Question:
8 Mile
The problem one has when going to see this film is that the star is so well known it is difficult going into the film not having an opinion already. I noticed that a large proportion of the audience clearly followed Eminem as an artist, whilst others did not go to see an Eminem film but rather a Curtis Hanson film. I feel into both categories, I like Eminem as an artist and I also greatly admire Hanson as a filmmaker, enjoying LA Confidential and Wonder Boys.
The film centres around Eminem’s character Jimmy (Rt as he is called by his friends) he lives in the shady part of Detroit in a trailer with his mum (Kim Basinger) her lover and his daughter Lillie. Jimmy is a white guy in a black business, he attends battles which are gatherings of up and coming rappers who are gaining street cred and artistic knowledge by battling each other. Those with the best rhymes and lyrics win and become the king of the rooster. Battling with nerves and prejudice Jimmy starts to build up the confidence he needs to become a white rapper.
Whilst the film clearly focuses on his musical battle, relationships are also a vital part of the film. Jimmy’s mother has problems with her lover, who is the same age as Jimmy, his daughter lives in the trailer having to put up with constant fights and argument. Whilst Jimmy is in search of a new love his crew are always getting into hustles with other gangs. Eminem plays Jimmy very well, although the film shares obvious similarities with Marshall Mathers’ real life story, it never feels like an Eminem film. Jimmy is a real life guy trying to get along and deal with all the struggles in life. Eminem plays Jimmy with such grit whilst at the same time he manages to dig deeper into the character showing his sensitive sides. The supporting cast is just as good especially Basinger looking almost unrecognizable as Stephanie Smith (Jimmy’s mum).
After the screening director Curtis Hanson was there to answer questions. He talked about how even how the film stars Eminem he didn’t want it to be an excuse for a soundtrack album. He want to tell the story of Jimmy and his troubled life. He mentioned that even the film has a very different feel to his previous two they all are essentially based around dialogue and the city the films are set in are all vital to the story. He mentioned that the film only takes place over a period of one week and that the it is clearly not Eminem’s autobiography.
Overall I enjoyed the film immensely, the combination of the talented actors, led by Eminem who managed to carry the film superbly, (so much so that there is talk of an Oscar) and the wonderful direction of Hanson has led to a great film. The real success of the film in my opinion is that the it will appeal to people other than the Eminem fans, the portrayal of the life of Jimmy and his struggles is really what comes through in this film and in doing so it becomes a good contender for best film in next years Oscars.
City of God
***Warning contains spoilers and those who have not seen the film may want to stop reading***
Just saw my first film at the festival it was City of God. I found it to be one of the most exhilarating and kinetic moving films I have ever seen. It tracks the story of a boy called Rocket from childhood in the 1960's living with his brother who is part of the most notorious hoods on the outskirts of Rio de Janeiro called the City of God. It follows this boy through until the 1980's, through the trials and tribulations of being a youngster growing up in one of the worst neighbourhoods of a dangerous Rio. He meets many people through his youth and the stories of each are told in a brilliant kinetic way.
The film is split up into sections each with there own title, it jumps between time frames similar to Pulp Fiction focusing on the people and places that make up Rocket’s life. The other main character in the film is Lil’ Ze he starts of in the notorious three the gang that Rocket’s brother Goose was a member of and throughout the film you see him climb his way up the ladder to becoming the leader of a gang that controls the City of God.
The direction by Fernando Meirelles (I) is superb, what could have been just another crime film was raised to a much higher level due massively to the direction of this man. He filled the screen with atmosphere, shot in a gorilla way (i.e. few conventional shots, the camera was constantly moving just like the characters on screen), the film replicates the feeling of living in a favella in Brazil. The director was at the screening and told us about the film, it has been a massive success in his home country brazil with over 3.2million people going to see it, the most successful film in the past 20 years, it received a standing ovation at Cannes earlier in the year and has been bought by 62 countries including the UK, hitting screens on the 3rd Jan 2003. The cast was picked off the street and narrowed down to 200, who attended acting classes for 6 months before the parts were given and 70% of the film is improvised giving it a remarkably real feel.
Overall a highly enjoyable film, fast paced, gritty, realistic and exhilarating.
