MindsEye

MindsEye.MAY 2014

ISSUE 1 £3.99

Stoker

Drive

Gravity

Blue Valentine

Only God Forgives

The Hobbit

Moon

04

05111519212327

content.

STOKERdo not disturb the family.

“An eerie slice of

cinematography”

A disturbing journey of violence and obses-sion, ‘Stoker’ is the chilling tale of a teen-ager’s infatuation that

will prove to be fatal.When a teenager living in an idyllic town suffers the tragic loss of her father, an unex-pected visit from her Uncle Char-lie whom she has never met, irrevocably changes her path.India Stoker (Mia Wasikowska) could not have foreseen the events that would unravel after the death of her father and best friend, Richard (Dermot Mulroney). Peculiar India feels isolated and bored in the fairy tale, family estate she now shares only with her emotionally distant mother, Evie (Nicole Kidman).

When Uncle Charlie (Matthew Goode) moves in, India suspects that this enig-matic and alluring man has ulterior mo-tives. Initially she is repulsed, but India soon finds herself becoming more and

more infatuated with him. Written by Wentworth Miller (Prison Break, Underworld) and di-rected by Park Chan-wook (Oldboy, Lady Vengeance), ‘Stoker’ is an ambiguous, slow burning mys-

tery. Everything appears ordinary upon first glance, but we soon find that there is something sinister and dark boiling be-neath the surface. Incredibly timeless and stylized with noir-esque tones, the idyllic setting of ‘Stoker’ begins to feel like a prison with India and Evie trapped in their own small universe by the intriguing Uncle Charlie. Almost stuck in the wrong time zone, the

07

hyper stylized location and costume designs conjure a fairy tale feeling, but will there be a happy ending?The film does not leave anything open; we have to discover the answer for ourselves and as soon as we think we have it figured out – the rug is pulled right from under our feet. This is something very familiar in all of Park’s films, he likes to keep the audience guessing and all of the elements we love are in this English-speak-ing debut.‘Stoker’ is an eerie slice of cinematography by Chung-hoon Chung (Old-boy, Lady Vengeance), with all of the elements working together to create intrigue and ten-sion throughout. The score by Clint Mansell (Moon, Requiem for a Dream), is one body with the visuals, it is elegant and classic com-bined with the strength and energy of modern day pop music. Using the music, cinematog-raphy and special effects, audience curiosity is soaring from the very first sequence that touches upon future events, without being too obvious. Various parts of ‘Stoker’ involve a number of different things happening to different char-acters all at the same time and the way these scenes were edited together turn the film into

“Gothic fairy tale.”

08

a masterpiece instead of a chaotic mess. Seam-less transitions between an awkward family din-ner and a brutal murder with its raw and moving aftermath somehow fit together to create one terrifying moment. You will not find a single Hollywood scare tac-tic in this film. ‘Stoker’ adopts a method of fear that is all too lifelike; the loss of innocence that turns deadly and the complete transformation of somebody’s mind. One of the main themes of ‘Stoker’ is India’s sexual devel-opment as she transforms from a teenager to a woman. The portrayal of this transformation through playing the piano or the changing of shoes, is incredibly refined and symbolic. Although some of these scenes become somewhat uncomfortable once you realise what is happening, they are cru-cial to the narrative. Before any of the chilling events have unravelled, you’ll notice scenes that include references – or literal actions – to the cracking of eggs; this could suggest that India is about to come out of her shell, with the help of Uncle Charlie. These scenes of obscure symbol-ism turn ‘Stoker’ into a work of art. ‘Stoker’ is another incredible film from the di-rector of ‘Oldboy’ and I did not expect anything less. On the surface ‘Stoker’ is a coming of age gothic fairy tale, but dig a little deeper and you will find a chilling representation of sexual re-

pression.

“A disturbing journey of obsession.”

09

10Words by Lottie Fox.

DriveBuckle up because this neon-noir crime thriller

will give you whiplash. Just when you think you are comfortable, Nicolas Winding Refn’s (Only God Forgives, Valhalla Rising) ‘Drive’ takes an unexpected, sharp and violent turn.

