Hello, welcome to Out Of The Void!

Now, I feel a certain level of privilege in being able to write these words down here. For what you are about to read culminates to nearly three years of work for myself. As a Sheffield Hallam graduate I am immensely proud that I have been given the opportunity to oversee the production and content on this first issue (the first of many more hopefully).

The story of my journey to this point is a long one so I’ll summarise it for you. Whilst studying in my third year on the BA English and Screen Studies course I was finding it incredibly difficult to get my own work into print and seen by a wider audience. I’d just finished an internship over at The Showroom cinema so I set up an online blog and started publishing articles. Some of my course mates were interested in what I was doing so I started taking their submissions too, and from there this magazine was born. We now have a team of around fifteen writers who are both students and graduates that contribute to the magazine on a regular basis. Over the last few years we’ve managed to release a couple of small zines, formerly under the moniker of On The Edge Films. Now with our transition over to Sheffield Hallam we’ve taken our new name, inspired by the wonderful screening facility that resides on Level 1 of the Owen Building. This magazine aims to provide you, the students of Sheffield Hallam, with a platform to get your work into print and for it to be seen by a wider audience. We want to offer a leg up, a helping hand that will one day lead to writing position or great post- graduate employment.

The Void will be a familiar haunt for English, film and performance students and somewhere I encourage you all to visit during your studies, if you can find time between writing essays. The SHU Film Society and It’s Only a Movie hold weekly FREE screenings for students and show an array of weird and wonderful cinema down in The Void. You’d be mad to miss out on what they have to offer.

So to this issue, Sci- Fi seemed like a logical place to start because not only are the BFI running their own science-fiction programme entitled Days of Fear and Wonder but this month Christopher Nolan also released his time travel epic Interstellar which has found its way onto our cover. Look out for an excellent review of the film towards the back of the magazine. This genre is so all encompassing and touches upon most of our own personal film tastes. Whether you like Buzz Lightyear of HAL 9000 at some point in most of our lives we’ll have all cherished a science- fiction film. Over the next few pages we have helpfully listed what we believe are the Top Ten Sci-Fi films of the 21st Century along with a few other interesting pieces to give you all a lovely dose of films set amongst the stars.

I’m truly honoured that I’m doing something that helps fellow students and graduates achieve their creative goals. The following writing and design work was all done by your fellow peers and possibly some of your own course mates. A big round of applause for all involved! Now sit back, strap yourselves in and come on a ride with us… to infinity and beyond.

Josh Senior

CONTRIBUTORS IN THIS ISSUE:

Josh Senior: Editor in ChiefCraig Mann: EditorOliver Innocent: Assistant Editor

Christian AbbottLiam BallRhys BeldingMartin CarterBenjamin HalfordLiam HathawayJoe Lister-StreepMax MarriottHannah McDonnellSamuel RileyNathan ScatcherdBethan TannerKris Thomas

DESIGN TEAM

Lauren BanisterJoe BembridgeTom ClaytonAlex FergussonTom FinnEddie Fowler

www.behance.net/GDSheffield

MESSAGE FROM THE EDITOR

03 04

05 07 09 12 13 14

15 16 17 18 19 21

TOP TEN#10 GRAVITY

SOVIET SCIENCE FICTION MARTIN

TOP TEN#09 LOOPER

TOP TEN #08 UNDER THE SKIN

TOP TEN#07 SUNSHINE

TOP TEN#06 HER

CELLULOID SCREAMS REVIEW

TOP TEN #05 ANOTHER EARTH

TOP TEN#04 MOON

TOP TEN#03 DISTRICT 9

INCEPTION REVIEW

TOP TEN#02 MONSTERS

TOP TEN#01 PRIMER

INTERSTELLAR REVIEW

CONTENTS

GRAVITY

1010

2013/ USA, United KingdomDirector: Alfonso Cuarón

Starring: Sandra Bullock, George Clooney

ravity is an absolute master class in how to use special effects and 3D to actually enhance the quality of a film,

rather than just creating a gimmick to draw audiences into screenings. Starring Sandra Bullock as medical engineer Ryan Stone and George Clooney as long serving astronaut Matt Kowalski, this Sci-Fi epic follows the difficulties that they encounter when they become stranded in the vast expanse of space, tasking them to find a way back to Earth in one piece.

The intensity of Gravity, especially when seen on the big screen, is almost unbearable as we see Ryan flying through the atmosphere uncontrollably amidst huge explosions that send debris hurtling towards the audience (when seen in 3D of course). Alfonso Cuarón’s use of 3D is implemented in an impressively realistic fashion, instead of it being used simply as a marketing ploy. The technique here actually enhances the feeling of being in space

and subjects the audience to the fear that the characters are experiencing. For example, when Ryan reaches out to grab something that is just that little bit too far away, or when bits of machinery are flying though the cosmos towards you, it is genuinely quite terrifying. 3D in Gravity is not just there for entertainment value, it’s for the scare factor too, and is very effective.

Gravity is more than just a Sci-Fi film. It is also a study of human emotion and the psyche when in distress or crisis. The complete isolation that Ryan and Matt are subjected to understandably plays with Ryan’s mind. She begins to hallucinate as the film progresses, emphasising how a person’s state of mind is not all that stable when left in such a lonely and hostile place. There are many images in the film in which Ryan is shown in the foetal position, and this seems to be a representation of her rebirth, maybe to reflect how she has changed as a person from this devastating and traumatic experience.

