MOON, for us the best film of 2009, won a BAFTA for director Duncan Jones for outstanding debut by a British writer, director or producer at last night's awards bash.
This might seem like a fringe category shoehorned in to make sure that British talent wins something (mainly because it is), but the fact is that the film should have been vying for major awards like Best Film, Best Director, Best Actor etc especially over the likes of AVATAR and DISTRICT 9, both of which were entertaining but not a patch on the intelligent, mesmerising, stunning MOON.
So, well done Duncan, you deserved better and more, but be consoled by the fact that your film is the better one and won the Sci Fi Freak's award the Golden Freakie, for best film of 2009.
Monday, 22 February 2010
BAFTA gets it right over AVATAR
AVATAR, now the biggest moneyspinning movie of all time, failed to become a big winner at last night's BAFTA bash when the British academy gave it awards only in two of the categories for which it was nominated.
This was not a backlash against the film's success or popularity, but rather a sign of the academy getting it right when handing out the awards.
The CGI epic won for special effects and production design and there isn't anyone who would disagree with those, surely. The virtual movie has pushed computerised movie making way beyond anything it previously was (though there are many who don't think that is necessarily a good thing) and the planet Pandora was never anything less than stunning. In many other aspects (plot, dialogue, acting etc) it really didn't make the grade.
So well done BAFTA for getting it right and not being swayed by the success or popularity into giving out awards that it didn't deserve.
This was not a backlash against the film's success or popularity, but rather a sign of the academy getting it right when handing out the awards.
The CGI epic won for special effects and production design and there isn't anyone who would disagree with those, surely. The virtual movie has pushed computerised movie making way beyond anything it previously was (though there are many who don't think that is necessarily a good thing) and the planet Pandora was never anything less than stunning. In many other aspects (plot, dialogue, acting etc) it really didn't make the grade.
So well done BAFTA for getting it right and not being swayed by the success or popularity into giving out awards that it didn't deserve.
Monday, 8 February 2010
What's in a name?
The art of the episode title is something that the science fiction and fantasy genres have got a head start on thanks to their pushing the boundaries in terms of subject matter. Because they don't necessarily have to relate to reality, sci fi shows can go out there at bit with their titles as well, borrowing from literary sources and quoting all out of context, but coming up with titles as wierd, wonderful and portentous as the shows themselves.
STAR TREK in all its variations has come up with some wonderful titles. FOR THE WORLD IS HOLLOW AND I HAVE TOUCHED THE SKY for example. It just reeks of quality and makes you want to know more. And who wouldn't have wanted to take a holiday in the CITY ON THE EDGE OF FOREVER? DEEP SPACE NINE went LOOKING FOR PAR’MACH IN ALL THE WRONG PLACES and tried to right WRONGS DARKER THAN DEATH OR NIGHT.
More modern pretender to the throne BATTLESTAR GALACTICA had a more practical line in episode titles, but still gave us A DISQUIET FOLLOWS MY SOUL and ISLANDED IN A STREAM OF STARS, both of them quality titles.
Of course, a title doesn't have to have a literary quality to it to be great. LOST'S best episode title was the more mundane ALL THE BEST COWBOYS HAVE DADDY ISSUES and SOMEHOW SATAN GOT BEHIND ME was offered up by X-FILES follow up MILLENNIUM.
And then there are the funny ones. A funny title usually has to be clever such as PUSHING DAISIES episode DIM SUM, LOSE SOME. A TOWN CALLED EUREKA found a knack for these in its later seasons, giving us the puns of BAD TO THE DRONE, SHOW ME THE MUMMY, FROM FEAR TO ETERNITY and SHIP HAPPENS. Cleverest of them all, however, was 3rd ROCK FROM THE SUN's I AM DICK PENTAMETER. That same show, though came up with the much less clever, but just as fun BIG ANGRY VIRGIN FROM OUTER SPACE. How could you resist an episode with that for a title?
There can also be the promise of advice from these shows. BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER was able to offer the advice NEVER KILL A BOY ON THE FIRST DATE which would appear to be good advice whilst HEROES offered to tell us HOW TO STOP AN EXPLODING MAN.
