Film Forum Writing Comp: Thread 1

Necronomicon

This is thread 1 of 3 in which articles written by forum members will be posted anonymously in a writing competition (carrying on from this thread).

Entrants had to write an article between 750-1,000 words.

We have 18 entrants, so there will be a further 2 threads with 6 articles each.

Voting is open to the entire forum.

The top two voted articles from each thread will be taken and put into one final thread, for one final vote. Hopefully this goes well and it can become a fixture of the forum in the future.

I'll now post up the first 6 articles. Please don't post until I have posted each of the 6 articles, once I have the thread will be open for discussion on the articles, critiquing etc.

Necronomicon

Article 1: A Brief History of Errol Morris

What do the following people have in common?

* Pet embalmers and pet cemetery operators

* The people of a town referred to as “Nub City”, so named because of the abnormally large numbers of residents who have made insurance claims for “accidental” loss of limbs

* Professor Stephen Hawking

* Execution technician and alleged Holocaust denier Fred A. Leuchter

* Ex-US Secretary of Defence Robert McNamara, partly responsible for diffusing the Cuban Missile Crisis

* Lynndie England, jailed for her participation in the “Abu Grahib Torture Photos”


They are all subjects of documentaries by “director-detective” Errol Morris, the hugely acclaimed American documentary film-maker.

Of Morris, Roger Ebert has said, "After twenty years of reviewing films, I haven't found another filmmaker who intrigues me more ... Errol Morris is like a magician, and as great a filmmaker as Hitchcock or Fellini."

Werner Herzog says “Walking out of one of [his] films, I always had the feeling—the sense that I’ve seen a movie, that I’ve seen something equivalent to a feature film. [It] feels as if [he] had completely invented characters, and yet they are not. We know the photos, and we know the events and we know the dramas behind it.”

In 1975 at the age of 27, Morris travelled to Wisconsin where he conducted several interviews with the infamous serial-killer Ed Gein (the inspiration for Leatherface, Norman Bates and Jame Gumb) intending to use them as a basis for a documentary which was never made but which would have been titled “Digging Up The Past”.

Around this time he was introduced to Werner Herzog who was to become a (financial) catalyst in the film-makers life. Together they interviewed “The Co-Ed Killer” Edmund Kemper, further investigated the crimes of Ed Gein and plotted to dig up the corpse of Gein’s mother to see if she was one of the bodies he’d exhumed and used to make his furniture.

Herzog showed up at the appointed time to carry out their plan but Morris backed out when he realised Herzog was serious. Convinced that Morris was incapable of completing a project, Herzog gave Morris $2,000 and pledged to eat his shoe if Morris ever managed to complete a film.

Unfortunately he underestimated Morris’ tenacity, his passion for filming people and his obsessive need to finish a project in whatever time it takes just “to see how it turns out”. “Gates of Heaven” (1978) was borne of a newspaper headline which caught Morris’ eye (“450 Dead Pets Going To Napa Valley”) which told the story of the transfer of pet corpses from one failed pet cemetery and another successful one, an event which Morris was inspired to capture.

When the film premiered in Berkley in 1978, Herzog was as good as his word. He had the shoe (the one he claimed to have been wearing when he made the bet with Morris) cooked in garlic and herbs at a nearby restaurant and ate it before the cinema audience … although he left the sole as “one does not eat the bones of the chicken”. The event was immortalised in Les Blank’s documentary “Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe” (1980).

In the meantime, Morris had used Herzog’s donation to travel to Vernon, Florida to investigate the rumour that the residents of the town were intentionally dismembering themselves in order to file insurance claims. However, his planned documentary “Nub City” metamorphosed into “Vernon, Florida” (1981), a film featuring some of the more eccentric residents, when “his subjects threatened to murder him” if he made the film he had intended.

A six-year stint as a private detective in New York City served to improve his skills as a researcher and to fund his planned next project, a profile of the psychiatrist Dr James Grigson also known as “Dr Death” due to his frequent testimony in capital murder cases. But Morris got side-tracked.

Through Grigson he met Randall Dale Adams who had been sentenced to death (later commuted to life imprisonment) for the murder of a Dallas police officer. Adams contended that the co-accused (David Harris) and principal witness for the state was actually responsible for the murder. Morris wasn’t convinced but having read the transcripts of the trial and actually meeting Harris he began work on “The Thin Blue Line” (1988) (“the first non-fiction film noir”) which is widely believed to have been the driving force behind Adams’ re-trial and subsequent acquittal.

Ironically, due to a technical problem with his camera, Morris was unable to film one of the meetings with Harris so the moment when Harris confesses (implicitly) that he was the real killer was only recorded in sound, but the impact was not lost in the film which showed a now iconic image of the tape recorder reeling with (their) voices playing over it.

A short-lived and unsuccessful foray into the world of film fiction with “The Dark Wind” (1991) was quickly followed by a return to documentaries with “A Brief History of Time” (1991), a biography of Professor Stephen Hawking, the world-renowned physicist. This was Morris’ first documentary project which he did not initiate, he was actually hired by Steven Spielberg.

