Zero Dark Thirty Film Review

News travels fast and the arts, arguably, just as fast. It seems that little time passes between major news, political and cultural events occurring and their portrayal in mainstream media. At time of writing a Julian Assange movie is well into production and Bradley Cooper has just been cast as disgraced cyclist Lance Armstrong. Barely eighteen months have passed since the death of Osama Bin Laden and now Kathryn Bigelow’s thriller about the hunt for the Al-Qaeda leader arrives on these shores amidst both critical adulation and a storm of controversy. Bigelow was already well into production on a project about the failed hunt for Bin Laden when real world events forced a rapid change of focus for the film. Hopes were high following her historic Oscar win for Iraq war thriller The Hurt Locker. Can her return to familiar theatre hold up to scrutiny?

 

Following the September 11 attacks, newly recruited CIA operative Maya (Jessica Chastain) is deployed to Pakistan where she joins a covert team dedicated to seeking out Osama Bin Laden’s couriers in the hope it will lead to his location. The narrative then follows Maya and her colleagues across a grueling decade of dead ends, shifting political landscapes, assassination attempts and haunted obsession before arriving at the inevitable outcome of May 2nd 2011.

 

Bigelow is a master of crafting a tough, machismo drenched world through her camera lens. Her past work has traded in different genres and protagonists from different walks of life. Her aesthetic here is similar to that of The Hurt Locker; lots of handheld camerawork, extended close ups and disoriented framing have a powerful culmanitive effect. What’s fascinating this time round is how much of the drama she chooses to show through screens within the frame. The protagonists of Zero Dark Thirty are shown poring over lengthy intelligence data, hours of interrogation footage, news reports of major terrorist attacks and the frighteningly familiar overhead sights of CIA drones. A good chunk of the final raid is viewed through the first person viewpoint of the SEAL’s night vision goggles. Where The Hurt Locker and films before it portrayed a war fought on the ground side by side with the ‘grunts’, Zero Dark Thirty portrays a unique 21st century attitude towards combat. This is  a war fought through intelligence, data and statistics. It is a cold and stark view that matches our 24 hour media mainlined view of contemporary warfare. That’s not to say that the film branches out in all directions; political figureheads are glimpsed briefly and major events (Invasion of Iraq, Obama’s election) are alluded to but never directly mentioned. There’s a cool and clinical air of detachment over the proceedings.

 

Without a backstory or even a surname, the central character of Maya is presented to us as a decidedly single minded individual with little to no life outside her hunt for Bin Laden. A child’s hand drawing reading ‘Mommy’ is glimpsed but never brought up and she shoots down all questions about her private life from colleagues. Such a portrayal could be viewed as unengaging but a fierce performance from Chastain makes it anything but. Pale, ethereal and with a thousand yard stare Chastain dominates every scene she’s in, her evolution from rookie to veteran wholly believable. While there is a whole other ideology hanging over the films head, it is also possible to see one aspect that attracted Bigelow to this specific take on the story. Maya is one of few female characters in the film operating in what is seen as a  predominantly male environment (read:Hollywood) and she spends just as much time butting heads with her colleagues than she does hunting her prey. ‘I’m the motherfucker who found him’ she cooly intones to a room full of indecisive superiors in what is probably the closest the film comes to a ‘victory’ moment. In many ways Maya’s journey reminded me of David Fincher’s superb Zodiac, another exhaustive, fictionalized account of the hunt for one individual and the havoc it wreaks on those who search for him.

 

Anyone heading into see Zero Dark Thirty will be no doubt aware of the controversy surrounding its alleged depiction of torture of detainees and the suggestion that such methods worked and led to Bin Laden. American senators have written letters to the production company criticising such a depiction whilst author Naomi Wolf wrote a scathing article comparing Bigelow to Nazi propaganda filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl. Certainly Bigelow and script writer Mark Boal do not shy away from the fact that ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ occurred at American forces hands and the opening scenes showing a detainee being stripped, humiliated and waterboarded are horrifying to watch. However the film portrays the brutalisation of detainees yielding no or useless information. It is when the characters re-examine existing evidence that they eventually wind up on the road to Bin Laden’s compound. I personally don’t agree that the film condones torture and prefer such a brutal stark portrayal to that of the likes of 24 where Jack Bauer’s relentless torture of characters become both repetitive and repellent. I certainly won’t pretend to be smarter than anyone making the allegations; I would point out Alex Gibney’s article on the film which though I disagree with it he argues his points very well. However I would point out the argument of torture being effective (and in turn accusations of condoning American violence) is largely undone by the cold, blunt delivery of the films finale. Bin Laden is finally killed practically offscreen in front of screaming women and children with no triumphant ‘got him!’ moment. The first thing the SEAL’s do when the deed is done? Take pictures with a camera to confirm the kill. More distancing through a digital screen.

