Anghus Houvouras picks his top five five directors whose output is getting progressively worse, and looks at their chances of redemption...

Some filmmakers age like fine wine.  Others ferment.  Every filmmaker has an occasional miscue or a film that doesn't live up to expectations.  But there are others who consistently work and yet seem to be spiraling down a slippery descent into mediocrity... or worse.  Here's a list of the top five filmmakers who have seemed to have lost their way.


5. Francis Ford Coppola

It feels like a lifetime since we've seen a Coppola film that is worth the two hour investment.  At one point he was the riskiest, most daring filmmaker in the business.  He took big risks and reaped big rewards.  But then he started turning out junk that barely qualified as mediocre.  It was right around the time he released the family friendly drama Jack with Robin Williams that his films went from well intentioned misfires to irredeemable garbage.  Then, he decided to start playing with the technology (never a good sign) and is now primarily interested in releasing digital garbage that no one has any interest in watching.  Twixt was the kind of awful I wouldn't wish on anyone and it makes me wonder how someone who turned out some of the best films ever made is now incapable of making something watchable.

Chance at Redemption: Low - As one of the elder statesman of cinema, Coppola seems to have little interest in getting back into the game.  It would be nice to see the man return to form for one last great movie.


4. James Cameron

He's made the two biggest movies of all time, and yet, has he ever made anything as engaging as The Terminator or Aliens?  The man knows how to push buttons and get an audience to react to his work, but as a filmmaker he's abandoned the idea of three dimensional characters in favor of three dimensional cinematic theme park rides that assault your every sense.  It's hard to watch Avatar and see growth.  Malignancy, maybe.

Chance at Redemption: Fair - If Cameron spends as much time crafting characters as he does immersive worlds for them to inhabit, he could deliver a masterpiece.


3. Kevin Smith

At one point I was such a fan.  Clerks was a movie I could put on almost any time and watch again and again.  A wonderful little foul mouthed independent comedy with great dialogue and memorable characters.  Smith took that little film and started an online empire making comic books, an animated series, and subsequent sequels with his most famous chronic characters Jay and Silent Bob.  Unfortunately the movies have been getting progressively worse.  Chasing Amy is a good movie, but almost everything after is a morbidly embarrassing orgy of excess.  Barely watchable junk like Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, Jersey Girl, Clerks II, and Cop Out are prime examples of a filmmaker who has lost his way.  He tried to find it again with the low budget Red State, a movie that felt like it was directed by someone who had never made a film before.  Amatuer hour style filmmaking that served as glaring proof that nearly twenty years in the film business had taught Smith very little.

Chance at Redemption: Poor - Smith announced he'll make one more film, Clerks III, before retiring.  It would have to be pretty exceptional to wipe away a decade of miscues.


2. Judd Apatow

Apatow's descent is a fascinating one.  The 40 Year Old Virgin is a fantastic comedy with great characters, funny dialogue, the kind of R rated sexual situations that had been sorely lacking in comedies, and a brief appearance by Leslie Mann.  He repeated his success with the same basic formula in Knocked Up.  Funny characters, sexual based comedy, for some reason a 2 hour plus running time, and a supporting role for Leslie Mann.  Not as good as the 40 Year Old Virgin (debatable, I know), but not bad.  Then he released the heinously unfunny Funny People with Adam Sandler.  Same formula, same basic type of movie, same two plus hour run time, and a big part for Leslie Mann.  Now Apatow releases his latest two plus hour comedy opus This Is 40.  Same basic scenario, same kind of humor, and what do you know: Leslie Mann.

Apatow's biggest failing is delivering such predictable product. You know exactly what you're getting with Judd Apatow.  You're getting a movie about people who refuse and/or struggle with maturity that's going to be two plus hours long, and feature Leslie Mann.  A Judd Apatow film has become as predictable as a Michael Bay movie.  There are no surprises, and the material is so similar that it's starting to feel like he's directing one, long never ending movie slash Leslie Mann highlight real.

Chance at Redemption: Fair - Providing he can make a movie without Leslie Mann


1. M. Night Shyamalan

 Could anyone else top this list?  Is there another filmmaker alive that started out with so much promise before crashing down into a firey crater that seems to have no bottom?  At one point I was such a fan of Shyamalan.  I loved The Sixth Sense.  What a perfect little movie.  And with Unbreakable he made one of the best superhero movies ever, deconstructing the idea of an everyday guy with superpowers.  His penchant for twist endings was worrisome.  I think everyone saw the potential for disaster coming when every subsequent film relied on some kind of third act gear shift.  Still, I liked Signs.  It was an effective thriller with another great ending.  The dividing line for Shyamalan's career was The Village, an imperfect film that I still find myself defending in spite of some pretty glaring flaws.  After that, the man released three of the most laughably put together studio films in the history of cinema.  Lady in the Water was a ridiculous mess.  The Happening might be the best bad movie ever made.  And The Last Airbender was like a master class in how not to put together a film.

Like Coppola, it's mind boggling to watch someone capable of orchestrating and executing films so early in his career now unable to even construct a cohesive narrative.

Chance at Redemption: Fair - After Earth may be Shyamalan's return to form.  Whether it's Sixth Sense form or The Happening form, we'll have to wait and see.


Agree with these choices? Are there any other directors who you feel have lost their way, and what are their chances at redemption? Let us know in the comments below...


Anghus Houvouras

Helen Murdoch on why we love Christmas films...

Gifts are being wrapped, trees are being propped up and the smell of mince pies is at every turn, it is of course Christmas, our favourite time of year. As a certified film addict, Christmas is the time of great movies as well, which got me thinking about what it is we love about them?


Nostalgia

Although we’re grown up and have a zillion responsibilities, there’s nothing quite like sitting down and watching Home Alone on TV for the millionth time. We love to regress back to our childhood to enjoy the innocence of Christmas; this is why the Christmas film is imperative. We’ve all seen It’s a Wonderful Life and Miracle on 34th Street more times than we care to admit but Christmas films have the unique ability to never get dull. Even if you’ve got the DVD in your collection, you’ll happily sit and watch it on telly – ad breaks and all - purely because it’s Christmas. These films capture the innocence of Christmas that we all love and miss; they are our catalyst for returning to childhood.


There’s always someone worse off than you

Christmas isn’t always a good time of year. You can be skint, having family problems and so on, but with some Christmas films there’s always someone worse off than you to put it in perspective. Think of George Bailey and the genius of It’s a Wonderful Life. Similarly to Pixar’s Up it takes you to the brink of depression before reeling you in for a big finale pay off. We’ve all felt like George Bailey at some point and his silver lining puts things in perspective for us.


Happy Endings

Speaking of silver linings, can any of you think of a Christmas film with a sad ending? If one exists I don’t want to watch it. What I love about a Christmas film is that you sit down already knowing that it’s going to pan out well. Of course there are moments of sadness and despair but these are usually rectified or placed next to happier endings. Think of Emma Thompson in Love Actually - her story doesn’t end well but as it’s placed next to the other happy endings it softens the blow and adds an element of realism. Home Alone and Home Alone 2: Lost in New York have their sad moments but that makes the pay off at the end even greater. Even an unconventional Christmas film like Kiss Kiss Bang Bang has a happy ending.


They come in all shapes and sizes

Christmas films are diverse to say the least. From Love Actually to Die Hard, directors and writers have continued to surprise us with what constitutes a Christmas film. There are the standard films we watch – It’s a Wonderful Life, Miracle on 34th Street, Home Alone, Love Actually– but then you have a film like Die Hard which is possibly the greatest Christmas film of all time. The cliché that there’s something for everyone is unashamedly true about Christmas films – unless you’re a Scrooge.


Everyone can enjoy them

At this time of year it’s all about family and friends gathering together to eat ridiculous amounts of food and settling down in the evening with a glass of wine or a pint and watching some good telly. TV becomes significantly better at Christmas and there’s something for all ages on each channel. Even though The Sound of Music, Titanic, Sherlock Holmes etc. have nothing to do with Christmas, they’re great for this time of year as everyone can watch them whilst munching on the remaining chocolate Celebrations.

Which Christmas films do you find yourself returning to year after year? Let us know in the comments below...

Helen Murdoch

Commenting on the Critics with Simon Columb...

It comes as no surprise that, in the wake of the horrendous tragedy in Newtown, there are groups of people who will blame the entertainment industry – and indeed the NRA has waded in with its opinion. A transcript from the NRA Conference reads:

"Through vicious, violent video games with names like Bulletstorm, Grand Theft Auto, Mortal Kombat and Splatterhouse. And here’s one: it’s called Kindergarten Killers. It’s been online for 10 years. How come my research department could find it and all of yours either couldn’t or didn’t want anyone to know you had found it? Then there’s the blood-soaked slasher films like American Psycho and Natural Born Killers that are aired like propaganda loops on "Splatterdays" and every day, and a thousand music videos that portray life as a joke and murder as a way of life. And then they have the nerve to call it 'entertainment.'"

Read the full transcript here.

Though a film writer, I am also a teacher. I’d like to think I have a vested interest in the expectations and attitudes the NRA have towards where violence comes from (films) and what should be enforced to ensure safety (teachers carrying guns).

Only last night I recounted a story to friends whereby I was involved in a fight - the only fight I have ever been involved in in my life. I was a teenager and I punched another teenager in the face – before running away in tears after committing such a ‘sin’ (thanks Mum for that conscience). Violence has never been my method of ensuring resolution to a situation. Despite this deeply rooted (cowardly?) response, I have always enjoyed films that have a healthy dose of violence – The Dark Knight trilogy, the Saw series, David Cronenberg and Martin Scorsese all rank as favourite past times of cinema. In addition to this, one of the very few games I play is Grand Theft Auto. With all this in mind, it is fascinating to see how completely at odds the NRA’s argument truly is. Clearly these ‘ills’ and ‘dangers’ in entertainment have yet to affect me – then again, these films and games are rated accordingly in the UK and I am above age. The ratings in America are a little more ambiguous…

The true horror, of course, is the assumption that the key to fixing the dangers of firearms is to ensure that staff are equipped. The NRA expects armed staff in schools whilst offering training for teachers themselves to carry guns on site. They explain how dangerous the “gun-free” nature of schools is, assuming schools almost have a walk-in policy for crazed murderers.

In the UK, there is not a culture of firearms. There is not a deeply ingrained expectation that live rounds are loaded into the guns of police officers. I remember visiting America for the first time in 2003 and my brother and I looked at the police, in awe, that they carried guns at all. Without a culture of firearms, the UK still gives us many of the best action filmmakers – Garth Edwards' The Raid, Sam Mendes and Martin Campbell's Casino Royale and Skyfall respectively, Christopher Nolan, Guy Ritchie (Snatch), Ridley and Tony Scott (American Gangster and Domino). Despite a clear appreciation of action-sequences using guns – there is a clear separation between watching action and personally using a gun.

