The Director’s Choice this year was the animated feature “Persepolis.” It’s essentially a biopic that follows the life of Marjane Satrapi, a young Iranian girl born into a progressive family during tumultuous times in Iran (the fall of the Shah, the reign of the Ayatolla and the Iran - Iraq war). Marjane goes off to Germany as a teenager to study abroad, but finds trouble ingratiating herself with other more carefree teens because she cannot escape the guilt of being away while her family and friends suffer back in Iran.
“Persepolis” is actually an adaptation of Satrapi’s graphic novel of the same name. Fortunately, the style of the film stays close to the aesthetic of the graphic novel. It’s very refreshing to see something that didn’t directly come from a 3-D computer animation program. The subject matter is obviously pretty heavy handed for an animated movie, and as other serio-animated movies like “Cool World” and “Heavy Metal” have shown us, these kinds of movies are hard to market. I personally like the fact that they are willing to take the risk to make a serious animated movie. And when I say they, I mean the French, and as we all know, those French people love to make “art.”
Oftentimes the pacing felt pretty slow, and I feel that has to do with the fact that American audiences usually associate animation with more plot-driven adventure tales rather than character-driven stories about relationships and historical tragedy. The most outwardly enjoyable scenes were the ones that used the animation to break reality, something that could never have been done as effectively in live action.
Writer/Directors Satrapi and Vincent Paronnaud have combined comedy and tragedy into a nice little piece of nostalgia. The only part about the writing that did not seem necessary was the fact that the entire movie was essentially a flashback. The first scene is Marjane at the end of the story, and we only go back to the present a few times, but we never learn any new information. The movie ends with her at the present, but does not go on from there. So what’s the point of doing this, to give the narration a line of reasoning? I feel that these pointless transitions back into the “present” only break the rhythm that the other scenes have going for them.
So, don’t go see “Persepolis” expecting an animated movie. Go to the movie and expect a great little character-driven biopic that happens to use animation to a good effect.
By Evan Watkins
Staff Writer, District
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
REVIEW -- Control
The only screening I couldn’t miss at this year’s SCAD Film Festival was Anton Corbijn’s “Control.” Since Chuck Klosterman’s “Killing Yourself to Live,” my intrigue regarding rock and roll suicide has grown into a minor obsession. Being a Joy Division fan also played an obvious role in my viewing desire. My expectations were exceeded – “Control” is a powerful and enlightening biopic of the Ian Curtis story I had only heard about in record store conversations of the past.
“Control” tells the dark story of Joy Division vocalist and songwriter Ian Curtis. Much of the film draws from Curtis’ widow‘s memoir, “Touching from a Distance.” Curtis faced problems unlike most glorified rock star suicide scenarios – understandable and ordinary situations of the rotten side of life. Unavoidable health issues, a long list of side effects, and hard-to-escape marital issues plagued his existence and inspired his music. Ian Curtis’ life isn’t something to criticize, and as such, neither is the premise of the film. The story itself is rather sad and unrewarding in the end (as suicide usually is); however, Corbijn’s recreation is accurate, classy and moving.
Sam Riley portrays Curtis with frightening accuracy. He speaks, sings, seizes and dances (read: seizes) as if Curtis were resurrected within his body. The film accurately represents the story visually and literally as a result of the film being based on Deborah Curtis’ rock wife memoir. This all goes without mentioning that each rendition of a Joy Division concert is a true cover by the band’s cast film members. The film nails down the varying, floating and rumor-ridden renditions of Ian Curtis’ life, bouncing around living rooms and music shops in two black and white hours.
Classy filmmaking is not understandably hard to come by. Tasteful typography, screenwriting trimmed of excess and a careful eye behind the camera is intrinsic to a worthwhile film, especially a biopic of a serious subject. Corbijn’s background as Joy Division’s main photographer and creator of the prolific and dramatic images related to the sound of their music lends “Control” stylistic success. The film’s simplicity of production complements the complex and depressing life of Ian Curtis.