Bowling for Columbine
***Warning contains spoilers and those who have not seen the film may want to stop reading***
The second film I saw at the festival was this documentary, the first documentary to be shown at Cannes for 40 years, it won the special jury prize.
Directed by Michael Moore, the film sends a message home in relation to gun laws in the USA. Starting with Moore going into a bank which gives free guns away to every person who signs up an account, Moore continues his tyrannical attack on gun laws in the States. By a means of Moore style confrontational interviews mixed with news footage and perhaps most disturbingly CCTV footage from the Columbine High School massacre; Moore slowly peels away the American dream. He bombards us with facts involving gun killings, a lesson in the history of the states (deeply bound with black humour), newsreels of America’s crimes against the world and interviews with the associates of the the Oklahoma Bombings, who he ends up humiliating unwillingly of course!
But Moore is not content in just tackling the issue of gun control, toward the end of the documentary he deals with the welfare system, racism, poverty and consumerism. In doing so he widens out the margins but still keeps within his criteria for the film. Moore’s style is very journalist, he cuts frantically between newsreels, film and CCTV footage. The main aim for Moore in making this documentary is to discover why America has such a high crime rate in comparison to other countries in the world, he concludes that is due to the media and the constant fear being pumped into the American society, stating that the Canada owns 7 million guns but only has 68 gun related deaths a year whilst the USA has 11,678.The film contains some disturbing imagery including wartime executions, mainly performed by the US army and footage of within the Columbine high school, but despite this I can say that this is one of the funniest films I have seen all year, it is laced with black humour. All these facts and images help to hammer home the message and leaves you wondering whats next from America and it obsession with guns.
After the screening Moore was there to answer questions from the audience and he did so after receiving a standing ovation. The questions ended with him lobbying to get rid of George Bush which received raptures of applause from the audience. I was also lucky enough to meet him at the end of the screening and he was a great guy.
Love Liza
***Warning contains spoilers and those who have not seen the film may want to stop reading***
A strange but poignant film about a man (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) whose wife has just commited suicide. The film relvolves around him coming to terms with her death and trying to figure out where he belongs in society. It is a very slow paced film and is film, as the day to day life of this man is potrayed. He slowly sprils into depression and becomes withdrawn from society and the people around him.. Throughout the film he is plagued by the letter his wife left him, but is too distraught to open it Becoming a solvent abuser he is lead into the world of collecting models becomes involved with certain characters which led to him opening the letter.
I enjoyed the film, despite it slow pace it had plenty to absorb. The direction was good for a furst time director but the fims weight was carried solely on Hoffman’s shoulders but thankfully he pulled it off giving a superb performance of thr troubled man. The film remained in a mode of homeostasis as the main character becomes more and more affected by what has happened and by the end of it you yourself feel the tug created by the loss of someone close to you.
Ken Park
I planned to see the second screening of Ken Park on the 10/11 and to my surprise it had been cancelled, I didn’t know why all the staff and the London Film Festival had said is that It was due to distribution rights well that was a load of rubbish after reading this on the forums originally posted by brunny 78:
From the guardian website:
US film director Larry Clark has had his latest work withdrawn from its inaugural showing in Britain, after starting a fight in which he tried to choke his British distributor.
Ken Park was due to have its first screening at the London film festival on Saturday. The London-based distribution group, Metro Tartan, withdrew it after he assaulted the head of the company, Hamish McAlpine.
The company is considering whether it will distribute the movie - which features scenes of violent, incestuous sex - while Mr McAlpine is taking legal advice on whether to sue the maverick director for libel in the wake of the altercation.
The fracas broke out at 10pm on Thursday night, at the restaurant of the Charlotte Street hotel in north Soho, as a party of 14 from Metro Tartan held a dinner in honour of the director, at which they were to discuss interviews to be held next day.
Before the main course had been served, Mr Clark, 59, suddenly took offence during a discussion that is understood to have been about politics. He stood up, threw a punch at Mr McAlpine, 47, who was sitting opposite, kicked over a table, jumped on the distributor, and had his hands around his throat before the two were separated.
