ContentsNovember 2011

November Features

Page 4: The Comic Book Move Does Not Exist

Page 8: Interview with Henry Rollins

Page 12: Prequels: All Filler, No Thriller?

Regulars

Page 3 Editor’s Note & Contributors

Page 25: Things to See in November

Reviews Section

Page 17: The Ides Of MarchPage 18: Real SteelPage 19: We Need To Talk About KevinPage 20: In TimePage 21: ContagionPage 22: Paranormal Activity 3Page 23: Don’t Be Afraid Of The DarkPage 24: Midnight in Paris

Contributors Editor’s NoteWelcome to the third issue of PictureShow

Magazine.

First I would like to applaud our incredible team who have all been working hard on

both work for the magazine, their respective degrees and many other activities. We’ve all taken on quite a challenge and after seeing

the results in this month’s issue we can all see that it’s worth it.

We have big things on the horizon as PictureShow is getting more and more notice beyond our immediate circle of friends and colleagues. But that’s all in the future and I want you to enjoy THIS month’s issue first. This month we have PictureShow’s first in-

terview with an actor, Henry Rollins, known for his roles in Johnny Mnemonic and Sons of

Anarchy.

We also have a splendid array of articles and features for you to browse at your leisure.

The idea of “Comic Book Movies” has always bugged me and now I have finally had the

chance to clearly communicate my thoughts.

Things to See in November is also absolutely jam packed with great screenings up and

down the country. Just check it out and see if anything takes your fancy.

See you next monthJoshua Hammond,

Editor-in-Chief

EditorsJoshua Hammond: Editor-in-Chiefjoshua@pictureshow-magazine.com

Dale Pearson: Editor

WordsJoshua Hammond

Dale PearsonBenjamin Schwarz

Chris BindingEdward Mason

ArtMichael Barker: Front Page Graphic

OnlineFind us at

pictureshow-magazine.com

Like us on facebook

Follow us@PictureShowMag

The Comic Book

Movie Does Not

ExistBY JOSHUA HAMMOND

PictureShow explores why it is unfair and unnecessary to group all adaptations of comic book properties together.

Films based on characters and ti-tles that originated in the world of comic books have thrived over the last decade. The so-called ‘comic book movie’ has gone from strength to strength. But is it ac-curate, or indeed, even useful, to label such a wide and varying type of filmmaking with the same term? Films based on novels are never pi-geonholed together and, similarly, when we carefully consider ‘the comic book movie’ we see that it is not really a genre at all.

Initially it must be said that al-though comic books are a visual medium, they do not always lend themselves to be adapted to the screen. An average page in a comic book has 9 frames and it can take anything up to a minute to read the page. An average film shows 24 frames a second, which adds up to 1440 frames in the same time

it takes to read a page of a comic book. Whilst it may look like the frames of a comic look make a great storyboard, the two mediums have a distinctly different use of images. Comic book artists have to econo-mise reducing scenes and ideas into a certain number of small frames. Though films are eventually edited, individual scenes can be shot at a number of different angles with a variety of different performances, which is in stark contrast to the comic book artist’s economical mind-set. The questions of sound and thought should also be consid-ered, in a comic book you can read various character’s thoughts in thought bubbles and this is hard to replicate on film leading directors and screenwriters to have charac-ters spell out on screen what they are thinking.

These differences have not stopped the barrage of comic book adapta-tions over the last decade. The re-lease of X-Men in 2000 has to be considered the turning point for both superhero films and the ad-aptation of comic book properties. Even though X-Men’s box office receipts were less impressive than films that came before or after it, it can be said that Bryan Singer’s film fully recognised the potential com-ic book properties had. Just over a decade later we have just seen the release of the 5th film in the X-Men franchise and next year we will see the 3rd part of a rebooted Batman franchise (and seventh film over-all) and a 4th Spiderman film as part of a new franchise. However, these are all Superhero films, they may borrow heavily from their comic book roots, but they are worlds apart from their origins.

Marvel Studios have made a val-iant effort to create a Universe in the same vein as their comic books by creating films that overlap and reference one another. Eventually their efforts will form The Aveng-ers - due to be released next year. Even though Marvel Studios give the impression that their films are closer to the source material and are therefore “comic book movies” - with their overlapping story lines and the inclusion of cameos by Stan Lee in film adaptations of the comics he helped create - these are no more “comic book movies” than Warner Bros. efforts with DC prop-erties such as Batman, Superman and Green Lantern. Like Warner Bros. films, Marvel’s output can only really be considered Superhe-ro Movies (or in the case of Thor, trans-dimensional Ancient Deity Fiction) because of their substan-tial difference to their comic book origins. This is not imply that the films are in any way “unfaithful” to their source material, rather that the stories are completely new and often just take certain elements of a

character to create the story.

The closest thing to a comic book movie recently, was Edgar Wright’s Scott Pilgrim vs The World. Instead of getting rid of the comic book’s thought bubbles and onomatopoe-ic sound effects, Wright fully inte-grated them into the film. By utilis-ing effects that are specific to comic books for both comedic and visual effect Wright created a superb ad-aptation of Bran Lee O’Malley’s comic book. Scott Pilgrim vs The World was reminiscent of the 1960’s Batman series, with sound effects flashing up on screen.

A similar effect was created by Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller in their adaptation of one of Miller’s greatest properties, Sin City. Sin City also embraced the look of the comic book that came before it with a staggering degree of accuracy. The black and white visuals of Miller’s comics and the convoluted and intertwining sto-ry lines are maintained in favour of making a conventional linear

story. Whilst taking into account the faithfulness of the adaptation wouldn’t it be fairer to call Sin City a neo noir or crime thriller, rather than a “comic book movie”.

Due to the animated nature of comic books, animation would appear to be the easiest medium to adapt a comic into. Prior to the theatrical release of Zack Sny-der’s Watchmen, Warner Bros. re-leased Watchmen: Motion Comic, which took the incredibly vivid and iconic frames of Watchmen and added limited movement and voices. Essentially, Warner Bros. created an adaptation of Watch-men that could be watched rather than read as nothing was taken out or removed in favour of manipu-lation for the effect of movement. Watchmen: Motion Comic came to a running time of 5 ½ hours. Zack Snyder’s Watchmen has a running time of 2 ½ hours. The difference in running time shows how much of the Graphic Novel had to be cut to get Watchmen on screen.