British folk have experience of these horrors too - as anyone who was alive in 1996 will recall. In a small town called Dunblane, Thomas Hamilton killed 16 children at primary school, and additionally shot a teacher before killing himself within the school premises. Consequently, public debate enacted two amendments to Firearms Acts that “effectively made private ownership of handguns illegal”. Suffice to say, gun-crimes and massacres in the UK are rare.

And, just a thought, what if the NRA is wrong? What if, by arming teachers and staff at schools, the number of massacres increases? Overworked and tired teachers blame themselves for an incident that will affect their position indefinitely; inquisitive and curious students interested to see what the teachers gun looks like – and what it sounds like. The outcome could be disastrous. The NRA can’t revive the dead and apologise – whereas, by ensuring better gun laws are in place, and less guns are accessible in the USA, I cannot imagine how the situation can get worse.

In the UK, out appetite for violence and ‘danger’ in computer games, TV and film has not waned – but I’d like to believe that students feel safe and parents feel comfortable knowing that a gun is the last thing their child will be exposed to at school. But I’d also like to think that parents use ratings placed on products effectively – if its rated 18, then a child shouldn’t watch it. There is a balance – but I don’t think that chastising entertainment is the way forward.

Simon Columb

Tori Brazier helps you plan your Christmas viewing with Flickering Myth's Top Ten* Terrestrial TV Festive Flicks...

The Christmas period has traditionally always been a time for squeezing an excessive amount of television viewing under one’s already-straining belt, with a plethora of comedy specials, dramas, films and one-off specials from which to choose.  This year Channel 5 has chosen to dedicate its entire primetime evening slot on Christmas Day to Eddie Stobart trucker documentaries.   With this potentially suggesting a decline in programme quality and choice (much as Stobart’s lorries are a delightful childhood memory), I have turned to the one facet of Crimbo viewing that will never let you down: the festive film.  Some choices are inexplicable, and the vast majority are not even remotely related to Christmas (Terminator 2: Judgment Day anyone?), but all of these movies offer an escape from frazzled cooks, awkward relatives (for any of my family reading, I of course do not mean you), yet more eating or the suggestion of having to move even a toe from the post-turkey sofa slump.  Here I list, in no particular order, ten films on the five basic UK channels (not all of us are flash enough to have Sky) for which you should avert your attention away from that extra Quality Street...


1) The Muppet Christmas Carol (December 24th, 11am, C4), a twist on a long-established Christmas film tradition.  Of the nine adaptations of Dickens’ classic novella aired over the next five days, this is far and away the most original, enjoyable and ‘muppetational’. It features the brightest and best of Jim Henson’s creations, including Kermit the Frog as Bob Cratchit, Miss Piggy as his wife Emily and The Great Gonzo as Dickens himself, alongside his sidekick Rizzo the Rat.  Michael Caine brings thespian gravitas to the whole proceedings as Ebenezer Scrooge.  There is also brilliant casting of hecklers Statler and Waldorf as the two Marleys, and perennial favourite Fozzie Bear- simply as ‘Fozziewig’.  Musical merriment is to be found in songs such as ‘It Feels Like Christmas’ and the opening number ‘Scrooge’, showcasing inspired rhymes such as “Don’t ask him for a favour ‘cause his nastiness increases/No crust of bread for those in need/No cheeses for us meeces”. There are also singing vegetables: what more could you want?

2) There are some great Hitchcock masterpieces on in December, including Notorious and The 39 Steps, as well as The Girl, a brand-new BBC drama based on the director’s relationship with actress Tippi Hedren, but my pick would have to be his adaptation of Daphne du Maurier’s Rebecca (December 26th, 10:30pm, BBC2).  Both hauntingly atmospheric and romantic, as well as being genuinely creepy whenever the sinister Mrs. Danvers is on screen, this film will have you wrapped-up in the developing relationship between Maxim de Winter (Laurence Olivier) and his unnamed second wife (Joan Fontaine and her fantastically inquisitive eyebrows). A great marriage between a visionary director and engrossing author.


3) Musicals are a customary festive television fixture, and though it might be shown every year, nothing can beat the sheer magic of MGM’s wonderful Singin’ in the Rain (December 25th, 1:35pm, BBC2), routinely voted best movie-musical of all time.  Starring the celebrated dancer Gene Kelly, then-ingénue Debbie Reynolds and the extraordinary hoofer Donald O’Connor, and featuring classics from the Arthur Freed songbook such as ‘Good Morning’, ‘You Were Meant For Me’ and of course ‘Singin’ in the Rain’, this film has ‘classic’ written all over it.  Add an authentic plot revolving around the difficulties of Hollywood transitioning to sound during the twenties, Cyd Charisse’s legs, and some zingy lines and humour, and it becomes simply exquisite.  If you only ever watch one musical, make it this one.  If you’re converted however, more Gene Kelly action can be caught directly before in On the Town (December 25th, 12 noon, BBC2) and in Academy Award-winner An American in Paris (December 26th, 2:40pm, BBC2).

4) Sometimes with all of that stuffing and multiple mice pies, it can be difficult to concentrate.  In this instance something light, comic and frivolous is just the ticket, and one can be purchased with minimum fuss for Airplane! (December 25th, 1:05am, C4).  This is the original spoof movie, slightly baffling audiences when it first appeared in 1980 but consequently gaining huge popularity.  Verbal and visual gags and pratfalls are crammed in at break-neck speed and performed by some rather wacky characters: indeed Leslie Nielsen’s role as the pilot proved career-making.  Never has taking lines literally been so hilarious.


5) And now for something more serious and thought-provoking- and also with the makings of a modern classic: Joe Wright’s Atonement (December 26th, 11:15pm, ITV1).  Another stellar literary adaptation for the list, this time from Ian McEwan’s novel of the same name.  A Second World War romantic drama, Atonement examines the affect of one jealous moment’s error in judgment on the lives of its central characters across decades. Keira Knightley acted in this one, and was really quite good.  She is ably surrounded by James McAvoy, Saoirse Ronan, Vanessa Redgrave and Benedict Cumberbatch.

6) Tangled (December 25th, 3:10pm, ITV1).  Having gone through a bit of a dry-spell creatively in the past twelve years or so, Disney really pulled it out of the bag (without Pixar’s help) for this one in 2010.  Returning to their fail-safe formula Disney retells a classic fairytale in their own indomitable style, this time the story of Rapunzel.  Despite using CGI for this film, Tangled retains all the charm of hand-drawn animation, harking back to Disney’s most recent renaissance during the nineties.  With an adorable heroine, a mischievous and charismatic hero, a gecko sidekick and another in Disney’s long line of wonderful horses (Maximus), the studio throw in their best new score in a while (welcome back Alan Menken) and we all fall hook, line and sinker for its spark.


7) Gone With the Wind / Ben-Hur (December 25th, 9am, C5 / December 25th, 1:15pm, C5) Both considered epics, both broke records at the Academy Awards, but many men are not interested in spoilt Southern Belle Scarlet O’Hara’s tumultuous relationship with the roguish Rhett Butler, even when set against the back drop of the American Civil War, featuring sumptuous production values and starring the equally-gorgeous Vivien Leigh and Clark Gable (shame).  For a more ‘manly’ sword-and-sandal blockbuster, look no further than Charlton Heston doing lots of rowing and chariot-racing in Ben-Hur.  The crux of the plot is a childhood friendship between a Jewish prince and a Roman tribune betrayed by age, prejudice and ambition. Thus Heston’s Judah Ben-Hur escapes and lives to seek revenge against his old best friend Messala (the tasty Stephen Boyd) for condemning him to a life of slavery in this four-hour marathon.

8) For anyone feeling particularly feminist, in a dark and twisty place, or just in the mood for an excellent thriller, look no further than the original Swedish adaptation of Stieg Larsson’s The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (December 26th, 10:30pm, C4).  Larsson’s Millennium series has been a recent international literary phenomenon, and this movie features the much-lauded performance of Noomi Rapace as fragile-yet-tough computer hacker, and now feminist icon, Lisbeth Salander.  Not particularly festive but hey, I did warn you earlier.  See the final two installments in the trilogy on the next two nights.


9) The Railway Children (December 26th, 9:25am, ITV1) is a gloriously British film, a film for all ages, and a real nostalgia trip for parents.  The Waterbury children and their mother are forced to move from their life of privilege in Edwardian London to a cottage by a railway station in the Yorkshire dales after their father is wrongfully imprisoned.  Over time the children bond with locals including the station porter and the Old Gentleman who takes the 9:15 train, and learn to love their new life, all the while longing to be reunited with their father.  The scene on the platform at the film's denouement is a prime example of tear-jerking perfection.

10) Time to add some animals to the Christmas mix, and what better than a large orangutan called Clyde?  Every Which Way But Loose (December 26th, 2:20am, ITV1) saw über-macho star Clint Eastwood unusually taking a role in a comedy caper after a career made in Spaghetti westerns and the Dirty Harry movies.  Clyde is his character’s pet orangutan (obviously) who just comes along for the ride when Philo (Eastwood) decides he’s fallen for a would-be country singer who’s suddenly disappeared when their relationship was going so well… Hilarity and lots of bare-knuckle fighting (a Philo/Eastwood speciality) ensue.  This film has not aged brilliantly, with the standard cringing sexism found in the majority of Eastwood’s work, but my mum loves it.  It also ranks inside the top 200 highest-grossing movies ever.

*Technically Eleven

Tori Brazier

During an interview with Parade about his latest film Les Misérables, Hugh Jackman took a moment to discuss his next appearance as the adamantium-clawed Logan in July's The Wolverine, explaining how the film ties in to Fox's wider X-Men universe, as well as confirming the rumour that he won't be the only X-Man to make an appearance in the James Mangold-directed solo sequel.

"You want me to get into trouble, don't you?" replied Jackman when asked to provide a scoop on The Wolverine. "Okay, the movie takes place after X-Men: The Last Stand. My character is at his lowest. He is supposed to be able to heal himself, but he may encounter someone who has worked out a way to really hurt him. And there is a cameo from one of the past X-Men in it."

Back in October it was reported that Famke Janssen had flown out to Sydney to film a cameo alongside Hugh Jackman, so it would seem there's a good chance that Jean Grey is set to return to the X-Men universe once more. There's been a lot of speculation online about the character being resurrected by the Phoenix Force, but going from Jackman's comments, I'd say it's more likely that she'll appear in some kind of dream or vision (assuming it is Jean, of course).