Police were called and Mr Clark was taken to a London police station, where he is understood to have spent four hours before being released with a caution. Mr McAlpine was taken to a nearby hospital's casualty but suffered no lasting damage.
Last night, Laura De Casto, managing editor of Metro Tartan, who was sitting next to Mr McAlpine, said: "It all happened so suddenly, as they had a discussion about politics. I saw Mr Clark stand up, throw a punch at Mr McAlpine, kick the table over, jump at him on the ground, and start choking him, before two chefs came out of the kitchen and pulled them apart."
Carrie Wicks, director of operations for Firmdale Hotels, said: "We have an open-plan kitchen, and so my staff jumped in and separated them. I wouldn't like to think what would have happened if they hadn't. Larry Clark was certainly determined, and he did create damage."
The director was asked to leave the hotel on Friday, with Metro Tartan refusing to pay for him to stay longer. All press interviews were cancelled.
The distributor then took the decision to withdraw the film from the festival, on the grounds that it could not condone such behaviour. "Neither myself nor my staff could condone someone exhibiting such behaviour," said Ms De Casto.
Last night, Mr Clark, best-known for Kids, which charted an Aids-ridden skateboarder's predilection for deflowering 13-year-olds, was unavailable for comment.
He had told the Observer he was "hugely disappointed" by the decision to withdraw the film. "I'd never normally fight someone - it's not in my nature. If Hamish wants to get his own back, I'll tie my hands behind my back and he can have a few free punches. But to take it out on my film is just absurd."
Mr McAlpine was yesterday recovering in the country, and is understood to be considering legal action over a claim by Mr Clark that the fight had been sparked by a row over September 11, in which it was alleged that Mr McAlpine made anti-US and other comments.
Mr Clark spent 19 months in a maximum security jail in the late 1970s for a variety of offences, including shooting someone in the arm.
Anybody seen any films at the festival?
Don't suppose you saw Dirty Pretty Things did you?
I was at Cannes earlier in the year and saw a few of the films being screened at the LFF. I agree that City of Gods is a beautiful film, really amazing, and Bowling for Columbine is a must-see too. If you can, try to catch the following films: Russian Ark, Lilya 4-Ever, The Man without a Past, Kedma, and Punch-Drunk Love.
I'm looking forward to seeing The Quiet American, and Dolls (Kitano's films are alwas pretty cool, though i've heard this one is a step-away from the whole gangster thing), as well as some shorts and animations which people always overlook at bigger festivals like this.
Originally posted by buffy-fan
The questions ended with him lobbying to get rid of George Bush which received raptures of applause from the audience.indeed. and it was me who asked him that question: "Will your next project go after George W. Bush?". :smokin:
what a night! sensational movie. the sort of thing that restores your faith in the medium of film. hilarious, shocking, informative, upsetting, enlightening and delivered with an XL set of *********. the most incredible thing i've seen on a cinema screen for quite some time. possibly ever. the scene when he nails that c--- heston is already one of the greatest moments in the history of documentary filmmaking for me. everyone should see this film.
Still to review is the surprise film, which until monday will be a surprise, surprisingly:nuts:
Thanks for these comments. For various reasons (money being one) I've cut down on what I've seen thsi year. I've not prebooked anything which has a UK distributor. So that left the Bertrand Tavernier interview and the debate on women filmmakers last weekend. The latter was quite lively, and both were interesting.
Otherwise, there's the restored <i>Lola Montes</i> tomorrow night. On Tuesday is <i>Black and White</i> an Australian courtroom drama - on past experience, distribution of Oz movies has been quite erratic in this country, so I thought I'd take a chance on it on the big screen.
And that'll be it for me this year. However, I do intend to see most of the films above when they get released.
I haven't seen anything at the Festival this year - my honeymoon ate into part of it and I didn't think it would be a particularly good start to my marriage if I was out late every night for its first "proper" week, though I did catch Guy Maddin's typically bonkers <I>Dracula - Pages From A Virgin's Diary</I> on a loaned VHS copy, and that's well worth a look if there are still tickets available and you fancy seeing the first silent <I>Dracula</I> since <I>Nosferatu</I>.
