Author: BRWC

  • What’s New Pussycat? – Rewatch

    What’s New Pussycat? – Rewatch

    What’s New Pussycat? – Woody Allen Retrospective. By Alif Majeed.

    It is easy to hate Woody Allen for very some pretty valid reasons. Certain things about his personal life cannot be justified. But that kind of hate does not deserve to be extended to his movies. It is especially sad when some of the same people who won accolades for his films go on to diss him and his work. It does bring about the much-vaunted question: How much can you separate the man from his art? On a personal note, it might be easy to denounce the guy, but it is hard not to acknowledge his immense contribution to cinema. 

    Several filmmakers have inspired him, and it is something he openly acknowledges both in his cinema and various interviews. His love for Ingrid Bergman is especially legendary. And though Marshall McLuhan was excellent in his cameo as himself in Annie Hall, you can’t help but wonder what Bergman, his original choice for the cameo, would have made that perfect scene even better. But there is no doubt as to how much of an influence he has been to scores of filmmakers. And the debt they owe him. 

    In a recent interview, he said that he is yet to make a great film. That came as a massive surprise as it felt like he is trying to downplay the impact of his work. It makes you wonder what it would be like to go through his entire filmography to figure where he started. And what better place to start than What’s new Pussycat? The very first movie he was involved with, even though it was on a writing and acting capacity.

    The story of how What’s New Pussycat? came to be is pretty unusual. Supposedly, the title came from Warren Beatty’s greeting as he picked up the phone. The entire movie came from the maker’s decision to flesh out a film out of the catchline. It is also interesting how the circle of merry-go-around between the studio, Warren Beatty, Woody Allen, and possibly even Peter Sellers changed the shape of the movie as we know it now. 

    What’s New Pussycat? is about a notorious womanizer Michael James (Peter O’Toole), who finds that old habits truly die hard as he finds it hard to be faithful to his fiancée Carole (Romy Schneider). Making it harder to let go of his philandering ways is the fact that every woman he crosses path with can’t seem to resist him. They include neurotic exotic dancer Liz Bien (Paula Prentiss), adventurer Rita (Ursula Andress), and Renée Lefebvre (Capucine). Michael’s psychoanalyst, Dr. Fritz Fassbender (Peter Sellers, with his creepy hat on, dialed way up) is stalking the latter, complicating things even further.

    Meanwhile, Carole decides to make Michael jealous by flirting with his nervous wreck of a friend, Victor Shakapopulis (Woody Allen). All this comes to a circle when they all end up at a hotel in the French countryside. All this causes chaos among all involved.

    You can’t help but wonder how the movie might be better off with the original choice when you watch the film. It’s a role Warren could have slipped walked in by just showing up considering his legendary ladies man reputation and charm. 

    Peter Toole is damn fine in the role, and he has all the devilishly handsome guy look pat-down. But he comes across as a guy who would be an excellent second choice. As if the role was showed down upon him, and he couldn’t make it his own. 

    As far as Woody Allen is concerned, the funniest thing about the character might be his name. Or maybe not because he is mainly just playing his version of the nervous, twitchy New Yorker. And it is not even the best version of the character. As far as Peter Sellers is concerned, he can either be annoying or well, the crazy genius that he is. Sadly, here he rides the thin line connecting the two that you know this is the genius that he is in movies like Doctor Strangelove and the first few Pink Panther movies. He tends to be close to The Magic Christian or Casino Royale level of lunacy. The latter even having Woody Allen and its chaotic insanity in common.

    It’s the women who come out of the whole affair smelling better from the movie than the male actors as they don’t have to do any heavy lifting, and the film does not rely on their reputation as much as their male counterparts. It might be easy to blame Woody Allen for the weird and disjointed script here. But in a power-play battle with Warren Beatty, his role was supposed to have been significantly reduced, both as a writer and actor. The latter ended up not doing the movie anyways, as he lost a power-play struggle of his own with the studio.

