Showing posts with label Special Features. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Special Features. Show all posts

Thursday, June 9, 2011

Special Features - Battle of the Bonds: Michael Fassbender vs. Daniel Craig

With talk of Michael Fassbender as a potential future Bond, Liam Trim oversees a battle between the X-Men: First Class star and 007 himself, Daniel Craig...

Okay so I know technically Michael Fassbender isn’t a Bond but there was no way I was calling this anything else. If you’ve seen the new X-Men film you’ll know Fassbender essentially gives a super powered performance of our favourite suave secret agent. My review points out as much here.

Critics up and down this green and pleasant land are saying they’d like to see Fassbender play Bond in future. Some are even calling for the head of Daniel Craig now, just two films after Craig successfully rebooted cinema’s longest running franchise to acclaim from commentators and audiences alike. But the problem is Casino Royale was almost six years ago. Since then we’ve had the action packed disappointment of Quantum of Solace, in which Craig was still good but hampered and limited by a mostly naff script. We’ve also had the crisis of MGM delaying the release of Bond 23. All the while Craig has been ageing, the poor thing.

I am a huge fan of Craig’s interpretation of Bond but even I have to admit that he’ll be under pressure if Bond 23 doesn’t vastly improve on Marc Forster’s Quantum of Solace. Sam Mendes is at the helm and the signs are good but then most of us Bond fans were saying that on the web about the last one. Forster was supposedly a director who could tell a story but we were left with some decent action at the start, which felt like it was still part of Casino Royale, followed by a disappointing story with flashes of average action that was an unsatisfying epilogue to the reboot at best.

Because of the delays then, as well as the unstoppable onslaught of human decay, Fassbender has the edge on youth. His career is also shifting into a top gear; at a time when Craig’s is also attracting big enough projects that could tempt him away from Bond should the 23rd instalment prove be a sinking ship.

Enough build up. Let’s compare a few necessary requirements for an actor playing a 00 agent. Bonds do battle.

FILMOGRAPHIES

Fassbender:

300 (2006)
Eden Lake (2008)
Hunger (2008)
Town Creek (2009)
Fish Tank (2009)
Inglorious Basterds (2009)
Centurion (2010)
Jonah Hex (2010)
X-Men: First Class (2011)
Jane Eyre (2011)

Craig:

Casino Royale (2006)
The Invasion (2007)
The Golden Compass (2007)
Flashbacks of a Fool (2008)
Quantum of Solace (2008)
Defiance (2008)
Cowboys and Aliens (2011)
Dream House (2011)
The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn (2011)
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011)

Round 1 – Acting Chops

Going from both men’s biggest hits and breakthroughs to the mainstream in 2006 (300 and Casino Royale) to the present day, it’s probably Fassbender with the more impressive list. There were meaty roles for him in Hunger, Fish Tank and the upcoming Jane Eyre. Hunger in particular alerted directors everywhere to his talent. The film carries a 90% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and is “anchored” by Fassbender’s performance, according to Empire Magazine. Working with Quentin Tarantino is no bad thing for a CV either.

Craig on the other hand followed up his cold and commanding debut as Bond with the critically panned The Invasion with Nicole Kidman and average kids film The Golden Compass, which was supposed to launch an all conquering series to rival Harry Potter. Flashbacks of a Fool was a favour to directing friend Baillie Walsh, in which he gave a performances as a washed up actor fallen from grace. It was good but not the main role in the film, as the rest was told in flashbacks to childhood and in any case it wasn’t a big hit. He pulled off an impressive accent in Edward Zwick’s Defiance and generally convinced as a leader. Only recently has Craig got some really appetising projects on the go though, working with the likes of Spielberg for Tintin, David Fincher for Dragon Tattoo and Harrison Ford and Jon Favreau for Cowboys and Aliens.

Verdict: Even with that lull for Craig, it’s difficult to separate the abilities of these two.

Round 2 – Sex Appeal

I am definitely the wrong person to ask about this. But there’s no doubt that Bond has to be able to inspire a certain longing in the ladies, with a mere gesture or flirtatious glance. Both actors have charisma and cool credentials. Fassbender dresses up smart in the latest X-Men, as well as donning casual hard man leather jackets and camp superhero costume, cape and all. In Fish Tank his character’s raw masculinity was irresistible to mother and daughter alike. Inglorious Basterds saw him with slick and precise hair and a uniform. After starring as Mr Rochester as Jane Eyre later this year, further legions of women will join the ranks of his swooning admirers, with the earliest recruits hooked by the sight of his muscular and barely clothed physique in 300.

From what I’m told Craig is not a bad catch either. Certainly upon news of his casting as Bond and following the first viewings of those notorious blue Speedos, the females in my social circles could talk of nothing else in fits of giggles for days. Perhaps they’ll like the sight of him in a Cowboy hat.

Verdict: I really don’t know, they both seem to be handsome chaps and I imagine it comes down to personal preference. However if I had to make a decision, I’d say that Fassbender’s mixed Irish/German heritage makes him more exotic. Plus he seems taller. I hear that’s good.

Round 3 – Who would win in a fight?

Fassbender fought like a lion on speed in 300. And as I’ve said he had very little on. That’s impressive and a Spartan warrior takes some beating. However Bond doesn’t fight with swords, well not very often. He’s got to be able to beat a man to death with his fists, win shootouts and take out bad guys in witty ways. Fassbender did a lot of grunting and killing in 300 but where were the one liners? And in Inglorious Basterds he got shot almost immediately after some lengthy chit chat. Bullets are meant to swerve to avoid 007.

Or in Craig’s case, merely puncture his huge pecs. Craig has proven himself already as Bond, especially physically. His stunts and fight scenes have brought the series up to date. Some have criticised the mimicking of Bourne-esque action, which is valid for Quantum of Solace but off the mark for Casino Royale. In the past Craig has blown up enemies of Israel in Munich and taken on the Nazis in Defiance. Judging by the trailers he’s going to kick some Cowboy/Alien ass this summer too.