 

There’s no ‘ra-ra’ patriot message to end on. The narrative ends hours before Bin Laden’s death is made public. No footage of celebrations in Times Square, rather Bigelow chooses to end on an image that suggests that the decade long mission has brought nothing but a Pyrrhic victory. Maya’s quarry finally caught, her life is practically over. Many may feel differently and either way it is no easy watch. But Bigelow has created a never less than compelling , astonishingly well made thriller which dodges the cliches it could have fallen into and shines a light where similar films have rarely gone. However you feel about that is completely up to you.

 

 

Les Miserables Movie Musical Exclusive Review

Les Miserables’ movie musical – screened for cast and crew members at the Odeon Cinema in London, Leicester Square on the 4th of December 2012 – soon to be released in the cinemas.

 

I was lucky enough to be invited to the cast and crew screening of ‘Les Miserables’ on the 4th of December 2012 at the Odeon cinema in London, Leicester Square.

 

 

In a speech, held before the screening, award winning British film and television director, Tom Hooper, did thank all the cast and crew in the cinema making his dream come true.

 

Sir Cameron Mackintosh admitted that it had been their dream to make a movie musical and the fact Tom Hooper asked him on this amazing project was a really good thing as the director came up with an amazing vision of how he wanted it. Tom had in fact suggested disaggregating all the scenes for filming purposes to then put them back together in the movie. Mr Mackintosh admitted making a movie and especially a movie musical takes so much more work than putting together a theatre production. He funnily mentioned how the lack of sleep was a constant thing during the production!

The film musical had just been completed before the screening and Mr Hooper ironically wished he could have had a couple of hours more to do some extra touches.

Les Miserables’ movie has already had the Guildhall screening in the USA where it received a great feedback but now, the main aim is to bring the production in London.

In between the mentions in Hooper’s speech, Simon Hayes and his team for the sound department and all the post production team which did an amazing work, the costume department – which had to really work out the choice of fabrics so that the microphones would not be inhibited – Steward Hilliker took care of this. The camera team which had to film several scenes with multi-cameras; it was a real challenge. Really, a great team work. Also, Hugh Jackman’s remarkable and poignant performance of Jean Valjean cannot be left unmentioned.

 

The live sung movie musical is much more emotionally bounding than the old school movie musical version where actors used to mime the singing on a pre-recorded track. I found the movie as poignant as the live staged version. In the theatre it is great to be present and literally breath the performance but unless you are sitting in the very first rows, you hardly get to see the actors expressions when in the movie musical you can clearly see their eyes and facial expressions. This works amazingly to get into the actors’ deep feelings highlighted by remarkable close ups that, on the big screen together with the musical effects, make the audience unavoidably feel exactly how the characters felt whilst singing those lines live to the cameras (see video link below).

The movie respects the same sequence of events of the original Boublil – Schönberg musical theatre score. The musical and emotional tension is not released till the ‘Master of the House’ entertaining scene where we even see a featured Father Christmas!

Pablo Bubar – one of the many cast members who attended the screening – explained to me how, for the revolution scene, he had been called on set for 6 days, working 13 to 14 hours per day. Crew members worked even more than 17 hours per day.

 

The movie produced by Working Title Films (Sarah Radcliffe and Tim Bevan) will be released on the 25th of December 2012 in the United States and on the 11th of January 2013 in United Kingdom.

Might this movie be the landmark for more live sung movie musical productions to come celebrating really good acting and filmmaking and I bet cinemas will be full again!