Although the subject matter of “Control” is melancholy, the film is both an enjoyable and thought-provoking experience that knocks the cliché of the downward-spiraling rock star lifestyle. Riley portrays Curtis with a truth and innocence not characteristic of self-destructive pop musicians, resulting in a character the audience can relate to unexpectedly. Curtis was overwrought with a pain and suffering we can see ourselves in. Riley brings that pain to the screen with an honest attempt at exhibiting Curtis’ loss of “control,” and succeeds.
“Control” is best music-related biopic I’ve seen. It stylistically matches the subject matter. The acting is spot-on. The production’s tone is suitable for Ian Curtis’ life story. And it includes the first contextually correct use of Joy Division’s “Love Will Tear Us Apart” that I’ve seen in a film. “Control” moves an audience of post-punk fans as well as any other film-watcher demographic alike – it’s the story of someone whose talent exceeded their ability to control it.
By Brian Smith
Arts & Entertainment Editor, District
“Control” tells the dark story of Joy Division vocalist and songwriter Ian Curtis. Much of the film draws from Curtis’ widow‘s memoir, “Touching from a Distance.” Curtis faced problems unlike most glorified rock star suicide scenarios – understandable and ordinary situations of the rotten side of life. Unavoidable health issues, a long list of side effects, and hard-to-escape marital issues plagued his existence and inspired his music. Ian Curtis’ life isn’t something to criticize, and as such, neither is the premise of the film. The story itself is rather sad and unrewarding in the end (as suicide usually is); however, Corbijn’s recreation is accurate, classy and moving.
Sam Riley portrays Curtis with frightening accuracy. He speaks, sings, seizes and dances (read: seizes) as if Curtis were resurrected within his body. The film accurately represents the story visually and literally as a result of the film being based on Deborah Curtis’ rock wife memoir. This all goes without mentioning that each rendition of a Joy Division concert is a true cover by the band’s cast film members. The film nails down the varying, floating and rumor-ridden renditions of Ian Curtis’ life, bouncing around living rooms and music shops in two black and white hours.
Classy filmmaking is not understandably hard to come by. Tasteful typography, screenwriting trimmed of excess and a careful eye behind the camera is intrinsic to a worthwhile film, especially a biopic of a serious subject. Corbijn’s background as Joy Division’s main photographer and creator of the prolific and dramatic images related to the sound of their music lends “Control” stylistic success. The film’s simplicity of production complements the complex and depressing life of Ian Curtis.
Although the subject matter of “Control” is melancholy, the film is both an enjoyable and thought-provoking experience that knocks the cliché of the downward-spiraling rock star lifestyle. Riley portrays Curtis with a truth and innocence not characteristic of self-destructive pop musicians, resulting in a character the audience can relate to unexpectedly. Curtis was overwrought with a pain and suffering we can see ourselves in. Riley brings that pain to the screen with an honest attempt at exhibiting Curtis’ loss of “control,” and succeeds.
“Control” is best music-related biopic I’ve seen. It stylistically matches the subject matter. The acting is spot-on. The production’s tone is suitable for Ian Curtis’ life story. And it includes the first contextually correct use of Joy Division’s “Love Will Tear Us Apart” that I’ve seen in a film. “Control” moves an audience of post-punk fans as well as any other film-watcher demographic alike – it’s the story of someone whose talent exceeded their ability to control it.
By Brian Smith
Arts & Entertainment Editor, District
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Coffee Talk Tuesday Morning by Danielle Koch
Students and professors met in the lobby of Marshall House for coffee and donuts and to talk with John Sayles and Maggie Renzi about being independent filmmakers.
