generally I steer clear of your bog-standard anime, but Children Who Chase Lost Voices (which we caught on Netflix) resonated with so much mythic gravity and such strong story writing, that it begs a second look. I gained the sense of startling depth in world building with a solid mythos. Though on the outside, this is very much a young girl's coming of age story and her dealing with her absent father, it is also very much a tale about how one comes to terms with loss through death.

While I'm no fan of cute critter side-kicks, Mimi the cat was adorable while being suitably pesky, and her own story arc was apt, and I won't say any more for fear of spoilers. Characters all have strongly developed narrative arcs that interlace well, and have satisfying conclusions.

The production is exquisite down to every last detail, and the plot gradually unfolds, taking you from the everyday to the absolutely downright fantastical to the point where I was watching with the gooseflesh creeping up my arms. I will add that up until now, my experience with anime has been (mostly) limited to a few Studio Ghibli films, so I don't have much of a repertoire to draw on in order to make comparisons save to say that this compares favourably to the likes of Spirited Away and My Neighbor Tortoro.

Also, I really need to watch more quality anime, so if you have recommendations, please feel free to make them.

Mad Max #review

In a self-destructing world, a vengeful Australian policeman sets out to stop a violent motorcycle gang.

I was most certainly a wee sprite when Mad Max came out (1979) but it was one of those movies that I've watched more than once over the years. It had a bit of a reputation – as in I heard a lot about it while growing up – before I first got to see it when I was in my early teens.

I also admit my feelings about the film have changed over the years. When I was younger, I got a big kick out of what I now term loosely as "revenge porn". And then of course there's the rather baby-faced Mel Gibson before he became a complete jerk (and a household name).

If you're looking for a template for late 1970s styling, you can't go wrong with this film. It's dated horribly. It's clear George Miller was already aiming at a post-apocalyptic vibe, but there's enough of a touchstone of the (then) contemporary to ground this film firmly in reality. This is a future that's just around the corner; it's recognisable.

The plot is a coat hanger. We're not going to delve deeply into what motivates characters (beyond the rather obvious need for revenge.) We're not even going to talk about whether Mad Max passes the Bechdel test nor whether women characters have agency (hint, Mad Max is very much a product of its time). This film is all about the chase and the stunts. If you go into watching Mad Max for anything other than the absolutely insane car chases, you're going to come away disappointed.

The film is very much the origin story that sets up for the films that follow, and out of all the four films currently in existence, it's most certainly not my favourite. Is this a great film? No, not really. Is it entertaining? I'd say so – if you're looking for the "oh my god how did they manage that?" kind of reaction when trying to figure out how they did the stunts.

Will I watch this film again? Probably. It's one of those that kinda stuck with me when I was growing up, even if it's not particularly great. I'll write it off as mood, setting and nostalgia, and leave it at that.

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989) #film

When Dr. Henry Jones Sr. suddenly goes missing while pursuing the Holy Grail, eminent archaeologist Indiana Jones must follow in his father's footsteps and stop the Nazis.

Indy's entanglements with the Nazis as arch-villains are pretty much stock standard fare for his exploits. At least by the third in the series, it's on the verge of becoming – dare I say it? – old hat. Nevertheless, Last Crusade is, in my mind, a stronger film than its predecessor in that it delves into the complicated relationship Indy has with his father (played by Sean Connery), as well as a final test of faith. We see Indy on the trail of rescuing his dad from the Nazis, with the aid of a femme fatale archaeologist Dr Elsa Schneider. She *is* rather distracting but she's far from the damsel in distress.

Of course the rescue mission does not go off smoothly. There are comical moments, when Indy and his dad are tied to a chair with the room burning around them – possibly one of my favourite Indy routines. The humour is silly, but so charming.

And of course the action, the stunts – they are typically edge-of-your-seat. Their journey eventually takes our heroes from Venice crypts and German castles to a mysterious city (in reality this is none other than The Treasury in Petra, Jordan, which is still on my bucket list of places to visit). As with each Indy film, there is a central theme and with this one it's a quest for the Holy Grail – which will allegedly gift the user with immortality. (Not a good thing for Hitler to have, no?) Indy and his dad take opposite stances, with Indy having chosen rationality his entire life while his dad has devoted his life to chasing a so-called magical object with all the fervour of a religious convert.

I need to digress here to this most excellent article by Leah Schnelbach about the religious themes running through this movie. Yes, it's a long article, but when you're done you'll possibly agree that the Indiana Jones films have far more substance than your bog-standard action films. Each time Indy has his brush with the supernatural, he clings stubbornly to science and reason, despite his experiences. Whether this is just his refusal to be swept away by that for which he has no logical explanation or him merely taking things in his stride, we're never quite sure, however he has perhaps his most important test in this film.

