An incredibly impressive debut film from youthful newcomers Will Sharpe and Tom Kingsley. Black Pond is a delightfully grim black comedy about the Thompson family, who’re embroiled in a tabloid scandal about the death of a new family friend. They say that truth is stranger than fiction and, while this IS fictional, it has a realistic plausibility and a documentary style which makes the almost farcical events seem hilariously absurd in contrast with the repressed sobriety of the upper-middle-class English milieu.
It’s one of these films that will have you grinning like a Cheshire cat all the way through, giggling and snorting like a child who’s just heard an old man fart during a quiet church service and eventually letting out a proper belly-laugh every now and then.
Colin Hurley, Amanda Hadingue, Simon Amstell, Will Sharpe (writer/director/actor) and the whole cast are excellent and Chris Langham makes a long-awaited return to film (with the controversy of his own personal ordeal with negative publicity perhaps adding its own somewhat dark undertone to the film – almost definitely NOT a conscious effort by the producers though!).
It’s a fine example of typically British satirical wit and exemplary of the potential of indie cinema, considering it was made on tiny budget of £25,000. The lack of money means this film will only be seen by few people on its limited release, but as it gathers rave reviews and serious respect, it will no doubt earn cult status by the time it’s out on DVD.
More like this and more from Sharpe and Kingsley please!
Here's my short review for Vincent Wants to Sea, which I wrote for STV's Entertainment website after seeing it on the last day of the Glasgow Film Festival 2012:
I didn't really think much of it. I felt as though they were exploiting characters who had mental health problems for the sake of comedy alone, whilst trying to hide behind a pretense of emotional sensitivity. I get the whole "oh, it's fine, people with behavioural, social and mental disorders are entitled to be funny protagonists in films too, don't be so politically correct, that's worse than not representing them at all!" argument, but this was an almost slapstick comedy that set out to make people laugh, not a poignant social drama that set out to break down prejudice and change people's attitudes.
I had absolutely no knowledge or expectations for this film
before watching it and I think this probably augmented the shock that came with
its viewing.
To sum it up in one word, I’d say this film is
unsuspecting. The characters, plot and
action are all totally plausible and the realist style lulls you into a sense
of suspended disbelief which makes the impending violence all the more
shocking. When I say violence, I don’t
just mean a Hollywood-style orgy of blood and guts everywhere. This isn’t sensationalist torture porn like
the Saw films. Tyrannosaur’s
violence is real and conceivable, like it could actually happen. But it happens when you least expect it and
by those whom you least expect it from.
The resultant effect is a shock that stays with you well after the film
is finished.
The cast are incredible.
Peter Mullan gives authenticity to a character so filled with rage it
would seem impossible for people like him to really exist. Eddie Marsan is one of the most provocative villains
I’ve ever seen on screen and Olivia Colman’s performance immediately tricks you
into forgetting what Peep Show is, much less remembering that she was in it.
I left this film thinking Paddy Considine HAS to make more
films. The direction if faultless – it has
the same oppressive grey landscapes as you would expect from any social realist
film and focusses more on faces, expressions and economic storytelling than superficial
flare. His writing is top notch
too. He has a way of clearly
highlighting the issues and themes (domestic abuse, anger, lust and love) and
presenting them in a fresh, engaging, inspiring and shocking form.
Tyrannosaur is a damn good film but it’s not enjoyable in the conventional sense of
the word. It’s affecting more than anything. You're moved, frightened and shaken by the things you see. You physically and emotionally react and this, I think, is what makes a
good film.
Glasgow Film Festival 2012 finishes up tomorrow night. I'll be going to see a few films throughout the course of the day and writing up more reviews for STV. It's been a busy week for me with work and various other commitments, so I haven't really had time to post the reviews I wrote last week until now. So, without further ado, here they are:
Time to Spare at Glasgow Film Festival
Glasgow Film Festival balances out its more challenging films with Time to Spare, a sickly-sweet populist comedy.
This year Casablanca celebrates its 70th
anniversary.It was made in 1942 at the
peak of the Hollywood studio system, the golden era of cinema, well after the
coming of sound and before the entertainment industry was revolutionised by
television.Shot in beautiful black and
white this Warner Bros production has a reputation as quintessential classic
cinema which has endured, if not improved since the year of its release.With 70 years of watching, rewatching,
studying, analysing and reviewing of this film before me, there’s no way I’m
going to say anything new or revolutionary here.Instead I modestly offer a brief look at what
appeals most to me personally about this gem of Classical Hollywood filmmaking.
Ask any film buff, critic, producer or anyone ‘what makes
Casablanca so great’ and you will receive a multitude of varied answers with
one consistent feature presenting itself most frequently of all – everybody
loves the film.This, for me, is
probably the most prominent reason for Casablanca’s longevity: it’s a
real crowdpleaser.
There is a great mix of romance and action - a
characteristic which defines most films considered classical in the
conventional sense.The love triangle
between Rick (Bogart), Isla (Bergman) and Victor (Henreid) is balanced with a
complex action plot where the Gestapo chase blacklisted Nazi detractors across
Europe.The balance between the action
and romance plots is the main feature of the film, although Casablanca is a
mixing pot of genres.It’s also
political, historical drama, comedy and almost a musical.There’s something there for everyone.
