The China Syndrome (Revisited)

The 70’s was a tumultuous time in modern American History; the hugely unpopular Vietnam War was coming to a close; The Watergate scandal saw the American Presidency embroiled in corruption, and the worlds international financial markets were headed towards collapse. Man has often created ways to push the destruction of society within a gasp of reality. The 70’s were arguably mankind’s luckiest decade: a period in history where we can look back and think “thank fu*k we dodged that one”.

I wasn't alive in 1979 when the thriller blockbuster “The China Syndrome” was released. The film was really an exclamation point on the preceding five or so years in the development of nuclear technology, it also signalled the real first signs that Greed and Power could ultimately destroy mankind. Nuclear power plants were springing up allover the United States, Russia and parts of Europe and they were expensive to run; the balance between safety and fiscal success was teetering on disaster. Nuclear energy had already proven its ability to cause mass destruction as early as the 1940’s with the atrocities committed on Hiroshima and other cities in Japan. The American’s were continuing to play with nuclear fire and chances are someone would be burnt increased with every passing decade.

The plot of 'The China Syndrome' captures this sentiment perfectly. It follows news reporter Kimberley Wells (Jane Fonda) as she and her cameraman Richard Adam’s (Michael Douglas) are witness to, and covertly record, an ‘Incident’ within a nuclear power plant whilst researching a story on alternative energy sources. The power plant’s shift manager Jack Dodell (Jack Lemmon) needs to decide between his loyalty to his work or his guilty conscience about disclosing the incident’s real magnitude. What plays out is an edge of your seat thriller that keeps you entangled right to the end.

I’ll admit my internal film Wikipedia had not previously registered the name James Bridges (director), after some research it was plain to see the guy knows his craft. Making only 8 films (Big Lights Big City), and all in the last 20 years of his life, Bridges utilises a number of unconventional techniques to tell his story. The biggest surprise for me was his choice to remove any musical score or sound track instead relying entirely on ambient noises. Any additional sound is produced by devices such as radio or TV commercials the result being that the only sounds we hear are those the characters hear. The technique is daring but it pays off by quickly building suspense. Other films have tried this technique only to add small snippets of strings or horns in one or two scenes; the Coen Brothers “No Country for Old Men” is a good example of this.

Jack Lemmon’s performance was nominated for an Oscar and rightfully so. He was amongst the best actors to ever do both drama and comedy at the highest level. There is not much one can say about Jack that hasn’t really been said. I will, however, ensure that I dig out some of his work that I haven’t seen as the year goes on.

'The China Syndrome’s' success for me was its ability to hold a mirror up to those profiting from sale of Nuclear energy. In 1979 just 13 days after the film was released disaster struck. As if just to highlight how topical The China Syndrome was, The United States experienced its worst nuclear accident on 3 Mile Island. More recently events in Japan have highlighted that the risk of nuclear power is still as topical as it was in the 70’s proving mankind’s greatest threat is mankind itself.

Shame - Is it possible to both love and loath? (Revisited)

Is it possible to both love and loath a film at the same time? I’m not trying to sound cliché, in fact it’s a very real question.  After watching Shame again for the third time in 2012 it has thrown me into complete internal disaccord.  I have certainly felt confliction on my journey thus far, but never to the extent which I could clearly define and feel both love and hate for a single film.  The credits rolled on Shame and again i was left feeling emotionally defeated, this due in part to the film's intense emotional intimacy but mostly due to the fact I spent the whole picture allowing myself to be romanced by the brilliance of film making, effectively ignoring the abhorrence of its subject matter.  It wasn’t until I left the theatre that I was able to reconcile the two and fully realise the inner battle I had experienced.

Shame is an unadulterated examination of one man’s battle with sex addiction and its impact on life, love and work.  To some this may seem like a desirable habitual fixation, the reality however seems nothing short of the personal enslavement and dependency you might see in a heroin junkie.

Our protagonist is Brandon (Michael Fassbender) and he is a sex addict. Shame introduces Brandon near the height of his addiction by which time it’s clearly apparent that his hyper-sexuality is in overdrive and now a mainstay of his daily routine, a routine of sexual solicitation and handmade satisfaction.  His perpetual cycle is interrupted when Sissy (Carey Mulligan) his lugubrious sister comes to live with him. He is made to supress his nocturnal compulsions, pushing his already volatile state of mind over the edge.