This months release of The Adven-tures of Tintin is an adaptation of the classic Tintin comic books by Hergé. Steven Spielberg and Peter Jackson opted to use “performance capture technology” similar to the technology used by James Cam-eron on Avatar. This was done try and replicate the look of Hergé’s comics on screen which has been achieved with an impressive de-gree of accuracy. Though an argu-ment could be made that although the characters are still cartoonish and are reminiscent to Hergé’s art-work that some of the magic is lost in the transition to film.

The comic book industry will con-tinually be mined for ideas and inspiration for the film industry, but the two are essentially different mediums. Think about why Hulk works as a character in a comic and not on screen or why the X-Men avoid yellow spandex in their movie outings. It’s because they look odd or out of place in a real-istic setting, two VERY different directors have attempted to adapt Hulk into a workable film, but nei-ther have worked - regardless of their considerable talents. Certain things can be accomplished on the page that cannot be shown on screen.

Essentially, this article boils down to the fact that Comic Books are a form for telling a story, film is sim-ply a different form. Occasionally Movies borrow the stories from comic books to tell the story in a different form and vice versa. This does not make a genre, the genre of the story should not change greatly, whether it be a revenge drama, su-perhero movie or hard science fic-tion. It is unfair, unreasonable and counter intuitive to group all adap-tations of comic books together as “Comic Book Movies”.

Interview with Henry Rollins

BY CHRIS BINDING

From the fronting one of the most prolific Hardcore bands of the 1980’s Black Flag to an impressive career in political activism, film and TV work ; Henry Rollins is a legendary indi-vidual who has undoubtedly done it all, touring the world for the bet-ter part of a quarter century. Both physically and intellectually intimi-dating, his hunger for experience based knowledge and a no holds barred delivery of his opinions have made have made him a powerful social commentator and a true al-ternative icon. After the dissolu-tion of Black –Flag, while balancing projects and touring with Rollins Band, Henry has successfully built up an eclectic filmography with ap-pearances in Michael Mann’s Heat, David Lynch’s Lost Highway, along with a guest role in the cinematic American network series Sons of Anarchy. Securing an interview with Henry was surprisingly easy, mirroring his palpable lack of celeb-rity vanity and correspondence with his international fan base. For such an impressive filmic career Henry’s views on his own success are modest and pragmatic, offering a true alter-native insight into working within the film industry.

CB: From your early days in the American Hardcore scene to the political activism and comedy of your spoken word performances, your career has spanned a variety of different media types. How did you first get involved in cinema and decide to make the delve into feature films?

HR: I got offers from directors. That was it. An opportunity to work. I never thought of acting as anything else but work. The more I did it, the more I understood that there were different choices I could make in scenes to make the charac-ter get to the truth, which is what I reckon is the job of acting. That be-ing said, it wasn’t a choice I made, it was an opportunity that came up and I don’t like to be without work. I have been freelancing for thirty years. I am always looking for a job. I am an Americanist. I live in a country that you pass or fail in. I plan on passing and surviving capitalism.

CB: From the white supremacist characters in Sons of Anarchy and Bad Boys 2, to policeman (The Chase), Motivational Speakers

(Feast) and military men (Wrong Turn 2) a lot of the characters you portray are often comedic or cor-rupt figures of authority. How do you go about choosing / receiving roles and does personal ideology and politics ever factor into this decision?

HR: I take what I am offered. That’s the long and short of it. If you’re a real actor, you choose parts. If you are a workaholic survivalist like I am, you say yes to work more often than not. I take those parts because they come my way. I am not in A Streetcar Named Desire nor am I Brando but it’s working out well.

CB: You’ve worked with a vari-ety of highly acclaimed directors and actors on a mixture of inde-pendent and Hollywood releases. What is your fondest memory of shooting and who has been the greatest pleasure (or nightmare) to work with? Black Coffee with David Lynch? On set shenanigans with Ron Perlman on the Sons of Anarchy Set?

HR: The funniest was working for David Lynch because he was as cool as I hoped he would be. I see him now and then. He is really great, thinks differently and always has interesting things on his mind. All the Sons of Anarchy people were great. Sometimes you’re on a show and there’s someone with an ego or whatever and you have to work around them. That’s not a problem for me as I have no ego with the work at all. I just want to do the part well. That being said, it’s rare where the whole cast is cool and friendly. That was the ‘Sons’ cast. They were all great and went out of their way to make me feel wel-come. I was sorry when it was over.

CB: Wrong Turn 2, Suck, Feast, spoken words on World War Z audio books are a lot of projects I am sure you had a lot of fun on. Are you an avid horror fan your-self?

HR: I am not. It’s not a genre that really holds any interest for me. I am happy to work in it though.

CB: As a self-confessed worka-holic currently powering through the dates of your latest spoken word tour what’s next? Have you got any film projects lined up or anyone you would love to work with? Ever considered moving into directing?

HR: I am working on a few books. I have been doing a lot of documen-tary work these days with National Geographic. That’s been a great ex-perience. I would like to do more doc work than anything else. I have no interest in directing but defi-nitely want to come up with ideas of things to shoot.

CB: With over 20 years of film and TV projects under your belt now, in retrospect have you learnt

any fundamental lessons about yourself or about the entertain-ment industry in general?

HR: I have learned that you have to be flexible and very professional in order to hang in the film and tele-vision world. The fundamental les-sons I have learned is that you bet-ter bring you’re A-game to every audition and day on a set. There are some frighteningly talented peo-ple in the entertainment industry. If you are not on the top of your game, you don’t stand a chance. Even on my best day, I struggle. So, I learned to prepare like a madman

and that has helped me very much.