John Sayles Interview
This video will be coming at a later date as it is too long. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Monday, October 29, 2007
REVIEW -- Grace is Gone
“Grace is Gone” is a charming little film that deals with the loss of a loved one and the inability to cope with it. John Cusack plays Stanly Phillips, a father of two, whose solider-wife is killed in the Iraq war. Out of an inability to tell his daughters about their mother’s death, Stanly decides to take them on a road trip to Enchanted Island (a thinly veiled version of Disney world), during which he painfully prolongs breaking the bad news.
Not only does writer/director James Strouse’s story hit on an emotional and topically prevalent level, but also his control of the acting is astounding. John Cusack is not playing his typical “John Cusack” character, which is the one that we know and love from “High Fidelity”, and “Grosse Point Blank.” In this film, he easily slides into the modern archetype of middle-aged dad. It’s not hard to believe that he’s a father from Minnesota, sporting the oversized glasses and windbreaker. In short, Cusack isn’t afraid to look ugly, and the movie benefits from that.
Despite the fact that neither looks like they could be related, two other great performances come out of the daughters, played by Gracie Bednarcz and Shelan O’Keffe. Strouse is able to create chemistry between father and daughters that truly allows their relationships to play out realistically on film. The youthful energy of Bendnarcz plays well against Cusack, who remains in an almost constant state of thoughtful paralysis, as he is unable to reveal the news of the death.
Technically, “Grace is Gone” was shot very appropriately. The camera was mostly static and invisible in its technique, which I feel benefits the film because so much of it hinges on focusing on the characters that we don’t need some radical crane move to emphasize the scene. In this movie, the camera is a visual reflection of the emotions of the characters. Cusack’s character is in a transformation that has built out of stasis. By not telling his daughters about their mothers’ deaths, he has in fact become closer and more perceptive to them.
The only part of the film that works against it is the fact that it is has the “independent stench” on it. Now, don’t get me wrong, I love movies that are, truly independent, but I feel that some have artificially put on this “independent” feel so that they have more clout with the artistic crowd. It’s not a tangible element within the film; it’s just an overall sense that the filmmaker is attempting to pander to the Wes Ander son/David O. Russell audience instead of just telling the story organically and appropriately for the subject matter (which I feel is the true mark of an independent film maker).
All in all, “Grace is Gone” is an enjoyable cinematic experience. It is apparent that writer/director Strouse, and actor/producer Cusack are not afraid to take the risk of delving into a serious and somewhat touchy subject that uses modern issues as it’s jumping off point. As long as filmmakers are willing to take those risks, they will always warrant appreciation.
By Evan Watkins
Program Director, Network
Not only does writer/director James Strouse’s story hit on an emotional and topically prevalent level, but also his control of the acting is astounding. John Cusack is not playing his typical “John Cusack” character, which is the one that we know and love from “High Fidelity”, and “Grosse Point Blank.” In this film, he easily slides into the modern archetype of middle-aged dad. It’s not hard to believe that he’s a father from Minnesota, sporting the oversized glasses and windbreaker. In short, Cusack isn’t afraid to look ugly, and the movie benefits from that.
Despite the fact that neither looks like they could be related, two other great performances come out of the daughters, played by Gracie Bednarcz and Shelan O’Keffe. Strouse is able to create chemistry between father and daughters that truly allows their relationships to play out realistically on film. The youthful energy of Bendnarcz plays well against Cusack, who remains in an almost constant state of thoughtful paralysis, as he is unable to reveal the news of the death.
Technically, “Grace is Gone” was shot very appropriately. The camera was mostly static and invisible in its technique, which I feel benefits the film because so much of it hinges on focusing on the characters that we don’t need some radical crane move to emphasize the scene. In this movie, the camera is a visual reflection of the emotions of the characters. Cusack’s character is in a transformation that has built out of stasis. By not telling his daughters about their mothers’ deaths, he has in fact become closer and more perceptive to them.