Then in 1997 he used his film “Fast, Cheap and Out of Control” (1997) to develop the Interrotron, a camera device which allows an interviewee to look directly at the camera and at the interviewer at the same time, a technique which was subsequently used by cinematographer Robert Richards in “JFK” and “Natural Born Killers”.

Morris went on to make “Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter, Jr.” (1999) about the aforementioned “execution expert”, “The Fog of War” (2003) a film of the life of former US Secretary of Defence Bob MacNamara and “Standard Operating Procedure” (2008) an analysis of the events in Abu Grahib … each as acclaimed as his earlier films.

He’s won an Emmy, an Oscar, the Grand Prix Silver Bear at the Berlin Film Festival, the MacArthur Fellowship “Genius” Grant, numerous awards from various film critic circles and national US newspapers and two of his films are in the Top 25 list of the best documentaries ever made as compiled by the International Documentary Association ... but most have never even heard of him ... possibly because none of these films have made Morris any money.

He directs (highly praised) commercials which fund his projects ... we wait in anticipation for the next one.

Necronomicon

Article 2: A *****/Boards.ie production
A story of screenplays, frustration and (very limited) success

It was on the 20th of June (2010 goes without saying but I gave it a holler’ anyway which is what them rap folks do or so I’ve heard) that I voiced my willingness for a film forum writing competition. I gave no thought to what I would write and I was also aware of the fact that no matter what Renn’s entry was going to win at everything forever (A link between The Room and Casablanca? The man’s a genius!). Despite this I was hugely eager and looked forward to see what I could muster. What I could muster was so unworthy of mustering it felt like smashing my head against a wall would be more productive because in that case maybe MAYBE something worthywould come and stain itself on my page. And even if it did I fail to see how I could PM Necronomicon a page of brain splatter or how I could relate that to film when half of my thinking box had made good with its legs and abandoned my head for more humble accommodation on a computer screen. I know this is very confusing. But so is quantum physics and that has no brain splatter. NONE! In this sea of physics and head goo I was lost with nothing to put a pen on to. All this lack of ideas reminded me of when I tried to write a short screenplay about a year ago. Then a idea took me to the back of the club and seduced me with its lack of clothing. I shall write a short screenplay and record everyday’s progress. That is what I did. Now the objective wasn’t to write a great screenplay but merely to recreate the creative process in all its pain and glory. Here is my story.
Friday the 2nd July: So today I’ve just been thinking about what I’m going to write about and what exactly I’m going for. The basic story is just about two young guys who decide to write a screenplay and that’s about it. I guess that means I’m writing an essay about writing a script which is about two young guys trying to write a script so yes very Adaptation. I’m not sure exactly where the story is going to go or what tone it’s going to have but it will be very short probably. That’s the only solid information I have at the moment but I’ll get back to you.
Saturday the 3rd of July: Anyone who says they enjoy writing are liars and communists. As you can probably tell it is not going well or even badly it’s just not going at all. I had this big intro with a voice over and it took me about 15 minutes to write the voice over which is about three lines. I then spent five minutes rewriting it. Then I spent yet another five minutes adding in an extra line. I re-read. I considered suicide. I got a can of oil. I poured it on myself. I got a match. I lit the match. Then BOOM! I snapped out of my pleasant daydream of suicide and considered ending writing for the day. I did. Unfortunately I’m weak. However there were positives today. I watched Terminator and Terminator 2: Judgement Day. Massive win. I’ve just been thinking when you read something or watch a movie it feels so wonderfully natural and to get that level of naturalism must be so forced. I know I’m talking about Terminator and Terminator 2: Judgement Day whilst talking about naturalism. Writing a movie must be so HARD. The desire to immediately quit when you sit down in front of that blank page is actually so strong that I nearly did give up. The idea of writing is just so daunting.
Sunday the 4th of July: Finally! Ideas are sprouting in my membrane! As you may gather today is better. I wrote a page! Yes please hold the applause. So I have decided that the sense of tone I’m going for is Spaced but a million jokes a minute kind of energy. For those who don’t know Spaced is the Edgar Wright directed and Simon Pegg starring show which aired in the late nineties to early nougthies. The show also featured Nick Frost and Jessica Hynes. The main reason for my Spaced influence is because as of the moment I am on a very boring holiday with nothing else to do but watch Spaced frequently. Nothing much to report today but sweet relief that ideas (very mediocre ideas) have finally started to appear. Put that can of oil away I’m happy!
Monday the 5th of July: Now in three day’s I have written two and a half material of slightly below average material. But you know what? I’ve achieved something! No one but me could have written this and it may have no story structure and it’s impossibly silly but I DID IT. I’m not Jack Torrence anymore! But I still have an inexcusable love of axes...Still more work to do. And I’m enjoying it! It’s all going very pop culturish.
Tuesday the 6th of July: My God....it’s done. My masterwork is completed (and by masterwork I mean...well you know). I’ve gone from mass self hate to this just pure happiness with the world around me and a undeserved sense of accomplishment. The world is my oyster (for about five minutes until I return to my ordinary emotion of apathy and annoyance with everything). Embrace it my fellow boards.ie members. Embrace the joy of screenwriting. I might be a Wiseau but I feel like a Wiseau. Either way it’s awesome.

