The Best Films I Saw in March

I watched a total of 26 films in March, up from my effort in February. I tried to see as many new releases as possible, but managed to avoid the critically-panned stinkers Battle: Los Angeles and Red Riding Hood.

New Releases (Cinema): Conviction (Tony Goldwyn, 2010), The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest (Daniel Alfredson, 2010), The Adjustment Bureau (George Nolfi, 2011), Hall Pass (Farrely Brothers, 2011), Rango (Gore Verbinski, 2011), Limitless (Neil Burger, 2011), The Mechanic (Simon West, 2011), Waiting for Superman (Davis Guggenheim, 2010), Barney’s Version (Richard J. Lewis, 2010), Griff the Invisible (Leon Ford, 2011, The Lincoln Lawyer (Brad Furman, 2011)

Watched First Time (TV/DVD): Man With a Movie Camera (Dziga Vertov, 1929), The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (Tobe Hooper, 1974), The Day The Earth Stood Still (Scott Derrickson, 2008)

Re-watched (DVD): M (Fritz Lang, 1931), The Apartment (Billy Wilder, 1960), Aguirre: The Wrath of God (Werner Herzog, 1972), Annie Hall (Woody Allen, 1977), American Beauty (Sam Mendes, 1999), 28 Days Later (Danny Boyle, 2002), Brokeback Mountain (Ang Lee, 2005), The Bourne Ultimatum (Paul Greengrass, 2007), The Hurt Locker (Kathryn Bigalow, 2009), Shutter Island (Martin Scorsese, 2010), Let Me In (Matt Reeves, 2010) and The Social Network (David Fincher, 2010).

Essential Viewing

Man With a Movie Camera (Dziga Vertov, 1929)

M (Fritz Lang, 1931)

The Apartment (Billy Wilder, 1960)

Aguirre: The Wrath of Gold (Werner Herzog, 1972)

Annie Hall (Woody Allen, 1977)

American Beauty (Sam Mendes, 1999)

Brokeback Mountain (Ang Lee, 2005)

The Bourne Ultimatum (Paul Greengrass, 2007)

The Hurt Locker (Kathryn Bigalow, 2009)

The Social Network (David Fincher, 2010)

Rango (Gore Verbinski, 2011)

Monster Inc. Prequel Title Announced

The confirmed sequel to beloved Pixar classic Monsters Inc. from 2001 will in fact be a prequel, titled Monsters University. With Billy Crystal and John Goodman reprising the voice-roles of Mike and Sulley, the events will chronicle the pair’s studies at the University of Fear (before they begin working at the factory) where their friendship originates. While I am feeling indifferent about Cars 2 this year, Monsters University sounds like a pretty cool idea. Big thanks to Jack Ibbetson at So I Saw this Film… for making me aware of this announcement.

Releases 31/03

 

Getting in slightly early this week, here are the March 31st releases: 

Just Go With It: A comedy starring both Adam Sandler and Jennifer Anniston. This is reason enough to keep clear. This sounds ridiculous, predictable, juvenile and another dire addition to the rom-com genre.

Rotten Tomatoes: 18%

Never Let Me Go: The screen adaptation of the acclaimed Kazuo Ishiguro novel, Never Let Me Go stars the wonderful young talents of Carey Mulligan, Andrew Garfield and to a lesser extent, Keira Knightley. It tells the tragic tale of a love triangle between three young people, who share their childhood together at what first appears to be an idyllic English boarding school. But the shocking truth of their existence is withheld from them. They re-unite as adults to face the dark secrets tied to their communal past. The Mark Romanek film has appeared on several critics Top 10 lists and should be a rewarding experience.

Rotten Tomatoes: 69%

The Lincoln Lawyer: The new film starring Matthew McConaughey (whose best work is arguably his role as a lawyer in the John Grisham adaptation, A Time to Kill). He stars in The Lincoln Lawyer as Mickey Haller, a Los Angeles criminal defense attorney who primarily operates out of the back of his Lincoln sedan. Haller has spent most of his career defending garden-variety criminals, until he lands the case of his career; defending Louis Roulet (Ryan Phillippe), a Beverly Hills playboy accused of rape and attempted murder. Based on the Michael Connelly novel, The Lincoln Lawyer likely won’t offer any twists on the courtroom drama, but, much like Connelly’s novel, should be fast-paced and engaging. McConaughey has to prove himself again, but the support cast is solid.