When part-time Hollywood stunt driver, mechanic and moonlight getaway driver grows attached to his neighbour and her son, he could never have known that this would be the beginning of a brutal turn of events.The mechanic referred to only as Driver (Ryan Gosling), is almost emotionless. Gosling creates a character who is focused and methodical with a cool and calm demeanour. It is Driver’s romantic connection with his neighbour, Irene (Carey Mulligan) and a growing bond with her son, Benicio that leads him to a job that would prove to be fatal. He finds himself in deep trouble with the East-Coast Italian mob, but this would only be the beginning.

12

13

The powerfully atmospheric cinematography, mostly nocturnal and of LA’s gritty corners is the work of Newton Thomas Sigel (The Usual Suspects, X-Men). The obscured, hard cut lighting was extremely effective in portraying the characters. Before we get to know Driver, most of the scenes show Gosling’s face in the dark. We only see his face fully lit in the second half of the movie when we have an understanding of his character. The story of Drive is nothing original, but by using mesmerizing mise-en-scene, Refn has reinvented the narrative that throws the audience into a violent, neon fairy tale. Refn has an excellent awareness on how to display violence in his films. His use of violent content is relevant to the narrative and building of the characters, unlike most other films, it has a purpose. Drive jumps from moody to graphically violent in the blink of an eye, up until that point there is not a drop of blood and as far as we are aware, Driver is a romantic introvert. There is something mysterious about Gosling’s character from the very beginning and Refn slowly knocks down Driver’s walls, and reveals who he really is; a caged monster.

“This neon-noir

crime thriller will give you whiplash.”

The films electronic-pop score, mostly composed by Cliff Martinez (Only God Forgives, Contagion), is unforgettable and gives a retro eighties feel to the movie. It is a huge part of the film’s atmosphere and it makes you want to drive around the neon lit, dirty corners of Los Angeles. Refn’s stamp is all over Drive, from the mood to the music. His mixture of violent chaos and drawn-out moments of silence puts you on the edge of your seat throughout. Refn’s films do not hit reality, but rather a distorted reality in which you can connect and relate to the characters but also bask in the pleasure of its ludicrousness. ‘Drive’ is an instant cult classic, and is a film you will want to watch over and over again.

Quite possibly one of the most unexpect-ed success stories of the year, both criti-cally and commercially, this sci-fi drama thriller from acclaimed director Alfonso Cuaron features Sandra Bullock as Ryan

Stone, a rookie Mission Specialist assigned to a routine spacewalk servicing the Hubble Space Telescope, along with veteran astronaut Matt Kowalski (George Clooney) on his final expedition before retirement. Disaster strikes during the mission, resulting in Stone and Kowalski be-coming separated, meaning a nervous Stone must singu-larly do all that she can to evade danger. Since its opening, the movie has been receiving an im-mense amount of enthusiastic reviews from critics and audiences alike, and for good reason. What Cuaron has done has presented us with one of the most astonishing motion pictures in years. Commencing with a continuous establishing shot lasting for 14 minutes, this film immedi-ately draws you into everything including the visuals, char-acters and narrative with an atmosphere that’s absorbing from beginning to end. Though the story is admittedly sim-plistic, it’s this atmosphere that keeps you engrossed and compelled through-out. Going against the now seemingly traditional 2 hour minimum running time for most contemporary movies, Alfonso Cuaron masterfully directs this film at a perfectly paced 91 minutes. No se-quence ever lasts too long, the story never once drags or becomes slow paced, and there is never a dull moment in sight. Sandra Bullock’s acting here is terrific, showcasing an outstanding balance of emotions from fear and inner weakness to strength and inner courage. It all amounts to a fantastic performance that’s sure to land the actress some accolades, possibly including a second Oscar. While George Clooney’s appearance is considerably more lim-ited, he still provides commendable support alongside Bullock.