The only part of the film that works against it is the fact that it is has the “independent stench” on it. Now, don’t get me wrong, I love movies that are, truly independent, but I feel that some have artificially put on this “independent” feel so that they have more clout with the artistic crowd. It’s not a tangible element within the film; it’s just an overall sense that the filmmaker is attempting to pander to the Wes Ander son/David O. Russell audience instead of just telling the story organically and appropriately for the subject matter (which I feel is the true mark of an independent film maker).
All in all, “Grace is Gone” is an enjoyable cinematic experience. It is apparent that writer/director Strouse, and actor/producer Cusack are not afraid to take the risk of delving into a serious and somewhat touchy subject that uses modern issues as it’s jumping off point. As long as filmmakers are willing to take those risks, they will always warrant appreciation.
By Evan Watkins
Program Director, Network
REVIEW -- Honeydripper
2007 Lifetime Achievement Award winner John Sayles introduced his newest film “Honeydripper” on Oct. 30. Set in the small town of Harmony, Ala, in the 1950s, “Honeydripper” is the story of Tyrone Purvis’ (Danny Glover) struggle to keep his nightclub alive. In an effort not to be taken under, he arranges for a recognized singer/guitar player to perform at the lounge. One successful night with this star will save Purvis from his debts. But when his arrangements fall through, he takes drastic action to provide a substitute. After arranging a deal with the sheriff for one of the inmates, Purvis can only hope this vagrant he’s pulled from the Judge’s cotton fields will sing well enough to save his club. The Honeydripper needs it bad.
The film has an all-star cast including Danny Glover, Lisa Gay Hamilton, Yaya DaCosta, Charles S. Dutton, Stacy Keach, Mary Steenburgen, Vondie Curtis Hall, R&B legend Mable John and singer-songwriter Keb’ Mo. The film also introduces Gary Clark, Jr.
Sayles wrote, produced and directed the film while Maggie Renzi handled production. Overall, the film adequately captures the Deep South, 1950s.Sayles and Renzi meticulously selected the locations. The settings chosen adequately portray what life was like at this time. The Honeydripper lounge itself is a clapboard shack, barely able to support the music with its weak electricity hookup and bleak insides.
But the acting, particularly that of Glover, Hamilton, Clark and DaCosta, enlivens the film. The cast skillfully vivificates the script, depicting the many emotions and struggles of one family through poverty, death, happiness and other times. Mary Steenburgen’s scene is particularly heartening on many levels. Not only does her placement as Mrs. Purvis’ boss signify the tension and relations of those times, but White female character Steenburgen. While Sheriff Pugh (Keach) complicates the plot with his brown nosing and insistent demands, the film centers on the soulful music and independence of this small black family.
“Honeydripper” carries themes of perseverance, hope and determination. Purvis, unable to accept the possibility of losing the Honeydripper, makes decisions both good and bad to keep the opportunities he has. “Honeydripper” is about the struggle to maintain the American Dream.
Despite its accuracies of the South and of the era, there are moments where the plot becomes slow and the dialogue is awkward. While Sayles is extremely talented and the information for the film is well researched, this is a movie about a southern black family written by a white man from the west coast. Perhaps the lack of suspense can be attributed to a conflict of heritage and culture, but whatever the reason, the film comes just short of immersing the viewer. Fortunately, the all-star cast does a great job of bringing to life these characters and this time period.
The music is wonderful lively, full of guitar, piano and horns, bluesy and jumping. Sayles and Renzi have a soundtrack deal with Rhino Records and it’s a good thing the lyrics will get stuck in your head for days.
By Elizabeth Rushing
Staff Writer, District
The film has an all-star cast including Danny Glover, Lisa Gay Hamilton, Yaya DaCosta, Charles S. Dutton, Stacy Keach, Mary Steenburgen, Vondie Curtis Hall, R&B legend Mable John and singer-songwriter Keb’ Mo. The film also introduces Gary Clark, Jr.