After he finishes up with The Wolverine, Jackman is set to line-up as part of Bryan Singer's X-Men: Days of Future Past - a sequel to X-Men: First Class which sees James McAvoy (Professor X), Michael Fassbender (Magneto), Jennifer Lawrence (Mystique) and Nicholas Hoult (Beast) joined by original X-Men trilogy veterans Patrick Stewart (Professor X) and Ian McKellen (Magneto) as they battle to prevent an apocalyptic alternate future where mutants are hunted and killed by Sentinels.

The Wolverine is set for release on July 26th, 2013, with X-Men: Days of Future Past following on July 18th, 2014.

More potent than a shot of Alabama moonshine, Eva Longoria and Billy Bob Thornton star in The Baytown Outlaws, a super-charged, foul-mouthed and very bloody, Tarantino-esque action-comedy, directed and co-written by Barry Battles.

The Baytown Outlaws is out to own on DVD and Blu-ray from 26th December and courtesy of Universal Pictures (UK), we have an extremely limited edition, one of a kind, exclusive T-shirt and a copy of the film to be won!

Read on for a synopsis and details of how to enter the competition...

"Meet the Oodies, a trio of redneck hillbilly brothers whose main source of fun – and only source of employment – is illegally enforcing several unwritten laws on behalf of the local corrupt sheriff. When their latest job goes disastrously wrong and ends in a massacre at the wrong address, the brothers are approached by Celeste, a witness to the mayhem, with a proposal. She’s willing to pay them $25,000 for the safe return of her godson, who has been kidnapped by her ex-husband. What she fails to tell them is that the man in question is a ruthless mobster who believes Celeste is dead, having previously arranged for one of his goons to pump her full of lead. Unsurprisingly, what should be a simple rescue mission soon turns into a southern fried battle royale of epic proportions as the brothers fall foul of a seemingly endless parade of psychopaths and miscreants who want them dead, ranging from a gang of crazy-ass biker chicks and a pack of ruthless road warriors to Federal agents, crooked cops and some very angry Native Americans."

Order The Baytown Outlaws on Blu-ray and DVD.

To be in with a chance of winning, firstly make sure you like us on Facebook (or follow us on Twitter)...


 By entering this competition you agree to our terms and conditions, which you can read here.

It's a Wonderful Life., 1946.

Directed by Frank Capra.
Starring James Stewart, Donna Reed, Lionel Barrymore and Henry Travers.

Based on the Philip Van Doren Stern's 1943 short story The Greatest Gift, Frank Capra's heartwarming fantasy drama It's a Wonderful Life was a box office failure upon its initial release in 1946, but it has since went on to justifiably earn a reputation as one of the greatest Christmas movies in the history of cinema, and it was also named as America's Most Inspiring Movie as part of the AFI's 100 Years... series in 2006.

Taking place in the small town of Bedford Falls on Christmas Eve, the film centres on George Bailey (James Stewart), a businessman on the verge of suicide after discovering he might be bankrupt. When prayers for George's well-being reach Heaven, a guardian angel called Clarence (Henry Travers) gets a chance to earn his wings by visiting Earth and showing George what life would be like for his friends and family had he never existed.

You can order It's a Wonderful Life on Blu-ray (which includes the original B&W and colourised versions) via Amazon.



Click here to check out our full archive of shorts and feature films.

Just a brief note to wish all of our readers a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year from everyone here at Flickering Myth, and to say thank you for supporting the site over the past twelve months.

We'll be revealing our "Top 10 Movies of 2012" on New Year's Eve, but like us you'll likely be casting your eye towards 2013's cinematic slate by now, so to help you plan your viewing here's a selection of potential highlights to look out for in the coming year (roughly sorted in order of arrival):

Gangster Squad (dir. Ruben Fleischer) - trailer here
Stand Up Guys (dir. Fisher Stevens)
Broken City (dir. Allen Hughes)
The Last Stand (dir. Kim Jee-Woon) - trailer here
Hansel and Gretel Witch Hunters (dir. Tommy Wirkola) - trailer here
Movie 43 (dir. Virtually Everyone in Hollywood) - trailer here
Parker (dir. Taylor Hackford)
Bullet the the Head (dir. Walter Hill) - trailer here
Warm Bodies (dir. Jonathan Levine) - trailer here
A Glimpse Inside the Mind of Charles Swann III (dir. Roman Coppola)
Side Effects (dir. Steven Soderbergh)
Beautiful Creatures (dir. Richrd LaGravenese)
A Good Day to Die Hard (dir. John Moore) - trailer here
To the Wonder - review here
Escape from Planet Earth (dir. Cal Brunker)
21 and Over (dir. Jon Lucas and Scott Moore)
Jack the Giant Slayer (dir. Bryan Singer) - trailer here
Stoker (dir. Park Chan-wook)
Admission (dir. Paul Weitz)
Oz: The Great and Powerful (dir. Sam Raimi) - trailer here
Carrie (dir. Kimberly Peirce)
The Incredible Burt Wonderstone (dir. Don Scardino) - trailer here
The Croods (dir. Chris Sanders and Kirk DeMicco)
Olympus Has Fallen (dir. Antoine Fuqua)
G.I. Joe: Retaliation (Jon M. Chu) - trailer here
The Host (dir. Andrew Niccol)
The Place Beyond the Pines (dir. Derek Cianfrance) - trailer here
42 (dir. Brian Helgeland)
Evil Dead (dir. Fede Alvarez) - trailer here
Oblivion (dir. Joseph Kosinski) - trailer here
Pain & Gain (dir. Michael Bay) - trailer here
Iron Man 3 (dir. Shane Black) - trailer here
The Great Gatsby (dir. Baz Luhrmann) - trailer here
Star Trek Into Darkness (dir. J.J. Abrams) - trailer here
Epic (dir. Chris Wedge)
The Fast and the Furious 6 (dir. Justin Lin)
The Hangover Part III (dir. Todd Phillips)
After Earth (dir. M. Night Shyamalan) - trailer here
Much Ado About Nothing (dir. Joss Whedon) - review here
Now You See Me (dir. Louis Leterrier)
The End of the World (dir. Evan Goldberg and Seth Rogen)
Man of Steel (dir. Zack Snyder) - trailer here
Monsters University (dir. Dan Scanlon) - trailer here
World War Z (dir. Marc Forster) - trailer here
Kick-Ass 2 (dir. Jeff Wadlow)
White House Down (dir. Roland Emmerich)
Despicable Me 2 (dir. Chris Renaud and Pierre Coffin)
The Lone Ranger (dir. Gore Verbinski) - trailer here
Pacific Rim (dir. Guillermo del Toro) - trailer here
R.I.P.D. (dir. Robert Schwentke)
Turbo (dir. David Soren)
The Wolverine (dir. James Mangold)
300: Rise of an Empire (dir. Noam Murro)
RED 2 (dir. Dean Parisot)
Elysium (dir. Neill Blomkamp)
2 Guns (dir. Baltasar Kormakur)
Insidious Chapter 2 (dir. James Wan)
I, Frankenstein (dir. Stuart Beattie)
Prisoners (dir. Denis Villeneuve)
Rush (dir. Ron Howard)
Cloudy 2: Revenge of the Leftovers (dir. Cody Cameron and Kris Pearn)
The Tomb (dir. Mikael Hafstrom)
The Delivery Man (dir. Ken Scott)
Paranoia (dir. Robert Luketic)
Sin City: A Dame to Kill For (dir. Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller)
Captain Phillips (dir. Paul Greengrass)
Oldboy (dir. Spike Lee)
Malavita (dir. Luc Besson)
The Seventh Son (dir. Sergei Bodrov)
The World's End (dir. Edgar Wright)
Ender's Game (dir. Gavin Hood)
Mr. Peabody & Sherman (dir. Rob Minkoff)
Thor: The Dark World (dir. Alan Taylor)
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (dir. Francis Lawrence)
Frozen (dir. Jennifer Lee)
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (dir. Peter Jackson)
Saving Mr. Banks (dir. John Lee Hancock)
Last Vegas (dir. Jon Turteltaub)
The Monuments Men (dir. George Clooney)
47 Ronin (dir. Carl Rinsch)
Jack Ryan (dir. Kenneth Branagh)
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (dir. Ben Stiller)

And that's not all, with several films set to enjoy 3D re-releases this coming year, including Top Gun (February), Jurassic Park (April) [trailer here], The Little Mermaid and Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (September) and Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (October).

Be sure to let us know what film you're most looking forward to in 2013, or if something's slipped under our radar.

Flickering Myth

Trevor Hogg chats with filmmaker Nisha Pahuja as well as producers Ed Barreveld and Cornelia Principe about the tremendous effort required to bring The World Before Her to the big screen... 



“I’ve always been interested in international stories,” explains Producer Ed Barreveld as to how he became involved with The World Before Her (2012).  “In 1997 when I was working as a line producer on a documentary, I visited India and somehow was quite affected by that visit.  It’s such a beautiful country with an old culture, rich stories, contradictions and a global power on the move. When director Nisha Pahuja who is Indian/Canadian and I met in 2008 with an eye on doing a film together, we kicked a few ideas around and we landed on the Miss India beauty pageant.  We thought this would be an interesting way to look at a country in transition.”  A teaser clip and pitch was presented to the IDFA’s (International Documentary Film Festival Amsterdam) FORUM.  “Early in 2009 we sent Nisha to India for a research trip and to do a bit of shooting so that we could put a demo together.  Nisha followed the 2009 pageant and spent a lot of time with one of the contestants, Pooja Chopra, who ended up being that year’s winner. Pooja’s back story was incredible; when she was 20 days old, her father demanded that his wife kill Pooja as she was the second daughter and he wanted a son.  Pooja’s mom did something brave and unheard of [in India]; she left her husband saying, ‘This girl will make me proud one day.’ And 23 years later she was in the audience when Pooja was crowned Miss India. In addition to this compelling story, we had some other spectacular footage that juxtaposed the beautiful women in the pageant with violence against women; we carefully scripted our pitch around this.  I distinctly remember the vibe of the room during our pitch.  You could have heard a pin drop; we really surprised people who had expected just another beauty pageant film; there were audible gasps from the audience during some of the scenes.”


