Here it is, the new long-awaited Fifty Shades of Grey Trailer, and doesn’t Jamie Dornan look handsome?
In Theaters Valentine’s Day 2015. What do you think?
The Fault in Our Stars has been a huge hit and rightly so. We have an interview with the two stars Shailene Woodley & Ansel Elgort. If you haven’t seen it yet, or read the book it is based on, do it now.
Q: Shailene, you emailed John Green about the role. Did he respond in a nicer way than Van Houton?
SW: He did. He was like I’m not the casting director so I actually can’t cast you but thank you for your kind words.
Q: Was it difficult to have that lightness in your performance of sick kids?
AE: Um, no. I think that the way that the book is written is that the characters do have that lightness. And then once also we spent time with kids who actually had the diseases or had been through them we realized that that lightness is present in those individuals. And that it was totally correct to have them present in our characters. Without the lightness it would be a shit movie. It’d be unrealistic and it’d be depressing and I don’t know what the point would be.
I think it’s all about the lightness and all about the fact that they’re real human beings who just happen to have something. The cancer in the story’s just the variable that makes the clock tick. And that makes the love even more important because it’s the last that you’ll have.
Q: Did it make it easier or harder that you’d worked together before?
SW: It made things definitely easier. I mean, we already knew each other; we’re already comfortable around each other. And we already loved each other. We already had a deep sense of admiration for one another. Which I think translated into this film.
Q: How was the atmosphere on set?
SW: Oh it was so much fun. I mean movie sets are really fun regardless of what you do when the camera rolls. But one of the things that’s so beautiful about this movie is it shows you that cancer doesn’t define you. And just like on the set we met a lot of people who did have cancer. A lot of young people and they don’t live their lives like this walking around you know, somber. They live their lives like this and be like yeah, I have this and it sucks. But it’s just what it is. And that’s sort of how our set was. We were dealing with heavy subject matters but you don’t sort of just wallow in the subject matter. You find ways to be light about it.
Q: Did you improvise on the relationship on set?
AE: A lot of those scenes set the stage for the relationship are like word for word from the book. A lot of them. Like the scene in the beginning where Gus talks about how he fears oblivion and Hazel speaks about if that’s what he’s scared of then she suggests he forget it. The metaphor scene down in the basement, those scenes are so important. You’re right. Because so many movies just have two pretty people and I mean they put them together. Yeah they’re supposed to kiss and fall in love right? But I love that this story really takes it’s time and has those scenes. It’s almost like a play. Because it’s so much about the relationship that there’s time for those things to happen. So important. Really lets the relationship develop.
The Fault in Our Stars is available here. Out on Blu-ray now.
*WARNING! MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*
Christopher Nolan films aren’t just films; they’re events. Although he completed his Batman trilogy with The Dark Knight Rises, Interstellar has been treated like it is the next great blockbuster (as much in the same league we’re anticipating the next DC/Marvel movie). Even continuing his trend to deliver trailers and TV spots that reveal little details about the plot.
The movie revolves around Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) who was once a pilot, now farmer in a Dust Bowl type future. The Earth is running out of food, even down to the last food resource; corn. He is also a widowed father of two children (as with the majority of Christopher Nolan’s films, main protagonist’s wife/love interest either has died or won’t last very long) but yet still has a craving for exploration (even learning that teachers at his children’s schools have new editions of books saying the moon landings were fake). He eventually comes across his old mentor, Prof. Brand (Michael Caine) and his daughter Amelia Brand (Anne Hathaway). They reveal the Earth is dying, so they have been building a space shuttle and needs Cooper to be the pilot. Their mission; to go through a wormhole that will lead to a different galaxy and find a habitable planet.