The level of focus in the story is intriguing.Not only does the story hone in on a very
intimate romantic drama, but tells an epic story that spans continents,
cultures, languages and time.The union
of the small scale with the mighty has an overwhelming effect when you watch
Casablanca.
The story is incredibly complex.What makes Casablanca such a treat nowadays
is that it typifies a completely different style of filmmaking than what modern
audiences are used to.Instead of giving
us the whole story on a plate in typically highly stylized form, as is the norm
nowadays (for mainstream films!), Casablanca makes you work for it.Most of the storytelling is done through
dialogue, referring to back story and off-screen events through the exchanges
between characters.A lot of meaning is
communicated very subtly too, so every time you watch the film you notice
something new or you pick up new meanings and you question the way you
originally put the story together in your head.While this form of storytelling might be considered laborious or
needlessly ambiguous by modern mainstream tastes, it was the accepted
convention in the Classical age and its glory lives on.
The dialogue itself is great for another reason: it’s
extremely quotable.Many of the lines
from this film are just spot-on and will be cited eternally: when Rick lovingly
toasts to the beautiful Isla “here’s lookin’ at you kid”; when Isla asks “play
it, Sam”; when a self-destructive Rick drinks and laments his long-lost love “of
all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, she walks into mine”;
when Rick puts it all into perspective “it doesn’t take much to see that the problems of three little people
don’t amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world”; when Louis makes the
crucial decision at the last minute “round up the usual suspects”.
Who could forget the music? ‘As time goes by’ is played repeatedly by the
Café’s resident muso, Sam, at the request of the stricken lovers. The main
melody is also incorporated into the orchestral
soundtrack, augmented into a swelling uplifting arrangement during happier
moments and pulled down into a minor feeling during emotional low-points in the
plot.
The characters are also truly compelling.Humphrey Bogart’s Rick is a cynical,
self-deprecating businessman on the surface, but he hides sentimentality, an
emotional weakness and an enduring principle to do the right thing.Rick may well be a Hollywood analogy of the
character of America during the globally turbulent period of World War II.Ingrid Bergman’s character is, of course,
absolutely gorgeous and full of intrigue, hidden secrets and emotional
complexity – everything a classic femme fatale should be.Paul Henreid’s Victor Laszlo is an
international man of mystery, Claude Rains’ Captain Louis Renault is a fickle
and corrupt police chief, Sydney Greenstreet’s Signor Ferrari is a fatcat
blackmarket baron, Conrad Veidt’s Major Strasser is a relentless Nazi and Peter
Lorre almost reprises his role in Fritz Lang’s M as a goggle-eyed murderer desperate to escape the wrath of his
impending prosecutors.All of the
characters have some sort of dimension to them, some sort of story – even the
waiter in the café has an implied back-story. It’s only really the Nazis who occupy the
realm of the stereotypical, and understandably so.
Generally, the complex interplay between compelling
characters, complex stories, witty dialogue, provocative score and a fusion of
genres makes Casablanca a popular classic which has enjoyed 70 years of
fully-deserved love and fame.But
everyone has their personal favourite moments, lines, scenes and characters –
that’s what truly makes Casablanca so great.
Alexander Payne, best known for his low-key life-crisis films Sideways and About Schmidt, stays in his comfort zone with this film but opts for a slightly more family-friendly style.
The Descendants follows the story of a middle-aged Hawaiian lawyer Matt (George Clooney) whose wife has been knocked into a coma and will eventually die. As he struggles to bring his somewhat dysfunctional family together to deal with her impending death, he finds out his wife was cheating on him. The backdrop to this is an on-going legal process in which his wider family are trying to agree on whether to sell a sizeable and beautiful piece of Hawaiian land inherited from royal ancestry.
This film delivers a sentimental human drama whilst avoiding clichés. The trailer and opening sequence states this as the premise: “my friends think that just because we live in Hawaii, we live in paradise. Are they insane? How can they possibly think our families are less screwed-up, our heartaches less painful?” etc. The picture does seem a little too sugar coated though. Its saccharine idealism overpowers the raw edge and potency which typifies Payne’s earlier films, such as Election.
I get the feeling that even though I can relate to the characters on an emotional level, there’s still an irreconcilable gulf between me and the Hawaiian upper-classes on a material level. I subconsciously dismiss the film as self-contained escapist cinema, making it as forgettable as it is enjoyable. It's one of those films where you feel like you've really enjoyed the experience, but can't remember much of it afterwards.
It still retains Payne’s unique essence, however. His originality, off-beat humour, lovably flawed characters, understated action and witty dialogue. The story world is very rich, but delivered in an easily digestible plot. Seeing the seemingly emotionally inarticulate protagonist deal with the complex social pressures bearing down on him is sometimes hilarious, sometimes heartbreaking, but always entertaining. While not as cutting as some of his earlier films The Descendants adds another refreshingly frank and plausible feature to Payne’s consistently commendable filmography.