Even though there is undoubtedly an impressive amount of spectacle in Gravity, there is also some intimacy in terms of human emotions being laid out to bare for the audiences to see and relate to. The juxtaposition of close-up shots of the protagonist’s faces against extreme long-shots of Earth and the space around them also emphasises the insignificance of the characters and their helplessness amongst such a vast amount of peril.

It is a nail biting adrenaline ride into the realms of survival and the pure nothingness of space, the perfect way in which to start our list.

Hannah McDonnell

G

03

s part of the BFI’s Days of Fear and Wonder retrospective of science fiction cinema from around

the world, the Showroom cinema asked for a film studies course on such films made behind the Iron Curtain. Well, two films immediately sprang to mind; Tarkovsky’s Solaris (1972) and Stalker (1979), but that was about it. The task of trying to put together an eight-week course of screenings and lectures looked, to say the least, challenging, but also a potentially very interesting prospect. Fortunately, the BFI had put on a season of eastern bloc sci-fi back in 2011 and that became the basis for research into the topic. The Kosmos season had brought together more than twenty films from the USSR, Poland, Czechoslovakia and East Germany to provide a fascinating collection of alternative perspectives on what the future might look like.

Finding out that such films existed was one thing, being able to see them was something else entirely. However, the wonders of modern technology and its ability to allow you to find almost anything online came to the rescue and allowed the sourcing of a bewildering selection of films from far and wide. Amongst treasures unearthed was possibly the first science fiction feature film, Aelita: Queen of Mars from 1924; Amphibia Man (1962), a colourful Creature From The Black Lagoon knock off; the pioneering works of Pavel Klushantsev, including such gems as Road to the Stars (1957) and Planet of Storms (1962); and, most surprisingly, a cycle of dystopian visions of the future

from the 1980s such as Konstantin Lopushanskiy’s Letters From A Dead Man (1986) set in a world devastated by nuclear war, showing that such fears were not something exclusive to the West.

The development of Soviet science fiction cinema was closely linked to the space race between the USSR and the USA; a race in which the Soviets took the lead in 1957 after the launch of Sputnik, the first satellite in space. They followed this coup by putting the first dog into space later that year and then, in 1961, the first man in space when Yuri Gargarin became the world’s first cosmonaut. There would be only a brief period of Soviet ascendancy in

this contest and the rivalry between the two opposing ideologies to reach the moon that ended in 1969 with NASA’s Apollo 11 landing also ended a cycle of space exploration films that reflect the hope of a utopia in space and whilst also implying that Earth is no longer divided into a capitalist West, and a communist East. In these films, unlike actual events, the Earth of the future was not only a united planet, but also a red planet.

Whilst carrying out this research, a new addition to the canon has been completed and gaining screenings on the international festival circuit. Alexei

German’s Hard To Be A God (2013) is based on the novel by Alexei and Boris Strugatsky (perhaps the finest of Soviet science fiction writers) and was in production for more than twelve years. German died during the final stages of post-production and the film was finally completed by his son, Alexei German Jr. The finished film is an extraordinary piece of cinema set on a planet similar to Earth but stuck in a medieval dark age ridden by fear, superstition and intolerance. A group of scientists from Earth have insinuated themselves into this society but are there only to observe and unable to initiate change. The escalating violence and terror pushes one scientist, Don Rumata, to his limits with devastating results.

German’s three- hour epic shows that the genre of Russian science fiction is very much alive and capable of taking on far more complex approaches to science fiction than much of what is produced by Hollywood.

The screenings eventually put together from this research comprise of Planet of Storms, Ikaria-XB1, Letters From A Dead Man and Solaris; a selection that displays the sheer variety available within this little known but still challenging and vibrant genre.

RED PLANETS SOVIET SCIENCE FICTION AT T H E S H O W R O O M C I N E M A .

“Alexei and Boris Strugatsky - Perhaps the finest of Soviet science fiction writers”

A

04

Martin Carter

LOOPER

Time travel – it’s a tricky thing to master in cinema. How much does it have to make sense? Completely? At all?

“This time-travel stuff fries your brain”, Jeff Daniels’s mob boss Abe says towards the start of Looper. So how does director Rian Johnson solve this problem? By asking the audience not to think about it too much. However, Looper isn’t really about time-travel - it’s more of a narrative device, used as an agent to tell a story about family, love and redemption.

Looper’s plot could easily become convoluted and alienating, but Johnson’s tight structure means that the narrative is well paced and always moving fast. Set in 2044, long after the invention of time-travel, the film is constructed around a seedy criminal profession: ‘Loopers’, specialised assassins hired by the mob to kill targets sent back in time from the future, thus removing the tricky business of evidence disposal. Loopers

are so-called because eventually their last job will be to kill their older selves, removing any chance that a lifetime of murders can be traced back to the mob. This is called ‘closing your loop’. One Looper, Joe (Gordon-Levitt), fails to kill his older self (Willis) and sets in motion a series of events that will eventually lead to a spectacular rural showdown.

Looper’s world is dark and dangerous, and there is a genuine sense of dread and foreboding that permeates much of the film. It is also ever-thrilling, certainly not lacking in action. What really elevates this film, though, is its powerful, emotional core: these characters have difficult choices to make, and we see in detail the impact these choices have on their lives and the motives they have for making them. Particularly moving is a montage that shows Joe’s transformation from his younger self into the bitter old man he will become. These are characters to care about, from both incarnations of Joe (who are simultaneously so similar

and so wildly different) to Emily Blunt’s gun-toting single mother.