In his first film since the exceptional 2008 drama Hunger, Director Steve McQueen offers us a gritty, repulsive and downright filthy examination of human natures capabilities. An actor’s director, McQueen demands a lot of his cast; each scene is staged with an eloquent simplicity. Requiring at most two or three setups McQueen allows dialogue to run without the complexity of multiple cuts and camera angles, for me the film’s most powerful scenes were ‘locked off’ one camera shots.

Actor Michael Fassbender (Inglorious bastards) is phenomenal in the role of Brandon; he was able to cut to the core of complex character, as vile as Brandon was I connected with almost everything Fassbender was selling me. Brandon’s sexuality obviously sits near the heart of the film, Fassbender was asked to give a lot, and luckily he had A LOT to give.  I would say however, whilst Shame is given the most restricted rating on offer in New Zealand, the film adheres to the contrived sexual simulations we have come to expect from cinema movies; anytime Shame deviated from this it seemed little more than to add shock value. 

There is a air of indifference about the importance of Sissy in the film - for me whilst nicely acted I saw right through McQueen’s thinly veiled attempts to make her relevant - ultimately she becomes an outlet for Brandon’s frustrations. There were subtle insinuations about the nature of the brother sister relationship, but left unformed this is of little relevance to our protagonist’s development.

All said and done the Shame is beautifully constructed and well-acted film, and for that reason I loved it. The ritualization of sexual addiction and the ugliness that ensues makes for a vexatious cinematic experience: for that reason it’s not one I’d want again.

West of Memphis - The Court of Public Opinion is now in session

In April i wrote about Paradise Lost 3 - Lost in Purgatory, the final of the trilogy that highlighted to the mainstream the plight of Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelly and their perplexing battle with the Arkansas Judicial System. Since first discovering the documentary Paradise Lost in 2005 i have been transfixed by tales of injustice and moral corruption. I have even penned a short about New Zealand's own sordid history of injustice as a direct result watching the Paradise Lost Films, as ive come to learn for most its all to easy to ignore that dark side of justice. 

Although its evident i wasn't the only one downunder taken early with the story of the West Memphis 3, infact it would be two New Zealander's who would join forces with the the already well established freedom fighters and provide the monetary injection needed to breath life in the stagnating cycle of appeals. It was clear to see the three were at least unjustly incarcerated the fight had only just begun when Wellingtonian film makers Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh moved by the Paradise Lost films decided breath new life into the case and back not only crucial DNA Evidence but a documentary outlining their findings. 

With two exceedingly well made documentary's on the case already produced Jackson, Fran and thier chosen Director Amy Berg had a difficult task ahead of them to make their story relevant, with the knowledge that that the three convicts had already been released what more could we learn about the captivating case without covering old ground.  Plenty evidently. 

Those that know the case will quickly identify that the film makers opted to use Mara Leveritt's book Devils Knot as the foundation of their story, but through the new DNA evidence and constantly changing testimony the film quickly finds it's own feet taking the viewer into the murky world of middle American politics and slippery criminal investigation.

Everyone who has followed the case has made their own hypothesis on what happened to the three innocent boys in the Robin Hood Hills in 1993, At one time or another everyone was quilty as sin, the Paradise Lost Films outed their perpetrator, Step Father Mark Byers pretty quickly and stuck with him however like others i didn't buy it, something didnt fit it was easy to be distracted by his extroverted personality but clearly the man was either bold and stupid or bold and heartbroken to draw such obvious attention to himself. 

The direction West of Memphis takes with their accusations sits far better with me, though if we have learnt anything from this tale its that the court of public opinion is a dangerous battle field, the film makers whilst aware of this opt for impact over impartially which in this case would seem justified but still unsettling given the history of the case.

There are times in West of Memphis where i felt uncomfortable with the lengths gone to emphasise points or illustration character, a young woman's battle with suppressed memories, drug addiction and therapy seemed intrusive and unnecessary, whilst relevant to their assertions, good taste seemed to momentarily desert the film makers to a point which saw two people in my crowded session leave. 

Laid bare West of Memphis gives a raw at times chilling account of the case and the agonizing last few years of the judicial process. I think Peter and Fran set out with an end goal and succeeded brilliantly in achieving it. The key interviews the film makers were able to land, the retractions tirelessly pursued and the first real evidence they produced all make this documentary captivating even for those of us who have passionately supported the case. 