 

http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi2587403289/

 

 

Written by Paola Berta

 

The Expendables 2 Film Review

Much fuss was made over The Expendables – a balls-out, high-octane, no-nonsense shoot ‘em up that Sylvester Stallone nurtured to the big screen. It was a lot of fun, and pulled together three Goliath’s of the action world (Stallone, Schwarzenegger and Willis) along with a handful of other action giants, both past and present.  Its success meant that The Expendables 2 was inevitable.

 

Along with the original ‘Expendables’ (Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Randy Couture and Terry Crews) Stallone has more hired guns in the mix for the second outing. Liam Hemsworth joins the Expendables crew, Jean-Claude Van Damme is on villain duty, and a seventy-something Chuck Norris is thrown in for good measure.

 

Unfortunately, it would seem less can indeed sometimes be more.  Whilst the first film seemed like a genuine hark back to something lost; an old-skool actioner with some old-skool actioniers, The Expendables 2 reeks of ‘for-the-hell-of-it’ laziness. The first treated the teaming up of Stallone, Schwarzenegger and Willis as a momentous occasion and played it cool. Their fleeting on-screen trio – the first EVER – was played with a serious hand (as serious as one can expect) with only a slight nod to the audience. Action took the front seat in that film (action and ultra violence, which fans of the 2008 Rambo will attest to).

 

For this reviewer however, The Expendables 2 has lost its trump card and gone for the cobbled-together, self reverential name dropping road and left all the good, old-skool action behind. Don’t get me wrong, there is action. The opening 20 minutes is as good as it gets. But with only a few more exceptions the action is not only not as plentiful as I would have liked but also not as brutal and ridiculously OTT as the first. Jet Li (an undeniable legend) gives a bunch of goons a cooking lesson they won’t forget, but quickly disappears off-screen for the remainder of the film! Statham, it cannot be denied, is a remarkable martial artist and his action sequences are crisp, violent and precise. In fact Statham is also by far the best actor among the Expendable crowd and were it not for him they would be left following Stallone who unfortunately just looks waaaaaaay to old for this sh*t. Schwarzenegger and Willis (the latter of which can also act, but seems to have forgotten) is laughable (not in a good way) and at points cringe worthy.  Every scene with them oozes self parody, with trademark lines being cheapened, hung, drawn and quartered like never before. Oh, and Chuck Norris pops up for no apparent reason and shoots a load of nameless henchmen. Then does the same again later. Fortunately his beard covers the fact that he is also, unfortunately too old for this sh*t. There is also a Chinese woman who is involved in some way, but her acting is so unforgivably bad at times that I wondered if she may have been on work experience. I can’t actually remember what she did in the film except that she was somehow ‘important’ to the story, my brain must have attempted to eradicate her memory from my head.

 

This leaves us with Van Damme. It may come as a surprise to some – although not those who witnessed his performance in JCVD (2008) – but the muscles from Brussels can act. His performance is – along with ‘The Stath’s’ – the best in the film by a country mile. He delivers his lines with natural menace and adds a real villain to an otherwise empty shell of a film. It is thanks to him and Jason Statham that the film is watchable beyond the first 20 minutes. Sure he breaks out the spin-kicks in the show-down but c’mon, there would be uproar were he not to.

 

The Director Simon West (most notable for Con Air in 1997) does his best with the poor script and ludicrous amount of characters to crowbar into the 100+ minutes run time, but it ends up feeling like words, scenes and characters have been shoved into the Lotto’s Lancealot Machine with set of balls number 2 and given a good going over, only to be poured onto the screen like the contents of an un-drained washing machine.

 

Word on the street (the internet street) has it that number 3 has been given a greenlight, with additional names like Harrison Ford and Nicholas Cage being bandied around by publicity types. Whether this will add more gravitas (try not to laugh) to The Expendables 3 or whether or not they are simply yet more names to try to cram inside a 90 minute window with integrity-destroying consequences is yet to be seen.  Thank God the true, un-paralleled master Bruce Lee isn’t alive to be dragged dragon-kicking and screaming into what unfortunately seems to this reviewer to be a sad misfire of an action film-wannabe.

 

P.S – Jackie Chan, please don’t take any calls from Stallone’s agent. I beg you.

Win A Copy Of Curse On DVD

Frost has teamed up with Grayson Pictures to give away a DVD copy of Cursed.

Curse is releasing the rarely seen Singaporean military chiller on Sept 17, 2012.