The problem one has when going to see this film is that the star is so well known it is difficult going into the film not having an opinion already. I noticed that a large proportion of the audience clearly followed Eminem as an artist, whilst others did not go to see an Eminem film but rather a Curtis Hanson film. I feel into both categories, I like Eminem as an artist and I also greatly admire Hanson as a filmmaker, enjoying LA Confidential and Wonder Boys.
The film centres around Eminem’s character Jimmy (Rt as he is called by his friends) he lives in the shady part of Detroit in a trailer with his mum (Kim Basinger) her lover and his daughter Lillie. Jimmy is a white guy in a black business, he attends battles which are gatherings of up and coming rappers who are gaining street cred and artistic knowledge by battling each other. Those with the best rhymes and lyrics win and become the king of the rooster. Battling with nerves and prejudice Jimmy starts to build up the confidence he needs to become a white rapper.
Whilst the film clearly focuses on his musical battle, relationships are also a vital part of the film. Jimmy’s mother has problems with her lover, who is the same age as Jimmy, his daughter lives in the trailer having to put up with constant fights and argument. Whilst Jimmy is in search of a new love his crew are always getting into hustles with other gangs. Eminem plays Jimmy very well, although the film shares obvious similarities with Marshall Mathers’ real life story, it never feels like an Eminem film. Jimmy is a real life guy trying to get along and deal with all the struggles in life. Eminem plays Jimmy with such grit whilst at the same time he manages to dig deeper into the character showing his sensitive sides. The supporting cast is just as good especially Basinger looking almost unrecognizable as Stephanie Smith (Jimmy’s mum).
After the screening director Curtis Hanson was there to answer questions. He talked about how even how the film stars Eminem he didn’t want it to be an excuse for a soundtrack album. He want to tell the story of Jimmy and his troubled life. He mentioned that even the film has a very different feel to his previous two they all are essentially based around dialogue and the city the films are set in are all vital to the story. He mentioned that the film only takes place over a period of one week and that the it is clearly not Eminem’s autobiography.
Overall I enjoyed the film immensely, the combination of the talented actors, led by Eminem who managed to carry the film superbly, (so much so that there is talk of an Oscar) and the wonderful direction of Hanson has led to a great film. The real success of the film in my opinion is that the it will appeal to people other than the Eminem fans, the portrayal of the life of Jimmy and his struggles is really what comes through in this film and in doing so it becomes a good contender for best film in next years Oscars.
City of God
***Warning contains spoilers and those who have not seen the film may want to stop reading***
Just saw my first film at the festival it was City of God. I found it to be one of the most exhilarating and kinetic moving films I have ever seen. It tracks the story of a boy called Rocket from childhood in the 1960's living with his brother who is part of the most notorious hoods on the outskirts of Rio de Janeiro called the City of God. It follows this boy through until the 1980's, through the trials and tribulations of being a youngster growing up in one of the worst neighbourhoods of a dangerous Rio. He meets many people through his youth and the stories of each are told in a brilliant kinetic way.
The film is split up into sections each with there own title, it jumps between time frames similar to Pulp Fiction focusing on the people and places that make up Rocket’s life. The other main character in the film is Lil’ Ze he starts of in the notorious three the gang that Rocket’s brother Goose was a member of and throughout the film you see him climb his way up the ladder to becoming the leader of a gang that controls the City of God.
The direction by Fernando Meirelles (I) is superb, what could have been just another crime film was raised to a much higher level due massively to the direction of this man. He filled the screen with atmosphere, shot in a gorilla way (i.e. few conventional shots, the camera was constantly moving just like the characters on screen), the film replicates the feeling of living in a favella in Brazil. The director was at the screening and told us about the film, it has been a massive success in his home country brazil with over 3.2million people going to see it, the most successful film in the past 20 years, it received a standing ovation at Cannes earlier in the year and has been bought by 62 countries including the UK, hitting screens on the 3rd Jan 2003. The cast was picked off the street and narrowed down to 200, who attended acting classes for 6 months before the parts were given and 70% of the film is improvised giving it a remarkably real feel.
Overall a highly enjoyable film, fast paced, gritty, realistic and exhilarating.
