The rain, the pouring rain, when will it stop? The world famous Croisette has seen a deluge of wandering bodies and torrential downpours. This is not the image of a permanently sunny Cannes one has imagined. I’m told the Mediterranean is out yonder, somewhere beyond the mist and drizzle. Alas, many of the gathered folk aren’t here to worship the sun but the light on the screen.

Day 1

Cannes was launched this year in peculiar fashion with Baz Luhrmann’s adaptation of the F. Scott Fitzgerald’s, “The Great Gatsby.” Already released in the USA and elsewhere by the time the film opened this year’s 66th Festival de Cannes, does it mark alack of ambition and invention from the head honchos? The connection seems to be that F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote Gatsby whilst holidaying very close to Cannes, and the festival bosses love Baz Luhrmann.

Left to right: Joel Edgerton, Carey Mulligan, Leonardo Dicaprio, and Tobey Maguire in “The Great Gatsby.”

Of course the Australian’s latest production flies in the face of subtlety and flips it the bird. We’ve known for a long time that the director does not know the meaning of a quiet shot or understated moments; his work has now taken on a further pompous grandiosity and unwillingness to deliver anything but an epic or epicness. It reeks of self-importance. The major issue with “The Great Gatsby”—a flawless literary work turned problematic motion picture—is length. This is an affliction that the novel does not suffer. Gatsby (film) is far too long for such a slender tale told. It runs out of steam and oomph mid-way through and never recovers. As it staggers like a drunk towards the finish and all is pretty much lost. It goes through the motions and we’re left with little that is profound (unlike the novel). Luhrmann attempts to conceal the lack of true energy by throwing glitter bombs at the audience —in uninspired 3D—and all manner of thrill-ride zooms through heavily CG backdrops. It makes for a poor distraction only buoyed by the committed performances of Leonardo DiCaprio, Carey Mulligan and Joel Edgerton.

Is there a more tiresome film-maker working today than Baz Luhrmann? Don’t answer that. There are other candidates for the pot, but the Australian helmer of spectacular-spectaculars just doesn’t know when enough is enough. He has become a sort of David Lean to the MTV generation (a creakily dated fellow, but an apt one). “The Great Gatsby” film is less a collective orgastic experience and like a dinner party whose guests give a big headache. The inner life and meaning of “The Great Gatsby” cannot simply be replicated for the cinema. It’s too… mysterious. Luhrmann is anything but.

“Heli” (2013, directed by Amat Escalante).

Amat Escalante’s latest picture “Heli” provoked walkouts and general unease. It is the story of a young man taking a morally good but foolish course of action, one which has extreme consequences for him and his family. Here is packed to the rafters with unpleasant imagery, including two scenes of barbaric treatment towards dogs. One is shot point blank and a puppy has its neck snapped by a police officer. We’re also treated to a scene of a teenager having his pubic hair set alight and, in another sequence, being forced to roll in his own vomit. All this unpleasantness is tough to watch, of course, but what is Escalante trying to tell us beyond “bad things happen and not much gets done about it?” There’s the vague whiff of attention-seeking art house posturing going on. Escalante’s Mexico is a land of fatalistic malaise where drug cartels massacre thousands, and headless corpses take pride of place on the prime time news as an everyday occurrence. Innocent people get caught up in the monster’s jaws. Many critics wondered where this year’s controversy would spring from, given that Lars von Trier and other Les Enfants Terribles are absent from Cannes. Escalanate stepped up to the plate and hit a home run.

Photo of protesters at Cannes. Image © Martyn Conterio.

Day 2

The second day began under heavy skies and lashing rain. Then it stopped suddenly and Lloyd Kaufman’s Troma outfit held a weirdy beardy protest, known as Occupy Cannes, outside the Grand Palais people were having a good old time making a nuisance of themselves to the bemusement and occasional interest of other festival-goers. One rotund gentleman with green hair ran naked down the Croisette and another shouted about independent cinema being destroyed by the big studios.

“The Bling Ring” (2013, directed by Sofia Coppola).

Sofia Coppola’s “The Bling Ring” opened this year’s “Un Certain Regard“section. For those who dismiss her work as vacuous and self-obsessed then there’s nothing here that will change one’s mind. (It must be expressed sincerely that I’m not a fan, but willing to give any director a chance.) Lo and behold, it turns out Coppola’s latest movie is genuinely amusing with actress Emma Watson putting in a sterling, no, make that solid gold, performance as a teenage burglar—one of a gang—that once terrorised the Hollywood hills and homes of A- listers. Shot by the late Harris Savides, who gets a dedicated even before the super-charged and funky title sequence roars to life, “The Bling Ring” is about taking celebrity obsession to entirely new heights. Not only do followers want to know the ins and outs of their fave celebs life—but these kids break into their homes. Supreme narcissism is not the reserve of the rich and famous.
“I want to rob,” says one character in a beguiling statement of intent that could also become a “new cool” slogan. “The Bling Ring” is hella fun, chill, dope, sick and all the other buzz words the charmingly idiotic leads use. Coppola continues to find a place in the filmmaking world beneath the shadow of her mighty father, but she has demonstrated that maybe there’s an ounce of talent lurking within her too.

“Fruitvale Station” was the second feature of the day and based on the real-life tale of police brutality in Oakland, California. Oscar, a twenty-two year old male, was shot by the police on a train platform after an altercation. Ryan Cooglar’s film is worthy and preachy and underwhelming despite based on a terrible incident.

“The Umbrellas of Cherbourg” (1964, starring the gorgeous Catherine Deneuve).

And last but definitely not least, Jacques Demy’s magnificent tale of doomed love, “The Umbrellas of Cherbourg,” screened in the “Cannes Classics” slot on a suitably rainy Thursday evening. In attendance was Michel Legrand (who got a standing ovation), Cannes Juror Christoph Waltz who was there purely for the pleasure of the movie and along with Demy’s widow Agnes Varda, looking frail and with a rather jazzy haircut, and son Mathieu Demy, an actor and film-maker too. (Do check out his debut, “Americano,” it’s very good.) The restoration of The “Umbrellas of Cherbour”g is a sparkling beauty (like star Catherine Deneuve), and it shines brightly off the screen (especially given the new restoration). What else is there to possibly say? It is the cinematic equivalent of luxurious confectionery. The evening was made of pure joy.

Credits:
Film stills © of respective movie studios

Photo of Andy Warhol (1986) by/© Robert Mapplethorpe.

Andy Warhol encapsulated the mass culture and kitschy pop art movement of the 50s and 60s with his infamous prints of Coca Cola bottles and Campbell soup cans. The man behind the art remains a great enigma though. It’s ironic that Warhol went to such great lengths to emphasize the shallowness of his own work, but when it came to his own personality, he was a deeply fascinating and complex human being.

He was more myth than man, heightened by the grungy glamour of The Factory scene in New York City alongside muses Edie Sedgwick and Candy Darling.

Photo of Edie Sedgwick. © respective owner.