I feel this story is not nearly over whilst we have Damien, Jason and Jessie on the right side of the law the films raises questions that need to be answered, i don't think we have seen the last film on this subject but i challenge society to look beyond this medium and focus on the task of convicting the sick individuals responsible in the court of law. 

Damien Echols has an upcoming book which i highly anticipate, and hopefully West of Memphis will get a general release, but for now those of you who want to learn more about the case visit http://wm3.org/

Convoluted Mayhem - The Dark Knight Rises

As some of you may know its was never going to be an easy decision for me to attend a screening of The Dark Knight Rises, the events in Colorado profoundly affected my emotional attachment to the film, as i imagine it would have for any good hearted soul. I'm ok with being the guy that says the first 15 mins were harrowing because as we now know it was those 1st 15 mins of cinema those 12 poor souls got to see,  that is an unusually morbid situation to be in.  My heart still bleeds for the loss of innocence to cinema at the hands of one misguided disturbed individual yet i feel we as lovers of the art of film will prevail. 

Nether the less joined by my father i endured the remaining 2hrs and 30mins.  I'm going to put it out there right now from the get go so we are under no illusions here - I David James Mitchell do not share the sentiments of the 91% of IMDB fans who in their collective wisdom rated the film so highly its runs the risk of being held in prosperity as a masterpiece, for in clear conscience the film critic inside of me could not allow it.

To understand the expectation of The Dark Knight Rises one must return back to 2005 and likely one of the most inspired pairings of direction and talent with Batman Begins. Director Christopher Nolan's Memento though 5 years old still demanded the attention and respect of patrons as did his choice for the caped crusader, the endowed Christian Bale who for many burst onto our screens in 2000's cult flick American Psycho. Together the two of them promised a grittier take on a tale that held real depth of character, which as we know until that point had been treated to hollywood glitter and giggles treatment. Boy did they deliver grit, twice infact, i adored the first film, and obviously the 2nd goes without saying to be one of elite films to outdo it's predecessor and avoid the curse of the sequel and we can all remember the late great Heath Ledger's breath taking performance as the villainousness Joker.... so film fan's what happened? 

Inception happened thats what, by far my film of the year in 2010 and heralded as Nolan's masterpiece, it was clear his confidence took a real hit when although financially and critically well received he was universally snubbed by the cinema brass aside the Ledgers well deserved post-humourous Oscar. 

With The Dark Knight Rises i feel Nolan has tried to be everything to everyone. His story lacks polish, the conviction of his hero is buried somewhere deep in the films subconcious without even a whimper of a yelp to be set free. I'm not one for spoilers so there isn't much argument to be made without disclosing the films meandering plot and non sensical character interactions. 

Maybe those with lower expectations will find solace in the fact that despite its numerous shortcomings there is the basis of a blockbuster film. Plenty of Eastwood-esque growling by Bale's Batman is complimented surprisingly well by Selina Klye (Anne Hathaway) and the ever wonderful Michael Caine. Our Baddy played by my man crush Tom Hardy is played loyally to what i imagine Nolan's interpreation of the all powerful villainy of Bain, yet for me his eyes don't give away the intense nature of his brooding soul, for that is all we ever see of him, instead we are subjected to an almost celtic broque delivered in a uncomfortably loud maniacal tone.

By my count there 7 things that dont make any sense in this film id happily discuss them in the comments section should you want to know,  lets play a game how many did you count?

Pusillanimous Brutality

Since learning of the terrible happenings in Colorado U.S, I haven't been able to sleep. I have an overwhelming sense that something has just changed about the cinematic experience.  For years (since i can recall) going to the cinema felt like the bastion of safety, growing up and to this day (or yesterday) i never thought twice about the communal nature of attending a movie. I have never once had to look at another patron in fear of what her or his motives in life were, after all we were together for the sake of loving an art form so for that 120mins or so we were essentially consorts in cinematic gratitude.

Today i feel a sense of loss in the fact that we all (the people reading this) have lost whatever piece of romanticism is left in joining others to share a magical screen experience. 

I have not seen The Dark Knight, i had planned to do so today but i cannot feel anything but harrow for those who lost their time in this life whilst partaking in what i consider to be the best damn past time in our tiny yet essential existence. My thoughts are with all of those families searching for answers.

How do you feel about this act of pusillanimous brutality?