Bah, work and rush and excuses and hand cramp. It’s a conspiracy I tell you, to disrupt my newly energised, three post old posting schedule. For the record I would like to stick to a Monday, Wednesday, Friday habit of posts, not all of them lengthy (depending on aforementioned distractions) but routine is important and something I’m notoriously bad at.
The subject of this post was brought about by two unrelated but thematically and creatively similar films that got me thinking about how realism is perceived within cinema. Rushmore and Son of Rambow are both comedies of sorts, they are also both slightly offbeat and, though I’m hesitant to use the word, quirky. But both in a way that doesn’t draw particular attention to it, or do it for attention grabbing reasons, as in both cases the style perfectly fits the story and the world in which they are set. So back to realism, I think there’s a material realism that many films employ, and an emotional realism which is a lot harder to pin down and trickier to achieve. Both these films are excellent cases in point for the latter, neither from a stylistic point of view are set in ‘the real world’, now you could argue no films ever are for arguments sake lets talk about it in terms of recognisable reality. Not that they are set in fantastical lands, but exaggerated versions of the recognisable.
Rushmore is set in a fictional private school in America, and Son of Rambow in 1980’s Britain, but it’s the way these worlds are constructed that lends them their own reality. Rushmore is a school seemingly perfectly created for Jason Schwartzman’s Max Fischer,a student who seemingly excels at everything except study. The way Wes Anderson presents Max’s world is in perfect keeping with his character, detailed, strange and unpredictable. The opening montage of Max’s extra-curricular activities (which features him as captain or founder of nearly every club) is hilarious but also tells us a lot about Max’s character. The thematic use of plays is clever as well, from the ham versions of popular movies Max writes and produces at the school to the stage curtains which introduce each act of the film. It presents the film as artificial, and yet emotional reality of the film remains intact and strong.
Similarly Rambow features frequent and affectionate references to British styles and fashions of the 80’s, and manages to evoke an era perfectly without recreating it through concrete housing estates and gloomy urban sprawl. As it deals with the lives of two schoolboys who bond whilst trying to make their own version of Rambo First Blood, it has a child’s view of the world as well with occasional flights into dream sequences and over the top violence.
But the artificial nature and construction of these films does not make them distant or unfamiliar, instead, through the characters and story they both manage to be immensely touching and moving by remaining true to their inherent humanity. This is where many films with much more focus and emphasis on historical accuracy or realism in terms of visuals or story fall short, because if the characters don’t ring true or act believably then the audience is taken out of the story. I may not believe the worlds of Rushmore and Rambow, but I believe the people.
It is the same way that animation can tell amazingly human and compelling stories whilst also presenting foreign and visually arresting new worlds. Pixar managed to make me feel more for a small box of a robot this year than many other fully populated films did, and this comes down to this ‘reality’ not in a visual sense, but in a behavioural way, a way that speaks to all of us in our shared experience.
After thinking about this I think that when it comes to reality and believability within films it has to come down to the characters, the films have to earn their moments and there is nothing more wonderful to watch than a film get it just right. When making Jaws Steven Spielberg came up with the films now famous ending, whereby Brody would shoot the oxygen tank in the shark’s mouth causing it to explode. The author of the book however at the time was against it, he felt that the audience would never buy it as it seemed so ridiculous and over the top, Spielberg reasoned however that if he didn’t have the audience by that point in the film he never would. True enough the sequence made it into the film and elated cheers from audiences upon its release. But if that moment hadn’t been earned, if the characters had been lazy and tired it never would have worked.
The same can be said of Rushmore and Son of Rambow, if either had included lazy characters or poorly contrived decisions they would have come off as indulgent and unbelievable. As it is they remind two potent reminders of how, regardless of the packaging, the best films simply show us something about us as individually, and together.
Showing posts with label film. Show all posts
Showing posts with label film. Show all posts
Tuesday, 6 January 2009
The heart of style
Bah, work and rush and excuses and hand cramp. It’s a conspiracy I tell you, to disrupt my newly energised, three post old posting schedule. For the record I would like to stick to a Monday, Wednesday, Friday habit of posts, not all of them lengthy (depending on aforementioned distractions) but routine is important and something I’m notoriously bad at.
The subject of this post was brought about by two unrelated but thematically and creatively similar films that got me thinking about how realism is perceived within cinema. Rushmore and Son of Rambow are both comedies of sorts, they are also both slightly offbeat and, though I’m hesitant to use the word, quirky. But both in a way that doesn’t draw particular attention to it, or do it for attention grabbing reasons, as in both cases the style perfectly fits the story and the world in which they are set. So back to realism, I think there’s a material realism that many films employ, and an emotional realism which is a lot harder to pin down and trickier to achieve. Both these films are excellent cases in point for the latter, neither from a stylistic point of view are set in ‘the real world’, now you could argue no films ever are for arguments sake lets talk about it in terms of recognisable reality. Not that they are set in fantastical lands, but exaggerated versions of the recognisable.
Rushmore is set in a fictional private school in America, and Son of Rambow in 1980’s Britain, but it’s the way these worlds are constructed that lends them their own reality. Rushmore is a school seemingly perfectly created for Jason Schwartzman’s Max Fischer,a student who seemingly excels at everything except study. The way Wes Anderson presents Max’s world is in perfect keeping with his character, detailed, strange and unpredictable. The opening montage of Max’s extra-curricular activities (which features him as captain or founder of nearly every club) is hilarious but also tells us a lot about Max’s character. The thematic use of plays is clever as well, from the ham versions of popular movies Max writes and produces at the school to the stage curtains which introduce each act of the film. It presents the film as artificial, and yet emotional reality of the film remains intact and strong.
