Jim Taylor

A ponderer with delusions of grandeur...

Edinburgh International Film Festival 2012

Jun 192012
 

Festival season has come around again in the fair city of Edinburgh, kicking off with the 66th Edinburgh International Film Festival (EIFF), which will run for the next two weeks.  This year, for the first time ever, the Geekzine will have a presence at the festival itself, and we’ll be bringing you reviews of the biggest, best and weirdest movies showing in the EIFF’s multiple venues, showcasing new work by both rookie and veteran film-makers from all over the world.

Also enjoying his first time at the festival will be new Artistic Director Chris Fujiwara, whose “strong and adventurous” programme promises to rejuvenate the festival after a couple of slightly disappointing years.  With strands as diverse as “Philippine New Wave”, “Focus on Denmark”, and retrospectives on the work of past masters Gregory La Cava and Shinji Somai, there really does seem to be something to suit everybody’s tastes at EIFF 2012.  This year also sees the UK premieres of Killer Joe, the new thriller from William Friedkin (The Exorcist, The French Connection) and Pixar Animation’s Scottish fantasy Brave, both of which are sure to be big draws.  New films starring Robert Carlyle (California Solo), Clive Owen (Shadow Dancer) and kung-fu legend Donnie Yen (Dragon) will round out the schedule, as well as dozens of feature films, shorts and documetaries from auteurs both foreign and domestic.

With over 300 films from 52 countries playing in 4 venues (Fountain Park’s Cineworld mulitplex once again among them), the next ten days promise to bring a veritable feast of cinema to Edinburgh, and your trusted Geekzine correspondents will be there to give you the inside scoop on all the glitz and glamour.  Stay tuned for what will surely be the geekiest take you’ll see on the most exciting future releases in cinema!

Jim “Critical Knife” Taylor, the geekzine’s chief literary correspondent, and urban professor….

Mars is not a four-letter word: Why Disney’s “John Carter” is worth your time and money

Mar 192012
 

John Carter (12A)

Released in the UK 9th March 2012

Running time: 132 mins approx.

John Carter is not a science fiction film; it’s important to keep this in mind.  The book upon which it is based, Edgar Rice Burroughs’ A Princess of Mars, is not a work of science fiction either.  Indeed, any attempt to paint the movie or its 95-year old source material as science fiction will only result in confusion and disappointment, as evidenced by the bewildered reactions of many film critics over the last two weeks.  Why am I labouring this point?  Because understanding why John Carter isn’t sci-fi is the key to enjoying it on its own terms.

The “sci-fi” label has been attached to the film (and retrospectively to the original book) primarily because of its Martian setting, which has itself created quite a stir amongst critics in the mainstream press.  This article from the Guardian is a particularly good example of many journalists’ seeming inability to suspend their disbelief when confronted with an epic adventure story set on a world which science now tells us is a (relatively) lifeless, barren rock.  Of course, when Burroughs was writing at the dawn of the 20th century, his vision of a Mars populated by warring tribes of red and green-skinned Martians who called their planet “Barsoom” must have seemed quite plausible.  It was, after all, a very different time.  The film’s slavish adherence to its source material in this respect might seem foolhardy in an age where we know just how unrealistic such a setting is, but it begins to make sense if we accept that John Carter is not really sci-fi at all, but is instead much closer to fantasy.

Works of science fiction, on the whole, always suppose a certain amount of plausibility in their premises.  While their settings and characters may seem outlandish, there is always the suggestion that we – the readers and viewers – are experiencing a world which could, one day, be realised.  Not so with works of fantasy, whose concepts seem downright absurd when considered from a realistic perspective.  This doesn’t stop them from being great stories, but if one comes to a fantasy film with the same expectations as one would have of a piece of science fiction, severe disappointment is sure to follow.  Read A Princess of Mars, and you’ll experience a pulpy, action-adventure tale set in a strange world of bizarre creatures, beautiful princesses, epic battles and heroic quests.  In short, a book which – superficially speaking – has far more in common with the works of Tolkien and C.S. Lewis than it does with those of Asimov or Clarke.  Its Martian setting is the only thing which links it to the more plausibly-inclined science fiction genre, and all the scientific discoveries of the 20th century have done is brought this aberration in line with the book’s true, fantastical nature.  Barsoom could just as easily be Narnia, and we shouldn’t think of it literally as Mars, but rather as “Mars”.  All the cinema-goer of 2012 needs to know when watching John Carter is that the hero has found himself in a strange new world that is not our own.  Any agonising over the plausibility of its setting will simply hamper one’s enjoyment of the film.

