Top 35 films (all time faves)

Last week I was in the pub with the guys from work.

A colleague asked me what my favourite film was, because he knew I liked films.

In response I asked him how many kids he had, when he said two I asked him which was his favourite.

I wasn't trying to be difficult, but this tack has been very successful in the past making people realise why I can't whittle down to a top 5 or 10. From over 3,500 films, these are my top 35 favourite films, literally the top 1%:

• Badlands (1973)
• Being There (1979)
• Black Narcissus (1947)
• Brazil (1985)
• Chinatown (1974)
• Days of Heaven (1978)
• Det sjunde inseglet (Seventh Seal, The) (1957)
• Dr. Strangelove (1964)
• Enfants du Paradis, Les (Children of Paradise) (1945)
• First Blood (1982)
• Fitzcarraldo (1982)
• French Connection, The (1971)
• Gattaca (1997)
• Godfather, The (1972)
• Gomorra (2008)
• Grosse Point Blank (1997)
• Groundhog Day (1993)
• Harold and Maude (1971)
• Heat (1995)
• Kung Fu Panda (2008)
• Lawrence of Arabia (1962)
• Leon (1994)
• Magnolia (1999)
• Man on Wire (2008)
• Matrix, The (1999)
• McCabe and Mrs Miller (1971)
• Midnight Run (1988)
• On the Waterfront (1954)
• Raging Bull (1980)
• Ravenous (1999)
• Rocky (1976)
• Shampoo (1975)
• Third Man, The (1949)
• Truman Show, The (1998)
• You Can Count on Me (2000)

Soderbergh's Media Diet

Studio 360 have just released Steven Soderbergh's media diet for the last year. Pleased it's not just me! Have a read here.

Battle: Los Angeles (2011)

Meh, I agree 100% with the critics (not always the case I'll have you know)...

Still, much better than Skyline (2010), but that wasn't difficult.

Take my advice, rent Restrepo (2010) instead.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (2010)

First of all, I know, I know. What was I thinking? To be honest I've always assumed the Narnia franchise was a British production. And, because it's important to keep abreast of all our film industry's efforts, I'd therefore give this one a looksee. This is made all the more important (unfortunately) with the onslaught of 3D. After all, behemoths like Harry Potter can't have all the fun, can they?

Alas, it's not a British movie, it's an American production (I'm still not convinced though). Why am I confused? Well, quite simply, because it's got lower production values than The Bill. I'm not joking! It looks really really cheap. However, even if it had been a British production, I still should've known better, this film isn't for me. It's not even marketed towards me. And more importantly nobody who reads this blog would see it anyway. A thoroughly depressing evening has been had.

This, the third in the series is once again produced by Walden Media (how many in the heptology will they make?). Twentieth Century Fox has since picked up the batten of distributor after being dumped by Disney. The first in the series made a killing. It's in the top 40 grossing movies of all time exceeding $700m worldwide. Not to sniffed at, despite a budget of $180m. The second cost $225m and took nearly $420m. Still not bad but not good enough apparently for Disney. I don't know how this one is going to perform, but I fear the end is nigh. What's going on Apted? Remember P'tang, Yang, Kipperbang (1982)? It's never been the same since. His attempt at Bond (The World is Not Enough 1999) wasn't great but he made the best of what he had. This, this is just woeful.

The Beaver (2011)

Erm, wtf?

Fair play to Foster though, choosing this film for her return to directing in 15 years is pretty bold. Let's hope it's better than her last.

Tron: Legacy (2010)

Quite honestly the most awesome and vacuous film you'll see this year (or next).

Muchas thanks go to ShowFilmFirst for a wonderful, professional delivery at Saturday's advance preview "Opinion Former's Showcase", despite the weather, the show must go on, and boy did it!