With Henry visiting the UK next year as part of his eight date ‘Long March’ spoken word tour and launching the documentary ‘Snake Underworld’ on National Geo-graphic Wild, it’s obvious his strong work ethic has not diluted with age. Putting his film work aside to truly experience Henry Rollins is to see his spoken word performances: he may not scream and brawl with the audi-ence like the old days but his power with a microphone hasn’t changed one bit.

Wrong Turn 2Following the success of Deliver-ance the sub-genre of horribly mountain men assaulting innocent city folk, has produced some in-teresting fares in the horror genre. Wrong Turn (2003) followed the plight of survivors pursued by a family horribly disfigured due to years of inbreeding, with the finan-cial success of the film producing a requisite sequel. Horror sequels to small independents are often poorly thought out cash–ins but director Joe Lynch must have sali-vated at the cult appeal of casting Henry Rollins, fittingly provid-ing him with a survivalist military role (the most favourable type to be in a slasher film) and host of a reality TV show. The result is pure brilliance with myriad one lin-ers ‘say hello to the missus from me’, a totally straight performance and unrelenting hillbilly carnage. A potentially mediocre film made thoroughly enjoyable by Henry’s appearance.

Sons of AnarchyWhen series producers were cast-ing the second series of popular US gang drama Sons of Anarchy they consciously created a guest char-acter, hoping that Henry would take the part. Thankfully, he did, fitting the role like a glove as the series antagonist and deadly new threat to the SAMCRO motorcycle club. Bringing his muscularity and brooding intensity to the part he inhabits a role of a white –suprem-acist and right hand henchman of white corporate power expanding business into small town America. As he stated his character’s only re-deeming factor is that he has kids ‘He is not the type of bad –guy you root for’ with his dark sadistic pres-ence and performance producing some genuinely shocking and dra-matic high points of the series.

Johnny MnemonicAs a precursor to The Matrix, Johnny Mnemonic (1995) shared similar themes exploring the ideas of technology and human psy-chology, starring Keanu Reeves as a data courier storing ideas in a implanted microchip in his head, who is hunted and pursued in a futuristic dystopian society. Although poorly executed and plagued by Keanu Reeves’ wooden performance Henry Rollins stands out in a major role as the street doctor ‘Spider’, in a almost steam punk clinic that resembles a pawn shop. Mirroring his real life role, he delivers some great dialogue about the wider societal conspiracies and government corruptions before ex-periencing a martyr’s death at the hands of Dolph Lundgren in what is possibly his most ridiculous role as the ‘Street preacher’. A stand-out straight role for Henry, in a film plagued by Lundgren’s camp the-atrics and Keanu Reeves’ chronic confused facial expressions.

Key Performances

Prequels: All Filler, No Thriller?

BY DALE J PEARSON

How the prequel went from ‘laughing stock’ to ‘stock idea’

For many years, ‘the prequel’, as a narrative device in film, has been somewhat of a running joke. It’s a type of film we only really tend to associate with laboured horror franchises and bumbling Gungans called Jar Jar Binks (the latter be-ing a far more terrifying prospect). Even the masterpieces which must technically be classed as prequels (The Temple of Doom, The Godfa-ther II) are rarely referred to with the term, purely because the very use of the term leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. As a result, the pre-quel has been a device used far less infrequently than its more popu-lar, and altogether more socially acceptable sibling, the sequel. At least, this was the mentally two years ago; since then, the prequel has seen an unprecedented and largely unexpected rise in critical prominence.

To say that prequels have always been poor is obviously an over-statement. One only needs to mention the likes of The Temple of Doom and The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly to see that this is the case. The major difference between these

films however and, say, Saw V, is that these films could just as eas-ily not be prequels – in fact, most first time watchers don’t even rec-ognise that they are. Indiana Jones’ escapades in The Temple of Doom could just as easily have come after The Raiders of The Lost Ark; simi-larly The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly’s status as a prequel is tenuous because the events of the film aren’t chronologically reliant on its pre-ceding films. The point is that films such as these carry different narra-tive expectation and are therefore vastly differing in nature to the ‘bad’ films we have come to associ-ate with ‘the prequel’.

Generally speaking, there are two types of ‘bad’ prequel. The first is nearly always associated with tired horror franchises. It will hardly come as a surprise to the reader that Psycho IV: The Beginning, Saw V and Wrong Turn 4: Bloody Begin-nings were less than runaway suc-cesses. In the event of a horror fran-chise running out of sequel ideas, it’s clear that the prequel is relied upon to inject fresh life into a wan-ing franchise. While one must also

consider that these films are bad for many of the same reasons any bad film is bad, what is also telling from this mentality is that the pre-quel is not simply a tool that can ever be used to simply grow new, interesting ideas, like some magic filmic tree. And the tried and failed attempts of filmmakers to do so, is a testament to how misunderstood a concept ‘the prequel’ has often been.

The second type of ‘bad’ prequel is the ‘filler prequel’. It can be nearly completely optimised by that tur-key of turkeys – Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace. Devoid of any meaningful freestanding plot, or indeed dramatic tension (as all the three original films definitely had) the film serves only the fill in the blanks. Technically speaking, this blank-filling could be done to any great film - one could film the events of Dorothy before she went to Oz, the events of Neo before he discovered the matrix, or even the events of Andy Dufresne before he went to Shawshank Prison.

The point is, is that it wouldn’t make a very good story – in exactly the same way that Anakin’s Scrap heap shenanigans didn’t make very good story telling.

So why did George Lucas feel com-pelled to make the Star Wars pre-quels? The reason is not that he felt compelled to fill in the story, as it were, but that he felt compelled to fill in the mythology. And when one creates a mythology so densely amazing as was done in Star Wars, the idea of making prequels can start to feel immediately justified. It can feel like there is still work to be done – and as The Phantom Menace showed us, this type of mentality can be very dangerous.

It is not surprising then that the emergence of prequels in recent years has been treated with some degree of caution. Especially when one considers that Star Trek, X-Men: The Last Stand and Rise of The Planet of The Apes all take place within already highly mythologised universes. (It is also important to note that none of the films decided to simply wipe the slate clean, as was done with Casino Royale and Batman Begins) With the wounds Star Wars created still very much sore, the most shocking thing about these films then is that they weren’t awful – in fact, they were far from it. Nobody is pretending that they were on a par with The Godfather II, but they managed to do some-thing that Lucas completely failed to realise – they told a story.

