The first post of a new year, and I've decided to review The Life of Pi, which I saw in my local cinema on New Year's Day. The film is based on the prize winning book of the same name, by Yann Martel, and has been translated to the screen by director Ang Lee. It is available in 3D, but I saw it in plain old 2D. The film is told in flashback by an older version of Pi to a writer, who has heard he has an amazing story to tell - and so he tells him this wondrous story of he survived, as a young man, in a lifeboat with a tiger called Richard Parker, after the ship he was on sunk.
The film is visually fantastic, without the 3D, it looks great. Even in the quieter scenes, like in India and with the writer, look fresh and are full of colours. However, the best scenes happen out at sea, when the ship sinks in a whirlwind of rain and when Pi is stranded in the ocean. Light is used to a great effect in a scene where Pi looks beneath the waves and sees a flurry of strange and lovely images - including a colourful glimpse of galaxies and stars.
Whilst those scenes are brilliant for their dreamlike quality, the tiger is incredible for its realism. I believe it must be mostly CGI, but it looks very real. It also sounds very real - its growling sounds threatening and close. I must say that the three actors who portrayed Pi were all excellent as well. They were all completely believable, and even though they were dealing with quite a dramatic story, they came across as melodramatic. Pi is a charming character, one which I enjoyed watching and who I sympathised with - which is fortunate, because as an audience we spend a lot time with him.
Now, I've gushed a bit about the look of the film and the main character, but what makes this film so good, I think, is that it is more than just a pretty face. In a way you can view it as two films - a wondrous story about a boy and tiger in a boat, or as beautiful discussion on religion, philosophy and human nature, without a perfectly definite answer at the end. I won't spoil the ending for anyone here, but if you have an interest in faith, human nature or philosophy, and a friend to discuss it with, you'll be talking for hours. It is a very thought provoking film, if you wish it to be, and I am sure people will have lots of different interpretations. This is why I think The Life of Pi may become a classic film one day - because its so lovely to watch, and yet so thought provoking. Who knows, ether way I can highly recommend it, and I think I may go see it again, but in 3D.
I thought, since this post would be the 40th I've written, and since we're gliding into a whole new this evening, I'd celebrate with a glance back at the previous year, and a look forward to the next. It's been pretty amazing for Britain, with the Olympics and the Jubilee, both of which were broadcast across the nation, and I guess for me too - I started this blog earlier this year, I worked at an Odeon, I went to two Second Light Lab events, wrote for an online magazine, entered a couple of script competitions and I got a position in an independent film company again. However, its now next year I am most excited about, as I have all sorts of ideas and plans for next year and some may work, some may not. I am definitely going to shoot my short science-fiction film - so watch this space! - but I also want to start up a webseries, which is going to be a bigger challenge. I've seen the candidates for the Streamy Awards, and they are amazing! If you haven't heard of the Streamy Awards yet, they are the awards for internet based TV, and this is only their third year running. I'd also like to improve this blog over the next year, start doing regular reviews of films and articles on the roles in the industry, give it more structure, rather than the randomness that its so far been. So, if you have any suggestions please leave a comment! But enough about me...
Here is a great mash-up video of, if not all, then alot of trailers from films of 2012, beautifully edited together. Enjoy!
It's fascinating where a single memory, or a thought, can take you.
Years ago I saw a Simpsons episode a character from another animated show, outside of the Simpson's universe, crosses over into the world of Springfield. I had never seen this other animated show, or heard of it, so I don't think I paid much attention to the character at the time.
Then a few days ago, for some reason, I remembered that character again - he had been a fictional film critic. This intrigued me. I promptly searched the internet, and I found what wanted - the episode had been A Star is Burns, the character was Jay Sherman and the show was The Critic.
Still intrigued I then went and watched The Critic. This wasn't particularly difficult since there were only two series, plus a clutch of webisodes much later on in 2000-2001.