With Looper Johnson has been brave and bold enough to create something strikingly original and inventive; an emotionally complex narrative world. Its science-fiction elements are treated with subtlety, while its thrilling set-pieces are big, ambitious and impressive. Looper’s real success is in its morally ambiguous, complex characters, and in this the film succeeds where so much science-fiction fails. These are real people, never reduced to stereotypes and character development is never sacrificed for special effects. With heart, brain and thrills, Looper brings everything to the table and, miraculously, all of its key elements work elegantly and effortlessly together. The result is both thought-provoking and pulse-racing: a time-travel yarn for the ages.

Bethan Tanner

2012/ USA, ChinaDirector: Rian Johnson

Starring: Joseph Gordon- Levitt, Bruce Willis, Emily Blunt, Paul Dano, Noah Segan

0909

05

UNDER THE SKIN

U

013/ UK, USA, SwitzerlandDirector: Jonathan Glazer

Starring: Scarlett Johansson, Jonathan Glazer’s

nder the Skin is one of the more recent entries on this list, but deserved of its place. It currently stands as one of

the strangest, most disconcerting and utterly remarkable films of the almost-fifteen years that have elapsed thus far this century.

It’s minimal premise – which was adapted from Michael Faber’s 2000 novel of the same name – features Scarlett Johansson (a drastic deviation from her recent Marvel successes) as a nameless extra-terrestrial that has adopted the physique of a seductive young woman and spends its time driving around Glasgow in a white van, luring unsuspecting males towards a truly ghastly demise…

One could interpret Under the Skin as an art-house rendering of Tobe Hooper’s bizarre apocalyptic extravaganza Lifeforce (1985), or – more fittingly – Roger Donaldson’s erotic sci-fi horror film, Species (1995). The latter

is a glossy Hollywood movie boasting a brazen B-movie female human/alien hybrid prowls the streets of L.A. for a suitable male who will unknowingly serve to assist in reproducing her species. Like a spider, only after mating with him will she kill him.

However, unlike Lifeforce and Species, Under the Skin has effectively downplayed the classic science-fiction themes of extra-terrestrial life and the threat of invasion (although clearly an invasion of sorts is taking place); instead it focuses on themes which appear to be a little more esoteric, but are equally as fascinating. What Under the Skin provides is a study of the physical human form and modern society from an extrinsic perspective; it tackles the notion of beauty being skin deep, as well as exploring just how uncomfortable we are with our own bodies and minds. All of this echoes the greatest works of David Cronenberg: Rabid (1977), The Fly (1986), Dead Ringers (1988) and so on.

With Jonathan Glazer at the helm – the director of Sexy Beast (2000), Birth (2004) and the ‘Guinness surfer’ advert

– one can certainly expect a degree of astounding visual flair. Here, Glazer oscillates between a familiar palette of greyish, overcast banality that is endemic of inner-city life, and some jarringly spectacular and surrealistic, unsettling visions; a reflection perhaps of how the film is taking quite identifiable themes and twisting them into something that is extraordinary, grotesque and ‘alien’ to us.

Throw in Mica Levi’s haunting electronic score and the final result is a uniquely transgressive and cerebral modern masterpiece, one that seems to be channelling the cold, clinical style of Kubrick with the often unromanticised socialism of Loach’s films whilst dropping the lot into the chasmal void of the unknown. Be afraid.

0908

07

Liam Hathaway

FREE FILMS FOR YOUR ENJOYMENTWE SHOW ALL YOUR FAVOURITES ON THE BIG SCREEN AND ALL FOR FREE

SHU FILM SOCIETY

COME AND FIND US EVERY TUESDAY 6.30 IN THE VOID

(FLOOR 1 OF THE OWEN BUILDING NEXT TO THE LIFTS)

SUNSHINE

U

2007/ UK, USADirector: Danny Boyle

Starring: Cillian Murphy, Chris Evans, Rose Byrne, Mark Strong, Hiroyuki Sanada, Michelle

pon finishing Sunshine, the story goes that Danny Boyle said he would never make another sci-fi film.

The experience was understandably arduous, and for a director who, until then, was most famous for the low-budget Irvine Welsh adaptation Trainspotting, you can’t blame Boyle for being overwhelmed by the whole experience. It is with this in mind that Sunshine becomes all the more special.

Prior to Sunshine, Boyle’s most famous films were all down-to-earth, home-grown productions: British films, but with a dynamic core only the most intriguing of British filmmakers can achieve. It is interesting, then, to see Boyle tackle what is essentially an American blockbuster of galactic proportions, even if it is a mostly British production made on a far smaller budget (around $40 million) than your average Hollywood sci-fi film. Despite the limitations in producing a film with creative ambitions that far outweigh

its budget, Sunshine manages to overcome said limitations with a finished product that easily surpasses most American sci-fi of the last decade.