Where one might have thought to concentrate on the backstory to the central protagonist in Planet of The Apes, or even the plague that wiped out the humans, Rupert Wyatt de-cided to push these important plot features to the side-lines and in-stead concentrate on the story of a man and his monkey. In doing

so, Rise of The Planet of The Apes vindicated the principle that fill-ing in the mythology is simply not enough, and that one must tell a story. Similarly, Star Trek and X-Men: The Last Stand both managed to find freestanding narratives and only alluded to the themes and ideas that needed to be set up for the proceeding films. They may not have been masterpieces, but as pre-quels, with so much more narra-tive ballet to do than sequels, they struck the balance perfectly.

It seems that that this emerging

trend of prequels is set to continue: Matthijs van Heijningen Jr.’s, The Thing is due to be released this De-cember, and of course, Peter Jack-son’s The Hobbit will hit the screens next year. Whatever the results of these titles, let it be known that over the last two years a revolu-tion has occurred – it may not have been particularly mind-blowing, and it may not have turned heads – but ‘the prequel’s worth has finally been accounted for.

The Good The Godfather II

Technically, only about half of this film is a prequel - but one half of The Godfather II is very often better than two of anything else. A young Robert De Niro fills us in on the rise of Vito Corleone.

Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom

Many will not have realised that the events of The Temple of Doom preceded that of The Raiders of The Lost Ark. It may not have been a prequel that aimed to fill in much of the Indy mythology, but it certainly delivered a thrilling film experience.

X-Men: First Class

Matthew Vaughn was famously up for directing the third film in the X-Men franchise. After being spurned in 2005, 20th Century Fox asked Vaughn to direct X-Men: First Class, a prequel re-volving around the formation of Charles Xavier’s School for Gifted Youngsters (Mutant School to me and you).

The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

Whilst, The Good, The Bad and The Ugly is the third film in the “Dollars Trilogy” it is genreally seen as a prequel to the other two; A Fistful of Dollars and For a Few Dollars More

The BadStar Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace

Fans waited 16 years to see how the infamous Darth vader came to be. Many of those same fans would happily have waited an-other 16 years if it meant that this failure of a project could emulate the quality of the original films.

Zulu Dawn

With a massive 15 years between, Zulu and Zulu Dawn, it seems to be an interesting choice to make a prequel to the the Michael Caine classic. Even with the incredible cast, featuring Peter O’Toole and Burt Lancaster, and meticulous historical accuracy, the film was a disaster.

The Scorpion King

The Scorpion King bizarrely is a prequel to a sequel rather than a prequel to the entire franchise. The character of the Scorpion King appeared in The Mummy Returns, which itself was poor. Equally bizarrely was the stag-gering amount of money the film took at the box office in spite of the largely negative reviews.

Butch and Sundance: The Early Days

Really? Come on. You can do bet-ter than this.

The Ugly Hannibal Rising

Those who always yearned to know how Hannibal became a cannibal will be keen to watch this backstory. Those of us, however, who prefer to watch good films will be thoroughly unimpressed by this poor quality prequel.

Saw V

Saw V follows Detective Mark Hoffman as he becomes the serial killer Jigsaw’s apprentice. Saw V marked the moment in the Saw franchise where the interesting concept we saw in the first movie was completely gone. So far gone, in fact, that it became unbelievable that enough people went to see it for the film to make ten times it’s own budget

Wrong Turn IV: Bloody Beginnings

Henry Rollins (featured on page 9) can be seen in Wrong Turn 2. Wrong Turn IV explores the origins of the cannibals from the entire series. Unsurprisingly this went straight to DVD.

The Exorcist: The Beginning

Just bloody awful.

Prequels: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

The Ides of MarchThe Ides of March is George Clooney’s fifth directo-rial feature and moves to the world of politics for its subject. Central to the film is Stephen Meyers (Ryan Gosling), a junior campaign manager for Mike Morris a Democratic Governor running in the Democratic primaries with a view to running in the Presidential Election. At the primary race in Ohio, Meyers’ ideals become conflicted once he is asked to eat with a rival Campaign Manager who wishes to enlist his help.

There is a very large shadow hanging over contem-prary politics on screen. It is the shadow cast by Arron Sorkin’s monumental drama, The West Wing. It is a shame that every drama revolving around contemprary american polican politics will inevita-bly be compared to the work done by Sorkin and co just over a decade ago. However, The Ides of March certainly aspires to create great drama in the most unlikely sources which was a template set by The West Wing to great acclaim.

Whilst George Clooney has been directing films for alomost a decade now, it still feels as though he is new to the job. Certain scenes are remarkably well shot, as characters hide in shadows and vicious silhouettes haunt various moments, though these are undercut by a heavy handed and almost amateur shooting of pivotal scenes. The music from composer Alexandre Desplat, who took home a BAFTA for his work on The King’s Speech last year gives the film a good and tense tone.

The cast is incredibly talented. Almost every ac-tor in a significant role has been nominated for an Academy Award and three, George Clooney, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Marisa Tomei, have come home with an award from the Kodak Theatre. As such it feels like The Ides Of March has almost been set up to garner huge amounts of critical acclaim and statuettes. It is massive Oscar bait and more often than not, the films that feel like Oscar bait are rarely rewarded.

With such a talented cast and bona fide man of the moment Ryan Gosling, whose latest films were received very well here at PictureShow, it seems a shame that all the performances seem to go through the motions. It is almost feels like a committee has selected the right amount of shouting and tears need to an Oscar worthy film and it all feels a little empty

because of it. Every single member of the cast has done better work and throughout the film you are waiting for someone to bust out their serious acting chops, but it never happens.