Everybody knows the screen prints, but not everyone is familiar with Warhol’s work as a film director. Picking up the camera in the early 60s, Warhol would go on to inspire a generation of experimental filmmakers like Stan Brakhage with his minimalist black and white works of film art. Warhol’s early experiments were basic screen tests of his factory hipsters kissing and sleeping. Like his paintings and prints were meant to be taken at surface value, even the titles offer no artistic indulgences but simply reflect the mundane acts that are being performed: “Sleep and Kitchen,” for example. His films strip away the layers of conventional narrative, like flakes of peeled white paint reflect a decade drowning in the mundane activities of TV and consumerism.

Actor DeVeren Bookwalter in “Blow Job” (1964). Film still © Warhol.

One of Warhol’s most influential underground movies is his short film “Blow Job.” With a running time of about 40 minutes, it takes the form of a single shot for its entire duration. The camera stays on the face of DeVeren Bookwalter as he receives the sexual act in question. Bookwalter was an accomplished theatre actor and director in his day, and “Blow Job” remains one of his few screen credits. During the film his face changes from angelic tones with white light moving across the surface to demented, pools of black shadow taking over his eyes and cheekbones, as this New York hustler looks up to God and beyond. The best word to describe it is hypnotic. Warhol draws us in to his microscopic world by freeing the audience from the rules of traditional cinema. Bookwalter’s head bobs in and out of frame but Warhol doesn’t re-adjust, it’s like a piece of performance art where mistakes are to be expected. The viewer becomes the voyeur in the Hitchcock fashion, as there’s no music or camera movement to cushion the blow, we’re invited to do nothing else but to gaze upon the erotic display. The fact that we never actually see the person delivering the blow job, only adds to the film’s mesmerizing power.

One of the many smooching scenes in “Kiss” (1963). Photo © Warhol.

In “Kiss,” the camera is given more to do as a string of images of young naked couples pecking each other’s faces, which are edited together in a 35 minute block. It’s got a definite air of an art installation that pervades a lot of Warhol’s early work. It’s a raw and unflinching piece that once again breaks the rules of mainstream cinema through its lack of narrative, music and dialogue. A mixture of long shots, close-ups, low and high angle frames provide some uncharacteristic variety to Warhol’s cinematic repertoire. In 1964, he made the infamous “Empire,” a highly experimental work lasting for over 8 hours and consisting of nothing more than a static shot of the Empire State Building at night. The captured footage is grainy, full of scratches and flickers of reflected light. It’s an important piece of modern art and underground cinema, if you can stomach the full-length running time. It’s so sparse and minimalist that the fact that it’s supposed to alienate the audience is a given, a film that’s all about form, where the structure of cinema takes precedent over content. There’s an objectivity to Warhol’s style and it’s particularly in evidence in “Empire.” Where the majority of auteur directors put so much of themselves into their films, Warhol takes a step back and watches from afar.

Jacques Audiard’s much anticipated new feature gives Marion Cotillard the kind of role Hollywood never could or would. She’s simply a force of nature as amputee Stéphanie and also forgoes the vanity of makeup for most of the film.

This isn’t some radical attempt to go ugly either, she’s even more stunning, for a steely determined look in her eyes shines off the screen. Mon dieu.

“Rust and Bone” isn’t exactly a retelling of “La belle et la bête” (1946), though, isn’t too far off. An impressionistic style is countered by a documentary type intimacy. The constrast is further developed in the characters with Ali (Matthias Schoenaerts) all impulsive, unthinking brute force, and Stéphanie, a calm authority. She does indeed have a calmative influence on the drifter she befriends by chance. We might think it is an unlikely relationship in so many ways, especially, as the sometimes meandering plot develops into more brutal territory. Stéphanie is unfazed by Ali’s underground boxing career. Yet, he remains the only person to treat her injuries with consideration and doesn’t overemphasize the differences. They go swimming on the beach, she’s hesitant about revealing her body but he’s so nonplussed (let them think what they want) it borders on charming.

Audiard’s eye for poetic visual sequences features such bravura shots as Cotillard dances to Katy Perry’s “Firework” on a rooftop; a bloody, recently dislodged tooth pirouetting on the ground; and Stéphanie seemingly making peace with the orca whale that merges out of the gloomy blue water to press right up to the glass.

Stephanie (Marion Cotillard) and Alain (Matthias Schoenaerts) in “Rust and Bone” (2012). Photo © Why Not Productions.

The film is very much about transformation both physically and spiritually. Cotillard is positively stunning—in both senses—as the young woman forced to change her life and take up a new challenge as lover and manager to Ali. And he is bloody hard work. The guy is very difficult to like, but we sense there’s a tragedy in his past that is never communicated, only felt. He treats his boy with indifference when not beating him. Yet perhaps it’s the only way he can love and show affection until he meets Stéphanie. Audiard has several times in his previous works explored seemingly odd relationships and tapped them for surprising elements.

“Rust and Bone,” however, isn’t the type of weepie picture that leaves us an emotional wreck in our chairs. It’s a bit too cool and calculated. Stéphanie’s accident is staged as an almost abstract affair, and Ali’s boy’s accident, though shocking enough, is heavily signposted and becomes overly symbolic of the man’s issues. There are incredible moments, definitely, but the emotional pay off is a tad muted as if Audiard was too worried about going down “that road.” This is something, therefore, of a conundrum: an anti-melodramatic melodrama with a touch of sang-froid.

“Rust and Bone” is worth seeing alone for Cotillard’s imperious turn that highlights only too well how poorly she’s treated by American movies.

Warning: This article includes explicit content (violence, nudity, and sexual references). Viewer discretion is advised.

From as long ago as 1896, when screenings of the Lumière brothers’ one-shot reel the “Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat” reportedly caused audience members to flee in panic from the rapidly approaching locomotive on screen, cinema has displayed a remarkable power to elicit extreme visceral reactions.

Ever since then, filmmakers have been testing the boundaries both of their chosen medium, and of their viewers’ tolerance. Here are five films that have given vivid realisation to the repellent, the unconscionable, and the downright offensive, all in the service of pushing art to its outer limits.

Images at top from “Un Chien Andalou” (1929).

“Un Chien Andalou” (1929).
In 1929, “Un Chien Andalou” was a short sharp shock of the new. Film novices Luis Buñuel and Salvador Dalí deployed voguish ideas of Freudian free association, and Surrealist dream logic to unsettle bourgeois values and destabilize cinematic convention. There are irrational leaps in time and space, the dead come back to life, books turn into guns, ants pour from a human hand, a man’s mouth is replaced with a woman’s armpit (or perhaps, even more outrageously, with her pubic triangle), a rape is prevented by the combined weight of pianos, clergymen and dead donkeys. Yet, it is the opening sequence of this 16-minute film that would prove most shocking: after a man watches a thin cloud pass across the full moon, a woman’s open eye is shown in close-up as the man’s razor blade graphically slices through it. Cinema’s capacity for ocular assault had been revealed.

The kidnapped adolescents in “Salò, or The 120 Days of Sodom” (1975).