Sayles wrote, produced and directed the film while Maggie Renzi handled production. Overall, the film adequately captures the Deep South, 1950s.Sayles and Renzi meticulously selected the locations. The settings chosen adequately portray what life was like at this time. The Honeydripper lounge itself is a clapboard shack, barely able to support the music with its weak electricity hookup and bleak insides.
But the acting, particularly that of Glover, Hamilton, Clark and DaCosta, enlivens the film. The cast skillfully vivificates the script, depicting the many emotions and struggles of one family through poverty, death, happiness and other times. Mary Steenburgen’s scene is particularly heartening on many levels. Not only does her placement as Mrs. Purvis’ boss signify the tension and relations of those times, but White female character Steenburgen. While Sheriff Pugh (Keach) complicates the plot with his brown nosing and insistent demands, the film centers on the soulful music and independence of this small black family.
“Honeydripper” carries themes of perseverance, hope and determination. Purvis, unable to accept the possibility of losing the Honeydripper, makes decisions both good and bad to keep the opportunities he has. “Honeydripper” is about the struggle to maintain the American Dream.
Despite its accuracies of the South and of the era, there are moments where the plot becomes slow and the dialogue is awkward. While Sayles is extremely talented and the information for the film is well researched, this is a movie about a southern black family written by a white man from the west coast. Perhaps the lack of suspense can be attributed to a conflict of heritage and culture, but whatever the reason, the film comes just short of immersing the viewer. Fortunately, the all-star cast does a great job of bringing to life these characters and this time period.
The music is wonderful lively, full of guitar, piano and horns, bluesy and jumping. Sayles and Renzi have a soundtrack deal with Rhino Records and it’s a good thing the lyrics will get stuck in your head for days.
By Elizabeth Rushing
Staff Writer, District
PODCAST REVIEW: August Rush
We saw August Rush and it was... not so good. Listen to what Angel Lamke and Matt Terrell from SCAD Student Media have to say about this.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Michael Douglas Interview in Print
On October 27, the Savannah College of Art and Design and the Savannah Film Festival presented Academy Award winning actor and producer, Michael Douglas, with a Lifetime Achievement in Acting award. Douglas has starred in films such as “Romancing the Stone,” “Wall Street,” “Traffic” and “Basic Instinct.”
Receiving the Lifetime Achievement Award left Douglas with mixed emotions.
“[The award makes me feel] old. You always think when you get these awards maybe they talked to my doctor and they know something I don’t. But it’s a lovely honor,” said Douglas.
Douglas also said the real thrill in being given the award is that it gave him the opportunity to visit Savannah for the first time. Douglas said that he was very happy to explore Savannah with his wife, Catherine Zeta-Jones, and his children, Dylan and Carys. Douglas and his family toured Fort Pulaski, visited with President Paula S. Wallace and were able to see many SCAD buildings including Bobbie’s Diner.
“It’s sort of a mindblower when you realize [SCAD] started in ’79. All I do is drive around town and ‘Oh, that’s a SCAD building and that’s a SCAD building.’ Each of them preserved and looking more cherried out than the next. It’s pretty impressive,” said Douglas.
Douglas began his career in the early 1970s acting on the television show, “The Streets of San Francisco.” However, his career didn’t really get jumpstarted until he started producing films, a career which he said he “lucked into.” He ended up being very lucky when the first film he produced, “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,” won all five of the major Academy Award categories including a Best Picture Oscar for Douglas.
For him, the key to producing quality work is the source material. Douglas first read “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” in college. Later, he discovered that his father, Kirk Douglas, owned the rights to the book. He then bought the rights from his father and spent nearly six years developing the book into a film.
“If you have a piece of material that’s good, it attracts the elements, it will attract the financing. The big trouble with movies today is how much it costs to market them, the publicity. But if you find a piece of material that you really like and you know how to make it into a three-act structure, then you’ll attract the people to you.”
Douglas said that producing has helped him in many ways in regards to his acting.