The Ides of March feels like another case of squan-dered potential. George Clooney is definitely a director getting used to new trade and certainly has some flair with the camera. The cast is superb, the crew are to die for and the film should have been superb, but with a lacklustre plot and very ordinary performances the film, like the action within it, feels insignificant. JH

Real Steel

Set in 2020, Real Steel revolves around world of Robot Boxing after robots replace human fighters. Charlie Kenton (Hugh Jackman) is an ex-Boxer who travels the country with a robot fighting various opponents. When he is left with his estranged son, Max (Dakota Goyo) for a Summer he introduces him to the world of robot boxing. The two find an older “Generation 2” robot, Atom, who they program to fight and slowly build his reputation in the industry.

Real Steel may look like a futuristic “effects-fest” where lots of robots destroy one another again and again. To an extent, this is the case, but there are more familiar elements to the film from the more tra-ditional Boxing movies of the last 40 years. Though it is lazy to compare Real Steel to Rocky or The Fighter, there is a traditional feeling to this very effects heavy family blockbuster.

Real Steel is staggeringly formulaic, you can see every turn of the plot coming from a mile away, there is absolutely nothing here that is trying to be too clever or subversive. Certain moments in the film have been done over and over again (but this time they are be-ing done with robots). We have a training sequence with a character in a grey tracksuit, a montage of all of Atom’s victories up until the last fight and scenes of people watching the fights on bars around the country. Real Steel offers very little that can be con-sidered new.

Though the film’s tried and tested plot may put off some cinema goers, it must be said that the film is entertaining. This is largely down to Hugh Jackman’s charisma on screen. As Charlie Kenton, Jackman continues his own trend of playing the lovable ruf-fian, the “bad bet” that pays out. Kenton is not a bad guy, he just does not really know what he’s doing. Jackman’s on screen relationships with his ex-girl-friend Bailey (Evangeline Lily) and his estranged son Max, are well played shifting the emphasis of the film onto the human characters rather than the robots.

Even though the fighting is done by robots, the bouts are remarkable. The superior use of CGI and mo-tion capture technology really makes the robots look convincing and the action brutal. For the family audience Blood is replaced by cooling fluid and stray wires. The film comes into it’s own in scenes where Atom “mirrors” the actions of the human characters, these moments are the most impressive and the tech-nique is used to great effect.

Director Shawn Levy has made a very traditional family Blockbuster in Real Steel. It is fair to say that the film is formulaic and certainly flawed, however, it is one of the more entertaining family releases of 2011. Essentially, Real Steel is a formulaic boxing movie, where the boxers are replaced by robots. Your reaction to the previous sentence will probably deter-mine your reaction to the film. JH

We Need To Talk About Kevin

October has been a harrowing month for UK re-leases. Following the nihilistic defeatism of Lars Van Trier’s Melancholia and shocking violence of Paddy Considine’s Tyrannosaur you would think things would start to look up. Unfortunately that is not the case. Based upon Lionel Shriver’s source novel of the same name, We Need To Talk About Kevin is cinema at its most visceral and powerful, with an emotional punch that is sure to invade your thoughts for days. Directed by Lynne Ramsey the film centres on the strained and conflicted relationship between a mother and son, both before and after an atrocious incident that is committed by son Kevin.

The incident is kept ambiguous throughout the film, with a fragmented narrative that explores the mother (Tilda Swanton) living alone in the present being vic-timised and outcast within her community, cross-cut with a family life exploring the upbringing of Kevin. This technique is skilfully implemented, producing a viewer involvement and mysterious intrigue to the act that Kevin committed and curiosity to the incon-sistencies between the past and present characters and locations. However the repeated stylistic use of the colour red from the opening at a Spanish tomato festival to self –consciously composed shot of a wall of tomato soup cans, links the past and present with clear connotations of bloodshed, creating a forebod-ing dark tone to the whole film and a uncanny antici-pation of horror.

However the real power lies behind the central performances with Ramsey succeeding greatly in creating an indefinably evil Kevin in both the tod-dler and teenage years. The chemistry between Tilda Swanton and the two young actors is incredible, with a conflict between normal maternal instincts and a growing realisation of her son’s strangeness and sa-distic tendencies being awkward to watch. As Kevin grows and becomes more intelligent the mother’s loss of control is effectively portrayed with emotionally tenacious conflicts that turn even a game of mini-golf into a dark battle of wits. Unable to bond with her son in any way and unable to confide in husband (John.C.Reilly) when suspicious ‘accidents’ happen around the home, she dislocates herself from Kevin, with the refusal to address her sons malevolence leaving her implicated in his horrific actions . These incidents are never explicitly shown, leaving sicken-ing and haunting images to the imagination.

We Need To Talk About Kevin is more than another ‘evil child’ movie and although it has artistic and aesthetic calculations in its puzzle –box narrative and visual iconography, the real point of the film is its exploration of nature and nuture that will leave you questioning the institution of motherhood itself . With an elliptic ending that offers little hope or reso-lution audiences were left in stunned silence , filing out the cinema without saying a word. If director Gus Van Sant’s Elephant tackled the same subject with documentary realism and objectivity, Lynne Ramsey delves deeper to the primordial causes behind ac-tions, refusing to scapegoat or blame and leaving the viewer to decide. In issues of this emotionally height-ened magnitude people find it easier to point blame but Ramsey denies the viewer clear identification with frustrating ambiguity. This is perhaps the point. The first step to truly confronting Kevin and the hor-rors of the world is to acknowledge and talk about them ; yet fittingly this is a film with subject matter that a lot of people would rather push to the back of their mind and forget. CB

In TimeIn Time is Andrew Niccol’s (Gattaca, S1m0ne) latest creation and revolves around the idea that humans have evolved to a level that means they only age to 25 and that “Time” has become a currency. As such your life will end when your “time” runs out” You work to earn more “time” to live, people can rob you for your “time” and “Time Zones” are various areas in a city, the more “time” you have the better the area. Will Salas (Justin Timberlake) is opposed to this way of life and seeks a way of giving everyone enough “time” to live without fear.