The Treasury in Petra, Jordan. Picture: Wiki Commons

The pacing with Last Crusade is tight – there's often little respite from one challenge to the next. Though the mechanisms of the dangers they face are not authentic, yet they have that fantasy elements that blend well and add a hyper-real, epic feel to the films – none of this will happen in real life but it's thrilling to watch. The slight slapstick edge is just right without feeling overdone as it had in Temple of Doom.

I admit that the first time I saw this film I didn't really love it as much as I did the previous ones. Second time round, I was assailed by the feels because of the father-son element. Harrison Ford is visibly older, and so is Indy – perhaps wiser but still the daredevil. I guess what makes Indy one of my perennial heroes is the fact that he thinks on his feet, often solving puzzles that I know for a fact would see me dead within instants. He has passion driving him – for knowledge, for discovering old secrets and revealing (and preserving) them for the good of mankind. Yes, he's a bit of a rogue, but his heart is in the right place. This film's a keeper.

The Shining (1980) #review

A family heads to an isolated hotel for the winter where an evil and spiritual presence influences the father into violence, while his psychic son sees horrific forebodings from the past and of the future.

I have a terrible admission to make – but better late than never, amiright? I only watched The Shining for the first time this year. Yes. I’ve been lurking around on this planet for more than 30 years and I’d NEVER EVER EVER watched this masterpiece by Stanley Kubrick.

Also, I absolutely loathe Jack Nicholson. I don’t know what it is about him – his face, his voice. I agree he’s a fantastic actor but he makes my flesh crawl and he was perfect for this role as Jack Torrance, the author who simply cannot get into his novel. The true star of this film is his long-suffering wife Wendy, who somehow keeps it all together when everyone else around her is going completely stark-raving bonkers. Little Danny’s premonitions are creepy, but even creepier still is the location.

Kudos to the set dressers and builders – the interiors of the Overlook Hotel are phenomenal and a fitting tribute to all that is awful about late-1970s décor. Kubrick manages to make me feel horrifically claustrophobic and paranoid all at once. Trapped like Jack and his family, we can only sit back and watch how Jack spirals into madness, and we know things aren’t going to end well. All the while poor, dear Wendy comes to realise she needs to get herself and her son out of this place – easier said than done when the inevitable blizzard cuts them off from the rest of this world. And she’s resilient, tenacious, and she’s a mother who’s absolutely terrified beyond all belief yet she just doesn’t give up.

Yep, there are the tropes, like the magical negro and the psychic children tropes, but Kubrick plays them well. Besides, the tormented author with writers’ block is possibly one of the oldest literary tropes in the box.

I’ve heard so many people go on and on about why this film is a pinnacle of its art, and I can see why. Everything holds together – the tension, the dialogue, the characterisation. I’ll be honest and say it’s not my sort of film because I’m a shallow creature with simple tastes for nubile androgynous elves, but I watched it from start to finish without even getting distracted by my social media feeds because it was simply perfection. The horror is at times subtle, be it the growing sense of menace of a toxic environment or it’s overt, shocking in the flashes of atrocities that Kubrick depicts. (Let me not remember that hotel in Ireland where I had to hang my bedspread over the multiple mirrors before I could get to sleep.)

I’m also aware that this film has been picked apart to death by film aficionados who’ve read all sorts of meaning into things, and that in itself is a fascinating topic to delve into if you’ve got time to waste. Go trawl YouTube if you number among the idly curious. And if you’re a sad old fart like me who waited until her late-30s to see this film… I’m just going to shake my head at you. Watch this fucking film. Seriously.

No. I haven't read the fucking book yet. I'll get there. When I'm 50.

What We Do in the Shadows (2014) #reviews

A documentary team films the lives of a group of vampires for a few months. The vampires share a house in Wellington, New Zealand. Turns out vampires have their own domestic problems too.

It’s not often that I’ll laugh until my sides hurt, but directors Jemaine Clement and Taika Waititi pushed all the right buttons for me with their mockumentary What We Do in the Shadows – and I dig vampires, as some of you may already know. I can compare this to The League of Gentlemen meets the vampire genre as we get to know Viago, Vladislav, Deacon, and Petyr, who cohabit in the prerequisite crumbling domicile in the midst of a Wellington suburb in New Zealand. Add their minion (and mum) Jackie to the mix (who clearly has ambitions to be undead) whose work includes procuring and disposing of suitable victims on the off-chance that they'll turn her. (Hint, they're far too comfortable with the status quo.)

Of course their idyll isn’t long-lived, and when one of the vampires accidentally creates a new (modern) vampire, the pecking order is thrown out of kilter, with side-splittingly hilarious consequences. (And of course there are many laughs at the Tweelighters’ expense.)

