Showing posts with label Film Writing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Film Writing. Show all posts

Tuesday, 7 May 2013

Psycho Review on Culturefly

Culturefly has just launched its new web page! It looks pretty snazzy in my opinion.

One of the articles on today's homepage is my own review of Hitchcock's 1960 masterpiece Psycho:

I think we can all safely say that even if we’ve never seen the filmPsycho we’re all aware that Norman Bates is the murderer, dressing up as his dead mother. If you were one of the two people in the known universe that wasn’t aware of that fact then my apologies but everyone knew that. It can be hard for us as modern audiences, to relate to how an audience at the time would have reacted to the twist, even the basic plot of the film is crystal clear in our minds.
Read the rest of the article here and take a look around the new site!

Tuesday, 30 April 2013

Nudity and characterisation on Game of Thrones

It has been an article overload this week hasn't it?

This piece from Bitch Flicks by Lady T is a good read even if you don't watch GoT. The same logic can be applied to other shows with similar levels of nudity who maybe don't approach the characterisation of their female characters in the same way. It's doubly good as the author has also read the books so there's a double perspective their.

Game of Thrones is not like Lord of the Rings or other popular fantasy series that forget that women exist. Women are prominent in the society of Westeros, whether behind the scenes or fighting on the fields...Considering the presence of so many complex women in Game of Thrones, it seems like critics might save their nudity-related complaints for other programs that populate their shows with mere ciphers (if they cast any women at all). So why are we still talking about nudity on THIS show?
A case could be made to draw parallels between the way audiences respond to the depiction of violence  and the way they respond to gratuitous nudity and sexual scenes. Both raises the issue (in very different ways however, context is key in sexual scenes) of whether showing something condoning it, e.g. the furore that surrounded the release of Zero Dark Thirty.

Where they differ however is that sexuality isn't bad in any respect, the concerns are over how much should an audience see. As Lady T writes, many shows with GoT's levels of nudity are "praised for grim dark realism" but GoT is the one that gets called out on it. Whatever your opinions on how nudity (and let's face it the issue is always with female nudity specifically) no one can deny that GoT is filled with a huge variety of female characters who embody a range of different character types

Friday, 12 April 2013

Writersroom on writing good female characters

When Joss Whedon was asked why he kept writing strong female characters, he (supposedly) replied "Because you keep asking that question"

Over at the BBC Writersroom blog they have an ace article on writing good female characters. It's worth a read.

Wednesday, 27 February 2013

Niche sub-genres that have and haven't taken off

Cross posted from Yellow Bunting


Genre is a useful tool for classifying films and a good way to attract certain audiences to certain films. Sub-genres and Hybrid-genres are a way for directors and writers to come up with new ideas and unique pieces of work. Sometimes then they accidently kick off a (usually short lived) trend:

Cowboy-Ninja Films

What’s cool? Cowboys are cool. What else is cool? Ninja. Therefore cool squared is personified by films like Bunraku (Guy Moshe, 2010) and The Warrior’s Way (Sngmoo Lee, 2010). Both genres share similar themes such as honour, revenge, redemption etc and in both these cases at least, makes for some striking visuals with The Warrior’s Way evoking a steampunk-esque aesthetic while Bunraku favouring a comic book/puppet theatre inspired look.

Terminal Illness Rom Coms

The perfect valentine’s date movie. Or not. 2010 and 2011 saw the release of Love and Other Drugs  (Edward Zwick, 2010) and A Little Bit of Heaven (Nicole Kassel, 2011). One starred Anne Hathaway and the other Kate Hudson and each played a woman who was dying from an awful terminal illness but found love. So that was nice.

For painfully obvious reason neither film was terribly well received though A Little Bit of Heaven got it far worse. Possibly because of the absence of Anne Hathaway.

Victorian Department Store Melodramas

Oh how the big wigs at ITV must have been kicking themselves when BBC broadcast The Paradise last year. Their own series Mr Selfridge looked like a rip off in comparison. Despite the fact that The Paradise is derived from a novel from Emile Zola’s Rougon-Macquart (albeit with all of Zola’s ideas on Hereditary personality deficiencies within a screwed up French family, the very thing the series was written to demonstrate, removed) novels and Mr Selfridge is based on the establishment of (guess where?) Selfridges department store on Oxford Street  the two share a staggering number of characters and plot devices. Eccentric, brilliant owner whose ideas are scoffed at but eventually proved right? CHECK. Young naïve sales girl with hidden talents for retail? CHECK. Men throwing themselves at her from all directions? CHECK. Rich bitch in fabulous hats skulking around and manipulating everyone? CHECK. Swooshing skirts. CHECK.