Rotten Tomatoes: 82%

In A Better World: Directed by Sussanne Bier and winner of Best Foreign Language Film for Denmark at both the Golden Globes and Academy Awards. Anton is a doctor who commutes between his home town in Denmark and his work at an African refugee camp. In these two very different worlds, he and his family are faced with conflicts that lead them to difficult choices between revenge and forgiveness. Sure to be a complex, thought-provoking, raw, emotional and above all important human drama.

Rotten Tomatoes: 79%

Heartbeats: 21-year-old filmmaker Xavier Dolan’s second film, Heartbeats, was a hit at the Cannes Film Festival and voted the audience favorite at last years Sydney Film Festival. It centers on two close friends, Francis (Xavier Dolan) and Marie (Monia Chokri), who find themselves fighting for the affections of the same young man. The more intimate the trio becomes, the more unattainable the object of their infatuation seems. Sexy, stylish and farcical are words used to describe Heartbeats.

Rotten Tomatoes: 74%

Weekly Recommendation: Strong week this week. With the exception of Just Go With It, I think all of the films are worth a look. Heartbeats is playing at limited cinemas, but I will endeavor to see the other three. The Lincoln Lawyer should be safe entertainment, but I don’t think Never Let Me Go or In a Better World will be disappointing either. Happy viewing!

Feature Article: A Conundrum for Cultural Critics

@font-face { font-family: “Cambria”;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: “Times New Roman”; }div.Section1 { page: Section1; }

Cultural criticism is a key facet of media journalism and one that is regularly and readily consumed by the general public. Many people make it their business to be educated about the cultural world around them, whether they are seeking a recommendation for an ideal film to see on their Friday night date, whether the new Sue Grafton novel is as page-turning as her previous work, or how their new favorite restaurant has fared upon critical review. Critical reviews are just as consumable as the texts or experiences they document. Many consumers read these reviews and analyses to ensure they make an educated cultural decision. With swift inflation, not everybody can afford to outlay regular cultural expense. Others are interested in comparing their own opinions of the texts with those of the published writers. But what has emerged as the most widely accessed and publicly trafficked medium to write and report through? Many cultural critics are becoming less and less convinced about the predominant origins of their readers. Is the rising storm of online criticism and blogging placing more professional, and better-respected modes of mainstream communications at risk?

As an amateur film and entertainment critic and avid blogger, do I expect as many readers to pass through my blog (amidst thousands of competing critics and blogs) as say listen to the weekly reviews over the radio, or tune into the weekly television slot for At the Movies? Not a chance. I thought I’d ask some of the online community’s leading film bloggers their opinions on the growth of online cultural criticism and how much of their readership is outside of the blogging network. I also thought it would be interesting to investigate the success of promoting ones work over social networking giants like Facebook and Twitter. While certainly not attracting the coverage of mainstream media, many would argue they still possess beneficial means of promoting ones business and widely relaying your cultural opinions and personal agendas.

I spoke to Ryan Helms, an avid and successful film blogger, whose fantastic website, A Life in Equinox, is one of the most respected sources of insightful film knowledge on the Internet. He believes, “Blogging is arguably the most internationally accessible medium by which one can openly discuss varying aspects of their society” but he argues that “it is also the most turbulent and unpredictable.”  For a film blogger, to receive 1,000 hits for a single day might seem like a big deal. But compare that to a daily newspaper, which is bought and read by millions of people. The coverage is incomparable. A swift response to the article is only a short click away, which means that bloggers are often subject to angry and malicious rants into empty cyberspace. Alternatively, a dedicated critic may also benefit from a wealth of positive response, which will ultimately prove beneficial for someone working online to hone his or her writing skills.

