Martin Scorsese To Retire?

Posted on December 13, 2013 by Catherine Balavage

Martin Scorsese has said he wants to retire from film-making after a ‘few more films’. The legendary Oscar-winning director was speaking last weekend at the Marrakech film festival, where he was acting as jury president. He went on:

“I have the desire to make many films, but as of now, I’m 71 and there’s only a couple more left if I get to make them, I miss the time when I had the desire to experiment and try different kinds of films, I miss that time, but that’s done, it’s over. There is obligation as you get older, you have family. I’ve been very lucky in the last 10 years or so to have found projects that combine the desire, the obligation to my family and the financiers.”

Scorsese said that when he started working with Leonardo DiCaprio it was “tricky” because the actor was so well known for Titanic. “When I did Gangs of New York and The Aviator, people kept asking me, ‘Is he an actor?'”

“I said yes. I saw What’s Eating Gilbert’s Grape, he film he did with [Robert] de Niro, This Boy’s Life before Titanic. So there’s a stigma there which people still refer to.

“But we found that he regenerated my enthusiasm for making films. Mainly because, as you get older, it gets physically difficult and also the business especially – the financial issues. You’re responsible for a lot of money, if you get it. It’s all pressure, but can you do it? His enthusiasm and excitement really kept me going, for another five pictures now.”

I had the pleasure of working on Scorsese’s Hugo and it was one of the most amazing experiences of my life. I still feel honored. I am glad that Scorsese will at least make a few more films, his contribution to cinema is outstanding. The day he retires will be a sad one but we will still have his legacy.

Hunger Games: Catching Fire Film Review

Posted on December 9, 2013 by Catherine Balavage

I was very excited to see Hunger Games: Catching Fire because I loved the first one so much. However, I was also worried that it would not be as good because it had so much to live up to.

One of the highlights of The Hunger Games was, of course, Jennifer Lawrence. An epic heroine, the new Ripley. A survivor with a heart, sacrificing herself for her sister. Straight-talking and brave; Katniss might be one of the best female characters in a film ever. She is certainly one of the most inspirational. A role model even for real women.

Whilst watching Hunger Games: Catching Fire one thing struck me: that there may be people watching it thinking our society is not like this at all, but the Hunger Games does reflect our society, and more countries more than others. The gaps between the haves and the have nots, social injustice, oppression; the Hunger Games is more than thrilling entertainment, it is also a statement on the world we live in. An intelligent action film, well written with brilliant acting and something to say.

It is hard to not get caught up in the story, in the characters and their plight. It is hard to not keep going on about Lawrence as Katniss. The audience love her, the people love her: she is the girl whos purity and bravery sparks a revolution. I have to confess that I have not read the books, but I really want to. Josh Hutcherson (Peeta) and Liam Hemsworth (Gale) are both excellent as the men Katniss is caught between: her real love and her media love. Who will she end up with in the end?

Peeta and Katniss are celebrities but also icons. They empower the people and pay the price. Peeta, Katniss and Haymitch (Woody Harrelson) make an excellent team, bonded together through what can only be described post-traumatic-stress-disorder. Katniss wakes Peeta up by screaming as she wakes up from a nightmare, he comes into her room: ‘It’s okay’, he says, ‘I get them too.’ Even Effie (Elizabeth Banks), that vacuous idiot, can barely take the injustice, finds her conscious and her feelings.

Donald Sutherland is excellent as President Snow and Machiavellian media chief Philip Seymour Hoffman is brilliant and full of depth. I was also pleased with myself as I saw the twist before it happened. The film is relevant, gripping and worthy. In fact the only bad thing I have to say is that it ended far too quickly and I have no idea how I am going to wait an entire year for the next installment.

Five stars.