Verdict: Fassbender needs more time to learn the ropes but unless he’s got his metal moving powers still, looks like Craig will knock him out.

Round 4 – Staying true to Fleming’s original

In X-Men: First Class Fassbender proves he can speak menacingly in Spanish, French and German. He is ruthless and suave and all action. He has a taste for the ladies and strong principles which he stands by. He is loyal. All of these qualities and more that Fassbender displays as the young Magneto, travelling the globe conducting his own private espionage, are those of Ian Fleming’s original spy. If Bond producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson were ever bold enough to take Bond back in time, Fassbender would be perfect for another reboot. His British officer look in Inglorious Basterds, combined with his Magneto, creates a pretty cool version of James Bond licence to kill.

It’s unlikely the producers will ever take Bond into the past and a Cold War world again because they feel that would tarnish the earlier films which covered that ground already. Bond needs to find a way to carry on in the modern world whilst retaining the best elements of the original. And Daniel Craig’s version of the character found that path with Casino Royale. His more human and more brutal portrayal took Bond back to his literary roots with tremendous results.

Verdict: Impossible to split. Fassbender has the potential to be a classic Bond as Fleming imagined him but Craig has already proven himself as a Bond inspired by the books as well as the films.

So at the end of that battle we know nothing new. It’s a draw on points. Basically Fassbender might be a good Bond when Craig steps aside but for now he’s doing a good job. What happens next all rests on Bond 23.

What do you think? Would Fassbender make a better Bond than Craig?

Liam Trim (follow me on Twitter)

Tuesday, June 7, 2011

Turning The Page: Robopocalypse by Daniel H. Wilson

Trevor Hogg reviews Robopocalypse by Daniel H. Wilson...

Writing in a breezy and plain manner, Daniel H. Wilson, who obtained a Ph.D. in robotics from Carnegie Mellon, has entered into the realm of science fiction thriller. If Wilson is able to channel his youthful and mischievous enthusiasm into more polished adult yarns he could become the next Michael Crichton. Oscar-winning moviemaker Steven Spielberg certainly believes in Wilson’s literary talent as he acquired the film rights to the latest effort from the Portland, Oregon based novelist before the book even had found a publisher.

Divided into five major sections, Robopocalypse chronicles the rise and fall of a malevolent artificial intelligence which highjacks everyday and military technology, such as smart cars, toys, domestic robots, and tanks, and converts them into lethal predators. The devastating World War III between men and machines is documented through a series of vignettes compiled via a transcript composed by human resistance fighter Cormac “Bright Boy” Wallace; he combines his personal recollections with the material obtained from a black box once belonging to Archos, the robotic nemesis that has a genocidal mission to annihilate humanity in a way that makes Adolf Hitler seem like a schoolyard bully.

Focusing more on the human struggle to survive as opposed to the machines’ is the smart choice, as well as the incorporation of short chapters as the tale becomes more interesting and speeds along to its conclusion. “I intentionally included very little science fiction up front,” stated Daniel H. Wilson in the Doubleday press release. “That’s the scariest part of Robopocalypse – that it’s feasible. There are no glinting robot armies from outer space, just the ordinary technology of our lives turning on us, ripping apart our civilization, and then evolving into something that human beings never intended.”

Cinematically, I will enjoy seeing the eerie city street scene where all the cellphones in the surrounding area ring as a computer hacker is stalked by Archos. The one element I have a hard time getting my mind around is the Japanese storyline where an infatuated computer genius seeks to save his virus-infected robotic pleasure doll. The inclusion of the characters from the Osaga Nation is a nice touch as Native Americas too often serve as a forgotten footnote in American culture. For those who seek light entertainment with a futuristic twist Robopocalypse is a worthwhile read; and for their added enjoyment, Steven Spielberg will be working his movie magic to bring the world created by Daniel H. Wilson to the big screen in 2013.


Order Robopocalypse from Amazon and visit Daniel H. Wilson's website here.

Trevor Hogg is a freelance video editor and writer who currently resides in Canada.

Saturday, May 28, 2011

Vision Quest: The Making of The Tree of Life

Trevor Hogg chats with visual effects supervisors Dan Glass and Bryan Hirota about the creation of Terrence Malick's latest, The Tree of Life...

Considered by many to be an enigma because of his reclusive nature and the long gaps between his films, American director Terrence Malick returns to the big screen with The Tree of Life (2011). Partly autobiographical, the story revolves around a boy growing up in the 1950s American Midwest whose relationship with his strict father and nurturing mother haunts him into adulthood. Featuring a cast of Brad Pitt (Se7en), Sean Penn (Mystic River), Jessica Chastain (Jolene), Joanna Going (Inventing the Abbotts), Jackson Hurst (The Mist), Fiona Shaw (Fracture), Crystal Mantecon (The Waiter), and Tamara Jolaine (Tough Love), the drama ignited worldwide curiosity when word came out that it included footage involving the formation of the universe. Could this be the resurrection of the mysterious project Q which was to explore the origins of life on earth? Given the responsibility of creating the nonexistent imagery was Visual Effects Supervisor Dan Glass, who has worked with the likes of Christopher Nolan (Batman Begins) and The Wachowski Brothers (The Matrix Reloaded, The Matrix Revolutions, Speed Racer). “My first discussions with Terry began about four and a half years ago and they were very vague and rather roundabout,” states Glass. “I remember one of the things that we talked about was trying to find a common language and approach. I asked, ‘Can you list the music that you imagine behind these sequences? Can we approach it from that angle?’ And he sent me a CD with a ton of music that was the type of stuff that he could imagine emotionally playing across these works.”

