Diving Headfirst Into The Underbelly Of The Pop Counterculture!
Just days after the full trailer for Floria Sigismondi’s The Runaways slipped out across the web, here comes a music video showcasing Dakota Fanning and Kristen Stewart as members of the titular band
Read more: Music Video Of Dakota Fanning and Kristen Stewart Performing Cherry Bomb as The Runaways.
(via)
In the most recent issue of The Sunday Times, artist Banksy did not only create the cover art, but the magazine also published a 6 page interview with him.
“Readers of the The Sunday Times in the UK were greeted with a six-page spread on Banksy including a question and answer session with the stealthy street artist. The interview ended up being quite insightful despite the fact that he talks in his usual tongue-in-cheek manner about museums, CCTV, his reasons for anonymity, his hypocrisy, his family, his art background, his collection, and sure to disappoint fans everywhere, he says – “I won’t be doing any more big gallery shows for a while, it’s all a bit dodgy. I’ve come into contact with a lot more villains since I moved from vandalism into selling paintings. The art world is full of shady people peddling bright colours.” It’s perhaps this distrust of the art world that led to the way his film “Exit Through the Gift Shop” turned out and also to the creation Pest Control, an entity that still refuses to authenticate his artwork that is taken off the streets by speculators.”
(via)
Horror Movie Phoonk 2 Maker’s Freaky Challenge.
A Bollywood filmmaker has issued a lucrative challenge to horror movie fans: a $10,000 reward for anyone who can watch his latest supernatural thriller, alone, in a cinema until the closing credits.
I missed Antichrist at the film festival and in its limited cinematic release. I admit that a few times I had occasion to see it but was scared off by what I’d read. So it was from the safety of the couch that I approached writer/director Lars von Trier’s (Dogville, Dancer in the Dark) polarising, scandalous work. It is the first DVD I’ve ever seen with a warning across the top in addition to the R rating for high impact violence and sexual activity emblazoned across the bottom.
It has been reported that von Trier wrote the film during a period of deep depression. The result is a melancholy meditation on guilt and grief, explored through only two characters. The subject matter is intense in its own right, and is magnified by the chemistry between the leads – Charlotte Gainsbourg (The Science of Sleep, 21 Grams) as the grieving mother (or Eve/Madonna according to some readings); and Willem Dafoe (Shadow of the Vampire, eXistenZ) her therapist husband (Man/Mankind) who seeks to console her. Von Trier uses only their interactions, visceral and confronting as they are, to explore his subject.
The prologue contains no dialogue and is presented in slow motion. The alarming juxtaposition of events is portrayed like a dance set to a Handel Aria and sets the tone for a film as beautiful as it is disturbing. The limited focus of the story takes us on a very personal journey through these raw emotions and is highly effective in doing so.
The brutality for which the film is famous is an extension of this journey and is not out of place. Shocking, yes and difficult to watch, yet quite brief. It is the motivation for and outcome of the acts that are more important. From the uproar it received I was expecting misogynistic violence for its own sake, drawn out and gratuitous. Instead von Trier forces us to question our morals, guilt and the limits of our acceptance.
Far from the ‘torture porn’ of films such as Eden Lake or the Saw franchise, the savagery of Antichrist serves only to emphasise von Trier’s point and ensure that we grasp its gravity. Like the narrative itself, only key moments of violence are shown. This technique endears me greatly and makes the film far more powerful. Rather than wade through the mundanity of the couple’s quotidian, it’s all killer, no filler. The sweeping photography and artistic mood soften the pace just enough so as to keep the audience enthralled.
The film will certainly not be to everyone’s taste. Its brutality is not something to which Hollywood audiences have been desensitised. These moments are however brief enough to make the film quite watchable and commendable in fact for successfully crossing these lines in a palatable fashion.
Antichrist engages various weighty subjects including Christian guilt and the creation myth, anti/feminism, gynocide, and society’s preoccupation with therapy. An essay could be written on each of these and it is for this that I am so intrigued by von Trier’s work. He has effectively produced a film that can be appreciated on many levels, the least of which is a beautiful but terrifying thriller.
I missed Antichrist at the film festival and in its limited cinematic release. I admit that a few times I had occasion to see it but was scared off by what I’d read. So it was from the safety of the couch that I approached writer/director Lars von Trier’s (Dogville, Dancer in the Dark) polarising, scandalous work. It is the first DVD I’ve ever seen with a warning across the top in addition to the R rating for high impact violence and sexual activity emblazoned across the bottom.