Necronomicon

Article 3: THE BOYS IN GREEN: A GREAT BUNCH OF LADS

As the FIFA World Cup comes to a close for another four years, the Film Actors World Cup (FAWC) is only just beginning and the Irish starting squad has officially been announced... While we didn’t stand a chance in the soccer, the line-up for the FAWC team envelops the nation in a sea of hope...
So who has made the cut to represent the Emerald Isle?

Making a return to the Irish squad, for what could be his last time, is David Kelly, who will be setting up camp between the nets as the Goalkeeper.
Kelly, at 81 years old, is one of the eldest in the competition. Don’t let his age fool you however, as Kelly can still keep up with the best of them, as we saw when he gave Johnny Depp a run for his money in 2005 during the remake of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. A veteran of the game, Kelly can often be underrated and doesn’t always receive the credit he deserves, but regardless, he always manages to fly his country’s flag with pride and is held in high regard by his teammates...

In defence we have Colm Meaney, Brendan Gleeson, Sean McGinley and Stephen Rea, all of whom are seasoned players, and are a force to be reckoned with.
Meaney, 57, made his big break back in 1987 when he appeared in a recurring role on cult TV series Star Trek: The Next Generation. Since then he has enjoyed roles in the Irish, UK and US film industries. Meaney is a fan favourite when it comes to FAWC and always guarantees a great game.
Gleeson, 55, like Meaney has had a colourful career at home in Ireland as well as the UK and the US and has become a household name thanks to films such as Braveheart, Michael Collins and in his role as Alastor ‘Mad-Eye’ Moody in the Harry Potter film series.
McGinley, 54, who has appeared in several of the same films as Gleeson has not been as successful across the water as Gleeson or Meaney have been, but he is instantly recognisable from his roles in Braveheart, Gangs of New York and Michael Collins amongst many other films which he has starred in. While he is lesser known than many of his other teammates, he is in no way less talented.
Rea, 63, won an academy award for his performance in The Crying Game and is well known for films such as The Butcher Boy, Breakfast On Pluto and V For Vendetta and is an integral member of the Irish squad...

Fighting the good fight in midfield will be Liam Neeson, Gabriel Byrne and Kenneth Branagh, all of whom are world renowned players.
Neeson, 58, has been announced as the team captain after leading the A-Team in his most recent role and also because of his kick ass performance in Taken. Neeson is one of the world’s most respected and loved actors and was in the eye of the public last year after the sudden death of his wife, Natasha Richardson.
Byrne, 60, is possibly best known worldwide for his role in The Usual Suspects, but many Irish know him best as Papa Reilly in the family classic, Into The West. Byrne is a dark horse and often scores many goals in these competitions, despite being a midfielder rather than a striker.
Branagh, 49, is often mistaken as a British actor, despite being born and bred in Ireland. Originally from Belfast, his family moved to the UK when he was nine, where he intentionally developed a strong English accent to avoid being bullied in school. Branagh however, has never forgotten his roots and Ireland has always had a firm place in his heart, and he has also done this Country proud in previous FAWC tournaments...

Up front we’ve got James Nesbitt, Cillian Murphy and Colin Farrell as the strikers, and they also happen to be the three youngest team members.
Nesbitt, 45, has one of those voices that’d melt your face and a happy go lucky, jack the lad persona that even the most evil of human beings can’t help but find endearing. Best known from his days on TV series Cold Feet, Nesbitt has had a successful career in the film industry in Ireland and the UK.
Murphy, 34, rose to success in 2002 after landing the leading role in post-apocalyptic thriller, 28 Days Later, and later went on to major roles in Batman Begins, The Dark Knight and the lead role in Irish favourite, The Wind That Shakes The Barley. Murphy is considered a hero amongst Irish fans and we expect to see him do well in this competition.
Farrell, 34, is the youngest player on the team, although there is only six days between himself and Murphy. Farrell has been the subject of much criticism over the years and has constantly been in the eye of the public due to his supposed drug and alcohol abuse as well as being quite the ladies man, but whether you love him or hate him, unlike marmite, Farrell has undeniable talent and is an asset to the Irish team...

So the team has been announced and Ireland are the bookie’s favourite to win the tournament, with Paddy Power offering odds of 3/16 for the Irish to be victorious. Only time will tell how well the team will do in the tournament, but they’ve got the support of the nation and the luck of the Irish on their side....
Good luck lads...

*DISCLAIMER – THE FILM ACTORS WORLD CUP IS A FICTIONAL EVENT CREATED ONLY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE ABOVE ARTICLE...