Even though Dan Glass points out that each movie production has its own unique set of creative challenges, he readily admits that Terrence Malick “was like no one else I’ve ever worked with or imagine I will work with again.” The native of London explains, “If I sat down to write out what I thought would be ideal for a director of a visual effects film, especially a lot of complex visual effects, he would probably not tick any of the boxes. Whilst you can say that was the challenge it was also very much the best and the most exciting thing about the project.” One of the big differences was the source material. “The script, if you can call it that, was really more like a set of notes that he has written and built up over some 35 years. He has been working on this project since the 70s. And we actually have negatives that he shot in the 1970s that we incorporated into the movie. So it really becomes a lifting of notes and ideas.”

“The first person we brought on was a very versatile Digital FX Supervisor by the name of Brad Friedman,” states Glass. “Brad helped build a small team in Austin to work closely with the director, editorial and myself to interpret, previz and ultimately complete many shots for the production. This team was critical as an experiment lab right next to Terry at all times to evaluate, to try things out. Production also set up a Research department gathering tons of imagery and scientific data for reference, and included a garage workshop where they would shoot chemical experiments and various things from Petri dishes to fluids in tanks; that was in conjunction with the stuff we did on a bigger scale with Doug Trumbull.”

Of major importance for the VFX Supervisor was the selection of the visual effects companies. “The way we had to approach the film was really very piecemeal,” says Dan Glass. “Aside from bringing in many people I have worked with over the years, that I trusted greatly to be able to interpret what was needed, we also brought in some very fine artistic sensibilities from several companies from around the world that approach things in a particular non digital fashion.” A plan was implemented to distribute the visual effects workload. “The material was divided into four broad categories we termed Realms: Double Negative in London handled the majority of the Astrophysical Realm led by supervisor Paul Riddle, journalist Michael Benson consulted and provided extraordinary source imagery from actual probes and telescopes. He and a colleague initially selected and stitched the images together, cleaned them up, and created huge resolution images of 30,000 pixels which we then broke into layers and dimensionalized over very slow exploratory camera moves. For the Microbial Realm we hired a small London boutique company called One of Us headed by Tom Debenham and Dominic Parker that do beautiful work; they have their own little studio where they shoot practical pieces and elements and combine them with very photographic looking CG. We also commissioned work from Peter and Chris Parks [Image Quest 3-D] who are a father and son duo in England…They do these richly detailed visual flows of colour which are very hard to describe and can imply things at any scale. We then had a couple of things that arose later in the schedule that really needed a very fresh approach.” Glass brought on Method Studios to help. “I knew some of the people there who had worked at BUF many years ago, and I loved that company and the way they worked which is very creative and collaborative. Also, because of their commercial background, Method were a hive of ideas rather than anything that just came with a particular process or specification for how to work.” Evil Eye Pictures based in San Francisco handled material principally in the Contemporary Realm including the live action segments of the film.

Regarding the topic which has garnered a lot of Internet attention, Dan Glass answers, “I can confirm that there are dinosaurs.” Given the responsibility of bringing the prehistoric animals back to life in the Natural (History) Realm was Frantic Films under the guidance of Mike Fink, which took on a new name after commencing work on the project. “I came onto it after it was already underway at Prime Focus,” states Bryan Hirota who served as a visual effects supervisor at the VFX facility. “The company worked on it for maybe eight months.” Hirota goes on to say, “Terrence Malick is notoriously secretive…I don’t know much about this movie. I don’t really know how the work fits in.” This is not surprising to Glass. “I would sometimes deliberately misguide the intention,” he admits. “An animator would want to know, ‘What’s the purpose here? What’s my motivation?’ So I would deliberately misguide a little and push in one direction and say, ‘Now adjust it and do this,’ just to try to get that zone where you have a little bit more of an ambiguity and something that’s more animal than human in its characteristics.”

“We used a tremendous amount of practical and scientific work,” reveals Dan Glass. “Terrence Malick would insist that every frame be attached to some amount of live action or practical content. It’s fantastic. I love that as an approach. Doug Trumbull, who is a good friend of Terry’s, came on board to help and consult in setting up a series of practical shoots that we did. We did three in all that we called the skunkworks and which were done over long weekends in Austin, some of the techniques dating back to 2001 [1968]. Techniques that Doug had used but then incorporating many of the things he has developed or worked with over his career, we would capture this terrific library of abstract, strange forms, and shapes. Those contributed to elements or in some cases the majority of an image within the movie; we would augment it with additional detail…mixing it up so it was never really clear what scale, or what was the origin of the material. Where it wasn’t possible we would include aspects of the ‘real.’”

An important part of the production for The Tree of Life was the effort devoted to portraying science realistically. “We were always very respectful,” emphasizes Dan Glass. “For example, to do some of the cosmological simulations of very early space there’s obviously little that we could have shot practically for that. But we paired up with some of the leading scientists in their respective fields, like Volker Bromm who specializes in Population III stars, the first to theoretically form in the Universe. So there’s this very deep, rich science behind the imagery…we also had the help of Donna Cox and Robert Patterson of the NCSA [National Center for Supercomputing Applications], who would take a base simulation, and start to create visualizations which were then fed to Double Negative, guided visually by contributions from a concept artist called George Hull. We would craft the thing into…picturesque imagery based on literal science.”

Questioned on how a unified look was achieved, Glass remarks that was not something Terrence Malick desired. “He preferred the idea of a patchwork quilt. If he shot something on a Super 8 camera, then an IMAX camera, then on a digital camera or…in space you might have something based on magnetic resonance imaging or infrared photography from the Hubble, each would have its own character, and that in his mind would lend to authenticity because you weren’t trying to smooth it, shape it and make it conform.”