Despite the festival reaction to the footage and presentation, the documentary struggled to get the necessary monetary support.  “It took four years to put the financing together,” states Ed Barreveld.  “In addition to the 2009 shoot and after our pitch at the FORUM, Nisha went to India to shoot the 2010 pageant because we thought the financing would come together and we could complete the film.  We did have interest but not sufficient to go into production. The financing didn’t come through and we put things on hiatus again. By late 2010 we had a good chunk of the budget in place and though we knew we were underfinanced, we also knew that with the commitments in place, we couldn’t wait another year as people would lose interest.  We decided that we would go in production with what was in place and continue to fund raise as we were in production.”  The financial concerns remained the biggest challenge for the project.  “We were constantly struggling to raise money to make the film happen,” states Nisha Pahuja.  “I had friends who kicked in portions of the budget when we didn’t have the money to shoot.  Because there was not a lot of money it also meant there were a lot of different things I had to do: production managing, organizing things, [arranging] access, research and writing.”  Barreveld adds, “We had some wonderful initial support; ZDF out of Germany was a very early supporter, Rogers Documentary Fund and the Shaw Media Fund gave us a generous grants but our Canadian license fees were not sufficient to qualify for CMF funding, a reflection of the state of funding of documentary in Canada.  Under normal circumstances Canadian license fees and CMF support would account for 30-40% of the budget making it much easier to raise the remainder.  In our case, with no CMF funds attached, Canadian broadcast support comprised 3% of the budget.  We applied to a lot of foundations and found a US based equity investor; a first for us and them, and this took a lot legal finagling to make this work so we would not fall afoul of Canadian certification rules. In early 2011 we decided to go ahead with what we had raised, which ended up being about 2/3 of the final financing and we constantly chased additional money throughout production.  Even this was a challenge but through the Ontario Media Development Corporation’s Film Fund, Telefilm’s Theatrical Documentary Fund, supported by our Canadian distributor Kinosmith, and giving up most of Storyline’s fees we were eventually able to meet the budget. We had no cash to go into the field when Nisha left for India and it was only through a last minute development loan from SuperChannel that we were able to make it work.”


A collaborator of Nisha Pahuja’s was recruited.  “With all the time and energy spent on a constantly under financed film, all my productions were suffering and nobody was happy,” reveals Ed Barreveld who was producing eight other documentaries at the time.  “Nisha had worked with Cornelia [Principe] on her previous film and suggested we bring her on board so someone could focus on The World Before Her full-time. We hired Cornelia and from that point on my role shifted to more of an executive producer role and Cornelia dealt with the daily demands of the production.”  Producer Cornelia Principe remembers, “Practically every day there was a crisis of some sort.  Threats to shut us down were ongoing during the shoots; both at the Hindu training camp and at the Pageant Boot camp. Having our sound gear stuck in customs for the entire six week pageant shoot was crazy making. How do you remain calm?  Well, you don’t really!   You keep on going. Having a sense of humour helped [sometimes]. Being persistent and not taking things personally helped [most of the time]. In a way, being here in Canada while Nisha was there helped since I could give Nisha a little perspective and be the calm mind and voice in the storm she was enduring.”  The familiarity between the producer and the filmmaker turned out to be an asset.  “I know Nisha well, and I know her strengths and weaknesses. Being an organized, dependable producer of people and money is important but balancing that with a creative mind is crucial; you need to develop both sides of the brain. Keeping an eye on the big picture and having your heart in the right place.  You are after all making a documentary not widgets – is really important too. You want to be respectful of the people in the film, be true to the larger story and feel on some level like your doing this for a larger purpose. This may sound corny but producing documentaries are hard work with little financial pay off; you have to have a good reason for why you are doing it to do it.” Working with Ed Barreveld proved to be useful.  “Sometimes a male authority on the phone with India does wonders!” Asked about the major problem she had to resolve, Principe laughs, “Too many to list and now that’s its over I want to forget!”


Contacts needed to be developed to get the required interview footage.  “Nisha can be quite charming and on her first trip in 2009 she met with the Miss India organizers and convinced them to allow us to film that year’s pageant,” states Ed Barreveld.  “It was relatively easy.  Nisha frequently travels back and forth between Canada and India so after we knew we didn’t have enough money to proceed with production, she would check in with the pageant people on a regular basis. We filmed the 2010 pageant the pageant’s organizers became use to her being around.  In 2011, when we proceeded with full production, the ownership of the pageant had changed and all of the sudden it appeared that we would not be allowed to film.  We had to engage legal counsel to help re-negotiate access; basically our line was that we had been dealing with them in good faith and that we had an agreement.  By that time we had spent well over $100,000 on the film, most of it with money borrowed from angel investors.  It took some time; I think management was a little spooked by the new ownership, a massive media entity, and were being extra careful about the optics of the pageant.  In the end we worked out a deal.  We were allowed to film the pageant but before locking picture would show them the scenes of the pageant and allow them to comment on these.  We made sure that they did not have approvals. When the time came, as per our agreement, we only showed them the pageant footage and carefully considered their comments which ended up being pretty innocuous.  As part of the deal we also granted them broadcast rights in India for one year from first broadcast.  One of the advantages of having to wait so long to go into production, possibly the one and only advantage, was that in the meantime Nisha had established a relationship with one of the foot soldiers of the Hindu fundamentalist movement [who went on to become a political leader].  By this time we had already decided that in order for the film to be effective we needed to show two sides of India; the modern side as represented by the women in the pageant and the fundamentalist side, represented by the Hindu fundamentalists’ nationalist agenda.”


“We had already spent over a year filming with our fundamentalist contact,” recalls Ed Barreveld.   “He was to be our main character, when Nisha learned of the Durga Vahini and their training camps.  This is how she met Prachi [Trivedi].  It was a no-brainer to focus on Prachi; it made so much more sense that if we were going to be telling a story about women in India, that it would be more effective if we could focus on women on both sides of the spectrum.  Prachi is documentary gold.  She’s actually my favourite character in the film because she is so passionate, dedicated and conflicted.  We could have done a film on her alone! Someone like her would probably do very well in the West but in her very traditional family she’s constantly walking a fine line.  What we call the beauty boot camp of the pageant, and the Durga Vahini camp were natural opposites and a perfect way to tell our story.  The equal screen time was necessary to help build the story; weaving the lead up to the final day of the pageant and the lead up to the girl’s graduation in the camp demanded equal time in the edit.  It was quite a challenge but our editor Dave Kazala managed to create a balance and give everyone a voice.”  Nisha Pahuja remarks, “The film felt more anthropological when I was first thinking about it.   Once I met Pooja and Prachi it completely changed.  It became much more personal.”  The two young women provided a key element to the project.   “For me it’s always about character and story.  I knew when I found Prachi and Pooja that I had great characters and that is half the battle.”  The premise was a simple one.  “We wanted to start off with showing that these two worlds were opposite and as we get deeper into it you begin to realize they’re not that opposite. There are a lot of similarities and the key similarity is these are women who are being shaped to fit someone else’s ideal.”  Barreveld notes, “I agree but what’s interesting is that the girls are aware of this.  Prachi directly addresses this at the end of the film but Ruhi [Singh] and Ankita [Shorey], two of the pageant contestants also articulate this quite clearly.  In their own way, they each try to plot a course through societal expectations and weigh what price they are willing to pay to achieve their goals.”


“I always knew that I was not going to have narration,” states Nisha Pahuja who intercuts title cards and archival news images with her own documentary footage.  “Initially, where we were going to have a third perspective where we would have the feminist perspective that would put those two extremes into a certain kind of context, and maybe comment on those two extremes and show another side of India and Indian women.”  The feminist perspective was removed.  “Once we started cutting it became a problem because, ‘Oh, God we have yet another kind of extreme.’  It was an interesting voice but we would have to lose some of the powerful moments in the other two worlds which we didn’t want to do.  It was actually in the edit that we decided to look at these two ideas of India.  It made sense to me because I was always trying to make a film looking at this country going through extreme cultural, social, political, and economic changes; and how women were being used to create these two different kinds of India and how they were also shaping the country.”  There are two particular moments that stand out to Cornelia Principe.  “The first time I saw the women on the beach in short shorts with white sheets covering their heads and torsos, I wanted to cry and laugh at the same time. I had never seen anything so strange, crazy and sad. And the fact that the women for the most part didn’t see what we in the West so clearly saw in the situation was astounding and eye opening for me.  Second one was in the edit when Nisha showed me the clip of Prachi talking about her father and how ‘he let her live’ and how ‘that was the best part, he let me live.’  I burst out crying. I was so saddened and moved by the fundamental lack of self-worth in this seemingly strong and capable woman. I felt this could explain not just Prachi’s behavior as a fundamentalist but many women’s inexplicable behavior like staying with an abusive partner for example.”


“Prachi’s constant struggle about who she is, what she is and how she navigates her relationship with her parents, who are both involved in the Hindu movement, is fascinating,” believes Ed Barreveld.  “By Western standards we shudder at the way she was raised and how she was shaped by this.  On the one hand I admire her passion and dedication but it’s clear that she’s brainwashed by her upbringing and the whole fundamentalist concept.  This is of course not unique to Hindu fundamentalism but any fundamentalism, be it Christian, Jewish or Muslim which are essentially patriarchal and misogynistic control systems.  It’s interesting to get a fly on the wall perspective in her world that’s so full of contradiction.  Late in life, I became the father of a daughter.  It was a little bit through this lens that I observe Prachi and Ruhi.  Prachi’s relationship with her father is heartbreaking and provides the empathy you need to feel for her.  Ruhi’s parents on the other hand understand that in order for her to succeed, she needs to break from the bonds of traditional Indian society and they support her to the best of their ability.  My daughter is five now and I can only hope that when she’s a young woman, my relationship with her will be like Ruhi’s and her father.  He is so proud of her and supportive.  She obviously loves him so much and it’s just a lovely relationship; the same for her mother who understands that ‘Jaipur is no place for a girl like Ruhi.’ They’re terrific parents.”  A heartbreaking scene occurs when Ruhi’s mother learns while watching the television broadcast of the pageant that her daughter’s ambition of being crowned Miss India has not materialized. “As a film crew you’re finding that balance between respecting people and giving them their space, and making sure you get what you need to tell your story well,” states Nisha Pahuja.  “When you see the close-up shot of her face and the tears shedding, that’s a powerful moment and you know that is kind of stuff needed to tell the story.”  Pahuja became emotionally entwined with the documentary where she is occasionally heard asking an interview question off-camera. “The film became personal for me and so I felt sometimes that I wanted my voice to be in it.  It felt right.”


“When we were shooting nothing went the way it was supposed to; nothing ever does when you’re doing a documentary,” observes Nisha Pahuja.   “In both worlds access was denied us for different reasons; that was a problem.  So you are thinking, ‘God, what are we getting?  What are we going to end up with?’  At some point I would say filming the pageant I started to realize that regardless of the fact that we didn’t have the kind of access we wanted we were still going to have strong material. With your footage you think, ‘Oh, God it’s going to be great.  Oh, God it’s going to be awful.’  That is the sort of tug of war which takes place.  We all felt that we had something strong but we needed the time to craft it.”  During the post-production, a member of the film crew played a significant role in assembling the footage into a coherent narrative and appropriate running time.  “It's hard to describe exactly what Dave Kazala brought to this film.  Filmmaking is a collaborative medium and when you work with someone like Dave, or Cornelia Principe for that matter, you have real partners who help you fight the battle.  With this particular film because it was driven primarily by ideas and not story, as was the original plan; it needed someone who could take those ideas and have them develop, shift and reveal things about each world.  We feel as if we are moving forward in the film and we are not because of story but the way Dave moved the ideas forward through his editing.  A lot of people comment on the fluidity of the storytelling, or they describe it as though they are watching a piece of music…that's Dave; he takes ideas that are complex and layered and sometimes he shows you things that you yourself didn't see and he puts them all together seamlessly.”