The movie is probably the most ambitious movie Christopher Nolan has made in his career. He continues to deliver a science fiction movie with challenging ideas and concepts about space travel (as he did with the concepts of dreams in Inception). Though this was originally intended to be directed by Steven Spielberg (based on a script by Chris Nolan’s brother, Jonathan Nolan) and this movie clearly shows Spielberg’s trademark about family (especially focusing on a father character like Jaws and Munich). Nolan has been known to focus more on the ideas than the characters
themselves, and you can clearly see that struggle to try balance the two. Though it does work for the most part and it’s all down to McConaughey being cast as the lead. He has certainly been having a huge career change and this film is no exception. If Mud, Dallas Buyers Club and True Detective proved anything, it is that he can be just as involving as he is likeable in his rom-com days. His craving to venture to the unknown is pretty much anyone’s curiosity and makes his motivation to help his family (and the human race) somewhat relatable. Even McConaughey delivers an incredibly emotional performance in one particular scene as he’s watching video messages of his children growing older. If Gravity showed that working in space is no fun and games, Interstellar shows us that space travel is not all that fun as Star Trek likes to make us believe (or wants us to). Especially dealing with relativity; every hour they spend, 7 years have passed on Earth (similar to The Forever War). The stand-out performance has to be character of Murph, played brilliantly by Mackenzie Foy and Jessica Chastain. She is the emotional core of the movie and drives the narrative forward.
The visual effects in this movie is absolutely mind-blowing. The use of both miniatures and CGI both seamlessly mix together. Nolan has been known to do everything real as possible and uses that effect in great use here. Pushing the envelope to make the cinematic experience as immersive the medium can deliver. Even creating inventive and charismatic robots as TARS and CASE (more friendly version of HAL 9000, if you will). The beautiful and stark cinematography by Hoyte van Hoytema (Let the Right One In, Tinker Tailor Solider Spy and Her) brings the alien but familiar planets to life. Though using different contrast of colours, using grey and blue for space travel scenes and using browns with scenes set on Earth. Hans Zimmer’s score rings back to 2001: A Space Odyssey (a movie Nolan has said he used as the biggest influence, as well as Star Wars and Alien on the production design), extending the huge scope of the movie and also creating genuine tension.
If there were one or two nitpicks to have with this movie, it has to do with the pacing. At times, the 3 hour long duration wasn’t noticeable. Though dealing with two story-lines at once felt a bit jumbled at times, yet Nolan was able to accomplish this with three to four scenarios at once seamlessly in Inception. Also, some of the character motivations seem a bit unfocused or rather force fed to us. Nolan’s dialogue, while very well written, seems to be a bit too analytical about its themes and ideas. The scientific theories is all very interesting but could’ve been condensed down. Some of the characters were also hard to be involved with and mainly because they were underwritten (like character of Tom, who gets overshadowed by Murph). Also, the ending will most likely split opinions. Without giving too much away; it basically leaves you to interpretation and suggestion (just like Memento and Inception). How you will feel about that is entirely up to you.
Overall; Inception is still the best Christopher Nolan sci-fi movie but this still stands as an exceptional film of the genre. It does reach to great heights and delivers the spectacle. The cast deliver great performances, especially from Foy and Chastain. It just doesn’t quite reach its grasp.
4 out of 5
This particular movie was built on the marketing that you had to see this movie (or read the book) to understand why you had to go see it yourself. The trailers were reminiscent to when Alfred Hitchcock gave away little to nothing about the plot, only snippets here and there. Our curiosity only grew and grew from movie posters designed as ‘Missing Person’ posters and word of mouth. David Fincher had our curiosity and now has our attention. That is the power Fincher has used to full use and the film itself doesn’t disappoint.
The movie is based on the best-selling novel of the same name by Gillian Flynn (who also wrote the screenplay). The story revolves around Nick Dunne (Ben Affleck), who one morning on his wedding anniversary finds his wife Amy Dunne (Rosamund Pike) missing. The police investigate the crime scene, finding no evidence to suspect a kidnapping. Eventually, everyone starts pointing fingers at
Nick, from police, neighbours and even talk show hosts. Though as the story progresses, we cut back to diary entries from Amy herself. Giving two completely different perspectives and asking ourselves; who is telling the truth?
