Monday, 30 May 2011

Jeff Conaway obituary

In the late 1970s and early 80s, Taxi was one of the best American sitcoms. It won 18 Emmy awards and its stars, among them Jeff Conaway, who has died in hospital aged 60, became household names. Conaway played the narcissistic, "resting" actor Bobby Wheeler, one of the characters working for the Sunshine cab company, all hoping for better jobs to turn up. In a way, the role mirrored Conaway's own struggle for greater recognition as an actor, which was not helped by his having been addicted to alcohol, cocaine and analgesics since he was a teenager.


In Taxi, the handsome Conaway , sporting the feathered hairstyle popular in the 1970s, had to compete with more fascinating characters in the avuncular Alex Reiger (Judd Hirsch), obnoxious Louie De Palma (Danny DeVito), sexy divorcee Elaine Nardo (Marilu Henner), unvictorious boxer Tony Banta (Tony Danza), and English-impaired immigrant Latka Gravas (Andy Kaufman). Most of the cast of the popular show went on to bigger things, while Conaway's one moment of glory in the cinema was already in his past.


He first made an impact as Kenickie in Grease (1978), released a few months before his debut in Taxi. As John Travolta's sidekick in the high-school gang called the T-birds, Conaway is a finger-snapping, leather-jacketed greaser, a comb and a witticism always at the ready. He says things like "You're cruisin' for a bruisin'?'' and "A hickie from Kenickie is like a Hallmark card, when you only care enough to send the very best!" He also does some nifty acrobatic dancing, especially in Greased Lightning, on top of a car – this resulted in a back injury that dogged him for most of his life. The cast were too old to play high-school students, but Conaway, at 28, was more convincing than most.


Conaway had already played the Travolta part in the Broadway production of Grease the year before, after starting as an understudy. In fact, Conaway had been on Broadway at the age of 10 in All the Way Home (1960) – based on James Agee's novel A Death in the Family – set in Tennessee in the early 1900s. The young Conaway, as a boy trying to come to terms with the death of his father in a car accident, was at the heart of the play. Although he was born in New York, the childhood summers spent with his South Carolina grandparents proved handy when auditioning for the part, because the director, Arthur Penn, wanted a boy with a southern accent.


He later enrolled in North Carolina School of the Arts, then studied drama at New York University. "I left three months before graduation," Conaway recalled. "There were hard feelings because I had the lead in a school production of The Threepenny Opera. But I was offered Grease on Broadway. Broadway! I couldn't turn it down."


After Taxi, Conaway was seldom out of work, though he found himself trapped in a vicious circle of trashy erotic thrillers in which he usually played a stud, and gradually, with age, detectives, fathers of teens (as in Jawbreaker, 1999) and strip-club owners as in Sunset Strip and It's Showtime (both 1993). His one directorial effort was Bikini Summer II (1992), a sex farce ending with a rock concert on the beach.


Conaway was much better served by TV, appearing in series such as Murder, She Wrote, Burke's Law and Matlock, and in 74 episodes of the science-fiction series Babylon 5 (1994-98) as Zack Allan, the tough security chief.


While he continued to act, Conaway was suffering from substance abuse problems, which came to a head in 1985 following his divorce from Rona Newton-John, the sister of Grease star Olivia, after five years of marriage. In 1990, he married Kerri Young, and had a subsequent fiery six-year relationship with Victoria Spinoza, a singer known as Vikki Lizzi. Earlier this year they filed restraining orders against each other, trading accusations of theft and violence, but were eventually reconciled.


Though Conaway sought treatment, he relapsed from time to time. In 2008 he appeared in the reality TV series Celebrity Rehab, in which he revealed his long-term addictions.


Conaway was found unconscious on 11 May due to a combination of legally prescribed painkillers to treat back problems and other medications. The adverse reaction caused him to contract pneumonia. He was put into a medically induced coma intended to aid his recovery, but was eventually taken off life support. He is survived by Vikki and his sisters Carla and Michele.


• Jeffrey Charles William Michael Conaway, actor, born 5 October 1950; died 27 May 2011


View the original article here

Sunday, 29 May 2011

Grease actor Jeff Conaway dies

Conaway, who had a history of addictions to drugs, alcohol and prescription painkillers, was hospitalised earlier this month after being found unconscious in his Los Angeles area home.

He was suffering from pneumonia and sepsis, and had been placed in a medically-induced coma.

The actor's family took him off life support on Thursday, media reports said.

A native of New York, Conaway began his acting career on Broadway but found national fame when he starred as Kenickie in the 1978 film musical "Grease," alongside John Travolta and Olivia Newton-John.

He also became a television regular for playing Wheeler, a cab driver, on the hit comedy "Taxi."

Conaway's problems with addiction were documented in 2008 when he appeared on the TV series "Celebrity Rehab".


View the original article here

Rob Lowe at Hay Festival: internet shouldn't be immune to super-injunction laws

Talking to The Telegraph at the Hay Festival, Lowe, who just added his 100,000th follower on Twitter, said: “Twitter users in the US are not subject to UK laws, so that rules them out [of being pursued by the authorities]. So then we are really talking about Twitter users in the UK and if they broke the laws in their own country – then they broke the law right? I don’t think the internet should be immune to the standing laws of countries.”

He said that he was “amazed” by the concept of super-injunctions as these type of “gagging orders” would never work in the US, as they fly in the face of freedom of speech.

Lowe, who was one of the headline guests at The Hay Festival promoting his book, Stories I Only Tell My Friends, said that celebrities still deserved some level of privacy in the digital age.

“I do think there ought to be, should be and probably is, some area of privacy left over even for public figures in the digital age,” he said.

Lowe found himself at the centre of his own scandal more than 20 years ago, when a tape was leaked which showed him having sex with two girls, one of which was underage. He joked on stage at the Hay Festival to Mariella Frostrup that he was ahead of his time, as celebrity sex tapes online were commonplace now, but said it wasn’t always the best to be a trailblazer.

Lowe, who writes all his own tweets and has an iPad to access ebooks, said told The Telegraph he thought ebook sales were at the tipping point.