Necronomicon

Article 4: Why Brokeback Mountain goes beyond being a mere “Gay Cowboy” film

Every week, without fail, I always get into a discussion about how Christopher Nolan rejuvenated Batman as not only a credible franchise but also as a genuine movie icon. The discussion almost inevitably steers around to the performance of Heath Ledger’s performance as The Joker in The Dark Knight and more often than not, the person I am conversing with will say that he was blown away. Why? Simply because he did not expect Ledger to be so good. I always ask them why did they think this and they usually cite films such as A Knight’s Tale and Ten Things I Hate About You as reasons why one could have not seriously expected Heath Ledger to give us such a worthy portrayal of The Clown Prince of Crime, especially within the gritty realistic world that Nolan had created. I always ask the same question in response to this: Had you not seen Brokeback Mountain before The Dark Knight was released? Now this is a question that has been met with an array of different responses. Some responded with silence. Others would laugh and make a joke about homosexuality. Some, however, responded with anger. You see, I had insulted them with my question, how dare I ask them had they seen that film about two ******s? It is a mentality that never fails to drive me to despair, not because I am a “closet homo” as some people have suggested, but simply because anyone who has seen Brokeback Mountain would know that it is so much more than just a story about “a gay love story”. My simple aim in this small essay is to illustrate exactly how Brokeback Mountain goes beyond being a mere gay love story.

“It's because of you Jack, that I'm like this! I'm nothin'... I'm nowhere... Get the **** off me! I can't stand being like this no more, Jack.” – Ennis Del Mar.

The above quote was uttered by Ennis Del Mar, who had lived for the best part of twenty years shackled to a life he hated. Ennis had nothing to show for what were meant to be the best years of his life. No money. Living on the breadline and wandering from one poorly paid job to the other. Divorced and having two kids he barely saw. Most of all, Ennis couldn’t be with the one person he loved and who loved him back: Jack Twist. Why did all of this happen? Well, it all begins with a decision Ennis made back in 1963. He decided that he would try to forget about the man he grew to love and do “right”, which was to marry his sweetheart Alma back home. Ennis made this decision because, well, there was no real decision to make. To him, shacking up with a man was out of the question because he grew up in a society which said that if you’re queer, you’re dead. Even his own father went to disturbing lengths to show Ennis (when he was a child) what happens to homosexuals.

Now, I am going to stop talking about homosexuality, and start talking about what affects living a life he hated had on Ennis. Firstly, Ennis began to neglect those around him. He became almost selfish in his attitude towards his own children and wife. Their feelings became irrelevant every time Jack Twist was around, and when Jack wasn’t around, Ennis vented his frustrations on his family. He acted out violently in front of his kids. He threatened to beat up his ex-wife after she finally let him know that she knew about him and Jack. He showed recklessness and a lack of concern for his own life by starting fights that he couldn’t win. Finally, the more he shamed himself in front of his family, the more he began to push away the one person that meant everything to him. Every time Jack suggested a solution to their problem, Ennis reacted with dismissive sarcasm and venom.

Is this not something we can all relate to? We deny ourselves certain desires, and we choose to ignore paths that we would like to go down, but are just too afraid to show some courage and make that decision. Furthermore, because we are denying ourselves what we really want, it begins to have a toll on not just you, but all of those around you. I guess what I’m trying to get at is the central message of the story: live your life the way you want to and to hell with every one else. Otherwise you’re going to wake up one day as an old man or woman who has nothing to show for a lifetime other than a life of regret. Is it not a fear that we can all relate to? I do mean everyone, from the old man with a lifetime of regret to the young son living his life in accordance to his parent’s standards to the student fresh out of college who is told he wasted his time doing a “worthless course”, we can all relate to the sorrow that Ennis Del Mar feels. We feel that we have wasted years of our life by making the wrong decision and not having the courage to rectify the situation. But is that a life we really want for ourselves? This is why Brokeback Mountain had such a profound affect on me, particularly the performance of Heath Ledger. Why? It is simply because that Ennis Del Mar personifies what it is to not be true to yourself.

Necronomicon

Article 5: Film Promotion is Spreading like a Virus

The year is 1999. I am a twelve year-old 6th class student, with what some might consider an unhealthy penchant for horror films for a kid who has not yet reached the lofty heights of secondary school. So when my class-mates begin to whisper excitedly about a new movie about students who disappear in the woods while shooting a documentary (a completely true story), I only have one thing to say: Where do I sign up?

I am, of course, describing the premise of The Blair Witch Project (1999). An average enough film if examined in isolation, it has to be said; however, what happens between the opening and closing shots of The Blair Witch only begins to tell the story of this pioneering production. It is not the actual content of the film for which it is best remembered; rather, it is remembered for how the filmmakers created an immersive experience in which thousands of people mistook fiction for non-fiction. It is remembered for how it put viral marketing on the radar on the film industry.