Okay, the gags are really silly, but if you know your tropes, you’ll end up with a belly ache, like I did. Especially when the werewolves entered stage right… Honestly, I don’t know when last I’d seen a film that was just so much fun (thank you, Netflix). And yeah, this is one I’ll watch again some time in the future. Considering how stolid and unwieldy most of the mainstream cinema fare is nowadays (especially from the US), this is a waft of bloody good (and gory) fun.

There’s not much else to say, other than the fact that the characters were incredibly well put together, and the humour is spot on. So many cringe-worthy awkward, and irreverent situations, but oh so worth it.

Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981) #reviews

Archaeologist and adventurer Indiana Jones is hired by the U.S. government to find the Ark of the Covenant before the Nazis.

The first time I encountered anything about this film was via my then best friend Evan, when we were both six. There were collectible sticker books and he had one for Raiders of the Lost Ark. I was very envious of him because he came from the US and had all the Star Wars figurines.

So, yes, my viewing of this film is very much mired in nostalgia for my childhood, and it formed part of my mission to watch all the Indiana Jones films in a set.

Raiders is the first of the Indiana Jones films and shows Indy going up against the best movie villains ever – the Nazis. The film draws on the Nazi fascination with the occult, and in this scenario the McGuffin is the fabled Ark of the Covenant that has been lost for millennia. That is, until the Nazis cotton on to the fact that it may have been buried in Egypt.

Indy does what Indy does best, and embarks on a treasure hunt that leads him to the rather fabulous Marion Ravenwood (the daughter of one his archaeologist buddies) and the two set off to Egypt to hunt for the treasure. Of course the ominous Nazi colonel is hot on their heels and Indy and co. enjoy a series of narrow squeaks in typical Indy fashion, aided and abetted by his somewhat eclectic friends.

There aren't many strong female characters in this film. There is Marion. But she's hardly the Damsel, which makes up for it. (But I can already hear the SJWs winding themselves up into a frothy.) But I like Marion. She punches hard. She's clever. She's tough. She's capable. From time to time she *does* need rescuing but then again, Indy's constantly getting into scrapes himself.

Everyone gets their just deserts, and typically, those who are greedy and overly ambitious in a selfish fashion come off second best. In the end. Cultural representations remain simplistic as per Hollywood but then again, don't forget the era within which this film was made, when being PC wasn't exactly high up on producers' agendas. We had quite a lively discussion about the problematic elements in the film – and whether shoehorning representation now would be forced or not – but in the end I agree to leave the film be for what it is. This is a swashbuckling, tongue-in-cheek action film and it's fun. (And it's most certainly inspired video games like Tomb Raider and Uncharted.) I watch films like this because I want to be entertained. Overthinking it ruins the enjoyment, and the devil alone knows there's enough BS in the world.

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984) #review

A skirmish in Shanghai puts archaeologist Indiana Jones, his partner Short Round and singer Willie Scott crossing paths with an Indian village desperate to reclaim a rock stolen by a secret cult beneath the catacombs of an ancient palace.

I was six when my sister dragged me off to the cinema to watch Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (directed by Steven Spielberg). I’m sorry to report that I spent nearly ¾ of the film with my back to the screen. I was petrified, and after that I had nightmares about evil priests in horned headdresses who tried to haul my heart out of my ribcage with their bare hands.

Yet over the years this has been one of those films that I have rewatched several times (I’ve lost count), and as I’ve grown older, I’ve enjoyed Temple of Doom, because the Indiana Jones films are somewhat silly yet incredible fun. And, of course, because Harrison Ford makes my heart beat a little faster now that I’m a big person.

Okay, I lie, I kinda never really grew up. I’m only pretending to be a big person.

But I digress.

The Indiana Jones films hark from that glorious, pulpy era of Hollywood action heroes. They don’t take themselves too seriously, and combine hair-raising stunts with equal doses of humour. And, of course, SFX that have dated horribly. But that’s okay, because I often feel that contemporary cinema relies too heavily on the CGI to make up for poor writing and cinematography.

Viewed through a contemporary, regressive left lens, the Indiana Jones films can probably be regarded as problematic with the portrayals of gender and race, but they inhabit such a fond, nostalgic place in my childhood, when such concerns weren’t even discussed, that I’m not going to waste my energy. I’m pretty sure there are plenty of SJWs who’re going to froth and have already done so at great length.

Indiana Jones is one of my favourite characters. He’s got the brawn where it counts, but he’s a professor – the ultimate in geeks – and a lady’s man. And he can crack a one-liner like he cracks his trademark whip. We meet him in Shanghai, where a deal goes wrong, and he and the singer Willie Scott and intrepid pint-sized sidekick Short Round end up in India. From there they get dragged into a quest to retrieve a village’s sacred stones where they run into an evil Kali cult complete with human sacrifice. In defeating an evil priest and retrieving the sacred stones, they also free the village’s children, and everyone goes merrily on their way. Oh, and let's not forget the grossest dinner party ever, that involves monkey brain soup with floating eyeballs, and a main dish that features baby snakes wriggling out of a steaming cooked momma snake. That's after the bugs for starters – this elicited a huge eewwwwwww from six-year-old Nerine.

