Author: Rosalynn Try-Hane

  • Review: The Messenger

    Review: The Messenger

    The Messenger is Jack. He’s the conduit between them and us.

    Them?

    Ghosts.

    Those with unfinished business who died too soon. The Ghosts are as tormented as Jack is and both are looking for peace in this thriller with a supernatural gloss. Yes, it is a film about dead people but look beyond that and you’ll find a tale of love, loss and ultimately hope. The Messenger as directed by David Blair confirms why British independent films are hot right now and definitely worth a trip to the cinema to see!

    It’s gritty realism and the scenes of people dying are graphic. I wouldn’t describe The Messenger as a supernatural thriller but rather a film that explorers love and loss in its’ many forms and uses supernatural elements, namely ghosts, to explore this narrative. Mercifully, the dialogue is sharp and funny, or rather if you enjoy your humour as black as midnight,as I do, then this it is spot on. It is this dark, gallows type humour that lifts the film and stops it from being a pastiche of Ghost and Sixth Sense set in an urban, English city. Andrew Kirk’s script is peppered with sarcastic wit and keenly observed scenarios although one criticism would be that The male characters appear more complex than the female characters especially the character of Emma, Jack’s sister. It is even hard to care or feel any empathy towards her character. He has included nods to the Sixth Sense as well as an interesting adaptation of the love scene from Ghost. However look beyond the obvious, The Messenger is a film about perceptions – who are you, what is your truth?

    Andrew Sheehan is mesmeric on screen. He gives a stellar and measured performance as Jack through delivery of the acerbic one liners and use of mannerisms to convey Jack’s torment of his particular gift: seeing dead people. The supporting cast including Joely Richardson, Jack Fox as one of the ghosts – Mark Lewis – who died too soon and Lily Cole who plays Jack’s sister Emma.

    You won’t want to kill The Messenger, maybe give him a good wash before you hug him, but this is definitely a film to see with friends or alone but possibly not one a first date.

    The Messenger opens in cinemas on 18 September.

  • INTERVIEW: Robert Sheehan – Star Of The Messenger

    In among the hoopla, humbug and whisky mist that engulfed the Edinburgh International Film Festival 2015, we managed to find a quiet 15 minute pause to sit down for a chat with the in-demand actor, Robert Sheehan, who plays the lead role of Jack in The Messenger. It was my first interview as press but Robert was easy going, thoughtful in both his answers and demeanour. We talked about solid scripts, unexpected reactions and why humour is always the answer.

    What attracted you to the role of Jack?

    The prospect of working with Darth Blair [David Blair – the director of The Messenger] as I call him once again was very, very attractive. He is a very safe pair of hands so that was immediately something that was [appealing]…because a lot of the time when you’re sent a script it can be very good but you don’t know any of the stuff that the director has made. You know you have to be very careful in getting on board because a director can make or break something no matter how good it is. The script was great and it was just one of those parts where you’re like I can’t turn that down. It was more strongly written on the page than any other parts in the film – you know what I mean it was even if I f–k it up kind of I’ll still probably steal the show – I’m joking.

    How much input did you have the look and feel of Jack? He’s always in that dirty overcoat.

    Yeah I wanted him to be someone who had abandoned any sense of hygiene or anything like that because this thing had been happening to him repeatedly for years to the point where he is so sick of people punching him in the face and telling him to f–k off that he’s just like f–k you, f–k you world. So that had to be reflected I think as much as possible in the whole costume – him falling asleep and waking up and the whole thing. I wanted to push more. I wanted his teeth to be f–ked up, but there gets to a point where I was politely reminded that we are making a film.

    Indeed, you do need to make money from a film!

    Exactly people need to be able to watch it without puking into their popcorn.

    How do you go about prepping for a role like this: I see dead people?

    I think you just have to work out the guy’s personality you know. The I see dead people thing is less important than how he deals with it. That’s where the interesting stuff comes out for me anyway – in this instance he deals with it in a very off hand [way]: [e.g. like him saying] “this is like something I had to deal with for years”. So it was just working away at the script and trying to feel comfortable in the skin of the guy.

    The scenes in the clinic – did you go to hospitals or clinics to prepare and see how it was?

    No. In this instance – I didn’t think that was going to be relevant really. It is kind of [like going ] into the unknown so I didn’t have to know what the inside of a hospital was like. So I suppose it’s great to do research if you can really make use of it but other than that it’s just wasting time.

    Watching the film I found myself laughing out loud at really inappropriate moments, most people weren’t. Why do you think humour goes hand in hand with hard times?

    Crikey. You know what I think humour goes hand in hand with good times and bad times but I know what you mean the dark gallows humour type thing. I think it’s probably a way of digesting a horrendous reality. If we don’t laugh at it we’ll cry – that kind of way.