“We are at a tipping point. I actually just had this chat with my publisher, because everyone was very surprised that in my book sales, fully 50 per cent are ebooks.

“We are definitely at the point of huge change in publishing. I really think that a lot of the people buying my ebook might not have bought it in hardback - so I look at it like if ebooks are expanding the market share, then ebooks are a really good thing. But if they are not expanding the market – and the people who would have otherwise bought the hardback are now just buying ebooks then it is problematic – but that’s the world we live in and we have to move with the times.”


View the original article here

Heartbeats – review

HeartbeatsProduction year: 2010Countries: Canada, Rest of the world Cert (UK): 15Runtime: 95 minsDirectors: Xavier DolanCast: Monia Chokri, Niels Schneider, Xavier DolanMore on this film

This wispy French-Canadian comedy has an epigraph by Alfred de Musset: "The only truth is love beyond reason." It's mostly about what strange magic attracts members of the same sex and opposite sexes to each other, usually reluctantly and rarely happily. The articulate characters, all well-heeled students in Montreal, discuss it over coffee and across the dinner table. Marie, the heroine, talks about it post-coitally with a succession of boyfriends, and she becomes part of a triangle. The other members of the chaste ménage are her best friend Francis, a somewhat callow gay man (played by the film's talented young writer-director, Xavier Dolan), and the androgynous Nicolas, whom someone calls an Adonis. Together they make up a Jules et Jim trio, but with the narcissistic Nicolas as the obscure object of the others' desire. The style is nouvelle vague but more Godard than Truffaut, and it's likeable enough, though there's far too much slow motion.


View the original article here

Apocalypse Now – review

The 1970s was Coppola's decade. He was involved in a succession of masterly films, as screenwriter on Patton, producer of American Graffiti, director of the first two Godfather films and The Conversation, and finally, in 1979, as true auteur of Apocalypse Now. They illuminated our times, and we can now see that Apocalypse Now is not merely the greatest film to come out of the Vietnam experience but one of the great works about the madness of our times. He immediately followed the early morning preview screening of Apocalypse Now at Cannes with a press conference which he began by saying: "My film is not about Vietnam, it is Vietnam," and he went on to state that during the shooting "little by little we went insane". How brave and prophetic he was.

Apocalypse NowProduction year: 1979Countries: UK, USA Cert (UK): 18Runtime: 153 minsDirectors: Francis Coppola, Francis Ford CoppolaCast: Dennis Hopper, Frederic Forrest, Harrison Ford, Laurence Fishburne, Marlon Brando, Martin Sheen, Robert Duvall, Rpobert DuvallMore on this film

Coppola took Heart of Darkness, Joseph Conrad's enigmatic story about the cruelties of colonialism, and turned it into a 20th-century fable about neocolonialism in which the story's eminently sane narrator, Marlow, becomes Captain Willard, the Special Services hitman, as crazy as his assigned quarry, Colonel Kurtz. The difference is that unlike everyone else around him, from the top brass down, Willard knows he's mad. Everything about the Taliban, al-Qaida, the pressures that took us into Afghanistan and Iraq, the assault on Abbottabad and the deadly troubles that lie ahead are to be found here in Willard's journey. It's a work of genius that may falter a little towards the end, though not fatally. This newly released version is more or less the one shown at Cannes and is definitive. The half-hour of material introduced 10 years ago in Apocalypse Now Redux is of no value, it diminishes the film and is to be avoided.


View the original article here

Friday, 27 May 2011

New Web Site

Just a wee post to let you know I've got a new site Learn Guitar 365.

The Hangover Part II – review

We all enjoyed ourselves during that first movie. But now … well, the hangover has begun. And begun so powerfully, so oppressively, that you might almost suspect the success of the original was created specifically to engender this comedown as a piece of conceptual art. Each reminder of the original, each repetition, each desperate, hair-of-the-dog attempt to recapture the party feeling: it's exactly like living through a hungover flashback-memory of what had once seemed so great.

The Hangover Part IIProduction year: 2011Country: USACert (UK): 15Runtime: 102 minsDirectors: Todd PhillipsCast: Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Jamie Chung, Justin Bartha, Ken Jeong, Mike Tyson, Paul Giamatti, Zach GalifianakisMore on this film

In Hollywood, said William Goldman, nobody knows anything. Who knew The Hangover, from fratpack comedy director Todd Phillips, was going to be such a huge hit? Nobody – perhaps not even the people involved. The story of a Vegas bachelor party that goes horribly wrong looked pretty ropey on paper, and yet it was great. Some thought it was sort of a monkey-typing-Hamlet fluke, but it's actually the sort of fluke that only happens to smart people who keep trying.


The Hangover was funny and the structure was daring. Act one: pre-party – then we jump straight to act three, post-party, and the movie is about the bleary, amnesiac guys trying to piece together act two: what the hell happened? This is not definitively revealed until the sequence of digital photos over the final credits. Brilliant! It showed the spirit of movies like The Usual Suspects or Reservoir Dogs.Bradley Cooper had the chops – he had been a forgettable, almost invisible presence in many movies before this, but he blossomed in H1. There were some cracking comedy turns. Zach Galifianakis was great as the weirdo brother-in-law Alan and Ken Jeong was a real find as the abusive comedy gangster Mr Chow. Everything came together.


Sadly, H2 can't even quite claim the credit of being the first Hangover sequel: the road-movie comedy Due Date, directed by Todd Phillips and starring Galifianakis and Robert Downey Jr, attempted to cash in on its success, none too successfully. At least it tried a vaguely different plot. Hangover Part II seeks only to repeat almost every element of the first movie. It's not a sequel, closer to a shot-for-shot remake. This time, the guys go to Thailand for a wedding, in the same shark-jumping way that the Sex and the City girls whooshed off to Abu Dhabi for their profoundly depressing sequel. It feels a bit like a feature-length Christmas special of a well-loved British sitcom.


The original's quirks have now become a formula. The grim daytime shots of Vegas at the beginning are now grim daytime shots of Bangkok; the tiger is now a monkey; there's a different sequence of photos over the final credits. Pretty much everything has its equivalent. Infuriatingly, all the fun has been drained from the movie, simply in repeating almost every trick. The same: but lame, and lame because the same.


