film reviews, interviews, features | BRWC

Author: BRWC

  • The Go-Between (1971): DVD Review

    The Go-Between (1971): DVD Review

    By Fergus Henderson. The inevitable Downton Abbey film has finally arrived, which means it’s the perfect time to examine perhaps the best of that breed of British films that encases in amber the late Victorian aristocracy and their swooning antics, 1971’s The Go-Between. What sets this film apart from the rest of that considerable canon are the two main creatives helming it, director Joseph Losey, and writer Harold Pinter. 

    The Go-Between is ostensibly the tale of a young boy, Leo (Dominic Guard), a guest in the country estate of the dandy Maudsleys. He becomes besotted by the older Marian Maudsley (Julie Christie at an indisputable career peak), who in turn is having a secret affair with burly working class farmer Ted Burgess (Alan Bates). No one can know, as Marian is due to marry the much posher Hugh (Edward Fox). Soon Leo, in a bid to win Marian’s affections, begins delivering their messages, ignorant to what he is really doing.

    Now this is ostensibly the story, but as you know, that story could quite easily be done by rote, a simple melodrama of colliding passions and forbidden love. Thankfully, The Go-Between is the third and best collaboration between Losey and Pinter, two absolute masters of subtext and emotion, and so it is truly the best version of that story, the version that expresses its full complexity. 

    It is a tale of youth and the winding journey from innocence to experience, one imbued with perversion and fatalism. It is a barbed tale of class, and the repression and expression of anger and sadness. It is doomed love, witnessed by a third party who becomes drawn destructively into it. It is, finally, an elliptically told story that looks back on the past but that seems to be saying that the present is the real mystery. 

    The whole thing is so gorgeous and tragic and enigmatic that is easy to forget how perfectly all of its components come together. You have Michel Legrand’s soundtrack, a dramatic cascade of piano scales that gives voice to the passion and drama the characters must keep hidden. There is Julie Christie, there is Alan Bates, both straining invisibly at the class hierarchies that bind them, acting as perfectly as anyone ever has. Behind it all you have Losey’s signature subtle weirdness, coming through in the modernist editing and taut camera work.

    It is hard to put into words what really makes this film work as well, and as singularly, as it does. Perhaps it is because Losey was an American, blacklisted and exiled from his home during the McCarthy era, who found his new home (and a renewed and developed artistic expression) in England. Perhaps it is because Pinter was a writer of such talent that Marian’s mother can ask Leo “what have you seen?” and a whole world of pain and suspicion and betrayal can sound out from underneath her words. Perhaps it is that both were fundamentally outsiders to the subject matter. 

    Whatever it was, the stars rarely align as perfectly as they did when Losey and Pinter decided to make this film. Seek it out, it is truly ageless. 

  • Enthusiastic Sinners: Review

    Enthusiastic Sinners: Review

    By Matt Keay.

    By In the mid-nineties, long before broadband-speed pornography, the only chances of a bit of the other on telly was your mum’s VHS copy of ‘9 1/2 Weeks’, and whatever you could find late on the four (and later, five) terrestrial channels on the small colour TV you were lucky to have in your bedroom. Consequently, many boys became acutely aware of a show called ‘Red Shoe Diaries’, which for early-teens was the absolute zenith of late night furtive fumbling fodder.

    It was titillating, intriguing, beguiling, and came and went in a brisk 30 minutes. ‘Enthusiastic Sinners’, however, is the ‘Red Shoe Diaries’ episode that Kevin Smith never bothered to make. It’s a fairly graphic soft-porn flick with pretty decent dialogue. It appears to be an attempt at the kind of film Burt Reynolds’ Jack Horner waxed lyrical about in ‘Boogie Nights’; a skin flick with a real story. 

    The plot is ostensibly a prolonged one night stand between Bruce (Christopher Heard) and Shelby (Maggie Alexander), whose meet-cute revolves around unhappily married Bruce, in his role as a police officer, being called to recently widowed Shelby’s house after reports of gunshots being heard on her property. When the call turns out to be a false alarm (her son, banging bullets with a hammer, incredibly), the pair are overcome with lust, decide to spend the day together, and proceed to participate in increasingly passionate bouts of sex, punctuated by soul-searching conversation. We spend the 85-minute running time forced, rather than compelled, to witness the potential genesis of a relationship, however unconventional it might be.