Andrew Niccol is slowly carving out himself a career as the go-to guy for interesting ideas for science fic-tion movies that can appeal to a broader audience. His previous writing credits are impressive, from The Truman Show to Gattaca and Lord of War, Niccol has explored various ideas about the next steps in human evolution. In Time is no different, except that the cen-tral idea raises questions about human’s perceptions of time, money and worth. Whilst this is an inter-esting take in the opening few scenes of In Time, it quickly digresses into becoming another heist movie

It is unfortunate that the central ideas to In Time are interesting, but the script becomes too obsessed with playing with the various meanings time has to people today. For example, Salas talks about how after he is given time by a relative stranger that he now has “enough time to take my mother to New Grenwich”, people on the street ask to borrow some “time”. Gangsters in this futuristic world are called Minute-

men and the police are known as Timekeepers, who are payed “per diem”. Though this may appear bril-liant on a page, it quickly becomes tired on screen. Sometimes the script feels like it is trying to just make it’s way to the next good “time” pun rather than evolving the story.

Considering that this is largely an action film, even in a science fiction setting, Justin Timberlake seems to be an odd choice for Will Salas. Though Timberlake is incredibly charming and very likeable, he is ut-terly unconvincing as the “peoples champion” Salas. Though this in part down to the dodgy script, Tim-berlake’s natural air is not that of a blue collar worker, making ends meet. Though the clock on his wrist may be counting down, he still lives in a “relatively” nice flat, goes out drinking and gambles.

In Time feels as though it could have been superb in a similar fashion to Niccol’s previous work, but only if the script had gone through a few more drafts and some of the awfully stilted dialogue was removed. Justin Timberlake is trying his best to carve out a career as an actor and last year’s The Social Network certainly showed some acting promise. However Timberlake is not an action hero, nor is he a people’s champion. In Time had real promise, but it fails to show this on screen. JH

Contagion

Contagion is not a bad film - rather it is crushingly mediocre. In some ways, this is worse than if it were utterly terrible, because at least then it might have acquired a cult following and thus be attributed the status of ‘good’ by a group of teenagers desperate not to be labelled as followers of the mainstream. But alas, like so many mediocre disaster-thriller types, Contagion is doomed to twinkle out of half-memory in a few years and simply be forgotten.

Perhaps this is unfair to the good elements of the film because they really are good: the cinematography often wanders outside of the bounds of ‘appropriate’ but never really reaches anything special, and the directing is similarly patterned. Cliff Martinez’s score is what really stands out in the film, never descend-ing into Hollywood-esque melodrama but constantly driving the pitch and pace of the film to perfection. His fuzzily industrial sounds fit the tone much better than the strings and pianos often employed to bully the audience into an emotional response.

But frankly, if the score is the stand-out feature of a film, you’re having problems. Especially if it’s a plot-driven disaster film. The script suffers from a chronic case of over-construction; that is to say it’s all over the place. One gets the feeling that it was written with a running time of about seven years and was then mutilated to a not-so-tidy hour and a half or so. The elements of the plot are many and various, flitting often between people and locations, all with different objectives. This does not make the narrative difficult to follow - rather it is difficult to care about so many different elements. Not enough time is allowed for any real emotional connections to be established with any one, so all ultimately fail. Threads seem to be begun and then abandoned before they are explored: hysterical panic is shown briefly and then forgotten, as is the idea of chemical warfare. The result is that the different elements are in tension, fighting for the limelight rather than illuminating one other.

This is reflected in the acting - not in the literal sense that they are all upstaging each other, but rather that most of the characters unrelated and do not meet, and are therefore competing for your emotional con-nection by default. From a technical stand-point, the acting is adequate - believable without being out-standing. No-one is bad in the film, but conversely no-one stands apart, so there seems no merit to singling any one of them out. It is certainly not a lack

of ability from the cast that is responsible for the void between audience and screen, but then again no-one really fights to fill it either.

What is irritating is that Contagion had the potential to be brilliant. An approach with more focus and less rigour would certainly have helped. At present, the film was far too eager to be both a human-interest story and a sci-fi documentary and consequently is neither. It is almost obligatory for a reviewer to take a pot-shot at the shoddy science in disaster films, but honestly, there wasn’t that much wrong with the sci-ence*. Perhaps this was the problem. BS

* bar an exceptionally naive scene involving an au-topsy of an infected woman’s brain that implied the doctors could see the contagion.

Paranormal Activity 3

Having already covered this ground twice, a third instalment of any film series can be a challenge, both for those making the film as well as watching it. Not meaning to say that it’s an impossibility for a series to be successful as well as good, but there can be tendencies for ideas once original, interesting or entertaining to become somewhat overegged or even gimmicky. Once unique concepts become outlandish and far-fetched, to keep breathing life into something inevitably losing its freshness. It is fair to say that Paranormal Activity 3’s attempt to draw new life out of old concepts offers nothing new.

Hitting the screens in time for Halloween, Para-normal Activity 3 offers up (yet) another serving of low-tech horror. For those not already familiar with the concept of the Paranormal Activity series, it is a rather simple one. The plot follows the story of a family in California in 1988, which is exposed to strange goings on in the night. Filmed entirely using hand held camcorders set up by Dennis (Christopher Nicholas Smith), it documents the haunting of his two step-daughters and eventually his family over a number of nights.

At 77 minute, the film is short in length, and short in horror to a certain extent as well. The build up is such that the first half is almost completely devoid of scares. With the normal family life being document-ed in such a fly on the wall fashion, it did somewhat invite comparisons with Big Brother, with the events

and conversations being slightly mundane. But what it did do effectively was to start putting in place the discomfort and unsettling feelings that eventually build up to the point where the film becomes genu-inely scary. With Dennis becoming obsessed with seeing the presence of a ghostly shadow in one clip he inadvertently filmed, and his wife Julie (Lauren Bittner) becoming frustrated with his compulsion to film the family sleeping at night, the story reaches a point of clarity where the family all become aware and terrified of the ghost that haunts them. But the terror isn’t just limited to the characters, as the un-folding events keep the viewer in an unsettling state of anxiety and shock until the very end.

