55th BFI London Film Festival - The Deep Blue Sea (2011)

The Deep Blue Sea, 2011.

Written and Directed by Terence Davies.
Starring Rachel Weisz, Tom Hiddleston, Simon Russell Beale, Karl Johnson, Ann Mitchell, Harry Hadden-Paton, Sarah Kants and Jolyon Coy.


SYNOPSIS:

The wife of a British Judge leaves her husband to embark on a self-destructive love affair with an RAF pilot.


It is quite fitting that the closing film of of this year’s festival is directed by one of the hidden gems of British cinema, Terence Davies. Adapted from Terrence Rattigan’s play, Davies’ The Deep Blue Sea features what could potentially be the most emotionally raw performances of Rachel Weisz’s career.

Set in London in the 1950’s, we see Hester (Weisz) becoming bored of her dull marriage to judge William Collyer (Simon Russell Beale) and her even duller mother-in-law (the very funny Ann Mitchell). When brash, self centred Freddie (Tom Hiddleston), an RAF pilot, offers her something new and exciting she begins an affair with him.

William finds out about her adultery but holds back on a divorce, forcing Hester to deal with the fact the she loves Freddie more than he loves her. At the same time she still holds on to the memory of the comfortable but uninteresting life her husband can provide; caught between the devil and the deep blue sea.

During the opening fifteen to twenty minutes of the film I must admit I thought it showed signs of being a slow, self indulgent movie, however from half an hour in onwards I was engrossed in the characters and the drama involving Hester. As I mentioned previously I believe that this understated role is a stand out performance for Rachel Weisz with a stellar performance from Tom Hiddleston to match.

Davies not only manages to get the best from his actors but he creates a beautifully elegant post war London that thanks to Florian Hoffmeister’s cinematography feels like you are being taken in to nostalgic photographs from that period in British history. Davies also shows us the traditional British ‘stiff upper lip’ and we are treated to scenes of togetherness and camaraderie that provoke genuine feelings of sentiment even in youngsters like myself who have no idea what life was like in the 1950s. And because of that, the time in which Hester’s story is set makes for an interesting character study during a time in Britain that relied heavily on fresh optimism, a paradoxical match that makes for an highly engrossing movie.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

55th BFI London Film Festival - Wild Bill (2011)

Wild Bill, 2011.

Directed by Dexter Fletcher.
Starring Charlie Creed-Miles, Will Poulter, Liz White, Sammy Williams, Leo Gregory, Jaime Winstone, Jason Flemyng, Andy Serkis and Olivia Williams.


SYNOPSIS:

Upon his release from prison, a violent ex-con attempts to build a new life for himself with his two sons, only to run into trouble with his former associates.


The London Film Festival is the perfect platform for British film makers to flaunt their talent to the watching world. According to a recent article in The Guardian, British cinema is on the rise (not something I particular agree with at the moment) so there is an apparent excitement surrounding new films set in the UK.

Wild Bill is set in the London borough of Newham during the period that the Olympic Games stadiums were being built. 15 year old Dean (Will Poulter) works on the building site illegally, but one of the foremen lets him help out to earn more money to support himself and his younger brother Jimmy (Sammy Williams), aged 11, who live parentless in a council flat block. Their mother left them in London and ran off to Spain some years ago but after being in prison for eight years their father, ‘Wild’ Bill, returns.

After first trying to move on from his kids and his past, Bill is blackmailed by Dean into staying for a few weeks for the purpose of a social worker inspection. After the inspection however, Bill tries to patch things up with his family and try to cut all ties with his previous gang associates... but of course that is easier said than done.

Essentially the film plays out like an overdrawn episode of EastEnders and depicts a life of poverty where drug dealing seems to be the only viable escape route. In the brochure for the festival, artistic director Sandra Hebron says these days films offer perfect escapism. This film is one of life that is precisely what cinema goers are trying to escape from, and only serves as a reminder of how bleak life can be these days. From previous primary research I have done for other projects, a lot of people (both British and foreign) said they thought of drugs and crime when I asked them about British cinema, both key features in this movie. But there are depths to this film that I only became aware of towards the end.

The script is in general not that bad, even though it features a shockingly embarrassingly behaving ‘youth’ who made me cringe every second he was on the screen. It is sprinkled with emotional dialogue, especially when Dean addresses his father’s absence (Bill: “I felt bad about missing you birthday”; Dean: “Which one?”). But there is a scene where Dean starts to have sex with a young girl and it is shot energetically and passionately with a raw soundtrack for backing. This to me felt very creepy - watching two young teenagers engage in a tryst like this was uncomfortable to watch!