While those behind The Blair Witch Project did not create the concept of viral marketing, it was the independent film which created the blue-prints for a viral campaign from which so many continue to draw inspiration 11 years on. The most defining feature of the campaign was undoubtedly the remarkable attempts to distort its fictional status. Prior to its full release, numerous websites began to spring up all over the internet borne out of intrigue, thus helping to propagate the myth. The centrepiece of the campaign was the official website, handled by Artisan Entertainment (who had bought up the rights after its premiere at Sundance). Among other features of the website were faux police reports, diary excerpts and even interviews with distraught parents of the characters, who mourned the loss of their ‘children’. Offline, promotion came in the form of The Curse of The Blair Witch; a documentary further exploring the film, which aired on the Sci-Fi channel on the eve of The Blair Witch Project’s release, breaking audience records. Film promotion would never be quite the same again.

Much is spoken and written about viral marketing, yet it is an enigma. A quick search will yield countless definitions and opinions, supporters and detractors. Ambiguity surrounds the concept, and it does not appear to be quite as well understood as some of the more traditional methods of promotion; though perhaps therein lies much of its intrigue. However, in the context of film, one term has quietly gathered momentum: distributed narrative. Essentially, it describes a participatory form of narration whereby individuals interact with and thus help shape the story. For us film enthusiasts it means a break in our linear consumption habits; no longer does our experience of a film begin when we walk into the cinema and end at the closing credits. It may begin in a number of ways; the discovery of a teaser trailer or tie-in website (two features which heavily characterised the viral campaign behind Cloverfield) or more intricate means such as alternate reality games. Upon a film’s end, we continue its lifespan by theorising about its meaning on our favourite forums, or by creating fan-videos and mash-ups.
In terms of mechanics, studios are implementing campaigns in a number of ways (I use the term ‘studios’ as shorthand - while some viral campaigns are hatched internally, many are outsourced to entertainment agencies; while in other cases film directors are taking a more hands-on approach to promotion, such as J.J. Abrams). Fundamentally, the official website of a film often acts as the centrepiece of a campaign, with all other elements revolving around it. As the internet has evolved, so too have the websites. They are increasingly dynamic and Flash-heavy, hosting animated introductions and trailers, among other 56k-unfriendly features. Significantly, a heavy characteristic of today’s film website is downloadable content, in addition to widgets which encourage the sharing of content with others; further enhancing the viral culture which now characterises film promotion. Social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter are being utilised as information and entertainment hubs. Alternate reality games (ARGs) have comprised some of the more intricate viral campaigns in recent years; pioneered by A.I.: Artificial Intelligence (2001) and more recently employed by The Dark Knight (2008) ARGs are immersive experiences whereby participants interact across multiple platforms, ranging from the internet to real-life locations. Fans who took part in the ARG behind The Dark Knight in one instance found themselves travelling to coordinates which turned out to be several bakeries across the US. Upon arrival they were to cite a name (Robin Banks, pun-tastically) to receive a cake in return. Embedded in this cake was an evidence bag which contained clues to further direct participants.

Film trailers have also become a feature of viral campaigns. Trailers were, of course, around long before viral marketing was conceptualised, but the advent of the internet has changed their characteristics. Notably, the phenomenon of the ‘red-band’ trailer has grown significantly, allowing studios to show film content which is more risqué in nature than they could on television. Indeed, red-band trailers for Knocked Up (2007) and Superbad (2007) created widespread interest in both films in advance of their respective releases. The ‘teaser’ trailer has also been important in creating hype around upcoming films; J.J. Abrams’ Cloverfield (2008) introduced itself to the world as a teaser trailer which sparked mass hype online, failing to disclose even the film title.

While viral marketing has its sceptics and detractors, there is no denying its effectiveness in terms of creating hype and building exposure; though how much a given campaign ultimately contributes to a film’s box office receipts is largely speculative. However, from a fan point of view, I truly believe that viral marketing has changed how we consume films. Many basic elements of film fandom - browsing websites, sharing trailers, theorising on forums - tie into this interactive era, and change us from passive to participative film fans.

Necronomicon

Article 6

I’m not old enough to be nostalgic. Okay, that isn’t entirely true, but I don’t feel like I’m at the point in my life where I can refer to “the old days” with a nostalgic sigh. When it comes to films, I’ve only really been watching since the early 90s, so my experiences are somewhat limited.

It also means that I’m not exactly in a position to say “They don’t make ‘em like they used to”. I was quite young when I saw Toy Story in the cinema, so in my opinion, they very much are making them like they used to, with a sequel just around the corner. I’m familiar with classic cinema though – from Wilder to Kurosawa through Godard and Welles, I am slowly working my way through a major backlog that has had an eight decade long head start on me. I’m starting to get familiar enough with cinema history to accept that they indeed no longer make films like they used to. In contrast to others, however, I fail to see this as a bad thing.