This movie is the definition of edge-on-your-seat. Fincher is the master of mystery/thriller filmmaking (as evidenced in Se7en, The Game and Zodiac). His eye to detail is so immaculate, with the production design to the bleak but beautiful cinematography by Jeff Cronenweth. Every clue is never left unnoticed. The score by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross is discomforting but also hypnotic (as Fincher said when giving direction for the score “Think about the really terrible music you hear in massage parlors. The way that it artificially tries to make you feel like everything’s OK. And then imagine that sound starting to curdle and unravel.“). That direction to the music is certainly what is felt through-out the entire duration of the movie. The more we find out Nick and Amy’s marriage, the more we realise it is not what we perceived from the start. This movie satarises the media, forcing us to rethink how we look at the stories that are laid in front of us. Even when answers are not met or answered, we’re so eager to accuse anyone to have some sort of resolution (just like Robert Graysmith in Zodiac). Even when one talk show host (played by Missi Pyle) flat out accuses Nick to not only be Amy’s killer but also accuses him to have a incestuous relationship with his sister.
Ben Affleck is continuing to mature as an actor. Fincher cast him the part as Nick Dunne because Affleck himself has been through hell in the eyes of the media and public. You can certainly see the weight that has been brought down on his shoulders. The supporting cast members were equally terrific, especially the surprise performance from Tyler Perry (probably given the most hilarious line in the entire movie, and one that summarises the Dunne’s; “You two are the most fucked up people I’ve ever met and I deal with fucked up people for a living.“) Though the stand-out performance has to be Rosamund Pike as Amy Dunne. She is unbelievably outstanding and one I would vote to get a Best Actress nomination. As mentioned earlier, talking more about her role would reveal a lot of the twists. Suffice to say, it is a performance everyone will be talking about the rest of the year (especially the ending may make couples feel uncomfortable or at least awkward).
Overall; David Fincher delivers an intense, no holds barred thriller. It is expertly crafted from everyone in the production. Stellar performances and award-worthy performance from Rosamund Pike. Easily one of the best movies of this year and highly recommended.
4 out of 5
If history is anything to go by there are many different ways of telling the legend that is Dracula and even more when it comes to covering the subject of Vampires of which Dracula is seen as the King or at least the one who started it all.
King of the Dracula movies so far has been Ford Coppola’s 1992 version, but here akin to the recent films such as ‘I Frankenstein’ what we have here is a dramatic retelling of the origin story, complete with armies in the style of 300, stop motion capture in the style of The Matrix and battles in the style and glory of Game of Thrones and more bats than Batman Begins. If Francis Ford Coppola had access to CGI effects like these who knows what he would have created. Instead it is down to director Gary Shore to capably show us his vista of the hows and whys of Vlad ‘the Impaler’ Tepes earning his supernatural powers and becoming a creature of the night.
Set in Transylvania during the 15th century, Transylvanian prince Vlad is enjoying a long period of peace. He served the Turks well and his brutal style of combat has earned him the name of “The Impaler”. When Sultan Mehmed (Dominic Cooper); heir to the Turks throne demands 1,000 boys including Vlad’s own son to participate in his army with the ultimatum of not doing so being war and mass slaughter of his people. Vlad chooses to make a stand and seeks out an old mythical mountain and a nightmare creature (Charles Dance) in order to save his family and kingdom.