This film is all about the action and adventure. The bad guys are really bad, greedy and ambitious. Indy is no less ambitious, but his motives are more altruistic – he seeks treasure for his university (how noble) so that they can be preserved for posterity.

Though this story is supposed to be a prequel to the events that transpire in the preceding Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark, I found that it lacked some of the dynamics that made Raiders a much stronger film. I suspect it was because Willie and Short Round as characters, weren’t developed fully. Willie seems to exist to solely act as the Damsel and comic relief while Short Round adds to the general hilarity (which didn't really blow my hair back as an adult, if I'm quite honest). When I was six, I found the dynamics highly entertaining (what 6yo won’t laugh at slapstick?) but now I even found myself slightly annoyed. Write Willie and Short Stuff out, and it wouldn’t harm the plot in the least bit. If the writers had bothered to up the stakes with these two with a bit more development, it would have been another thing entirely and may have elevated the film somewhat.

But apart from this, the Temple of Doom is what it is – a silly, fun film to watch. The villains are Disney-esque in their badness, and yes, if you’re offended by everything under the sun, you’ll most likely make a long list of things that are problematic about the Temple of Doom. Maybe I’m viewing Indy through the rosy lenses of nostalgia, but I always did dream of one day being an explorer, and seeking lost mysteries, and Indy remains a character who inspires me to write the things I do.

Velvet Goldmine (1998) #movies

In 1984, British journalist Arthur Stuart investigates the career of 1970s glam superstar Brian Slade, who was heavily influenced in his early years by hard-living and rebellious American singer Curt Wild. (IMDB)

I admit that I rewatched Velvet Goldmine in the wake of David Bowie's passing. It was purely out of nostalgia. This was also one of the few films I saw on the big screen way back when it first came out, possibly with an ex of mine during a time when we ourselves thought we were terribly glam wearing makeup and being all gothic and beauteous.

So, yeah, there's a big pile of nostalgia attached to this.

I wasn't a Bowie fan back then, however now I realise what an impact his music and style had on the goth scene – and how most of the bands that I look up to now were heavily influenced by the man. Glam rock was never quite my thing but I've gained an appreciation for it in my dotage.

I'll also admit that my interest in this film is very much for the visual elements (beyond perving at Jonathan Rhys Meyers and Ewan McGregor. Gosh darnit, I admit it. This film is all about perving at those two. I am a shallow, vapid creature who doesn't much care for Christian Bale.

There's really not much of a story, if you aren't dazzled by fangrrrling. Singer Brian Slade has an affair with guitarist Curt Wild. Everything goes south in a narcotic haze and then Slade fakes his own death at the height of his fame – and everyone's pissed off at him and his career nose-dives. Then there's some sort of hush-hush cover-up with intimations about a man who fell to earth a-la Bowie while the dull-as-dead-woodlice reporter tries to find out what happened to his hero way after the fact. And everyone damaged by Slade has his or her turn to Bare All The Uglies. There are even Men In Black. We never find out why there are Men In Black. And I'm fine with that. Really I am. Save that I don't think these magical elements were played up enough.

(There're also those who say that the film hints at Bowie's connection with Iggy Pop – I'd rather say they're inspired by the two. And the next person who sagely advises me of this fact can go blow themselves – I've heard that tired pony trotted out by folks so often I'm like meh. Tell me something new.)

Granted, there are magical interludes in the film – music videos within the narrative – that most certainly add a glamorous touch (and for those alone make this film worth watching). Yet at the end, once the glitter and grease paint has smudged off, and the sun has robbed night of her splendour, we're left with the ugliness of the people in the story. And perhaps that is the story – that we paint our faces to be what we're not and in that way become trapped. We create an ideal we can never live up to. The fairytale prince is ephemeral. He is not who you want him to be. And he's bound to disappoint you.

In the end, he is just as sad as running mascara after you've spent the last half of the night talking to God on the Big White Telephone.

Okay, I'm getting all heavy-handed with my clichés etc. This is a pretty film. I'll take it out, dust it off, and watch it once in a while just to feel that sick pulse of enjoying pretty boys wearing make-up shagging and prancing around in too-tight pants. Because it makes me happy-sad, and reminds me of my own stupid young adult years when I wanted something I could never have. That wasn't even real.

I'll leave you with that. You probably won't enjoy the film for the same reasons I do, nor feel disappointed with it for the same reasons I do. Maybe it's also because the film reminds me of who I never got to be. And also that the dream invariably turns to ashes in your mouth.

PS, I'm also really not in a very intellectual mood of present, so feel free to disregard everything I've written here as the ramblings of a middle-aged maggot.

Starship Troopers (1997) #review

Humans in a fascistic, militaristic future do battle with giant alien bugs in a fight for survival.

