Rome, Open City

Friday's screening was the post war Italian film 'Rome, Open City'.

I can't say that I loved it but it definitely had some nice points. I think Andy described it best "It's a film to appreciate rather than to enjoy." .

The films we are watching at the moment seem to fall into that category. They seem to sound more entertaining than they actually are. 'The Battle for Algiers' and ' Rome, open city' bring up images of a rather different cinematic experience than they actually deliver. Of course, I certainly appreciated certain aspects of the films. I agree with Andy that the character of the French Para commander was really fascinating, his sense of respect and duty were really quite interesting. However, apart from the odd moment or character popping up in the films I found myself to be immensely un-entertained. Neither Open City or Algiers had enough entertainment value to sustain their run-times. As I recall Richard Attenborough saying "If it's not entertaining, it's not worth making".

Clash of the Titans

It will come as no surprise to most people that I am rather looking forward to the new Clash of the Titans picture. They have recently just released the first teaser trailer for the film and I have a few things I'd like to mention -just a quick blog today.

The trailer, to my surprise, came across very much in the same tone as '300'. It seems as though they have opted for the more 'kick-ass' popcorn approach for the re-make -not that this is necessarily a tragedy. I enjoyed '300' very much and it's a very entertaining film but it's audience appeal was limited by its over testosterone filled style. The choice of contemporary soundtrack I fear will also result in '300' becoming a dated film down the line.

Now I realise it is a bit much to be making criticism of a film based on its first teaser but it just seems to portray a very shallow, action crammed movie. All this being said, I'm still looking forward to the film. And there is nothing particularly wrong with a film that's just an action adventure and nothing more -it's good fun but that's all it is.

"You ARE the First Brigade!!"

Gods and Generals

Having finally received the HMV vouchers for the Drama Works weekend, I decided to use at least one of the cards on myself. So I purchased a couple of DVDs that I had never seen before. Two of the films had, before, taken my interest -but not enough to spend currency on. 'Gods and Generals' and 'Gettysburg', directed by Ronald F. Maxwell are two historical epics based innand around the American Civil War.

Gods and Generals stars Robert Duvall as legendary Confederate leader Robert E. Lee, Stephen Lang and Jeff Daniels. This being set before 'Gettysburg' but made afterwards is in my opinion the stronger and more enjoyable of the two films. It appears to follow mainly the Southern perspective of the war and only occasionally dipping over into the Federals' point of view.

On a historical not, I confess my self rather ignorant of the conflict as a whole and knew only the basics. I remember being surprised when Andy mentioned that the South had more of a romantic reputation -when talking about 'The Searchers'. I always thought the Northerners were more romantic -as I ignorantly thought they were trying to free the slaves.

My point being that these two films (apart from entertaining) also greatly educate their audience.

A note of warning, however, these are very long films.

Although, I believe the prequel to be the better of the two films, it certainly has a less definable story focus. Where as Gettysburg is clearly about the story of that particular battle, 'Generals' covers several and follows s scattering of characters. If I had to identify an overall story I would say it would be predominantly the story of General Thomas 'Stonewall' Jackson -played by Stephen Lang.

Lang's performance throughout the film is the nearest thing to the emotional and personal core of the film. He is who we invest most of our emotion and support in through the film. Having said this, when we flip over to a character of the opposite side we do not see them as the enemy.

With Lang's character championing the side of the Confederacy, it falls to Jeff Daniels to take us through the side of the Union. Although Daniels' character doesn't have nearly as much screen or story time as Lang, he gives a very good an sincere performance that humanises the common soldier.

The battle sequences in Gettysburg, at times, tend to get a bit repetitive. For instance, there is about a three minute sequence of cannons firing -I find myself thinking to myself "I get the point". 'Generals' on the other hand does not over expose the point to the same degree.

To give it its due, the battle sequences are fantastically well done, exhilarating and with a lot of realism -or so it looks.

There occurs a brilliantly emotional moment in which two opposing Irish regiments are pitched against one another, the result is quite moving -helped tremendously by the score. I would hazard a guess that near 80 percent of the film is musically scored.

I really enjoyed Gods and Generals and would recommend it to those interested in the history of the conflict. My main criticism of it is that it does not devote an equal share of the story to all character story lines. As a result the film has a somewhat uneven feel in terms of structure.

A perfect film, it is not, but one that I enjoyed and one that has many enjoyable features.

Mitchell Library visit.

And so we all trooped round for this long anticipated field trip to the Archives. I was fairly looking forward to the visit -although perhaps not the trek to get there.

I knew that we would be seeing some fairly old documents and be given a quick briefing on the Archives. However, it seemed to me slightly removed from our course subject -even with our section on research.

None the less I found myself completely fascinated at the presence of such a wealth of historic documentation. One document in particular I found to be quite mesmerising, that of the Papal correspondence. I'm not entirely sure I remembered exactly but I think it was from 1188 A.D. -the Twelfth century anyway.

On a completely non Film related note, I couldn't help my eyes from drifting back to that specific item. To think of the time and world that that letter was written was crazy. To think that a year prior to the Ink touching that letter's surface Saladin Recaptured Jerusalem from Christian hands -and almost 100 years of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem came to an end. Also, the fact that the letter was from the most powerful person in the Christian world -a major world player.

Ok, I may be self indulging in my very 'Un-Filmy' interests, but I was really amazed to see a document from one of my favourite periods of history. Incidentally, just to put the letter into a cinematic frame, it was written a year after Ridley Scott's 'Kingdom of Heaven' is set.

Perhaps I'm being a tad bit obsessive though. The other documents were also extremely fascinating. I particularly found the Luftwaffe reconnaissance picture of the Clyde interesting.

I would say, however, that I enjoyed the trip to the Archives on a far more historical level than that of a research one.

I thought I would put in a short blog on the Friday shoot of Phil's 'Golden Rule'.

Although only involved in the one day of the shoot, I'm glad I had the chance to contribute to the project.

From what I saw around me during the shoot I realised just how professional our class can operate when organised or motivated well -compared with that of first year's performance. Everyone seemed very comfortable in carrying out their own respective jobs.

One thing that the shoot did bring in to my mind was the fact that we don't get many chances to shoot stuff. It can get slightly frustrating at times when we don't get to shoot outside projects to fill in the time between Academy films. But such is life.

All in all, Phil did a very fine job of directing from what I could see and I'm sure the film will work out ok.