“Salò, or The 120 Days of Sodom” (1975).
“All things are good when taken to excess,” announces an ageing Italian dignitary near the beginning of “Salò, or The 120 Days of Sodom.” In what was to be his final film, Pier Paolo Pasolini adapted the closed libertine system of de Sade’s eighteenth-century novel to Italy’s mid-War Fascist period, exposing the contagious corruption of absolute power even in uncomfortably recent times. The dignitary and his three equally respectable companions have 18 teenage boys and girls abducted to service their own perverse pleasures, which include orgiastic rapes, staged spectacles parodying religious and cultural institutions, enforced coprophilia, and ultimately torture and murder. It is a film that speaks to the authoritarian abuses of twentieth-century history—but it has also, thanks to the chilling (and unflinching) way in which it presents grotesque atrocity, proven as difficult as feces for censors to swallow whole, if at all.

Paul Laugier’s scarring movie, “Martyrs” (2008).

“Martyrs” (2008).
The real-world terror of 9/11 and the counter-terror of Guantánamo and Abu Ghraib ushered in a new(ish) kind of horror—loosely termed “torture porn”—which served up bodily depravities as uneasy entertainment throughout the mid-Noughties. The final word in—and on—this film cycle is Pascal Laugier’s fiercely intelligent “Martyrs.” At first, it traumatises viewers and characters alike with a jarring blend of genres, and a gut-wrenching confusion of moral sympathies to match all the on-screen helter-skelter of violence and abjection. But then, as its heroine Anna (Morjana Alaoui) finds herself trapped in a hellhole of torments from which there can be no escape, Laugier puts the screws on us all, in a contemplative and ambiguous final-act interrogation (delivered in a whisper) of the contradictory motives involved in bearing witness to such horrors.

The mysteriously masked man and Milos (Srdjan Torovic) in “A Serbian Film” (2010).

“A Serbian Film” (2010).
True to its state-of-the-nation title, Srdjan Spasojevic’s “A Serbian Film” is an electrifying, ithyphallic allegory of a country bestialised, violated, commodified and sold—by its own—down the river, as Milos (Srdjan Torovic) agrees to make one last sex movie for former State Security apparatchik Vukmir (Sergej Trifunovic), only to become complicit in his family’s tragic undoing. Spasojevic reduces Belgrade to a Sadean porn set where everyone is both metaphorically and literally fucked from the cradle (“Newborn porn!”) to the grave for the dubious entertainment of exploitative outsiders (just like ourselves). In all its hyperbolic viciousness, “A Serbian Film” may be, to borrow the phrase used by Milos’ wife to describe pornography to their young son, “like a cartoon for the grown-ups”, but Spasojevic makes us uncomfortably aware how right Vukmir is in what he says of his own absurdist production: “Victim sells.”

The stomach-churning “Human Centipede.”

“The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence)” (2011).
Mad surgeon sews abductees together, mouth-to-anus. So unspeakably, surreally shocking was the concept underlying Tom Six’s “The Human Centipede (First Sequence)” (2009) that the director could exercise visual restraint without seeming to. Not so, “The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence)” (2011), which graphically depicts outrages perpetrated by a mentally challenged man doomed to repeat (at least in his head) the horrific abuses that he himself had suffered as a child. Yet Martin (Laurence R. Harvey) is also repeating scenes from the first film—a film which he watches and re-watches with a fanboy’s obsession, making him an unnerving double for the kind of person (just like you and me) who would seek out this sequel. Martin may lack his rôle model’s surgical skills, professional tools, scientific interests or concern with clinical hygiene—but in all his sick, sweaty grotesquery, Martin is us. Confronting cinema has come full circle.

Read More:
"Ten Films That Will Give You Nightmares."

Credit:
Film stills © respective film studios.

Dana Carvey may be the funniest human on earth. The mere sight of his impish smile can make your sides hurt with laughter as you anticipate the ensuing comedic onslaught. Be sure and go to the bathroom before his show.

Carvey, of “Saturday Night Live” and “Wayne’s World” fame, performs at the State Theater in Easton Pa. on May 2.

As an actor on SNL from 1986-93 he created some of television’s timeless comedic characters. Viewers will never forget the Puritanical Church Lady scolding fellow parishioners, or bodybuilder Hans of Hans and Franz ridiculing “girly boys.” His “Chopping Broccoli” skit is quintessential Carvey. Although SNL made him a household name, it was his role as Garth in the wacky movie “Wayne’s World” (1992), with SNL buddy Mike Myers, that solidified Carvey’s status as comic genius.

A man of many voices, his impersonations of President George H. Bush, presidential candidate Ross Perot, and television host Regis Philbin are legendary.

Dana Carvey doing stand-up comedy in 2005. Photo © Mike Carano.

Roger Sands, Scene 360: What was your childhood like?

I was born in Montana and then we later moved to the Bay Area when I was six. I came from a very eccentric family with five kids which was the ideal setting to become a comedian. There was always a lot of laughter in the house.

Were you the class clown?

At time, yes. I also always liked to have a lot of fun with my buddies. I announced in fourth grade that I wanted to become a comedian and then I grew up making $100,000 a year.

Did you play sports in high school?

I participated in track and ran a pretty decent mile. I actually developed some of my stand-up routine while ad-libbing with my friends during 20-mile runs.

How would you describe your style of humor?

I think my humor is based on rhythm and attitude as opposed to telling jokes and one-liners. I like abstract, inexplicable stuff. It’s like free form jazz. I need to find a sweet spot with the audience and build upon that, which often means ad-libbing about 50 percent of the time. That’s the beauty of stand-up comedy.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Do you ever confuse voices?

Not often, but it has happened on occasion.

Do you see humor in most things?

Pretty much so, but there are, of course, certain subjects I won’t touch at all.

How do you play to the crowd?

You need to be aware of the crowd in order to adjust your comedy for that particular night. I don’t use a lot of swear words, but will on occasion. I’ll hold back if I see an eight year-old in the crowd. I don’t want to traumatize him, although many are seeing worse things all the time on the Internet.

When the audience is laughing hysterically, which they do many times during your act, do you need to slow down so that they can digest everything?

Absolutely. You never want to walk over your last joke. I’ll make a lot of silly physical gestures on stage as part of the routine, before moving to the next skit.

Who have you performed with?

Adam Sandler and Kevin James used to open for me before they made it big. I used to joke with them by telling them that they’d never make it in show business.

Carvey portraying the Church Lady on Saturday Night Live.

How did Saturday Night Live come about?

I auditioned for them once at a club in the Bay Area and it didn’t go well at all. Lorne Michaels (producer of SNL) came back a year later, and by that time I had the Church Lady skit down really well and my entire stand-up was in good shape. Rosie O’Donnell, who was scheduled for the night, gave me 45 minutes and Lorne loved my act. I owe my career to Rosie.

What was it like moving to New York City?

It was terrifying, like an out of body experience.

Were you nervous before your first show?

Petrified. I was pacing in the dressing room, doing push-ups, anything to try and calm my nerves. I did the Church Lady in the last skit for the rehearsal, which is conducted several hours before the main show. It went over so well they moved it to the first skit for the main show.

How long did it take you to finally lose your nerves before a show?