I admit freely that the first occasion I saw this film, I spent most of my time hiding behind the couch. I was squeamish, and I didn't (at that stage) handle gore all too well. (Also, I'd yet to see the Alien films, so I can be excused, I think.) I shrieked like a little boy with his willy slammed in a car door.

Pretty much all I recalled from the first viewing was a lot of gore, explosions and missing limbs. I didn't recall the satire too much. Granted, fast forward a good decade or so later, I find I was more fascinated with the social commentary than the action. So far as old SF films go, the actual production of Starship Troopers holds up well (and in fact better than the rejigged CGI for Star Wars episodes IV to VI). Perhaps it's because to a degree Starship Troopers still feels a bit old school that helps. Movement is also so fast in some of the action sequences that if there is dodgy graphics, it's over too quickly for it to be out and out annoying.

The characters are, for the most, forgettable and pretty much cardboard cut-out. There's the yawn-worthy prerequisite love triangle, the dick-measuring rivalry between two males, and it's all very much a much of a muchness. Nothing groundbreaking. Johnny Rico wants to go kill himself some bugs 'cos they blew up his home town. He'll break a few hearts along the way and inspire some others. Pretty much stock-standard hero's journey. I could probably check all the boxes if I wasn't so god-damned utterly lazy and ill-inclined to make the effort.

Two words, however: Clancy Brown. I love me some Clancy Brown. Pause a moment to bask in the gorgeous baritone of that man's voice.

Okay. Enough fangrrrling.

What the director Paul Verhoeven says about society is far more interesting than the film's actual narrative. And the way he draws parallels between contemporary American society and Nazi Germany, though a bit heavy handed, are chillingly close to the bone. But that's about it. His motives are so dog-damned obvious it's kinda like getting slapped upside the head with a floppy bratwurst.

And I'm pretty sure your average movie goer won't have the socio-historic context to draw those parallels because they'll be too busy cheering on all the ultra violence. And gore. And missing limbs. And explosions and shit.

Sorry, I'm jaded. Social media has taught me much about the human race (which is probably why I live like a hermit at the bottom of Africa).

This is a solid piece of SF cinema, that's quite self-aware about its message. But it's not a film that's having me flail about in transports of joy. Most importantly, it didn't irritate me, like most films do nowadays. In hindsight I'm glad this film was made during a time when cinema wasn't overly reliant on CGI to make up for the deficits in most scripts nowadays. It means there's slightly more meat to the bone here. And Verhoeven had to pay attention to his work.

Will I watch this film again? Meh. Maybe. Will I tell you to? Meh. Was this eye-achingly awful? Nope. But it wasn't The Event Horizon, and nor was it Alien or Fire Fly, if you catch my drift – all of which I'll most likely revisit when the time comes.

Interstellar (2014) #review

A team of explorers travel through a wormhole in space in an attempt to ensure humanity's survival.

Interstellar was another of those films I swore I’d not go see, possibly mainly because of the hype. But then I discovered that Hans Zimmer did the soundtrack. Then I listened to the soundtrack and fell utterly in love. Zimmer wears his Philip Glass on his sleeve with this one, and if anyone’s seen Koyaanisqatsi they’ll understand the reference.

TBH, I couldn’t help but think about that Jodi Foster film Contact (1997) while I was watching Interstellar. Granted, I don’t remember much about Contact except that it left me feeling rather disappointed and that it tapped into some of the current pet conspiracy theories surrounding extra-terrestrial life.

Interstellar sucker punches the audience with its visual and aural elements. Apparently (and this is what I’ve heard anecdotally) the science behind the time dilation in the film all checks out. I wouldn’t know, since the whole relativity thing kinda does my head in, and I’m simply not motivated enough to get into arguments with people who know more about the subject than I do.

All I’ll say is that the narrative loop (because the story kinda loops into itself) was almost predictable. The actual premise of the story didn’t really blow my hair back, because I mean, really, if they have enough technology to send people through wormholes, then why the hell can’t they fix the blight that’s destroying all the food crops? Surely they’d have biodomes or synthesised food or something? But jawellnofine, don’t pay the author any mind. This is a film, and things get simplified for the sake of cinema.

At the heart of the story, however, there’s the troubled relationship between a father and his daughter. That kinda tugged on me hard and made me a wee bit choked up. Especially near the end. Daaaaamn. But then again, anything involving fathers and daughters and complicated relationships will hurt me because I can’t help but reflect on my own father and how much I miss the relationship I never really had. But this is neither the time and place for me to have a moment of existential wangst.

What Interstellar also succeeds in underscoring is exactly how hostile space is. These kinds of films never fail to instil a sense of claustrophobia in me – I’ve always been fearful of situations where people run out of vital resources like fuel or oxygen. There’s a predictable race against time by the end of the film that will leave most folks digging holes into the soft foam of their seats.