It has been reported that von Trier wrote the film during a period of deep depression. The result is a melancholy meditation on guilt and grief, explored through only two characters. The subject matter is intense in its own right, and is magnified by the chemistry between the leads – Charlotte Gainsbourg (The Science of Sleep, 21 Grams) as the grieving mother (or Eve/Madonna according to some readings); and Willem Dafoe (Shadow of the Vampire, eXistenZ) her therapist husband (Man/Mankind) who seeks to console her. Von Trier uses only their interactions, visceral and confronting as they are, to explore his subject.
The prologue contains no dialogue and is presented in slow motion. The alarming juxtaposition of events is portrayed like a dance set to a Handel Aria and sets the tone for a film as beautiful as it is disturbing. The limited focus of the story takes us on a very personal journey through these raw emotions and is highly effective in doing so.
The brutality for which the film is famous is an extension of this journey and is not out of place. Shocking, yes and difficult to watch, yet quite brief. It is the motivation for and outcome of the acts that are more important. From the uproar it received I was expecting misogynistic violence for its own sake, drawn out and gratuitous. Instead von Trier forces us to question our morals, guilt and the limits of our acceptance.
Far from the ‘torture porn’ of films such as Eden Lake or the Saw franchise, the savagery of Antichrist serves only to emphasise von Trier’s point and ensure that we grasp its gravity. Like the narrative itself, only key moments of violence are shown. This technique endears me greatly and makes the film far more powerful. Rather than wade through the mundanity of the couple’s quotidian, it’s all killer, no filler. The sweeping photography and artistic mood soften the pace just enough so as to keep the audience enthralled.
The film will certainly not be to everyone’s taste. Its brutality is not something to which Hollywood audiences have been desensitised. These moments are however brief enough to make the film quite watchable and commendable in fact for successfully crossing these lines in a palatable fashion.
Antichrist engages various weighty subjects including Christian guilt and the creation myth, anti/feminism, gynocide, and society’s preoccupation with therapy. An essay could be written on each of these and it is for this that I am so intrigued by von Trier’s work. He has effectively produced a film that can be appreciated on many levels, the least of which is a beautiful but terrifying thriller.
Floria Sigismondi’s movie based on The Runaways is almost upon us.
There is a teaser trailer available now at the official website as well as the movie poster.
The Runaways (Neon Angels) is based on lead-singer Cherie Currie’s book ‘Neon Angel’ – a reflection of her experiences as a rock star, but also delivering a strong anti-drug warning to teens and others. David Bowie’s “Space Oddity” serves as a metaphor for the narrative– a slow countdown, a surreal but spectacular rise to fame, then alienation and burnout – a long long way from home.
The movie chronicles THE RUNAWAYS from 1975 – 1977; formed by teenage girls living near Hollywood, CA., and heavily manipulated by their manager Kim Fowley as ‘jailbait rock’ (all the girls were 16 or younger when the band recorded their first album). The band ultimately succeeds on their own merits as musicians, becoming the first all-girl rock-band to ever break into the world of arena-filling hard rock acts.
The movie focuses on the band’s formation, and their meteoric rise to fame. Their first single, ‘Cherry Bomb’, gets some attention in the United States, where THE RUNAWAYS’ U.S. tour hits major venues (Cobo Hall, with RUSH) and sleazy rock-clubs, often pairing them up with The Ramones, Cheap Trick, Tom Petty, and other popular 1970′s rock acts. But ‘Cherry Bomb’ and several other songs from THE RUNAWAYS’ first 2 albums become huge hits in Japan — and their arrival for a set of shows there in 1977 is like Beatle-Mania. The band is overwhelmed by the Japanese reception. Almost prophetic, THE RUNAWAYS’ last big hit song in Japan is ‘Neon Angels On The Road To Ruin’.
Cherie is initially thrilled to be in the band, and lives the rock star life. She pushes the edge — and their records sell well, generating lots of media controversy and hype. But during the tour of Japan, her personal life disnintegrates, and she burns out — ultimately leaving The Runaways when they return to the U.S. The bass player (Jackie Fox) quits too, leaving only Lita Ford, Joan Jett and Sandy West. Joan Jett has decided that rock & roll is her life, and that The Runaways is her ‘family’; she is upset by Cherie’s decision to leave, but knows that decision is best — for Cherie.
THE RUNAWAYS’ success was earth-shaking in rock music — changing the rules forever. But with the successful 5-girl lineup no longer intact after the Japan tour, their future was dubious, at best. Lita Ford (guitar) and Sandy West (drums) still think the band can make it big again, so they persevere with Joan Jett.
Floria Sigismondi’s movie based on The Runaways is almost upon us.
There is a teaser trailer available now at the official website as well as the movie poster.
