Slumdog Millionaire

As I said with '127 Hours' I am a big fan of the works by Danny Boyle, but the main reason I really liked 'Slumdog Millionaire' (2008, Danny Boyle) was it's structure. The content itself was extremely moving and at points too horrific to watch, but the structure made a powerful impact on me personally.


'Slumdog Millionaire' as a quick summary is about a young man in India who participates in the Indian version of who wants to be a millionaire and ends up in prison accused of cheating as he gets all of the questions right.

This is where the film starts, at the end with Jamal (Dev Patel) in prison, he is being interviewed, allowed to argue his case and this for me is where the film becomes a innovative piece of filmmaking.


Jamal begins to tell the interviewer how he answered each question. The answer to every question lies within an experience he has had in his life, therefore through the sequence of questions reveals to the audience Jamal's life story - the high and the low points. We become immersed in the sadness of his tale, he has been through so much and even when the tides seemingly begin to turn (Winning the contest) the world brings him back down on his knees.




The film does however end on a high note, with music and dancing! in the typical style of a Bollywood film. Jamal is set free and he gets the girl! A more hopeful end to a saddening story. This is probably one of my favourite structured films ever, I like the cuts between the present and the past, flashbacks all linking together to complete the story of Jamal, told in a format familiar to British audiences.

The Borrowers

'The Borrowers' (1997, Peter Hewitt) is by far one of my favourite films, I say this about most films I write about! but this film generally is a favourite! It reminds me of staying at my Grandma's house, watching it with my sister and cousin on video over and over again!


'The Borrowers' , based on the book by Mary Norton, follows the story of a whole world of miniature people that live beneath the floorboards of our world borrowing all they need to survive without us even knowing.

'A borrower is quiet, conscientious, and inconspicuous. We don't steal; we borrow'.

The story begins when the Lender family are forced to leave their home after the death of a relative, who's will cannot be found and therefore there is no proof that the house belongs to them. Their house is purchased by Mr Ocious P. Potter who plans to destroy the house and build his own empire on the land. However, it is not just the Lender's that inhabit the house, beneath the floorboards lives the Clock family - Pod (Jim Broadbent), Homily (Celia Imrie), Arrietty (Flora Newbigin) and PeaGreen (Tom Felton !). Usually unseen, adventurous Arrietty finds herself captured by Pete Lender (Bradley Pierce), initially a huge problem, it turns out to be a good thing as the clocks are able to find hope in Pete to help them to move out of the house with the family.

However, as with any film, things do not go to plan and the Clocks and Pete find themselves at war with Ocious who eventually finds himself up against the entire population of Borrowers in the town.

The reason I thought of this film was actually through Facebook! I found an article about the actors then and now! The biggest change I think has been in Tom Felton! From playing the young irritating PeaGreen to becoming Harry Potter favourite Draco Malfoy!

The style of the film reminds me of others such as 'Stuart Little' (1999, Rob Minoff), released during a similar sort of time, I think I love these films best as they were around as I was growing up. Don't get me wrong, I love a lot of new films but without a doubt the older ones are my favourite.

The Jungle Book: Live Action

My first reaction to the news that 'The Jungle Book' was to be remade as a live action was that it was going to be a disaster. I think 'The Jungle Book' (1967, Wolfgang Reitherman) has to be one of my favourite Disney films. Watching it on video, singing along with the songs and the style of the animation was all part of the appeal- why would anyone want to make it live action?

But when I thought about it, there are several other Disney films which have been remade into live action, and of which I have liked both versions. 'Peter Pan' (1953, Clyde Geronimi, Wilfred Jackson, Hamilton Luske) for example. The first live action remake 'Peter Pan' (2003, P.J Hogan) is one of my sisters favourite films, and I have to say I really enjoyed it (Although after having to sit through it for about the tenth time it starts to lose its appeal!). This was a success as far as I was concerned. Further to this 'Pan' (2015, Joe Wright) is due for release on 16th October, with an all star cast including Hugh Jackman, Levi Miller and Amanda Seyfried. From what I can gather from the trailer, this film not only allows Peter Pan to be reborn but it explores the part of the story that has never been explained - where did Peter Pan come from. For this reason I am interested to see how well the story fits with the previous versions.



'Cinderella' is another Disney classic that was beautifully re-made into live action earlier this year - 'Cinderella' (2015, Kenneth Branagh)- starring the gorgeous Lily James who I recognise as playing Lady Rose in Downton Abbey (See previous Post!) This film was as enchanting as the original animated version, if not more. The songs, the wildlife, the crazy fairy Godmother (As played by Helena Bonham Carter) and of course the iconic blue dress.