“Producing is like seeing the whole picture. You have to understand what the movie is going to be in three acts. Acting is like tunnel vision. They kind of pay you to be selfish. As an actor, having a producing background makes me see the whole movie. So I’m pretty good at knowing what my responsibility is, if I have to pick up the pace or create threat or create humor,” said Douglas.
Douglas has also won an Academy Award for Best Actor for the film, “Wall Street.” Currently, a script is in development for a sequel to that film titled, “Money Never Sleeps.” Douglas is attached to star in the film but he is not producing it.
“They’re working on a draft. And I just threw my two cents in. I’m not a producer. So we’ll just see when the script comes in and how good of shape it’s in, if we can do it or not,” said Douglas.
Thankfully, it seems the Lifetime Achievement Award is motivating him to continue to add to his impressive body of work. During his acceptance speech at the awards ceremony Douglas spoke of the other benefit of the award — his children now know what he does.
“I don't have a movie that they can see. So up until tonight, they knew mommy is an actress and daddy makes pancakes. So thank you. Now they know what their father does,” said Douglas.
by Danielle Koch
News Editor, District
Receiving the Lifetime Achievement Award left Douglas with mixed emotions.
“[The award makes me feel] old. You always think when you get these awards maybe they talked to my doctor and they know something I don’t. But it’s a lovely honor,” said Douglas.
Douglas also said the real thrill in being given the award is that it gave him the opportunity to visit Savannah for the first time. Douglas said that he was very happy to explore Savannah with his wife, Catherine Zeta-Jones, and his children, Dylan and Carys. Douglas and his family toured Fort Pulaski, visited with President Paula S. Wallace and were able to see many SCAD buildings including Bobbie’s Diner.
“It’s sort of a mindblower when you realize [SCAD] started in ’79. All I do is drive around town and ‘Oh, that’s a SCAD building and that’s a SCAD building.’ Each of them preserved and looking more cherried out than the next. It’s pretty impressive,” said Douglas.
Douglas began his career in the early 1970s acting on the television show, “The Streets of San Francisco.” However, his career didn’t really get jumpstarted until he started producing films, a career which he said he “lucked into.” He ended up being very lucky when the first film he produced, “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,” won all five of the major Academy Award categories including a Best Picture Oscar for Douglas.
For him, the key to producing quality work is the source material. Douglas first read “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” in college. Later, he discovered that his father, Kirk Douglas, owned the rights to the book. He then bought the rights from his father and spent nearly six years developing the book into a film.
“If you have a piece of material that’s good, it attracts the elements, it will attract the financing. The big trouble with movies today is how much it costs to market them, the publicity. But if you find a piece of material that you really like and you know how to make it into a three-act structure, then you’ll attract the people to you.”
Douglas said that producing has helped him in many ways in regards to his acting.
“Producing is like seeing the whole picture. You have to understand what the movie is going to be in three acts. Acting is like tunnel vision. They kind of pay you to be selfish. As an actor, having a producing background makes me see the whole movie. So I’m pretty good at knowing what my responsibility is, if I have to pick up the pace or create threat or create humor,” said Douglas.
Douglas has also won an Academy Award for Best Actor for the film, “Wall Street.” Currently, a script is in development for a sequel to that film titled, “Money Never Sleeps.” Douglas is attached to star in the film but he is not producing it.
“They’re working on a draft. And I just threw my two cents in. I’m not a producer. So we’ll just see when the script comes in and how good of shape it’s in, if we can do it or not,” said Douglas.
Thankfully, it seems the Lifetime Achievement Award is motivating him to continue to add to his impressive body of work. During his acceptance speech at the awards ceremony Douglas spoke of the other benefit of the award — his children now know what he does.
“I don't have a movie that they can see. So up until tonight, they knew mommy is an actress and daddy makes pancakes. So thank you. Now they know what their father does,” said Douglas.
by Danielle Koch
News Editor, District
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)