Now it's the nerdy dentist Stu (Ed Helms) getting hitched, to a beautiful Thai woman Lauren (Jamie Chung), whose father hates Stu. Slightly insultingly for Justin Barth, his character Doug was the groom-to-be who disappeared in the first movie but he doesn't get a turn at participating in the hi-jinks now.


Stu stays in the story and Barth's nice-but-dull character is sidelined. Stu's goofiness is evidently considered more important to the action, and Phillips perhaps considers that the gang already has a handsome guy in the form of Cooper's Phil. Now it's the bride's sweet younger brother Teddy who tags along on the stag night, disappears, and has to be found at all costs, because he is the apple of his father's eye: he is played by 21-year-old Mason Lee, son of the director Ang Lee. Jeong and Galifianakis seem very subdued and under-par compared to their earlier appearances.


Then there's the question of the big non-PC cameo to match Mike Tyson's bizarre performance in the original. Rumours have been rife. We had heard about Mel Gibson (that idea was abandoned), Liam Neeson (reportedly cut) and even Bill Clinton.


Actually, Paul Giamatti makes an appearance as a bad-tempered tough guy, but this isn't the big cameo – that comes in the form of the celebrity booked to sing at Stu's wedding. You may be hoping for Liza Minnelli. Well, no spoilers, but suffice it to say, this too is a bit of a letdown.


Making The Hangover Part II must have been like going up to a great guitarist who'd just pulled off a brilliant improvised solo, and telling him he had to repeat the performance the next night, note-for-note. The result is self-conscious to say the least.


I have to admit that there are one or two nice lines. When the guys gather outside Alan's bedroom, preparing to invite him along, Jeffrey Tambor, playing Alan's father, tells them to "Go in slowly; let him acclimatise." When Stu defiantly claims: "There's a demon in me!", Alan hits him with a zinging comeback in the bad-taste spirit of the first film. Flashes of fun like this are rare. It's a sobering experience.


View the original article here

Thursday, 26 May 2011

X-Men: First Class reveals a series in need of mutation

One can't help feeling that the X-Men movies have enjoyed a rather charmed life. Matthew Vaughn's X-Men: First Class, which opens in the UK on Wednesday, will be the fifth film about Professor X and his merry band of mutants to hit the big screen in only 11 years. That's as many as Superman, two more than Spider-Man and only one fewer than Batman. Critical drubbings for various instalments in those other "franchises" have led to drastic regime changes at the top, often coupled with years of soul searching over which direction to go in next. Yet Twentieth Century Fox cheerfully goes about its business of making sure a new film arrives in multiplexes every couple of years, even after non-starters such as 2006's Brett Ratner-directed X-Men: The Final Stand and 2009's insipid Wolverine.

X-Men: First ClassProduction year: 2011Country: USACert (UK): 12ARuntime: 131 minsDirectors: Matthew VaughnCast: James McAvoy, January Jones, Jason Flemyng, Jennifer Lawrence, Kevin Bacon, Michael Fassbender, Nicholas Hoult, Rose ByrneMore on this film

X-Men: First Class may be a prequel set in a new era (the early 60s) with a new cast, but it is not nearly as much of a genuine mutation from the norm as might be expected. Nor is it quite as good as some early reviews have suggested.


Whereas Christopher Nolan breezily ignored all the previous Batman films with his genre-defining Batman Begins, Vaughn and screenwriter Jane Goldman's script is based on a story by Bryan Singer, who made the first two X-Men movies. The film ends up being not so much a radical reinvention of the series as an affirmation of those earlier features: it has their DNA running through its system, and we're left in no doubt that events are intended to prefigure those we've already seen pan out on screen.


Had X-Men: First Class arrived back in 2000, when Singer's first film hit cinemas, it might have been revolutionary. Arriving as it does in 2011, it feels like a throwback to an earlier, simpler era where audiences were willing to accept cardboard cut-out villains and one-dimensional heroes. It's the sort of film for which the caveat "it's only a comic book movie" will be constantly offered in conversation.


There are nonetheless some excellent aspects. Vaughn convincingly introduces us to the young Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and Erik Lehnsherr (Michael Fassbender), and shows us why the two might just as easily have been friends as enemies. Lehnsherr (the future Magneto) has a cracking stony-faced early escapade to Argentina to track down some retired Nazis, coming off like James Bond with superpowers (and a mean, lean, Daniel Craig-style 007 at that). McAvoy is typically lovable as the cocky yet earnest Xavier, the sort of geeky posh bloke who might have ended up as a charismatic, well-meaning charity boss had he not been gifted with mutant genes. Of the remaining cast, Jennifer Lawrence, January Jones and Rose Byrne all do well to flesh out meagre material, though the film rather limits their involvement to that of classy eye candy.


Kevin Bacon makes a suitably sinister villain, but it's here that the film begins to reveal its limited ambition. The 60s setting almost compels the film-makers to pay homage to Bond et al, but the villains in X-Men: First Class are like bad guys in cheap James Bond movies. They want to take over the world because they want to take over the world. There are efforts to explain their hatred of humans, but they are the same arguments used in the earlier films, and there's very little complexity to them.


I forget whether the line: "Mutant and proud" appears in the original films or comic books, but its use here by Lawrence's Mystique feels contrived and unnecessary. So, too, the scene in which Fassbender, addressed by his given name, utters: "I prefer Magneto." At these moments, it's impossible not to shudder at the cargo load of obscenely stinky, sweaty cheese that has just been driven right through the centre of the movie. Did some suit at Fox insist on these lines being used, or did Singer, Vaughn and Goldman genuinely think they were a good idea?


I've often berated studios such as Warner Bros on this blog for umming and ahhing over what to do with Superman in the wake of Singer's prosaic Superman Returns in 2006, but the opposite end of the spectrum is Fox's attitude that you don't mess with a good (or even a bad) thing. Had the money men who oversee X-Men been in charge of Batman, George Clooney would still be sporting rubber batnipples and Joel Schumacher would be planning his fifth or sixth instalment. Hence, X-Men: First Class is not so much a reboot as a gentle reroute.