Often, when people sigh and reflect on films past, there’s the insinuation that quality has diminished, and that cinema at one time was better than it is now. There’s the suggestion that cinema in general has stagnated. I can kind of see where they’re coming from. Contemporary cinema lacks many of the features that defined motion pictures in the earlier decades of the 20th century. There’s no longer a sense of innocence. We lack real movie stars like the Bogarts or the Monroes. It could be argued that we’re also missing the constant innovation and surprise of a rapidly advancing art form. Has any recent film changed the face of the entire medium like Citizen Kane did? Barring Avatar, of course, whose success has unfortunately caused studios to start adding 3D to every other major release, even when it’s entirely superfluous.

Despite this, I remain positive about cinema no longer being like it was. I still go to the cinema multiple times every week, and am always excited about the new Christopher Nolan blockbuster, Pixar masterpiece or world cinema gem.

Today, film-makers no longer have to work with quite as tight restrictions as their predecessors did. A character can now say “****” on screen, a luxury that was not enjoyed until relatively recent times. A director can openly make points about sex, drugs, violence, war, race and all kinds of other subjects that were taboo in the past. The technology is better, and I don’t mean just in terms of “ooh, 3D!” Cameras are smaller and cheaper, and the best blockbusters have far less limitations with the ever-improving capabilities of computers. Anyone can make a movie, and talented people can do wonders with little to no money.

Of course, many would counter-argue that contemporary cinema is a devolution of classic cinema for precisely the same reasons I’ve just put forward. For me, I see it as a wealth of opportunity for the many excellent film-makers working today. Sure, the breaking of taboos has led to morally stunted shock-fests like Saw, but also created forward thinking and intelligent films like Martyrs, Requiem for a Dream, Shortbus and Reservoir Dogs. Talented directors like Lars von Trier and Michael Haneke are able to surprise the audience in ways that would have led to swift censorship in any other era. These films aren’t for everyone – although I’d be firmly of the opinion that no film is for everyone – but the themes they examine are often hard hitting, raising a cheeky middle finger to the MPAA in the process.

I’d stress again that in many ways the nostalgic have a point. I’m not sure if we have directors today who will ultimately be remembered in the same way as Akira Kurosawa, Orson Welles or the other pioneers are today. There’s a hell of a lot of talent out there, but only time will tell if they ultimately have the same impact and influence as the masters.

With all that said, I come to my main point. The real reason I’m glad “they don’t make ‘em like they used to” is that all these old classics still exist. No matter how alien the face of contemporary cinema seems, the older films are still knocking around; no generation has ever had it as easy to track them down and discover them (or rediscover them as the case may be). With the advent of VHS, DVD and Blu-Ray, classics have been restored, archived and re-released to the general public. Want to watch The Apartment? Pop into a shop or head online and buy the DVD. It isn’t quite the same as seeing it on opening night in 1960, but still. The vast majority of the greats still exist, and you can pretty much watch them whenever you want. We’re free to watch and appreciate films that predate us. Contemporary cinema doesn’t overwrite what has come before. If anything, it strengthens the appeal and influence of the past.

Not only do modern audiences have access to this huge archive, but talented modern directors are still making fantastic films. The best contemporary directors are still making funny, exciting, shocking, romantic, intelligent and entertaining films. The rate of innovation has perhaps slowed, and the morals have changed along with the stars, but cinema still is a rich and exciting art form that is full of talent if you’re willing to look. You mightn’t always find them in the multiplex – although you often can – but there are still masterpieces being made. There’s a lot of crap, but it’s often easy to forget there has always been crap. Thankfully, it’s not the crap people remember (actually, I may be giving people too much credit here!).

So yeah, “they don’t make ‘em like they used to”. And I for one am ****ing delighted they don’t.

Necronomicon

Article 7

One evening, as I was browsing the web, I half saw a film trailer on the TV. I could see an action sequence out of the corner of my eye. As the music swelled the camera closed in on the hero as he delivered his big line. “Oid raaaather go ta hell!” he said. It took a moment before this sank in. I looked up in time to catch the name of the film, Solomon Kane. What the hell had I just seen? Because it looked like a big action film fronted by a man with a thick west country accent. I had to see it.

In the weeks between me seeing the trailer and me seeing the film I used every opportunity to throw the line into as many conversations as possible. “Go to Sligo for the weekend? Oid raaaather go ta hell!”

Solomon Kane is a 16th century swashbuckler. A neer do well who spends his time pillaging foreign lands and running people through with his blade. So bad is he, that the devil sends a reaper to claim his soul. Solomon fights him off but realizes that unless he changes his ways his soul is damned to hell. The opening sequence was fast and furious and quite loud, this was what I was blaming my disappointment on. Because so far James Purefoy as Solomon Kane sounded like your average RADA trained actor. Was I in the right film at all? I needn't have worried, as soon as we landed back in England it appeared. And it was glorious “Oi have vowed to leave moi evil wayes behoind me.” He told a monk as I sat giggling quietly.