In Fear Film Review

Posted on November 20, 2013 by Daniel McCarthy

The backroads and woods of rural Ireland open up to steady and relentless menace in this

psychological horror thriller, the debut feature of writer and director Jeremy Lovering. The basic

setup is familiar and uncomplicated; Lucy and Tom (Alice Englert and Iain De Caestecker), a

young couple in the first weeks of a burgeoning relationship, are travelling to a secluded hotel

for the evening on their way to a music festival. However as night descends and their directions

start to lead them in circles, the two of them become hopelessly lost before realizing that they

may not be alone…

Eschewing a standard format for what seems like very familiar material in the horror genre,

Lovering has taken the bold move of denying his two leads a set script. The actors were provided

with a brief outline of what direction individual scenes would take but were left unaware

of what exactly would occur. Improvisation and surprise are the driving forces here. It’s a

directorial stroke that provides the film with a fresh feel despite the well worn setting. It shows

particularly in the performances of the two leads whose increasing paranoia and discomfort is

entirely convincing. Even before the scares start their portrayal of a burgeoning relationship, all

uncertainty and stubbornness, gives their predicament an incredibly believable air. This is helped

by the increasingly claustrophobic direction as open roads give way to the sweaty, grimy interior

of the couples car. This culminates in one tremendously unsettling scene, which Lovering takes

his time letting the penny drop for the characters to realize just how dire their situation is. It’s the

directorial equivalent of twisting the knife.

The novel approach that Lovering and his collaborators take is welcome to a narrative that does

at times stray towards the predictable. An early confrontation with hostile locals is a nice nod

towards Straw Dogs, but as we go from winding roads to useless maps, low petrol and rising

tempers there is the nagging feeling that we’re going through a checklist of horror tropes. Some

hardcore genre fans may perhaps even find themselves moaning as characters make decisions

and take actions that only characters in horror films would make. Some may also find the final

act somewhat anticlimactic, though the final shot really encapsulates the idea of a never ending

pursuit and terror. Whatever flaws In Fear may have, its expert direction and performances give

it the edge that it needs to stand out in clogged up market of British horror cinema. On the basis

of this, Lovering may prove to be a director to watch.

Breaking Bad Marathon Hosted At Prince Charles Cinema

Posted on November 17, 2013 by Frostie

Breaking Bad: Marathon – The Pilot and the Epic Conclusion
What? A one off exclusive event showcasing the pilot and the last sixteen episodes of the show in a back to back marathon for the first time ever in stunning theatrical format. Relive every heart-stopping moment in the comfort of a cinema seat rather than your sofa.
Where? Prince Charles Cinema, 7 Leicester Place, London, WC2H 7BY
When? 8pm for 8.30pm Saturday 30th November then all night

If the end of Breaking Bad has left you feeling (Heisenberg) blue then this is definitely the event for you.

Breaking Bad fans will be able to get tickets from the Prince Charles Cinema free on Friday 15th November at 13:00, available via the website or you can turn up at their box-office on the day, limited to 2 tickets per person.

Breaking Bad: The Final Season and the Complete Series Boxset will be available November 25 on Blu-ray and DVD

How To Survive A Plague | Film Review

Posted on November 8, 2013 by Daniel McCarthy

Nominated for the Academy Award for best documentary feature earlier this year, How To Survive A Plague arrives on these shores this week. With a engrossing yet intimate scope, the film examines the outbreak of the AIDS virus in the 1980’s and specifically its impact in Greenwich Village, New York. Faced with underwhelming medical advancement and indifferent political reaction, a diverse group of young men and women facing almost certain death banded together to found activist group ACT UP. Refusing to die quietly, they took their plight and struggle into the public domain and doggedly began a chain reaction that would turn AIDS from being nearly hundred percent lethal into a manageable disease. Director David France employs a wealth of archive footage and interviews with surviving activists to tell this remarkable story.