    How’s this interviewing going? How you feeling? Good?

    Yeah, like I’m talking to a friend.

    Perceptions features strongly in the film : how people view others in the film. How do you want the film to be perceived?
    I like that you found it funny. I really do. I really like it when people have the non preconceived reaction to something. I really do like that. The problem I think with a lot of people when it comes to receiving art or protesting or anything like that that they confuse seriousness with solemnity if you know what I mean. You can be solemn and you can’t be having a laugh but you can’t be having a laugh if you’re supposed to be serious. When humour is excluded from anything I’m not interested.

    Congratulations on having two films [The Messenger and The Road Within] at the festival. Tourettes, seeing dead people, what’s next?

    Seeing dead people with tourettes. That would be awesome wouldn’t it? That sounds like a storyline out of Misfits weirdly enough. The next film that I am doing is a love story type film. [It’s] a beautifully written thing – Dunstin Lance Black -who is a writer director. He’s American – he wrote Milk and a few other bits and [my co-star is] Hailee Steinfeld. It’s small [budget] in American terms but 5 [times greater than the budget for] Messengers.

    The Messenger is out in cinemas on 18 September.

  • The BRWC Review: Irrational Man

    The premise of Woody Allen’s new film, Irrational Man, is random chance. Well he took a chance but the film just felt pretty random and notably absent is Woody’s wit.

    Irrational Man is all about philosophy professor, Abe Lucas (Joaquin Phoenix), emotionally and physically washed up, who moves to a upmarket college town to head the philosophy department. He’s the archetypal stranger that everyone has heard a story transformed by whispers and giggles in the college hallways of his conquests with students, his friends dying horrible deaths etc. There’s no end of irony in the story – the philosophy professor who’s searching for meaning in his life: will it come from youth in the form of Jill (Emma Stone) or a married but frustrated professor Rita (Parker Posey). However meaning arrives in the most unexpected way when by chance in a cafe when he overhears a group of strangers talking. He leaves the cafe reinvigorated with a desire to live life to the full after making an irrational yet profound decision. Will this overheard conversation in a diner provide him with the chance to live the life he always dreamt of?

    The irony of the socially awkward, peculiar man, surrounded by beautiful and accomplished women sounds like a classic Woody Allen film. It would appear that the Grand European Tour is over and Woody is home and back to what he knows: upmarket Americans with first world problems discussing existentialism, Sartre and what it means to be truly honest. All of that is great. For the first half of the film: there are laughs and as is to be expected Joaquin Phoenix is on fine form bringing to the forefront the demons that haunt his character mixed whilst uttering deliciously wicked lines: “philosophy is verbal masturbation”. Parker Posey is luminous on screen and so effortless plays her character of the professor bored with life and in search of excitement. Emma Stone however overacts and clearly out of her depth perpetually wide eyed and vocal fry. However, the hypothetical dinner party discussion game that dominates the second half of the film runs out of steam and when the second twist comes 10 mins before the end I just thought get it over already.

    Dare I say it but the film could have done with the famous Woody Allen narration, it needed to be more neurotic and ease up on the philosophy. The message of random luck, fate, chance are really driven home but in the end the film just felt a little random. It was better than in my opinion the awful Match Point but then nearly everything Woody Allen ever wrote or directed before and after was better than that film.

    Irrational Man is ‘new’ Woody Allen think Vicky Christina Barcelona with a glimmer of vintage but not enough to make it memorable. Having said that it makes easy viewing and would work well for a night with friends, even dare I say it Woody Allen hating friends, or a date night.

    Irrational Man is released on 11 September across the UK, rated 12A.

  • Review: The Treatment

    The Treatment is a visceral, engaging and gut wrenching thriller of the first degree that will keep you on the edge of your seat right until the very end.

    The film follows Inspector Nick Cafmeyer who works in the vice squad. He is haunted by the unsolved disappearance of his younger, 9 year old brother Bjorn and the guilt he feels. He is reminded of this constantly as Plettinckx, a known sex offender who taunts Nick. At the same time, there is the fresh disappearance of a 9 year old boy that Nick must solve. a As Nick uncovers more about what happened to his brother he starts down a path that is morally ambiguous and potentially dangerous. Does he really care what is right or wrong anymore?

    The Treatment is directed by Hans Herbots. The screenplay is written by Carl Joos based on the book of the same name by English writer, Mo Hayder. The original setting for the book was London although this is moved to Antwerp in Belgium. The film tackles the very difficult subject matter of child abuse. It leaves you speechless and the director Hans Herbots is brave and daring in his direction. There are certain scenes that are shocking and graphic and left me questioning whether or not they needed to be included. However, that is where the film’s intensity lies in some of the more shocking scenes. Geert Van Rampelberg through a powerful and nuanced performance conveys the brooding and dangerous nature of Nick Cafmeyer on screen. The cinematography is wonderful: just because it is ugly subject matter it doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be a feast for the eyes and that is exactly what it is.