The show is set in New York and centres around Jay Sherman, voiced by Jon Lovitz, an overweight, balding, film critic in New York, who pans nearly all the movies he reviews. In the first series he also doesn't have much luck with women either. The supporting cast include his billionaire boss Duke, his make-up lady Doris, his parents, his sister Margo, his ex-wife, son and his Australian actor friend Jeremy.
The episodes generally deal with Jay's relationships with his friends, family and women, and the struggle he has with his boss over the ratings for his show, Coming Attractions - Jay is not very popular with the viewers because he thinks every movie stinks, which is in fact, one of his catchphrases.
The show was created and produced by Al Jean and Mike Reiss, with producer James L. Brooks who owns Gracie Films, in the early 90's - and yes, those names may look familiar because they have all been involved with The Simpsons, and there was fact actually some controversy over The Critic/Simpsons crossover episode, which Matt Groening apparently complained was just an advert for show, which had just moved to FOX.
Now, I have been trying not to compare to The Critic to The Simpsons, because even though it has a lot of links Springfield it is a totally different show.
However, the Simpsons is the biggest mainstream cartoon and I was introduced to The Critic through the same said cartoon, so perhaps its not to unsurprising, if I end up comparing Jay Sherman to Homer Simpson. After all they are similar - fat, balding, attention seeking, useless at times, but also think Jay Sherman shares alot of qualities with another Simpsons character - Lisa Simpson. Yep, Lisa. Why? Because Jay Sherman is often, like Lisa, the voice of integrity and reason in a world of stupidity. For example, in the episode Uneasy Rider where Jay quits his job rather than promote a chewing tobacco, pointing out to his boss that his audience includes children. In other cartoons, including Family Guy and American Dad, the protagonist might have spent the whole episode realising that they should quit - Jay does in five seconds.
Not to say that he doesn't put up with promotions for cigarettes and beer in his show in other episodes, but he does so unwilling. Much like Lisa, he can also be sensitive, considerate, insightful and sometimes unselfish. Jay generally wants to make the world better, though mainly in the film department.
To be fair of course, the show isn't perfect. The stories, like any show, can be a bit hit and miss - and one episode even ended, annoyingly, without properly resolving a storyline. The fact that it was done in the early 90's does show too, from time to time - for example in a gag about Princess Diana. Also, if you are not American some of the cultural and political jokes may go over your head, more so than in current American cartoons - I am British, so I don't know who Milton Berle is, and whether its funny or not if he acts like a ninja.
Nonetheless, I think it is an enjoyable cartoon which has a good mix of intelligent humour, silliness and slap-stick - and its I think its theme song by Hans Zimmer is wonderful, especially the second series version.
So it is rather a shame that The Critic was cancelled so early on. Though the series is on DVD now, and I hear that it has become something of a cult programme - so gone, but not forgotten at least! To find out more about the series, check out this website: The Critic - starring Jon Lovitz.
Ah, Christmas, and the annual Christmas television - the Christmas specials, the 'classic' Christmas films and the Queen's Speech, which this year is in 3D, for some reason. So, here's my brief round up of some of the Christmas specials - those one-off episodes of popular television series centred around the Christmas holiday itself.
As usual the BBC has a Doctor Who Christmas special, which is - I think for the second time in the reboot's history - acting as a bridge for the series into the New Year.
It's interesting to note that the last two specials have both been inspired by Christmassy stories - A Christmas Carol and The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe - and wonder if it'll turn out that the coming special gives a nod to another literary classic this year. Though so far the trailer does not seem to suggest it - though the Doctor in a top hat does remind one of the Madder Hatter somewhat. These specials can be a bit hit and miss, and I wasn't to keen on last year's. However this year looks like it might be rather good - with deliciously creepy looking snowmen and the addition of Richard E. Grant and Ian McKellan doing some voice-acting.
There's also going to be plenty of period drama from Downton Abbey, Call the Midwife and The Making of a Lady.