    The problem is that a reason cannot be fathomed why ‘Enthusiastic Sinners’ exists. If it was made to be sandwiched within a framing device like the raunchy David Duchovny vehicle of a bygone age, then why the lengthy witty repartee and the rural establishing shots? If the intention was to revisit in some abstract way the nostalgia of chance sexual encounters, then why drag the conceit out for an hour and a half? 

    "Enthusiastic Sinners" Trailer from Mark Lewis on Vimeo.

    Any enjoyment of the film rests on the chemistry of the leads, (the only characters in the picture), which is undeniable. Their performances are strong, and the dialogue is delivered convincingly and naturally. There are moments when anticipation of their next round of hanky-panky delivers disappointment, rather than excitement, as it detracts from an otherwise riveting two-handed scene of character-building back and forth.

    The feeling of listening in on a couple figuring each other out, of hedging their bets even as they bare their innermost feelings and desires to each other is an aspect of the film worth exploring, but the voyeuristic haze through which director Mark Lewis frames his actors results in a strange feeling of imposition upon the tryst, as if the viewer has become complicit in the affair, and cannot appreciate on face value the thrill of the situation as presented.

    ‘Enthusiastic Sinners’, unfortunately, is a potentially great short film, grossly bloated into a feature. Even with a reasonably taut runtime, it drags, and leaves you with the feeling that you’ve witnessed something you shouldn’t have. Not unlike ‘Red Shoe Diaries’.

  • Such A Funny Life: Review

    Such A Funny Life: Review

    By Naseem Ally. ‘Such A Funny Life’ directed by Oliver Mann centres on a stand up comic, David Gutierrez, from New York who brings the laughs on stage, but offstage his life is no laughing matter. David is in dire straits.

    He suffers from the loss of his sister and has to take care of his autistic mother Mariah, who is living in constant fear of his father, Ralph. With David having to deal with all this, comedy ends up becoming his escape. 

    Rob, a childhood friend that David confides in offers support along the way. However, Rob has the tendency to take things to the extreme. He offers David a hand in making his father ‘disappear’ if need be. Will their friendship get tested?

    Initial Thoughts

    There are some great shots in Such A Funny Life, particularly the sequences for the opening credits.  A beautiful timelapse of the Los Angeles skyline at night really set the tone.  The city where every budding comic and actor flocks to, looking to get their big break in the city of Angels. 

    There seemed to be some references to ‘8 mile’ but I don’t know if it was the director’s intention. It was reminiscent to the opening scenes of Eminem in the bathroom pumping himself up before going on stage. This is David’s one shot. His one opportunity.  But thankfully, for him at least, there is no ‘mom’s spaghetti’. 

    Highlights

    David played by Gonzalo Trigueros gave a solid display and captured the essence of someone down on their luck, looking for a glimmer of hope. In the film, David says ‘I’m really trying to find the things that make me smile’. In response to this, his mother replies ‘Do something funny. Do a show for me, you and Gabby’.  Unfortunately, in Mariah’s state, she is unable to comprehend that her daughter is sadly no longer around. 

    In the supporting cast, a stand-up comic named Dale offers a word of advice. ‘Your perspective doesn’t count, these are people you don’t know…laughter is like all the cool kids wanting to hang out with you’. Even with the seed of doubt planted in his mind, David still has the desire to make it out of his situation and prove that he can make something of himself.

    Visuals

    The lighting used adds depth to the film’s overall look.  The hue from the mirror lights that reflect on David as he’s pumping up is a nice touch.  There’s also an amber tinge on the stage he’s performing on which is also visually appealing.

    The contrast of New York and L.A is reflected in the mood of the film which is noticeable throughout.  From the looks of it, some thought has been put into the portrayal of David’s dark, gritty and traumatic past. It really does capture his life in inner-city New York.

    Film Score

    Supplemented with a fitting musical score, it paints the picture of having a positive outlook in the face of adversity.  The score feels like it could fit on a playlist alongside the likes of MGMT and Empire Of The Sun.  During the transitions, the electronic and spacey sounds work well and add a sense of eeriness at certain points in the film.

    Closing Thoughts

    A hiccup for this film is in the editing. In particular, when David has a flashback to his time in school and the words ‘Queens, New York – PAST’ appear.  To me, it felt a bit, well, ‘cheap’. ‘Queens, New York – 1989’ for instance, would have been better.