Known for his stunning cinematography, Terrance Malick wanted to make the most of the imagery featured on the screen. “We had one shot we were working on for the longest time that was nearly two minutes long,” says Dan Glass. “It is there to give you time to take in what you’re looking at. Part of his focus is always rich, detailed images, generally keeping as much depth of field as possible so it gives your eyes plenty to wander around and take in.” After spending many months finessing a shot, Terrence Malick, Dan Glass and his visual effects team would view the end result in one of the theatres in Austin. “We’d reach a stage where we were happy with it,” says Glass. “Then sometimes weeks later he’d ask, ‘Can we put that back up again? Let’s think about this again.’ And he’d consider trying to experiment on another track. There was always this element of the piece continually evolving and developing, which was very different to what you normally have a chance to do in a lot of the bigger visual effects pictures where it can all too often be a case of ‘That’ll do. That’ll do. Move on. Move on.’”

Bryan Hirota observes, “Malick, it seems to me, needs to see stuff, and then brings his film to life in the editorial process; it’s not necessarily clear to him exactly where his film is going to take him. It’s like a process of discovery for him.” Informed of Hirota’s comment, Dan Glass responds, “With Terry… his vision is strong. He knows where he’s going but because his goal is much more esoteric, it’s less tied down to any literal representation. That’s why the editorial process is critical to him, even with his live action; he shoots a lot of footage that can play in many different contexts, and some of his favourite moments are things where they’ve yelled, ‘Cut!’ and the actors almost break character. Those are the pieces he’ll love. Similarly, in the visual effects…you’re working for days, weeks, sometimes months trying to make something so precise. And yet for Terry that could work against the very organic nature of the material so we had to spend more time to free it from itself.”

“Each shot is unique and crafted as such; they’re really approached from every angle as an individual piece,” says Dan Glass. “At one point we were approaching 60 minutes of footage that we were completing, of which somewhere between 12 to 15 minutes was ultimately used.” The IMAX format was chosen because they wanted to retain an incredible level of detail. “All of the work in Tree of Life is done to 5 1/2 K resolution…There’s a genuineness to that; it’s really trying to more closely represent the photography of the real thing. And the music and sound I would say are tremendous. The sound design I was really bowled over by, in terms of how it helps emotionally taking you through the piece.” Summarizing the final cinematic experience, Glass states, “It’s a very powerful movie about memories, emotions, and our place in the world.” As to what he thought The Tree of Life was going to look like, he confesses, “I don’t know in some ways what I was expecting it to be...I think the thing that was constant throughout the experience of working with Terry was that you know not to expect anything. There’s always something mysterious to be found.”

Vision Quest: The Tree of Life & The Big Lie
Image Conscious: A conversation with visual effects supervisor Bryan Hirota
Image Conscious: A conversation with visual effects supervisor Dan Glass

Visit the official website for The Tree of Life.

Trevor Hogg is a freelance video editor and writer who currently resides in Canada.

Friday, May 27, 2011

Kerzel-Town: Director Justin Kerzel talks Snowtown

Director of the outstanding Snowtown - Justin Kerzel - took some time out of his well deserved Cannes-paign to talk to Blake Howard about the experience of his masterpiece...

BH: Snowtown feels like a scientific experiment, it creates/portrays the conditions that a serial killing troupe can exist. How much did the setting and local cast affect what your decisions during the shoot?

JK: This was a film, which needed to be told from the inside out so we were incredibly informed by what the environment and people were telling us it wanted to be. Many ideas came from being there and really observing the pretty unique psychology of the place. Definitely some of those round table conversations about paedophilia in the area came from very real workshops about the subject matter. Sexual abuse is a very passionate and prominent problem in the area and some of those arguments and ideas were really sculpted from people’s real thoughts and ideas.

BH: For me, this film gives Lars von Trier's stunning Dogville (the fictional nightmare commentary of smalltown incestuous human impulse and ignorance). Did you have any directorial or filmic influences in mind when you were filming?

JK: Not really. I didn’t watch many films at all as I really wanted to be not influenced by anything else other than the real community and landscape we were filming in. I guess the way Michael Haneke rarely shows what is causing the violence in his films, where the film is more about how the characters respond and relate to the violence around them is a real inspiration to the structure and psychology in Snowtown. In terms of Australian films I think there is a really strong heritage of muscular dark crime films which goes all the way back to Wake in Fright, Romper Stomper, The Boys and Chopper. I do think there is something very particular about how we portray violence and masculinity on screen. I’m sure these films in some unconscious way affected our approach to Snowtown.

BH: When I think about Henshall's performance - the contrast between his sweetness (in true socio 'psycho'pathic form) towards those he cares and the clinical artistry of his brutality is memorable to say the least. How much did you fashion Daniel's performance and how much did he bring to the character?

JK: To Daniel and I it was really important that the audience understood how this man came to be trusted and let in to this community. Through our research we discovered that John was a bit of an everyman, someone who was very sociable and present within the community. So at the beginning it was important for Dan to find an ease in the community and develop very genuine relationships with the other cast. He spent 10 weeks in the area and started to find the skin of the John character. He put on 10 kg and spent as much time possible with the family especially Lucas and the boys. I didn’t want Dan to read too much about serial killers, it was important that he just be very present and intimate with the other characters and approach the role on a very real and human level.

BH: Where you ever conscious of distancing yourself from the Australian True Crime T.V interpretations that seemingly glamorize serial killers?

JK: Well there had been a couple pretty sensationalist documentaries about the murders, which I thought, were very one-dimensional and more like a body count film. I also didn't want to glamorize the violence like in some true crime TV but instead make it very real and confronting. When I read all the transcripts I was shocked by the brutality and I wanted its horror to be extremely truthful, not distorted but visceral and affecting.

BH: How long do we have to wait for your next film?

JK: Hopefully next year I will be making a film with my brother Jed who did the music with Snowtown. It’s a black comedy and obviously very different from Snowtown.

After Snowtown - my ticket's already bought.

Read Blake's review of Snowtown here.

Blake Howard is a writer/site director/podcaster at the castleco-op.com.