The story follows the crew of Icarus II, who are tasked with stopping the sun from dying. However, they encounter Icarus I - the first ship to attempt the mission - with disastrous consequences. Boyle and screenwriter Alex Garland were keen to create a very scientifically-accurate film, hiring Professor Brian Cox to work as a consultant and making the cast research their respective fields of scientific expertise for months in advance. Much of Sunshine’s tone is reminiscent of films of a similar ilk, most notably 2001: A Space Odyssey, a film where science is favoured over action and exceeded only by spectacle. However, Boyle has a slightly less clinical touch and there is far more action than in Kubrick’s film. Sunshine’s action-oriented scenes of cosmic spectacle are just as mesmerising to watch as their Hollywood counterparts,

the final scene in particular being one of the most engaging I have seen in a long time. This is, of course, also due to the actors. The film is exceptionally well-cast, especially Cillian Murphy’s Capa - the ship’s physicist and primary protagonist - and Chris Evans as Mace, the ship’s engineer. If the film has one flaw, it is the inclusion of Mark Strong as Pinbacker, whose presence sends the film into somewhat more predictable territory towards the final act.

Overall, Sunshine might not quite qualify as a masterpiece but it is essential viewing for fans of both Danny Boyle and science-fiction.

Max Marriott

0707

09

JOIN US AT THE SHOWROOM THIS DECEMBER FOR THE FINAL MONTH OF THE BFI DAYS OF FEAR AND

WONDER SEASON. WE’VE BEEN BLASTING OUR WAY THROUGH NEW AND CLASSIC SCI-FI FILMS

SINCE OCTOBER BUT WE’VE SAVED SOME OF THE T.

COMING SOON: THE BEST OF 2014, FEATURING BOYHOOD, THE LUNCHBOX, PRIDE, UNDER THE SKIN AND IDA.

THERE THE CHEAPEST IN TOWN: SUNDAY TO THURSDAY, STUDENTS PAY JUST A FIVER! ON FRIDAY AND SATURDAY STUDENTS PAY 5.10 BEFORE 5PM AND 5.90 AFTER 5PM.

THINGS TO COME

Dir. William Cameron Menzies / 1936 / Austria / 117mins (PG)

Showing on 9 Dec at 8.30pm

Our Cult Tuesdays strand brings you this sweeping sci-fi classic full of futuristic vistas and modern cityscapes, based on the story by H.G. Wells. Beginning before World War II and travelling to 2036 AD, this journey predicts a host of modernities before following a rocketship to the moon.

2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY

Dir. Stanley Kubrick / 1968 / UK / 160mins (U)

Showing from 5 Dec

Kubrick’s spectacular, transcendent epic has been the touchstone for all science fiction films since its original 1968 release. Widely regarded as one of the best films ever made, critic Roger Ebert described Kubrick’s masterpiece as “a stand-alone monument, a great visionary leap, unsurpassed in its vision of man and universe.”

Dir. Jake Schreier/ 2012 / UK / 89 min(12a)

Set in the near future, an ex-jewel thief receives a gift from his daughter: a robot butler programmed to look after him. But soon the two companions try their luck as a heist team.

Dir. John McTiernan / 1987 / UK / 107mins (18)

Shwarzenegger action classic. Arnie’s group of hardnosed commandos are hunted down one by one by an alien warrior in the South American jungle. “If it bleeds, we can kill it.”

PART OF OUR MIDNIGHT MARAUDERS STRAND(because some films need to be watched late at night!)

PA

RT

OF

SC

IEN

CE

FIC

TIO

N S

CIE

NC

E F

AC

T:

A S

ERIE

S O

F FI

LMS

& D

ISC

US

SIO

NS

WIT

H A

CA

DEM

ICS

FR

OM

TH

E U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F S

HE

FFIE

LD. J

US

T H

OW

MU

CH

WE

SEE

IN

FILM

S IS

BA

SED

ON

FA

CT

AN

D C

OU

LD IT

EV

ER H

AP

PE

N?

WIT

H

PR

OFE

SS

OR

TO

NY

PR

ES

CO

TT.

HER

H

2013/ USADirector: Spike Jonze

Starring: Joaquin Phoenix, Scarlett Johansson, Amy Adams, Rooney Mara, Olivia Wilde, Chris Pratt

er’s status as a science-fiction movie seems almost incidental. It’s clearly a speculation on the

direction in which technology seems to be heading, given the increased personification our most innovative tech wizards are fertilising our machines with. It’s also a diagnostic of Western Society as one currently consumed by chronic technophilia, suggested by the movie to be a development of the self-absorption of the ‘00s, in that the condensation of a world of information into tiny mobile devices allows and encourages the harnessing of one’s fetishes and wants, completely privately and without restriction.

But that all feels irrelevant when you’re watching the movie, as does the outright peculiarity of its story; the intellectual and emotional depth at play assuages the disquieting premise of a man falling in love with an operating system, including its crudeness as a metaphor. Part of this

is thanks to Arcade Fire’s excellent score – with damaged, droning chords conveying deathless melancholy and swirling synth arpeggios fuelling sections of unbridled infatuation – but also to the stunning visuals, which portray Los Angeles in the not-too-distant future, the frame doused in a colour scheme which aids the movie’s balance between vibrancy and warmth.Praise is also due to the cast led by Joaquin Phoenix, ever the weirdo underscored by sheer humanity. However, it’s Scarlett Johansson who indisputably powers the movie as the vocal actress behind OS Samantha. Despite being a performer whose undeniable command is usually attributable to her body language, here she dominates each and every scene with only her alarmingly proficient voice, her physical absence barely even registering. Together, Phoenix and Johansson capture the intonations familiar to anyone experienced with flagrantly doomed relationships, making Her an almost

painfully candid exploration of love in general, not just technophilia.