Striking up a bargain, Vlad is allowed to experience what it’s like to be a vampire for a short period of three days, giving him the strength of 100 men, the speed of a falling star and enough power to destroy his enemies. However, the catch is that he will also have an insatiable thirst for blood. If Vlad succumbs to this thirst he will forever be damned as a vampire and the evil that was contained within the mountain will be released. The story cracks along at a fairly fast pace; a solid film debut for Gary Shore who has directed from a script written by Matt Sazama and Burk Sharpless. The dialogue is fantastic, very much the piece and the direction wise enough to have just enough scares without it crossing the boundary into actual horror territory. This film takes the honourable sympathetic approach to Dracula’s virtues – a man who is willing to risk all, including his humanity and sanity to save his son, his family, his kin and his kingdom.
Special effects alone cannot carry a movie and there are some great performances, Dominic Cooper and Charles Dance all carry their roles capably but it has to be said it is the charismatic presence of Welsh actor Luke Evans (Fast and Furious 6) which really anchors this film. It is incredible how he shines in this role, able to bring real emotions and real anguish to a character not yet previously seen. Thanks to him, you believe in Vlad’s cause, compromise with his predicament and feel empathy with his character when he seeks to exact revenge.
There is no doubt that Dracula Untold is a competent film, for many either they will either like it or hate it. There is just enough vampirism and love enough to soothe Twilight fans and more than enough action to suit the man cubs out there.
The slight let down is the ending which blatantly sets things up for a sequel. Hopefully if the film does well things could be very interesting indeed.
The Verdict
If you are into modern day imaginings, was a fan of the Twilight series and like Game of Thrones or Gladiator this film is your thing
8/10
If history is anything to go by, you just can’t keep a good guy down. Liam Neeson aka undisputed throat puncher returns as ex-covert operative Bryan Mills. The guy who hunted down his daughter’s kidnappers, The man who taught his daughter to drive in the space of a few hours and the man who’s torture skills include nails, wire and a whole load of electricity returns in Taken 3. After watching the first two Taken films you could be forgiven for wondering where they could possibly go next and who else could be kidnapped. However from the trailer it seems that for Taken 3 they are upping the anti when his ex-wife is brutally murdered. Consumed with rage and framed for the crime, Mills once again goes on the rampage, this time hunted himself by the CIA, FBI and the police. For one last time, Mills must use his “particular set of skills,” to track down the real killers, exact his unique brand of justice, and protect the only thing that matters to him now – his daughter.
The trailer looks heavy – enjoy. Taken 3 hits cinemas January 9, 2015
Is it better to give than receive?
The Giver’ is the latest in the long line of film adaptations aimed at the angst driven young adult market; the very same genre that belonged to Twilight, Hunger Games, the latest iteration of Spiderman and most recently Diversion.
The movie Divergent is an interesting comparison to make because to be honest, even though Lois Lowry’s novel The Giver was released almost 15 years before Divergent in 1993 to what some would say was more critical acclaim once you have seen Divergent you just can’t watch this film without thinking this is just another version of the same film. To excuse the pun; this film just doesn’t diverge enough.
To be fair it boasts a decorated cast led by Jeff Bridges and Meryl Streep and a capable director in Patriot Games’s Phillip Noyce; these key ingredients come together to create an incredible cocktail with what they have. But Meryl Streep in her bad girl role comes across like Kate Winslet’s evil step sister but with a whole lot less ‘aggy’, Jeff Bridges on the other hand is as enigmatic as ever but unable to really breathe given the limitations of his role.
Like many of the aforementioned films The Giver is set years after a cataclysmic event that prompted society to adopt a scheme whereby emotions are stripped and families are assembled based on character traits. When a young person leaves childhood, they are handed pre-determined roles within society. Those that don’t ‘fit’ become outcasts or ‘forgotten’; people can’t lie, the society is fashioned on order and obedience and with power comes control. Now, I don’t know about you but I’ve seen enough film adaptations to know that it is just ripe for someone who thinks differently to challenge the corruption and change the upheld views.