Thursday, May 26, 2011

Special Features - Mystery marketing is no substitute for good filmmaking

Liam Trim on the viral marketing campaigns of The Dark Knight Rises and Super 8...

Last week the hype for Christopher Nolan’s third Batman film, The Dark Knight Rises, moved into top gear with the launch of a clever and mysterious publicity campaign. On Thursday the 19th of May the official website became active, only to reveal nothing but a black screen and the sound of chanting. By the following morning, the most dedicated and geeky intelligent of fans, had filtered the noises through various ingenious programmes that visualise sound waves, revealing the Twitter hashtag #TheFireRises. To cut a long story short, the more people that Tweeted the hashtag, the more of an image from the film was revealed. Eventually a genius with time on their hands managed to expose the whole picture, giving the world its first glimpse of Tom Hardy’s beastly Bane.

As exciting as all this was for fans eager to learn about the sequel to The Dark Knight’s phenomenal success, such high concept viral marketing is not a new idea. Christopher Nolan in particular should know this, after previous films of his have utilised the growing trend for such campaigns. Most notably, last year’s Inception generated enormous hype with lots of vague waffle about the “architecture of the mind” doing the rounds on forums before any plot details had emerged. The official Facebook page for the film released clues to the whereabouts of Inception merchandise and tickets, sparking races across British cities for the treasure. There was also a special app for the film.

Even The Dark Knight had seemingly legitimate websites, both pro and anti Harvey Dent, calling for support in the Gotham city elections for District Attorney. But the undisputed king of mystery, minimalist marketing is Lost creator JJ Abrams. He produced 2008’s Cloverfield, which was perhaps the first project to truly embrace the public lust for speculation and a hunt for clues. It was promoted with the merest slither of information and talked up as a story that blurred the boundaries between fact and fiction, claiming to be comprised of "found" footage from real home videos. Lost too, made the most of secrets to stir debate amongst fans.

Abrams is the director of this summer’s much anticipated Super 8, which is co-produced by the tantalising team of him and Steven Spielberg, and the trailers have adopted the same old tricks which we’ve come to expect. During the flurry of Super Bowl trailers earlier this year, Super 8 remained the only real enigma amongst a pack of blockbusters, which undoubtedly made it stand out. But there are also drawbacks and limitations to such cryptic and vague promotion.

A few weeks ago a select group of journalists and critics got to see the opening 20 minutes of Super 8. And whilst many of them had positive things to say, those that have already written about their snippet of Abrams’ creation pack their articles with questions and a tone of scepticism as they look to extract the substance from the chorus of theories. Several commentators have said that the uneven blend of a heart warming buddy movie, a scary alien attack and effects heavy blockbuster, doesn’t satisfy the hype.

Without all the frustrating teasing, perhaps the writers would have been more inclined to focus on the film’s positives. How can the product ever live up to unrealistically heightened expectations? The trailers have already been ripped apart, frame by frame, for the slightest of clues. Cinemagoers with regular internet access may have heard of Super 8, but by the time of its release its barebones promotion may have left them either uninterested or so frustrated that they seek out an idiot who has leaked detailed spoilers.

Such saturation of the web certainly gets people talking and immersed by the ideas of a film. But it’s not a standalone guarantee of a box office hit. For one thing, despite its all conquering swell, the internet still does not reach everyone. Even some of those that use it may not wander into areas dedicated to film or have the time and desire to unravel marketing mysteries. Other media such as television and newspapers remain a vital tool for more instant advertising reach, rather than a slow burn.

There have also been failures that are too reliant on viral campaigns, even when those campaigns are successful. Disaster epic 2012 caused such a stir about the end of the world that NASA had to set up a special page to reassure people. But after it bombed with critics and the public, the big budget project was still a flop. Countless low budget releases think that cheap online methods will assure sufficient publicity but without a breakthrough in more traditional media, most of these languish and pass unnoticed in the cyber shadows, even when they have their merits.

The fact remains that viral marketing often only helps increase the hype for an already much anticipated film. The Dark Knight Rises will be a box office success regardless but the occasional prod from the filmmakers will cause sizzling talk to increase the takings still further. JJ Abrams and Steven Spielberg are names that will attract attention because they are accomplished storytellers, not marketing magicians.

In the case of Abrams I would hope that the motivations behind his teasing details and whiffs of mystery are noble; he wants his audience as absorbed as possible by his fictional world and genuinely surprised by its twists and turns. Abrams, Spielberg, Nolan and others know that what matters in the end, after the hype, is the film itself. Get this wrong and the publicity will be a curse rather than a blessing.

Liam Trim (follow me on Twitter)

Monday, May 16, 2011

Talkin' Trilogies - Issue #4 - The "High School Musical" Trilogy

Luke Owen charts the 'High School Musical' trilogy...

No wait! Come back!

Alright, so this may hardly be “one of the greatest trilogies of all time”, however I once again refer to my original post and my rules:

1. It has to be a trilogy

And like it or not, this is a trilogy of films.

Now, don’t think that I am reviewing this series of films to bad mouth them. Quite the contrary in fact, I actually like these films. And with this issue of Talkin’ Trilogies, I hope to show you why.

So, let us take a trip back to 2006 where the Disney Channel was getting ready to premiere a film that, unbeknownst to them, was going to take over the world.

High School Musical (Ortega, 2006)

When unknown writer Peter Barsocchini wrote the screenplay for High School Musical, I’m sure he had no idea what effect it would have on his career. The only thing he had written of note prior to High School Musical was the 1994 Wesley Snipes / Gary Busey movie Drop Zone. “It’s just one of those projects where the planets sort of lined up from day one” he told the L.A Times on August 26th 2007.