The Runaways (Neon Angels) is based on lead-singer Cherie Currie’s book ‘Neon Angel’ – a reflection of her experiences as a rock star, but also delivering a strong anti-drug warning to teens and others. David Bowie’s “Space Oddity” serves as a metaphor for the narrative– a slow countdown, a surreal but spectacular rise to fame, then alienation and burnout – a long long way from home.
The movie chronicles THE RUNAWAYS from 1975 – 1977; formed by teenage girls living near Hollywood, CA., and heavily manipulated by their manager Kim Fowley as ‘jailbait rock’ (all the girls were 16 or younger when the band recorded their first album). The band ultimately succeeds on their own merits as musicians, becoming the first all-girl rock-band to ever break into the world of arena-filling hard rock acts.
The movie focuses on the band’s formation, and their meteoric rise to fame. Their first single, ‘Cherry Bomb’, gets some attention in the United States, where THE RUNAWAYS’ U.S. tour hits major venues (Cobo Hall, with RUSH) and sleazy rock-clubs, often pairing them up with The Ramones, Cheap Trick, Tom Petty, and other popular 1970′s rock acts. But ‘Cherry Bomb’ and several other songs from THE RUNAWAYS’ first 2 albums become huge hits in Japan — and their arrival for a set of shows there in 1977 is like Beatle-Mania. The band is overwhelmed by the Japanese reception. Almost prophetic, THE RUNAWAYS’ last big hit song in Japan is ‘Neon Angels On The Road To Ruin’.
Cherie is initially thrilled to be in the band, and lives the rock star life. She pushes the edge — and their records sell well, generating lots of media controversy and hype. But during the tour of Japan, her personal life disnintegrates, and she burns out — ultimately leaving The Runaways when they return to the U.S. The bass player (Jackie Fox) quits too, leaving only Lita Ford, Joan Jett and Sandy West. Joan Jett has decided that rock & roll is her life, and that The Runaways is her ‘family’; she is upset by Cherie’s decision to leave, but knows that decision is best — for Cherie.
THE RUNAWAYS’ success was earth-shaking in rock music — changing the rules forever. But with the successful 5-girl lineup no longer intact after the Japan tour, their future was dubious, at best. Lita Ford (guitar) and Sandy West (drums) still think the band can make it big again, so they persevere with Joan Jett.
Floria Sigismondi’s movie based on The Runaways is almost upon us.
There is a teaser trailer available now at the official website as well as the movie poster.
The Runaways (Neon Angels) is based on lead-singer Cherie Currie’s book ‘Neon Angel’ – a reflection of her experiences as a rock star, but also delivering a strong anti-drug warning to teens and others. David Bowie’s “Space Oddity” serves as a metaphor for the narrative– a slow countdown, a surreal but spectacular rise to fame, then alienation and burnout – a long long way from home.
The movie chronicles THE RUNAWAYS from 1975 – 1977; formed by teenage girls living near Hollywood, CA., and heavily manipulated by their manager Kim Fowley as ‘jailbait rock’ (all the girls were 16 or younger when the band recorded their first album). The band ultimately succeeds on their own merits as musicians, becoming the first all-girl rock-band to ever break into the world of arena-filling hard rock acts.
The movie focuses on the band’s formation, and their meteoric rise to fame. Their first single, ‘Cherry Bomb’, gets some attention in the United States, where THE RUNAWAYS’ U.S. tour hits major venues (Cobo Hall, with RUSH) and sleazy rock-clubs, often pairing them up with The Ramones, Cheap Trick, Tom Petty, and other popular 1970′s rock acts. But ‘Cherry Bomb’ and several other songs from THE RUNAWAYS’ first 2 albums become huge hits in Japan — and their arrival for a set of shows there in 1977 is like Beatle-Mania. The band is overwhelmed by the Japanese reception. Almost prophetic, THE RUNAWAYS’ last big hit song in Japan is ‘Neon Angels On The Road To Ruin’.
Cherie is initially thrilled to be in the band, and lives the rock star life. She pushes the edge — and their records sell well, generating lots of media controversy and hype. But during the tour of Japan, her personal life disnintegrates, and she burns out — ultimately leaving The Runaways when they return to the U.S. The bass player (Jackie Fox) quits too, leaving only Lita Ford, Joan Jett and Sandy West. Joan Jett has decided that rock & roll is her life, and that The Runaways is her ‘family’; she is upset by Cherie’s decision to leave, but knows that decision is best — for Cherie.
THE RUNAWAYS’ success was earth-shaking in rock music — changing the rules forever. But with the successful 5-girl lineup no longer intact after the Japan tour, their future was dubious, at best. Lita Ford (guitar) and Sandy West (drums) still think the band can make it big again, so they persevere with Joan Jett.
