Once again – do you still have a question what to watch this weekend? Check out the top ten British Films as they list by Don Shiach in his book.

The Third Man (1949)

Odd Man Out (1947)

Black Narcissus (1947)

The Red Shoes (1948)

Richard III (1955)

The Fallen Idol (1948)

Lawrence of Arabia (1962)

The Lady Killers (1955)

Saturday Night and Sunday Morning (1960)

It Always Rains on Sundays (1947)

It is very weird sometime when you realise that somebody has written a book about such a trivial thing as sex in the film and based all the things on some scientific theories. It is not quite usual to treat sex as a part of a science in my country. What about yours? Can you very easily speak about sex in films in the same way as if you were talking about the special effects or acting? I can‘t, really.

First of all I guess I haven‘t watched too many films with the sex slant so often that I could make some observations and conclusions about the tendency. Second, I wouldn’t be able to compare Islam and Modern West approach to sex, as I am not a part of Islam and not a part of the Modern West. And also I would have to read damn too much books about anthropological and psychoanalytical theories on sex until I could draw some tendencies about this kind of issue in film.

So, that is why I found this book interesting – no need to read a pile of the books about various theories on film and sex, no need to watch a bunch of films and try to figure out how to turn a trivial thing into a scientific one. Maybe somebody would even write an essay about sex in films and about films of sex, huh?

Though a top box office star in the seventies, Eastwood was an actor of limited ability; and realizing this, he chose his roles accordingly. Lacking the natural talents of Marlon Brando or Jack Nicholson, Eastwood needed to be cautious about which characters he portrayed on the screen. He was very much, on the surface at least, a movie star, and more than capable of portraying the steely eyed Harry Callahan of the Dirty Harry (1971) franchise and very able to send up his tough guy image opposite an ape in Every Which Way But Loose (1977), but for anyone to suggest Eastwood as any character in The Godfather (1972) would have been simply insane. Yet quietly behind the scenes, almost invisible to most moviegoers, Eastwood was forging a career as a director, making his directorial debut with the fine thriller Play Misty for Me (1971). The only way he could get the studio to back the film was by playing the male lead, but he generously allowed his co-star to steal the film. This was a time when actors rarely stepped behind the camera, unlike today when actors are often directing. Eastwood is the only one to have emerged a great filmmaker, making many forget that he was ever an actor, even though his acting became much stronger in his later years.

Like fine California wine, Clint Eastwood has become a greater artist with age — stronger, much more complex, and fearless to attempt anything on screen that other actors and directors would balk at. In 2008, there are three major American directors looked to for masterpieces. They are Martin Scorsese, Steven Spielberg, and Clint Eastwood, who, since 1992, has put forward a body of work envied by every working director and virtually every actor who ever attempted to direct a film.

Read the rest of the story…

The same discussion on one of the film forum was about the newest and coolest James Cameron‘s Avatar film. Especially the incredible experience to watch in 3D theatre. I’ve heard on the radio that it had already won few critic circles awards and leave away the Oscars. Well done. Though I have to confess honestly, I haven‘t seen the film, and I‘m not sure when I will watch it if I do it at all. But I just let myself make some assumption just from what I‘ve heard about it and the trailer. It does seem indeed that it would be a film about homophobia/xenophobia/ or some other phobia of others, different than you are and  that unknown and unfamiliar difference scares and so people consider it as an impedance and tries to eliminate the others who are different. The ones who watched the film tell that the story is very predictable and it is obvious in the plot what will happen and how it will end. I bet James did it on purpose. He took the regular story of incomprehension between two sides and surrounded it with the spectacular effects, which releasers sold as a grant in 3D format. Why not? Thousand of people go and see the film just for incredible spectacle. Cameron knew it was worth to put up all the 200mln dollar. As you remember he is the one who created Terminator phenomena and then Titanic success. So – respect and appreciation to the author, and applauses to the viewers. One day, when I wont’ be able to remember what is wrong with human beings in confrontation with other kind of beings, and when my mind will be craving for the spectacle, I will watch the film as well. For now I choose to distance from the world wide euphoria.

In one of the previous discussion, I promissed to post a note about what is cinematic, as it seemed that sometimes people get confused talking about a film in what is film language and what is films message, narrative and the plot.  However this time I decided to give an example not of a film, as it seems that film might be quite complicated, today I’m reconsidering the “cinematic” term in viedo games.

The last ten years have ushered in a whole new era of game development. In addition to the constant influx of new technology and content, the convergence of the film and game industries has pushed game developers to achieve a whole new level of standards in epic gaming. This trend has been illustrated by the increasing number of games that are being optioned into feature films—and more and more films are being translated into video games. Also, with animated features, it is now a common occurrence to see a simultaneous release of a film and game (Bee Movie and Beowulf are just two recent examples). In retrospect, the mash-up of these two mediums seems to be a natural one. The gaming industry and the film industry already have many things in common, including similar roles and positions while working in production, comparable production cycles, and many mirrored production concerns.

Also, more and more filmmakers are actively becoming involved with the game industry. For example director/producer Jerry Bruckheimer is partnering with MTV to create a game production lab, Steven Spielberg is getting involved with game development, and director John Woo was recently involved with the production of the game Stranglehold for Midway Games.