    With a running time of just over eighty-three minutes, this is a digestible film. It manages to draw you into David’s life within the first fifteen minutes and doesn’t feel like a drag. 

    Underneath all this lies a level headed, relatable character who is somewhat of a social outcast, looking for acceptance through bringing people together to laugh. Even if it’s at his own expense. 

    Little do they know, behind closed doors, David’s life is a very sad tale. 

    After all, in the words of Dale, ‘laughter is like all the cool kids wanting to hang out with you’.

  • How Drones Are Being Used In The Film Industry

    How Drones Are Being Used In The Film Industry

    How Drones Are Being Used in the Film Industry. By Frankie Wallace.

    Drones (also known as unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs) have been making headlines lately with conversation regarding their use in art and business. No industry better encapsulates the creative abilities of these machines like Hollywood. At an increasing rate, new feature films are using drones for aerial and hard-to-get shots. Films like James Bond: Skyfall, The Wolf of Wall Street, and Jurassic World helped to pioneer this trend, and it looks like it will continue.

    The use of UAVs in filmmaking is just one of several technological advances revamping modern cinema. For instance, immersive virtual reality (VR), known for its use of headsets and ability to put users directly into a digital storyline, has been recently used in healthcare, therapy, real estate, and astronaut training. But as it turns out, immersive VR has also found favor with filmmakers. The potential of these new technologies being used in conjunction could make way for a new era of film. Imagine if VR movie viewers could experience the heights shot by drones!

    Coming back to UAVs alone, it is certain that they will set a high bar for new perspectives in film. On top of that, they’re considerably cost-effective. As we see these machines enter and change Hollywood, it’s difficult not to marvel at how they have brought life to the big screen.

    Why Do Directors Find Drones So Useful?

    Drones have been contributing to society for quite some time now, being used in industries like disaster recovery and global health. They’ve also been the center of some controversy, particularly with their use by the military. Because of this controversy and concerns that they may interfere with personal aircraft, they were generally prohibited from commercial use until 2014. 

    But several filmmakers saw their potential and sought out means to use them. Partially due to their efforts, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) initially approved the use of UAVs for six movie companies, and in 2016 established established a set of rules for their commercial use. This opened the technology up to other film studios and businesses.

    Directors didn’t only see potential for aerial shots per se, but for drones’ overall ability to offer new perspectives. Randy Scott Slavin of the New York City Drone Film Festival has noted that UAVs “literally go to places people [can’t] get to.” This benefits film directors greatly, and is the primary reason moviegoers will continue to see UAV shots in films to come.

    The Cost Effectiveness

    The technological advantage drone cameras offer to anyone using them for film work is greatly magnified by their cost-effectiveness. Giant cranes, helicopters, and the like were necessary to get a similar perspective in the past. These would often cost upwards of $25,000. But drones are only a few thousand dollars to purchase and easy to fly.  

    The affordable opportunities offered by UAVs was best explained by Mike Fantasia, a supervising location manager for some of the biggest movies in theaters right now (his recent credits include Spider-Man: Homecoming and the newest Top Gun movie). Fantasia told Variety that he could “see a drone hoisting a light into the night sky, replacing a crane or manlift, or holding a silk to block or temper the light on a sunny day.” He also added that the machines had potential for bringing equipment onto location, which could be especially valuable when filming at great heights or hard-to-reach locations.

    With all that UAVs are capable of, the bang for your buck is pretty phenomenal. For a filmmaker on a limited budget, they offer an affordable leap toward a pristine production. This is why they are quickly transforming how movies are made, and why many think they will become commonplace in Hollywood soon enough.

    Drones Now and Drones In The Future

    While the potential of drones is unarguable, there’s still a lot to be figured out about how they can be used. And even as filmmakers continue to experiment with them, they remain controversial. This has been covered in film and cinema, such as the very straight forward “Drone Strike” short film and a recent episode of Black Mirror in which small UAVs are used as murder weapons.

    Even so, it would seem that the film industry intends to keep using the machines. Notably, there are some legal complications surrounding UAVs. Since the FAA has only allowed their commercial use for a short amount of time, government regulation of drones is still being discussed. This serves as a reminder that at the end of the day, UAVs are powerful, and we’re not sure what they’re completely capable of yet in civilian hands.

