Tag: satire

Categories
Uncategorised

The Love Witch (2016)

Anna Biller’s second feature, The Love Witch is a film I have been eager to watch for a while now. Since its release in 2016, The Love Witch has gained a cult following and become a firm favourite of modern horror thanks to its modern interpretation of 60s horror. The film follows witch, Elaine Parks (Samantha Robinson) who moves to a small town after suffering a breakdown due to the death of her ex-husband. The films acts as an ode to 1960s horror films as well as a technicolour fantasy and is definitely a passion project for Biller who serves as director, writer, producer, editor and composer. If that alone doesn’t impress then the final result is sure to please. Much like the film’s protagonist, The Love Witch is impossible to put into a box. It stands on its own two feet as a brilliant feminist piece that subverts the rules in the filmmaking book to create one of the most original films this century.

Biller’s vision is fully realised thanks to her impeccable direction and writing. The choice to make the actors perform in a presentational style plays in perfectly with the nostalgic side of the film. Also, Biller’s genius use of natural colouring to give the film a technicolour aesthetic is innovative and unique. The dedication Biller put into this film is phenomenal and she is definitely a filmmaker to watch. Her script is among the best original scripts of this century hands down and I am shocked it wasn’t up for some major awards. It’s a shame that this film didn’t receive a wide release because it’s a wonderful representation of women in film. This is very much Biller’s film and its empowering to see a woman take the helm at so many roles in the filmmaking process.

To say Samantha Robinson is hypnotic as Elaine is an understatement. From the first shot when we see Elaine driving to her new home we hear her story in the voice over, it’s clear that the weight of the film lies on Robinson’s shoulders and she carries with ease. Elaine is a tragic character, desperate to find love and will do anything to get it but faces drastic consequences. To write her off as a weak character would be a huge mistake as there is a strength to Elaine that becomes evident as the film unfolds. Unafraid and aware of her sexuality, Elaine tries to find her place in a patriarchal world that has never cared for her. This is a fantastic breakout role for Robinson and proves that she has a promising career as a leading actress. Even when she isn’t onscreen, her presence can be felt because she is so affectice in her role. As Elaine begins to succeed in her quest for love, the mask begins to slip as her self-absorbed nature and lack of empathy leads to her downfall. It soon emerges that maybe Elaine isn’t as naive as we are led to believe. This is thanks to the presentational acting which Robinson pulls off flawlessly.

Biller’s score is inspired by Medieval and Renaissance music injected with synthesised sounds to give it a modern feel. Much like the rest of the film, the score is unpredictable and deeply original. There are so many standout pieces throughout the film but the track playing when Elaine and interior designer, Trish go for tea is a particular highlight. The music numbers really enhance the film and create blur in genres as it flits from horror to musical to comedy in the score alone. There are also pieces that feature childlike singing which I think exemplifies the naivety of the film’s characters and is played at pivotal moments and the transition of naivety to realisation. I really hope that Biller continues to score her films because she perfectly encapsulates the originality of her film.

Overall, The Love Witch is one of the most original films I have seen in a while. Its unique take on nostalgia mixed with the strong female gaze makes it a strong win in my book. Biller’s talent as a filmmaker and visionary is evident from the opening shot and it’s clear that she is a force to be reckoned with. This has quickly become a firm favourite of mine and I can see myself rewatching this many times as it’s a film rich in subtext. I am really looking forward to seeing her next film Bluebeard.

What do you think of The Love Witch? Let me know in the comments below!

Categories
Uncategorised

“Amok, amok, amok, amok, amok”: Halloween Family Fun

“I’m a master of fright, and a demon of light, and I’ll scare you right out of your pants!” 

– Jack Skellington, The Nightmare Before Christmas

Halloween is a favourite time of year for many. The spooky decorations, costumes and sweets galore, Halloween is the perfect time of year to whip out the horror films and have a marathon. Also, given that we’re in a lockdown situation, it seems like a movie night will be the best way to celebrate the scariest night of the year. However, not everyone can stomach the gore of the Saw films or Midsommar but don’t fret, there are so many films available for younger audiences and the faint of heart. But why do people of all ages love to watch scary films? Filled with creepy costumes, unimaginable monsters and black magic, horror has always been relied on to entertain and stretch the imagination to its limits.

The first name that comes to mind when thinking of family horror is Tim Burton. Combining Halloween with a Christmassy texture in his earlier films such as The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993) which features characters he created. His imagination sparked a new wave of gothic childlike films that have gained millions of fans around the world. From the magical music numbers to the vulnerability of his characters, Tim Burton’s vision is undeniably horror but also mixed a variety of genres such as comedy and musical to make it suitable and accessible for all ages. Even in his later films such as 2005’s Corpse Bride, he adapts this approach and it still remains as popular as ever.