About four years, literally. The last three years were fine.

You and the other cast members are credited with saving the show by many people in the industry. How so?

Things had not gone well the few previous seasons before we arrived, and NBC didn’t even give us a full year’s contract initially. Things took off and the viewing audience responded.

Why did you leave?

I had been there from 1986 to 1993, at the time the longest tenure of any cast member, including previous ones. I wanted to do different things, and had the opportunity to do some more movies after the success of “Wayne’s World” with Mike Myers. Also, I was barely breaking even from a financial standpoint. We made good money, but were not being paid like actors on Cheers or other successful programs. New York City can be a very expensive place to be, so I felt it was time to try some other things.

Mike Myers (Wayne) and Dana Carvey (Garth) in “Wayne’s World” (1992).

You mention “Wayne’s World.” How did that develop?

Lorne wanted to produce some movies, and thought that particular skit would be a big hit with a movie audience.

He was very prophetic.

Sure was.

What was it like working with Mike Myers?

Fantastic. He’s a great guy, very talented, and hard working.

There was speculation that you would be offered Regis’ position on “Regis & Kelly” when he left. After all, no one does Regis better than you.

People assume that when you’re on the show quite often that you actually would like to take over the host’s job. I was not interested in that at all. At this stage in my career, I don’t want to move from California to New York.

You and Kelly seem to have great chemistry.

I adore her. She is so funny and charming. But we laugh so much at each other it would be very hard to do a day-in, day-out show together. All of it is improvised.

You’re not big into social media. Why?

That’s about to change. I’ll be getting Twitter and Facebook accounts along with a website very soon. Although, I won’t be tweeting about what kind of pants I’m wearing today or stuff like that. However, I love the idea of a weekly podcast and may be looking into the possibility of doing that.

Photo of Carvey in the metro.

Who’s your favorite person to sit down next to?

Jimmy Fallon. We crack each other up.

What do you do in your spare time?

I love music and will play the guitar for hours. I’ll also work out with light weights, hike and run.

Seems like you’re very contented these days?

I’ve been incredibly lucky and blessed throughout my career, and now have the luxury to pick and choose what I want to do.

Anything new to announce?

For the first time, I’ll be touring with Kevin Nealon and Dennis Miller beginning this summer which should be a blast. Stay tuned.

Credits:
Cover photo courtesy of Dana Carvey

All other photos © respective owners

Top: Christopher Jobson’s (from Colossal) office space.

As the Internet has evolved over time, there has been a craze to launch more and more blogs. With over 500 million active projects online, how can any blogger stand out from the crowd?

In reality, those having success are not in the millions, but rather in smaller number. Out of a list of well-known, leading art blogs, I have invited four websites that basically started out with a goal to explore their passion in the arts, and without focus on fame or profit. The first project is Colossal, founded just three years ago by Christopher Jobson in the United States. He runs the blog by himself, and it currently receives 1 to 3 million readers per month, and it was nominated for a Webby in 2013. Next is Lost At E Minor, launched in 2005 by two Australian brothers Zolton and Zac Zavos. Their project receives half a million views every month, featuring a wide range of art and design, primarily lowbrow creations. Third is It’s Nice That, a London based project founded in 2007 by Will Hudson. A blog that is managed like a magazine, it publishes articles to over 400,000 subscribers. And finally iGNANT, a German website created in 2007 by Clemens Poloczek. It also showcases a diverse range of artistic disciplines, in 2011, it was awarded with a Golden Lead in category, “Weblog of the Year.”

My goal for this interview was to unite websites with similar focus as Scene 360, and be able to speak with these bloggers about the commitment needed to maintain their projects, and what rewards were obtained for their hard work.

Counterclockwise: Interviewees – Christopher Jobson (Colossal), Caroline Kurze (iGNANT), Will Hudson (It’s Nice That), and Zolton Zavos (Lost At E Minor).

Adriana de Barros, Scene 360: When and why did you create your site?

Colossal: The site started in late 2010, as part of a list of 100 different projects/endeavors/to-dos that I planned in attempt to reinvigorate my creative ambitions. I wasn’t sure what I wanted to do with myself exactly, that year I took everything from ceramics classes to a cooking course. I also learned to kayak and started writing more. Somewhere on the list I simply wrote: “Start a Blog”—and here we are today.

iGNANT: Site founder Clemens Poloczek created iGNANT to share fun, strange, extraordinary and beautiful art, design, architecture and photography. Since then, it has constantly grown and developed as a virtual universe filled with inspiring stories and pictures.

It’s Nice That: This project started in April 2007, as a response to a university brief. It was a way to document the creatives I was looking at and referencing within my own work at the time. It has subsequently grown to champion creativity across the art and design world, and goes out to 400,000 more readers a month than when we started!

Lost At E Minor: My brother Zac and I decided to collaborate on a project back in 2005, so we launched a simple weekly email where I would write about some of my favourite artists and musicians. We just sent it out to a small group of our friends. Each week, a few random people would email us and ask to be added to the email newsletter list. So it quickly started growing organically. Eventually, we launched a website to archive the newsletters, and then the website became more of a focal point for running new content. Lost At E Minor “proper” was born. That was back in 2006. Since then, we’ve had very consistent organic growth to the point where the website currently gets around 500,000 monthly unique visitors.

A screenshot of Lost At E Minor’s website.

Can you please explain your daily activities managing a website of this caliber? What are viewers unaware of?

Colossal: This is now a full-time gig, so you can imagine I’m spending anywhere between 6-10 hours each day either directly on the blog or on related projects. Before going full-time, I still managed to squeeze in 4-6 hours each day, this was mostly in the morning and late at night. I read several hundred art blogs, keep a close eye on places where new art/design/creative projects emerge, and even have services that help me monitor artists portfolios and gallery websites for new additions.

Along the way there have been huge growing problems, changing hosts, adding server capacity and modifying WordPress to make it do what I want. But finally after two years of ups and downs (imagine the look on my face after getting a hosting bill for serving 17TB of data one month), I’ve finally reached a place where the technical side almost completely takes care of itself without much of my personal interference.

iGNANT: I am working full-time as editor-in-chief of iGNANT. I am involved in everything that is related to the content of the blog. At least three articles are posted per day, and what readers might be unaware of is that we have to ask every artist for permission before presenting his/her work online. It is great on one hand, because it’s nice to get in touch with the artist and most of them are really happy to be part of the site. On the other hand, it takes quite some time to contact each person. Furthermore, we work on several of our own projects like “Work in Progress,” “iGNANTravel,” as well as different collaborations where we produce the content too. We are constantly thinking of new ideas that could be fun for us and our readers.

It’s Nice That: We have an editorial team of 4, an events manager, a sales executive and myself. We tend to work 9 – 6 with a few hours either side where necessary. Within this time, we write about 9 articles for the site everyday, and we publish a quarterly magazine and a series of events.