None of this would be nearly as effective without Spike Jonze’s Oscar-winning script, which provides an invigorating story that makes every scene a unique exploration of its characters and themes, all deftly contributing to the movie as a multi-textured and unified whole. Her is a great science-fiction movie not only because it uses conventions only as far as to provide its unique thematic and narrative ingredients, but also because it perspicuously reflects our society in terms of the macro and the micro; there’s a lot of ourselves to be witnessed in its looking glass, either collectively or individually. For all its restraint, Her is a cinematic behemoth, one that is wholly worthy of attention.

0006

12

Liam Ball

or three glorious days in Sheffield, Halloween horror left its mark on the city with the increasingly-popular

Celluloid Screams Festival at the Showroom Cinema. From October 24th – 26th, cutting-edge independent horror combined with cult classics from days gone by combined to reign supreme at one of Sheffield’s finest cinemas, and I was in attendance to capture the moment. So what were some of the highlights of the weekend? Personally, it was a great opportunity to witness the work of Astron-6, a small group of Canadian filmmakers who specialise in feature films, fake trailers and shorts largely based around 80s pop-culture, especially (and unsurprisingly) horror. The team were there to open the festival with their latest feature-length offering The Editor: a hilarious evocation of Italian giallo film, complete with intentionally laughable performances, terrible dubbing and deplorable writing.

Let it never be said that horror fans don’t have a sense of humour; elsewhere the festival continued to enjoy its share of comedy, with a show-reel of Astron-6’s earlier work and a screening of What We Do In The Shadows, a vampiric mockumentary by the makers of Flight Of The Conchords. The film was voted the best feature of the festival and will enjoy a theatrical run soon, so look out for it on general release.

One of the more unusual - but rewarding - films at the festival this year was Spring, co-directed by Justin Benson and Aaron Moorhead. More of a romance than a typical horror film, Spring follows a boy-meets-girl structure, except in this scenario the girl turns out to be an immortal mutant beast. It doesn’t sound very romantic I know, but impressive technical feats elevate the film and display just how professional low-budget cinema can be. The festival has also attracted some high-calibre special guests, including noted producer and director Brian Yuzna - who attended retrospective screenings of classics Society, Bride of

Reanimator and Dagon - and Laurence Harvey, who appears in The Editor but is best known for his performance in The Human Centipede 2 (Full Sequence). I have been a regular attendee of Celluloid Screams since 2010 and the festival is always a highlight of my year that continues to get bigger and better each October. I have no idea what Celluloid Screams 2015 will bring, but I’m dying to find out.

“ I have been a regular attendee of Celluloid Screams since 2010 and the festival is always a highlight of my year that continues to get bigger and better each October”

Benjamin Halford

F

SCREAMSCELLULOID

FESTIVALREVIEW

13

ANOTHER EARTH2011/ USA

Director: Mike CahillStarring: Brit Marling, William Mapother, Matthew-Lee Erlbach, Meggan Lennon, AJ Diana

Another Earth is a science-fiction film that can truly be described as beautiful. Shot and edited by its

director Mike Cahill, the film premiered at the 27th Sundance Film Festival and went on to win the Alfred P. Sloan Feature Film Prize, presented to the best film that focuses ‘on science or technology as a theme, or depicting a scientist, engineer or mathematician as a major character.’

The film opens on a young Rhoda Williams (Brit Marling), a woman who has been obsessed with astronomy from a young age and has just been accepted into MIT. After going to a celebratory party, she drives home intoxicated and causes a fatal accident, resulting in the destruction and separation of a close family. This happens on the same day as a second Earth appears mysteriously in the night sky, a sudden astronomical anomaly which is partly responsible for the accident.

The majority of the film takes place after Rhoda has been released from prison, concentrating on her struggle to reintegrate into society and to find a resolution to the accident that ruined so many lives. After discovering that not everyone in the other car died in the accident, she takes it upon herself to try and set things straight. As she pursues this goal, the mysteries surrounding

“Earth 2” begin to unravel as the first space flight to the planet is announced.Earth 2 is used as a motif throughout the film - often glimpsed in the distant sky - and Cahill manages to compose each and every shot of this new Earth beautifully, to the extent that it never fails to take your breath away. These shots alone are hauntingly memorable; after watching Another Earth, the image of a second blue planet hanging in the dusk lingers in the mind for a very long time.

Another Earth’s cinematography as a whole is phenomenal, and it is clear that Cahill shot each scene with strong,

purposeful intentions which is shown through his fantastic use of the hand-held camera and creative editing which allows for tonal shifts between grace and misery. This is further fortified by the film’s impressive score, entirely composed by the production company Fall on Your Sword, with the except of ‘The Saw Song’, an incredible piece composed by Scott Munson and performed by Natalia Paruz, also known as ‘The Saw Lady’.

So what of Earth 2? A replication of our own planet hanging in the sky is a powerful metaphor, and one that is ultimately difficult to contend with; it could represent the fragility of identity, the fleeting nature of existence, the rarity of second chances in life or a complex combination of the above. Needless to say, this is a film that rewards repeat viewings; richly layered, Another Earth only reveals more of its beauty on a second visit.

Rhys Belding

0505

14

MOON2009/ USA

Director: Duncan JonesStarring: Sam Rockwell, Kevin Spacey, Dominique McElligott, Kaya Scodelario, Matt Berry

Isolation, loneliness and sadness are words that summarise the atmosphere of Moon, the incredible directorial debut

from Duncan Jones. This is a quietly moving film that pays tribute to some of the greatest science-fiction films of the sixties and seventies: Solaris, Silent Running and 2001: A Space Odyssey, while simultaneously creating something strikingly original.