“An incredible cinematic experience”

g r a v i t y15

g r a v i t y

The highest point of all the film’s stand-out qualities easily goes to its cinematography, visual effects and technical accomplishments, all of which are nothing short of downright stunning. I’ve already mentioned the opening sequence that plays out in one con-tinuous 14-minute long shot, though every frame throughout is a gorgeous sight to view, from the external shots in space to every sequence featuring Bullock inside the Inter-national Space Station. The visual and technical achievements exhibited here are only further en-hanced by some of the greatest 3D I’ve ever had the pleasure to watch. The depth and dimen-sionality, especially inside the ISS, is consistently incredible, yet it never holds back from adding a plentiful load of move-towards-and-out-the-screen effects too, including nuts and bolts flying loose and outstretched arms reaching for them. These rightful-ly move in just far enough to always get noticed, yet remain subtle enough so that they never once feel gimmicky. One especially noteworthy effect is that of a scene where an emotionally defeated Bullock removes her helmet and starts to cry, releasing a

“Absorbing from

beginning to end”

17

tear that slowly floats from her eye right towards the screen. Although momen-tary, it’s a simply unbelievable scene that surely breaks new ground for filmmak-ing, particularly with 3D technology. Four years after it took the world and film industry by storm with its own revolutionary and in-fluential achievements, “Avatar” is now no longer the go-to movie for 3D demonstration. As far as I’m concerned, this is. I don’t know what else to add without giving away too much, or repeating what countless other reports have al-ready stated. With its tense and gripping

story, excellent performances from the cast, and its numerous visual and tech-nical accomplishments, “Gravity” is a

tremendous film on so many levels. Easily the best film I’ve seen this year, and an incred-ible cinematic experience that demands to be witnessed in 3D on the big screen. Prepare to be amazed.

“Bullock’s acting is terrific”

18Words by Chris Wing.

On paper Blue Valentine sounds like a drag; the heart breaking portrayal of a young couple’s marriage disintegrating and the tale of how it got there, but ac-tually it is a monument of

real life, love and pain. Michelle Wil-liams plays Cindy; a wife, mother and nurse. She sits alone in a cold, grey ho-tel room while her husband Dean (Ryan Gosling); a heavy-drinker who is com-fortable with his lack of ambition, bangs on the door, trying to get in to her. The camera remains frozen, but you’ll find yourself moving in on Cindy’s devastat-ingly pain ridden face; she is a woman broken down and defeated by a claustrophobic mar-riage. She doesn’t know how she got there or how she is going to escape. This is communicated without Williams saying a word, which is not only a reflection of her in-credible talent but also the ability of writer and director, Derek Cianfrance, who debuted with this film in 2010. It wasn’t always this way for Dean and Cindy, the film shows the happier times for the couple by cross-cut-ting between time periods. We soon see Dean’s flash-

back to the moment he first met Cindy – at a nursing home, where she was visiting her grandmother and he was working for a moving company. You may not notice straight away when watching the film, but Cianfrance

uses subtle visual hints to switch between the auspicious past and the bleak pres-ent. The flashbacks are filmed on warm 16 millimetre film and the present on icy digital video. Gosling and Williams construct such in-timate and recognizable characters, the audience really cares about them and whether there destructive marriage is salvageable. Blue Valentine plays out the most harrowing moments in a crumbling

relationship; it has the sting and misery of real life and the effect is powerful. The film never falls into melodra-ma, which makes it the most authentic and heart wrench-ing film I have ever watched.‘Blue Valentine’ is committed to life’s most wistful mo-ments, but it is such a breath taking and vivid experience that you will find yourself thinking about it for days.

“The sting and

misery of real life.”