Rather than being a weakness, John Carter‘s faithfulness to Burroughs’ original novels is actually its greatest strength.  The sheer reckless abandon of the movie is a welcome break from the formulaic and rather safe blockbusters of recent years.  Burroughs’ more outrageous ideas are embraced with glee by the film-makers, and really very little has been tempered for the sake of a cynical contemporary audience.  A principled, 19th-century Virginian cavalryman (his past as a Confederate Captain left satisfyingly murky) ends up on another planet, discovers the difference in gravity gives him superhuman strength and agility, and sets about battling armies, rescuing a princess and saving the world.  That’s the plot in a nutshell.  Director Andrew Stanton is not interested in making any apologies for the pulpy nature of the story or its characters, and the result is a refreshingly bonkers yarn which really needs to be taken on its own terms to be appreciated.  The film looks incredible (as you’d expect for a project which reputedly cost $250 million), with steampunk airships gliding across expansive, alien landscapes whilst an array of convincing CGI creatures gaze on in wonder.  There are solid performances from Lynn Collins as Dejah Thoris and the ever-dependable Mark Strong in yet another villainous role, and despite a few digressions the film’s storyline holds together well and isn’t sacrificed for the sake of superfluous action sequences.  The injection of some knowing humour into the story is perhaps the sole concession made to a modern audience, and it’s a welcome one, as some of the film’s more ridiculous features would have been hard to stomach with a completely straight face.

John Carter is not, however, a perfect film.  Some judicious editing would have worked wonders on several overlong exposition sequences, and Taylor Kitsch – despite some moments of gravitas – lacks the charisma and the acting range to be completely convincing as the eponymous Earth-man.  Stanton and his fellow screenwriters have also made the questionable decision to incorporate elements from the 2nd and 3rd books in Burroughs’ original series, leading to some slightly unwieldy plot turns in an otherwise smooth-running narrative.  These issues aside, though, John Carter is an immensely enjoyable romp, and nowhere near deserving of the critical mauling it has received in some quarters.  The sad fact is that the film’s legacy may well be determined firstly by Disney’s abysmal attempts at marketing, and secondly by the crowd of disappointed sci-fi fans whose judgement rests in part on the plausibility of an inhabited Mars.  The key to enjoying  John Carter is to meet it halfway.  Abandon your preconceptions and give in to the fantastical, and you’ll discover that this movie is one of those rare beasts; a blockbuster that just wants to have fun.

Jim “King of Nantwich” Taylor

Before Prometheus: What Peter Weyland’s TED talk tells us about the Alien-ating nature of progress

Mar 132012
 

 

Guy Pearce as the enigmatic Peter Weyland. What exactly is he up to?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUxdAWrsag8

and www.weylandindustries.com

 

With the Summer blockbuster season fast approaching, the latest piece of Hollywood viral marketing to light up the blogs and social networks of the great webtropolis is this 3-minute video, which acts as a teaser of sorts for Ridley Scott’s hotly-anticipated Alien prequel Prometheus, due out in June.  Intriguingly, the clip seems to be aimed squarely at fans of the franchise rather than the casual viewer, as the word “Prometheus” is used only in reference to the mythical Titan, and only those with an intimate knowledge of the Alien universe will understand the significance of the name Weyland.  One could question the wisdom of such a tactic, as surely the people at whom the video is targeted are the ones most likely to see the movie anyway.  Maybe it’s just an extra treat for the fans, who knows?  What is more interesting, however, than this underlying marketing strategy is the content of the video itself, and the implications it has for our understanding and interpretation of the recurring themes of the Alien franchise.

The clip features Guy Pearce in character as Peter Weyland, founder of the company that will presumably become Weyland-Yutani, the sinister corporation ever-present in the background of the other films in the series. Weyland is giving a speech at a future version of the TED conference, taking place in 2023 – sixty-two years before the setting of Prometheus.  In front of an enraptured audience, Weyland (in a plummy English accent which some have considered to be an attempted impression of John Hurt) extols the virtue of humanity’s technological development, making a brief mention of the androids which appear in Alien and its sequels.  The creation of such life-forms, he claims, signals humanity’s ascent to godhood.  This small glimpse of Weyland’s possibly delusional nature unsettles the onscreen audience, and shifts the tone of the clip to a more sinister atmosphere.  Weyland then concludes his speech with talk of his unlimited ambition and unstoppable drive to change the world.