Sam Bell (Sam Rockwell) has spent three years alone on the moon as part of a work contract with Lunar Industries, who have dispatched him from Earth to mine an alternative fuel source named helium3. With no live communication to his home planet, Sam has only pre-recorded messages from his wife Tess (Dominique McElligott) to maintain his hope and sanity. The only one-to-one interaction Sam has is with an AI provided by Lunar Industries named GERTY (Kevin Spacey), who at the film’s outset ominously recalls the quintessential AI-gone-bad: HAL 9000.

With only weeks until the end of his contract and his return to Earth, Bell starts to suffer from hallucinations and begins to suspect that he may not be alone before he uncovers the heart-breaking secret behind his existence. Sam Rockwell gives a career-defining performance as Bell, perfectly capturing the existential struggle that comes with emptiness and abject isolation. Desperate to reunite with his family, Rockwell imbues his character with genuine emotion, perfectly encapsulating the heartache that comes with long-term separation from loved ones. As the truth slowly reveals itself, Bell experiences hopeless sadness, anger and confusion in turns to create one of the most moving performances of 2009, in a genre film or otherwise.

Jones creates a perfect contrast between Rockwell’s heart-wrenching, moving and ultimately human performance and the stark lifelessness of the moon’s environment; the somewhat tedious - but ever friendly - GERTY is

the closest thing to a secondary human character. Spacey’s voice performance is wonderfully matched to artificial intelligence: an emotionless monotone that leaves open the possibility that GERTY might be hiding something behind his ever-helpful nature.

CGI is used sparingly and only when necessary in Moon. In fact, the film strikes a nice balance between practical effects and computer graphics: the lunar station is wonderfully formed and there is some true spectacle to shots of the moon’s surface. But amongst Moon’s beauty is a dark heart: this is a beautifully bleak experience from beginning to end, another feature that aligns Moon with the greatest sci-fi features of years gone by. Clint Mansell’s haunting score adds the final touch: Moon is Duncan Jones’ masterpiece - a moving, provocative and intense wonder for anyone who has the heart for a trip to the dark side of the moon.

Sam Riley

0404

15

DISTRICT 92009/ USA, New Zealand, Canada, South Africa

Directed by: Neill BlomkampStarring: Sharlto Copley, David Jones, Jason Cope, Nathalie Bolt

At the time of its release five years ago, District 9 was released to a fair amount of hype. Helmed by ambitious

first-time feature director Neill Blomkamp (who had cut his film-making teeth on adverts), and bolstered by a production credit for Peter Jackson, it understandably got tongues wagging and imaginations brewing amongst sci-fi fans, with a cryptic marketing campaign elevating the anticipation to fever pitch. As it turned out, the film not a disappointment: a fresh jolt for the science-fiction genre and one of the most interesting and inventive genre movies of the decade.

Filmed and set in South Africa, District 9 follows government officials as they respond to the arrival of an alien race by essentially enslaving the extra-terrestrials, segregating them into a large ghetto (the ‘District 9’ of the title) away from humans, and generally subjugating them under strict government checks backed up by brute

force. The parallels to South African apartheid are obvious, and the poverty-stricken slum inhabited by the ‘prawns’ (as they are pejoratively known by most humans) feels almost tangibly dirty and run-down, everything shot in a semi-‘found footage’ style which makes the film’s world feel all the more strangely plausible. After all, when people treat others so terribly just for having a different skin colour, how would they react when an entirely different species - friendly or otherwise - shows up?

When Multi-National United - the film’s stock ‘sinister corporation’ - sends their operative Wikus Van Der Merwe (Copley) to evict some alien residents from their homes, he is inadvertently sprayed with a mysterious substance which appears to initiate his transformation into a ‘prawn’. Viewed as a threat by MNU to either be killed or captured and experimented on, Wikus is forced to team up with a couple of the aliens against his former employers. The simple set-up of ‘seeing how the other half lives’ opens up some

fairly on-the-nose commentary on social injustice and racial prejudice.

This was Sharlto Copley’s acting debut, and it is clear why he went on to have a successful career in Hollywood with this impressive all round performance. The film boasts some memorable action scenes and the impressively economic effects work keeps the film’s vision of future South Africa feeling believably grounded, with an internal logic to its juxtaposition of grimy squalor and high-tech futuristic weaponry.

Overall, District 9 is a modern classic: its mixture of political/social analogue, splatter-heavy action and intense body-horror that recalls the early work of David Cronenberg - all anchored by an emotionally involving central performance - qualifying it as a modern science fiction classic and wholly deserving of its place as one of the finest sci-fi films of the 21st century.

Nathan Scatcherd

0303

16

2010/ UK, USADirector: Christopher Nolan

Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ellen Page, Tom Hardy, Marion Cottilard

nception is a visually and mentally astounding film. It holds nothing back in warping the traditional narrative

structure of the Hollywood blockbuster. Christopher Nolan, the film’s writer, director and producer, already had a huge following of diehard fans before the film’s release, undoubtedly due to the critical and commercial success of the ‘Dark Knight’ trilogy. But Inception takes its cues from his more daring work: the likes of Following, Memento and The Prestige. The overarching link between these films is Nolan’s tendency to play with traditional notions of temporality. Memento’s narrative is structured backwards; Following revolves around a multi-layered flashback; even Batman Begins is non linear in its narrative approach Inception subsumes these ideas and adds some of the science-fiction elements we first glimpsed in The Prestige, running wild with the resulting combination. Not until the release of Interstellar would we see these two elements; science-fiction and the orkings of time - come together in an all-out space epic.