Bowling for Columbine
***Warning contains spoilers and those who have not seen the film may want to stop reading***
The second film I saw at the festival was this documentary, the first documentary to be shown at Cannes for 40 years, it won the special jury prize.
Directed by Michael Moore, the film sends a message home in relation to gun laws in the USA. Starting with Moore going into a bank which gives free guns away to every person who signs up an account, Moore continues his tyrannical attack on gun laws in the States. By a means of Moore style confrontational interviews mixed with news footage and perhaps most disturbingly CCTV footage from the Columbine High School massacre; Moore slowly peels away the American dream. He bombards us with facts involving gun killings, a lesson in the history of the states (deeply bound with black humour), newsreels of America’s crimes against the world and interviews with the associates of the the Oklahoma Bombings, who he ends up humiliating unwillingly of course!
But Moore is not content in just tackling the issue of gun control, toward the end of the documentary he deals with the welfare system, racism, poverty and consumerism. In doing so he widens out the margins but still keeps within his criteria for the film. Moore’s style is very journalist, he cuts frantically between newsreels, film and CCTV footage. The main aim for Moore in making this documentary is to discover why America has such a high crime rate in comparison to other countries in the world, he concludes that is due to the media and the constant fear being pumped into the American society, stating that the Canada owns 7 million guns but only has 68 gun related deaths a year whilst the USA has 11,678.The film contains some disturbing imagery including wartime executions, mainly performed by the US army and footage of within the Columbine high school, but despite this I can say that this is one of the funniest films I have seen all year, it is laced with black humour. All these facts and images help to hammer home the message and leaves you wondering whats next from America and it obsession with guns.
After the screening Moore was there to answer questions from the audience and he did so after receiving a standing ovation. The questions ended with him lobbying to get rid of George Bush which received raptures of applause from the audience. I was also lucky enough to meet him at the end of the screening and he was a great guy.
Love Liza
***Warning contains spoilers and those who have not seen the film may want to stop reading***
A strange but poignant film about a man (Phillip Seymour Hoffman) whose wife has just commited suicide. The film relvolves around him coming to terms with her death and trying to figure out where he belongs in society. It is a very slow paced film and is film, as the day to day life of this man is potrayed. He slowly sprils into depression and becomes withdrawn from society and the people around him.. Throughout the film he is plagued by the letter his wife left him, but is too distraught to open it Becoming a solvent abuser he is lead into the world of collecting models becomes involved with certain characters which led to him opening the letter.
I enjoyed the film, despite it slow pace it had plenty to absorb. The direction was good for a furst time director but the fims weight was carried solely on Hoffman’s shoulders but thankfully he pulled it off giving a superb performance of thr troubled man. The film remained in a mode of homeostasis as the main character becomes more and more affected by what has happened and by the end of it you yourself feel the tug created by the loss of someone close to you.
Ken Park
I planned to see the second screening of Ken Park on the 10/11 and to my surprise it had been cancelled, I didn’t know why all the staff and the London Film Festival had said is that It was due to distribution rights well that was a load of rubbish after reading this on the forums originally posted by brunny 78:
From the guardian website:
US film director Larry Clark has had his latest work withdrawn from its inaugural showing in Britain, after starting a fight in which he tried to choke his British distributor.
Ken Park was due to have its first screening at the London film festival on Saturday. The London-based distribution group, Metro Tartan, withdrew it after he assaulted the head of the company, Hamish McAlpine.
The company is considering whether it will distribute the movie - which features scenes of violent, incestuous sex - while Mr McAlpine is taking legal advice on whether to sue the maverick director for libel in the wake of the altercation.
The fracas broke out at 10pm on Thursday night, at the restaurant of the Charlotte Street hotel in north Soho, as a party of 14 from Metro Tartan held a dinner in honour of the director, at which they were to discuss interviews to be held next day.
Before the main course had been served, Mr Clark, 59, suddenly took offence during a discussion that is understood to have been about politics. He stood up, threw a punch at Mr McAlpine, 47, who was sitting opposite, kicked over a table, jumped on the distributor, and had his hands around his throat before the two were separated.