For this series to reach the heights of great comic book movies, it requires a real DNA change. No more Singer, and no more idiotic one-liners, please. It's time for a genuine mutation.


View the original article here

Hay Festival: When the Nazis came to Hay

When I tell people this they’re often surprised. Isn’t it painful, they ask, to watch film-makers, producers and actors change, rough-handle and manipulate your novel? But, I explain, they haven’t.

No one has done anything to my book. I can see it now on the shelf above my desk. It still exists as I wrote it, with all its flaws and voice and dialogue intact. When a book is turned into a film it is the story that is manipulated, not the novel, and as such I was excited rather than anxious when the film’s director Amit Gupta asked me to co-write the screenplay with him.

We wrote quickly, aided by the fact that I was living in New York and Amit in London. This meant the script was effectively worked on for 36 hours at a time, with me sitting down to my desk there just as Amit was ending his day’s writing here. In what felt like hardly any time at all I was being sent headshots of actors Amit wanted to cast.

Suddenly we were just weeks away from filming. Everything was falling into place.

Everything, that is, except for our leading lady, for whom we were still looking. Then word came through from Sam Jones, our casting director, that Andrea Riseborough – the actress who played Margaret Thatcher to great acclaim in the television drama The Long Walk to Finchley and will soon be seen as Wallis Simpson in Madonna’s new film, WE – might be available. She was, however, about to leave the country for her home in Los Angeles. Amit didn’t waste any time. Driving out to Heathrow to meet her in the departures hall they discussed his aspirations for the film and for the part of Sarah Lewis which we hoped she’d accept.

Sarah is both the central character of the novel and the film. A young farmer’s wife, she wakes one morning a few weeks after the German invasion to discover, along with the other women in her isolated valley, that her husband has disappeared, leaving, she thinks, to join the British Resistance. A month later a patrol of German soldiers arrives in the valley.

Over the course of a harsh winter these two groups, the abandoned women and the stranded soldiers, form a fragile mutual dependency. When the snow thaws everyone must face the consequences of the blurred lines between occupier and occupied, but no one more than Sarah Lewis. As such it was a part for which we needed an actress capable of evoking a great depth of inner struggle while still maintaining a restrained performance. Andrea was the perfect candidate and, as Amit told me later, that last-minute drive to Heathrow turned out to be his most important dash to an airport ever – not to catch a plane but to catch an actress who, thankfully, a few days later, said yes.

Somehow, all through the year of working on the script, I’d never imagined that day when I’d first walk onto the set of our film.

When I did, the pure physicality of it took me by surprise. As vans and lorries unloaded props and the art team dressed the set of Sarah Lewis’s house, I felt as if it was my own imagination that was being unpacked and arranged around those rooms.

Up until then everything – notes, novel, outlines, the script from drafts one to seven – had been words on the page. Now, suddenly, we were in a different world, of things, light, sound, people and animals.

I met Andrea myself at the end of that first day’s filming. The house we were using was high on the slopes of Llanthony valley. She wore a large padded coat over her costume and was playing a guitar on a sofa in the kitchen. It felt like meeting two people at once – our female lead who I didn’t yet know, and a woman I’d dreamt up many years ago who I did.

In watching her other films I’d seen how Andrea often found character through a nuanced awareness of accent. This was the case with her depiction of Sarah in Resistance, too. The film is set in the border country near Hay-on-Wye, in the valleys and hills that often rise in Wales and fall in England. It’s a landscape that’s evolved a particular accent; a Welsh accent, but with the hint of Herefordshire burr. Andrea told me how she often uses the British Library audio archive to find the voice of her characters, not just by listening to the accent of an area, but also to the accent of a time. In the days before we began filming she told me she’d continued this line of preparation by going to aqua aerobics classes at the pool in my old school in Abergavenny.

At first I couldn’t see the link; how, exactly, was treading water and lifting foam weights with the pensioners of my home town preparation for Andrea’s part in our film? But then she started relaying the conversations of those classes in the accents of the women who took them with her, and I understood.

“No, not like that! You gotta lift them right out haven’t you? Tha’s it! There you are now. Lovely.” Suddenly, it was both Andrea Riseborough sitting before me and the old women I’d known growing up in Abergavenny who, 60 years earlier, would have been the same age and had the same voice as Sarah Lewis.

They never lived through a Nazi occupation, of course, but the organisation at the heart of my novel – the Auxiliary Units whose men make up Britain’s Resistance – was very real. I was introduced to the Auxiliary Units by a farmer called George Vater who I’d known when I was growing up in a village outside Abergavenny. In his eighties, George, like other men of a similar age, began talking about a secret they’d kept for most of their lives, about how during the war they’d been recruited by military intelligence officers and trained to be members of the British Resistance.

Around 350 underground bunkers were built by the Royal Engineers all over Britain, and around 4,000 men and women were recruited. The Auxiliary Units were to be Churchill’s last-ditch defence; a controversial and, in terms of international conventions, illegal government-funded civilian insurgency. Given the strategic importance of the area, and the possibility of an invasion via the Bristol Channel, there was a particular concentration of Auxiliary Unit bunkers in south Wales. In coalmines above Port Talbot, in the woods above Newport, on top of the Blorenge outside Abergavenny, around the village of Usk and, I’d heard rumoured, in the valleys south of Hay-on-Wye.

In Resistance, the story of the Auxiliary Units is experienced through the character of George Bowen, a young man (based upon the real George Vater) played by Iwan Rheon. George is recruited as a spy, just as George Vater was, by a mysterious intelligence officer called “Tommy Atkins”, played by Michael Sheen.

Given this narrative, Michael dropped into filming in a particularly suitable way, arriving for an intense two days of shooting with Iwan before, just as his character does in the film, leaving and abandoning the young man to the consequences of his duty. A further energy was added to these scenes by the fact that Iwan had long admired Michael as an actor and relished the opportunity of acting opposite his theatrical hero.

Before we embarked on writing the script for Resistance, Amit and I always knew that however much circumstances might influence the filming process there were two stipulations on which we wouldn’t be willing to compromise. The first was that our patrol of German soldiers should speak German rather than English with German accents.