    What’s New Pussycat? is not half as bad as its retrospective reputation suggests, but by the time the movie gets over, you sigh in relief that you finally plowed through it. Like you completed a chore you did not want to but it ended up being not as bad as you imagined. The catchy earworm of a theme song is the one thing that stays with you long after the movie is over. 

    It is a movie that was a lesser work of a newcomer who went on to great things. The difference is that it is not pretty evident over here, and it is a must-see only for a Woody Allen completist. Still, for its tremendous star cast who look like they are having fun while trying to one-up each other and some mildly amusing scenes which might have a stamp of a pure filmmaking genius yet to refine his voice, this little curio has to be seen.

  • The Fanatic: The BRWC Review

    The Fanatic: The BRWC Review

    The Fanatic: The BRWC Review. By Fergus Henderson. – When it was announced last year that Fred Durst, of Limp Bizkit infamy, was about to release a psychological thriller starring John Travolta, it would be an understatement to call the reaction dubious. Not only was it written and directed by Fred Durst, a name that despite his prior forays into filmmaking remains synonymous with the eternally mystifying nu-metal moment – its star is an actor whose career since Battlefield Earth has been in steady, notorious decline. Where the hell would this fit into his body of work?

    Then there was the plot, which focuses on an unstable autograph hound who begins stalking his favourite movie star. So, a pulpy thriller addressing celebrity and fandom, guided by a pair who have flailed messily through the flashing lights of fame for decades. It must, at the very least, be something to behold.

    Unfortunately, those expecting (perhaps hoping) for the crass and ludicrous genre fare everything about it would suggest will find The Fanatic a disappointment. Durst appears to be re-mounting his bid for a second act as a serious director, his film more King of Comedy than Rob Zombie. Travolta, similarly, has gone full immersion with his character Moose.

    Of course, suggesting that the film is trying to make a legitimate point is not the same as saying that it succeeds. Watching this film, one doubts that the film itself has any kind of clear idea about what it’s saying. 

    The plot is relatively simple and follows in the vein of the aforementioned King of Comedy wherein an unhinged fantasist becomes dangerously embroiled in the life of their celebrity obsession (who turns out to be an asshole). Eventually someone gets captured and things come to a head.

    The similarities end there. The King of Comedy’s leadis delusional, hungry for fame and attention. It is Western culture at large that creates and rewards this kind of behaviour, the film says. The Fanatic’s lead Moose, as portrayed by Travolta, is broadly autistic and ultimately just looking for connection in Hollywood’s world of cold artifice. 

    As it turns out, Hollywood was the real bad guy all along. 

    This is the grand thesis hitched to the film’s backend, its bid for artistic legitimacy, and it rings hollow. All of the film’s supposed messages are floated half-heartedly over the last ten or so minutes. Everything that comes before scans as a straightforward thriller, a few tonally consistent but poorly done touches of black comedy thrown in for good measure. 

    The very fact that Travolta’s character is autistic is supremely problematic, and not just for the obvious reasons. It is first used as a plot device, in place of characterisation, to explain his obsession. It is then deployed patronisingly to keep us on his side as his behaviour escalates and things go from bad to criminal. 

    Ultimately the big problem is that the film is hamstrung by its inability to decide whether or not he’s a bad guy or a sacrificial lamb- although of course if they didn’t want to be known as the people that made the insensitive film with an autistic guy as the villain, they should have stopped a whole lot earlier in the writing stage. Travolta’s portrayal is committed, sure, but sensitive (or advisable at all) it is not.

    After flip-flopping around for an hour or so, the film finally ripcords the conflict altogether by making his celebrity idol Hunter Dunbar (easily the film’s best character, played with well observed arrogance and subtlety by Devon Sawa) the true bad guy. 

    So now we know what a film directed by Fred Durst and starring John Travolta looks like. For the better: it is competently put together, and features a sturdy supporting cast. For the worse: it features an all-time misstep for Travolta. It is po-faced when it should be camp, it is ridiculous when it should be serious, and most disappointingly it is middle of the road when it should have been insane.