BLUE VALENTINE

19

Uncomfortable, unusual and underrated; Only God Forgives is the latest masterpiece from the critically acclaimed Nicolas Wind-ing Refn (Bronson, Valhalla Rising, Drive). Set in the criminal underworld of Bang-

kok, Only God Forgives centres on drug-smuggler, Julian (Ryan Gos-ling). Julian’s already complicated life gets even more difficult when his brother is murdered, which results in his mother coercing him to find and kill the perpetrators. Expect another incredible perfor-mance from the award winning Ryan Gosling (Drive, The Notebook, and The Place beyond the Pines), who was dubbed “the fucking best!” by Refn. Filled to the brim with jaw dropping violence, heaps of tension and awkwardly long shots, Only God Forgives is much like Refn’s previous work. If you are one of many who are not familiar with Refn’s work, he makes con-templative movies with limited narrative and a minimalist screenplay. He challenges the audience to get into the psyche of the character, with the long and silent paus-

es allowing you time to make your own decision of the character.Erotic reds and luminous neon lights fill the screen, con-trasting with the eerie corners of night-time Bangkok. Refn teams up for the second time with cinematographer

Larry Smith (Bronson and Eyes Wide Shut), who does an incredible job of capturing Bangkok and representing the lead characters through one-of-a-kind photography. Only God Forgives is shot in some atypical locations, like a sleazy bar in Chinatown. This gives the film an incredibly authentic feel as opposed to a sparkly studio set. A haunting and alluring score, creat-ed by music composer Cliff Martinez (Drive and Contagion) fills the room

and is uncannily similar to his score in Drive.Refn said “Art is an act of violence” so do not hope for a tranquil film, the images are surprising, disturbing and mesmerizing.

“Erotic reds and luminous neon lights.”

ONLYgodFORGIVES


The Hobbit

The HobbitThe Desolation of Smaug

picking up immediately where “An Unexpected Journey” left off, the second part of Peter Jackson's trilogy sees Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman), Gandalf the Grey (Ian

McKellen) and the merry band of dwarfs, led by Thorin Oakenshield (Rich-ard Armitage) continue on their quest to take back the land of Erebor. Their journey will take them through Mirkwood, Esga-roth, and Dale, where they will comes across the likes of giant spiders, bow-wielding elves Le-golas (Orlando Bloom reprising his role), and Tauriel (Evange-line Lilly), and eventually, the Lonely Mountain, where they will encounter the fearsome drag-on, Smaug. Arriving almost a year after the first part, which was met with a very split reaction from critics and audiences, this continuation is one that I found neither superior or inferior to its prede-cessor as a whole, but just about equal to it. It has many of the same qualities as the first, and some additional ones thrown in too, but it also has a number of the same flaws. In contrast to the light-hearted approach to Tolkien's materi-al in “An Unexpected Journey”, “The Desola-tion of Smaug” adapts the next part of the story with a darker tone, almost feeling like it's trying

to recapture the atmosphere that “The Lord of the Rings” brought. This shift in direction does bring some advantages with it, and in some of the film's more action and excitement-oriented sequences, manages to implement this style without costing the movie its sense of adven-

turous fun. Unfortunately, it's only this way in limited doses, at least for the first two thirds. Though vastly more consistent in tone than its predecessor, the pacing, though also an improvement, is still far too pedestrian at times, and once again, a busy narrative featuring several overly-strained sequences remains a problem. As countless reviews and publica-

tions have stated since the first film's release, adapting J.R.R. Tolkien's 300-page children's novel into a trilogy with all three instalments likely to clock in at well over two and a half hours each wasn't really a smart idea to be-gin with. A plethora of additional substance is required, but this doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing so long as what's being add-ed is worthwhile and both compliments and enhances the feature, which unfortunately the film doesn't often do to a great extent. Occasionally it shines, but a lot of the added material feels average or decent at best, and generally fails to contribute much in the way of

“The atmosphere

is intense”