Set in on the Island of Pulau Hantu in the south of Singapore. CURSE tells the
terrifying tale of a military squad sent to an island to investigate the mysterious
disappearance of a group of soldiers. Accidentally disturbing a burial site, they
unleash a terrifying supernatural curse…

Curse is directed by Esan Sivalinhgam who said of the shoot: “We expected it to
be one hell of an adventure but it turned out to be the adventure from hell”. Facing
torrential downpours, extreme temperatures, venomous reptiles plus censorship
issues and stumbling across a real burial site, it was a miracle the film was
completed in its fifteen-day schedule.

The stellar cast includes Adrian Psang, who starred in rge award-winning
SPIRALLING; SPYGAME, NIGHTWATCH and most recently BAIT 3D.

Curse is available on DVD from 17th of September]

CURSE will be the first release by newly-created Grayson Pictures. For a chance to win, follow @Frostmag on twitter and tweet “I want to win Curse DVD with @Frostmag” or subscribe to our newsletter.

Ted | Film Review

It is not everyday you get to see a movie about a talking, swearing, dope-smoking, over-sexed stuffed teddy bear. Which is unfortunate, because this film is hilarious. Wrong and not for the easily offended, but hilarious.

As the result of a childhood wish, John Bennett’s teddy bear, Ted, came to life and has been by John’s side ever since – a friendship that’s tested when Lori, John’s girlfriend of four years, wants more from their relationship.

Seth MacFarlane directs, writes and voices ‘Ted’, the stuffed teddy bear who comes to life. It doesn’t sound plausible at all but it doesn’t matter. This film allows you to suspend your disbelief and just laugh at the witty script.

Mark Wahlberg, Mila Kunis and Seth MacFarlane are all great and Giovanni Ribisi plays a psycho in an amazing performance. Wahlberg is also great, he really is an actor of note with great comedic timing. Wahlberg and Kunis have great chemistry so even when Wahlberg’s character keeps screwing up, you root for him.

Rules of Engagement actor Patrick Warburton also makes an appearance with Ryan Reynolds. This film is just really funny. I know it is not to everyone’s taste and it is edgy humour, but I think it is great. One of the funniest films of the year. Top marks. I hope they make another one. Check out some of the movie quotes from Ted below.

Robert: Give me back my Teddy Bear!
[Charges John and Lori at full speed. John punches him in the nose, knocking him unconscious to the ground]
Lori: Jesus!
John: I’m sorry, but somebody had to go all Joan Crawford on his ass!

John: Can you call my cellphone?
Lori: Yeah
[Lori calls John’s phone which plays “The Imperial March”]
Lori: Is that my ringtone? What is that? Cause it sounds really negative.
John: No. I-it’s from The Notebook

Ted: [to Tami-Lynn] You have a baby? Is it alive?

Perry Bhandal on Interview With a Hitman | Film Interview

What inspires you?

Music is my biggest inspiration. Sequences just appear fully formed in my head as I listen, whether it be movie soundtracks, modern classics or just rock and pop. Snippets of life experience also play a big part. For example I was in India with my family in 2003 and we were visiting this incredible temple at the top of a steep hill with a bustling marketplace below. On my way down a little girl (obviously a street child) walked alongside me with her hand stretched out all the way down to the bottom. I gave her some money, she walked off and then stopped when she saw how much I had given her and turned and gave me the most wonderful smile. That small encounter inspired the complete screenplay ‘Assassin’ which is set in 1970’s India.

I also read a great deal both fiction and non-fiction and have come to have an understanding of how the world works and the compromises that we all have to live with working in the system as is. Which is why anti-heroes or flawed heroes are of so much interest to me. It’s easy to like someone who is perfect onscreen. Or perhaps with a flaw that would lead one to empathise i.e. a drug or drink habit. That’s not enough for me, because that’s not real life. Take for example the character Viktor in Interview with a Hitman. He’s a cold blooded killer who has done the most awful things. But by the end of film, people who have watched the film, have told me they like him, when they shouldn’t and that they empathise with him. Anti Heroes do that to us. The put up and mirror to ourselves and ask – given the circumstances – would you do any different?

What is the hardest thing about making films?

Every stage in the process has its challenges.