    Good films should have an emotional impact. The Treatment delivers an emotional heavy weight fighter punch of an impact and so it should. The subject matter of the film is not easy. Looking beyond that, this is a great film and a daring one too. I can’t imagine any Hollywood studios would not remake this film or if they did it would be greatly sanitised. The Treatment is not a popcorn movie though, it demands a good measure of whisky (or whatever your poison is) after viewing. Go and see this film, it is one of the best thrillers you’ll see all year.

    The Treatment is released on 21 August nationwide.

  • Interview: Hans Herbots – Director, The Treatment

    In the plush surroundings of the Hospital Club I sat down for a 30 minute talk with the very interesting and interested director Hans Herbots, to talk about his film – the gritty and dark thriller -The Treatment. I drank a glass of wine as I had done whilst watching one of the most powerful and thought provoking thrillers I’ve seen in recent times. We discussed intense film shoots, the darkness that dwells inside of us and whether we can laugh even in dark times. On the day of the film’s release, in a very hot and what felt airless room we talked about: the film’s intensity, what it means to be a responsible filmmaker, censorship and the power of storytelling.

    It’s audacious and a daring piece of filmmaking but did you ever think at any point during the whole process that maybe you shouldn’t make the film?

    I thought it was really important to be very wise and to think a lot about how far you could go in telling this story – in what you could show and couldn’t show. I liked the story because it gripped me. I think it’s important to tell stories that are maybe not nice to watch or hear all the time and I think this was one of those stories. So I never thought we shouldn’t make it.

    How closely involved were you with the screenwriter, Carl Joos in terms of developing the script to the final film we see on screen?

    Well Carl was the one who picked the book. He’s a big Mo Hayder fan. He thought with the back story of this one and the previous one [book] would make a great film. So he went out and he wrote three or four drafts of the film and that’s when I read it for the first time and was enthusiastic. There were a further two other drafts and a few things changed but not so much. The main thing that I did was in getting it ready to shoot we made it more intense than the original script that had more dialogue in it. In the process of making the film we took out a lot of dialogue and wanted to stay closer to the character and feel him and feel the things that he felt. So in the writing of the script I was not too involved especially not at the beginning.

    The audience is almost complicit in Nick’s spiral into moral ambiguity because you know you want him to find his brother but that’s morally wrong. I suppose that wasn’t intentional or was it? Did you want the audience to have a moral dilemma?

    In a way yes and no because the whole film is about is about what is good and what is wrong and where does good become unfair or the other way around. So in a way that was one of the smaller, not one of the major themes. In a way that it feels what happens in life as well. That is why these stories are so interesting for me apart from the abuse and the negative things it shows that life isn’t black and white. It is a very complex thing.

    How do you respond say to that certain scenes in The Treatment are too graphic. Whilst We don’t necessarily see what happens to the boys when Nick watches the videos the imagination is a powerful thing. Did those scenes need to be shown? Did you ever do self censorship?

    We thought how far should we go. I thought it was important for the audience to feel to feel the rage Nick was feeling and to feel the same [level] of anger that he was feeling. And the only way , not the only, but one of the ways to have the audience at the same point was to show that, for a little bit, because actually we don’t show anything. The only thing you see is a boy on a couch and a person coming next to him. But as you say the imagination is a powerful thing and you see enough to not want to think [about it] but enough to feed that imagination. I thought that was very important because in the course of the film Nick also does things that are not very good and what he does at the end with the killer he goes a long way and it was important that the audience could really stay with him the whole journey when it’s not so nice.

    I also thought when you make a film about child abuse and all these kind of things it’s too easy not to show anything. You really feel the things that Nick is feeling and showing these videos was one of the elements that I thought was important to show. It’s important to talk about abuse and to see what abuse does to people and to feel how bad it is and to make the audience have all these feelings. I thought it was important that they see just a part of it. It’s a big part of the discussion.

    Indeed it is. The scenes in the videos and the mother looks down and sees what she sees what is happening. It’s not just right minded people who go to the cinema but also paedophiles who don’t have the same moral fibre that we have. Were you ever afraid of what you were showing on screen would lead to copycat crimes?

    Copycats I don’t think so because, I would hope what is described on screen is almost impossible to happen. But are you thinking that it might give and it’s difficult to express myself right in English because it’s not my native language. them pleasure to watch it? In that way it becomes dangerous

    Yes, in a perverse way it becomes “legal” because they are watching it in a normal cinema like everyone else. When I saw those scenes I thought this comes really close to giving child abusers pleasure.