Rather than settle for a standard talking head format that many documentary features use, France takes the bold approach of solely using existing archival footage for the vast majority of the films running time. Nearly 700 hours of home videos, news reports,testimonial footage and art protest videos have been whittled down to just under two with contemporary interview audio layered over the soundtrack. This approach reminded me of the brilliant documentary Senna, which also employed little seen existing footage to fill in for contemporary replacements. Like that films director, France realizes that he has an absolute goldmine at his disposal and that the images alone speak volumes. The confrontation between activist Bob Rafsky and then senator Bill Clinton is well documented enough (‘I feel your pain’). But there are numerous stirring and even jaw dropping scenes of protests, rallies, and interviews that convey the monumental struggle in all of its resilience. Ugly undercurrents of homophobia saw many victims of the disease meet indifference or outright hostility from what should in theory be American societies most supportive institutions; the healthcare industry and the Catholic church. One extraordinary sequence focuses on a mass ‘die in’ protest at St. Patrick’s Cathedral as protesters called out the church’s dismissal of condoms and the AIDS crisis altogether.

In the midst of the drama and tragedies that defined the era, France never loses focus of the figures at the centre of all of this. As the film reaches its later stages we are treated to a more conventional talking head interview format with surviving activists but this change in style is fully justified by the emotional arc that they, and in course the audience, have been on by that point. This was not simply a fight for political and social rights; it was a battle for life itself with no room for compromise. Many moments captured on camera here are raw and emotionally devastating. A rally culminating with the ashes of AIDS victims scattered across the White House lawn is utterly heartbreaking. If there is a crescendo to the grief and anguish of this generation, it comes from acclaimed playwright Larry Kramer silencing a group of squabbling, divided activists. ‘Plague! We are in the middle of a plague!’ he bellows. His voice cuts through the discourse and chills to the bone of the audience. It’s a statement that sums up the battle that this community had to face together, and one that they overcame with unity, humour and dignity. It’s a statement, and a cause, that deserves to be heard and remembered and this film is brilliant testament to that.

Utopia Film Review

Posted on November 7, 2013 by Daniel McCarthy

Author, journalist and filmmaker John Pilger has spent the last four decades providing a voice for the vulnerable and powerless. He has worked up an impressive resume of work, picking up a Bafta and Emmy in the process, that tackles the theme of division between the powers to be and those considered to be ‘lesser’ individuals who suffer in their wake. His best known work is focused on his native Australia where his breakthrough film The Secret Country (1985), focused on the indigenous Aboriginal population and their shameful persecution over the years. This focus is reiterated in Utopia (named after the Aboriginal homeland in the northern territory) along with the shocking facts of how their land was stolen from them and the various injustices against them that have not ceased with the passage of time.

Pilger does not hold back in his words and examinations of the current climate in Australia and rightly so. References to ‘the lucky country’ are used alongside words such as ‘genocide’ and ‘apartheid’; words that are hard to associate with one of the world’s leading nations. However they seem fully justified in the wake of Pilger’s disturbing revelations. There have been film projects, both factual and fictional, that have focused on the dark chapters of slavery and of ‘The Stolen Generation’, the hideous government policy that saw children taken from their families in order to be used as slave labour and as a deliberate effort to ‘breed out the black.’ Such depictions of shameful events seem like a distant memory but there appears to be no let up in unjust persecution on the native population. If anything it would appear to have taken on a more subtle and ‘respectable’ facade. Grim statistics of neglect, rife disease, suicide rates and overwhelming incarceration of Aboriginal citizens portray a chilling view of a seemingly national ignorance. Amidst this catalogue of atrocity, Pilger specifically focuses on the steady and insidious efforts of a government endorsed think tank that attempted to quietly erase the dark history of the nation’s past (‘no genocide, no theft of land’) and then proceeded to fuel various moral panics in the media, including a notorious claim of mass paedophilla taking place within Aboriginal tribes. The claims were untrue and served as a mass distraction to a land grab in the area to mine for natural resources that have kept Australia’s economy strong during the recent downturn. Images of the countries majestic rural beauty take on a dark, melancholic tone in the knowledge of what has been to done to lay claim to it. The interview subjects gathered together on behalf of the government and media institutions, which includes former prime minister Kevin Rudd, are given a fair approach by Pilger but this still appears to provide more than enough rope for some of them. His interview style is concise and devastating in it’s blunt to the point attitude but not as devastating as his subjects apparent apathy or, more shockingly, a casual indifference to the shocking social divisions and injustices over the years. This sentiment also come across in a quietly disturbing set of soundbites from from everyday citizens celebrating national holidays to commemorate the arrival of westerners to the continent. Though it is admittedly unlikely for the filmmakers to include footage with those uneasy at the one sided nature of the celebrations, it’s still unnerving to see such willful disinterest and prejudice in a first world nation.