According to RollingStone.com, ‘Lemmy’, a documentary that follows Motorhead’s frontman Ian ‘Lemmy’ Kilmister on the road and into his home, will premiere at the 2010 South By Southwest (SXSW) festival in Austin, Texas this March.
The film promises fans more access than ever before to Kilmister’s life, and includes interviews with past and present bandmates and such peers/admirers as Slash, Dave Grohl, Metallica, Alice Cooper, Ozzy Osbourne and wrestling superstar Triple H.
Directors/producers Greg Olliver and Wes Orshoski, spent three years with Lemmy to capture the life and history of the legendary rocker, traveling from Kilmister’s Hollywood home to concerts in Scandinavia and Russia.
The film was reportedly shot on a combination of HD video and super 16 mm film.
“Lemmy never ceases to surprise me,” Orshoski told Billboard.com in a 2008 interview. “You think you know who Lemmy is, but you have no idea. If you think you have Lemmy all figured out, trust me. You don’t!”
“Shooting Lemmy is like filming dangerous wildlife. He never does what you expect him to do, and he never does anything you want him to do,” Olliver added. “A lot of the coolest shots are shots we had to wait for four or five shows to go by before we could get them.”
Check out the teaser trailer here.
Sherlock Holmes is Guy Ritchie’s welcome return to form. I loved Snatch (2000), a snappier, funnier, post-modern improvement on his 1998 Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, which he also wrote and directed. As the gangster flicks rolled out (Revolver was ok, RocknRolla pretty terrible) it was presumed Ritchie was a one trick pony.
Although finally free of Madonna’s apron strings, Ritchie has not strayed far from these familiar themes. He has however wisely left the screen play to newcomer Michael Robert Johnson and Anthony Peckham (Don’t Say a Word 2001 and Invictus 2009, the Clint Eastwood directed Nelson Mandela story released this year); who have penned a beautifully original adaptation of Conan Doyle’s well-known characters.
In a cinematic landscape where originality is thin on the ground (especially in crowd-pleasing blockbusters) it is so refreshing to have our hero written as quirky, unassuming and lacking Hollywood hyper-sexuality. Johnson and Peckham have resisted tarring Holmes with the cliché brush and have instead unpacked the literature to make him three dimensional and irresistible.
The irresistibility is no doubt aided by my favourite nearly-crashed-and-burned-in-the-90s born again sex symbol, Robert Downey Jr. The man who began his infamy in April 1996, arrested for possession of heroin, cocaine and an unloaded .357-caliber Magnum handgun, while speeding down Sunset Boulevard (how cool?!), RDJ struggled until 2001 to kick his habits. From there he’s emerged the brooding hero, sneaking back to fame via indie hits A Scanner Darkly (2006) and Zodiac (2007) to last years smouldering Iron Man.
RDJ’s performance is perfectly offbeat. I wish he’d given us a little more but it is, after all, a detective story not the romance it is in my head. Perhaps in the sequel. A lovely complement both aesthetically and in pace is Jude Law, whose absence of sugary pretty-boy cheese makes him likeable for a change. He is instead mildly conflicted, reasonably intelligent and pleasantly tolerable. The pair bounce scrumptious dialogue off each other and Ritchie makes the most of it, revisiting the fantastic rollicking pace that made Snatch the most-watched DVD in my collection. Actually the pace doesn’t really let up – there is barely any sorbet between the courses – but I hardly noticed I was so immersed in the richly drawn world.
Ritchie remains the only director who makes me enjoy watching violence. Gracefully choreographed as in Snatch (the scene where Brad Pitt loses the boxing match is one of my favourites) he this time explores the forethought in slow motion before smacking you with a deliciously satisfying denouement. This is entertainment!
While the world wows at Avatar I was thrilled at the lack of CGI in Sherlock Holmes. The film does contain a fair amount of digital magic but it’s portrayed with restraint, in a tone that matches the film’s setting. The characters believe what is happening and so do we. In fact, Ritchie is a paragon of restraint in his clever use of narrative devices as well – voice over and flash backs both just enough to keep us interested but not so much as to become tiresome or overstated.
Also worth a mention is the music, composed by the ridiculously prolific Hans Zimmer. The instrumentation in particular adds another dimension of enjoyment to the film. It subtly complements the narrative – accordions at the entrance of the French character; discordant clock chimes building suspense as Big Ben looms over the action. Superb.
I loved this film. It’s exactly what I want when I go to the movies to relax. Something that assumes I am intelligent and quick witted, yet still indulges my id. Thinking person’s light entertainment.