Someone who reads a review in the paper really has limited means to communicate with the writer. Helms also declared, that “it requires a certain work ethic to establish and maintain a blog that maintains an air of respect among ‘professional’ media outlets.” With plenty of room for error and growth, many cultural bloggers are un-paid, semi-professional writers tackling the vast cyber expanse of the World Wide Web to develop their skills and have their work exposed for evaluation in a public forum. Comparatively, there is often immense pressure on a print or television journalist when faced with a one-shot article. Most film and entertainment critics working under contract with leading editorials also post a copy of their work under the related website, and their opinions are merged into a collaboration for entertainment sites such as Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic. So even if their desired mode of reporting is through print, it is essential they cater for the inevitable growth of online readership.  Thomas Caldwell, radio film critic with Triple R and a contributor for The Big Issue agrees, “It is hard to find decent online work that’s not connected to an established source or by somebody who already has a presence in traditional media and sees online as an extension of their profile.”

Tom Clift, an emerging film critic from Melbourne and a contributing writer for Row Three and Flickchart agrees, “There still tends to be a certain prestige associated with print media” and “from a writers point of view, there is certainly some amount of pride in seeing your name in print.” Predominantly a working online critic, Tom “turns to blogs and websites for almost all cultural criticism, for two key reasons: convenience and diversity.”  There is no debating the wealth of material available online, but the issue is, of course, discerning between the quality of the contributions. Anders Wotzke, a leading Australian film critic, editor-in-chief of Cut Print Review and member of the Online Film Critics Society, argues, “In traditional media, professional standards – a sense of quality control – still apply. For employed print critics, their work is their livelihood, rather than a hobby or a casual job.” Anders also believes that this will change. “As we begin to tame the Internet,” he states, “I’m certain online critics will be just as reputable as those in print, if not more so.” Caldwell also argues, “Traditional media seems to be increasingly disinterested in serious writing about cinema and it’s certainly viewed more as entertaining reporting than cultural criticism” which tends to suggest that the credibility of a high percentage of online criticism is not as low as many believe.

As for the exposure on Social Networking sites like Facebook, I am not yet convinced that there is any benefit to this strategy. It is a great way to keep your acquaintances and regular readers informed about new articles and developments in your work. But in terms of attracting new readers, I have found that many followers will be linked to Facebook, having already followed the site. Twitter makes it so easy to communicate with individuals of similar professional interests, and joining a large online community is an essential way of building recognition within your chosen industry. Most cultural critics will agree that trying a hand in different mediums is helpful to finding an appreciative audience. As Wotzke states: “Unlike in print, where your audience is only as big as the number of copies you print, there is a limitless supply of readers, watchers and listeners waiting online to be reached.” As a motivated hard-working online critic myself, this is great news. The skill-set of the 21^st Century cultural critic now requires a diverse portfolio of talents to ensure professional recognition, but amidst the desire to be widely published, the choice of medium to target has presented a conundrum for agents of cultural criticism. 

What are your thoughts? 

New Release Review: Waiting for Superman (Davis Guggenheim, 2010)

Award-winning documentary Waiting for Superman is an engrossing and comprehensive insight into the failures of the public education system in the United States. Director David Guggenheim (An Inconvenient Truth), through his tracking of five children through their school experiences, seeks to reveal and analyze the ways the system is failing, and interviews several education reformers about the inventive methods they believe can fix the problem.

For three of the children; Anthony, Daisy and Emily, their commitment to learning and desire to escape the public system and attend college is uplifting and inspiring. Anthony is in the fifth grade at a public school in Washington D.C, which is rated one of the worst in the country. Having lost his father to drug use, he wants to grow up and be successful and create a childhood for his own children superior to his own. Daisy, who resides in East L.A, has already written to the medical school she wishes to attend in the future. While driven to learn all that she can, the failures of her school will seriously jeopardize her chances of making it to college. Emily’s poor math marks at her Silicon Valley school will likely relegate her to a lower academic stream, and little prospect of choosing the college of her choice. For first-graders Bianca and Francisco, Guggenheim speaks more to their mothers, who are desperately trying to find alternative education for their children. Bianca lives in Harlem, where her mother is struggling to pay the tuition fees at her local Catholic School because she doesn’t feel comfortable sending her daughter to the public one. While Francisco’s mother works hard with him at their Bronx home, only to discover that he has experienced early struggles at school. With nowhere else to turn, each of these families decide to apply for the admission of their children to the independently-run Charter Schools set up in disadvantaged areas by visionary educational reformers. But the competition is fierce, with only limited spots available, and whether these children are accepted or not is decided by a public lottery.