  • Vikki Lenola: A Quick Chat

    Vikki Lenola: A Quick Chat

    A quick chat with actress Vikki Lenola who starred in the horror movie Covenant. By Eleanor Klein.

    Where were you when you found out you had landed a role in Covenant and how did you react? 

    I was on my way to a gig in Toronto when the director contacted me. I was very excited and grateful!

    What was it like being on set? Can you describe to us a typical day for you on set? 

    This film set was really fun. We stayed at a cabin in the middle of the woods, hours away from the city. There were trails to secluded caves and water areas too, which were both beautiful and a bit eerie. The large property was the perfect location for a spooky horror/ thriller. I loved that my role required me to scream at the top of my lungs in the woods like a maniac! When else do you get to do that? The fight scenes were fun too.

    Each day would I would start with makeup being done. My role was Alexandria, the temptress witch. So I had 2 very different looks. One being the sweet look of the temptress, and the other when she reveals her true evil witch form. While getting makeup done, I’d read over my lines again and get familiar with any props we were using. While we filmed for many hours, after working it was like a bunch of friends renting a cabin. I remember the one night was election night, and we all sat around the tv with popcorn watching the polls as Trump won the election. It sure made for an interesting night of conversation! I also remember being excited about the delicious vegan meals made by the director.

    We would love to learn more about your journey into acting. How did you break into acting? 

    I have been modeling for years now. So it feels like a natural extension to what I’m already doing. I take on a variety of gigs in order to have steady work in the industry. For this job I was recommended by the actor who had already secured the lead male role. I had met him about a year earlier at a fashion show I was booked for, and he was booked as the host. We chatted during breaks and discovered we were both into acting. It was nice of him to remember me and help me land such an interesting role.

    What roles do you hope you secure in the future? 

    All roles are great in their own ways, and I’m always thankful when someone thinks of me for a role. But I especially appreciate roles like in Covenant, where the character has some depth and strangeness. Action is fun too. I have my firearms licenses so I can safely handle (or even just be around) guns on set, and am working on training for combat for stage and screen.

    What advice do you have for anyone looking to get into acting? 

    If you’re not comfortable in front of the camera yet you may want to take some classes. Once you are, just like a lot of self-employed careers I think it takes a lot of dedication and networking. If you truly enjoy those things, I think you’ll be fine. You get what you put into it. If you really want it, don’t give up! 

  • Abe: Review

    Abe: Review

    By Alex Purnell. Abe is a heart-warming coming of age film about twelve-year-old Brooklynite Abraham who is born to Palestinian and Israeli parents and attempts to bring his torn family together through the magic of food, though Abraham finds himself struggling with his identity because of his differing religious heritages.

    When Abe’s duo-religious parents bring him to a cooking summer camp, he instead ditches the kiddy club and goes to learn from Brazillian fusion chef Chico, who Abe meets at a street food stand. Chico almost becomes a father-figure for Abe during this turbulent time in his life, allowing him to indulge in his love of food and come up with creative solutions to solve his problems at home. 

    Directed by Brazilian filmmaker Fernando Grostein Andrade and starring Stranger ThingsNoah Schnapp as the lead, Abe tickles your tastebuds with a loveable cast, but unfortunately turns out undercooked and leaves you with a some-what undesirable taste in your mouth due to its lacklustre plot, caused by awkward pacing and muddy, overzealous editing.

    Despite this, though, the underlying message is that of understanding and healing within feuding religious groups, and what Abe does beautifully displays this through the art of cooking.

    It was intriguing to see the different food from the two cultures and how Abe used the cuisine to be in touch with his heritage. Though, it was also interesting to see the dilemmas caused by these differences, such as the fact that Jewish Israeli’s use chickpeas to create their Falafel, whilst the Palestinian’s use fava beans, and how this is such a hot button debate based entirely on identity. This helped create an intensity within the family arguments, and how these quarrels cemented the identity of Abe’s split family, but did nothing but distance him from his relatives.