NOTE: I am aware that being set in 1906, Mr Selfridge should properly be termed an Edwardian Department Store Melodrama, but that aside, all the other glaring similarities between the two still stand.

Films based on board games
Battleship I’m looking at you. But it may surprise you to learn that another classic family favourite, Cluedo, was turned into a film in the 1980s. Clue (Johnathan Lynn, 1985) stars Tim Curry as butler who brings together a group of eccentric and chromatically themed characters in a case of blackmail and murder. It is wonderfully tacky and gloriously cheesy and comes complete with three different endings, only one of which makes sense but don’t think too hard about that. It was poorly received but has become a cult classic.

Horrifyingly it is being remade by Gore Verbinski.

Thursday, 7 February 2013

For Your Consideration

Cross posted from Yellow Bunting


Awards season is upon us and as every film geek knows it is a grand celebration of all the achievements made in Western (okay mostly American) film over the past twelve months. Saying that, it’s also a chance for every aforementioned film geek plus critics and casual observers to gripe and whine about the various “snubs” and omissions and for the nausea inducing, sycophantic interviews that forms half all of the multi channel coverage, the other half being those horrific “let’s rip into these otherwise successful and beautiful women by making offensive comments about their appearance” shows.

I have a love/hate relationship with awards shows. On the one hand gets everyone talking about films and I have to own up to enjoying my fair share of glitz and glamour. On the other hand it gets people whinging about films and the complaints over who has been omitted can overshadow the glory of those who win.

The best example of this is how the word “snub” becomes the buzzword on everybody’s lips as soon as the first batch of nominations are out.



There is always outrage that XYZ didn’t make it in or if Film A was nominated why wasn’t the guy who directed it? This year for example, Skyfall didn’t receive any Oscar nominations for its lead actor or director and wasn’t nominated for best picture.  Even at our own BAFTAs Skyfall is trailing behind Lincoln (which hasn’t even been released in the UK yet, much to the consternation of many British film goers) which got 10 nominations. Director Steven Spielberg has been “snubbed” by both BAFTA and the Academy who have both left him out of the lists for Best Director. Add into the mix the same arguments about animation and foreign film that come back year after year and you start to wonder why anyone bothers. Of course money plays a huge part as does ego and the fact that many awards and nominations are politically motivated but there is also the fact that these are good films.



It isn’t helpful to dwell on the negatives and flinging the word “snub” around just diminishes the achievements made by those who did make it in to the nominations. So I for one resolve this year to approach awards season with an open mind and view it as a way to be introduced to new films and discovered new, thoroughly deserving, talent.

Full list of Academy Award nominees here
Full list of BAFTA nominees here

Friday, 25 January 2013

Why I love Spoilers: A response article


A while back our own beloved Daisy penned an article on how much she hates spoilers and ever since then I have been planning my rebuttal because however much I adore her I disagree whole heartedly. Not only do I not mind spoilers I actively seek them out. I flip to the last few pages of a book, I go online and check out synopses of every episode of my favourite TV shows before they’re aired and I love to know every twist and cliff hanger weeks in advance.
But why? Some would argue that the pleasure in watching a film or TV show or reading a book is getting to the end, watching the story unfold in front of you. Who wants to ruin that by know what’s going to happen. Raise your hands fellow spoiler lovers!
For me I think part of it is that really while I’m desperate to know what’s going to happen, seeing how it happens is just as important so I never feel that I’ve lost something by finding out ahead of the movie that Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker’s father (sorry to the one person who didn’t know that but if you didn’t know then you probably weren’t interested or you live under a rock and then certainly aren’t able to read this so all is well). Also I have to confess to both extreme nosiness and impatience, which together are a volatile combination that means I don’t deal with suspense very well.
I have tried very hard in the past to be strict with myself. I was a victim of the same Harry Potter spoiler that Daisy mentioned in her article and up until that point (I was about ¾ of the way through the book) I hadn’t so much as skimmed ahead a few pages. Needless to say my self-control was not rewarded.  I do agree with Daisy that spoiling something for someone else isn’t fair because this does boil down to personal choice. I love having everything laid out before me but I wouldn’t go and inform the friend who watches the same shows as I do if she wants to be surprised.
Maybe the reason that so many of us choose to spoil things for ourselves is that really and truly we don’t like surprises. We want to be safe and secure when we watch television because it’s a relaxing pastime and who wants all that tension.
For me the website TV Tropes (which does cover up spoilers so you have to highlight them to see them) and Spoiler TV were my gateway drugs into fictional foresight so if you are on Team “Spoilers Are Ace” I would check them out and find out who gets killed, who gets married, who’s been sleeping with their long lost dog and who changes allegiances two episodes/chapters before the epic battle where that character bites the dust.