The daddy of all the great episode titling shows, though, was BABYLON 5, which delighted in great, literary sounding titles. Get a load of these - MIDNIGHT ON THE FIRING LINE, THE GEOMETRY OF SHADOWS, PASSING THROUGH GETHSEMANE, CEREMONIES OF LIGHT AND DARK, FALLING TOWARDS APOTHEOSIS and INTERSECTIONS IN REAL TIME.
And the greatest episode title of all time. Well, for our money that goes to BABYLON 5 as well for the impossible to dislike THE DECONSTRUCTION OF FALLING STARS.
STAR TREK in all its variations has come up with some wonderful titles. FOR THE WORLD IS HOLLOW AND I HAVE TOUCHED THE SKY for example. It just reeks of quality and makes you want to know more. And who wouldn't have wanted to take a holiday in the CITY ON THE EDGE OF FOREVER? DEEP SPACE NINE went LOOKING FOR PAR’MACH IN ALL THE WRONG PLACES and tried to right WRONGS DARKER THAN DEATH OR NIGHT.
More modern pretender to the throne BATTLESTAR GALACTICA had a more practical line in episode titles, but still gave us A DISQUIET FOLLOWS MY SOUL and ISLANDED IN A STREAM OF STARS, both of them quality titles.
Of course, a title doesn't have to have a literary quality to it to be great. LOST'S best episode title was the more mundane ALL THE BEST COWBOYS HAVE DADDY ISSUES and SOMEHOW SATAN GOT BEHIND ME was offered up by X-FILES follow up MILLENNIUM.
And then there are the funny ones. A funny title usually has to be clever such as PUSHING DAISIES episode DIM SUM, LOSE SOME. A TOWN CALLED EUREKA found a knack for these in its later seasons, giving us the puns of BAD TO THE DRONE, SHOW ME THE MUMMY, FROM FEAR TO ETERNITY and SHIP HAPPENS. Cleverest of them all, however, was 3rd ROCK FROM THE SUN's I AM DICK PENTAMETER. That same show, though came up with the much less clever, but just as fun BIG ANGRY VIRGIN FROM OUTER SPACE. How could you resist an episode with that for a title?
There can also be the promise of advice from these shows. BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER was able to offer the advice NEVER KILL A BOY ON THE FIRST DATE which would appear to be good advice whilst HEROES offered to tell us HOW TO STOP AN EXPLODING MAN.
The daddy of all the great episode titling shows, though, was BABYLON 5, which delighted in great, literary sounding titles. Get a load of these - MIDNIGHT ON THE FIRING LINE, THE GEOMETRY OF SHADOWS, PASSING THROUGH GETHSEMANE, CEREMONIES OF LIGHT AND DARK, FALLING TOWARDS APOTHEOSIS and INTERSECTIONS IN REAL TIME.
And the greatest episode title of all time. Well, for our money that goes to BABYLON 5 as well for the impossible to dislike THE DECONSTRUCTION OF FALLING STARS.
Tuesday, 2 February 2010
2010 Razzies for Sci Fi - now that's more like it
The Razzies - or the anti oscars - have a better track record of picking what's worst in the movies than their illustrious opposites have in picking the best, but then it's an easier job. For 2010 the big winners (or losers dependant on how you look at it) are
TRANSFORMERS:REVENGE OF THE FALLEN - This is nominated for the worst film, worst director (yes, you Michael Bay, hang your head in shame), Worst screen couple for Shia LaBoeuf and Megan Fox, Worst Actress for Megan Fox, worst supporting actress for Julie White's embarrassing turn as LaBoeuf's high mother and worst remake,ripoff or sequel. It should be noted that this film also got the Golden Freakie as our worst film of 2009.
LAND OF THE LOST - This comedy without jokes is up for worst film, director, screenplay, worst remake,ripoff or sequel, worst screeenplay, worst couple for Will Ferrell and anyone who he was on screen with and worst supporting actor for Jorna Taccone. This was an unworthy runner up in the Golden Freakies for worst film of the year on the Sci Fi Freak Site.