    Though one could argue that the theme of Abe trivialises the complex and longstanding conflict between Palestine and Israel, the underlying message is heartfelt and is vital to the story. 

    Abraham’s character conflict is the strongest source of emotion throughout the film, being born to Palestinian and Israeli families causes him to struggle to keep either side content. 

    An example of this would be his mother’s Jewish side coercing Abe into having a Bar Mitzvah, whilst he feels obliged to participate in Ramadan to keep his father’s side proud. This culminates with Abe attending a friends Bar Mitzvah, only to be bullied for being half Muslim by some of his Jewish peers, though the altercation is brief, Abe’s social life is something I wish the film went into more depth with.

    The use of editing is novel, to say the least. Abe utilizes modern internet culture through the use of social media to make the character of Abraham more relatable. This is done by overlaying Abrahams Tumblr and Instagram account to show his online presence and how he is perceived by his peers. Although this is a matter of taste, for me the use of this technique provokes an out-of-touch feeling and doesn’t add to the film, rather it makes the film seem amateurish in its attempt to seem stylish.

    Nevertheless, Abe is an enjoyable and endearing film only made more so by the mouth-watering food and the charming acting of Noah Schnapp, who really seems to come into his own. If you’re interested in watching a refreshing, light film, I would consider giving Abe a go, though if you’re looking for something with more depth I would consider looking elsewhere.

  • Hammer: The BRWC Review

    Hammer: The BRWC Review

    By Alex Purnell. Drug money, murder and cornfields, director Christian Sparkes takes us on a foreboding action ride, unfortunately, the track is plagued with a questionable plot and poorly written characters.

    When a drug deal goes awry after one side of the party attempts to rob the other of their money, shots are fired, and as young Chris (Mark O’Brien) flees the scene with the money and accomplice Lori (Dayle McLeod) in tow, they find out that Lori has a fatal gunshot wound. After hiding the money and Lori bleeding out in a cornfield, Chris frantically drives off, only to be seen and followed by his father. Adams (Ben Cotton), the individual that Chris had ripped off, though, furiously attempts to get revenge on Chris, despite being wounded himself. Chris’s father, Stephen (Will Patton) agrees to help his son get out of the mess, but the two get embroiled in a bloody quest to evade Adams, grab the money and find Lori’s body, dead or alive.

    Hammer is primarily about family and the traits you inherit from your parents, whether good or bad. After Chris’s family found out about his involvement within the drug trade, his mother and father distanced themselves from their son. Despite this, after Stephen agrees to help solve his son’s current affair, he himself starts to show his dark side, emanating aggressive characteristics, questioning his past, and theorising whether or not he had directly influenced his son to turn out the way he did. This consequently causes the audience to query his past and how he might have impacted his son’s upbringing.

    The largest issue with Hammer is its dull characters, their flip-flop values and their horrifically questionable priorities. There’s a complete lack of consequence and little to no development of any character, apart from Stephens increasingly aggressive behaviour. Because of this, the characters aren’t particularly pleasant or agreeable, causing a rather frustrating viewing experience.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKZaECe42P8

    Despite this, Hammer has its moments. I did enjoy the few action sequences the film provides, and I particularly enjoyed the pawnshop scene, which felt real, raw and refreshing from the rest of the film. The scene also greatly improved the dynamic between the father and son, something that Hammer desperately needed more of. In addition to this, I am a sucker for cornfield scenes, a strange cliche I have found myself loving, from Interstellar to Children of the Corn, it adds a maze-like dimension, causing the characters to rely solely on their sense of hearing and luck to find what they are looking for. 

    In short, Hammer is a relatively intriguing action film but doesn’t bring anything new to the table. Its inability to create any tension due to a lack of consequence is its biggest downfall, although it is somewhat gripping and has some well-executed action sequences that keep you watching throughout.