Throughout the film the sense of quiet anger and shame is raw but never lapses over into trite sentiment. Aboriginal interviewees contained in the film have been at the receiving end of neglect, stereotyping and institutional racism and there is no pleading for sympathy from them or in the tone of the film. There is the inclusion of astonishing footage of labour strikes that helped signal the collapse of slavery in the nation. Rather than raging against indignity, there is a focus on the quiet and calm search for justice. This is encapsulated in one astonishing scene where Pilger accompanies the descendants of Aboriginal prisoners to the sight of a remote former prison where hundreds were incarcerated and lost their lives. It is now a luxury resort, with no references or memorials to its past and those who died there. The camera holds on the elder descendants face, clearly wracked with pain and anger, yet refusing to be broken by what he sees. Filmed in an unfussy and focused manner, it’s small moments like this that hit the hardest. Pilger and his collaborators voice is a calm yet impassioned one and it deserves to be heard in this extraordinary film.

UTOPIA will be released in UK cinemas on November 15th. It will be released on DVD December 16th and broadcast on ITV on 17th December. It is set to be shown in Australia early next year.

Free Film Download Roid Rage – Halloween Zombie Action Film

Posted on October 31, 2013 by Frostie

Want something to watch? Here is a free film for Halloween.

“Roid Rage” is about Billy Beck, a steroid dealer who gets a designer drug from The UK that is equipped with dangerous livestock products that morph bodybuilders into superhuman killer machines.

Jack’s Jacked Gym, the place that Beck sells his gear out of, is sponsoring a local amateur bodybuilding contest called “The Mega Muscles Contest” on Depot Island.

Spectators take a ferry out to the island and enjoy shopping at the array of local vendors and sponsors.

It is supposed to be a fun family day. But things are far from fun when Beck decides to inject the contestants with the experimental drug that he gets from England before the contest.

The handful of pumped-up hopefuls take the stage and strut their boldest and brightest poses.

Everything seems normal but then something happens…

“Roid Rage” – Wickid Pissa Films from Josh Mitchell on Vimeo.

The mad cow disease, mixed with the anabolic steroids, causes the ultimate roid rage and the hulking and angry contestants rush the crowd and begin snapping innocent spectators’ spines like twigs.

The DEA is on the island to make a big bust but they are forced to team with Beck and several rogue survivors to battle a small crowd of mutated muscle monsters.

The film’s action scenes and thrashing characters cut and illuminate like hatchet blades, inviting the innocent spectator into a world of truculent, flawed characters who live and die in a place that looks like Oz after dark.

Happy halloween.

Brian Yuzna Interview | Film

Posted on October 29, 2013 by Frostie

Brian Yuzna (pictured left) is one of the world’s most prolific and respected genre film-makers and on the eve of RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD 3 receiving its network TV premiere on the Horror Channel, Yuzna gives us some insight into the making of the film, news on the SOCIETY sequel and why he thinks Horror has gone too mainstream.

RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD 3 is broadcast on Saturday Nov 2, 10.40pm.

Q: Did you know from a young age that you wanted to work in the movie industry?