Seeing how successful it was on release, Disney have taken ownership of The Nightmare Before Christmas since and before this appeared to channel their Halloween offerings into their live-action films. It’s rare to find someone who isn’t aware of the 1993 hit Hocus Pocus which follows the evil Sanderson sisters, a trio of witches set on killing the children of Salem to regain their youth once more. Led by Bette Midler in one of her best performances, Hocus Pocus follows the same approach at exploring the scary topics through comedy and music. It’s no surprise that, despite being critically panned, dedicated fans watch the film every Halloween. Between the likeable characters and the fantasy aspects introduced through the eyes of a Californian native who has recently moved to Salem with his family. What transpires is the terrifying resurrection of three witches who are hellbent on killing the town’s children before sunrise on Halloween night or they will vanish again. It’s a fun film with quite a bit of adult humour to appeal to older viewers and lots of creative costumes to captivate children. It’s such a great watch. Besides, who doesn’t love to sing along to Midler’s fantastic rendition of “I Put A Spell On You”?

Despite never having made a feature film for them, Burton did work at Disney in the 80s but was fired as his work was deemed too dark for children. However, it cannot be argued that his influence has had an affect on Disney’s approach to scarier films in the years since. This reasoning is odd considering that 1985 saw Disney release their scariest movie to date with The Black Cauldron bringing the Studio’s first PG rating. However, it may be due to the film’s failure at the box office that supported their decision to fire Burton. Aside from The Black Cauldron, the only horror animated films Disney had released by 1990 was The Tales of Ichabod and Mr. Toad (1945) which, despite its dark ending, was much lighter in tone than The Black Cauldron. Needless to say, Disney is not the only studio producing horror content for a younger audiences.

Another popular way that filmmakers integrate horror into their films is through satire. Even if younger audiences don’t understand all of the punchlines or references, there are still plenty of laughs to be had. Take Aardman’s Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit and Laika’s Paranorman, two stopmotion animations that take the horror genre and change the rules. The former taking the classic monster werewolf and turning it to a vegetable-crazed were-rabbit and the latter making its protagonist the “monster” as he is a young boy who can see dead people. What makes these films so successful in their audience outreach is that the visuals and stories are enough to captivate and scare younger audiences and older audiences will understand the deeper context.

Halloween has always been a popular time for film fans with new horrors being released every year. Not only is it fun to watch new films but revisiting old favourites for nostalgia always makes for a great time and although it is entertaining to watch some the more gory offerings, it’s nice to watch a lighter family Halloween film as well. Just because a film doesn’t contain massive amounts of blood and guts doesn’t mean that a film can’t be scary and entertaining. Films like The Nightmare Before Christmas and Paranorman have become modern classics because of their fearlessness in bringing out vulnerability in potentially scary characters. No one has to miss out on the jumpscares and thrills after all.

Categories
Uncategorised

London Film Festival 2020: Siberia

The third film on my viewing list was auteur Abel Ferrara’s film Siberia based on a script co-written by Ferrara and Christ Zois. Marking Ferrara’s sixth collaboration with Willem Dafoe, the film follows bar owner, Clint (Dafoe) who lives in the wilderness of Siberia. Starting with a simple voice over over the opening credits with Clint recalling a memory with his father when he was younger, Siberia soons delves inwards with hallucinations, chance meetings and confrontation with his memories. He encounters his father, brother and ex-wife in a bid to find and understand himself. Ferrara’s direction is distinct and rich in his vision. His use of lighting and contrast is brilliant, particularly the scene in the cave where Clint encounters his brother. It’s a film that leaves a lot to interpretation and it seems that Ferrara is not making any judgement on Clint or his choices.

The best way to describe the script is on that spirals inwards. The opening act on the film focuses largely on the Siberian landscape and Clint’s existence in this vast space before entering into his own mind as he tries to puzzle out his life. The isolated wintery wonderland is soon replaced with various settings including deserts and woodlands, taking us on a geographical journey as well as an emotional and mental one. The script is motivated by the journey rather than the dialogue and in the first act, Clint doesn’t really speak and the writing is about how he occupies the space. As his customers in the bar speak to him in various languages, Clint briefly responds and nods as long as though he understands. Whether or not he does is up to viewer interpretation but he is a good reader of people. It then envelopes into him not being a good reader of himself.

Willem Dafoe can always be relied on to bring a great performance and Siberia is no exception. As Clint is faced with various faces from his past and present, we begin to paint a picture on why Clint has settled into his lifestyle. Clint isn’t a character that necessarily has to be liked nor is he particularly special or interesting. His hallucinations are a result of his choice to live alone and refusal to face his past. The memories are what shape Clint’s character and give a more rounded portrait. The scene in which is talk to his ex-wife, he refuses to take full responsibility for the failure of their marriage. His hardness seems unbreakable and is also elevated by the fact that he doesn’t interact with people as much anymore. Dafoe’s performance is quiet and subdued but powerful all the same. He is the perfect fit for this character.