Similarly Rambow features frequent and affectionate references to British styles and fashions of the 80’s, and manages to evoke an era perfectly without recreating it through concrete housing estates and gloomy urban sprawl. As it deals with the lives of two schoolboys who bond whilst trying to make their own version of Rambo First Blood, it has a child’s view of the world as well with occasional flights into dream sequences and over the top violence.
But the artificial nature and construction of these films does not make them distant or unfamiliar, instead, through the characters and story they both manage to be immensely touching and moving by remaining true to their inherent humanity. This is where many films with much more focus and emphasis on historical accuracy or realism in terms of visuals or story fall short, because if the characters don’t ring true or act believably then the audience is taken out of the story. I may not believe the worlds of Rushmore and Rambow, but I believe the people.
It is the same way that animation can tell amazingly human and compelling stories whilst also presenting foreign and visually arresting new worlds. Pixar managed to make me feel more for a small box of a robot this year than many other fully populated films did, and this comes down to this ‘reality’ not in a visual sense, but in a behavioural way, a way that speaks to all of us in our shared experience.
After thinking about this I think that when it comes to reality and believability within films it has to come down to the characters, the films have to earn their moments and there is nothing more wonderful to watch than a film get it just right. When making Jaws Steven Spielberg came up with the films now famous ending, whereby Brody would shoot the oxygen tank in the shark’s mouth causing it to explode. The author of the book however at the time was against it, he felt that the audience would never buy it as it seemed so ridiculous and over the top, Spielberg reasoned however that if he didn’t have the audience by that point in the film he never would. True enough the sequence made it into the film and elated cheers from audiences upon its release. But if that moment hadn’t been earned, if the characters had been lazy and tired it never would have worked.
The same can be said of Rushmore and Son of Rambow, if either had included lazy characters or poorly contrived decisions they would have come off as indulgent and unbelievable. As it is they remind two potent reminders of how, regardless of the packaging, the best films simply show us something about us as individually, and together.
Friday, 2 January 2009
My year in film: 2008
I think it’s only natural for our horizons to become broader as we get older, partly down to familiarity I guess and partly down to a greater understanding and willingness to try something new. Musically this has been something I’ve witnessed before and I think 2008 was the year it really happened for me with film. Now I’ve always been a big fan of films and watched as much and as many films as I could, but last year I really felt like I stepped out of what I had always watched and liked to catch up on some history, seek out more esoteric and lesser known works and to get to grips with film more as a medium as well as entertainment. Not that I’ve suddenly come over all avant-garde where I won’t even consider a film unless it’s 3 hours long with subtitles and set in 1936 Paris with extended shots of clouds and trees, but I think the range of what I have seen and enjoyed has greatly improved.
A large contributor to this change has been the existence of a certain film-rental company from whom I receive regular films through the post. The ease of adding films to my list and the random nature of what I get sent I have really enjoyed, and the depth of the library has helped me start to plug the great gaps on film knowledge that I have regarding films dated earlier than 1980. In fact my previous aversion to older films, born I presume of a relish of the new and an unfamiliarity with cinema history, along with a stubbornly held belief that such films were old fashioned or boring, is slowly dissipating. One of the advantages however to being averse to older films for so long means that I now have a wealth of significant films to dive into and discover. In the last few months alone I have seen for the first time films such as Apocalypse Now, Duck Soup, The Apartment, and Vertigo which is just the start. However I’m not completely recanting my modernistic leanings, and have of course watched and enjoyed many more up to date films as well, though from a slightly wider spectrum than in the past.
So if I talk about the year in film to me it is not just about the films released in 2008 but those I have seen and experienced for the first time in the last 12 months. A year in which I was floored by the manic genius of the Marx Brothers, in which the greatest love story I witnessed was between two machines hundreds of years in the future, where for once the highest grossing film of the year was also one of the best, where I finally understood at least some of why the Coen brothers are so highly regarded and where I still had time to enjoy the low-brow but puppet filled hilarity of Forgetting Sarah Marshall (well OK not puppet filled, per-se but certainly more puppet filled than any other film I saw this year.) Oh and lastly an honourable mention to the worst film I saw this year which was undoubtedly The Happening, as a fan of M Night it is a shame to see how far he has fallen, it really was a painful experience. And whilst it would be unfair not be mention the horrible performances in the film as well I will simply attribute them to a director who rather lost the plot, thus exonerating the lovely Zooey Deschanel from any criticism, as it should be.
So there will be no top [insert number here] list from me this year, but I will leave with a list of the films I appreciated, enjoyed and that affected me the most in the last 12 months and the hope that this voyage of discovery I find myself on (one filled with awful cliché’s apparently…) continues throughout 2009 and that I am able to at least share some of what I find in this very space. So I hope you’re having a fantastic new year and I’ll be back real soon.
Not a best of list for 2008 but a list of films I liked a lot in no particular order:
(catchy title, huh?)
The Assassination of Jesse James
Wall-E
Cloverfield
There Will be Blood
Brazil
Duck Soup
Gone Baby Gone
The Dark Knight
Apocalypse Now
The Apartment
Rushmore
Crimes and Misdemeanours
Before Sunrise
Lars and the Real Girl
Into the Wild
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)