Lost At E Minor: I oversee all the content that runs on Lost At E Minor, manage and update all our social channels, and liaise with advertisers, PR people and all the other interested parties that contact us every day. But that’s just half of my daily job. Conversant Media is the parent company of Lost At E Minor, and it also publishes the Australian sports site The Roar, which I am very involved in. So I’m generally splitting my time between the two sites. We are fortunate to have a dedicated and talented team working with us at Conversant Media—because they assist across both sites, and make my life a hell of a lot easier.

A photo of Will Hudson’s (It’s Nice That) work space.

Is revenue from your project sufficient to make a living off of it?

Colossal: Unbelievably, yes.

iGNANT: As I am working full-time at iGNANT, I need to make a living off of it. But actually we pretty much reinvest everything in new projects and ideas as we aim to make progress. I believe it is of great importance not to stagnate, but rather keep the drive going and work on new concepts.

It’s Nice That: Very much so, we have 6 full-time staff members and it has been our full-time job for the last 4 years!

Lost At E Minor: The business model has evolved over time. For the first few years, Lost At E Minor generated no revenue. But as we became more educated about how online sales and other channels of revenue worked, we started selling relevant advertising across the site. We now have two sales managers, and a newly hired sales executive from Sydney who sells our Australian ad inventory, and we have some networks in the US and UK who represent our international inventory. So, yes, everyone employed by Conversant Media, and working full-time on Lost At E Minor and The Roar are making a living off that work.

Christopher Jobson’s personal and artistic photos at Instgram.

Do you think the art blog community is competitive or supportive of each other?

Colossal: Through running Colossal I have met dozens of really amazing bloggers, artists, and critics—many of which somebody on the outside might consider in direct “competition” with Colossal. And yet I have found them to be surprisingly supportive of my work, and all have been extremely open with sharing ideas, advice, and problems. Without question, I support all of the largest and smallest art/design/photography blogs, because let’s face it, this is the web and we can only survive as a network. When one of us succeeds, often the others do too.

iGNANT: Definitely supportive! We wouldn’t exist anymore if it wasn’t that. You need to have a good network of people that are supportive. We are in connection with amazing photographers, video makers and writers that we highly appreciate. We get inspiration from them and we love working with people who are passionate about their craft.

It’s Nice That: I think like all industries you get a bit of a mix, on the whole though it’s very positive with people supporting where possible. What’s great about the nature of an online community is we’re in touch with people from all corners of the earth, far beyond our London home.

Lost At E Minor: Pretty supportive. I have “virtually” met a number of editors from some of the larger culture sites, and have formed great working relationships with a few of them. I worked out of the Cool Hunting office in New York at one point for just under a year, renting a desk space from them, which was fun! Generally, there is a willingness to work together to help each other grow traffic and share content where relevant. A while back, I had setup a Tweet Swap initiative where invited culture blogs had access to a spreadsheet with Tweets from other culture blogs in them. The idea was that the members all swapped Tweets through their Twitter channels, which helped everyone grow traffic and share new content with their respective followers. That was well-supported and we had a great group of members like Flavorpill, Inhabitat, PSFK, and more.

A screenshot of iGNANT’s website

You have featured thousands of artists, has anyone emailed you to share a success story?

Colossal: Though I don’t often discuss this much, it’s the single greatest perk of running Colossal. Every week, I get emails from artists and galleries discussing the aftermath of their work going “viral.” I’ve heard about artists selling out shows, or simply finding representation for the first time, which is phenomenal! Educators email me about how they bring the website up in class or how they use the artwork they discover as a jumping off point for new projects. It’s a humbling and motivational experience, and it really keeps me going on the slow days.

iGNANT: There are several artists that I am in close contact with and I follow their careers. It’s so nice to see their artwork developing and to find new stuff every time I check their site. Often the artists give us a heads up when they have new exhibitions or publish books—an example is Klaus Pichler’s art series “Skeletons in the Closet” and Ward Roberts’ hardcover “Courts.” For me, it is great to hear success stories in the field of the arts, as I wish more young creatives could make a living off of it.

It’s Nice That: One of the most satisfying things about doing what we do is the platform we provide for all of these amazing creatives. We’ve had a number of emails and phone calls from people getting commissioned within hours of their work appearing on the site.

Lost At E Minor: Nothing stands out, but we get emails everyday from people we feature who appreciate the support, and let us know that they’ve been commissioned or sold some prints as a result of Lost At E Minor. That is always nice to hear!

Credit:
Photos © respective owners

In 1895, British author H. G. Wells penned the renowned book The Time Machine, which much later on was developed into two films of the same name from 1960 and 2002. The novel sparked the human interest in the idea of time travel, i.e. “using a vehicle that allows an operator to travel purposefully and selectively.” ^[1] It is a concept that continues to drive scientific debate, as well as people’s imaginations.

However, it is in cinema that the theory has found huge room to grow spanning across genres and decades. While many films and franchises from Harry Potter to Star Trek have used time travel as a minor element of the wider story, we are going to be looking at films that are truly based around the phenomena.

Bruce Willis portrays James Cole in “Twelve Monkeys” (1995).

#5

“Twelve Monkeys” (1995).
Set in a post-apocalyptic future where a deadly virus has forced the remaining human population to live underground, this time travel movie demonstrates the maddening effects of changing the past. Bruce Willis stars as James Cole, a convict sent back in time to stop a virus from being released, but instead is placed in a mental institution alongside the mysterious and psychotic Jeffrey Goines (Brad Pitt). The film from Terry Gilliam is masterfully shot and really draws the viewer into Willis’ psyche, as both the audience and the central character begin to question not only the mission, but also his sanity.

Left to Right: Alex Winter and Keanu Reeves play two students in “Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure” (1989).

#4

“Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure” (1989).
In 1989, Keanu Reeves was still a decade away from his career defining role in “The Matrix,” but with the lesser known actor Alex Winter, the two helped create a movie that lives in pop culture history. They played two high school students who were in danger of flunking history until a mysterious stranger gives them a time machine. Using the machine, the two airheads travel through time seeking out historical figures and making a mess of almost everything along the way. A completely ridiculous and nonsensical film that is difficult to see being made today, but somehow works as a very funny and creative movie that definitely doesn’t take itself too seriously, dude!

Bill Murray as Phil Connors in Groundhog Day” (1993).

#3

“Groundhog Day” (1993).
What would you do if you could repeat the same day over and over again? That is the question Bill Murray has to tackle as weatherman Phil Connors in this 1993 classic. Trapped in a time loop that only he notices that the day is repeating itself like a broken record, Murray works the situation to his advantage in every way. From learning about a woman in order to seduce her, to using his knowledge of the townspeople to portray himself as a God. “Groundhog” Day has proven itself a timeless masterpiece, with Murray completely stealing the show as Connors. It is first and foremost a romantic comedy with Andie McDowell as the love interest, but “Groundhog Day” proves to be so much more. Incredibly funny and sweet, this is a film about time travel that doesn’t get bogged down in the science and instead focuses on the characters.

Schwarzenegger as the Terminator and Edward Furlong as John Connor in “Terminator 2: Judgment Day” (1991).