Resistance is a story of occupation. Once uniforms are replaced by civilian clothes then language becomes the most manifest form of occupation. As film-makers, the juxtaposition of a wartime setting, German words and Welsh hills, was exactly the kind of emotional and thematic shorthand we needed.

The second stipulation was that Resistance be filmed in the landscape in which the original story is set, the Black Mountain valleys south and west of Hay-on-Wye. It was this landscape that first inspired the novel and which, we hoped, would lend the filming of it a unique charge. What I hadn’t appreciated was how practically useful filming on home turf would be.

Time and again we were saved by the generosity of local people and local knowledge when, often last minute, we found ourselves needing everything from three leather dog collars (from my parents’ neighbours), to a horse (an old friend of mine), to a vintage car (offered by the dentist when I bumped into him in the pub one night).

When we required over 200 extras for the filming of the country show, I found myself calling on the services of family friends and old school teachers, all of whom willingly showed up to have their hair cut and be dressed in Forties clothes at 5am on a cold autumn morning.

The filming of that show was a day when the story of our film felt as if it had, for a few hours, punched right through to an uncomfortable reality. Many of the extras on that day could still remember the Second World War and the real fear of a possible German invasion. One of them was the owner of a Third Reich birth certificate. Another’s grandfather and great uncle had been members of a local Auxiliary Unit Resistance patrol. One of the vintage-car owners we had approached was the grandson of the vicar who would have operated the wireless network of the Resistance in the area around my own village.

When, halfway through the day, a high-ranking Nazi officer was driven around the show ring and greeted with “Heil Hitler” salutes beneath those swastika banners, the chill that ran through the watching crowds felt remarkably genuine and sinister.

But it was on a filming day towards the end of our shoot that the translation of my story from page to screen really came full circle. The scene was the capture of an Auxiliary Unit bunker by Wehrmacht soldiers. Young local boys and old men being dragged out, beaten and shot. What made it feel like a return to the beginning of my journey with Resistance was that we were filming this scene on the site of a real Auxiliary Unit bunker outside Usk. At some point during the Second World War real farmers and gamekeepers from this area, many as young as 17, would have trained in this bunker, preparing to conduct their acts of sabotage regardless of the fact they’d been told their life expectancy was no more than two weeks. For me, watching the extras and actors film this scene provoked a double-layered sensation.

I had, by that point in our shoot, become familiar with seeing events I’d created at my desk made manifest on set. With the filming of the show I’d got a glimpse of the wider alternative world I’d created for Resistance. But with this more intimate scene, taking place on the very same ground where that alternative history would have happened (and which for those young recruited farmers was an all too possible reality) the merging of imagination, fact and recreation was invested with an even greater voltage.

The scene was, too, a potent reminder of why I’d sat down to write Resistance. I wanted to write an anti-war novel that used an alternative Second World War to bring questions of sacrifice, collaboration and occupation close to home. To create a story which tried to use that narrative as a lens through which to view and question all wars.

I hope that in translating those aspirations of the novel into a film the cast and crew of Resistance have found yet another way to keep that most crucial of questions resonant and alive.

Owen Sheers will be discussing ‘Resistance’ and showing clips from the film with Francine Stock at 7pm on Sunday May 29 and with Peter Florence at 9am on Monday May 30

For details and tickets see the Hay Festival programme


View the original article here

Wednesday, 25 May 2011

Star Wars 3D and Live Action TV Series Update from George Lucas

May 25, 2011 by B. Alan Orange
George Lucas talks Star Wars 3D and TV show delay George Lucas talks Star Wars 3D and TV show delayStar Tours: The Adventures Continue has recently launched at Disneyland, and to help promote this rebooted ride, Star Wars universe creator and director George Lucas made an appearance on G4's Attack of the Show, where he talked exclusively about the 3D conversion of Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace, and why the live action Untitled Star Wars TV Series is still being delayed.

When asked why we should trust that his Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace in 3D is going to be better than the recent 3D converted films that we have seen, this is what George Lucas had to say.

"We got into the 3D field a long time ago. We've worked for years and years to build a group of people who could do this in an economic, reasonable time frame. It wasn't until the last few years that we achieved that. We had Industrial Light and Magic supervise the whole thing. They are very familiar with it. The problem is that the people doing the conversion don't know what the sets looked like, or where the people were standing. Those are critical issues. We were able to have people who were there, who knew where the actors were on set, and who were experts in the technology. They could help the company grow to a whole new level. And I think we have taken it to a level that is equal to anything that is being shot in 3D. There are two kinds of 3D. One is behind the screen, and the other is the traditional "effect" of 3D, where they poke things in your face. I am not a big believer of poking things in your face. I am a believer in watching a 3D movie, which is a better experience than watching a 2D movie. It's like going from black and white to color. It's a better way to watch it. Its three-dimensional, it feels much better. That's what you are going to get from the new Star Wars."

When asked if there were any particular moments in Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace 3D that utilize the process to an effective degree, George Lucas didn't really sell the idea as necessary.

"There are a few moments, but they aren't big moments. There are moments when a person is standing in the background that has a key piece of information. In the 2D movie, they sort of blend in with the background. You don't notice them that much. Now, in 3D, they stand out. You really get to see what they are talking about. You get the story much faster and much better. It's nothing overwhelming. It's just a better experience, and it's easier to understand the story experience."

Talk then moved onto the live action Untitled Star Wars TV Series, which has been delayed indefinitely. George Lucas explains why.

"It sits on the shelf. We have 50 hours. We are trying to figure out a different way of making movies. We are looking for a different technology that we can use, that will make it economically feasible to shoot the show. Right now, it looks like the Star Wars features. But we have to figure out how to make it at about a tenth of the cost of the features, because its television. We are working toward that, and we continue to work towards that. We will get there at some point. It's just a very difficult process. Obviously, when we do figure this problem out, it will dramatically effect features, because feature films are costing between $250 to $350 million. When we figure this out, they will be able to make a feature film for $50 million."

You can check out the entire interview in the clip below.

Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope was released May 25th, 1977 and stars Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Peter Cushing, Alec Guinness, Anthony Daniels, Kenny Baker, Peter Mayhew. The film is directed by George Lucas.

Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace was released May 19th, 1999 and stars Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Jake Lloyd, Ian McDiarmid, Pernilla August, Oliver Ford Davies, Hugh Quarshie. The film is directed by George Lucas.


View the original article here

Monday, 23 May 2011

Conviction, DVD review

The true story of Massachusetts waiter Kenny Waters can be told, quite simply, in a sentence. He was jailed without parole in 1983 for murder, and served eighteen years while his sister Betty Ann dedicated her life to researching how she could prove him innocent.

Conviction feels like a loyal dramatisation of the tale, which focuses on Betty Anne (Hilary Swank), a single working mum, continuing to fight the battle, despite the forces of America’s legal system, and her family, being against her.

This small-town legal drama is rescued from blandness by the many famous names and faces in the cast, and the character-driven sub-plots that they carry: Minnie Driver plays the bored but smart British law school undergraduate who finds a much-needed project in Betty Anne; Melissa Leo is horribly wasted as a dried out and sour policewoman with a vengeance.

But it is Sam Rockwell’s Kenny, a charismatic but scarred and unpredictable man, capable of changing the way you feel about him from one scene to the next, who carries the film. He is also the only marker of time passing – his face, his eyes, the way he holds his own weight seem to tell the story of his years in prison.

Director Tony Goldwyn, who has directed episodes of popular TV series including Dexter and Law & Order, specialises in drawing out suspense in a crime story and offsetting it with a family saga. He does it well here, managing to resist temptation to spin the tale into a melodrama, even though the story hinges on a potentially spineless theme: sisterly sacrifice.


View the original article here

Sunday, 22 May 2011

Cannes Film Festival: Tree of Life wins Palme d'Or

Gardner said when it came to the prospect of Cannes prizes, Malick had been "very sweet. He said, 'If we were that lucky, I'd like to thank my wife Becky and my parents."'

The Tree of Life, which opens Friday in the United States, stars Brad Pitt, Sean Penn and Jessica Chastain in a far-flung story of family life that plays out against a cosmic backdrop, including glorious visuals of the creation of the universe and the era of dinosaurs.

Dunst won for her role in the end-of-the-world tale Melancholia, whose director, Denmark's Lars von Trier, was banned from the festival after sympathetic remarks for Adolf Hitler at a movie press conference.

"Wow, what a week it's been," said Dunst, who plays a deeply depressed woman coping with her family's foibles as a rogue planet bears down on a possible collision course with Earth.

"It's an honor that is a once-in-a-lifetime thing for an actress," said Dunst, who thanked festival organizers for allowing "Melancholia" to remain in the competition after von Trier's Nazi remarks and offered warm words for her director. "I want to thank Lars for giving me the opportunity to be so brave."

Von Trier was not allowed to attend Sunday's ceremony.

Jean Dujardin claimed the best-actor prize for the silent film The Artist, in which he plays a 1920s Hollywood star whose career crumbles as talking pictures become the norm. In keeping with his singing, hoofing character, Dujardin did a little tap dance as he took to the Cannes stage.

Dujardin said he wanted to share his prize with co-star Berenice Bejo, who stood up and blew kisses at him on stage. The film was directed by Bejo's husband, French filmmaker Michel Hazanavicius, who also directed Dujardin in the "OSS 117" spy spoofs.

"I hope to make other silent films with you," Dujardin told Hazanavicius.

Several well-received films, among them Spanish director Pedro Almodovar's horror thriller The Skin I Live In and British filmmaker Lynne Ramsay's We Need to Talk About Kevin went home empty-handed.

Malick, who has made only five films in a nearly 40-year career, previously won the directing prize in 1979 for Days of Heaven on his last trip to Cannes. The Tree of Life was shot three years ago and festival organizers had hoped to premiere it at Cannes last year, but it was not ready in time.

Prizes were awarded by a nine-member jury headed by Robert De Niro that included actors Uma Thurman and Jude Law.

The Tree of Life was the first American film to win top honors at Cannes since back-to-back recipients in 2003 (Gus Van Sant's "Elephant") and 2004 (Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11").

De Niro told reporters choosing the top winner was difficult because of the range and "great qualities" among the 20 competing titles but that The Tree of Life ultimately fit the bill.

"It had the size, the importance, the intention, whatever you want to call it, that seemed to fit the prize," De Niro said. "Most of us felt the movie was terrific."

The second-place grand prize was shared by Belgian brothers Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne, two-time winners of the Palme d'Or, for their troubled-youth drama The Kid With a Bike, and Turkish director Nuri Bilge Ceylan for his meditative saga Once Upon a Time in Anatolia.

The third-place jury prize went to French actress-turned-director Maiwenn's child-protection drama Polisse.

Lars Von Trier's Melancholia found favor with Cannes jurors.

"As far as I'm concerned, it's one of the best films. I think it's a great film," said French director Olivier Assayas, a juror.

Von Trier provoked a firestorm at the film's press conference when he delivered rambling remarks about his German heritage in which he said he understood and sympathized with Hitler.

He also made wisecracks about Jews, comments that brought condemnation from Jewish and Holocaust groups and prompted Cannes organizers to boot him out, an unprecedented punishment for a filmmaker who won the Palme d'Or in 2000 with Dancer in the Dark.

Another Danish filmmaker, Nicolas Winding Refn, won the directing award for Drive, his action thriller starring Ryan Gosling as a Hollywood stunt driver caught up in a heist gone wrong. Refn gushed thanks for Gosling, who producers allowed to choose which director he wanted.

"He really wanted to make the movie and he really wanted to make it with me," Refn said.

The screenplay award went to Israeli filmmaker Joseph Cedar for Footnote, his tale of rival father and son Talmudic scholars.


View the original article here

Saturday, 21 May 2011

Hay Festival 2011: Richard E. Grant on growing up in Africa

While Grant never had a stutter, he did once have speech issues of his own. When on April 29 1982, he arrived in England to try to make it as an actor – he reels off the date instantly – he spoke the sort of Noël Coward colonial English Grant called Wah-Wah. Later, this became the title of the 2006 film which he both wrote and directed.