And then with regards to acting, I have to admit Matthew McConaughey is a very strange-looking man who, as an actor, has grown on me over the past few years. I quite enjoyed him in True Detective. I’m looking forward to seeing him The Dark Tower. He brings a certain dry, wry practicality to his roles that tickles me.

Would I watch Interstellar again? Probably not. It’s one of those life’s-too-short-to-revisit films, though I know there are others who’ll disagree. I’m kinda on the fence with this one, but I know I’ll be listening to the OST again and again, at full volume, because Hans Zimmer totally blew me out of the water. Again.

Star Wars: Episode VII – The Force Awakens #review

Three decades after the defeat of the Galactic Empire, a new threat arises. The First Order attempts to rule the galaxy and only a ragtag group of heroes can stop them, along with the help of the Resistance.

I’ve purposefully held off talking about Star Wars: Episode VII – The Force Awakens (TFA) for a number of reasons, the main one being to allow the hype to die down (and also mainly because I’ve just not had much in the way of time for reviews of any sort until now).

In preparation of this landmark event, myself and a few friends marathoned the preceding Star Wars films so that we’d be ready for TFA. This also resulted in a fair amount of lively discussions as we weighed up the merits and flaws of the various films.

And in that regard, I feel it’s important to view TFA through the lens of the preceding films.

When Episode IV came out all those years ago, George Lucas and his mates didn’t have access to all the neat CGI effects that we take for granted these days. So some of the costumes and creatures are, by today’s standards, a bit corny. (And yes, half the shit Lucas puts in with the rebooted episodes was mostly unnecessary.) Yet it was very much the pulpy, slightly tongue-in-cheek self-aware humour of these early films that makes them stand out for me. They consciously play with the stereotypes and conventions. (Aren't you a little short for a Stormtrooper?)

Though I didn’t see any of the films on the big screen until Episode I, episodes IV, V and VI nevertheless had a huge impact on me at the tender age of 11 when I got to see them on telly. Bad SFX and all. I could suspend disbelief and get carried away by the sheer excitement of what is a classic case of a Chosen One prophecy.

I could segue off on a whole Joseph Campbell Monomyth vibe but I’m not going to because that discussion has been done to death. I use it often enough when running writers’ workshops, as it’s one of the most basic themes in many SFF stories.

I’ve always maintained that the true hero of the entire saga is Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader – the hero who is only able to bring balance to the known universe once he’s dabbled in the Dark Side. The first six films are all about him. Episode VII in that sense is a fresh start; it’s the Great What Happens After.

Except Episodes I to III fall flat for me not only because of the wooden acting and godawful dialogue, but because they lost the X-factor that made IV to VI awesome. That sense of fun is simply lacking, and we're left with a limping morass of doom and gloom. Which could have been fixed (and this series of posts offer some lovely suggestions).

Yet if we’re looking at cyclical storytelling (which is often inherent in all sagas) then the choices JJ Abrams makes for TFA, are perfectly sensible.

Episodes IV to VI have an energy all of their own. It’s typical farmboy-turns-hero. We are invested in ever-escalating badness. We are introduced to the planet-busting Death Star. A bigger bad behind Darth Vader is introduced, and lastly an even bigger, meaner and downright nastier planet-destroying secret weapon is vaporised. Everyone lives happily ever after. Well, kinda.

Episodes I to III bring nothing new to the table other than backstory, along with annoying amphibious locals in possession of prehensile tongues. We have a showdown between primitive tribes somehow beating a technological superior army. (Moon of Endor, anyone?) We have betrayal. We learn why Anakin went bad (because twu lub, y'know). It can be argued that much of the energy for episodes IV to VI is sorely lacking here, as our anti-hero is revealed as a snotty, whiny brat who pouts and stomps his feet when he doesn’t get his way. Obi Wan, so sagely expressed by Alec Guinness in IV to VI, is portrayed by a sorely ineffectual, under-utilised Ewan McGregor. Natalie Portman’s Padme has a single purpose – to be Luke and Leia’s mum and literally die of a broken heart at the end as a reason for the good guy to go bad. Her passing, of course, just seems like a by-the-by GRRM treatment to get rid of inconvenient characters. Basically, these prequels were three feature-length missed opportunities and pointless staring off into distances with teared-up eyes filled with unjustified emotional wangst.

So yeah, I was filled with trepidation when Episode VII came out. Would they find that fresh current that somehow recaptured what made IV to VI great (for the time in which they were produced)?

My verdict: a resounding yes. I am a huge fan of the Star Wars franchise, despite its many flaws. Episode VII delivered all the excitement and more. Was it a bit too self-referential? I mean, I’ve heard some folks say this is basically A New Hope rebooted. I’ll agree, that there were many moments that echoed the earlier instalments, but I’ll counter by saying that the echoing was necessary to pay homage to the existing canon and to provide a platform for fresh dynamics.