What the Paranormal Activity series has shown is that you can be well into repeating an idea, and it still comes out as effective. When the film eventually gets going, the use of suspense to delay and build up terror creates an intensely chilling atmosphere. With broadly respectable performances from the cast, and the use of the homemade, low-tech approach, quite underused in this age of Hollywood blockbusters (and an interesting change from the high budget, CGI, 3-D approach), this film creates exactly what the viewer will expect from it. The problem is that it just takes far too long to get there. EM

Don’t Be Afraid Of The Dark

Don’t Be Afraid Of The Dark is based on a 1970’s made for TV movie woth Kin Darby (of True Grit fame). It follows a young girl Sally (Bailee Madison) who moves into an old house in the woods with her father (Guy Pearce) and his girlfriend (Katie Holmes) only to discover that the house and it’s previous resi-dents hold a terrifying secret.

A trend has blossomed over the last few years, where directors with big reputations support new talent by producing or helping write films to work on. Peter Jackson helped bring Neill Blomkamp to the world’s attention by producing District 9, Quentin Tarantino was executive producer on Eli Roth’s second feature, Hostel. Don’t Be Afraid Of The Dark is directed by Troy Nixey, a comic book artist with little experience directing, Guillermo Del Toro wrote the screenplay with Matthew Robbins and produced the movie. Whilst Del Toro did not direct the film as he has a multitude of projects on his plate you can clearly feel his influence on the film.

Don’t Be Afraid Of The Dark offers a promise it never lives up to. Guillermo Del Toro’s name as a producer is usually a sign of a quality and usually creepy film (see The Orphanage). Guy Pearce has a knack of becoming involved in incredibly well received films such as L.A Confidential, The King’s Speech and The Hurt Locker. And whilst this is only the directors debut feature, Troy Nixey comes with interesting cre-dentials from the world of comic books, in particular his work with Neil Gaiman. Unfortunately none of these aspects come together well.

Even with the incredible amount of talent behind the script, Don’t Be Afraid Of The Dark’s dialogue and plot are clunky. Merging together motifs from Del Toro’s back catalogue and any number of haunted House flicks the film quickly freefalls into disaster. The script moves from cliché to cliché and begins to generate laughs rather than scares, the final line of the film is so unintentionally funny that it’s the most surprising moment of the film. The “monsters” of the film are some of the least scary monsters ever comit-ted to celluloid, not only do they look ridiculous, but they can be vanquished by keeping the big light on. Despite ALL this, the weakest link in Don’t Be Afraid Of The Dark is undoubtedly Katie Holmes who fails to exhibit any signs of a personality throughout the film whilst simultaneously being set in “peril mode”.

Don’t Be Afraid Of The Dark fails to deliver on any-thing original. Though this may seem obvious when considering that it is a reworking of another film, it is still surprising how little originality the film demon-strates. From “the dark house in the woods” to “the child that knows the truth” Don’t Be Afraid Of The Dark flails around in a cesspool of convention, cliché and crap CGI. Don’t Be Afraid of The Dark still seems to be made for TV. JH

Midnight In Paris

Woody Allen’s output over the last decade has been rocky at best. For every Vicky Christina Barcelona there’s a Melinda and Melinda. It is a relief to find that Midnight in Paris is certainly of a higher calibre than his most recent works.

Midnight in Paris follows struggling Hollywood screenwriter, Gil Pender (Owen Wilson) as he travels the streets of Paris at night, only to be transported back in time to the 1920’s. At night Gil mixes with the creative elite, such as Gertrude Stein (Kathy Bates), Salvador Dali (Adrian Brody), and Ernest Hemingway (Corey Stoll), who all inhabited Paris during the 20’s and during the day he is thrust back to modern times to deal with his fiancee Inez (Rachel McAdams) and her family on a business trip.

It becomes very clear, early on in the Midnight in Paris that the plot is clearly a fantasy of Woody Al-len’s. The protagonist Gil, is a screenwriter for Hol-lywood who has become tired of his work and wants to write more serious works, something Allen him-self tried in his mid thirties and again in his fifties. It is no secret that Allen is obsessed by the cities that surround him, his early works are love letters to New York City (in particular, Manhattan). Many of his more recent films have been set in London or Bar-celona. Is is unsurprising therefore that Midnight in Paris is a love letter to the titular city.

Midnight in Paris has a talented cast. Even the actors

in smaller cameo roles may have an oscar nomina-tion or two. It is incredible then, that Owen Wilson, whose career has been somewhat turbulent over the last few years, manages to create a performance that is distinguishable from the rest of the cast. Wilson is definitely channeling a “Woody Allen” vibe here. His awkward gazes and mad speech patterns is reminis-cent of Allen’s various characters and it works rather well.

Unfortunately the rest of the characters are not given much screentime in the slight 94 minute run-time. Too often does Allen rely on characature to make the audience entirely aware of which literary master Gil has bumped into. Gil’s meeting with Salvador Dali, Man Ray and Luis Bunuel may draw a few laughs but is a little weak. Many of the characters with personal relationships to Gil are also reduced to cultural stereotypes such as the suspicious father-in-law, overbearing mother-in-law, tyrannical fiancee and the sexually liberated, beautiful “girl that got away”. As such the cast can seem underused, even wasted, but to consider such a light film in those very serious terms seems unfair.

At its very core Midnight in Paris is a light comedy and Allen pulls this off well. The protagonist, Gil is that special type of remarkable “everyman” that you only ever find in movies. It is fair to say that whilst Midnight in Paris is not groundbreaking or hysteri-cally funny though it has some interesting ideas and memorable performances. JH

Things to see in November

As our regular read-ers know, here at Picture-Show we like to show you the wealth of classic and cult cinema being shown at the most fascinating in-dependent cinemas. The next four pages are packed full of events, festivals and special screenings to be enjoyed across the coun-try.