To think that whether or not these children will receive adequate education is decided by a bouncing ball, or a random assignment, is tremendously troubling. You would think, in a developed country like America, that every child would have the right to quality education. The film examines a variety of reasons to stipulate why this is the case. Poor funding, overcrowded classrooms, unfairly scaled grading, teacher incompetency in addition to the children’s broken homes are all thrown around as reasons why the system is failing. Guggenheim quickly establishes that it would take someone with superhuman powers to fix this gargantuan problem, and because none like Superman exist, it appears to be solely up to the founders of these independent school networks, and headstrong revolutionary chancellors like Michelle Rhee. Rhee, during her term, outraged the Teachers Unions by closing schools, firing principles and attempting to overturn contracts of Tenure. One of the most passionate and inspiring characters is Geoffrey Canada, who runs a Charter school covering an impoverished area of Harlem. He lengthens the school day and year, has smaller class sizes and employs quality teachers for tuition. The greatest moments of the film stem from his confidence that he can transform a struggling and disadvantaged child into a college graduate. The academic results of the Charter schools, as expressed in the film, are better than even higher-funded and expensive private schools. The credibility of these statistics has been the front of controversy since the film’s release, though.

To complement the footage of the children, and the accounts of Canada, Rhee and Bill Gates are a series of animated graphics to assist us to digest the often-horrifying statistics. Among these are the revelations about the plummeting reading and math levels of children across the country, and comparisons made between the money spent on catering for school dropouts who end up in prison versus the cost of a year of private school tuition. The film’s climax is the most heartbreaking of all. As we see the five families attend their separate lotteries, hoping desperately to hear their number called. Perhaps their lives will be changed forever. The disappointment on the faces of the unlucky ones will resonate with viewers long after the final credits. Waiting for Superman is engrossing, maddening, uplifting and ultimately heartbreaking. A very well made documentary that tackles very troubling issues. Despite centering its view on American schools, the desperation of their families, especially Bianca’s and Francisco’s mothers, will be appreciated by anyone. Certainly worth a look.

My Rating: 4 Stars (B+)

Short Reviews on a Pair of Jarmusch Classics

Dead Man (A)

Johnny Depp gives a remarkable performance as William Blake in Jim Jarmusch’s masterful western. Found fatally wounded by Native American outcast Nobody (Gary Farmer), and mistaken for the ghost of 19th Century English poet of the same name, Blake is escorted through America’s hostile West to escape the pursuit of three hired killers sent after him. As his physical condition worsens and the pair near the coast, his spiritual journey begins. This is one of the strangest, bleakest films you will ever see, but also one of the most captivating and beautiful. It features some great cameos (especially Iggy Pop, Billy Bob Thornton and Lance Henriksen), some intense violence (including the famous head-crushing scene), stunning black and white cinematography and a truly incredible score written/performed by Neil Young. Not to be missed.

Broken Flowers (B+)

 This a bizarre film. Timed to near-perfection the seemingly meandering plot is full of surprises and a series of brilliant performances. Bill Murray (in a role rivaling his nominated performance in Lost in Translation), Jeffrey Wright (hilarious as his sleuth-obsessed neighbor Winston), and Sharon Stone, Francis Conroy and Jessica Lange as the ex-girlfriends he visits, are all fantastic. Broken Flowers is a film that demands your attention but subtly rewards you with a series of entertaining encounters between Bill Murray and a variety of unique individuals as he partakes his road-trip. His mission is to discover which of his ex-flames had communicated with him via a pink letter about a son he never knew existed. Murray’s world-weary, disinterested expression throughout the film is also very amusing. The flashing drive-by cinematography is beautiful and the soundtrack very unique. Broken Flowers was a hit at the 2005 Cannes Film Festival and now after my third viewing – yes, I admit it takes a few to grasp, I can certainly recommend it.

Upcoming Releases

Really looking forward to Never Let Me Go, released in Australian cinemas this Thursday. Check out the trailer below: 

Sucker Punch, the new film by Zach Snyder (300 and Watchmen), is getting absolutely roasted by critics in the U.S. It is set for release in Australia on April 7. You can check out the trailer below. The visuals look incredible, but is there substance to match the style? I think not. 