MEGAN FOX - It's a bit unfair that she is nominated for worst actress in TRANSFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN as she was effectively hamstrung by the role in the film and it is well out of order that she was nominated again for JENNIFER'S BODY.
GI JOE:RISE OF COBRA - is also up for worst movie.
EDDIE MURPHY - is up for the worst actor of the decade and we think he ought to get it on the strength of MEET DAVE alone.
TRANSFORMERS:REVENGE OF THE FALLEN - This is nominated for the worst film, worst director (yes, you Michael Bay, hang your head in shame), Worst screen couple for Shia LaBoeuf and Megan Fox, Worst Actress for Megan Fox, worst supporting actress for Julie White's embarrassing turn as LaBoeuf's high mother and worst remake,ripoff or sequel. It should be noted that this film also got the Golden Freakie as our worst film of 2009.
LAND OF THE LOST - This comedy without jokes is up for worst film, director, screenplay, worst remake,ripoff or sequel, worst screeenplay, worst couple for Will Ferrell and anyone who he was on screen with and worst supporting actor for Jorna Taccone. This was an unworthy runner up in the Golden Freakies for worst film of the year on the Sci Fi Freak Site.
MEGAN FOX - It's a bit unfair that she is nominated for worst actress in TRANSFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN as she was effectively hamstrung by the role in the film and it is well out of order that she was nominated again for JENNIFER'S BODY.
GI JOE:RISE OF COBRA - is also up for worst movie.
EDDIE MURPHY - is up for the worst actor of the decade and we think he ought to get it on the strength of MEET DAVE alone.
Oscar Nominations for Sci Fi Movies - what's up with that?
The 2010 Oscar nominations are out and it doesn't come as no surprise that AVATAR leads the science fiction field whilst much better films MOON and LET THE OTHER ONE IN don't even get a mention.
The list is
PICTURE - Avatar and District 9 (neither of which deserve a nomination let alone the award. I mean they were fun, but best picture of the year? I don't think so.)
DIRECTOR - James Cameron for AVATAR (can you direct a film made inside a computer?)
ADAPTED SCREENPLAY - DISTRICT 9
ART DIRECTION - AVATAR and THE IMAGINARIUM OF DR PARNASSUS (OK, so AVATAR was very pretty so we might forgive them this)
CINEMATOGRAPHY - AVATAR and HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF BLOOD PRINCE (Does a film made in a computer actually have cinematography?)
Sound Mixing - AVATAR, STAR TREK and TRANSFORMERS:REVENGE OF THE FALLEN (Transformers? Really? Crash, bang, wallop! is mixing sound?)
SOUND EDITING - AVATAR and STAR TREK (apparently editing is different from mixing and STAR TREK sounds good.
MUSIC SCORE - AVATAR (Did anyone actually notice the music?)
COSTUME - THE IMAGINARIUM OF DR PARNASSUS (What, nothing for the loincloths of AVATAR?)
FILM EDITING - AVATAR and DISTRICT 9. (Again, as AVATAR was made in a computer how much film was edited?)
MAKEUP - STAR TREK
VISUAL EFFECTS - AVATAR, DISTRICT 9 and STAR TREK.
So, once again, to get a nomination for the Oscars you have to be American, big, successful and not too complicated or containing a thoughtful plot. Show some aliens and then blow them up is the way to the American Academy's heart. We can only reflect on the fact that they only give genre films the big awards when the absolutely have to, so the question is whether AVATAR's made enough money that they don't feel they need to reward it any more for things it doesn't deserve.
The list is
PICTURE - Avatar and District 9 (neither of which deserve a nomination let alone the award. I mean they were fun, but best picture of the year? I don't think so.)
DIRECTOR - James Cameron for AVATAR (can you direct a film made inside a computer?)
ADAPTED SCREENPLAY - DISTRICT 9
ART DIRECTION - AVATAR and THE IMAGINARIUM OF DR PARNASSUS (OK, so AVATAR was very pretty so we might forgive them this)
CINEMATOGRAPHY - AVATAR and HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF BLOOD PRINCE (Does a film made in a computer actually have cinematography?)