Read the rest of the story…

I’ve already discussed about music in films, so now going further I’ve found some interesting facts about the famous musicians (and bands) participating in cinema world. Check this out.
Evrybody knows The Beatles – Paul McCartney (Liverpool, England, 1942–) (guitar); John Lennon (Liverpool, England,1940–1980) (guitar); George Harrison (Liverpool, England, 1943–2001) (guitar); Ringo Starr
(Richard Starkey, Liverpool, England, 1940–)(drums).
The group that started out as the Quarrymen and Johnny and the Moondogs, etc. was simplythe biggest phenomenon in pop music history (although Elvis Presley fans might beg to differ). They were a harbinger of the British Invasion, and are still considered one the greatest (as opposed to only the most popular) musical groups for their ever-maturing musicianship and, not incidentally, showmanship.

The Beatles’ “Yesterday” is the most covered song in history, with more than 3,000 different recordings. Their final live performance came in 1969 and McCartney, Harrison and Lennon went on to sterling careers of their own. Lennon often performed with his wife Yoko Ono, including in the Plastic Ono Band that appeared in the movie Sweet Toronto in 1970.

Their first movie A Hard Day’s Night, directed by American Richard Lester, easily stands on its own as a most worthy comedy film, and is arguably the best movie made by any pop group.

Drummer Ringo Starr, cast as the comedian of the Beatles, went on to an acting career of his own and appeared in  everal American films as a solo performer. A Hard Day’s Night (1964) “A Hard Day’s Night,” “Can’t Buy Me Love” and several other songs * What’s Happening! The Beatles in the U.S.A. (1964) [documentary] * Pop Gear (1965)  [documentary] “She Loves You” and “Twist and Shout”* Help! (1965) “Help!,” “Ticket to Ride” and several other songs * Yellow Submarine (voices only) (1969) “Eleanor Rigby,” “Yellow Submarine,” “When I’m Sixty-Four” and many other songs * Let It Be (1970) [documentary] * The Day the Music Died (1977) [documentary].

P.S. Ringo Starr also become the voice of Thomas The Tank Engine, and became famous as a narrator in his own right.

Shot in 37 days on a small budget, the film had been the critics’ darling during award season, with Eastwood winning the highly coveted New York Film Critics Award for best director.

The script came to Eastwood from writer Paul Haggis, a Canadian who arrived in Los Angeles 20 years earlier and had made a strong living in television. Despite his success he had a difficult time getting anyone in Hollywood interested in the project, including Warner Brothers, long his home studio.

The story is that of Maggie, a Southern girl who has come to Los Angeles looking for an escape from her trailer park roots and welfare-supported family. Though she wants to fight, she has no training and no one is willing to train her, but she comes in time after time to the rundown gym owned by Frankie, where Scrap ekes out a living as a cleanup man. They used to be fighter and cut man, but Frankie allowed Scrap to keep fighting once and it cost the man his eye, something that Frankie feels enormous guilt over. Scrap let go of it a long time ago because he knows that Frankie has greater ghosts hanging around him. His daughter, who abandoned him a long time ago, returns the weekly letters he writes unopened, leading Frankie to church day after day seeking an answer.

In Maggie he finds one.

Read the rest of the story…

In one of the newsgroups about cinema, there is always a flame which is called “tell me what to watch this weekend”. It seems that people can not decide what film to watch on their days off and looking for some recommendations and advice. In one book I accidentally discovered a list of 60 cult films. Can‘t tell that I watched them all, but the ones I have, are definitely worthy to be called cult films. What about you? Do you have that problem “I don‘t know what film to watch” and do you think the films which are on the list are all worth to be here?

Read the rest of the story…

Who is “he”? Well “he” is a guy who occasionally gives me some books about films. Thank you to him once again, as without those books I would be less educated and more disappointed as living in this little country getting any film books is a problem. There are barely two ways to get them – a magic way (something like knowing a nice guy who knows where to find them and he just gives them to you because he can) or a troublesome way (some other way than listed above, probably the one where you have to order or buy books via the internet and wait for the parcel, I’m not sure), anyway, so the last book I received is

“Diva, Defiance and Passion in Early Italian Cinema” by Angela Dalle Vacche

Diva is a book about an age and a sensibility that may be gone, but whose intense debates showed an admirable seriousness of intent and ambition toward results. In a society shaped by the values of classical beauty and Renaissance humanism, Italian modernity negotiated technology with aesthetics, mass regimentation with individual defiance. Sadly, these efforts did not include a meaningful transformation of gender roles. Regardless of its failure to lead the way toward a cinematic avant-garde, the diva film was much more than just escapist melodrama. Rather, this genre turned into an alarming survey of major social problems, such as prostitution, adultery, and out-of-wedlock births.

Read the rest of the story…

When hearing all the gossip about film stars, one instensibly starts to think “why?”. Why film stars earn the biggest money and have the most enjoyable job ever? Why do these things happen and when did they start to happen? Let’s check the film history and see what it says about the first stars.

Mary Pickford, when she joined the Biograph Studio in 1909 at the age of seventeen, her starting salary was $40 a week, a sizeable income for a young woman. Equivalent to four or five times the earnings of an average public school teacher. Over the next eighteen months, her salary rose to $100 a week.

Read the rest of the story…