“Globalization is rapidly changing the world,” states Ed Barreveld.  “That and the emergence of India as a world power player are changing Indian society.  Young women realize that they can and should play a role in how the country develops. It is now legislated that Parliament and state legislative bodies have 33% female representation. And of course there have been strong women such as Indira Ghandi who was the world’s longest serving prime minister. But generally women are still undervalued; an international survey puts India fourth in the world as the most dangerous place for women.  Female feticide and infanticide are still very much a reality.  I’m hopeful with a stable economy, if democracy persists and the Hindu fundamentalists don’t gain the same foothold as their Muslim counterparts in most of the Arab world, that eventually things will get better for women.  Let’s not just point the finger at India and the Muslim world; we in the West still have a long way to go as well, as evidenced by the recent campaigning in the US.”  Cornelia Principe agrees with her male colleague.  “I’m still working on how women are evolving in my country! In fact, I’m in pre-production right now on a doc for CBC on working mothers called The Motherload.”  As for Nisha Pahuja, she believes,   “We can’t think that people don’t fight.  People always fight.  They fight for change.  People are fighters whether you’re fighting against racism and poverty.  They fight for their rights and always have.  It’s the same in India.  There is a strong feminist movement that across the board.   It’s in the villages, cities and the country; it’s national and that sort of momentum will continue.  There is a growing backlash. There is more violence against them.  There is more rape and crime.  There were a couple of things that happened recently. The villages are run by things called panchayats which are village councils.  In one part of India in the Punjab, the panchayats are trying to pass a resolution where the legal age girls can be married goes from 18 to 16; they feel that will stop rapists and gang rapes.  That is one ridiculous thing.  The other thing is that they are trying to stop teenage girls from having cellphones.  The more women who are fighting for change the more of these measures are trying to restrict them.  It will change.  It has to change.”


“It’s a difficult time for documentary right now; particularly in Canada where we’ve relied on television licenses to finance our films and a private culture of film financing and risk taking like in the US doesn’t exist,” states Ed Barreveld.  “The recent rule changes at the Canadian Media Fund driven by the cable industry, and this is my personal conspiracy theory the conservative government, are in my opinion anti-documentary. The advent of reality television, the push for new media and the consolidation of broadcasters and the need to keep shareholders happy and eyeballs on their channels, resulted in a general dumbing down of programming. Documentary for them only works if it’s entertaining.  Of course, a good documentary needs to be entertaining, my company is called Storyline Entertainment so we’re very aware of this, but it should also inform, educate and make people think. I’d like to think our films do all of these things. Most of the interesting stuff now happens on cable and it’s predominantly drama.  When I watch TV, it’s hard to distinguish the CBC from Global or CTV.  TV hours are now 39 or 44 minutes encouraging people to channel surf during commercials – a lot of TV feels like product.  Even the National Film Board, arguably the inventor of documentary, is putting more money in their obsession with new media.  The irony is that documentary audiences at festivals continue to grow.  Look at festivals like IDFA and Hot Docs where there are line ups outside the theatres and tickets sell out in advance. Hot Docs sees their audience increase each year.  During the night of hurricane Sandy I attended a screening of The World Before Her in Oakville.  Despite the weather, some 400 people were in the audience and most stayed for the Q&A afterwards; they loved the film and were totally engaged. But in the long term, unless there are drastic changes, documentaries will only be made by people who can afford to do so, or artists who strictly work within the arts council system.  I see many of my colleagues, some extraordinary talented people, leaving the business.  We’ve had some fantastic successes in the past year but we never know from day to day whether we’ll still be in business a month from now.”


Cornelia Principe concurs with Barreveld about the troubled future for documentaries.  “I fear feature and one-off documentary production is a dying ‘art’ and ‘business’; I use quotes because it is essentially both. Fewer and fewer filmmakers will be making films; there will be the few that command Oscars and HBO pre-licenses, and then there will be the young first-time filmmakers who will make a documentary on their own dime while living in their parents’ basement. Those in between, like myself and most of those I work with and know, there are less and less of even today from 10 years ago, and I see no reason, sadly, that this trend will not continue.” Despite all of these obstacles The World Before Her has thrived on the international film festival circuit winning Best Documentary Feature at Tribeca as well as receiving awards at Hot Docs, Edmonton and Traverse City.  “I have certainly flirted with the idea,” admits Nisha Pahuja when questioned as to whether she would leave making documentaries for scripted dramas.  “It would be interesting but I don’t think so.  Documentaries are hard to make; there is something about them that is so vital and engaging because you’re dealing with real people and stories.”


Many thanks to Nisha Pahuja, Ed Barreveld and Cornelia Principe for taking the time to be interviewed.

To learn more make sure to visit the official website for The World Before Her and read our movie review here.

Trevor Hogg is a freelance video editor and writer who currently resides in Canada.

Paul Risker asks whether the BBFC's 12A classification is forcing producers to sacrifice artistic integrity for commercial gains...

Then and Now

The Woman in Black and The Hunger Games are a reminder of how far removed we are from the years of censorship controversy at the hands of the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC). The 1970s saw The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974) banned in British theatres despite international theatrical releases. The moral panic of the 1980s, instigated by the ‘video nasties’, saw the video release of Straw Dogs banned under the 1984 Video Recordings Act, contrary to the X rating theatrical release in 1971.

In ‘the year of our Lord’ 2012, the opposite is true, something that in the past would have been considered ironic. The distributors and producers of The Woman in Black and The Hunger Games have displaced the censors, securing through voluntary cuts the desired 12A rating.

The producers of The Hunger Games took it upon themselves to submit a rough cut of the film for an ‘advice viewing’, enabling them to achieve the desired 12A rating. Such discourse is not dissimilar to the way in which Spielberg in the 1990s would consult with former director of the BBFC James Ferman on questions of content, ensuring his films achieved the all-important family friendly ratings.

The producers of The Woman in Black however sought no ‘advice viewings’, and were disappointed with an uncut 15 rating on submission. In North America the film had received a PG-13 rating from the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), the equivalent of the BBFC 12A classification. What passes for the 12A rating does in fact vary to the PG-13, and therein lay the mistake of the producers to not be fully aware of the variations in international guidelines.

Self-censorship in the case of these two films begins a discourse on the relationship between commerce and art in cinema, and the issue of a film’s integrity over marketing, promotion and distribution strategy.

The minor differences between the MPAA’s PG-13 rating and BBFC’s 12A suggests that whilst art and the experience of art should not be defined by international borders, these minor differences permit such compromises to exist, even in the West.

Censorship or Commercial Strategy?

Discussing the cuts requested by distributors and producers to The Woman in Black and The Hunger Games, Mark Kermode in his recent ‘Uncut’ video blog argued, ‘…that’s not censorship, that’s marketing, that’s promotion, that’s distribution.’

The lynchpin in the marketing and promotion strategy for both The Hunger Games and The Woman in Black was the young adult audience, with the intention of capitalising on a fan base that for The Hunger Games was derived from its young adult source material, whilst for The Woman in Black it was star power.

The Woman in Black stars Daniel Radcliffe as Arthur Kipps, who through the Harry Potter film series, none of which exceeded the 12A classification, had secured the young actor a loyal fan base. Despite a potentially lucrative star, there was no guarantee the fan base would follow Radcliffe to his latest film, but distributors and producers hoped nevertheless that his presence would prove to be a profitable asset.

Whilst The Woman in Black is an example of the influence of a star over marketing, promotion and distribution strategy, The Hunger Games testifies to the influence of source material, and the demand on strategy to secure the audience that is expected to come along with the rights of a work when originally purchased. However, both strategies were dependent on attaining the MPAA’s PG-13, and the BBFC’s 12A rating.

The censoring of material which would have otherwise made The Woman in Black and The Hunger Games 15 rated films by the distributors and producers, is an act of self-censorship, and whilst Kermode defends it as commercial strategy, it is censorship which derives from the marketing, promotion and distribution concerns.

Profit or Art?

Horror is a diverse genre, in which ghost stories can range from subtle, atmospheric narratives such as The Innocents (1961) and The Others (2001), rated the advisory 12A, to films such as The Sixth Sense (1999) and The Orphanage (2007) rated 15. Whilst the latter two horror films require a subtle and deft touch to build atmosphere, they also employ intense jump moments.

Director James Watkin’s skilfully manipulates the architecture of the haunted house, the mechanical toys and dolls faces, to build a sense of impending doom, using as any atmospheric horror film does the shadows and empty space upon which the spectator can project his or her own horrific imaginings. The audience derives an unadulterated pleasure of nervous tension from the anticipation of the eventual jump moments. Much like the punch line of a joke, the jump moment is crucial to these types of horror films, permitting through skilful editing and use of sound and image at key moments the release of tension; the second unadulterated pleasure of the horror film.

Subtle horror films bypass these moments, skilfully building and maintaining tension without giving into such indulgences, and if they should they are subtle jump moments that lack the intensity of those to be experienced in The Sixth Sense, The Orphanage and now The Woman in Black. These less intense horror films are exercises in the art of subtle and suggestive horror, efficiently maintaining a sense of suspense and anticipation, until the characters yield the final revelation.

It is these intense jump moments which define the difference between a 12A and a 15 rated horror film. The Woman in Black was deemed unsuitable for twelve year olds as a result of the intensity of image and sound in jump moments. In order to attain the desired lower rating, distributors and producers were required to tone down the intensity of apparitions and sound effects, in turn lessening the impact of jump moments.

David Austin, BBFC Head of Policy on BBC Radio 5 Live’s Kermode and Mayo Film Review gave a thorough explanation of the support provided to distributors and producers to attain a 12A rating:

‘Throughout the film we asked the company to tone down some of the sharper sounds during jump moments. The film makes very effective use of sound, and that really added to the intensity and the scariness of the jump moments; so we asked them to tone down the sound in parts… Again jump moments, faces suddenly appear at a window, or sequences like that, and the company with our agreement toned down the image, so the shots were darkened, so the impact of the shots was reduced, and we felt that when the company made all those changes, we felt it was classifiable at 12A. It is still a scary film, but not quite as intense as it had been when we first saw it.’