    One thing that we can know, however, is that drones are incredible assets to modern filmmaking. Their cost effectiveness combined with their ability to go where humans can’t has brought a lot of value to feature films. Only the future will tell how drones are used in Hollywood from here on out out. But despite the aforementioned controversy, it would seem that several directors have their fingers crossed for the better.

  • Matthew Tibbenham Chats Surviving Confession

    Matthew Tibbenham Chats Surviving Confession

    BRWC spoke to Matthew Tibbenham, director of Surviving Confession.

    Why filmmaking, Matthew?

    Matthew Tibbenham: Because I have no real skills! But seriously, I’m a creative person, but for the life of me, I can’t draw, paint, or sculpt. What else is a creative person like myself supposed to do apart from be a film director? I imagine all these things in my head, but sadly, other than writing, I can’t bring these visions to life. That’s what’s great about directing and working with such talented people who have real skills. Whether it’s the storyboard artist sketching shots, the production designer creating sets, or the composer writing beautiful melodies, it’s an amazing art form that brings hundreds of talented people together to create something wholly unique. As Aaron Sorkin wrote so eloquently in Steve Jobs, “I play the orchestra.”

    You started in various positions, working on major studio films like Sinister and Deliver Us From Evil. What did you learn working on those productions that you’d later apply to your own films?

    Matthew Tibbenham: Yeah, it was great working with Scott Derrickson, Ethan Hawke, and C. Robert Cargill on Sinister and with Scott on Deliver Us From Evil. I think all film directors need to have a good understanding of every aspect of filmmaking and that’s what I’ve tried to do throughout my career. On Sinister, I was able to do everything from watch over the shoulder of the director as I brought him coffee and asked him about the shots to editing some of the Super8 movies in the film and finally doing the second unit directing. For anyone who wants to be a director, if you can, I would definitely recommend being a Director’s Assistant. You’re next to the director almost the whole shoot and most directors want to talk about their work so they’ll be open to any questions you have. And if you’re lucky, they’ll let you do more than just get them lunch or their dry cleaning.

    Also, in between Sinister and Deliver Us From Evil, it was great reading all the scripts that came in for Scott. After reading hundreds of scripts, you quickly understand what makes a good story and how to fix major problems most scripts have. You might not be able to write as well as most of the screenwriters out there, but soon you’ll understand what kind of films you’re drawn to and what sets a bad script apart from a good one, or even a great one.

    In addition to story and filmmaking in general, I’d also say editing is one of the most important things an upcoming director can learn. A lot of directing is about pacing and making sure everything flows well. If you edit other peoples projects or even you own, it helps add to the internal rhythm you have for judging movies and figuring out what’s right for a scene or moment. Nathan Dodge did an amazing job editing our film, but even after he was done, I went through the film meticulously and re-edited some scenes that just needed that extra special touch.

    Looking at your CV, you’d assume you gravitate towards horror – but your directorial debut suggests otherwise. Tell us why this particular movie?

    Matthew Tibbenham: I’d love to do a horror film one day, and I have a few planned, but it’s really hard to find a horror script (let alone any script) that doesn’t feel like it’s been done a hundred times before. Plus there’s the budget aspect. There’s a lot of great low budget horror movies, but the horror movies I like are more Guillermo del Toro level and I knew I couldn’t do that for my first feature.

    When our screenwriter Nathan Shane Miller sent me Surviving Confession, I couldn’t put it down and I knew it would be something we could make together because of it’s one primary location. Also, the story really hit me. I relate to almost everything the characters are going through and it made me question my own life and decisions. I love those kinds of movies. Father Morris doubts about whether what he’s doing actually makes a difference or if he’s just spinning his wheels and I feel like that practically every day. While Father Morris’s doubts are shown through the lens of the priesthood, I think it speaks to anyone, no matter their profession or religion.

    Was it an easy movie to get up? Can you talk about the process involved in getting this film ready?

    Matthew Tibbenham: Shane actually wrote it because he and I have been trying to get other scripts made for years. I originally met Shane through Scott Derrickson when Shane sent Scott a horror script he had been working on. As assistants do in Hollywood, I had to read almost every script that was sent to Scott and write coverage for it. Most of the scripts are horrible and those are the ones coming from agents and managers. When I read Shane’s horror script about a WWII Japanese POW camp, I couldn’t put it down. For the almost two years I worked for Scott, his script was easily one of the top scripts I had read. I looked Shane up and couldn’t believe he didn’t have a manager or agent. So after talking to Scott and creating a sizzle reel for Shane’s script, I approached Shane and the producer he was working with and told them I wanted to direct the film. Sadly, we still haven’t been able to get that script made since it requires a $10-20 million budget, but I started working with Shane on other scripts and we started to pitch to different places.