The screenplay. It is there that you absolutely, must get it right. If the screenplay doesn’t work then the film is never going to work. It is tempting to move on from the screenplay and think that it will work itself out. But it won’t. If it doesn’t work on paper it will never work onscreen.

Then it’s the casting. The casting for Interview with a Hitman was both a pleasure and nightmare in equal proportions. It was a pleasure when an actor came in nailed the audition or gave me an interpretation that exceeded or even challenged my expectations. It was nightmare seeing actor after actor, willing each and every one to do well and for no-one to even come close. Those were the low points. A prime example was casting for the lead, Viktor. Nobody that auditioned could deliver what I wanted. It got so bad that I began to think that I had written a character that couldn’t be played. So I got our casting director to send out another request and that’s when Luke was put forward by his manager. I had seen Luke in Blade and Hellboy and knew that he could do it. So I cast him straight away.

Locations. I had the film running in a loop in my head and after the selecting the actors that will make the characters real it was on to making real the world that those characters inhabit. I had to compromise on a few locations but Newcastle is a amazing city with exactly the kind of locations I was looking for so on the whole I got the look I was after.

Then it’s a case of inspiring the great cast and crew into delivering the best film possible. I knew from my business background managing large projects with big teams that everything is driven from the top. There can be no hesitation or doubt. I was a first time director with an experienced crew and a lead actor that had done over thirty four films and worked on two huge movies with one of the biggest directors in the world Guillermo del Toro. I had to deliver an impossible 18 day schedule. Even if I felt any doubt, which I did a few times during the shoot, I could not show it. I was absolutely clear on what I wanted all the time. I had trusted my instincts up until the day of the first shoot and come to rely on them. They didn’t let me down.

And then there’s the post production. I thought the hardest part was shooting the film but the edit turned out to be a real challenge. The film cut together beautifully and the first cut was just under two hours and everyone that watched it raved about it. I was very careful to protect the creative process during that period and was able to deliver something that worked really well in a really short space of time.

Then we got into the rounds of reviews and started getting input and great feedback from the distributor. There was a lot of interest in the film and lots of opinions that wanted to be heard. There were times that I felt the film was being pushed in a direction that I didn’t want but, as a first time director, you have to listen to those that have more years in the industry. Fortunately I was able to preserve the core of the vision I had set out to deliver. Protecting the creative process is massive in this situation and I was fortunate to work with two editors that were completely bought into that and I was able to deliver a final cut that pleased everyone. Having said that the Director’s cut will be a little longer than 92 minutes. I’m pretty nifty with Final Cut now so I’ll be putting that one together myself.

Once the picture’s locked then the music starts. This process normally starts earlier but finding the right composer took a while. I had a fantastic temporary score to work from and an amazing composer to transform that into the great electronic sound that I wanted for the film

At the same time I worked on the look of the film i.e. Grade. I wanted a de-saturated, high contrast, stripped out look to the film and we definitely got that but it took quite a few days in the grading suite!

Then it’s all down to the audience. You hope you have made something that audiences will enjoy and find accessible and also challenging.

What is your writing process?

I have been writing a long time so I’m now at the point where I spend most of my time tweaking the screenplays I’ve already written. I will need to sit down and finish the novel version of Penumbra – my next film.

As I mentioned above Music and my love of anti-heroes tend to drive my imagination down a certain path. It’s normally on a train or listening to music whilst driving that sequences starts to form in my mind. With Hitman, the characters of the young and adult Viktor and how one grew up to be the other came to mind first. I mull the idea for a few months to see if it builds any momentum. Then I start to sketch out the story in note form. I don’t start writing until I have the complete end to end story in place. Then I just sit down at write until the first draft is done. Interview with a Hitman took me four weeks from sitting down to getting the first draft out. Then a few months of script editing which resulted only in some changes to the second act. So pretty quick especially if you compare it to Penumbra which has taken some ten years to get it where it is!

How did you come up with the concept for your film?

I didn’t want to do a standard Hitman movie, where you’re usually introduced the protagonist fully formed. I wanted to get under the skin of what makes a man like Viktor. I wanted to ask questions like ‘does a man of violence like Victor deserve a second chance?’