    I never thought of that actually because, of course, it was never the intention to do so. It is actually the opposite. My intention was of the contrary to maybe show people what it is or what I think that it is because of course I have never seen it myself. Again, I wanted the audience to be able to identify as much possible with [the character of] Nick but also to a take a firm stance against these kind of things.

    There’s a real intensity when you are watching The Treatment and you remember the Dutroux case [Belgian paedophile ring case] and see the parallels. How have we allowed these awful things to happen? That’s what it is great about the film because it shows how easily it could happen because these people fly under the radar.

    Again, one of the reasons why I wanted to show the footage and it was a big moral discussion – should we but, without this sounding wrong, I I wanted it to hurt the audience a little bit. I wanted it so that you couldn’t just walk out and say we saw a nice film. It is shocking and horrifying.

    It is horrifying and that is where the film’s impact lies in seeing these images. That’s what great art should do – provoke the audience to express they are feeling. I drank after the film.

    I was surprised by the reactions that came from that footage [the videos] because the only thing that I wanted to show -which we had to create – was the helplessness of these children. When we created it was in a nice room, music playing and we replaced the sound later so you just see this huge couch and this small kid being helpless and it is touches us so much: the helplessness of this little person and then imagine the loneliness [they are feeling].

    Do you think as a film maker, not just about The Treatment necessarily, that we need to be provoked so that we never forget awful things? In a way that 12 Years A Slave was horrendous to watch but beautifully shot and so we’ll never forget the horrors of slavery.

    Yes and no but mostly yes I think. I don’t like films where the message is too clear or you really feel that this is made because you must see this or that. But 12 years a slave – I thought it was a beautiful film but, as you say, at the same time horrific. I like it a lot when a film is really good just as a film but at the same time when you walk out of the theatre [cinema] it keeps you talking about it, about the subject matter. I think that is something great that film can do if it is done in the right way by making a good film in the first place, and then having the effect of generating discussion of the different views and opinions with the people you’ve been watching the film with. For me I think that is something, not every film needs to have that. Sometimes you just want to watch something. But the films that I want to make, and a lot of people because you make two or three years making a film, I want the story to be worth living with for three years.

    How long did it take to shoot?

    41 to 42 days which is long these days. The production company was serious and dedicated to make this into a good film. Only when there was enough money to make it properly did we start to shoot. Although the first version of the film was 3.5hrs so we almost shot two films. We had to cut it down and really get to the essence. That was a good thing and it made the film as intense as it is right now.

    How did you unwind, it is quite dark. It got under my skin. Did you take yourself away for 42 days and shoot it?

    The preparation was intense and the shooting was intense and [we] took a lot of time looking for the right locations and they were often remote or gritty and not happy places. It was pretty strange because we shot mixed days starting at midday and finished at midnight. So the whole crew started to live in this parallel universe because when you come home at one or two in the morning everyone is asleep and then when they go off to school or work you’re still sleeping. For the first two or three weeks we shot all the scenes only with Geert so there wasn’t the usual chatter of actors on the set so it was pretty intense. We stayed pretty intense. We had a small accident on the shoot 3 to 4 days before the end so the last 4 days were shot three weeks later. My wife was due to give birth right after the shoot but that fell in the middle of it. It was hectic especially with the birth and that made it even more intense because of the whole subject matter.

    Are you happy with the final version that was released?

    Yes, it is always a process and in a way you rewrite the film in the editing especially with thrillers because it has a lot to do with when do you show what. When you switch a scene sometimes it doesn’t work any more because people see too early.

    You seem to be like dark subject matter?

    In the beginning I did all kind of things. I’m fascinated by the darkness that is inside everyone and most people don’t think they have it in them or it won’t ever come out. People need one or two problems or things that aren’t working out in their lives and things start to happen. I think these are interesting stories. It happens to all of us and, hopefully not too many times in our lives, so it is interesting to tell stories about this.

    Maybe it’s an English thing but with the darkness comes humour. You have to laugh through the pain. Do you ever think you might like to tell a dark comedy?

    Yes but dark comedy is hard to tell.

    Shallow Grave is dark but funny in parts.

    I’ve never tried it actually. I don’t know maybe I should try it. It’s a great question. The more humour there is the darker you can go often. Sometimes I [ask myself] should we have had more air in the treatment some lighter moments to lift it up.

    You’ve directed both television series and films. Do you prefer one more than the other?

    I like both actually. It’s fascinating. It’s a different way of storytelling in film much more condensed whereas in television you have more time to develop characters and look into [the] characters. I like to go back and forth.

    The Treatment is released in cinemas on 21 August.