'The Jungle Book' (Jon Favreau) is set for release in 2016 starring Scarlett Johansson, Idris Elba and Bill Murray. I am starting to think that maybe this will work. All the animals will be CG, Favreau admitting he was influenced by the success of 'Avatar' (2009, James Cameron). If this is the case, and the animation reaches such a standard, then I think this film could be a success. There appears to be a current trend of Disney live action re-makes, I wonder who will be next to step up and which story they will chose to tell?

Downton Abbey

Downton Abbey, created and written by Julian Fellowes is by far one of the best series I have watched (alongside Sherlock of course!) and the new series continues to thrive!


Downton follows the Crawley family, owners of Downton Abbey between 1912 and 1925, seeing them face good times and bad times, and the terrors of the first world war. What I love most about Downton Abbey is the characters. They have been built on in such a way as to create an engaging array of personalities.



My favourite character is Violet Crawley (Maggie Smith). Now this may be because I am a huge fan of Maggie Smith anyway, however the character of Violet provides a comical streak to the show, an Dowager Countess of Grantham stuck in her old fashioned ways. This is heightened by the conflict created between her and Isobel Crawley who embraces the ways of the modern world.

Downstairs in the servants quarters, the most lovable character is by far Mr Charles Carson (Jim Carter). He is the calming influence of everyone from the kitchen maids to Lady Mary herself. He is a friend to all and will always offer a shoulder to cry on, whilst maintaining professionalism in his role as Butler of Downton. Finally, in the most recent episode Mr Carson himself has been rewarded for his all round nice personality by marrying Mrs Elsie Hughes (Phyllis Logan). A long time coming, the wedding is small and private with the surprising comeback of much loved character Tom Branson - I can't wait for the next instalment!

As well as likeable characters, some characters are designed so we love to hate them. The prime example of this is Thomas Barrow (Robert James), underbutler at Downton. He is always stirring trouble, making life for servants below stairs extremely difficult at times. However, he himself has an underlying feeling of vulnerability. Firstly, he is homosexual which was unaccepted during this time in history, proving a great struggle for Barrow to conceal this. He is also forced to go to war, terrified by the horrors of the first world war, Barrow purposely gets shot in order to be sent back to Britain. This vulnerability creates a small amount of sympathy for Barrow, so despite hating him, the audience cant help but like him as a character.


The first series could be criticised for jumping too quickly through time, however the pace has slowed down dramatically in later series, perhaps because the popularity of the show has been realised.
The final series of Downton is currently being aired at 9pm on ITV. It is said that the final episode will be a Christmas Special (Which has now become part of Christmas day in my family! all sitting round to watch Downton) and there is also talks of creating a film. I just hope it lives up to the high standard of the television series.

Le Voyage Dans La Lune

A trip to the moon! 'Le Voyage Dans La Lune' (1902, Georges Melies) was first brought to my attention by the film 'Hugo' (2011, Martin Scorsese) in which there are several reference to the film that arguably started the idea of film making. It then appeared as the first film recommended in the book '1001 movies to see before you die' (Steven Jay Schneider, Ian Haydn Smith), so I went straight to Youtube to search it out. (See link below)

The thing I loved about this was the theatrical feel. It was a transition from theatre to camera. There were elaborate costumes and sets all eye catching and over the top. Further to this, several innovative techniques are used to set the scene, such as placing the camera in front of a fish tank containing live fish and placing the set and actors behind to create the illusion of being underwater. Its the traditional idea of creativity and innovation which nowadays is driven by modern technology (CGI, 3D).


There is no sound except for overlaying music which creates an upbeat feel to the film. There is also no colour due to the black and white nature of the first cameras, however this did not stop the costumes that were created from being bright and colourful, despite the fact these cameras would not pick this up.


At only 12 minutes in length, it proves that with hard work and a good idea, a lot can be fit into a small amount of time with very little technology. I think it is important to keep advancing with film technologies, however I think a lesson should be taken from this film, its not all about the technology, and therefore I think more films should go back to basics.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FrdVdKlxUk

Sherlock

I have to say, the first time I watched 'Sherlock' (2010, Mark Gatiss, Steven Moffat ) I only managed the first ten minutes, I think I had decided before I'd seen it that it wasn't my kind of thing. I couldn't have been more wrong! I think the lesson here is watch outside your comfort zone, you may be surprised by what you enjoy (The same thing happened with 'Withnail and I' (1987, Bruce Robinson) , now one of my favourite films!). A couple of years on, my cousin and I watched the first series back to back followed by the first episode of the second series! Before we knew it a whole day had gone by, but it was completely worth it.