24

importance to the expanded narrative. Orlando Bloom's return to reprise his role as Legolas is a welcome one, as is the addition of Evangeline Lilly as Tauriel. Their con-tributions are enjoyable, but mostly lack memorability and significance, ensuring that you could easily re-write the script without them (which I suppose is a given seeing as neither appear in the book). Also, this may be a “maybe it's just me” case, but I have some serious gripes about the sound mixing. Far too much emphasis on the music and effects made much of the dialogue incredibly difficult to decipher, even completely unintelligible at times. I'm in-clined to believe that this may have been a fault with my cinema at the time, and that possibly some of the speak-

ers in the screen were faulty or not optimized for the film. But having been to the same cinema to see “Frozen” the week earlier and experiencing no problems there, I'm not

so sure. I can't decide whether it was a technical fault or whether a serious flub in editing on the audio front has been made. Now after everything I've written out it may seem like I really despised this film, but is it really such a major disappoint-ment? Well I was beginning to think

so until the last third, during which Bilbo comes face to face with Smaug. And for all the flaws present in the first two acts, the film immensely redeems itself throughout a simply marvellous final act. The atmosphere is intense, the action is gripping, and with scenes inside the Lonely

“Adventurous fun.”

25

Mountain, the visual spectacle is just breathtaking. It's here that we see Smaug in all his glory, and the creature just looks stunning. The attention to detail on his body is amazingly well realised, the way he moves and blends into the surroundings and alongside the human stars is fantastic, and the essence of intimidation is captured perfectly in both the sneer in his face, and his deviously demonic voice, provided by Benedict Cumberbatch in a superb performance. Generally speaking, the first two thirds of the movie do have their fair share of good qualities. After being slight-ly critical of some of the CGI in “An Unexpected Jour-ney”, the effects here have got better, and are far more consistently impressive. The acting once again is great, especially from Freeman and McKellen, and there are a number of fun segments. There's just a lot of filler that

isn't terribly engaging to go through as well. This, as a result, continues to make “The Hobbit” film adaptations fantastic in many ways yet so frustrating in others. It feels like there is a spectacular movie in here somewhere, but it's locked in battle with a lot of average, or merely just decent, content that could easily be trimmed or omit-ted. For what Peter Jackson gives us, “The Desolation of Smaug” is still an impressive film. If you can be patient for about an hour and 45 minutes, which you may even find yourself enjoying more than I did, then the last hour is most certainly rewarding; one that makes it worth the price of admission.

26Words by Chris Wing.

MOON

A sombre tale of isolation and dislocation,

‘Moon’ looks at a variety of complex subjects

in an impeccable manner.

Delivering a study of human isolation and the

subsequent psychological issues, indie sci-fi

‘Moon’, directed and written by Duncan Jones (Source Code),

is fascinating and unsettling. We are invited to climb into the

skin of a single character and contemplate the lonely, confined

world in which he lives.

28

“A sombre tale of isolation and dislocation.”

29

even though it is only five years old. The film had a budget

of only $5 million, so uses a very retro technique for its

effects. As much as possible was captured in-camera,

using models instead of CGI to save money and to give

the film a unique, hybrid look that feels real.

An authentic and original sci-fi story, ‘Moon’ is a chilling

look at a possible reality in which we solve the energy

crises, but at a huge price. ‘Moon’ is utterly gripping

and a depiction of human emotion set in the desolate,

emptiness of space. Polished shots and silent moments

communicate the loneliness of Sam, who has only himself

for human company. This is the heart breaking story of

a man lost and forgotten beyond the Earth’s atmosphere

with the desperate longing to go home.

The film follows Sam Bell (Sam Rockwell), a lone

astronaut working alongside his computer GERTY,

(a homage to ‘2001’s HAL 9000, voiced by Kevin

Spacey). Sam’s job is to oversee mining operations on

the moon for a company extracting helium-3 which is

sent to Earth and used to create clean, fusion energy.

Sam is nearing the end of his three year stretch when

he begins to unfold the shocking secret behind the

company that sent him into solitude.

‘Moon’ was written by Duncan Jones for Sam Rockwell

to play the part of Sam Bell – and it is clear to see why;

Rockwell’s intense and Oscar-worthy performance

carries the film and makes for an incredible and chilling

experience.

‘Moon’ seems as though it was made in the era of films

like ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’, ‘Alien’ and ‘Silent Runners’

Designed & edited by

Lottie Fox

MindsEye

Documents

Transcript of MindsEye