BY: No, I didn’t. Like most kids, I loved movies; and I saw some scary ones at a young age that really disturbed me. That gave me an interest in horror for the rest of my life. But I never imagined that you could actually make a living making movies. Back then there were no dvd extras and tv shows demonstrating how movies were made. While in high school I had fooled around with a friend’s 8 mm camera and we mostly shot special effects but it wasn’t until I saw Truffaut’s Day For Night that I had an idea of how a movie crew worked. Many years later I was vacationing with my girl friend and we rode past a big encampment outside of Cartagena, Columbia and I recognized that it was a film shoot. That evening we left our modest quarters and were eating at a restaurant on the beach when a couple of jeeps drove up with the rowdy actors etc from the shoot. As they drank and ate and partied I realized that I was on vacation and they were on a job – but they were having more fun than I was. That’s when I thought maybe making movies was a desirable job! Cut to a few years later when I was working as an artist and had an art supply store. I acquired a 16mm Bolex wind up camera and started making a short film – a short film full of fx that turned into a feature. Although I never took a film class, I learned how to make a movie just by doing it with people who did know how. The process fascinated me – it was exciting and satisfying. The movie I made was pretty bad, but I was hooked. I moved to Los Angeles to make movies.

Q: How did the Return Of The Living Dead III project come together?

BY: Joel Castelberg and Danica Minor contacted me about directing Return 3 – they said they had the rights and thought that I would be a good collaborator. I was thrilled because I loved both Return of the Living Dead as well as Night of the Living Dead. In order to set it apart from the plethora of zombie movies that had been made (even back then!) I decided that a zombie should be the main character. They found a company to finance it and we began listening to pitches from potential screenwriters. However, when the time came to formalize a deal it turns out that Joel and Danica’s agent was wrong about the rights being in their control – so it all fell apart. Soon after I mentioned this to Mark Amin, the ceo of Trimark Pictures, and somehow he acquired the rights and offered me the job of directing and producing. Again, the process of interviewing writers began, but this time it was Trimark who lined them up. When I met John Penney and heard his pitch, I was immediately sold. He was the guy.

Q: What did you think of the script the first time you read it?

BY: There never was a first time that I read the script. John had a ‘pitch’, which was a basic ‘take’ on the movie. His idea had to do with kids on the run, kind of a Romeo and Juliet, in a world in which the military is experimenting with the living dead as weapons. I don’t remember exactly the details, but my obsession with having the main character be a zombie fit right into that. The next step was for John to write a ‘treatment’ to base the screenplay on. John and I brainstormed the ideas and John organized them into characters and a story. Then the Trimark development folks would review it. By the time we got to the screenplay John and I were collaborating very effectively. John was seamlessly able to satisfy his storytelling ideas as well as mine – and Trimark’s as well. In fact, for the only time in my moviemaking experience, I had the screenwriter (and co-producer) on the set with me throughout the shoot. During pre-production John Penney was there to rewrite the script according to the cast, the locations that we found and the ideas that came up with the storyboard artists and fx artists. So during the filming we were literally shooting the script.

Q: Was it a difficult movie to cast?

BY: It wasn’t a difficult movie to cast because of the support of Trimark. I feel like they were able to access excellent options for each of the roles. They were very involved with the casting and fortunately we seemed to be very much on the same page as them regarding the casting ideas. Trimark had strong ideas about the casting, but never did I feel like I was obliged to accept an actor that wasn’t my choice. They really were good to work with. The biggest role of course was Julie – and we were all pretty blown away by Mindy Clarke. But Trimark was most helpful, I think, with the secondary roles for which they brought in really quality talent. It is really great that the cast, in my opinion, is uniformly good.

Q: How much of the budget went on special effects?

BY: Not that much – but working with my producing partner Gary Schmoeller (to whom is due a great deal of the credit for the success of the movie) we used an approach for producing the effects that had worked well for us in the past. Typically fx horror films of that era would hire one fx company to produce all of the fx – the theory being that by giving them all of the fx budget they would be able to dedicate more of there time to your production. Our approach was the opposite – with limited funds it is better to break the fx down into categories and hire various companies with different strengths. This meant hiring an fx supervisor (Tom Rainone in this case) to find the appropriate fx artists, make the deals and supervise the work. Paying a top fx artist for a key fx makes sense – paying the same artist to create background zombies may not be cost effective – a newer fx company might put extra effort into the effect in order to show there stuff. Some fx artists are experts in prosthetics and others in mechanical devices. We tried to get the most bang out of our fx budget.

Q: Was it a difficult shoot?