It is clear that Nolan wanted to challenge the typical audience for blockbusters when he released Inception, but this is both the film’s strangest and weakest point. The narrative is unclear and multi-layered, as if Nolan is daring the viewer to try to understand his film, but this is undermined by needless hand-holding in the form of endless expositional

dialogue. This is something which is also true of Interstellar: a visually impressive film filled with talking heads. The basic plot points are restated constantly, which also reveals whenever a paradox has been found. With less exposition, Inception might have the pleasant quality of a half-remembered dream rather than a tedious lesson in pseudo-science. However these are minor issues, made

up for in bounds by an impressive cast and amazing performances. Leonardo DiCaprio leads as the captivatingly meticulous - yet clearly unstable - Cobb; DiCaprio proves once again that he shines most when playing characters haunted by a half-buried past. Yet Tom Hardy threatens to steal the show here: mesmerising in every scene. Inception also sees brilliant turns from Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ellen Page, Marion Cotillard and Ken Watanabe. This is an ensemble cast to go down with the all-time greats.Inception is, of course, a film about dreams, and inside the human mind each shot is awe-inspiring and full of spectacle. Cinematographer

Wally Pfister clearly understands that cinephiles turn out in droves for spectacle; to be amazed by strange new worlds. And, of course, Hans Zimmer’s now famous and much-imitated score defines the film. Despite its flaws - and there are some big ones here - Inception is a unique Hollywood blockbuster. It attempts something that is sorely absent from the majority of big-budget sci-fi tales:

a challenge. Some decried the film for its depth; others accused it of being nothing more than a pseudo-intellectual heist film. It is certainly a film that has divided audiences; to some a dream, to others a nightmare.

I

Christian Abbott

I N C E P T I O NS T E P P I N G I N T O S C I - F I

“ It is certainly a film that has divided audiences; to some a dream to others a nightmare”

17

MONSTERS2010/ UK

Director: Gareth EdwardsStarring: Scoot McNairy, Whitney Able, Mario Zuniga Benavides, Annalee Jefferies, Paul Archer

Before Gareth Edwards became the toast of Hollywood, directing this year’s $160 million

budget Godzilla, he directed the $500,000 budget, almost homemade Monsters in 2010. Why is this important? Because Monsters is a huge achievement.

Science-fiction films (especially those in which Earth is invaded by an alien species) are a dime-a-dozen today. Monsters gives us something much more than just the special effects carnage we are usually force-fed, and part of its charm comes from what little we see of the titular creatures. Obscuring the aliens adds mystery, keeps us on the edge and wanting more. When we do get those beautifully voyeuristic moments, mere glimpses of life from another planet, they never disappoint. The creatures are brought to life with wonderful special effects, painstakingly created by Edwards on his home computer

with shop-bought FX software. It is jaw-dropping to witness what he has managed to achieve and it is to Edwards’ credit that he uses the effects sparingly. The aliens are only ever used as background characters, secondary to the protagonists’ physical and emotional journey. There is nothing gratuitous here and that is exactly how it should be. Edwards uses what he has at his disposal exquisitely, and his use of location is outstanding, brilliantly exaggerating the computer-generated effects.

Narratively, we get some of what we might expect from a film about alien invasion. We follow Andrew (Scoot McNairy) who has been employed to escort Samantha (Whitney Able) from Mexico back to America. After a series of unfortunate events, they are forced to travel by foot through the quarantined, alien infested, ‘infected zone’; densely populated with monsters, but also blighted by the use of chemical weapons in an attempt to keep the threat at bay.

It is here we realise that the film is less about the titular monsters and more about the human interaction between our main characters, the organic love that ensues, and the state of the world we live in. It is clear that the film is a comment on America’s current immigration situation, but this is dealt with in such a delicate way that nothing feels convoluted or melodramatic; everything has its place and nothing is forced. Together, all of these elements present a story that feels real. As a result, Edwards asks: Who are the real monsters here? A question only hinted at during the film’s beautiful climax, and one you will have to answer yourself.

0202

18

Joe Lister-Streep

ST“Mankind was born on Earth. It was never meant to die here.”

19

cinematic experience, it never truly feels like a cohesive one. The three approaches frequently jar, contradict, and undermine each other with the result that the film feels less like a unified whole than a patchwork of different images, ideas, and feelings. This incompatibility becomes evident when Nolan immediately follows distressing emotional scenes with breathtaking chase sequences or interesting expository dialogue about the gravitational pull of black holes. The preceding scenes of emotion are quickly abandoned, swept under the carpet and forgotten about until Nolan remembers to follow them up later. This lends the film a rather disjointed quality that, while never really encroaching on the overall effectiveness of the film as an enthralling piece of entertainment, somehow dilutes its power over the viewer and ultimately prevents it from attaining the status of a true classic.