At this year’s Hay Festival, whose title sponsor is The Telegraph, Grant is speaking to Peter Godwin, the writer, about his own childhood in Africa, the subject of Godwin’s new book, The Fear. It immediately struck a chord with Grant. “As soon as I read it, I tried to get in touch with him. It’s a very rare feeling when you read something and you feel you know who that person is. I did get in touch and that’s how we became friends.” Although Godwin grew up in Zimbabwe and Grant in Swaziland, they’re roughly the same age – Grant has just turned 54 – and both witnessed the end of colonialism and the uneasy transition to independence.

Swaziland became independent in 1968, when Grant was 11. This was a big year for him in all sorts of ways. In particular, it was the year when he witnessed his mother having sex in a car with his father’s best friend while he lay in the back pretending to be asleep. This was the moment when he started keeping a secret diary. It was also the moment when he gave up on God. Shortly afterwards, his parents divorced and his father plunged into what he calls “extremely violent alcoholism” – so violent that he tried to shoot Grant after he’d poured away a case of whisky in a doomed attempt to stop his father from drinking.

Throughout the rest of his childhood and his adolescence Grant kept his dark secret. “I think the first person I told was my wife. I certainly never told any of my teenage friends because that would have given them ammunition. I also think I blamed myself for what had happened. I know from other children who have been through similar things – you blame yourself for seeing something you shouldn’t have seen. If you told anyone else, the floodgates of blame would open. So you censor yourself.”

All this happened a long time ago, of course, and the days when Grant kept everything bottled up are long gone too – he recreated the scene in the car for the opening of Wah-Wah. He doesn’t even have the same name any more. Back then he was Richard Esterhuysen. He changed it to Grant when he became an actor. However, the effects of what he saw and what he kept quiet about clearly haven’t gone away. Scrape a little below the surface and there they are. Grant has been married to Joan Washington, a voice coach, for the past 25 years. Does he attach a greater premium to monogamy as a result of what happened?

“Absolutely,” he says leaning forward in his wing-backed chair. “Because I saw the nuclear damage it did my father and that was the most profound marker of how to live my life. I place an enormous premium on loyalty. If someone betrays me, I can forgive them rationally, but emotionally I have found it impossible to do so.

“For instance, I had a 29-year friendship with someone that was betrayed eight years ago by this person when they accidentally copied me into an email that they sent to a mutual friend. I read it and found this poison in the middle [it was to do with what he calls “an annihilation” of his Wah-Wah script]. That ended the friendship and I was absolutely devastated. The trouble is that if you place such loyalty on your friendships, as I do, then it doesn’t really allow for much human error.”

It’s affected his moral outlook in other ways too, he thinks. Once his judgmental needle swings into position, it seldom budges. “When I meet a couple, I’m always interested to know if they have been together for a long time, or how loyal they are, because I know that will impact on how much I’m prepared to trust them. If I know someone is really promiscuous, that will certainly temper how close I allow myself to get to that person.”

So he inherently disapproves of them if they are promiscuous?

“Disapprove… hmm. That’s a strong word. But often on location when people are married or with a long-time partner and they’re bonking someone else on the cast and crew, and then you have to pretend it’s not going on when the other person turns up – I hate that. On two occasions, I have absolutely refused to collude with it.” What? He’s actually told the other person? “No, because you can’t play God and that would be so hurtful. But it does change my attitude towards that person. If that’s being old-fashioned, my hand goes up into the sky to accept that.”

Here again, if you were prone to flip journalistic analysis, you might detect a dislike, an abhorrence even, of keeping secrets – his own or anyone else’s. Oddly enough, the one person Grant has been able to forgive is the least likely of all: his mother. “As soon as I knew something about my mother that she didn’t know I knew, that completely warped any possibility of a normal relationship. At least it did until it was confronted and that didn’t happen until I was 42 years old. We had a very long face-to-face and there was one area which hadn’t been touched upon which was the car-seat stuff. When I brought it up, she said, ‘Please forgive me.’ I think for a parent to say that to a child, even though I was middle-aged by that point, is about the most powerful thing they can do. And of course you forgive them.”

Partly because of his performance in Withnail & I, his breakthrough film, in which he played a bitter out-of-work actor, I’ve always had this image of Grant as a Great Hater, someone who nurses a deep loathing of anyone who has crossed or slighted him. When I put this to him, he gives a shout of incredulous laughter. “A Great Hater? My God… I am very aware there is not much moderation in how I see things or do things. It’s kind of all or nothing with me. If I love someone it’s to the nth degree. And if I dislike them I suppose it’s the same. A Great Hater? That’s hilarious. I’m going to have to work on that.”

On the day we met, Grant had just returned from spending a weekend with Bruce Robinson, writer and director of Withnail and How to Get Ahead in Advertising, which Grant also starred in. They’ve been close ever since. Indeed, Grant says, they’ve been close pretty much from the moment they met. “As soon I met him I had this strange sense of being plugged into something very familiar, almost as if we already knew one another.”

Like Grant’s father, Robinson was a combustible drunk – he’s given up booze now. “I suppose what Bruce shares with my father is this combination of being enormously vulnerable and vituperative at the same time. That makes for incredible comedy. My relationship with Bruce is very cut-and-thrust jibey, but he makes me laugh more than anyone else. I’ve never really thought about it before, but yes, there is something about the best of my father in him.”

Robinson has recently returned to directing after almost 20 years, with an adaptation of Hunter S Thompson’s novel The Rum Diary, starring Johnny Depp. However, there’s no part for Grant in it. “It’s an American story so it never crossed my mind that I might get a part. But if Bruce made The Gin Diary and it was set in England and I wasn’t in it, then, yes, I’d be asking what had gone wrong.”

Grant’s relationship with Hollywood can’t have been helped by the publication of his engagingly/suicidally frank diaries about his experiences there. Bruce Willis, for one, is unlikely to include him on his Christmas card list after Grant complained about his self-centred behaviour – they were in the megaflop Hudson Hawk together. However, he says he was never aware of doors slamming shut in his face afterwards. “I don’t think I was sufficiently famous or powerful for that to be a problem. It’s true that Joel Silver [producer of Hudson Hawk] or Bruce Willis have never employed me again, but I didn’t expect them to because that whole shoot was absolute chaos.” For a judgmental, morally rigorous person, Grant seems to have an astonishing number of friends, including fellow Hay headliners Nigella Lawson and Rob Lowe.