The self-censorship of these jump moments, the toned down sounds and images deprive the spectator of the jump, the scare circumvented due to the failure of the producers and director to realise that jumps are dependent on the length of the exposure of sound and image. The image and sound of the apparition at the window in one shot, or the body hanging from the ceiling rafters in another are too brief to stimulate the intended jump of the spectator; from which derives that pleasure of terror one experiences when viewing a horror film.

M. Night Shyamalan’s The Sixth Sense was released in UK theatres uncut with a 15 rating, followed two years later by The Others rated an uncut 12. In consideration of these two films, they successfully embraced an individual interpretation of horror, despite their identical twists.

Prioritising commercial concerns over the integrity of the film in order to reach a broad audience is an example of profit over art. The Woman in Black on original submission was rated an uncut 15, in line with similarly intense horror films. Forcibly reshaped into a 12A, just as the woman haunts Arthur Kipps in the film’s narrative, the ghost of the film’s former self haunts the British 12A rated version.

Final Thoughts

It is reasonable for producers to construct a marketing, promotion and distribution strategy that provides the best opportunity to secure a return on investment, requiring the film to take a gross profit double its budget. Commercial strategy should however not compromise the integrity of the film as a piece of art. Whilst producers of The Hunger Games were successful in substituting cuts with alternative shots, unlike The Woman in Black they were able to avoid structural compromises within its narrative, but geography determines whether you see a more intense or less intense version of the film.

Either the BBFC need to amend the 12A guidelines to bring it in line with the MPAA’s PG-13 rating, who are also focused on the well-being of American youth and their exposure to unsuitable material, or producers need to be aware of international censorship guidelines to ensure borders do not define the experience as is the case with both films.

To ensure there is not a repeat of these compromises, there is a requirement for greater synchronisation between promotional, marketing and distribution strategy, and consideration of the artistic execution to ensure the film attains the desired rating on both sides of the Atlantic with integrity.

Despite self-censored cuts and re-substitutions, The Woman in Black and The Hunger Games have performed well at both the domestic and international box office. Looking to the future, this financial success may persuade producers to tone down 15 rated films to the more commercial 12A rating. The Woman in Black proves that despite cuts and a compromised integrity, the appeal of the film was not hindered. The Hunger Games may exasperate the situation setting a precedent that darker and more mature subject material, originally explored in higher rated films like Battle Royale (2000), The Running Man (1987) and Rollerball (1975), can now be successfully depicted in 12A rated films - a lucrative category that reaches a broad audience.

Whilst The Hunger Games is for the most part effective in its depiction of the violence of the games, and the early 12A rated Bourne trilogy possessed the intensity of higher rated action films, not all films will be as effective, and it will be a matter of wait and see as to the way producers and distributors choose to proceed with the use of the 12A rated film: for profit or art?

Paul Risker is a freelance writer and contributor to Flickering Myth, Scream The Horror Magazine and The London Film Review.

Safety Not Guaranteed, 2012. 

Directed by Colin Trevorrow.
Starring Aubrey Plaza, Mark Duplass, Jake Johnson, Karan Soni, Jeff Garlin, Jenica Bergere, Mary Lynn Rajskub and Kristen Bell.


SYNOPSIS:

Three magazine employees respond to an unusual classified ad from a guy seeking a companion for time travel.


The premise of Safety Not Guaranteed is fairly simple – Jeff Schwensen (Jake Johnson),  an arrogant reporter at a Seattle Magazine heads out to the country to research for an article on an advert placed in a newspaper ("Wanted: Somebody to go back in time with me... Safety not guaranteed"). He takes along two interns with him, the shy nerdy Arnau (Karan Soni) and the awkward, self-contained Darius (Aubrey Plaza). They find the poster: the paranoid, initially ridiculous Kenneth (Mark Duplass), but when Darius signs up to be his partner in time travel she starts to see more to him, and the three begin to wonder if there wasn’t some truth to the advert after all.

It’s a premise that could so easily have belonged to an altogether different film, a zany comedy with paper-thin characters and a cartoonish central character, but Safety Not Guaranteed is not that film. Rather, it’s both funnier and more likeable than we had any right to expect. Duplass’ Kenneth, potentially grating, is a fully fleshed-out character; Never a caricature, and ultimately vindicated in his beliefs (just because you’re paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you). The film doesn’t make fun of him, and his relationship with Darius is genuinely touching. The chemistry between Duplass and Plaza goes a long way to making you care about these characters, and the same goes for the rest of the cast, from the way Jeff’s initially seedy attempts to find an old flame leads to something altogether more tender, to Arnau’s timid attempts to resist being forced into things he doesn’t want to do. Even minor characters have something to them, each one has dimensions. It’s a sad state of affairs when believable character development in a comedy comes as a surprise, but that’s exactly how it feels, seeing people doing things that they probably would do feels refreshing, and credit has to go to Connolly for his smart script, but also to Plaza, Duplass, Johnson and Soni for resisting the temptation to play up to their characters extremities (nerdy, arrogant, flat-out crazy) and instead bringing to fore the more genuine traits.

The dialogue is pinpoint, ranging from Clerks style pop culture gags (Stormtroopers are ‘blue collar workers’, and therefore ignorant to the workings of a laser) to intelligent dialogue that manages to feel neither over-written nor out of place. Neither of these are easy to get right, and Connolly has managed both.

The obvious narrative turns are avoided, loose ends are left untied, and there are no big speeches at the end; the nerdy character doesn’t become a heartthrob, and perhaps most surprisingly, a scene in which Kenneth plays his own song to Darius is not at all saccharine or embarrassing.  Particularly intriguing is a discussion between the two about their reasons for travelling back in which both characters are essentially lying, and yet the film plays them as moments of startling emotional realization for both of them. It’s a smart scene, exposing the superficial nature of standard character motivation, and suggesting that maybe the best reason for going back in time is simply to be somewhere else. What could so easily have been a zany comedy about zany people is in fact a sweet, melancholy film about the pitfalls of regret and nostalgia, without ever seeming ponderous, or succumbing to sentimentality.

Safety Not Guaranteed, then, is one of the best comedies of the year – a smart, sweet little thing that manages to be more than the sum of its parts. The team behind this are reportedly working on a remake of 80’s Disney classic Flight of the Navigator, with a bigger budget and hopefully a bigger audience. If Safety Not Guaranteed is anything to go by, they’ll work wonders.

Flickering Myth Rating: Film ★ ★ ★ ★ / Movie ★ ★ ★ ★

Jake Wardle

Back in November when it emerged that Academy Award-winning screenwriter Michael Arndt (Little Miss Sunshine) had written a treatment for Disney's forthcoming Star Wars trilogy, three names were said to top the studio's wishlist to step into the director's chair for Star Wars: Episode VII - J.J. Abrams (Star Trek Into Darkness), Brad Bird (Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol) and George Lucas' good buddy Steven Spielberg (Lincoln). While all three subsequently went public to downplay their interest, Abrams has now become the first to go on record to state that he was approached about the job:

"There were the very early conversations and I quickly said that because of my loyalty to Star Trek, and also just being a fan, I wouldn't even want to be involved in the next version of those things," Abrams told Empire (via ComicBookMovie). "I declined any involvement very early on. I'd rather be in the audience not knowing what was coming, rather than being involved in the minutiae of making them."

Abrams also took a moment to address any potential rivalry between the two big sci-fi franchises should a future Star Trek sequel find itself going up against one of Disney's new Star Wars movies, as well as expressing his excitement about the continuation of the Star Wars saga: "I guess the franchises could go up against each other, but I'm not thinking that far ahead. I'm a huge fan of Star Wars, Empire and Jedi, and the idea of the world continuing is exciting and will be amazing. Kathleen Kennedy is a friend and there are no smarter producers. It's in great hands."

While Matthew Vaughn (Kick-Ass, X-Men: First Class) is thought to be the front runner to secure the Episode VII directing gig, Disney has so far remained firmly tight-lipped about its plans for the epic space opera. However, with Star Wars: Episode VII is scheduled to arrive in cinemas in 2015, we should expect to hear an official announcement in the very near future.

There was a time when The Lord of the Rings was as synonymous with Christmas as the Lord's birthday boy. A film adaptation of each book was released once a year for three Christmases. There was a problem, though. They weren't long enough.

To remedy, people gave their loved ones extended editions - four disc sets - where the snappy theatrical releases were allowed to breathe. The trilogy went from 558 minutes to 683, from 683 to 726. All of that stuff you enjoyed in the originals, now there was more of it. More trees walking. More Saruman being white. More oddly sexual scenes between Frodo and Sam.

But The Hobbit is such a tiny book. A pamphlet, some said. The film would essentially be a Christmas film, just as those were before it. And Christmas is a time for excess. Dinners are seven course events, houses camouflaged in lights; it's no mistake that Ben-Hur (224 minutes) and Gone With the Wind (238 minutes) both sat like stubborn, fat children in the 25th's television schedules. If The Hobbit was anything less than half-a-day long, outrage would ensue.

Here's a TIP - Trust in Peter. The Hobbit's theatrical release only ended up at an anorexic 169 minutes. But there's at least two more of them. And eventual extended editions.

Yet despite the glorious running time, there was a frustrating centre to The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. Judging by his supporting characters, he's 100 feet tall. He wears a hat, and has a beard. He's Gandalf the Grey... and he's bit of a troll.

Seems about right.

6. He vandalises other people's property

At the start of the film - well, not at the start of the film literally, because that has Bilbo and Frodo looking at a map, but the bit after the start of the film - Gandalf rocks up to a Hobbit hole and imposes himself on its owner. It's morning, and Bilbo is enjoying a quiet piping of a few smoke rings. Smoke rings are a big deal in Middle-earth. By all accounts, it's like their television.

But Gandalf, you see, is bored. Much in the same way that the great Greek gods would play with the fate of mortals, Gandalf is tired of immense power. He wants a challenge. So he uproots a gentle hobbit and manipulates him to go on a life threatening adventure. Why Bilbo, exactly, is never fully explained. Sure, he's perfect burgling-size, but he doesn't seem to have the XP to steal gold from a dragon.

Gandalf mocks Bilbo so much, the poor hobbit is harassed into hiding in his own house. The wizard then proceeds to etch a mark into Bilbo's freshly painted front door. A hobbit, mind, to whom Gandalf hasn't spoken for decades.

He's trolling Bilbo from the start.

5. He invites dwarves into your Hobbit hole without asking.

First off, Hobbit hole is not a euphemism. Secondly, although dwarves are smaller than people of average height, the Hobbit hole is more akin to their size. Dwarves, therefore, take up just as much space in a Hobbit hole as fully grown adults do in a normal house. This is no matter of 13 dwarves making up six and a half people. It's one of Gandalf taking the space of two. Effectively, he's invited 15 people into Bilbo's quiet home. Without asking. Using vandalism.