The quick shift in locations give this film a dreamlike quality with its fluidity and exaggerates the visceral nature of the film. The film explores a whole spectrum of genre and music alike. In its genre, the film brings out drama, horror and satire whilst indulging in explicit sex scenes and gun violence. The music choices also shift from the beautiful score composed by Joe Delia to song choices that range from folk songs to heavy metal. Despite its inward approach to exploring a singular character, Ferrara contrasts this with widely vast technical and creative choices. It allows the different sides of Clint to emerge, peeling off the layers one by one.

Overall, Siberia is a film that demands complete audience attention otherwise it won’t make much sense. It is a film rich in visuals and settings and makes for an intriguing character insight. I’m not sure if it is a film for everyone as the film doesn’t follow any conventional structure or explain the shifts in scenes which can be off-putting but I think it is definitely a film worth watching, particularly for the direction and Dafoe’s performance. It’s a thought-provoking piece that explores a lot of ideas despite its short running time of 92 minutes and I am looking forward to seeing what Ferrara and Dafoe’s seventh collaboration will be already.

Siberia is showing at the London Film Festival on the 10th October. You can book your tickets on the BFI website.

Categories
Uncategorised

Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966)

Based on the Edward Albee stageplay of the same name and marking Mike Nichols’ directorial debut, Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? follows older couple, Martha (Elizabeth Taylor) and George (Richard Burton) as the cracks in their relationship between to crack and crumble with the arrival of newlywed couple Nick (George Segal) and Honey (Sandy Dennis). Very much like the stage production, the film itself is minimalistic and relies on the strength of the actors’ performances which is provided in spades. Elizabeth Taylor who gives her best performance since her Tennesee Williams duo with Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (1958) and Suddenly, Last Summer (1959).

The screenplay is nothing short of amazing. Adapted by Ernest Lehman and there are only minor differences to the film, largely due to location. The Albee play is set only in Martha and George’s house whereas the film gives us a short break in a local roadhouse. It’s not a change that creates any detriment to the film and makes for an opportunity to see how these characters act outside of the comfort of the homely setting. Martha and George’s son is given a name in the film, Nick, in the film adaptation but does not have a name in the play. Again, this is an understandable change as it creates a more emotional charge for the audience as it feels more “real” and relatable when giving him a name. This is similar to the narrator in Truman Capote’s novella Breakfast at Tiffany’s who is given the name, Paul Varjak, which probably makes it easier to confirm especially when protagonist Holly Golightly refers to him as “Fred” after her brother. Changes as small as these don’t compromise the vision of the film and in Lehman’s case, it brings a different dimension to Albee’s play and enhances it in some ways.

Taylor had had her fair share of turbulance with the press and public as her lifestyle and general sexuality was judged and she was seen as a poor role model but this film allows us to see that she isn’t afraid to “deglamourise” and get gritty when needed. She has always been a brilliant actress as previously proven but portraying Martha gives us a chance to see the darker side as Martha manipulates and instigates. She is such an unlikeable character but Taylor has such a presence that it is impossible to feel Martha’s power as she dominates with her physicality. She manipulates the audience into feeling how she wants them to feel, gaining sympathy when needed and repulsion when required. Her performance is nuanced and showed that her career was far from over.

Richard Burton on the other hand plays the oppressed husband waiting to explode as Martha provokes again and again. One of the best actors of the Golden Age of Hollywood, Burton was seriously undervalued during his lifetime and found himself without an Oscar despite seven nominations under his belt. This was indeed one of those performances and despite his brilliance, this really is Taylor’s film. That isn’t to say that his performance isn’t excellent because it is among his best of the best and shows the potential that he was capable of being succombing to alcoholism.

The supporting actors, Segal and Dennis shine as the young couple seemingly in love. The longer they spend time with the miserable elders, they start to see parallels in their own relationship. Sandy Dennis is particularly eyecatching as Honey, the initially subdued housewife who then begins to disagree with her husband. It captured the Academy’s attention as well who award her with the Best Supporting Actress gong. The arrival of the young couple gradually means that the film becomes a game of Chinese whispers as secrets are thrown around to the wrong people and conflicts happen every five minutes. It’s a spiderweb of the complexity of relationship and ultimately seeks to find the foundation of their relationship and destroy it. The ending then leaves the question of what happens next as their years of marriage and lies lay bare in front of them.

The film is a great example that plays can be adapted successfully to the big screen without making big compromises. The film allows the actors to bounce off each other rather than blending into a spectacle. Seeing Taylor and Burton onscreen is always a treat as well and to see such volatile performances makes the film raw and honest. It’s a film that feels enormously progressive for its time as the couple grieve over the death of their son, deal with their bad habits and open up about their tumultuous marriage. The characters are not trying to be likeable because they react as their character would react rather than catering to a Hollywood audience as the big studios would play it.

What do you think of the film? Let me know in the comments below!