North West

Manchester CornerhouseGilda 20th November

One of our Editor-in-Chief ’s favourite films, Gilda, tells the story of the wife of a casino owner who becomes involved with one of his employees. Many people know it today for the classic head swish shown in The Shaw-shank Redemption. You need to see it to know why it sent prisoners wild. Both sinister and sexy, Gilda is not one to miss

LiverpoolCUC CinemaOldboyLet The Right One In

Last month PictureShow had an article ti-tled, Remade in America. At the heart of the article were the two films Liverpool’s CUC are showing this month. Oldboy is the South Korean tale of a man who is imprisoned for 15 years by someone for no particular reason only to be released to wreak vengeance on his captor. Both brutal and brilliant Oldboy is now up for an American remake by Spike Lee and starring Josh Brolin. Let The Right One In, however, is a slower more contemplative piece about a young boy who befriends a vampire who happens to live next door. Tomas Alfredson, who directed last month’s Tinker Tailor Solder Spy, directed this fantasticly chilly swedish tale.

North East

NewcastleTyneside CinemaSexy Beast 1st December

Nobody ever forgets the first time they saw Sexy Beast. From the boulder at the begin-ning to the climax, Sexy Beast is just utterly unforgettable. This is mainly due to the ab-solutely standout performances by Sir Ben Kingsley and Ray Winstone who seemingly have roles reversed as Winstone is the quiet man terrified by his insane boss. The dialogue is frenzied and hilarious and it is unbelievable to think that Sexy Beast is over a decade old.

SheffieldShowroomCult Tuesdays Every Tuesday

When we discovered Sheffield Showroom we could not believe that we had not had in our pages before. To celebrate the 30th anniversary of The Evil Dead, Showroom are shoing it on the 8th of November. The Evil Dead is an absolutely classic horror film. It introduced the world to the creative partnership that was Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell. With a chin to die for, Campbell’s Ash must fend off unnatural forces when he and his friends go camping in the woods. Bloody AND Brilliant.To top it off, later in the month, Showroom are showing Ghostbusters. Now we know that you have probably seen it before, but who wouldn’t want to see it again?

Central

DerbyQuad CinemaThe Wind That Shakes The Barley10th November

The 2006 Palme D’Or winner from Ken Loach is getting shown at the Derby Quad. Not only Ken Loach’s greatest Box Office suc-cess but the biggest Irish success of all time. The drama follows two brothers fighting for independence from the United Kingdom.Sublime Performances and superior directing make a trip to Derby well worthwhile.

Leicester Phoenix CinemaDay of The Undead19th NovemberMidday to Midnight

Not content with just showing the Romero Classics the team at Leicester Phoenix have come up with 12 hours of delirious Zom-bie mayhem from more interesting sources. Comedy, Horror, Thriller it’s all there at the Day of The Undead.

South

LondonShortwave CinemaUnderwire Festival23rd-26th

From the 23rd to the 26th of November Shortwave Cinema is dedicating a great deal of its time to Underwire Festival, a festival dedicated to demonstrating the talents of women in the film industry. Alongside the many screenings there will be discussion panels and workshops for any to attend

Genesis CinemaEvery Sunday400 BlowsDistant Voices, Still LivesRashomomBlack Narcissus

The Genesis Cinema in Whitechapel is intro-ducing a season of brilliant films shown on a Sunday. The pick of the lot must be Akira Kurosawa’s Rashomon which is playing on the 20th. The classic Japanese film tells four sto-ries that come together in a thrilling climax. Well worth a trip.

The Prince Charles CinemaKill Bill Double Bill14th November

Quentin Tarantino’s huge samurai revenge films were originally planned to only be one film. But as the story grew and grew it had to be split in two (like many of the DiVAS). The Prince Charles Cinema is showing both films back to back in a gloriously gory double bill. Go. Roar. Rampage.

South East

HarwichElectric Palace CinemaRaiders of The Lost Ark27th November

Possibly the greatest film of all time, Raiders of The Lost Ark is a classic adventure tale. If you have not seen Harrison Ford’s most icon-ic character (yes, more iconic than both Han Solo and Deckard) in action against the Nazi’s to retrieve the Ark of The Covenant then you need ot make your way to The Electric Palace in Cambridge. One for EVERYBODY.

South WestBathLittle Theatre CinemaHot Fuzz24th November

Edgar Wright’s second “Bloody Cornetto” feature, after Shaun of The Dead, follows PC Nicholas Angel as he is transferred to a small village in Gloucester as he was so good he was making the Metropolitan Police Ser-vice look bad. Inspired by outlandish action movies, such as Point Break and Bad Boys II, Wright’s movie perfectly adapts the very american genre into the lovely british coun-tryside.

Wales

CardiffSoundtrack FestivalVarious Locations

Soundtrack Festival is a small festival based in Cardiff that looks at the unique reltionship between music and film. This year’s pro-gramme has events and screenings scattered across Cardiff. The pick of the bunch must be the opportunity to see A Clockwork Orange on the big screen. There will also be an exhi-bition of things about A Clockwork Orange from the Kubrick Archive and a discussion panel.

The opening and closing night features are also generating a great deal of buzz on the festival circuit. Shame by Steve McQueen (not THAT one) and Coriolanus by Ralph Fiennes. Shame tells the story of a sex addict in New York who has trouble with the arrival of his sister at his apartment.

Kotatsu FestivalChapter26th November

In addition to their work with Soundtrack Festival, Chapter have also put together a mini festival based around Japanese Anima-tion. Showing Arrietty, Tales from Earthsea, Paprika and Redline in one day may sound heavy going but it will most definietely be worth it.

ScotlandGlasgow GFTGeek Film NightAngel Heart4th December

Mark Millar hosts this monthly “Geek Film Night” at the Glasgow Film Theatre. His choice this month is Angel Heart. A heady combination of hard boiled mystery and hor-ror, Angel Heart follows Harry Angel (Mick-ey Rourke) a downtrodden PI whose meeting with Louis Cyphre (Robert DeNiro) sets off an incredible series of events. Before Rourke’s descent into madness in the 90’s this is an incredibly stylish and scary. An 80’s classic

We hope you enjoy any one of these fantastic films. Don’t forget to look out for interesting screenings in

your town or city and help support local, independent cinema.

PictureShow Magazine

will return on the 5th of

December