Saturday, 15 December 2012

Movie Making Madames Part Five: Ida Lupino and Dorothy Arzner


The prevalence of women as content makers in the film industry, particularly in Hollywood, dropped dramatically after the advent of sound and the realisation that movies were big business. While women thrived in the avant-garde, at this point in Hollywood there were only two active female directors after the “talkies”, Dorothy Arzner and Ida Lupino. Arzer worked from the introduction of sound in the 1920s to the early 1940s while Lupino was only only female film director of the 1950s.
LA born Dorothy Arzner originally wanted to be a doctor but after visiting a movie studio shortly after the end of WWI she set her heart on becoming a director. She would go on to become one of the most formidable and respected women to work behind the camera.
Dorothy worked her way up from the bottom before being promoted to a role as a film editor, a highly specialised and intricate job in the days of celluloid. The movies she worked on were huge successes and Dorothy used her new found clout to land a directing job. But it couldn’t be any old flick, Dorothy (or Ms. Arzner as she would insist on being called on set) wouldn’t direct anything less than an A-picture. Back in those days films were often run in double bills with newsreels and shorts so you could spend a whole afternoon at a cinema. The two films were the A-picture, (higher budget and more prestigious) and the B-picture (a cheaper, quicker flick). The B-Movie just wasn’t an option for Arzner and her first film Fashions for Women in 1927, was a commercial success.

Alongside this Arzner was also an innovator. While directing Clara Bow’s first sound film, Arner told a sound operator to attach the microphone for the shoot to a fishing pole so she could follow the actress round the set who now had freedom of movement. This handy piece of equipment, the mike boom, is a staple of any filmmaker’s kit today.


Most of her films centred around strong women and Arzner flourished before the introduction of the Hay’s code, industry imposed measured to curb “risqué” content in Hollywood films. Arzner worked with some of the greatest actresses of her time and was well known for having affairs with many of them.  Her work led Arzner to be the first woman to be inducted into the Director’s Guild of America and it earned her a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. She retired from directing in the mid forties but spent the rest of her life passing on her skills as a writer and director by teaching at the UCLA film school.
Ida Lupino was a British born actress from a show business family.  While she was respected as an actress she was referred to as “the poor man’s Bette Davis” for accepting many parts that Davis turned down. She was still well known for defying the studios and raising hell and during suspension for refusing a role, Lupino became interested in the process behind the camera.  Her enthusiasm grew and Lupino and her husband started their own production company where Lupino wrote and produced some of her films. In 1949 Lupino directed her first film to great acclaim though she didn’t take credit having only slipped into the role when her predecessor suffered a heart attack.

Lupino’s films as a director were similar to her films as an actress: highly moralistic, low budget and concerned with the truth however unpleasant. Often her films looked at “women’s issues” offering a unique perspective that no one else in Hollywood could give at the time but she also became the first woman to direct film noir with The Hitch-hiker in 1953:



Interestingly the film features and all male cast and though the studio was keen to play up the success of the lone female director, it was at Lupino’s insistence that they also stress her femininity so she wouldn’t seem threatening to the men she worked with.  In later life she made the transition to the new medium of television and directed 50 separate episodes of various programmes. For her efforts her adopted country awarded her two stars on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, one for services to film and the other to services to television.
Next week sees the final part of the series with the modern female filmmakers rising to prominence.
Cross posted from Yellow Bunting. Sorry its a bit late. It actually went out before the Perks podcast.