#2

“Terminator 2: Judgment Day” (1991).
Very few sequels match, let alone surpass their previous installments, but “Terminator 2″ does just that! James Cameron’s decision to turn Arnold Schwarzenegger from baddie to goodie proved to be a stroke of genius, as the Austrian cranked up the action and the one liners. “Terminator 2″ features Schwarzenegger as the T-1000 sent back in time by the human resistance, battling the machines in order to protect their leader John Connor (when he was a boy). The film managed to not only continue the compelling story line that built upon “The Terminator” from 1984, but also created incredible special effects and stunning action sequences.

Christopher Lloyd as Dr. Emmett Brown, and Michael J. Fox as Marty McFly in “Back to the future” (1985).

#1

“Back to the future” (1985).
Despite his varying roles, it is difficult to imagine Michael J. Fox as anyone other than Marty McFly from “Back to the Future.” The classic 80s film, also starring Christopher Lloyd, not only inspired two sequels and countless parodies, but it is the defining time travel movie! After accidentally being sent back in time to 1955 in a temperamental DeLorean, Fox must attempt to get back to his own time and ensure he interferes as little as possible with the past. However, his task soon becomes far more complicated as his actions impact on his parent’s lives, and Fox faces a race against time to not only get back home but to maintain his very existence. Fun and clever, “Back to the Future” manages to get the viewer on the edge of their seat. For most, the ultimate time travel machine is the DeLorean (see cover image) powered by the flux capacitor, and no “Time Travel Countdown” would be complete without a nod to the 1985 Robert Zemeckis classic.

Bibliography:
1. "The Time Machine." Wikipedia. Retrieved on April 22nd, 2013.

Credit:
Cover Image, the DoLorean time travel vehicle from "Back to the Future."
All photos © respective film studios.

It is official: Star Wars is back! Disney buying out Lucasfilm was an event nobody saw coming—not industry wags or obsessive bloggers. The Mouse House has purchased Marvel and Pixar in recent times, but snapping up the Star Wars trademark and rights is a truly extraordinary happening.

With the promise of a new trilogy just on the horizon (“Star Wars Episode VII” will hit our screens in 2015), here’s the current sextet of films dissected and placed in order of merit.

Film poster of “Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace” (1999). Image © Lucasfilm LTD..

#6

“Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace” (1999).
The expectation and hype surrounding George Lucas’s 1999 return to film-making was pretty insane. Goosebumps collectively rose on the skins of the audience, as John Williams’ rousing score blasted from THX-approved sound systems, but things soon turned to grave disappointment and a general sense of what-the-f**kry? “The Phantom Menace” stinks. Here’s a film that opens with a title crawl about taxation. Yes, taxes. Further confounding things is the malignant and borderline racist creation Jar Jar Binks, a character “for the kids,” but whom adults wanted to throttle. Though Lucas has some dodgy racial form—inadvertently, of course—with Lando.

What just about rescues “The Phantom Menace” is a cool finale featuring two Jedi knights fighting against Sith baddie, Darth Maul. The film also included a slightly creepy romance between boy-genius/Jesus Christ clone Anakin Skywalker and teenage queen Amidala/Padme (Natalie Portman). Reverse genders, and you’d realise how unseemly it is. “The Phantom Menace” is everybody’s least favourite Star Wars movie.

“Star Wars: Episode III – The Revenge of the Sith” (2005). Image © Lucasfilm LTD..

#5

“Star Wars: Episode III – The Revenge of the Sith” (2005).
Common delusion among Star Wars fans is the prequels got better as they went along. We need to face certain facts. “The Revenge of the Sith” was certainly dramatic, with Anakin finally succumbing to the powers of the dark side of the Force and finally getting his Darth Vader on. Yet, Lucas continued to fudge the spectacle with his cack-handed approach to directing human beings. He seems utterly at home with computers and artificial figures. Not only that, “The Revenge of the Sith” features Darth Vader crying “No!” upon hearing of the death of his beloved Padme. It’s laughable. Darth Vader doesn’t cry or get upset—he’s an emotionless man-machine… with mystical powers.

“Star Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones” (2002). Image © Lucasfilm LTD..

#4

“Star Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones” (2002).
“Attack of the Clones” is a vast improvement on Lucas’ initial prequel, the arthritic and devoid of spirit flick that is known as “The Phantom Menace.” This was the last Star Wars picture to be shot on celluloid. The future would be digital. Sir Christopher Lee as Count Dooku is introduced as a new villain, and we follow Anakin’s rise and the beginnings of his fall. It might be dumb and robotic still, but Attack is a parsec ahead of Phantom.

“Star Wars: Episode VI – The Return of the Jedi” (1983). Image © Lucasfilm LTD..

#3

“Star Wars: Episode VI – The Return of the Jedi” (1983).
Two words: metal bikini! Nerds across the galaxy to this day have posters on their wall of Princess Leia dressed in her iconic desert wear. And the film itself? Regurgitates the Death Star scenario, uses a forest planet after Hoth and an opener on Tatooine. And features the Emperor Palpatine being evil before Darth Vader has his redemption and throws the old bastard down an air shaft. It’s a movie of two halves, though it does have its fans. In the late 1990s, Lucas went back and added special effects and new music to the trilogy, ridding the movies of crappy effects and alterations. The biggest crime was the removal of the Ewoks song! A cinematic act of vandalism. The replacement was utterly naff.

“Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope” (1977). Image © Lucasfilm LTD.

#2

Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope (1977)
Riffing on Akira Kurosawa’s “The Hidden Fortress” (1958) and 1930s radio serials featuring Flash Gordon, Lucas’ Star Wars (retitled “Episode IV – A New Hope” for the 1981 re-release), not only earned hundreds of millions at the global box office, but heralded the age of the blockbuster movie. Lucas and Steven Spielberg were always the more commercially-minded of the 1970s movie brats, yet Georgie surprised everybody as he started off as an experimental filmmaker. It’s a remarkable volte-face. Star Wars became an overnight sensation, and allowed the director to build his own empire after keeping hold of rights to merchandising and toys. The film had everything: cool characters, an adventure story set beyond the stars, a startling vision of the future that looked used up and like a floating junkyard, and all wrapped around a classical narrative arc involving heroes and villains.

“Star Wars: Episode V – The Empire Strikes Back” (1980). Image © Lucasfilm LTD..

#1

“Star Wars: Episode V – The Empire Strikes Back” (1980).
A sequel that is better than the original movie is a rare thing. Irvin Kerschner sat in the director’s chair, as a result of the first film production being stressful for George Lucas. Darker, leaner, and brave enough to feature a downbeat ending, “The Empire Strikes Back” is near to a classic as this series could possibly ever get. Audiences were treated to Han Solo’s seeming demise; a fantastic battle on the ice planet of Hoth; the introduction of Yoda; a Jedi knight rocked to his core by a certain revelation; and the duplicitous Lando Calrissian (a Judas figure supreme). Nobody really likes Lando, no matter how Lucas tried to make him cool in “The Return of the Jedi” (1983). His inclusion was a bit of Hollywood tokenism, always galling, especially when they deny it. That the only black actor in the film turns out to be a semi-villain just compounded suspicions. His sidekick, Nein Numb, however, is a dude.