The film kicked off nicely with Solomon being sent away by the monks. Befriending a puritan family Solomon learned of a demonic overlord who was ruling the land. Determined to keep out of it Solomon and the family went on their merry way until they encountered some very bad men out to do some very bad things. While his new found friends came under attack Solomon was distraught. He had vowed to leave violence behind him. But could he really stand by and see the people he cared about hurt? As the violence hit fever pitch Solomon made his decision and told one of these demons that if he took back up the sword then his soul would be damned to hell. At this point I sat up in my seat. This was where my line would appear. “Oid raaather go ta hell!” I thought to myself. The music swelled, the camera zoomed in “Ahhhht is a proice oi shall glaaadly pay” he said.

I got the line completely wrong. I had fallen in love with a tag line that never existed. And I'd been using it for weeks. I felt cheated, and almost blamed the film for getting it wrong. In fact I spent about 5 minutes ignoring the film in my annoyance.

Eventually I started to pay attention again. In the aftermath of the attack Solomon found himself on a rescue mission. He set off across a rain soaked England towards a home he could no longer recognize. On what can't have been a very big budget, the film invoked a dark and brooding atmosphere. The characters were almost constantly battered by rain. You could see their breath when they talked. After being in this world for an hour I was almost starting to feel the cold seeping off the screen myself. As Solomon tracked his prey he was faced with several enemies, each of them taking him on in bloody battles. Slowly I was beginning to forgive the film. How could you hold anything against a film that had the lead character sigh wearily before a fight and say “So it be evil ya do be doin?”

The film didn't pull any punches. It had no qualms with killing innocents or putting our hero through some pretty awful trials. Its not often that a 'no brainer' action film can surprise you, but there were a couple of occasions where I did not see certain plot points coming. The film came to a head as Solomon reached his old home, which was now under the rule of a demon. We had plenty of action sequences and some graphic violence up to this point. So I was quite surprised that the film sort of petered out. I mean sure there was a bad guy, but he was just Jason Flemyng in some makeup and a bad wig. And there was a cheap looking demon popping out of a mirror. But it felt like the film makers had either run out of money or ideas.

As the film ended I tried to gather my thoughts. I had gone to see it expecting to laugh all the way through. And for a lot of it I did. I mean they gave a lot of super serious lines to a man that sounds like he should be in an ad for cider. But I was surprised with how much I actually liked it. In fact it became a bit of a ripping yarn. It looked great, it had a terrific central performance and it had possibly the best accent in film history. Apart from an anticlimactic ending and my sadness over the loss of the greatest tag line ever I have to say that I thoroughly enjoyed it. Its the type of film that should get a good airing as Christmas telly film fare. Although maybe not in the middle of the day, what with all the ultra violence. As I left the cinema I decided that it would probably be one that I'd buy when it came out. The rain soaked visuals will alook pretty stunning on Blu Ray. It will obviously cost that bit more but aaaaahts a proice oid glaaadly pay.

Necronomicon

Aticle 8 - How Hollywood re-wrote the West, turning Killers into Heroes.

As a society we tend to assume that the greatest threat to our cultural heritage is an abject terror which will come from the outside and lay waste to all that we hold dear. We look at the totalitarian systems of past generations and fundamentalist terrorist threats of now, yet we constantly fail to recognise what is perhaps the greatest threats to our cultural heritage, the entertainment industry and the manner in which it gleefully rewrite the past in order to separate us from our hard-earned money.

Over the past century cinema and television has carefully blurred the line between fact and fiction to such a degree that many viewers are unable to decipher one from the other. Often it is not the viewers fault but rather the filmmaker who use every trick in the book in order to convince the viewer that what they are watching is an onscreen depiction of factual events. Suspension of disbelief has long been the corner-post of cinema and given how history illiterate the average viewer is, film makers are easily capable of manipulating fact and reworking it in a manner which best suits their agenda.

Many people argue that this is a modern occurence which has gained in popularity since the attacks on the twin towers and how Hollywood waged a war on terror in which the good guys always won. Those who subscribe to this belief are as wrong as the films they so swiftly attack. Rewriting of the past in cinema has existed since the dawn of the medium and nowhere is this more prevalent than in the Western genre.

The western is the perhaps the oldest genre in the American film industry, providing as it does a nostalgic glazed view of the dawn of the untamed American frontier, an expanse as great as man had ever crossed, the last line between civilisation and the wild. The western has managed to single handedly characterise's the American mythos unlike no other. To the casual viewer it is the romanticized view of a time long forgotten that appeals to them but to film makers and those interested in cinema the Western is viewed as one of the building blocks of cinema, a genre from which many others have evolved and one which can reflect both current and past events in a manner which is easily digested. It is in essence the definitive American genre, one which around the world has long been seen as a reflection of America and her past, a dusty, bloody, horse **** strewn mirror of the past if you will.