Sound Mixing - AVATAR, STAR TREK and TRANSFORMERS:REVENGE OF THE FALLEN (Transformers? Really? Crash, bang, wallop! is mixing sound?)
SOUND EDITING - AVATAR and STAR TREK (apparently editing is different from mixing and STAR TREK sounds good.
MUSIC SCORE - AVATAR (Did anyone actually notice the music?)
COSTUME - THE IMAGINARIUM OF DR PARNASSUS (What, nothing for the loincloths of AVATAR?)
FILM EDITING - AVATAR and DISTRICT 9. (Again, as AVATAR was made in a computer how much film was edited?)
MAKEUP - STAR TREK
VISUAL EFFECTS - AVATAR, DISTRICT 9 and STAR TREK.
So, once again, to get a nomination for the Oscars you have to be American, big, successful and not too complicated or containing a thoughtful plot. Show some aliens and then blow them up is the way to the American Academy's heart. We can only reflect on the fact that they only give genre films the big awards when the absolutely have to, so the question is whether AVATAR's made enough money that they don't feel they need to reward it any more for things it doesn't deserve.
Friday, 29 January 2010
DOCTOR WHO hates my dad
Much has been made of the homosexual agenda that some people have suggested runs under the reinvention of the universe's favourite Time Lord under Russell T Davies, but there is a more insidious plot going on here - to undermine fathers. Call Fathers for Justice and have red powder thrown at the show's creators.
The evidence?
Rose's dad is a loser and a coward and, though he saves her in the end it's only after he's been shown time and again to let her down (see Father's Day)
'Are you my mummy?' asks the Empty Child, but he isn't asking for his daddy and why? Because the blighter's gone and done a runner.
The Idiot's Lantern features an abusive father, who is so bad he has to be sent packing in the end.
And I don't know why we have to 'Fear Her' in the episode of that name because it's the (again absent) father who turns out to be a monster to be feared.
Where is Donna's father? We see her mum and her Grandad, but her father? Nope, not a sign. Clearly another absentee pater.
Then there's 'The Doctor's Daughter' in which the Doctor gets a surrogate child and immediately disowns her and won't have anything to do with her. Good parenting image that one.
'The Next Doctor', well he just manages to forget that he has a son that needs rescuing. That's the kind of thing that slips the minds of all dads at one time of crisis or another.
But it's not just restricted to the main series either. In THE SARAH JANE ADVENTURES, Sarah is bringing up Luke without a dad (admittedly through a technicality) and Clyde's father is shown to be a right selfish git who is also absent. Maria and Rani both have non-absent fathers, but they are shown to be a bit rubbish and pompous.
And Captain Jack Harkness, what kind of a Dad is he, going around killing his own grandson in CHILDREN OF EARTH.
So, the next time that you want to go on about supposed gay subtexts in DOCTOR WHO spare a thought to the real victims of this show - fathers.
The evidence?
Rose's dad is a loser and a coward and, though he saves her in the end it's only after he's been shown time and again to let her down (see Father's Day)
'Are you my mummy?' asks the Empty Child, but he isn't asking for his daddy and why? Because the blighter's gone and done a runner.
The Idiot's Lantern features an abusive father, who is so bad he has to be sent packing in the end.
And I don't know why we have to 'Fear Her' in the episode of that name because it's the (again absent) father who turns out to be a monster to be feared.
Where is Donna's father? We see her mum and her Grandad, but her father? Nope, not a sign. Clearly another absentee pater.
Then there's 'The Doctor's Daughter' in which the Doctor gets a surrogate child and immediately disowns her and won't have anything to do with her. Good parenting image that one.
'The Next Doctor', well he just manages to forget that he has a son that needs rescuing. That's the kind of thing that slips the minds of all dads at one time of crisis or another.