Rumour has it that High School Musical actually started life out in 1999 as the proposed sequel/reboot of Grease, tentatively titled Grease 3, which would feature the children of Danny, Sandy and other members of the original cast. The project was shelved after several re-writes in 2004 and according to the IMDB.com trivia page the basic plot remained the same when it was carried over to High School Musical. However, I can find no interviews or articles that confirm or deny these claims, so it’s all hearsay.

“I thought it would be really fun to write a Disney Channel movie that my daughter could watch” he told Written By in 2007. “Because two of the other things I was working on were going to be R rated” he continued, “and High School Musical was a totally different experience”.

The story focuses around two central characters, Captain of the basketball team Troy Bolton and Gabriella Montez, the bookish nerd who have a chance meeting on the last night of a holiday break. The pair are thrown up on to a stage and are forced to sing, where they both discover that they can not only both sing very well, they both secretly love it. As luck would have it, Gabriella has now moved to the same school as Troy which would allow their romance to bloom. The pair audition for the duet role in the schools winter musical and get the parts – but now they have to lead double lives as neither of their respective clubs will allow them to do both.

Taking influences from musicals like Grease and Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, Barsocchini weaved together an entertaining if a little basic script. The characters are very clichéd, the dialogue is stilted and the plot is incredibly standard. It has one simple message, “do what you want to do, not what society deems you to do”, which can be found in many Disney productions. However, despite these negative criticisms, the film was accepted on first draft. “It was the first time in my career, and probably the last time, that a company greenlit the first draft… they said, ‘we really like it and we’re sending it to directors” he told Written By, “and I said, ‘the first draft?!’” The first director they sent the script to was a man named Kenny Ortega, who would go on to take the job.

Ortega had a few soirees in the world of directing, but his real calling card was his work as a choreographer in the 1980s for films such as Dirty Dancing, Pretty in Pink and Ferris Bueller’s Day Off. As well as bringing Barsocchini’s script to life, Ortega also took on the role of choreographing the dance sequences for the film along with Charles “Chuckie” Kaplow. “Kenny [was a] real stickler for choreographing for the camera” he said at a Q & A session for the Choreography Media Awards in 2009, “There was one day when we we’re working on the basketball number and I had done the choreography for the basketball team, Kenny was in another room with another group. He came in and he saw what we had done and the first thing he said was, ‘where is the camera’”. Ortega could have just shot these dance numbers as flashy music video style segments, however because he cared about the project and wanted to succeed, he really put in the effort so that the film would look like a proper movie rather than a cheap made for TV effort.

Now, you could read that and say that Ortega pushed High School Musical into a film that is all style and no substance – a beautiful shell with an empty core. And at the very base of the film, it is. Despite Ortega’s efforts, the main problems with the script could not be overcome. The dialogue is hokey and the story is clichéd and basic. However where Ortega succeeds in making the film a fun experience - which was the entire point of the film. High School Musical is a fun film. The songs are catchy, the choreography is great and it looks as good as a made for TV movie can look. Having said that, there is one thing that really brings the film to life – its cast.

Ortega made the decision to cast complete of mostly unknowns with the exception of Ashley Tisdale who had some success from the role of Maddie Fitzpatrick in Disney’s The Suite Life of Zack and Cody. Either the casting process was incredibly thorough or they got very lucky as they managed to cast an incredibly charismatic bunch of actors. Most notably the afore mentioned Ashley Tisdale who plays drama bitch Sharpay Evans, Corbin Bleu as basketball jock Chad Danforth and the ever charming Zac Efron who took on the lead role.

What is interesting about Efron is that this was the role that catapulted him into the megastar he is today. However, for a film that involves a lot of singing, Efron himself barely sang a note. Because Ortega deemed his voice too low for that of a tenor and his voice was over dubbed by actor and singer Andrew Seeley who also tested for the role of Troy. This leads me to believe that Efron was not cast for his voice but for his looks and his natural charisma. A smart move as Zac Efron was, in my mind, one of the leading contributors to the success of High School Musical. Noted director Gus Van Saant wrote in Interview Magazine in 2008, “Efron radiates a sort of well-scrubbed mannishness. He’s an entertainer in the most traditional sense of the word.”

The made for TV movie premiered on the Disney Channel on January 20th 2006 to a record breaking audience of 7.7 million viewers. Since then, it has been seen globally by 225 million people. A staggering amount for a TV movie that was made for $4.2 million, which is low in the world of Disney TV, to fill a time slot.

The success of High School Musical was instant and its popularity was huge. The DVD shifted 1.2 million copies in the first 6 days and was the second Disney Channel Original Movie to be certified platinum. By August, the soundtrack had sold more than 3 million copies and was number one on the Billboard 200 chart twice. The film spawned a series of books, dolls and a ton of other merchandise as well as a worldwide concert tour, an on stage musical and an ice show.

For me, High School Musical is a mixed bag of affairs. While the songs are incredibly catchy and the film the choreography is top notch, the plot lacks any credibility and a lot of the acting is very wooden. The young cast do have a very natural sense about them, but Vanessa Hudgens in particular falls flat on screen. But this was a made for TV movie and I’m not expecting The Shawshank Redemption here.

With all of this popularity, it would have been foolish for Disney not to commission a sequel. And commission one they did.

High School Musical 2 (Ortega, 2007)

“When [High School Musical] executive producer Bill Borden and I were talking [about the sequel], I said, 'What's the greatest day of the year for a kid? Let's turn the page. Let's not do what's expected. Let's start it on the last day of school.'” Barsocchini told Richard Stayton in the September 2007 issue of Written By. “I had summer jobs” he continued, “not that kids today get summer jobs, you know, because it's harder for them. But I said that would be a fun thing, and Disney was like, 'Okay.'”