Once there, the dwarves raid Bilbo's pantry, taunt him for worrying over precious family heirlooms and then sprawl themselves across the home in slumber, probably drunk, and definitely smelly. All the while, Gandalf sits in the shadows, puffing on his pipe, smirking beneath his beard. To him, putting this poor hobbit out of his comfort zone is hilarious. It's the Greek god thing again.

Hobbits: they're neither big, nor clever.

4. Why doesn't he use his bright white flashy thing all the time?

There's a bit in the movie where the dwarves are captured by goblins in the mountains. It's a pretty desperate situation. Bilbo falls down into the mountain's depths and encounters Gollum. The dwarves face imminent death from the Goblin King and, like, squillions of goblins.

But where's Gandalf in all this? Gandalf does this thing where he abandons his companions in incredibly dangerous portions of their quest. In this instance, he decided to stay with his elf and wizard chums in Rivendale, sipping on wine and talking moon runes. Everyone else had to venture through the mountain where giants were playing some kind of drunken Royal Rumble.

Thankfully, Gandalf likes an entrance. It's almost as though he purposefully disappears just so everyone's all overwhelmed when he returns to save them. So grateful are they for his reappearance that they forget he abandoned them in the first place.

So the dwarves have pretty much given up hope, with the death and the squillions of goblins and everything, and all of a sudden - BOOM, bright white flashy light thing. Hooray, Gandalf's here! Thank [enter Middle-earth deity here]. He's saved us from all these goblins and is now proceeding to kick all kinds of goblin ass. It's just a pity he didn't do that earlier, like when they were being chased by wolf-riding goblins. Or later on, when the large orc guy corners them at the end.

If you've got a bright white flashy thing that temporarily disables monsters who are sensitive to light, then use it all the time.

But he's Gandalf, and he's on a troll.

"I'm getting too grey for this shire."

3. He becomes unreasonable when faced with Thorin's perfectly understandable issue with Elves 

Thorin Oakenshield is the appointed leader of the dwarves. Partly because he's got Royal blood, partly because he's insane enough to have taken on a whole army of orcs with a piece of wood.

The plot of The Hobbit follows the dwarves' attempts at winning back their kingdom of Erebor from the dragon Smaug. When Erebor originally fell, and people were burning and dying, King Thranduil and his army of Wood-elves arrived to help.

But they didn't help. They remained on their hill, watched as the great Dwarf kingdom crumbled and then left.

Thorin was on the battlefield that day to see their abandonment, and harbors a pretty hefty grudge because of it. And rightly so, you might think.

Gandalf doesn't.

G-Grey reduces the Elves' betrayal to a petty disagreement, and then suggests they visit Rivendale to read some runes. Thorin becomes understandably annoyed at having to meet with the race that watched his own burn. Gandalf, however, becomes disproportionately angry at Thorin's reluctance and rides off in a huff knowing danger lurks nearby for the band.

But it's okay, because when Bilbo and the dwarves are about to be eaten by trolls - BOOM, bright flashy thing. Gandalf's back. Yay. Perhaps that's why Gandalf likes Elves so much. They share the whole abandonment thing.

Huh? How did we end up in Rivendale?

DAMMIT GANDALF.

"You SHALL NOT...wait, this isn't right."

2. Why didn't he call those giant eagles to take them to the Lonely Mountain in the first place?

Rather similar to the bright white flashy light thingy mentioned earlier, Gandalf has another rather useful trick up his oversized wizard sleeves. A trick that would be particularly useful for a long and dangerous quest over a darkening, increasingly perilous land.

He has a flock of giant eagles at his peck* and call.

*wocca, wocca.

Traveling by giant eagle is a both safer and faster than pony. But Gandalf only sends for his feathered friends at the film's most desperate moment. Dwarves, hobbit and wizard are all clinging to a burning tree on the edge of a cliff, their escape route blocked by orcs and fire. Here, Gandalf's flock of giant eagles occupies the same section of lazy screenwriting as 'Dr Who's sonic screwdriver'.

But perhaps calling the flock of giant eagles truly is a last resort, a solution when all others are exhausted. Then enlisting their help this late on is passable. Gandalf isn't a troll. He just saved everyone's lives.

...

...that would be the case, if the eagles didn't drop them off in the Middle of Earthing nowhere.

And not only are they set down atop a very tall rock, with no obvious path to below - the eagles, presumably at Gandalf's request, chose a spot where their actual destination is within view. The Lonely Mountain towers on the horizon. What's that, an hour by eagle? Nah, it's ok giant birds, we'll take it from here. Yeah, that vast expanse beyond us does look fraught with peril. But where's the fun/lucrative second feature in that?

Thanks anyway.

So that's why he wanted to go to Rivendale.

1. He directly causes the events, and thus the hundreds of thousands of deaths, in Lord of the Rings

Number Two of Gandalf's trolling ended The Hobbit, and set up all the work our heroes will have to do in the second film. But the consequences of his actions do not cease with The Hobbit franchise. They also cause all the conflict in The Lord of the Rings.

Upon emerging from the goblin-encounter in the mountains, Bilbo recounts how he escaped Gollum to the dwarves and Gandalf. He chooses to leave out the rather important part about the ring that makes him invisible, but that doesn't stop G-Dog noticing Bilbo fingering it in his pocket.

Gandalf knows what power that ring holds. You can tell it in his crinkly brow and twitching beard. But he doesn't do anything. He lets the ring - an object of immense magical importance - stay in the possession of a hobbit with whom he'd only very recently become reacquainted.

In effect, he ruins Bilbo's life. The hobbit is eventually crippled by addiction. It also sends Bilbo's nephew, Frodo, on a quest that nearly kills him multiple times.

And not just Frodo, but Sam and Merry and Pippin, too. Gimli, Legolas, hundreds of thousands of men, orcs, elves, dwarves, goblins...few in Middle-earth were left untouched by Gandalf's negligence.

Thengel died. Haldir and Denenthor, Steward of Gondor, too. King Theoden of Rohan, Sarumna, Smeagol. Even Gandalf died once.

But most importantly, Gandalf indirectly killed Boromir of Gondor, who perished defended the hobbit's in Frodo's quest.

So to Boromir. To Alec Trevelyan. To Eddard Stark. May they rest in pieces. (Warning: contains spoiled Beans.)


Oliver Davis

Following yesterday's Christmas Special 'The Snowmen', the BBC has released a new coming soon teaser trailer comprised of footage from the remaining episodes of the seventh series of Doctor Who, which is due to resume airing in the Spring.

After her introduction in the Christmas Special, Jenna Louise-Coleman's Clara Oswald takes centre stage in the trailer as the Doctor's (Matt Smith) new companion, while it also promises the return of some of the Time Lord's most formidable alien adversaries, which is rather apt seeing as the latest batch of episodes coincides with the 50th anniversary of the classic British sci-fi institution.

If you didn't catch the 2013 teaser on TV yesterday, you can check it out right here...


Doctor Who is set to return to TV screens in April 2013 on BBC One and BBC America.

British film and television producer Gerry Anderson has passed away aged 83, having suffered from Alzheimer's Disease since early 2010. Born in London in 1929, Anderson began his career working at Gainsborough Pictures in the 1940s and after completing his national service he went on to form AP Films alongside cinematographer Arthur Provis, with the duo then producing the children's series The Adventures of Twizzle (1957-1958) for Granada Television. This marked Anderson's first-foray into the world of puppetry, and AP Films followed this up with further puppet series including Torchy the Battery Boy (1958-1959), Four Feather Falls (1959-1960) and Supercar (1960-1961) - the latter of which officially introduced the 'supermarionation' technique that would become synonymous with Anderson's body of work.

Following the space adventure series Fireball XL5 (1962), Anderson and his wife and producing partner Sylvia Anderson went on to develop Stingray (1964) before enjoying their biggest hit with the sci-fi adventure Thunderbirds, which ran throughout 1965 and 1966 and ultimately went on to become the most endearing and famous of all of Anderson's productions. Following a name change to Century 21 Productions the company produced three further supermarionation TV shows - Captain Scarlett and the Mysterons (1967), Joe 90 (1968) and The Secret Service (1969) - as well as two Thunderbirds features, Thunderbirds Are Go (1966) and Thunderbird 6 (1968), with both failing to transfer the series' popularity into box office receipts.

After the live-action feature Doppelgänger (1969), Anderson returned to the small screen in 1970 with the live-action series UFO and later produced his final collaboration with Sylvia, Space: 1999 (1975-1977), which was the most-expensive British show ever-produced at that point in time. However, it would also be Anderson's last success until the mid-1980s when he served as co-creator of another puppet-based action series, Terrahawks (1983-1986); he subsequently went on to produce the sci-fi police procedural Space Precinct before returning to Saturday morning children's television with Gerry Anderson's New Captain Scarlett - a 'hypermarionation' CG reboot of the classic 1967 series.

The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel, 2012.

Directed by John Madden.
Starring Judi Dench, Bill Nighy, Penelope Wilton, Maggie Smith, Tom Wilkinson, Ronald Pickup, Celia Imrie and Dev Patel.



SYNOPSIS:

Seven retired British tourists travel to India to stay in what they believe to be a newly-restored and luxurious hotel.


The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel is a hotel, and movie, that you'll definitely want to visit. Seven British retirees (Judi Dench, Tom Wilkinson, Maggie Smith, Bill Nighy, Penelope Wilson, Ronald Pickup and Celia Imrie) all discover what looks like a great getaway in India called the Best Exotic Marigold Hotel. All of them travel to India in hopes to just get away from it all and get some much needed relaxation. Once they arrive they are very hesitant because the hotel is nothing like it was advertised but the manager (Dev Patel) assures them that his hotel is the best. After a while the residents start to find things they love, not only about the hotel, but about India as well. Maybe the Best Exotic Marigold Hotel really is the place they thought it would be.

This is one of the best examples of a movie that doesn't have the greatest of plots but is elevated because of the great performances from the actors involved. Looking at the story, it's something we've seen many times before, maybe not set in India but we've seen it nonetheless. Thankfully, every major actor really does give a great performance. The standouts from the cast are Judi Dench and Maggie Smith, who I think both give Oscar-worthy performances. Everyone has great chemistry together which only makes it better with each scene. Even Dev Patel, who hasn't had too many great roles since Slumdog Millionaire, does a good job as the hotel manager.

Even though the overall story isn't the best, the individual stories for some of the characters are quite interesting. Most interesting of all is Tom Wilkinson's character who is returning to India to search for his lover who was taken away from him many years ago when he lived in the country. Maggie Smith travels to India for an operation but ends up having a life changing experience. The rest of tales range from somewhat interesting to barely even a story. While the performances are great and some of the stories are interesting there are a few overly cliche things that kind of bring the movie down - most specifically Dev Patel's entire storyline involving his girlfriend and mother. It all leads up to an ending that I honestly wasn't too pleased with, but I guess they just wanted to go with a happy ending.