This task falls to none other than Jonas (Brenton Thwaites); chosen to take over the role of receiver of memory from The Giver. He will learn everything about the world before the ‘new world order and utopia’ in order that he has the wisdom to advise the Elders in times of crisis. How will he learn you ask? Is it by reading books, in these types of utopia aren’t books banned? Of course they’re banned, No he learns through ‘mind-melds’ with The Giver, because he needs to ‘experience’ the past. Oooooh I hear you say. That’s exciting. Yes, and it is through these experiences that Jonas learns his new role comes at a cost, you see there is no such thing as love in this life, and no such thing as joy. As such he begins to experience an emotional awakening. Noyce cleverly visualizes Jonas’s epiphany by bleeding colour into black and white images, this happens in such a gradual deliberate way that it almost makes you take a double take, for example he sees the vivid red of an apple, or his love interest’s bright eyes before later seeing the sky full-on blossom into Technicolor.It’s a really nice touch.
This is one of the film’s greatest strengths, by experiencing Jonas relieving the memories of our own history the audience themselves are taken on a journey of the highs and the lows of life. It is there that the connection comes within the film as when he returns each day back to the society the blandness is almost all consuming and it is there you recognise with his plight to change things.
There are some other good supporting roles too. Katie Holmes and Alexander Skarsgård have great turns as Jonas’s parents, whilst Taylor Swift appears in hologram form as a former protégé of The Giver. Unfortunately, none of them are on screen long enough to create much of an impact.
Whilst obviously on a tighter budget than Hunger Games and Divergent, The Giver does well with its production values and costume design. Indeed if Steve Jobs is in charge of architecture up in heaven most would agree it would look like this.
The only thing I thought let the Giver down was its ending; it just lacks that visceral punch of its contemporaries. However, some would argue that it isn’t necessary; this is a touching film about love and identity; about power and responsibility not a movie actioner. It’s a nice film but I can’t help but feel it’s a shame; if this film had come out five or even ten years earlier it would probably be one of those memorable films of a lifetime. However with Hunger Games and Divergent sequels on the horizon my only fear is that this title will soon be forgotten.
7 / 10
In my other life as an actress I have noticed a worrying trend. Well, I say ‘trend’ but actually it has been going on for years: female parts in films were the character has no name and is called ‘The girl’. The girl is usually the only female part in the film and will also have at least one nude scene. Just because it is not humiliating enough to be offered a script where all of the men have names and you don’t, you also have to get your tits out. Nameless and objectified: actresses deserve better than this. WOMEN KIND deserves better than this.
It is hard to describe just how depressing it is to work in an industry where women are reduced constantly to the sum of their parts and not even named. the worrying thing is that this is a common practice. Upon complaining about this on my Facebook, prominent film maker and casting director Rory O’Donnell said: “This is incredibly common. I made fun of it when I wrote The Landlady and gave all the female characters first, last and nicknames and called the only male character ‘The Boyfriend’….but he did get a name during shooting.” If only there were more people like Rory.
But what is to be done? Well we need more female filmmakers for a start. Here are some highlights from an amazing survey done by Stephen Follows on his must-read blog.
Read more about his survey here. It was in all of the papers so Stephen is truly doing his part for equality. I often get asked why I don’t leave the industry. The truth is I did take a little break. Of course if my agent had called during that period I would have not said no, but it was a quiet period and I took the moment to reflect on my chosen path. One of them anyway. I often think that if I did not have this magazine and did not make my own projects I might go slightly mad. Luckily I do and I can fight instead. I made Prose & Cons which had a strong female cast and I am making more films with my filmmaking partner Steve McAleavy. The way forward is not to quit the industry, not to let these men give our breasts the starring role while our actual talent is just a nameless supporting character: the key is to raise awareness and FIGHT. Get men to join the battle and equal the playing field. Women deserve more and we won’t stop until we get it. The fightback starts here.
Catherine Balavage is a writer, film director, actress and the owner and editor of this magazine. She is also a published author and wrote the book How To Be a Successful Actor: Becoming an Actorpreneur which has received rave reviews and is a must for actors everywhere.