Benedict Cumberbatch offers an outstanding performance, bringing both the seriousness of a crime solver and comedy perfectly together to create a very unique Sherlock Holmes that draws in and holds your attention throughout every episode. The same can be said for Martin Freeman in the role of Watson. He offers a thread of normality to neutralise the extraordinary character of Holmes, but who in himself holds bundles of personality, with his background as a soldier playing a huge part in the way his personality has been shaped. This is subtly implied by Freeman perfectly. As well as performance, the cinematography helps the audience to begin to understand the mind of Holme, making him less distant and therefore more likeable. Close up, slow motion shots of the clues in which leads Holmes to his conclusions allows the audience to follow the complexity, offering an explanation to originally impossible conclusions, creating excitement and tension as it keeps the

audience guessing.

'Sherlock' is probably now my favourite British TV series and I would without a doubt rate it 5/5, 6 if it were possible!

Documentary Categories

Within the documentary genre, there are several different modes (as defined by Nichols) which depict the way in which a documentary is made. I would describe documentary as the filmmakers version of the truth, even if it appears fly on the wall, the footage is edited which shapes a viewpoint that may be different from the actual truth.


Fly On the wall would be the Observational Mode. This is where viewers are left to make their own decisions, it appears to record information as it is, however you still only see the footage the film maker wants you to see and it is edited together to create some sort of viewpoint, although this is less obvious than other modes.

Asif Kapadia- Director of 'Senna' (2010) and 'Amy' (2015)

The Expository Mode is when a documentary is about an argument, when it is exposing something. It is often associated with talking heads (Interviews) and the voice of God (Narration). This is very commonly used within documentary.


Some documentaries however, or within certain scenes, subvert the usually realistic feel of a documentary and become some what experimental pushing the focus over to the visuals. This is known as the Poetic Mode.


Filmmakers such as Broomfield are often categorised in the Participatory Mode. This is when the filmmaker takes part and there is interaction between them and their subject. For example in 'Kurt and Courtney' (1998, Broomfield) There is barely a scene where Broomfield and his Boom mic cannot be seen. I personally favour this style as it allows you to follow the directors exploration of his subject matter, adding for me an extra level of excitement.

Nick Broomfield and his boom

Mockumentaries also have a category know as the Reflexive Mode. Included under this are also films in which you watch the director make the documentary.


The Performative mode is when you see the filmmakers point of view or opinion, however it can be argued that all documentaries do this as the director only shoots and edits the footage they want you to see, thereby allowing them to shape your opinion to a certain extent.


Finally There are Drama/Doc's. These are reconstructions (often used for period documentaries) that recreate something however this is flagged up so the viewer knows that it is not 'real footage'.


Despite being categorised, it is highly unlikely that a documentary will fall into just one of these categories, often they are a mix of at least two or more, or contain scenes that subvert the predominant mode.

Faster

So the first unit of my Film and Television Production university course focuses around the film genre of documentary, with the aim of creating my own 3 minute documentary within a group. Naturally, to prepare we were advised to increase our viewing of documentary film and TV and what better place to find this than Netflix! My first step was to look at the material in the documentary section of Netflix and add to my watch list all of the films that grabbed my attention with the aim of eventually watching them all.

I began with Mark Neale's 'Faster' (2003). This is a film that explores the world of Moto GP, narrated by Ewan McGregor, particularly focusing around the rivalry between Max Biaggi and Valentino Rossi, the injuries of Garry McCoy and the rise of John Hopkins. This sparked my interest as from the age of around 7, I remember sitting down on a Sunday afternoon with my dad to watch the Moto GP. When I was 12, I was lucky enough to go to watch one of the races at the Donnington circuit, complete with paddock passes!


There were lots of good things that I liked about this film. First of all, particularly during the beginning sequences, fast paced editing creates a  sense of thrill and energy reflecting how I imagine riding a bike at high speed would feel. This fast pace was also inter cut with contrasting slow motion shots which built a sense of excitement as it highlights the immense power of the GP bikes. Further to this, there is a scene roughly 10 minutes before the end of the film that uses a montage of narration - the names of Biaggi and Rossi can be heard building up the idea of the rivalry between them.


Overall,  I really liked this film- the content and the structure, however there were parts which personally I found did not fit the rest of the film. Specifically,  two of the truck drivers are interviewed which I think is an interesting point of view to include, they give a real insight into the world of the Moto GP, however the interview is filmed as they are driving along in the cab of their truck. In my opinion, this was quite distracting and reminded me of trucker programmes screened on television.

I love the mix of techniques in this film. Archive footage, in-car/ outside interviews, subtitles and the experimental feel of the editing (i.e. split screen). This film is well made, and explored a topic that I took great interest in.