There's plenty for young children as well, with the sequel to The Snowman - The Snowman and The Snow Dog on Channel 4 on Christmas Eve. Whilst on Christmas Day, there is the animation Room on the Broom on the BBC, which features a whole host of voice talent that adults will enjoy recognising - including Gillian Anderson, Simon Pegg and Sally Hawkins. Well that's a quick look at what's on telly, for more Christmas listings and reviews, check out the Radio Times site.
So, this is post is a little late - as I usually post on Sunday's - but I've been really distracted and busy the last few days, and of course Christmas is coming up!
Anyway, exciting and sad news. I sent a script into First Light Movies as part of a pilot grant with a group of filmmakers, but we sadly did not get the funding. However, I have decided that I am going to do the film anyway. Its a short of course, in fact its short film I pitched at the Second Light Producer's Lab a few months ago, and I wrote it with the idea of making it on almost no budget. I remember a lecturer at the Producer's Lab telling us how about a web series that was meant to be nearly no budget, had actually cost about about £1,000 pounds to make! Now I know in real terms - when we're talking about budgets for films like The Hobbit or Cloud Atlas, or epic television shows like Battlestar Galactica and True Blood - that £1,000 is amazing cheap. However, I was still really surprised - a £1,000 is not no-budget! My goal, at least at the moment, is to produce stuff to a high standard on barely any budget. Which I suppose at this stage in my career, I can. Because I know people who are trying, like me, to break in and who may own better equipment or have different skills, but are happy to go in for free so they can gain a credit for their developing CV. Also the advent of YouTube has allowed lots of people to create lots of cheap but creative media. That's another subject I want to explore in a post, web series and online series - but that's for another day.
It is a truth universally acknowledged - if you don't mind me borrowing from Austen here - that one anyone interested in being in the media, is in need of a portfolio. So recently I have been browsing the web for screenwriting competitions, as winning a competition is going to look good on the old CV, as well as hopefully give me the opportunity to get one of my ideas made. However, I have not just been limiting myself to screenwriting competitions. I am going to enter Stones & Stories, a competition looking for ideas for a fifteen minute radio play, which ends on the 10th of December - so I am working to writing and re-writing this weekend! Which brings me to the main point of this entry, and that's radio. Radio, though I often overlook it, is really a wonderful medium for a writer, because it can allow you to do pretty much anything - and on a much lower budget than TV and film. Two good examples of this freedom are two of my favourite radio shows, The Goon Show and The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.
The Goon Show in particular actually benefits from the fact it is not visual. In one episode for example, Neddie describes how sees a beautiful veiled woman, who goes up to - only to discover it Eccles in disguise! This is much easier, much more surprising on the radio as the audience is unable to see veiled woman. On TV the surprise might be given away by the masculinity of the body underneath the woman's clothing. You can also do hundreds of things on radio that would look unrealistic or use up a lot of budget on television - such as Ford turning into a penguin in The Hitchhikers Guide, or The Goons being able to defy physics when Neddie lets Eccles stand on his shoulders, and then pulls Neddie up onto his.
That's not to say that radio shows have not been converted to the screen. The Hitchhiker's Guide of course was, and the effects were very good - except perhaps for Zaphod's second head.
The other thing I like about radio, and this again is apparent in my two examples, is its use of wordplay. Though that should not be surprising as dialogue is really what has to tell the story - along with some carefully chosen ambiance and sound effects of course. I suppose in short, what I am trying to say is, to all those writers out there - television and film isn't the only medium, and the radio gives a writer an amazing freedom in terms of budget and scope of story. You can write about any place, any time, any person dead or alive and all you needs is the sounds and the voices. For another example of this check out Old Harry's Game, a sitcom about the Devil - it is actually a radio show, but some clever and talented person has done a stop-motion for it.
Anyway, please tell me if you agree. Do you think radio gives you more freedom, story wise? What about animation, is that the same?