There’s action in Interview with a Hitman but it is also a character piece. I remember after an advance screening, one of the audience who worked with abused children came up to me afterwards and said that it was a realistic description how children get changed by what happens around them and grow up to be men of violence like Viktor.

Did meeting Spencer Pollard, the CEO of the well-known distribution company, Kaleidoscope, change your life?

Kaleidoscope was actually just Spencer on his own and starting out when I met him! Amazing what he has achieved in such a short space of time. It was good meeting and getting to know him. I would like to say that my relationship had a bearing on him coming onboard as distributor but if you knew him as I do you would understand that ultimately it had no bearing. It was the compelling nature of the commercial proposition (script, cast, budget, vision) that I had put together that drove his decision to commit. Ie the opportunity to make a significant return for Kaleidoscope, which he already has, purely on international sales alone, with Interview with a Hitman. There were two other parties wanting to partner on the project, but I stayed with Spencer because of the relationship we had built up.

What advice do you have for other filmmakers?

Don’t let go of your dreams. Work on perfecting your art. Be patient. The creative industries are capricious and can be somewhat insular. Focus on what works for the mass market first. Even Spielberg had to start off by putting bums on seats with Jaws and ET before his name meant he could do the projects he wanted to do. And remember it is a business first and foremost and the greatest chance you have of breaking in is to do what any business does when entering a new industry – deliver a product that your market will want to invest in.

How hard is it to get funding?

It is inversely proportional to the commercial viability of the proposal. With Interview with a Hitman getting funding was fairly straight forward once all the elements in the package came together.

What are your plans for the film?

Interview with a Hitman has presold in every major territory worldwide going to the United States, Germany, China, France, Japan, Middle East, Thailand, Malaysia, Korea, CIS, Baltics, Benelux, India, Indonesia, Australia, Kuwait

Kaleidoscope have released it in UK Cinema’s and the DVD release is scheduled 27th August.

I am hoping the audience will like it and that it gets critical as well as commercial success.

How did you get into the industry?

I did an MA in Film and Television at Brunel in 1990. I remember I had a Eureka moment in the first film studies class. It stayed with me and didn’t diminish. As soon as the course finished I borrowed some equipment from the University and set about making a short film.

Why did it take you a while to get back into film?

My short film started opening some doors for me. But as with a lot of people, life tends to have different plans for you. I got married and so ensued job, mortgage, responsibilities etc. And there’s not a lot of room for something as self indulgent and flighty as a career as a film director.

So I had to lay that aside, but continued writing in my spare time, building up quite a number of screenplays that I would have loved to see on the big screen. Over time I built up an IT consultancy business. In the back of my mind I always thought that I would take up my passion but a more realistic and down-to-earth part of me realised that it was becoming more and more distant.

My father passed away at the beginning of 2009. He, along with my mother had come to the UK in the mid sixties and had worked hard to give me the start in life and the opportunities they had never had. I know my father had his own dreams and aspirations but he was far too much of a stoic to ever burden us with them. He had given up on his dreams and I knew he wouldn’t want the same for me. So a few months after his passing I sold my consultancy business and set up my film production company Kirlian Pictures Ltd.

My business experience had taught me a great deal and I knew that to succeed in this industry was no different from any other. I had to deliver a product to market that audiences would want to watch. It was fortunate then that, as I had built up a compelling and highly commercial body of work and was ready to go.

I immersed myself in all aspects of film making, lenses, cameras, cinematography, lighting, sound. Being very technical had served me well in my IT business and I wanted to make sure I knew how to get what was in my head onscreen.

And because I was coming at the industry from a business perspective I took a part time producers course.

The first film was going to be Penumbra, a revenge thriller that’s been described as ‘Taken’ meets ‘Max Payne’.

The size of the budget led to significant pressure from investors to hand over the directorial reigns to someone who was more of a known quantity. Is a less risky proposition. I knew there was no way I was going to let anyone else direct Penumbra so I went back to the drawing board and wrote a lower budget feature called ‘Interview with a Hitman in April 2010. I spent a few months script editing and once it was right, moved on to production packaging.

I began presenting the film to potential investors. To head off any concerns about me being an unknown quantity I went out and bought a piece of previsualisation software that the studios use to model films sequences and try stuff out. I previsualised the first five minutes of the film as I envisioned it playing out.