Guy Pearce deserves praise here for a magnetic performance as the ever-so-slightly unhinged Weyland, but what he actually says during his mere 3 minutes onscreen is of huge importance, too.  This newly-released clip could be seen as just an enjoyable bit of fluff to whet fans’ appetites before Prometheus is released in June, but it’s especially interesting to see how Weyland’s personal Machiavellian ideals were the ethical foundation of his company, and evidently continued to inspire future generations.  The Weyland-Yutani corporation’s lust for new technology, for unlimited progress by any means necessary has been evidenced by the underhanded tactics of some of its employees in previous installments in the franchise, as they scrambled to find any way they could to acquire the deadly alien life-form and use it for their own purposes.  More importantly, though, the video invites us to consider some eerie simlarities between the behaviour of Weyland and his successors and that of the alien xenomorphs with which his employees would eventually make contact.  Both Weyland-Yutani and the aliens pursue their respective goals (technological progress for the humans, continuous reproduction for the aliens) relentlessly, without any heed of moral concerns.  The alien xenomorphs, presumably, possess no moral capacity to speak of, while the agents of the company have set theirs aside; either way the end result is the same.  Unfettered by moral restraint, the two groups are united in their slavish dedication to processes which have no end in sight, and in the pursuit of which no sacrifice is too great; an amoral obsession which can be traced right back to the mad glint in Peter Weyland’s eye.  Humanity was not, as he says, becoming godlike.  They were becoming alien.

How much of this subtext is genuinely intended by Ridley Scott and Damon Lindelof is questionable, and it is perhaps fanciful – though tempting – to speculate that Weyland and his ilk are also intended to be a satire on the amoral world of contemporary big business.  That said, the alien/corporate comparison is an easy one to make, and once again brings to light a somewhat overused but no less poignant sci-fi trope; it is human beings who are the real monsters.

Jim “This Time It’s Braw” Taylor, student & bookseller

DVD review: Matinee (1993)

Feb 192012
 

As a director, Joe Dante will forever be associated with more recognisable achievements like Gremlins (1984), Explorers (1985) and The ‘Burbs (1989), but in 1993 he also made a wonderful little film which serves as both a celebration of the monster movies of his youth, and a biting satire of ’60s Cold War hysteria.

Matinee tells the story of Gene and Dennis Loomis, two young brothers who are living on a military base in Key West, Florida during the Cuban missile crisis of 1962.  As the grim possibility of nuclear war hangs over them, the brothers seek solace in the local movie theatre, which seems to show an almost endless parade of schlocky horror films.  The news that maverick producer Lawrence Woolsey (John Goodman), is coming to town to showcase his new monster movie, “Mant!”, brings a glimmer of excitement into the boys’ lives, but in a town on the brink of perceived annihilation even something as simple as getting free passes to the matinee can lead to a dramatic string of unforeseen consequences.

Like The Goonies – one of its spiritual predecessors – Matinee recognises the natural resilience of its child protagonists.  The teen-aged heroes consistently show themselves to be more level-headed than the adults around them, whether it be in facing down the oncoming apocalypse or just persevering through a scary movie.  This theme is beautifully played out in a sequence where a local teacher (a figure of stern authority in an earlier scene) is reduced to a nervous wreck in his pursuit of breakfast cereal during an outbreak of panic-buying at the local grocery store, all the while being coolly observed by an amused Gene.  The exception to this rule is Woolsey himself, a man who at times resembles an overgrown kid with his wild enthusiasm for movies and his apparent ambivalence in the face of potential mass extermination.  He rises above the self-interested cliche which his character could so easily have become, and instead emerges as a inspirational figure; the only adult who doesn’t let himself be cowed by the very real threat of nuclear war.  Part of this is of course down to his fervent desire to sell his movie to the people of Key West, whatever the odds stacked against him by events unfolding in Cuba, but it’s hard not to see him in a favourable light as he talks passionately about bringing entertainment to a town of, as he calls them, “yokels”.  Woolsey’s speech about the joy and awareness of living that only a brush with mortal danger can bring is, however, a piece of sinister satire attacking American and Soviet approaches to propaganda during the Cold War years.  It is one of those points in the film at which Dante gently reminds us that Matinee has a message to convey about the use and abuse of spectacle in manipulating our emotions, and there is surely no spectacle greater in the human imagination than that of The Bomb.