“That’s just because of my age,” he says. Is he sure? “Well, it’s true that I’ve never been solitary, although I spend a lot of time alone. I’ve never felt lonely or been shy. I suppose I also feel that you only have one shot in your life, so if you read something you really like, or admire someone’s work, it’s worth letting them know. I do seem to have met a lot of people that way.”

On the list of Grant’s screen credits that I was sent prior to interviewing him, it says: “Lanky British player who has had some success in mainstream Hollywood features.” Accurate enough, I suppose, although it seems a bit grudging. He’s actually been in some excellent films – working with Scorsese, and Coppola – and he’s just finished what must be one of his weirdest-ever jobs, playing Michael Heseltine to Meryl Streep’s Margaret Thatcher in the film The Iron Lady. Does he find acting as fulfilling as he did, say, 20 years ago? “Do you find journalism as fulfilling as you did 20 years ago?” he shoots back. “It depends,” I say cautiously.

“Exactly. It depends what you’re doing. When you’re around someone like Meryl Streep then every fibre of excitement you had about being an actor comes hurtling back at you. But it doesn’t happen very often, regrettably. Some people of my age still have the focus and drive they had when they were younger. I know actors who are out there on the streets of Soho ready to rottweiler their way into a casting session at any cost. But with me, I’m much more interested in where I’m going to go on holiday.”

When he was in his forties, Grant went into psychoanalysis. “I remember the therapist saying to me, ‘Although your father is dead and your parents are divorced, in the heart of you, as a child, you want them to be together again and you want them to be alive.’ But that’s what we all have, isn’t it? It’s the Wizard of Oz – click your heels three times and you’ll go home. And home is where you want to be. So, did what happened to me define me? Yes,” he says. “I suppose in a way it did.”

Richard E Grant will be talking to Peter Godwin at Hay on June 3. For tickets and information see the Hay Festival programme.


View the original article here

Monday, 2 May 2011

Insidious calls forth the wrong demons

Slashers slash you, psychotics torture you and monsters eat you. Vampires and zombies require you to share their unappetising fate. Demons, however, are something else: they can possess your very soul. Yet they pose a problem for the fright-seeking filmgoer: what are they?

InsidiousProduction year: 2010Country: USACert (UK): 15Runtime: 102 minsDirectors: James WanCast: Andrew Astor, Angus Sampson, Barbara Hershey, Leigh Whannell, Lin Shaye, Patrick Wilson, Rose Byrne, Ty SimpkinsMore on this film

During the heyday of big-screen demonic horror, from the mid-60s to the mid-80s, this wasn't much of a problem. Fiends still enjoyed a respectable pedigree in the canon of organised faiths. Not just The Exorcist, but other landmark titles such as Rosemary's Baby and The Omen drew upon timeless dogma that even unbelievers could appreciate. Thereafter, however, the great religions began to go off hell and its damnable denizens. Understandably, horror films started to rely more heavily on flesh-and-blood bogeymen.


Nonetheless, there seems to be something about the demon's allure that has survived ecclesiastical relegation. The last couple of decades have seen a revival in its cinematic fortunes. However, it's been expected to move with the times. Some of the recent wave of demonic films, like The Rite, The Exorcism of Emily Rose and The Last Exorcism, have tried to root their devilry once more in a Christian context, but it's not these that have taken off. The big hitters have been The Blair Witch Project and Paranormal Activity, and both of these chose to secularise their fiends.


Insidious too has little time for the first estate. A would-be clerical exorcist is quickly shown the door in favour of geeky ghostbusters armed with complicated equipment and led by a new age seer. All goes scarily enough so long as the hobgoblins are engaged only in that teasing foreplay that seems to amuse them so much. As usual, doors slam themselves, books rearrange themselves and mysterious imprints appear, all to suitably creepy effect. Yet eventually we have to be told what's generating these phenomena; as soon as we are, everything goes to the devil.


The film-makers deserve credit for creating a logically consistent universe. It's just that without roots in any genuine residual fears, the world they conjure becomes merely farcical. Nowadays, demons who depend on cadaverous complexions, grand Guignol makeup and Miss Havisham's cast-off togs for their spookiness, and whose lair features dry ice and gothic candlesticks in place of the torments of hell, just can't be expected to cut it.


In the face of today's glumly materialist attitudes, you can't help worrying that our so recently disinterred fiends may be forced to give up the ghost, and with it their comeback ambitions. One of the most enterprising of recent demonic titles was the Spanish found-footage shocker [REC]. Yet when Hollywood remade the film as Quarantine, the supernatural prime mover was stripped out in favour of a mere rogue virus.


Still, we have to acknowledge that in the first half of Insidious, the demons deliver the goods. As unexplained shadows, they conjure up a brand of dread that no other bogeyman could have managed. Fortunately for them, we seem to continue to harbour sufficient fear of unspecified, menacing malevolence; it's just when it declares its hand that it falls flat.


You can see why this might be. We're still afraid that we or those around us may become possessed by evils – but by disease, dementia, mania, depression or rage, rather than satanic imps. In the early stages of Insidious, the diabolic atmosphere is knitted to real-life torments. Renai and Josh fear that their child has fallen prey to an incurable medical disorder. Renai fears that she's growing old and that her husband is becoming a different kind of man. He fears that she's becoming mentally ill. Such are our real terrors; nowadays, hints of the demonic can underscore them, but not surpass them.


As is customary in a film such as this, Renai experiences spooky happenings while Josh is away. When she recounts them he doubts her sanity, but when the spookiness confronts them both at once he's forced to come round. In fact, Insidious might have worked better if the spooks had stayed within Renai's mind.


Of all demonic films, some consider The Shining the most chilling. Yet while The Overlook may indeed be haunted, the demons that really matter are those summoned up by Jack's own mind. In the future, fiends should perhaps settle for a merely supporting role, as metaphors for the terrors that have outlasted them.


View the original article here