Police were called and Mr Clark was taken to a London police station, where he is understood to have spent four hours before being released with a caution. Mr McAlpine was taken to a nearby hospital's casualty but suffered no lasting damage.
Last night, Laura De Casto, managing editor of Metro Tartan, who was sitting next to Mr McAlpine, said: "It all happened so suddenly, as they had a discussion about politics. I saw Mr Clark stand up, throw a punch at Mr McAlpine, kick the table over, jump at him on the ground, and start choking him, before two chefs came out of the kitchen and pulled them apart."
Carrie Wicks, director of operations for Firmdale Hotels, said: "We have an open-plan kitchen, and so my staff jumped in and separated them. I wouldn't like to think what would have happened if they hadn't. Larry Clark was certainly determined, and he did create damage."
The director was asked to leave the hotel on Friday, with Metro Tartan refusing to pay for him to stay longer. All press interviews were cancelled.
The distributor then took the decision to withdraw the film from the festival, on the grounds that it could not condone such behaviour. "Neither myself nor my staff could condone someone exhibiting such behaviour," said Ms De Casto.
Last night, Mr Clark, best-known for Kids, which charted an Aids-ridden skateboarder's predilection for deflowering 13-year-olds, was unavailable for comment.
He had told the Observer he was "hugely disappointed" by the decision to withdraw the film. "I'd never normally fight someone - it's not in my nature. If Hamish wants to get his own back, I'll tie my hands behind my back and he can have a few free punches. But to take it out on my film is just absurd."
Mr McAlpine was yesterday recovering in the country, and is understood to be considering legal action over a claim by Mr Clark that the fight had been sparked by a row over September 11, in which it was alleged that Mr McAlpine made anti-US and other comments.
Mr Clark spent 19 months in a maximum security jail in the late 1970s for a variety of offences, including shooting someone in the arm.
Answers:
Anybody seen any films at the festival?
Answers:
Don't suppose you saw Dirty Pretty Things did you?
Answers:
I was at Cannes earlier in the year and saw a few of the films being screened at the LFF. I agree that City of Gods is a beautiful film, really amazing, and Bowling for Columbine is a must-see too. If you can, try to catch the following films: Russian Ark, Lilya 4-Ever, The Man without a Past, Kedma, and Punch-Drunk Love.
I'm looking forward to seeing The Quiet American, and Dolls (Kitano's films are alwas pretty cool, though i've heard this one is a step-away from the whole gangster thing), as well as some shorts and animations which people always overlook at bigger festivals like this.
Answers:
Originally posted by buffy-fan
The questions ended with him lobbying to get rid of George Bush which received raptures of applause from the audience.indeed. and it was me who asked him that question: "Will your next project go after George W. Bush?". :smokin:
what a night! sensational movie. the sort of thing that restores your faith in the medium of film. hilarious, shocking, informative, upsetting, enlightening and delivered with an XL set of *********. the most incredible thing i've seen on a cinema screen for quite some time. possibly ever. the scene when he nails that c--- heston is already one of the greatest moments in the history of documentary filmmaking for me. everyone should see this film.
Answers:
Still to review is the surprise film, which until monday will be a surprise, surprisingly:nuts:
Answers:
Thanks for these comments. For various reasons (money being one) I've cut down on what I've seen thsi year. I've not prebooked anything which has a UK distributor. So that left the Bertrand Tavernier interview and the debate on women filmmakers last weekend. The latter was quite lively, and both were interesting.
Otherwise, there's the restored <i>Lola Montes</i> tomorrow night. On Tuesday is <i>Black and White</i> an Australian courtroom drama - on past experience, distribution of Oz movies has been quite erratic in this country, so I thought I'd take a chance on it on the big screen.
And that'll be it for me this year. However, I do intend to see most of the films above when they get released.
Answers:
I haven't seen anything at the Festival this year - my honeymoon ate into part of it and I didn't think it would be a particularly good start to my marriage if I was out late every night for its first "proper" week, though I did catch Guy Maddin's typically bonkers <I>Dracula - Pages From A Virgin's Diary</I> on a loaned VHS copy, and that's well worth a look if there are still tickets available and you fancy seeing the first silent <I>Dracula</I> since <I>Nosferatu</I>.
1 2