Credit:
Top Cover Image of Darth Vader © Lucasarts

Amongst the wave of particularly fine films generated in Scandinavia in recent years, is released “She Monkeys” (“Apflickorna”) directed by Swedish filmmaker Lisa Aschan.

The film focuses on adolescent Emma (Mathilda Paradeiser), a self-possessed girl with ambitions to break into the local equestrian acrobatic team. Through training, Emma meets Cassandra (Linda Molin), an already established member of the team. The two girls dress almost identically bar subtle differences. Both enjoy dominating and manipulating, but who is controlling whom is in constant question, both physically and psychologically. Director Aschan has crafted a work exploring the concept of control, presence, sexual exploration, and ambition.

Added to the exploration of burgeoning sexuality is Emma’s little sister Sara (Isabella Lindquist). Aged around 7 years old, Sara is, from a child’s perspective discovering the tricky territory of her own desires. Eager to connect with her older aloof sister, Sara is trying to understand the notion of gender differences, which is beginning to be enforced on her innocence from the outside world.

Emma (Mathilda Paradeiser) and Casandra (Linda Molin) in “She Monkeys” (2012). Photo © ATMO.

Aschan knows how to make a taunt movie, that at one hour and twenty-three minutes feels fully formed. The director and co-writer uses the real screen presence of Paradeiser and Molin to articulate the power struggle that strength of will and desire can elicit. This arguably intangible concept is fully realised from the tight ponytails of the girls, and studied movements both at training and while they are interacting sexually or competitively. In this world, men are not secondary, but they are also not central to the female characters and where their internal aspirations lie. Aschan creates space for the inner world of Emma, which assists and doesn’t detract from the ever tightening undercurrent of drama, in “She Monkeys.”

With minimal soundtrack, and beautifully lit to catch the Swedish summer landscape, “She Monkeys” become an unlikely thriller. As with “Turn Me On, Goddammit!” (2011), Aschan also deals directly with adolescent female desire without recourse to belittling the significance of its presence.

The opening scene of “Post Tenebras Lux” succinctly captures all that the movie is about. A toddler stands in a meadow during a thunderstorm; horses and a pack of dogs run in and out of frame. She is both enthralled by the enchantment of the setup, and yet it could easily turn sinister, even violent.

This is a film—an opus of cinematic art—that explores to various extents the function of anxiety in waking life and dreams. One might declare it riddled with fear and hesitation, although simultaneously it is intrigued and worried by these tumultuous emotions. Fear and desire, these twin engines propel “Post Tenebras Lux.”

The much commented use of a distorted lens in exterior scenes, which caused blurring and rippling effects on the edges of the frame, lends Carlos Reygadas’s latest a spectral beauty! It is as much an aesthetic choice, as it is an inventive depiction of the representation of memory and its fogginess. Despite certain harsh qualities and mystery of scenes, there’s a softness and intimacy too. It is like looking through a photograph album, but not necessarily in the correct, chronological order.

Nathalia Acevedo stars in “Post Tenebras Lux” (2012).

The husband, Juan (Adolfo Jimenez Castro), appears both brutish and loving. He is also entirely self-aware of his problems. A solid criticism to the movie is this: “Do we really need another film about male anxiety?” One longs for a sequel to “Post Tenebras Lux”—to form a diptych—told from the point of view of the mother and wife.

Do Juan and Natalia (Nathalia Acevedo) visit a sex club, or is it the projection of the husband’s fantasy? Juan mentions an addiction to Internet porn, and we might leap to the conclusion he imagines the episode as part of his inner erotic yearnings. Do we judge him as a pervert, or attempt to understand his sexual frustration? Or even recognise it in ourselves? The closeness might well frighten those of a nervous disposition. In another scene, he badgers his wife about performing anal sex. She is demure and that leads to an argument and childish accusations by Juan. You cannot turn real life relationships into the highly stylised and often lurid porno fantasia. Would he really want this, anyway? The power of desire is stronger than the angst of fulfilment. Perhaps, though, the scene is literal and that explains better the hesitation and nerves.

Film still from “Post Tenebras.” Filmmaker Carlos Reygadas won “Best Director Award” for this
motion picture at the 2012 Cannes Film Festival.

To shadow, rather than counter Juan, “Post Tenebras Lux” uses a subplot involving a peasant that the middle-class newcomer has befriended. A short sequence in the village shows how Juan is seemingly oblivious to Natalia’s unease at mingling with the locals, suggesting she is less comfortable with their new social arrangement, and even a bit of a snob. The peasant has problems with his own life and family relationships leading to one of the most brilliantly staged representations of existential frustration ever put on film.

“Post Tenebras Lux” is a beguiling and richly thematic work of cinema, and confirms Carlos Reygadas as a modern master of the medium. He has captured something remarkable, here.

Credit:
Photos © Carlos Reygadas

It was with a huge sense of anticipation, as well as a hand full of popcorn that I took my seat for “The Avengers” (2012) movie. Despite being directed by Joss Whedon (known for “Buffy the Vampire”), and having an incredible cast featuring Robert Downey Jr. Liam Hemsworth, Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson and Marc Ruffalo, there was still a sense of lingering doubt as the lights dimmed. How would all these characters be brought together in one film? And most importantly would Phil Coulson get enough screen time?

But my fears, and the fears of many other film fans were instantly dismissed as Whedon managed to deliver a spectacle that not only provided plenty of bang for your buck, but also pleased critics and studio execs as well. The feature film grossed over $1.5 billion worldwide. However, “The Avengers” was more than just great, it was a movie that demonstrated that the comic book superhero genre was here to stay.

Although Christopher Nolan created a truly classic trilogy with Christian Bale as the tormented Bruce Wayne, the story also came to a close last year. And if “The Avengers” film flopped, it could have seen the public turn away from this movie category for a while. But this was not to be, because Disney through Marvel lined up sequels for Spiderman, Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Captain America—not to mention another Avengers, and Warner Bros. set to release a rebooted Superman and a possible Justice League. As you can see, comic book movies look to be as part of the LA landscape as the Hollywood sign itself.

Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark in “Iron Man” (2008).

#5

“The Avengers” (2012) will not make it into the Top 5, because it is at a hugely unfair advantage with more than one superhero. Now, starting with John Favreau and Robert Downey Jr.’s “Iron Man,” this 2008 release went against the popular comic book theme of the time (darker = better), and provided people with one of cinema’s most charismatic characters. Created by Stan Lee in the 1960s as part of a bet to prove that he could create a hero who was also a successful businessman. The character Tony Stark, played perfectly by Robert Downey Jr. is set to be a part of the third installment later this year, and there are no signs of slowing down the “Iron Man.” Director John Favreau weaved a blockbuster movie around the tormented Stark, which not only provided plenty of fantastic action and creative comedy, but also real character development. Sticking very close to the original comics story, “Iron Man” is still made relevant for modern audiences and fanboys alike.

Hugh Jackman as Wolverine in “X2″ (2003).