Really want to check out Barney’s Version, Biutiful, Waiting for Superman and Never Let Me Go this week. Lots to catch up on. Did you see anything exciting over the weekend?

New Release Review: Griff The Invisible (Leon Ford, 2011)

Griff The Invisible is an offbeat Australian romantic comedy/drama written and directed by Leon Ford and starring Ryan Kwanten (True Blood, Red Hill) in the lead role. Premiering at the 2010 Toronto International Film Festival, Ford’s quirky film was well received by audiences, with the consensus praising the charm and warmth of the tale. I found plenty of enjoyment in this ‘undeniably Aussie’ film. Barring some incredible plot elements, Griff the Invisible is fueled by fine performances from the leads, humorous idiosyncrasies and an outstanding score. An enjoyable experience, it succeeds in balancing the worlds of escapism and fantasy with the often-painful ‘reality’ with only a few minor stumbles.

The story follows Griff (Kwanten), a nervy and socially awkward office worker who struggles daily to fit in with the rest of the world. His office colleagues ridicule his strange, dreamy behavior, and he becomes the target of bullying, especially from the irritating office jerk, Tony (Toby Schmitz). His only friend is his protective older brother Tim (Patrick Brammall), who has recently moved from Adelaide to Sydney to keep an eye on Griff, who has been prone to erratic behavior in the past. Griff keeps to himself, lives in seclusion and meticulously orchestrates his daily schedule, which is often a direct preparation for his nightly responsibilities, where Griff assumes his crime-fighting secret identity. Under the cover of darkness he becomes Griff the Invisible, his self-appointed superhero who roams the dark streets of his local neighborhood, protecting the innocent residents from shady night stalkers.
Equipped with a full-body invisibility suit and with his house adorned with advanced surveillance technology, he eagerly awaits any chance to answer the distress call of humanity. Tim is slowly growing more frustrated by Griff’s eccentric behavior and wants nothing other than for him to wake up and live in the ‘real world’. When he spots posters and mannequins around the neighborhood questioning the identity of a masked vigilante roaming the streets, he hopes Griff isn’t involved. Through Tim, Griff is introduced to a beautiful young scientist named Melody (the gorgeous Maeve Dermody, Beautiful Kate), who shares Griff’s fantasies about the supernatural and his disregard for the rules of reality. She questions the universe around her and tries to devise a way to pass through solid matter, like her bedroom wall. As Griff continues to develop even more elaborate costumes, and takes his nightly missions off the street and into his office (as he devises secret methods to humiliate Tony), the more trouble he finds himself in. He pushes his brother away; he is arrested on suspicion of stalking and is fired from his office job. Only Melody remains committed to him. When he seeks to abandon his fantasy world altogether and finally face the reality of his existence, he finds the superpower he never knew he possessed, the ability to love. Melody’s uniqueness has made her a fellow social outcast, and with Griff she finally has found someone she is willing to let into her personal ‘bubble’, and pair develops a powerful and believable romance. 

Griff the Invisible is filmed primarily in the inner-city suburbs of Sydney, with the scenes in Griff’s office shot in the high-rise buildings surrounding Darling Harbor. Central Station and Hyde Park also feature. Ford and his team make effective use of the city, and while it is not shot in a particularly interesting way, some of the special effects are quite impressive. The soundtrack, featuring predominantly songs from local Sydney band, Kids at Risk, accompanies the action perfectly in every scene. The songs were so enjoyable, that I often found them to overwhelm the visuals at times. All the sequences featuring Griff and Melody are excellent, and both Ryan Kwanten and Maeve Dermody give powerful performances, as the pair form an awkward romantic kinship. Griff’s withdrawn, child-like personality is full of likable quirks and you really start to feel for him once the film establishes that his superpowers are all in his head. He is only ever comfortable when he pulls on his latex costume, and spends most of his daily existence trying to remain invisible. Following his hilarious role in True Blood and the recent Red Hill, Kwanten has proven his range and versatility. Melody is a curious girl who is genuinely interested in the world around her. While just as withdrawn as Griff, she appears to view the world from within another dimension. With her big glowing eyes, and concerned infatuation with Griff, she is stunningly captured.