All in all, The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel surprised me quite a lot. It's not anything groundbreaking but the amount of heart put into it and the great performances from the actors make it a movie that you really should check out.

Flickering Myth Rating - Film: ★ ★ ★ / Movie: ★ ★ ★

Jake Peffer

The Watch, 2012.

Directed by Akiva Schaffer.
Starring Ben Stiller, Vince Vaughn, Jonah Hill and Richard Ayoade.


SYNOPSIS:

Four men who form a neighborhood watch group as a way to get out of their day-to-day family routines find themselves defending the Earth from an alien invasion.


The Watch stars Ben Stiller as Evan, a Costco manager who is constantly creating new groups and clubs to use up all of his spare time. After a friend of his is killed while on security at his store he creates a Neighborhood Watch group to hopefully track down the man responsible. He's able to recruit three members; Bob (Vince Vaughn), a guy always looking to have a good time, Franklin (Jonah Hill), a high school drop-out who failed to make the police force and Jamarcus (Richard Ayoade), someone the others are not familiar with but are happy to have on board. Once they form this group they soon find out that they are dealing with a force greater than they imagined, one that is not from this world.

I was split on just about everything The Watch had to offer. The initial premise of the movie I thought was interesting - combining R-rated comedy with sci-fi elements is something we don't often see. However, I don't think it was able to capitalize on everything it could have. While some of the comedy and sci-fi worked for me there were plenty of times that it didn't and I couldn't help feel disappointed that it didn't stay consistent.

As far as things I enjoyed, I thought the chemistry between the four main actors was great. They all seemed like real friends and it didn't take long to start liking them. Vince Vaughn and Jonah Hill really stand out compared to Stiller and Ayoade. This is easily the funniest Vaughn has been in a long time and the way Hill plays his character is nothing short of hilarious. Everything with the aliens I thought was pretty well done. Practical effects on the aliens were used a lot more than CG and I really appreciated that they took the time to use them and didn't just have a CG infested movie.

There are a lot of moments where the movie stalls which is what makes it less enjoyable. Side stories involving Stiller's wife and Vaughn's daughter are not needed at all other than to give both their characters a little more development. Not only are they not needed but they also spend a little too much time with both stories. A red herring that can be seen from a mile away takes up a lot of time from the good points of the movie as well. Anytime they move away from trying to track down the aliens is when things get boring. I also wasn't a fan of either Stiller nor Ayoade in this. While both had good chemistry with the main group I just didn't think either of them were great on their own.

Overall, The Watch has some laugh out loud moments and a rather interesting premise but it gets dragged down by unnecessary side stories and a few too many crude jokes.

Flickering Myth Rating - Film: ★ ★ / Movie: ★ ★ ★

Jake Peffer

Searching for Sugar Man, 2012. 

Directed by Malik Bendjelloul.
Starring Rodriguez, Steve Segerman and Dennis Coffey.


SYNOPSIS:

A documentary looking for the elusive and mysterious 70s singer/songwriter Rodriguez.


Rodriguez is an enigma. He was better than Bob Dylan, but didn't sell. His albums sit alongside Abby Road and Bridge Over Troubled Water in fans' record collections, but hardly anyone's ever heard of him. He blew his brains out onstage. He set himself on fire at a gig. He overdosed on drugs. He's the 'Sugar Man' the documentary seeks.

Tales of his death bump into and contradict each other throughout the film. The opening scene has Sugar, a South African record shop owner, regaling the self-immolation rumour of Rodriguez's death. Other reasons and situations are given for his passing, but there is one aspect on which the talking heads all agree - Rodriguez is dead.

But when did death ever stop a person becoming famous?

The details are fuzzy - a friend of a friend of a friend; some guy's girlfriend; a vinyl washing up at Cape Point - but somehow someone introduced Rodriguez to South Africa. And despite being a manual labourer from Detroit, he became as big as Elvis Presley amongst the white, liberal middle class of the Apartheid suffering country.

His songs were peppered with revolution, which got them promptly banned by the 70s censorship board. The music sounds like pretty inoffensive stuff unless you listen to the lyrics. Titles like This Is Not A Song, It's An Outburst: Or, The Establishment Blues does little to endear itself to oppressive governments. It explains the protesting slant of Rodriguez's supposed causes of death

But the record still spread. While the South Africans could read about other American musicians, for Rodriguez they had nothing. He was an unknown in every other country. A pair of dark shades constantly masked his face in album artwork. He was a tabula rasa, a blank slate on which to project a revolutionary spirit.

The documentary enhances Rodriguez's mystique. Old photographs are of a man in shadow, or standing far away in the frame. Sketches are drawn from old record producers who worked with him, or Detroit bricklayers with whom he'd clocked in. The camera becomes an active eye, looking at cities from above, tracking along streets as though its involved in the search, too.

Unfortunately, the documentary takes its quest a little too 'Paxman'. The majority is naturalistic, allowing the talking heads to speak uninhibited and narrate the stock footage, without interrupting questions. Occasionally, however, the director, Malik Bendjelloul, inquires from behind the camera. His voice disrupts the flow, and it sounds too clear, as though added in post-production. But this is the film's only flaw.

Searching for Sugar Man has an enchanting idea at its core, that a work of art can find deep significance somewhere entirely different to its original conditions. There are echoes of the Robert Johnson myth, the blues guitar player who sold his soul to the Devil - a character borrowed by the Coens in O Brother, Where Art Thou? He, too, was a nobody during his time. It was only years later, after a recording had made its way around America, that his music found fame. But he was long dead, having been poisoned by a lover's jealous husband. Or drunk into the gutter. Or taken by the Devil to repay a debt.

Wouldn't it be nice, though, if the posthumous icons caught a break once in a while?

Searching For Sugar Man is out on DVD and Blu-Ray today.

Flickering Myth Rating: Film ★ ★ ★ / Movie ★

Oliver Davis (@OliDavis)

With pre-production now well underway on X-Men: Days of Future Past, we're starting to get an idea of which X-Men veterans will be appearing alongside their younger counterparts from Matthew Vaughn's X-Men: First Class when director Bryan Singer brings Fox's two X-Men timelines together in 2014. One character we'll be seeing plenty of is that of Professor Charles Xavier, with Patrick Stewart set to reprise his role from the original X-Men trilogy alongside First Class' James McAvoy, and over the past few days both actors have been talking about getting back into the wheelchair for the forthcoming sequel:

"I’m very happy to report that Bryan Singer is coming back to direct the movie. I’m very happy that my lovely friend Ian McKellen [Magneto] is going to be with me," Stewart told Hero Complex, officially confirming his involvement after previously suggesting that Singer had jumped the gun by announcing his casting. "I don’t know anyone else who is to be involved in the project. Maybe it’s just the two of us! That would be a movie! Magneto and Xavier’s conversations…. I’m not being cute. That’s all I know. Maybe once the holidays are over, more information will begin to come through. I have a vague idea of the time commitments, but I don’t know where we’re going to shoot. But I’m greatly looking forward to it."

Meanwhile, speaking to Total Film (via ComicBookMovie), James McAvoy offered up a few comments on his hopes for the sequel: "I thought the biggest thing that X-Men: First Class gave the franchise was a real palpable sense of humor that wasn’t just for a couple of moments.  It was running through the thing. And I hope that continues. I don’t know how easy it will be for me to be a part of that as my character’s going to be in a pretty f**ked up place. It’s a shame because I like the fact that Charles Xavier was witty and funny and a bit of a lecherous old guy trapped in a 30-year-old’s body."

McAvoy also went on to reveal that Days of Future Past will deal with the issue of the younger Xavier's healthy head of hair: "[Screenwriter] Simon Kinberg and I had a chat about it and we came up with a whole bunch of idea about how, why and where he might go bald. It’s got to be linked to the plot though. In the comics, he lost his hair as soon as his powers awakened, and we clearly didn’t follow the source material. It can’t just be that he looks in the mirror at the end of the film and goes 'Oh f**k, I’m losing my hair'. Although that could be quite funny with all this shit going on... he goes 'Arge, I’m really stressed...'"

X-Men: Days of Future Past is set for release on July 18th, 2014, with Michael Fassbender (Magneto), Jennifer Lawrence (Mystique), Nicholas Hoult (Beast) and Hugh Jackman (Wolverine) so far confirmed as joining Patrick Stewart, James McAvoy and Ian McKellen in the cast. 

As we approach the end of 2012, the folks over at TorrentFreak have put together their annual lists of the most pirated movies and TV shows from the past twelve months, which is based upon the number of illegal downloads from various torrent sites.

Despite the inclusion of box office behemoths such as The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises, the found footage comedy Project X was the most pirated movie of the year with an estimated 8,720,000 (and also the lowest-grossing release to feature in the top ten), while HBO's epic fantasy series Game of Thrones overtook Dexter to become the most-downloaded TV show of 2012, peaking at 4,280,000 downloads for a single episode.

Here's the ten most downloaded movies of 2012, along with the estimated number of downloads and North American box office grosses:

1. Project X - 8,720,000 downloads, $100,931,865 US gross
2. Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol - 8,500,000 downloads, $694,713,380 US gross
3. The Dark Knight Rises - 8,230,000 downloads, $1,081,041,287 US gross
4. The Avengers - 8,110,000 downloads, $1,511,757,910 US gross
5. Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows - 7,850,000 downloads, $543,848,418 US gross
6. 21 Jump Street - 7,590,000 downloads, $201,585,328 US gross
7. The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo - 7,420,000 downloads, $232,617,430 US gross
8. The Dictator - 7,330,000 downloads, $177,547,352 US gross
9. Ice Age: Continental Drift - 6,960,000 downloads, $875,093,094 US gross
10. The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1 - 6,740,000 downloads, $712,171,856 US gross

And here are the ten most pirated TV shows of 2012, along with the estimated number of single episode downloads, and estimated total US TV audience for each show:

1. Game of Thrones - 4,280,000 downloads, 4,200,000 total US viewers
2. Dexter - 3,850,000 downloads, 2,750,000 total US viewers
3. The Big Bang Theory - 3,200,000 downloads, 15,820,000 total US viewers
4. How I Met Your Mother - 2,960,000 downloads, 10,140,000 total US viewers
5. Breaking Bad - 2,580,000 downloads, 2,980,000 total US viewers
6. The Walking Dead - 2,550,000 downloads, 10,870,000 total US viewers
7. Homeland - 2,400,000 downloads, 2,360,000 total US viewers
8. House - 2,340,000 downloads, 9,780,000 total US viewers
9. Fringe - 2,280,000 downloads, 3,120,000 total US viewers
10. Revolution - 2,130,000, 11,650,000 total US viewers