    I have a ton of projects I’m working and trying to get made. And a few of them are even horror! I’d love to direct that WWII Japanese POW horror script Shane originally sent Scott Derrickson and we tried to get made for a few years. Maybe now someone will give us a proper budget for it!

    After years of doing that though, still no one wanted to give us a reasonable budget for even his lower budget scripts so he sent me Surviving Confession and asked me if I wanted to produce it independently. Again, I thought it was so good, surely someone would give us a reasonable budget for the film so we can attach some named actors, but after a year of trying, no one would finance the film so we decided to self-finance the film through family and friends and make it totally independently.

    Tell us about the inspiration for the script?

    Matthew Tibbenham: You’d have to ask Shane his inspiration for writing the script, but for me, it appealed to my time growing up in Texas in a very religious home. I grew up going to church 2-3 times a week and loved it, but as I grew older, I started to have doubts and slowly moved away from Christianity.

    While working for Scott Derrickson, he showed Ingmar Bergman’s Winter Light at a retreat he was speaking at and it really hit me. It’s a bit slow and one of his lesser known films, but Bergman’s long takes and the character’s deep emotions made me fall in love with the film. Shane sent me Surviving Confession shortly after and I knew I had to direct it.

    They don’t make movies like these anymore do they? And because of that, did you find it harder to get distribution?

    Matthew Tibbenham: Not too many. And I get it, it’s a tough sale. It’s not quite a comedy, not quite a drama. It’s not faith based because it doesn’t beat people over with a Christian message, but it is about a priest so non-religious people might be turned off, even though it’s not a Christian movie. And without named actors, it was an uphill battle. But it’s an amazing movie and it’s sad that because it doesn’t fit into a small marketing box, it was really tough finding a distributor.

    However, we did have one distributor that loved the film and was going to give it a ten city theatrical release along with Blu-ray, DVD, and streaming. We were all excited and thought our movie would get the release it deserved. But sadly, it’s one of those Hollywood stories where the little guy gets screwed over by Goliath. After being promised things for over a year, the company found a loophole in the contract and just stopped responding to emails and phone calls once our minimum guarantee was due.

    Thankfully, producer Jo Rauen came in and helped cover the distribution costs and has been leading the charge with distribution. I sent him the movie after our original distribution deal fell through and he loved the movie. He’s an extremely hard working producer and we would’t have been able to get the film on iTunes, Amazon Video, or Google Play or reach half the audience we did without his help.

    Where did you find your actors?

    Matthew Tibbenham: We held open auditions for a few weeks in LA at various locations including CAZT and Film Independent offices. We saw hundreds of actors and once we narrowed it down to five or so for each role, we held call backs to pair different people together and see what kind of chemistry they had together.

    Jessica Lynn Parsons was actually one of the last people who auditioned for Amber and she was recommended by our cinematographer, Mark Farney. Once we had her read with Clayton Nemrow, our male lead, we knew we had the perfect combination.

    If one of them ends up a breakout star as a result of the movie, who do you predict it’ll be?

    Matthew Tibbenham: From all the reviews that have come in, I’d definitely say Clayton Nemrow, who plays our lead, Father Morris. His performance channels a wonderfully sarcastic, intellectual priest, who is yet somehow still very likable and relatable. He’s always spot on in the role and he shows almost every facet of human emotion in the film. Hopefully, a director or casting director on a much bigger budget movie will cast him in their next project after seeing this film.

    What are you working on next?

    Matthew Tibbenham: I have a ton of projects I’m working and trying to get made. And a few of them are even horror! I’d love to direct that WWII Japanese POW horror script Shane originally sent Scott Derrickson and we tried to get made for a few years. Maybe now someone will give us a proper budget for it!

    Also, our producer Jo Rauen and I are attached to do another movie together that’s a vampire thriller called Nightfall, written by Mike Meade. I’ve also got another movie set up with producer Magdalena Maria Herfurtner in the UK, written by Haydn Worley that’s more in line with Surviving Confession called Somewhere In-Between. And finally, I’m direct a British comedy TV pilot called Guides with Frances Keyton & Luke Ireland. So lots coming up and it just depends on funding which happens next!