The Western as a genre has allowed us to look at contemporary political and social ills through reinterpretation of past incidents. During the 1930s when America was in grasp of the great depression, white hat sporting, gun tooting, singing cowboys offered the viewer a sense of hope in which the good guys always triumphed and come the end credits any chaos which had ensued was replaced by a return to the status quo.

It was in the 1941 film Jesse James at Bay, that Roy Rogers starred as one of the west's most infamous outlaws. In the film Rogers plays the roles of both Jesse James and Clint Burns a fictional character whom in the film is often mistaken for James, giving their striking resemblance, a trick more familiar to modern audiences from the classic 90s action films of Van Damme. Fact is played with so fast and loose that any sense of reality soon disappears as the film descends into a farcical mess in which Burns is hired to impersonate James only for James to kill Burns and then impersonate him, it's the kind of pitch that Eddie Murphy would wet himself over. Of course the incident is complete fiction with no basis in fact though to be fair it would be somewhat pedantic to argue fact versus fiction in a film starring a singing cowboy.

In the years following the release of the film the tale of Jesse James became one of the corner posts of the western genre and with over 60 interpretations of the character the sad fact remains that the vast majority of them have as much basis in truth as the Lord of the Rings saga. Think about it, 60 films based on a real life character and only the long forgotten 1972 The Great Northfield Minnesota Raid and 2007s The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford coming close to the truth. More often than not James is painted as one fo the following, a clever outlaw who stole from the wealth to finance a lavish lifestyle, a robin hood figure who stole from the rich and gave to the poor or a dastardly villain who used the ill-gotten gains to help finance another civil war. These widely conflicting depictions of James life have led a number of and this outlook largely depends on which attempt to dramatise his life they accept as truth.

One can argue that this desensitising of a ruthless killer allows the viewer a level of empathy which otherwise would be missing from any depiction of the man as the casual cinema goer does not want to watch a film in which the despicable actions of a cold-blooded killer and outlaw are served to them as entertainment. The rewriting of James role in history is just one example of how Hollywood can a violent killer into a robin hood figure who robbed from the rich to give to the poor.

The saddest aspect of this is that it's not an isolated incident, Hollywood has long traded on rewriting the past in order to get bums on seats. It's a neat trick considering that it allows America to take a past of blood shed and genocide and shape it into something grander, something heroic, something which can easily be passed off as fact.

johnny_ultimate

Going to unsticky this now, but the poll is open until Monday afternoon so if you haven't voted yet, do!

Thanks again to Necronomicon for organising this.

Handsome Bob

*bump*

I know there's a lot of articles to read peeps but if you could spare us your time to read them and vote that would be super. Everyone is entitled to vote, don't be scared.

I think a lot of people assumed it was just the initial 6 articles and once they read them that was the end of it.

Necronomicon

Yeah, the last two articles got a raw deal, but circumstances kind of dictated that. We were supposed to have three threads worth of material, but in the end we only got two more articles after the first thread was posted so they had to be tacked on the end, after all the voting happened.

I'll reveal the authors tomorrow when the voting closes.

Handsome Bob

Poll closed, it's a stalemate. :P

Kess73

Article 8 is a cracker, kudos to the person that wrote it, and articles 4 + 6 were two more I really enjoyed, abd each of the remaining five were well worth the time spent reading them.


Missed the voting and going by the way the votes panned out, my vote would have changed nowt, but just wanted number 8 to know that there would have been a vote for it.

Necronomicon

Article 1 - Littlebook
Article 2 - MrSir
Article 3 - CaptainNegative
Article 4 - LZ5by5
Article 5 - Necronomicon
Article 6 - johnny_ultimate
Article 7 - Hrududu
Article 8 - Darko

Congrats to Littlebook and LZ5by5, and thanks to everyone that contributed both articles and votes. Apologies again to Hrududu and Darko for the reasons I mentioned above. Maybe further down the line we can try it again, and hope for a bit more of a response!

Handsome Bob

Fair play for organising this Necronomicon, it was an ambitious idea and I enjoyed contributing. Even though it didn't get off the ground I really enjoyed the challenge and was probably the most worthwhile thing I've done on Boards. :pac:

I'm genuinely surprised that I got the lion's share of the votes alongside Littlebook. As I'm sure a lot of you noticed there are a few grammatical mistakes in my article and I was pissed off at myself for letting that happen.

Anyway, well done to all who contributed, I really enjoyed reading your articles over a bottle of baileys over the weekend.

Kess73

Kess73 wrote: »

Article 8 is a cracker, kudos to the person that wrote it, and articles 4 + 6 were two more I really enjoyed, abd each of the remaining five were well worth the time spent reading them.


Missed the voting and going by the way the votes panned out, my vote would have changed nowt, but just wanted number 8 to know that there would have been a vote for it.

Thanks man, actually reread it for the first time since submitting it and realised that I accidently deleted part of the sentence "These widely conflicting depictions of James life have led a number of and this outlook largely depends on which attempt to dramatise his life they accept as truth."