The key flaws are in parts of the script, and there are moments that just feel a bit too unrealistic. The pace is also quite one-note, and it visually lacks the drive of its grander audio accompaniment. The office bullying, while not particularly savage in any way (although it does culminate in a beating), seem a bit too juvenile to really be of issue within adult society. Of course Griff is a socially inept and sensitive person, but Tony was acting like he was still in primary school. Tim’s relationship with Melody is also endowed with some odd choices. After only one date, Tim is invited over to her place for dinner, where Melody’s mother discusses their potential marriage. Whoa! Melody is clearly not interested in Tim, but he remains adamant that they are a couple and refers to her as his girlfriend. Much of the central confusion between Griff and Melody, who clearly are attracted to one another, is over her relationship with Tim. Realistically, there was very little to suggest they were seriously involved, and most of the sequences seemed a bit misguided. It’s all a bit too low-key to really be excited about.
While I have heard Griff the Invisible compared to Michael Vaughn’s Kick-Ass, presumably because of the theme of a civilian self-appointing himself a superhero, it functions more as a sweet romantic drama that chronicles the destiny of two oddballs. It’s a simple, heartfelt story of love, the fragility of humanity and the desire to be accepted for who you are. It is a solid directorial debut from Ford, and a strong early contender for Australian Film of the Year.

My Rating: 3 Stars (B-)

Stylish Blogger Award

Okay, so this chain-letter type thing has been floating around the film blogging community. I got tagged by Stevee at Cinematic Paradox and thought I’d participate. The idea is to reveal seven interesting facts about yourself, and then tag seven other bloggers to participate. 

So, here we go:

1. My name is Andrew Buckle. I share my name with an Australian golfer. I am an Australian film blogger. I live in the Inner West suburb of Leichhardt, Sydney.

2. I work at my local cinema.

3. My favorite film of all time is Platoon. The second viewing I distinctly remember being the single greatest film experience of my life to date.

4. The only films I have sat through in their entirety twice in the span of 24 hours are The Usual Suspects, American History X and Ace Ventura: Pet Detective (Yep!). Don’t ask me about the latter. The former is also one of my favorite films.

5. I used to read so much as a kid, but now I have more untouched or unfinished novels in my possession than any number I have successfully completed.

6. If there is a person in film whose personality closely resembles me, it is probably Tom (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) from 500 Days of Summer.

7. I am a huge Philadelphia 76ers fan. Great to see them in the East’s playoff hunt this season.

So, there you go. Seven tagged bloggers:

Univarn @ A Life in Equinox

Andrew @ Andrew at the Cinema

Aiden R @ Cut the Crap Movie Reviews

Dan @ Dan the Man’s Movie Reviews

Sam @ Duke and the Movies 

Film Geek @ Final Cut

Tom Clift @ Movie Reviews by Tom Clift

Critical Analysis: Alien (Ridley Scott, 1979)

‘In space no one can hear you scream’ is the tag-line of Ridley Scott’s (Blade Runner and Gladiator) 1979 classic, Alien. Widely respected amongst the film community as one of the most thrilling and visually unsettling monster films of all time, the commercial and critical success of Alien spawned three sequels; Aliens (James Cameron, 1986), Alien3 (David Fincher, 1992) and Alien Resurrection (Jean-Pierre Jeunet, 1997). The features of this critical analysis will highlight the conceptual and thematic concerns presented throughout the film; notably the features of the Alien organism, comparisons between the Nostromo and the Alien planet, Ripley’s femininity, the mother and child dynamic and the array of techniques utilized throughout by Scott to express these themes.
One very successful feature of Alien is that it has found a niche amongst multiple genres. It is rare works such as Alien and John Carpenter’s The Thing (1982) that can find a place in both the science fiction and horror genres, as they employ iconography and key conventions that can be found in both. The setting of the story in outer space, the elaborate advancement of technology and the investigation of mysterious planets is true to the science fiction genre, while Scott infuses fresh life into this storyline, paying homage to ‘creature films’ and the earliest examples of horror film. The fact that Alien gives rise to the non-pleasurable emotion of horror is ultimately enjoyable for the viewer because of the ‘mastery’ over and ‘relief’ from these anxieties, or the recognition that it isn’t happening to us. As an audience throughout the film, we have distinguished terror towards the threat posed by the Alien’s mode of being. It attacks the crew because they threaten its survival and because they provide the means for its continued survival. Outside of the Alien vessel where it is discovered, Kane is exploited into giving it the opportunity to live a life. It does what any other organism would do, to utilize all possible resources to enhance and prolong this opportunity. The point in the film when the Alien first appears it is less a creature than a disruptive ‘event’ oriented toward a future of its own elaboration. There is a distinct destabilization of the film’s boundaries and the character’s identities that must be reasserted at the conclusion. The Alien disrupts these boundaries and all events that occur for the remainder of the film are centered on the impending threat of the Alien.

