One Right, So Many Wrongs

Once upon a time, in a land 2 hours down the M6, in a small town near Burnley, there was a boy, a boy who cherished everything he watched. Going to the cinema was an event, a treat, and everything was fantastic. Some of that enthusiasm for cinema is still there, but an unabashed and wide eyed view of films has been replaced with some cynicism. Why? Well when I began studying film I realised that for every good and bad profitable movie, there were a number of unprofitable ones, some bad but some criminally good. Which leads me to a trailer I watched today. This is due to hit cinemas but what baffles me is how this is getting to a cinema. I just can't believe that some people are given the amazing opportunity to make a film and they create something like this . . .



One comment reads 'we basically just watched the whole movie'. I could not have put it better myself. How are production companies and distributors not aware that this kind of behaviour isn't doing anyone any favours? Films like Inception and The Artist, proved wide audiences have the capacity to think for themselves and understand cinema as visual language. Time and time again multiplexes will put on this trash in favour of something that might actually be good. I know why but can you honestly see this film pulling in the punters? Especially after seeing most of the film in the trailer? Horror has proved time and again that subtlety is the way to a good scare. How can this be coming to our cinemas . . . now? Ok, we had our run of thrillers/horrors back when remakes and conceptual thrillers based around modern society had a brief and not very lucrative run. God remember Cellular?



And Phone Booth which I personally enjoyed. But there they seemed to get the measure right, the story made sense, even if it tore a leaf out of the book of clichés. ATM just looks like the definition of retarded, how the hell do you get trapped in an ATM by Bansky standing out in the middle of a car park?? I guess that may be a selling point. I know for a fact why ATM was made; low budget, conceptual idea, and the murder factor. If I'm at all honest I noticed that one of the popular genres asked about when I worked in retail was thriller or horror. People like to be scared and in all fairness there are hundreds more atrocities out there, but they usually hide their shame and do a straight to dvd release. And rarely do they ever actually scare anyone. I cannot believe that this was written by the guy who wrote the brilliant Buried, a really great thriller that actually had me on the edge of my seat. I can't imagine why any distributor in the UK would even consider putting this car crash of a movie on the big screen. However . . . *breathe* . . . this is all based on the trailer. It gives away nearly all of it's cards, but has saved one crucial thing that will get people interested in seeing it. Who is the guy and why is he doing this? My bet is disgruntled ex-boyfriend, or even better a taxi driver who missed a fare thanks to the douche who gave the girl a ride home. If Buried is anything to go by it will probably try and teach some moral lesson about our reliance on technology and how isolated we can end up. A noble moral, but it looks like the wrong way to slant it in this case.

Needless to say most of youtube seems to agree in their comments. It is pure garbage and looks ridiculous, I might just have to see it to prove a point. I'll eat my words if it's any good, but judging from the reviews I can't see me doing that.

Anyway let me know what you thought.

Satisfying Curiosity

I've been keen to watch a number of random films in the past week with me suffering from a bout of serious sinusitis I gave the old dvd collection a dust off and watched some old favourite documentaries like Murderball and The Devil And Daniel Johnston. But tonight I was having a random browse on youtube and came across a video that featured a cartoon dame dancing with Gabriel Byrne in what looked like a Who Framed Roger Rabbit style film. After several seconds of research (god bless imdb) I found out what I'd been missing on and discovered a familiar title . . . Cool World. I don't where I'd ever come across it before but I had heard of the title, however had no idea what it was about. I also found out that Brad Pitt and Kim Basinger also star in it. My curiosity itched as I found the trailer and saw a link to watch the whole thing. Ok . . . let's go.

Brad Pitt is beamed to the land of cartoons called Cool World when he is involved in a motorcycle accident having just come home from war in 1945. Years later a comic book artist (Byrne) is beamed into the same world which he thinks he created through his Cool World comic books. His obsession with a character of his Holli Would has him chased down by Brad Pitt who now operates as law enforcement in Cool World. There's one major law in Cool World; noids (humans) cannot have sex with doodles (cartoons). The shit hits the fan when Byrne is seduced by Holli and she changes for the worse.

What I saw was a mental, colourful and rather imaginative shit fit of a film. It's the kind of film that at times has deep subtle undertones that could make it an absolute gem of cinema, but it falls flat on it's backside because of the lack of direction and the limitations of the technology to bring it to the screen. The characters have the potential to be seriously well rounded individuals with desires and motives that aren't at first noticeable because of the serious mishandle in direction. The trailer makes out that Gabriel Byrne is the central protagonist, the poster obviously has other ideas and the film . . . well it can't really make up its mind. The animation is not on par with that of Who Framed Roger Rabbit and there is an obviously large focus on Holli as this turned up temptress with a heaving chest and body to die for. To discover this was made by the same guy who made Fritz The Cat comes as no surprise, it goes for the sex sell, rather than actually making a good movie.

I loved the old style animations, I felt a great sense of nostalgia at seeing something new from a period when I was glued to cartoons. It's just such a shame, I can see why this doesn't get as much light cast on it as Who Framed Roger Rabbit, but it has buckets of potential, especially given it's got a 15 rating. But it has this for the wrong reasons. This could have been dark, daring and noirish, and not so seedy. The plethora of rubbish cartoon characters ruin the punk feel and the weak interaction of actors to cartoons makes this a real bargain bin movie. You wonder what these great actors (save Kim Basinger) were thinking getting themselves involved in this.

I did however really enjoy watching this, it was a great discovery that rather than forgetting about I will remember . . . for a little while. It's not a great movie, but that's why these obscure films get uploaded on youtube. It's like the Super Mario Bros Movie . . . you know it's a piece of shit . . . but there's a small place for it in your heart, for some unknown reason. If you have the opportunity and the curiosity do give it a watch, stay with it and you might enjoy it. But it is a bloody car crash of a film, the ending had me scratching my head to the bone. I'm off to find a copy, a crate of beers and rally my best buds together to sit and laugh ourselves silly at how ridiculous this film is.