The budget, genre, previz (which went down a storm) and the quality of the screenplay packaged together was a compelling commercial proposition in its own right. However, Cast is the primary determinant of value in a genre feature film (horror being the exception) so I went out to cast.

I got a fantastic response and I assembled a great cast very quickly. The only problem was casting the lead, Viktor. Nobody that auditioned could deliver what I wanted. So I got our casting director to send out another request and that’s when Luke was put forward by his manager. I had seen Luke in Blade and Hellboy and knew that he could do it. So I cast him straight away.

After that the investment just rolled in. In fact we had to turn investors down because I had decided to invest in it myself via my production company. I knew I could deliver a great film so absolutely wanted to be part of its success. That was in May 2011 and we started shooting in August 2011.

What was it like working with Luke Goss?

Working, with a Luke was great. I had a very clear vision of what I wanted and he worked so hard to give me that. A director’s vision is articulated through the prism of an actor’s performance. Great actors like Luke become the characters they play and bring their own nuances and detail. That part of the process I really loved, working with him and the rest of the cast to find the truth in this fictional world I had created. And I think we succeeded. You’ll see a very different Luke Goss in this film.

What’s next?

Interview with a Hitman was a stepping-stone. The way for me to prove I could actually deliver a film that was a commercial success and hopefully one that audiences have enjoyed and will continue to enjoy watching.

So now that I’ve done that it’s back to the much bigger budget action, thriller Penumbra. Penumbra is the story of a loving family man who, when his young son is kidnapped and killed by child traffickers is left with a choice; freedom from the unbearable pain (by taking his own life) or catharsis in the form of revenge.

He chooses the latter and in doing so descends into a vile underworld and risks becoming the very thing he seeks to destroy.

Set in present day Europe. This is the story of a man’s search for absolution, his fall from this world into darkness, his salvation by an unconditional act of love and his redemption through the ultimate sacrifice.

The film will be shot mostly in Budapest with a couple of weeks in the UK. I would love for Edward Norton to play the lead Blake. We’re aiming to start shooting in April Next Year.

For more info you can go to:

www.perrybhandal.com

Production company www.kirlianpictures.com

On twitter @perrybhandal

The film review is here

Man on a Ledge | Film Review

Man on a Ledge is a smart, fast-paced thriller. It is very much a ‘cinema’ film, and by that I mean one of those films you watch just for pure entertainment.

An ex-cop (Sam Worthington) is jailed for a crime he says he didn’t do and manages to escape from prison. He later threatens to jump to his death from a Manhattan hotel. He asks for a female police psychologist (Elizabeth Banks) who tries to stop him jumping. As the film unwinds we see that things are not as straightforward as they seemed. The plot has lots of twists to keep you entertained.

I really liked Elizabeth Banks’ performance. She known as a strong comedic actress but is equally good in this thriller.

A lot of this movie was filmed on a real ledge, a brave move by Sam Worthington who suffers from vertigo. Jamie Bell plays Worthington’s brother. Bell is fantastic in the film and so is Mandy Gonzalez as his girlfriend.

Ed Harris is as amazing as ever as the villain of the piece. I really don’t want to give too much of the film away but it really is worth a watch. Rent or buy for a good night in.

Man on a Ledge is pure entertainment. It is just a fun film which has the benefit of having brilliant actors in it. The acting really is top notch.

Prometheus | Film Review


This film is clearly a prequel, although Ridley Scott at one point denied it. Long awaited and much discussed, when the trailer was released a while back the internet went mad. The film is visually stunning and has brilliant performances by Michael Fassbender and Noomi Rapace. Rapace plays a driven and intense scientist who’s longing for a child is used against her and twisted in a horrific way. Fassbender is an android made to look like a humanoid so he doesn’t scare the crew.

This film comes 33 years after the first Alien movie and has some elements of the previous movies; a crew on a ship called Prometheus with an android, a scene like the alien coming out of John Hurt but much more icky.

There has been some complaints that the film is slightly predictable, but what monster movie isn’t? It is a monster movie for god’s sake. Prometheus is beautifully made, well acted, thrilling and entertaining. Is also has excellent production design and incredible visual effects. It is an ambitious and impressive film. Definitely worth a watch.