In light of the film’s somewhat disjointed nature, it is perhaps best to concentrate on the strength of Interstellar’s individual approaches rather than dwelling on its flaws as a whole. In fact, when looked at this way, as an almost episodic experience, it is easy to forget the film’s flaws. Interstellar’s blockbuster approach is perhaps its biggest asset. Nolan’s action sequences are so exhilarating, so visually magnificent and compelling, that it is almost impossible not to get drawn into the story and be entertained. Nolan certainly knows how to pull off memorable action set-pieces and makes great use of the IMAX format to deliver the most immersive experience possible. Take, for example, a scene where a huge tidal wave descends on Cooper and his crew. Nolan takes full advantage of the IMAX screen’s huge scale, making the wave appear enormous by having it span the complete height and width of the screen. This imposing visual is further enhanced

n the not so distant future, our planet is dying. There are too many people, the crops are failing, and the Earth’s

dust is choking us to death. Cooper (McConaughey) - a NASA test pilot forced into life as a farmer once the funding for space travel dried up - receives a strange, otherworldly message in his daughter’s bedroom. He deciphers the message as a set of directions which lead him to a secret base run by NASA. It is here that he is informed of Earth’s impending doom and is convinced to take part in a dangerous mission to travel through a wormhole to explore new, potentially habitable worlds. However, in order to save his family he must leave them behind, knowing that he may never see them again.

Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar is something of a composite film, exploring its central concept via three very distinct approaches. Nolan’s film is, first and foremost, an action-oriented blockbuster, tackling space travel in a typically intense, visually exciting manner. Nolan also looks at space travel with a scientific eye, distilling the science-fiction genre down to its basics; that is, a fictional narrative rooted in some form of scientific fact. The final and, indeed, most surprising approach is that of a personal, highly emotional family drama. Surprising, not because it is a seldom used device in science-fiction cinema, but because of how the quiet, tender, insular drama of family life contrasts with Nolan’s huge, grandiose action set-pieces. On the whole, Nolan utilises each approach with verve, executing sequences which are individually thrilling, thought-provoking, and emotionally affecting. However, it becomes increasingly apparent that, over the course of the film, these three approaches are often incompatible. The main problem with Interstellar is that, while it is undoubtedly a stunningly immersive

by the film’s impressive sound design, which is deafeningly intense in IMAX, so much so that you can actually feel the sound as well as hear it. Nolan refuses to let you watch this film in a detached manner; he wants you to experience it as much as watch it, he wants you to feel the same sense of danger and excitement his characters feel. In this respect, Nolan succeeds wholeheartedly. Interstellar’s scientific angle is also of particular interest, making the film a lot more thought-provoking than the average summer fare. The film explores such weighty scientific facts and theories as black holes, wormholes, gravity fields, and time dilation. Granted, it does get some of the science wrong and there are inevitable paradoxes, but at least it tries to lend some credence to its subject matter and attempts to stimulate the mind as well as the eyes and ears. Interstellar’s mo st unexpected strength lies in its gripping, emotionally involving performances. Matthew McConaughey in particular is absolutely fantastic as Cooper, delivering heart-wrenching scenes with utter conviction. He is a completely believable character who, unlike most action heroes, is not afraid to let loose and cry. Overall, Interstellar’s strengths far outweigh its weaknesses and it easily transcends its disjointed story, emerging out of the black hole as a thrilling, intellectual, emotional ride into another dimension.

2014/ USA, UKDirector: Christopher Nolan

Starring: Matthew McConaughey, Anne Hathaway, Jessica Chastain, Casey Affleck, Michael Caine

I N T E R S T E L L A R

Oliver Innocent

I

PRIMER2004/ USA

Director: Shane CarruthStarring: Shane Carruth, David Sullivan, Casey Gooden, Anand Upadhyaya, Samantha Thomson

Let’s address this in the first line – Primer is a difficult film. It is both difficult to understand and difficult to

love. People who have seen it will tell you of the relentlessly inaccessible nature of the plot, the dense script composed largely of theoretical physics terminology and the lack of answers to any questions you may have by the end of the film. What they won’t tell you is that Shane Carruth’s Primer is one of the most rewarding and miraculously brilliant pieces of science fiction cinema of the last 14 years and thoroughly deserves the top spot on this list. Made on a shoestring budget of $7000, Primer is the work of a true auteur with Carruth tackling writing, directing, soundtrack and acting duties with flair and aplomb, even going as far as studying physics at university level to better understand the complexities of his concept.

It is important to note that Primer is not a conventional science fiction film and

bends the rules of established genre norms almost to the point of breaking. There are no alien species, no vast space stations or faraway planets to be explored; instead, Carruth’s debut concerns scientific process, ethical dilemmas and human interaction in the face of a world changing discovery. The film deals with the accidental discovery of a primitive means of time travel by two scientists attempting to create a device in their garage to counter the effects of gravity on small objects. What follows is a tightly wound plot of deceit between friends and the misuse of great power. The scientists indulge in stock market manipulation with their knowledge of future transactions, attempt to change impending events in order to inhabit the role of the hero and interact with the multiple versions of themselves which the machine produces. In a sense, Primer is the very definition of an anti-sci-fi. Conventional tropes are disregarded and the action transferred

to suburbs, car parks and storage facilities. The real achievement of Primer is the blending of an impossible concept with a humanist twist – it explores the ethics and problems which arise in the face of a science fiction concept, the resulting effects on the families of the characters and the corrupting influence the power of time travel has upon them.

There are extensive videos available online attempting to explain the interweaving timelines, essays which dissect the mysterious procedure which occurs within ‘the box’ and theories concerning the multiple versions of the characters – all best ignored until after you have fully immersed yourself in the strangely familiar world of Primer, a film which is difficult to love but impossible to forget.

0101

21

Kristofer Thomas

FACEBOOK.COM/SHUOUTOFTHEVOID