So Barsocchini was going the Are You Being Served? route by taking characters out of the comfort zone we’ve grown to know them in and putting them into a foreign environment. This tends to happen with TV to movie adaptations (see the afore mentioned Are You Being Served?, Kevin and Perry Go Large, Sex and the City 2 etc.) and this tactic is usually because the comfort zone has outstayed its welcome. However, this was not the case with High School Musical 2, but as Barsocchini said, “let’s not do what’s expected”. It was a bold move as audiences had built up a perception of what High School Musical as an entity meant. They may have just wanted to see more of the same rather than taking a 180 degree turn. Zac Efron didn’t see it that way however stating in his August 2007 interview with Rolling Stone Magazine, “In the first movie, you got to meet the characters of High School Musical. In the second movie you get to join the ride”.

High School Musical 2 takes place at the end of the Wildcats first year together as friends and they are preparing for their summer holiday. The only problem is Troy needs to get some money to be able to pay for his college tuition fees. Meanwhile, Sharpay has plans to steal Troy from Gabriella by giving him a job at the country club that her parents own. What she didn’t count on however was Troy bringing the rest of the Wildcats with him.

Bottom line, High School Musical 2 is a vast improvement on the original film. The production looks better, the acting is better and most importantly for the genre, the songs are better. The overall scale of the film feels less ‘made for TV’ like its predecessor even though this was still made for the television market. Much like with the first film, the basic plot and dialogue is carried by the excellent cast of charismatic youngsters. Corbin Bleu really steps up his game as does the rest of the cast, but its Lucas Brabeel that makes the biggest improvement from the two films by stepping out from the shadows and into the forefront. The true stars of the show once again however are Zac Efron (who actually sings this time) and Ashley Tisdale.

Whilst watching this film through again recently, I made the discovery that without Tisdale’s superb telling of Sharpay’s tale, I probably wouldn’t like this film or indeed the series as much as I do. She gives undoubtedly the best performance in the second movie and steals almost every scene she is in. Her annoying habits and tendencies are highlighted beautifully by Lucas Grabeel’s performance as her brother Ryan who is the perfect counterpart. Tisdale’s beauty and charisma really bring the character from being a clichéd bitch antagonist to easily the best character of the franchise. What makes this a bad thing however is that, as an audience member, I’m not supposed to like her. When she gets her comeuppance at the end of the film, I genuinely feel bad for her which I’m certain was the not the intended point.

Despite my overall praise for High School Musical 2, I do have one reservation against the film which is the case of inconstancy regarding the actual musical side of the film. Edgar Wright said in an interview with DVD Review regarding the fights in Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, “When the emotion is too great to convey in mere words, characters in a musical will sing out.” This works in the case of movies like Grease or Little Shop of Horrors where they use the musical number to move the story forward. However in the world of High School Musical, they don’t just sing to move the plot or build characters, they also sing in shows as part of the story. This creates a bizarre world in which Chad Danforth dances around singing with his friends only to then have a conversation with Ryan about how he hates dancing and singing. Which is then followed by a song in the film sung by Chad called ‘I Don’t Dance’ during which he does an elaborate dance number. It doesn’t make sense and is horrendously inconsistent.

With that one complaint aside, High School Musical 2 is again a very fun film. Much like the first film, it was trying not to be a cinematic masterpiece. It set out to be a fun way to spend an hour and a half and it succeeds on every single level. This is encapsulated by the final number of the film, ‘All For One’ sung by the entire cast. There is such an overwhelming sense of fun and enjoyment and the cast (including a blink and you’ll miss it cameo from Miley Cyrus) look like they are having a blast. This delight is portrayed so well that you can’t help but smile.

Premiering on August 17th 2007, High School Musical 2 brought in a 17.2 million viewers which was not only a Disney Channel record, it was also the most watched basic-cable television show at the time beating out Monday Night Football’s display of the New York Giants and the Dallas Cowboys in 2006. Over the premier weekend, the show totalled at a staggering 33.04 million viewers. The success of the sequel, and the franchise, could not be denied.

As I said earlier, I think High School Musical 2 surpasses the first film in every respect however I appear to be in the minority. HSM2 has the lowest Rotten Tomatoes score as well as the lowest IMDB.com rating. Phil Null of filmcritic.com said upon the DVDs release in 2008, “[High School Musical 2] lacks the sizzle and originality that made the first film so popular... The songs in this instalment are nowhere near the quality of those in the original, but they work well enough.”

The writing was on the wall, High School Musical was not a one trick pony, it was not a happy accident and more importantly, it was not a fluke. High School Musical was quickly becoming a billion dollar franchise. Imagine what sort of money could be made if the series took to the silver screen...

High School Musical 3: Senior Year (Ortega, 2008)

In the history of cinema, the usual course of franchise movies that overstay their welcome on the big screen is for them to move to a straight to DVD release. High School Musical is the exception to the rule however by making the transition from made-for-TV-movie to big screen adaptation with a large scale production and budget.

High School Musical 3: Senior Year is, as the title would suggest, about the graduating year for the Wildcats. With such a huge part of their lives coming to an end, it’s now up to the kids to make the decisions that will take them into adulthood. The main issue of which is whether Troy wants to follow his dream of being a pro basketball player or following his heart and study the performing arts. On top of that, the Wildcats are preparing for their final ever production at East High School simply titled, ‘Senior Year’.

Returning again to pen the script for the third instalment was Peter Barsocchini who said in an interview with movieweb.com, “the first thing when approaching High School Musical 3, knowing it was going to be a theatrical [release] – you literally have a bigger screen to work with. So conceiving musical numbers and the scale of what we did and approaching to do was expanding.” So, the big question surrounding High School Musical 3: Senior Year is whether the transition from small to silver screen was a smooth one. While HSM3 is a good film, it does often feel like an over polished TV movie. However, you cannot fault them on upping the scale of the production.