There is a touchstone of familiarity to keep the existing fans happy while not dropping us off the deep end. And oh, the delicious nuance. Kylo Ren has an opportunity to redeem himself, which he rejects. Han Solo makes a stand (and we’ve all seen how he’s been running for years) – and pays the price – but his sacrifice provides a vital pinch point in the plot. We have the call to adventure and the denial of the call (hello, Campbell). We have women plausibly in pivotal roles (thank you). We have diversity that doesn’t feel forced (once again, thank you). Rei, Finn and Damon make a delightful triad easy to love, to temper the rather creepy Kylo Ren. I'm really looking forward to see how they'll develop.

At the appropriate moments, I clung to my seat, shrieked and cried. Abrams certainly knew exactly how to play me.

TFA is a film that was clearly created by a fan of the franchise, for the fans. Is it fresh and original? Objectively, I have to say no. Has it revived the franchise? Yes. But does it entertain? Oh yes. Will I watch it again? Make that a HELL YES.

Avatar (2009) #review

When his brother is killed in a robbery, paraplegic Marine Jake Sully decides to take his place in a mission on the distant world of Pandora. 

It took me a very long time to get round to watching Avatar. Mainly it was the case of the film having way too much hype at the time of its release. Also, at the time, I’d had a lot of other things on my mind and going to the movies had been the least of my concerns.

By the time the film came out on DVD, it was a case of not being able to convince my SO that we should watch it. So yes, ever since 2009, right up until early 2016, I successfully avoided watching the film about the blue slightly feline alien people who hug trees.
I’m also aware, on the periphery, that there was a lot of bitching and moaning from various communities about stereotypes – especially the idea of the “noble savage” vs. “evil, greedy capitalist scumdogs with big guns”.

Did James Cameron have an agenda when he created this film? I suspect he did, even if he didn’t quite admit it to himself. Or even if he did, does it really matter? There’s a more than heavy-handed environmental message here to bash viewers upside the head. And yeah, some of the dialogue is a bit “Well, as you know, Doctor Bob, the unobtainium…”

Unobtanium. I mean, really? [Falls over. Dies laughing]

But then again, attempting nuanced dialogue in big-budget films when you’re aiming for a broad audience isn’t always possible. I guess. And knowing what I do about behind the scenes of big-budget films … things can be hairy. Sometimes simple is best.

But …

But …

What I can’t deny is that Avatar is a pretty film. A very, very pretty film. I’m almost sorry I didn’t get to see it on the big screen because the CGI, even years on from its release is still jaw-droppingly amazeballs. And the James Horner OST, though a bit schmaltzy, is pure loveliness. I am still listening to it on Apple Music.

Essentially, as I’ve read before, Avatar is Dances with Wolves on a moon with blue cat people instead of the First People. Privileged white boy somehow immerses himself into alien culture and succeeds in becoming their Chosen One. It’s pure, Marty Stu wish fulfilment in all its inglorious ridiculousness.

SJWs and the rest of the Regressive Left probably have a million reasons why this film franchise is harmful to XYZ and that James Cameron is a Very Bad Person.

If you’re looking for depth of character, grey areas, and a nuanced plot, then this is not your film. If, however, you just want to hold onto the ikran and let go to fall through the verdant rainforest, and discover a fantastically rendered world filled with dangerous beasts and insane vegetation, this is a lush, gorgeous film. And kudos to all the creatives behind the scenes in production and art department. You guys are amazing, and your work is beautiful. Also, any film featuring Sigourney Weaver rocks.

On Alien and Aliens #film

For me this story starts when I was in primary school, back in the mid- to late-1980s in South Africa. We were at the arse end of the world thanks to apartheid, so my gentle readers, you must understand that we were always a little slow to get the good stuff. A movie would release in the US, and if it was popular, it would filter through to us a few months later. And it would take even longer for it to appear on VHS for us to hire.

Picture: Wiki Commons

It was probably when I was in Grade 3, 4 or 5, or thereabouts, that I gradually became aware of Alien and Aliens. And I vowed after listening to the boys in my class go on and on about the gory film and the simply frightening alien to NEVER EVER watch the film.

I was pretty good about my resolution too, for many years, until I met and married my husband, who by his own admission is a prime example of what happens when a young, bright mind is raised on a steady diet of horror movies (he makes short surreal horror films now in his spare time).

Somehow I still avoided Alien and most of its sequel, Aliens, but I did see and enjoy Alien Resurrection and watched bits of Alien 3 over the husband’s shoulder. But, quelle horreur! I did not see the film that spawned the whole franchise. Ever. Popular culture being what it is, I’d certainly read enough graphic novels and reviews, and had seen plenty of references to piece together the story. I didn’t think it necessary to see the first film. (Besides, remember that vow I made to myself in primary school?)