Barbara Creed in her article ‘Horror and the Monstrous-Feminine’ develops some interesting theories from the film that link to the representation of the ‘primal scene’ where she provides three important representations. The ‘birth scene’ (as described by Creed) at the beginning of the film begins with the camera exploring the inner body of the ‘Mother Ship’ and culminates with a long tracking shot down one of the corridors, ending in a womb-like chamber. We see the characters slowly awaken from their sleep almost as children of the spaceship controlled by the computer system called ‘Mother’. By exploring this space, we are revealed the environment that will enclose the lives of these characters for the rest of the film, while also possibly providing a metaphoric indication of the insignificant space that humans have occupied since the conception of the earth an incalculable number of years ago. We are also quickly asserted the fact that advanced technology will play a role in the film as we are filled with incredible imagery of strange looking devices and buzzing computer machinery. We are first introduced to the recognizable face of John Hurt, whose star title at the time was the biggest name to appear among the film’s acting credits. In what is an almost uncanny parallel to Janet Leigh’s character in Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho, the audience is made to believe that he will be the human centre of the film. But after the ‘event’ featuring the arrival of the Alien, this easy presumption is shockingly proven incorrect.

Creed contrasts the first ‘re-birthing scene’ with a second representation. The horseshoe shaped Alien craft on the planet is first seen from the left hand side in a series of long shots. Later there is a cut to another long shot facing the centre of the horseshoe as if between the legs of the craft. This suggests a body; its outstretched legs positioned either side of a ‘vaginal’ entrance, through which we see the small figures of Dallas, Kane and Lambert enter. Compared to the atmosphere of the Nostromo, however, the ship is dark, dank and mysterious and full of mutilated organisms, notably H. R Giger’s design of the disfigured human discovered by the investigating trio. In this incredible set piece, a ghostly light creates ominous shadow; there is a compete absence of an accompanying score and the sound of their movements echo through the caverns. After curiously examining an egg discovered within the ruin, the face-hugger attaches to Kane’s face. This can be interpreted as a punishment for his violation of the Alien space as he penetrates what appears to be a force-field barrier that surrounds and covers the eggs.

The birth of the Alien from Kane’s stomach plays on what Freud has described as a common misunderstanding that many children have about birth, being that the baby grows in their mother’s stomach from which it is also born. The dinner sequence is one of the most jolting moments in motion picture history. To the sound of shredding flesh and a cracking rib cage, Kane’s torso ripples with blood, heaves violently upwards and the creature bursts from his chest, spraying blood and bodily substances all over the rest of he crew. An incredible feature about this scene is the fact that none of the other actors were made aware of what was going to happen to Kane and their reactions to the emerging Alien were completely natural reactions of horror. The initial presentation of cleanliness and sterility dominates the interior of the Nostromo, while the threat posed by the Alien is explicitly presented as one of contamination. The dinner sequence is brightly lit, the table is white and the characters are wearing white uniforms. This purity is violently disrupted by Kane’s convulsing and the splatter of blood by way of the emerging Alien. This scene is an attempt to appropriate the procreative function of the mother, to represent a man giving birth. The Alien is referred to later in the film by Ash (Ian Holm) as ‘Kane’s Son’. It is also interesting to recognize that often in horror films when man creates life, he gives birth to monsters and almost always results in an unleashing of evil. Another notable film in this genre is David Cronenberg’s The Fly (1986).
Each of the members of the crew come face-to-face with the Alien in sequences where the mise-en-scene is coded to suggest an intense feeling of isolation. Apart from the scene of Kane’s death, all of the other sequences occur in tightly enclosed, dimly-lit threatening spaces reminiscent of the giant hatchery where Kane first encounters the eggs. The technique of parallel editing underscores the rupture between the futurism of the ship’s operational quarters and the swamp-like catacombs of the cavernous cargo areas and claustrophobic air shafts and makes the attacks of the Alien in these parts more dramatic. In these sequences the terror of being abandoned in the depths of the Nostromo is matched only by the fear of reincorporation. One notable feature is the fact that each of the characters dies because of a care for each other. The Alien would not have been brought on board had they not wanted Kane to live and Parker chose not to shoot the Alien with Lambert still in his line of fire.