While the eponymous villain of Woolsey’s “Mant!” is a monstrous hybrid of man and insect (humorously rendered in rubber), Matinee itself features a monster which is less obvious, but no less terrifying.  Although never appearing on-screen (except in dream sequences or as a special effect) The Bomb – and the terrible destruction it represents – is always lurking in the wings.  The fear of its arrival consumes every waking moment of the characaters’ lives, the film’s atmosphere heavy with a dark threat despite its sunny Floridian setting.  Like the great horror directors to whom he’s paying tribute, Dante knows that his monster is most effective when its true nature is left to the imagination, and though we know that the movie must surely end without the commencement of World War III, that doesn’t stop us sensing the cold, persistent dread that the characters must all be feeling.  Despite all this, however, Matinee as a whole never feels suffocated by the nuclear threat, and has the same easy charm as many of Dante’s other works.  At heart, it’s an adventure film which pays tribute to the magic of cinema, and while it may not be as epic in scope as films like The Goonies  or Dante’s own Explorers, it still does a great job of combining a portrayal of quirky, small-town America with a more solemn message about those who would sell us our dreams.  In short, Matinee is a thoroughly enjoyable film about a time when the cinema really could seem like a gateway to another world.  All of which makes it even more frustrating that it isn’t currently available on DVD!

Jim ‘To me, Poseidon!’ Taylor, student, bookseller & Dwarf Squire

Midwinter Chills: The Ghost Stories of M.R. James

Dec 132011
 

The British national tradition of Christmas ghost stories is something of which I was uttely ignorant until one December a couple of years ago, when a friend introduced me to the work of M. R. James.  Widely regarded as being one of the finest writers of ghost stories in the English language, James would hold small gatherings every Christmas Eve in his study at King’s College,Cambridge, where he was a Mediaeval scholar and provost from 1905 to 1918.  In this presumably warm and comfortable setting, James’ stories, read aloud by the author, would regularly induce a chill that no amount of brandy could banish.

Although his academic work was much celebrated, it was for these ghost stories that James would become famous, and even reading them nearly a century after they were first written it’s not difficult to see why.  Eschewing cheap scares and obvious gore, James’ tales have an incredible sense of atmosphere, something which is far rarer and more valuable in the telling of an effective ghost story.  The most gruesome elements are often merely implied by the author, leaving them instead for the mind of the reader to fully envisage.  This use of suggestion, coupled with an inescapable, creeping sense of dread characterised much of James’ writing, and it comes as no surprise to learn that H.P. Lovecraft was known to be an admirer of his work.

But frightening though they frequently are, James’ tales still seem imbued with an almost pastoral warmth, mainly through his choice of setting.  Most of his stories are framed as real-life accounts related to the author second hand, with the protagonist usually a fellow academic visiting a country estate, abbey or rustic lodging house, only to discover that the pleasant veneer of their surroundings conceals something unexplainable and terrifying.  This jarring juxaposition of such quaint and idyllic locations with shocking supernatural events works particularly well in creating an unsettling reading experience.  James was in fact considered somewhat revolutionary in his day for this choice of setting, as it marked a departure from the gothic style that had characterised the work of many of his predeccesors.  He enjoyed using this more realistic approach, he said, as it was easier to make the reader believe that their own humdrum existence was only one wrong turn away from a waking nightmare.

It’s certainly difficult to choose a personal favourite from amongst James’ many wonderful creations, but the three that stick in my mind most vividly are the demonic occupant of Number 13, the sinister “black pilgrimage” of Count Magnus and the cautionary fable of Oh, Whistle and I’ll Come to You, My Lad.  The latter has been adapted twice for television by the BBC; first as a surreal and disturbing short film in 1968 (which is now sadly unavailable), and more recently as a much inferior modern reimagining in 2010.  All of these stories capture the essence of James’ writing, steeped as they are in the sort of atmosphere he loved to conjure up in aCambridge study every Christmas Eve.  If you’re looking for chills of a different kind this winter, the ghostly tales of M. R. James will remind you just how good a scary story can be.

Jim Taylor, Senior Bookseller, Waterstone’s Edinburgh Cameron Toll 

 Newer Entries