Where High School Musical 3: Senior Year falls down in my book is the plot points that have just been carried over from the first two films. Troy has to decide whether he wants to act or play ball just like he did in the first film and Gabriella has to decide whether she wants to stay in East High with Troy or “go her own way” as she did in High School Musical 2. Even if this is some people’s first view into the world of High School Musical, Barsocchini should have tried to implement newer plot threads instead of re-hashing old ones. He talked about the scale of production in the afore mentioned interview and that seems to have taken precedent over the actual plot, story and character development. Whereas the first two movies where trying to be something a little bit different from other musicals, High School Musical 3: Senior Year just feels like any other teen musical. Even worse, it just feels like another entry into the franchise and nothing special.

Not to say that High School Musical 3: Senior Year is a bad movie because it’s actually really fun. The songs are still catchy, the mood is high and the choreography is excellent. While I don’t think it’s the best one of the series, it really holds itself up compared to its predecessors. I mentioned the ending of High School Musical 2 with the big end number that highlights the essence of fun the film exudes, well High School Musical 3 also has this big number to cap off the film. This one though is actually quite poignant when you look at the lyrics:

High School Musical
Who says we have to let it go?
It's the best part we've ever known
Step into the future...but hold on to
High School Musical
Let's celebrate where we come from
The friends who've been there all along
Just like... from High School Musical

This can be seen one of two ways. One of those ways being that this song is a wonderful way to celebrate the end of the series. It is a way for the cast members to show their appreciation for the filmmakers taking them from unknowns to major players. Or you could look at it as Disney saying, “We made you and don’t you forget it!” For me, I think this a great way to end the franchise, even if it is a little self-masturbatory. It’s nice to see this cast of characters I’ve grown to love go their own separate ways and out of my life.

This is truly one of the great things about the High School Musical trilogy, which is that the franchise was written and directed by the same people and it features the same cast. It means by the third film they have all gelled together which means they will put out a better product. However, there was one cast member that nearly missed this entry...

On September 6th 2007, nude photos of Vanessa Hudgens were leaked onto the internet and shared throughout the world. Not only was Hudgens’ squeaky clean image tarnished, Disney’s almost impeccable reputation was under threat. On October 17th 2007, OK! Magazine published a story that claimed Disney were done with Hudgens and that they didn’t want her to be in the movie. The article reads, “OK! can exclusively report that Disney has made up its mind about what to do next and that the 18-year-old actress will not be asked to board the boat for the third HSM film. ‘Disney finally decided that they don’t want her back,’ an insider reveals to OK!. ‘They feel that as long as Zac Efron is in the movie, all will be fine.’” However, on the same day, Access Hollywood posted a story which confirmed that Hudgens was still in negotiations with Disney for her role and that they were not going to drop her. Hudgens’ rep said, “totally untrue. It’s an old rumour. OK! Magazine was having a slow news day”. On the 24th October 2008, Hudgens did an interview with The Daily Mirror in which she said, “I think that everything happens for a reason and I wouldn’t take back anything I’ve done. I don’t like talking about it because it was something that was meant to be private and I’d still like to keep it as private as I can.”

Despite the negative press this put on the film, it was always bound to be a success. Premiering on October 24th 2008, High School Musical 3: Senior Year beat out Saw V in box office weekend takings by drawing in $42 million in the US alone and in total has brought in over $250 million dollars. Reviews were mixed with some critics downright hating the film while others enjoyed it. Tim Robey of the Daily Telegraph said that, “[when] refitted for the big screen, it becomes an eerily plastic business, like a blown-up dolls house”. David Jenkins of Time Out said “the bottom line is, if you’ve not already booked tickets for the entire family, think twice before being caught up in the hype. At best, you’ll be disappointed; at worst, you’ll want to blow up a high school.” Mark Kemode said in his review that he heard other critics “audibly tutting” in disapproval. However, Kermode was among many top critics who actually liked the film. He went on to say in his review that, “I’m going to leap to its defence, I really enjoyed it” and to claim that it would be in his top 5 of that year. Mark Olson of the L.A Times said, “The HSM series has always been playful and high-spirited, with a refreshing emphasis on collective action and the importance of group effort over the individual, and there's nothing in High School Musical 3: Senior Year to upset the formula.”

So, with a now billion dollar franchise under the belt, it will come as a surprise to those not in the know is that this is where the High School Musical story ends.

High School Musical 4 and spin-offs

It seems very odd for a company like Disney to just pull the plug on a franchise, especially one that is this hot. In High School Musical 3: Senior Year we were introduced to a whole host of new characters that would in effect be “the next generation” of High School Musical. I’m not sure whether audiences reacted negatively to them or whether they couldn’t get a script right, but these characters were never seen or heard from again. Since the final films release, all talk of a fourth instalment as pretty much died of death and it’s looking more and more likely that we have seen the end of this franchise.

That was until this year when the straight to DVD release of Sharpay’s Fabulous Adventure, a spin off movie featuring Ashley Tisdale as Sharpay pursuing a career on Broadway. Now, I’ve not seen this movie so I can’t pass judgment on it, however being that Sharpay was the best thing from all three movies, I would be more than happy to give this a go.

Recently I wrote some reviews for the Roger Corman produced monster movies Sharktopus and Dinoshark. In those reviews, I wrote that the films “could have been a good little tongue in cheek monster movie that would do quite well among B-Movie fans. However, these titles keep getting put in the hands of incompetent filmmakers who don’t know one end of a camera from another, let alone how to make an entertaining film.” This is a key point I bring up when I am jumping to the defence of High School Musical. Ortega and his team weren’t trying to change the world; they were looking to entertain it. Much like Sharktopus and Dinoshark, the High School Musical series was a straight to DVD affair that was just intended to make its money back. However, because the filmmakers cast a group of enthusiastic actors, they brought in a writer who wanted to write a fun script and they had a director with a clue they ended up with a not only an incredibly entertaining film, but a impressively successful one too.
“We need to save our show from people who don't know the difference between a Tony Award and Tony Hawk.” – Sharpay Evans, High School Musical (Ortega, 2006)
Luke Owen