But it's not just restricted to the main series either. In THE SARAH JANE ADVENTURES, Sarah is bringing up Luke without a dad (admittedly through a technicality) and Clyde's father is shown to be a right selfish git who is also absent. Maria and Rani both have non-absent fathers, but they are shown to be a bit rubbish and pompous.
And Captain Jack Harkness, what kind of a Dad is he, going around killing his own grandson in CHILDREN OF EARTH.
So, the next time that you want to go on about supposed gay subtexts in DOCTOR WHO spare a thought to the real victims of this show - fathers.
AVATAR biggest money grabber ever
James Cameron's AVATAR has lumbered past the impressive box office record held by TITANIC (made of course by James Cameron). It's no wonder that studios keep entrusting this man with more money than was lost by Icelandic banks to make his pet projects because his huge budgets bring in huge receipts.
But is AVATAR really a film?
Sounds like a silly question since it's showing in cinemas all over the world, but bear with me.
Films are about narrative, about character, about plot development and emotional involvement. AVATAR is about pretty pictures. HUGE pretty pictures...and in 3D. Watch in awe as cartoon creatures sweep over huge landscape paintings. Wonder as mountains float in the sky. Gasp at the beauty of a tree hundreds of feet high releasing its seeds. Fantastic images all, but do they add up to a movie.
The characters in AVATAR are cyphers, barely deep enough to be called characters. The plot is back of a postage stamp stuff and nobody develops at all. If it's a film then it's a bad one.
So how come it's made more money than the Mint?
AVATAR isn't a film it's a spectacle. It's intent is not to tell a compelling story, but rather to use what minimal story it can be bothered to come up with as an excuse to create those compelling, startling and wonderful images. It's no surprise that AVATAR is available in 3D and on the IMAX system because it is here that those images will have the greatest impact be they aerial journeys, mystical moments of giant machines blowing the hell out of everything in sight in an orgy of mechanistic (but nonsensical) violence.
The problem here is that success talks and AVATAR will make Hollywood think that throwing enough special effects at the screen is all you need to do make a great sci fi movie and that means we'll get more films from the likes of Michael Bay where eye-candy takes the place of mind candy and we really don't need more of that. Our only hope is the fact that the same year brought us the mind-blowingly brilliant MOON (infinitely better on 1% of the budget) and the entertaining DISTRICT 9 both of which acheived more with less.
So well done to AVATAR for making so much money in the middle of a global financial meltdown, but we just hope that the cost hasn't been too high and the damage too deep.
But is AVATAR really a film?
Sounds like a silly question since it's showing in cinemas all over the world, but bear with me.
Films are about narrative, about character, about plot development and emotional involvement. AVATAR is about pretty pictures. HUGE pretty pictures...and in 3D. Watch in awe as cartoon creatures sweep over huge landscape paintings. Wonder as mountains float in the sky. Gasp at the beauty of a tree hundreds of feet high releasing its seeds. Fantastic images all, but do they add up to a movie.
The characters in AVATAR are cyphers, barely deep enough to be called characters. The plot is back of a postage stamp stuff and nobody develops at all. If it's a film then it's a bad one.
So how come it's made more money than the Mint?
AVATAR isn't a film it's a spectacle. It's intent is not to tell a compelling story, but rather to use what minimal story it can be bothered to come up with as an excuse to create those compelling, startling and wonderful images. It's no surprise that AVATAR is available in 3D and on the IMAX system because it is here that those images will have the greatest impact be they aerial journeys, mystical moments of giant machines blowing the hell out of everything in sight in an orgy of mechanistic (but nonsensical) violence.
The problem here is that success talks and AVATAR will make Hollywood think that throwing enough special effects at the screen is all you need to do make a great sci fi movie and that means we'll get more films from the likes of Michael Bay where eye-candy takes the place of mind candy and we really don't need more of that. Our only hope is the fact that the same year brought us the mind-blowingly brilliant MOON (infinitely better on 1% of the budget) and the entertaining DISTRICT 9 both of which acheived more with less.
So well done to AVATAR for making so much money in the middle of a global financial meltdown, but we just hope that the cost hasn't been too high and the damage too deep.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