Monsters (2010)

The "credit card" movie is dead. The term was first used to describe micro-budget filmmaking in connection with Robert Rodriguez's El Mariachi (1992). Apparently he used all available credit and then resorted to experimental clinical drug testing. Nowadays, despite ongoing loan opportunities, it's simply not possible to use credit cards to fund independent filmmaking. Last year the UK's budget breakout film was Duncan Jones' Moon (2009), reportedly costing $5 million. This year the crown belongs to British born Gareth Edwards, he's made a film that has cost a tenth of that amount. 

Edwards' background is in visual effects, after 10 years in the industry his career peaked with must-see documentary In the Shadow of the Moon (2007). A Discovery Films tribute featuring talking heads from all surviving members (except Neil Armstrong) of the Apollo space programme. Monsters is Edwards' first film as director (and screenwriter, cinematographer, production designer), however, unlike Shadow, Nasa don't garner anywhere near the same amount of prestige.

The American space agency has sent a probe to a newly discovered planet to collect samples of alien life forms. On it's return to Earth it crash lands in Central America. The films begins six years after this event with New World Tribune photographer Andrew Kaulder (Scoot McNairy) in South America promising his employer he'll safely return his stranded daughter Samantha Wynden's (Whitney Able) through the infected and quarantined zone back into homeland USA.

British company Vertigo Films are on fire right now. As distributors they've been behind some outstanding films since establishing in 2002, highlights to name but a few include London to Brighton (2006), The Escapist (2008) and my favourite, Shotgun Stories (2007). Following this success they're now branching out to production, Monsters being one of the few so far. An obvious yet key inspiration throughout the film, apparently suggested to Edwards by producers at Vertigo, was In Search of a Midnight Kiss (2007), a truly magical romantic comedy (discussed in more depth here) also staring Scoot McNairy. It's set in downtown LA (a different kind of jungle) with slightly less monsters. This leads us to the first criticism of the film...

In the ongoing pursuit of maximising box office potential a trend of late has arisen. This regards the misrepresentation of art-house films as more generic and mainstream, primarily through marketing campaigns (posters, radio spots or the trailers). After viewing the Somos Lo Que Hay (We Are What We Are) (2010) trailer you would be forgiven for expecting a fast-paced zombie-like cannibalistic gore fest. In fact, only one character is nibbled (rather than bitten) and even that occurs off screen. The trailer for Cyrus (2010) plays off Jonah Hill's previous box office smashes Superbad (2007) and Forgetting Sarah Marshall (2008) rather than what it really is, a brilliant effort to bring the Duplass brother's canonical  Mumblecore sub-genre to the mainstream.

Ultimately this type of marketing leads to unfavourable critical press and a general public who quite rightly feel cheated. It's akin to false advertising, and William 'D-Fens' Foster would not be happy. While watching The American (2010) on Friday, a large majority of the audience appeared bored, either talking, texting or in general fidgeting. They were probably expecting lighthearted charming Gorgeous George - Up In The Air (2009) - Clooney re-enacting his assassin role in Out of Sight (1998). What they got was stoic paranoia, and his best performance since Michael Clayton (2007). 

In Monsters' case, whilst the quad is not inaccurate, it is misleading. "Jaw-dropping", "Packs a powerful punch", "A new world of terror". Alongside the trailer and quad backgrounds one would assume this is another post-apocalyptic/dystopian-world genre movie along the lines of 28 days later (2002), The Road (2009, Book of Eli (2010), District 9 (2009), Doomsday (2008), or perhaps even Southland Tales (2006). In reality the action is minimal. As is often the case when budget constraints are in place the filmmaker has to infer rather than show. It can prove much more effective. Monsters is more concerned in developing the relationship between its two central protagonists rather than CGI.

The title alone is misleading, was that Vertigo's marketing departments idea also? As Steve Rose states in his article Monsters: The bedroom blockbuster that's the anti-Avatar:

"it servers up hipster indie vibes and, despite the title, offers a 

genuine alternative to your standard monster-movie fare"

The film made a huge impact when it was first unveiled at this years SXSW festival and the viral campaign has continued to grow since. It's a wonderful twist on a tired genre and well worth a viewing if you can.


Monsters is released this Friday and is certified 12A.