BY: It was a difficult shoot in that we were trying to make a bigger and better movie than we were budgeted for (we always aim higher than our budget). But the shoot was so well organized (kudos again to Gary Schmoeller), and Trimark were so supportive, and our Director of Photography (Gerry Lively) was so tirelessly resourceful that everything went more or less according to plan. It was very hard, exhausting work – but the whole crew seemed to be pulling in the same direction, so I really would not categorize it as a ‘difficult’ shoot.

Q: Why do you think the film has built up such a loyal following?

BY: Because it is a really good zombie movie. I say that as someone who has made a lot of horror movies that I wouldn’t characterize as ‘really good’. Return 3 has a good clear story and satisfying horror. Mainly what sets it apart in my book is the love story at the center of it all. I think it is very romantic, you really feel for Julie and sympathize with Curt’s determination to not let go of her. I feel like it is a goth romance, a heavy metal tragedy, a young love in a corrupt world. As a life long horror fan I think that Return 3 holds up as an example of good ‘90s horror.

Q: Horror Channel has also shown films from The Dentist and Re-Animator series of movies, do you think its times these characters came back?

BY: Yes, I do. Corbin Bernson has tried to get the rights to do a third Dentist – he loves playing that character. And it would be good see Jeffrey Combs get out the re-animating syringe one more time. And I have been asked many times about a Re-Animator re-boot. Problem is, as always, financing. The business has changed considerably due to the digital revolution. There just aren’t many Trimarks out there any more.

Q: Have you ever been tempted to make a follow up to your astonishingly original shocker, Society?

BY: I am actively working on it. Once again it is all about the financing. My idea for a sequel is to have it take place in these super exclusive late night clubs that they have in Hollywood. Once you get in there is always a VIP room or a VVIP room that is off limits…

Q: What state do you think the horror movie industry is in at the moment? A victim of its own success, perhaps?

BY: Horror has become so mainstream that it seems to have mostly lost that transgressive creativity that used to make it so exhilarating. Now that Zombie movies have hit the mainstream (the modern equivalent of the ‘Western’?) they have mostly lost the element of the macabre, the disturbing sense of dead things coming wrongly to life, and are now mainly action films about disease and overpopulation. Vampires are more romantic than horrific. And extreme violence is the norm almost as an end in itself. I think that we are at the end of a cycle and that a new kind of horror will grow out of the new production and distribution digital technologies. We seem to have reached the limit of what the screenplay structure formulas (popularized especially by Syd Field) of the last decades can give us. Whereas these ideas began as a way to identify the structure of successful movies and learn from them, they have inevitably led to a be treated as a set of rules to follow, rules that can lead to a sameness in screenplay structure that makes you feel like you know what is coming in a film from the early scenes. The horror genre has a relatively rigorous structure and it may be time for new filmmakers to develop it into more effective directions. One of the most interesting horror films for me recently was Cabin in the Woods. It wasn’t very scary, but the way it deconstructed the horror tropes made me think that after that you just cannot make a teenagers in the woods movie again. The times dictate our fears, and these times are definitely very different from the last few decades. I am waiting for the new classics to emerge – horror with the effectiveness and artistry of Rosemary’s Baby, The Omen, The Exorcist, The Shining – and the devastating impact of Night of the Living Dead and Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

Q: You’re a multi talented person but are you happiest directing, producing or writing?

BY: I am happiest when I am giving form to something I have imagined. It is the most exhilarating to direct – but if the director is doing stuff that surprises and delights you it is fantastic to produce. Writing is the fun of brainstorming the original ideas. When you produce you can stay with the movie for a long time after everyone else is gone. And with producing you can get so many more movies made. I love collaborating and am happy to take whatever role is available as long as I feel like I am a real member of the creative and organizational team.

Q: So what projects are you working on at the moment?

I am working on the sequels we mentioned above – but also have very interesting multi platform project with John Penney called The Pope.

Brian Yuzna, thank you very much.

TV: Sky 319 / Virgin 149 / Freesat 138

Frost Magazine

Books and Lifestyle

Tag Archives: Film