#4

In 2000, Bryan Singer introduced audiences to “X-Men,” one of the first of the new wave of comic book superhero inspired films. But it was his phenomenal follow up “X2” (2003) that makes our list! Whilst “X-men” introduced us to the world of mutants with different powers, the sequel truly began to delve deep into the life of these superheroes. It developed the palpable relationship between Magneto and Professor Xavier (Ian McKellan and Patrick Stewart), and allowed the new born star of Hugh Jackman (Wolverine) to really shine. In addition to reuniting the original cast, Singer also introduced the brilliantly evil Brian Cox (as William Stryker), and hinted at the back story of the franchises most loved hero, Wolverine. The movie was dark and full of in jokes, and has kept elements of humor and action that gave the original such a wide appeal. For example the opening scene featuring Nightcrawler at the White House, still looks incredible 10 years later.

Tobey Maguire as the superhero in “Spider-Man” (2002).

#3

For many, the man behind “The Evil Dead” (1981) and ”Army of Darkness” (1992) was a completely-off-the-wall choice to direct a tentpole film like “Spider-Man” (2002). This was compounded with the selection of Tobey Maguire as leading man, a young Californian actor who had yet to carry a movie on his own. But Raimi and Maguire proved the doubters wrong… twice! Although the evil genius of Doctor Octopus and the difficulty of Peter Parker accepting his responsibility as Spiderman make for an incredible sequel, Raimi’s original still explodes off the screen and could not be more faithful to the original story.

The movie grossed over $800 million and was even nominated for two Oscars. Despite the success of the first two films, Raimi’s third outing was a bitter disappointment filled with too many villains and not enough plot. Nonetheless, Spiderman has proven its ability to stick around, as Andrew Garfield and Marc Webb have demonstrated in “The Amazing Spiderman.” With another sequel for the reboot already set for release in 2014, the franchise looks set to continue to deliver plenty of incredible action sequences. However, will the new set of films struggle to outdo the incredible original? It is difficult to forget the memorable tagline and a kiss that won’t soon be forgotten.

Christopher Reeve as the Man of Steel in “Superman” (1978).

#2

“Superman” (1978) is for many the original and defining superhero, as the seemingly invincible man who was torn away from his home is unable to live a normal life, and is driven by the desire to help people. The movie starred Christopher Reeve (for many the only Superman), the devious Gene Hackman (Lex Luthor), and Marlon Brando (Jor-El). While Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster’s 1930s original comic “Superman” proved to be the blueprint for many great superhero stories, it has also been a similar platform on the big screen. It pushed the special effects of the time to the limit, and it was noteworthy for some incredible performances. The classic storyline was a success with the general public and critics alike, winning an Oscar and receiving three further nominations. The film also spawned numerous TV shows and motion pictures.

More recently, “Man of Steel” (2013) prepares an attempt to reinvigorate the franchise this summer. Will DC Comic be able to shake off much of its checkered movie history? The truly selfless hero remains close to many people’s hearts, but few films since have really made people believe that a man can fly.

Heath Ledger as the Joker in “The Dark Knight” (2009).

#1

In 2009, Heath Ledger became only the second actor to win a posthumous acting Oscar for his role as The Joker in “The Dark Knight.” A role that for many not only topped Jack Nicholson’s phenomenal performance 20 years ago, but also helped create this epic masterpiece. Christopher Nolan and Christian Bale not only built on the extraordinary platform established by “Batman Begins” (2005), but also redefined how to make a comic book film. The enthralling storyline was driven by the phenomenal cast and expert storytelling, while Gotham city was brought to life by the IMAX cameras and the rejection of CGI (the truck flip jumps straight into mind). “The Dark Knight” was based on the 1996 comic “Batman: The Long Halloween,” which depicts the rise and fall of Harvey Dent. And the film became the first within genre to break the $1 billion mark. The new, darker Bruce Wayne was light years from the shark repellent spray of the 1960s, as Nolan toyed with the audience across 152 minutes. The opening 10 minutes provides one of the most intense and alluring bank robbery scenes across any genre, and sets up the movie perfectly. Though a middle bridge between the beginning and the end of the Nolan/Bale Batman saga, “The Dark Knight” created a world that shocked and engaged audiences, and still remains one of the best movies ever made!

See Also:
"The Dark Knight Rises" (2012)

Credits:
Photos © respective film studios

Since winning a Palme d’Or for “4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days” (2007), Cristian Mungui has become something of a celebrated cause for movie critics. He is placed as figurehead to the Romanian New Wave—whether he’s comfortable with the tag, or not.

Mungui’s follow-up, the mysteriously titled “Beyond The Hills” is a portrait of a religious community slowly succumbing to hysteria, as a troubled orphan pitches intent on taking one of their own away to Germany.

At two hours and twenty-eight minutes, the pace is glacial, though it’s made very clear from pointers along the way, where it shall eventually land. The term “slow cinema” is fraught with peril, and is actually not that helpful a moniker despite the good intentions behind it. And it is a bit like certain figures in this film. A heavy dose of fatalism blasts over the windswept wintry vistas that feels positively Gothic. Yet, it’s Mungui’s point blank depiction of events spiralling out of control, that offer an environment with no clearly defined heroes and villains. There is only painfully human responses and resistances, and this packs the biggest punch.

Voichita and Alina in “Beyond the Hills” (2012). Photo © Mobra Films.

Alina (Cristina Flutur) and Voichita (Cosmina Stratan), best friends and maybe former lovers, reunite with a plan to escape their lives in rural Romania to Germany. The scheme is never destined to get further than the monastery gates, as Alina is more insistent on a shared future than her object of affection and desire. The latter is happy enough in her role as a sister soldier for Christ. And in the compound, Voichita has found safety and the love of a close knit community. The film opens with Alina bursting into tears as she sees her friend again, and Voichita asks her not to cry. This sets the tone of the relationship, the rest is misunderstanding and misery.

“Beyond the Hills” is also a study about authority figures whom render a person powerless in their pursuit of “doing the right thing.” We are then shown how emotionally expedient it is to claim genuine bemusement, as if it leads to exculpation of the individual and collective actions. The religious order appear terrified of Alina, but their priest (a leader), a man more worried about having his church and worldly status, can see through superstition and meaningless “signs.” But he commits to a course that may well ruin them all.

The beautiful Romanian landscape in “Beyond the Hills.” Photo © Mobra Films.

Mungui plays cleverly with a host of social and political issues, which along with cultural references could easily skirt cliche and melodrama. In stripping away these burdens, “Beyond the Hills” focuses on suppression of desire and exhibitions of power that turn malignant. Alina, fully expecting a happy ending does not get her way, and so she becomes like a child—disruptive and increasingly unhinged. The way these church members and other authorities deal with this girl, results in nothing but a tragedy. Is she mentally ill, possessed by Satan, or a woman fixated on a friend as a private piece of heaven and salvation from a life that has felt condemned? She’s at the gates of freedom, but denied entry.

The austerity, coldness and pace of the film will no doubt test the patience of some. However, twinned with a camera that rocks gently like a cobra waiting to strike, and at other times a master-class in exact framing; “Beyond the Hills” is an outstanding work of cinema that ends on a note of symbolism, as simple as it is deeply affecting.