Besides, dude, those films were made way before the days of CGI. How the hell could they stand the test of time? Or so I thought.

Conversations were had with fellow creatives. The lads decided “We must have an Alien marathon”. I was dubious at first, but then thought, why the hell not. Perhaps it was time to put it all in context. Especially since we’d improved our home entertainment system profoundly from the days of peering at an old, half-blown CRT monitor we’d inherited from a friend.

I need to also add that Sigourney Weaver is one of my favourite female actors, precisely because she’s often cast in strong roles. Death and the Maiden. Hello.

Okay, so let’s do this.

We (sanely) decided to split the films down the middle, hence Alien and Aliens on one night, and at some point soon we’ll do the other two. Directors respectively are Ridley Scott and James Cameron. Weaver obviously follows through the entire series.

At this point I also need to highlight another reason why I’ve found the Alien franchise so alluring, and the reason is the Swiss Surrealist HR Giger. I’ve held a long love-hate fixation with his art over the years, and his involvement with the film started quite by the by even before he was consulted regarding the design. Screenwriter Dan O’Bannon crossed paths with him while working on the failed Alejandro Jadorowsky version of Dune. So the influence was there while O’Bannon conceived of the screenplay with his mate Ronald Shusett, and they were instrumental in getting him on board by the time they got round to production.

Something else that needs to be considered regarding the success of Alien, was the context in which it came into being. Remember that Star Wars was a huge, rip-roaring success for the SF genre in 1977, so it was also a case of O’Bannon and Shusett being in the right place at the right time with their screenplay.

I’d like to think that the contrast between the two films also played a role in its success. In Star Wars we have a rollicking space opera of epic proportions. In Alien, we are faced with the stark sterility of space, where mankind becomes prey to a superior biological organism. We are stripped of the romance and are faced to face with the primal danger of the hunter and the hunted.

To find oneself toppled from one’s post at the apex of the food chain is a deeply unsettling thought. Add to that the aesthetics of the Xenomorph (as the alien organism is known), and the way violation of others lies at the heart of its very existence (its sexual reproduction results in the oral rape of its host species). All unsettling, this blend of sex and death. What makes it even more frightening is that we are not able to reason with this life, whose sole motivation is so similar to ours – the Xenomorph wants to live, and will make use of whichever resources are available to do so. Humanity is merely a means to an end. And it doesn’t rest well to be relegated to a food source and a form of reproduction, does it?

In the second film, the themes of motherhood are also explored, which becomes rather unsettling when considering the role of the Xenomorph queen and the way she cares for her babies when compared to Ellen Ripley trying to make up for the fact that she missed out on being a mother to her long-dead daughter (floating about in stasis can play havoc with your timeline).

In discussion with the husband afterward, I realised also that another big theme running throughout both movies was that of corporate greed. The Weyland company owns the commercial vessel Nostromo on which Ripley is a crew member. It’s thanks to the company requiring an alien retrieved with complete disregard to the crew’s safety that is pivotal in the catastrophe. (And the reason for Ash countermanding Ripley’s quarantine order becomes even more clear.) In Aliens, an entire colony forfeits their lives so that Weyland can have access to the Xenomorph.

Picture: Wiki Commons

The question is asked: who is the real monster? The Xenomorph whose savagery is born out of natural instinct, or humanity, which will willingly turn on its own kind in order to further its aims?

As for my initial, childhood squeamishness, I went into the film with the expectation that everyone would die except for Ripley. Which was a far more healthier attitude to have. “Will he/she survive?” became more a case of “In what grisly manner and when will this person die?”

Both Scott and Cameron are able directors, who are adept in building and maintaining tension. Despite the lack of the almost ubiquitous CGI we’ve become to know and love for our cinema, neither director gives us overlong, detailed views of the Xenomorph. Instead, use of selected focus, light, sound and framing, the supreme predator is implied rather than revealed, and becomes all the more frightening because our imaginations have to fill in the missing details. (Perhaps our contemporary filmmakers can learn a thing or two from these older films, which I feel in a way are quite superior to the bad rash of Too Much Awesome afflicting contemporary cinema).

What starts out fairly mundane, is gradually unveiled in a full, unrelenting horror, for which we are woefully inadequately prepared. These two films straddle several genres (SF/horror/thriller) at the pinnacle of their craft, and over the intervening years and despite such massive leaps in filmmaking that give us dragons and massive mechs, have lost none of their power to cause us to suspend disbelief.

Oh, and I screamed. I screamed like a little girl at all the appropriate parts. And I loved every minute of it.


Sources:
“Alien (film)” Wikipedia n.p. 2015. January 13, 2015 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_%28film%29>

“Alien (Creature in Alien Franchise) n.p. 2015. January 13, 2015 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_(creature_in_Alien_franchise)#Concept_and_creation>