The Alien is conceived as a predatory, threatening monster in appearing to penetrate the female in all three of its incarnations (face hugger, chest burster and full grown ‘dragon jaw’), which suggests the outline of the masculine member. Alien is actually a disturbingly sexual film and Giger’s creature can be described as the first ‘interstellar rapist’ captured on film. The Alien dispatches each male crew member with gruesome speed, but leaves Lambert and Ripley to the end. It is also possible to see the creature playing with Lambert in her final scene. The tail rears up underneath her in an act of penetration/rape and her anguished cries are audible over the intercom. This observation can be linked to the final sequence where the creature rears up on a scantily clad Ripley (Sigourney Weaver), after having spent a few minutes in the pod watching her undress. Unlike the heroine in most horror films she hasn’t shed her clad for a male antagonist, but the for the Alien tormentor. Like any woman who feels threatened under the male gaze, the first thing Ripley does is climb into a protective suit and cover herself up. Ripley’s vulnerability is also raised by Cosima Urbano, in which she says that Ripley submits to the monster and returns its gaze in order to eliminate its horror. The pain and discomfort experienced during the watching of the film is considered necessary and inevitable in order to achieve what she calls the ‘final victory’. Creed solidifies this idea in saying that “scenes of gore satisfy a morbid desire to see as much as possible before we are forced to look away.”
Stephen Mulhall argues that it is the Alien’s monstrous representation of human sexual difference that most fundamentally drives the plot of Scott’s film and he raises a sense that Ripley’s final, isolated confrontation with the Alien is something to which she is fated from the beginning. Only at the very conclusion of the film when she strokes the cat and begins to get undressed is Ripley solely allowed to express her femininity, an identity she is unable to express amongst the masculine environment of the Nostromo. Alien connects the orality with Ripley’s experience of the human world she inhabits, by underlying the degree to which her voice fails to register in that world. When she forbids Ash from opening the hatch to allow Kane to be brought back on board, he acts as if she had not spoken and allows the ‘contaminated’ party to enter. When he attempts to kill her later, he does so by forcing a tightly rolled magazine (pornographic?) down her throat. Ash’s action in this scene are an imitation of the Alien and its penetrative actions on Kane.

The true outstanding feature of this film is H.R Giger’s extraordinary design for the Alien monster, which remains one of the most disturbing creations in the history of cinema. It is a terrifying creature that changes shape as it transforms into a mature life form. While highly intelligent and sadistic, it is both biological and mechanical state and appears to be indestructible. In the later installments of the Alien franchise, there are multiple Alien attackers, but the humans are blessed with higher-powered weaponry to better counter the threats. The Alien has ‘no remorse’ for its actions and is sexual, instinctive and malicious. In Alien, the dominant gaze is the object and appearance of the Alien itself, which is distinctly uncanny as we only see the creature fully in its entirety on few occasions. The gaze creates space for the the spectators to position themselves within the film and we feel the fear of the characters as we are also blinded to what we are witnessing. The director manipulates the audiences’ vision through the altering of the gaze, which takes the form of Jonesy, Parker and Lambert as they witness the attacks off screen. Scott eliminates the use of extreme gore, but instead creates the sense of paranoia in that we know the characters are dead, but we are spared the true horrific extent of their deaths. Overall, Alien is one of the most visually rewarding science fiction/horror films ever conceived. Thematically, the film is a very dense project and the film and especially its key character, Ripley, will continue to be an important topic of debate for film analysts into the coming decades.

My Rating: 4 1/2 Stars

 
 
@font-face { font-family: “Times”;}@font-face { font-family: “Cambria”;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: “Times New Roman”; }div.Section1 { page: Section