But in spite of this and the other flaws I have mentioned, I found myself eager to find out the conclusion to the film, so it that respect I suppose it entertained me. It’s not going to break any box office records or stand out as a significant through British film but it might be one to watch if you have nothing to do for a couple of hours.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

55th BFI London Film Festival - Curling King (2011)

Curling King (a.k.a. Kong Curling), 2011.

Directed by Ole Endresen.
Starring Atle Antonsen, Jan Sælid, Jon Øigarden, Linn Skåber and Ane Dahl Torp.


SYNOPSIS:

Years after being banned from the sport, a former curling champion comes out of retirement in the hope of raising funds to pay for a life-saving operation for his old coach.


When browsing the BFI London Film Festival guide, one film grabbed my attention quite unexpectedly: that film was Curling King. And rather excitedly I went along to see it. I was not disappointed.

Curling King focuses on Truls Paulsen (Atle Antonsen), who is at the top of his game in the sport of curling. However, his unfortunate desire to get every last detail perfect sends him over the edge and he is banned from the sport and sectioned.

Years later Truls is released, only to find out his coach and mentor Gordon is seriously ill and needs a lung transplant. He comes up with an idea to help his hero: get his old team back together and win the Curling National Championship, and therefore pocket the prize money, which has been donated by an avid curling fan who pledges his lottery winnings to the victors.

But getting the unbeatable curling team back together is not as easy at seems due to the nature of the characters. There’s the horny guy who will literally sleep with anything, the insomniac who blames his pillows for his lack of sleep rather than his unresolved issues with his father and the quiet one who has a strong interest in birdwatching.

Whilst watching the film I couldn’t help but compare it to the American sporting comedies Blades of Glory and Dodgeball. In Dodgeball Vince Vaughn’s Average Joe’s team enter a national competition to win prize money to keep their gym open and in this movie Team Paulsen want the money to help save Gordon. I didn’t spend the whole film making direct comparisons however certain elements, such as the quirky commentators, did take me back to the Hollywood hit.

But Curling King is a very funny film in its own right, with a strong focus on loyalty and friendship buried beneath the farce. The characters all have hidden depths to them and I really did find myself willing Truls and his comrades to triumph in the face of adversity.

Other secondary characters such as Truls’ wife Sigrid (who spends hours chatting to her best friend on the phone even though they live two doors away from each other) and his arch rival Stefan Ravndal add to a collection of characters who the audience can anticipate something comical is going to happen whenever they are on screen.

There are also some great scenes that really are comedic set pieces of the highest order: watch out for the delivery guy who tries not to disturb the insomniac and the scene where Sigrid tries to seduce the rebellious Truls. These will be just two of the countless talking points post viewing.

I firmly believe that this film has the potential to be one of the sleeper hits of this year’s festival and I recommend it very highly. I will be trying to catch it again with my girlfriend who really wants to see it based on the synopsis and my thoughts and I have no doubt in my mind that she, and anyone else that goes to see it, will be laughing throughout. These days it’s quite rare for a comedy film to be consistently funny for the entire film but Curling King scores a victory on that front too. A must see movie.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

55th BFI London Film Festival - The Future (2011)

The Future, 2011.

Directed by Miranda July.
Starring Miranda July, Hamish Linklater, David Warshofsky and Isabella Acres.


SYNOPSIS:

A couple adopt a stray cat - a decision which radically alters their perspective on life.


The Future is Miranda July’s second feature, and like her debut film Me and You and Everyone We Know (2005) she continues to focus on quirky characters and indulge in surreal flavours of storytelling. This film should stand out alone as it features narration from an injured stray cat (yes, that’s right), but more on this later.

Sophie (played by writer/director July) and Jason (Hamish Linklater) are a couple in their mid-thirties who live in a small apartment in Los Angeles. The film opens with them sitting opposite each other, legs entwined, each on their own individual laptop. Perhaps a message here to highlight how modern technology has infiltrated even the most personal times we spend with those most important to us. But that is not the focus of the film at all.

They want to adopt a stray cat whom they call Paw Paw because of his injured leg. Due to the injury Sophie and Jason must wait for a month before he recovers enough for them to adopt him. After being told that he could live up to five years longer if he is looked after well, having previously been told he may only live for six months, this conjures up feelings of dismay for both members of the couple: that soon they will be approaching the big 4-O, something that Jason acknowledges as “forty is the new fifty. Everything afterwards is loose change.”

And so during the thirty days in which they have to wait for Paw Paw they decide to make drastic changes to their lifestyle’s before, they assume, it’s too late. The first thing they both do is quit their jobs (she, a children’s dance teacher; he, an IT support technician). Jason volunteers for a tree charity looking to address the issue of global warming and Sophie wants to upload dance videos of herself onto the internet like a former work colleague.

All the while we have interjections of Paw Paw’s narration. The cat’s desire to be adopted, his need to be petted and his excitement and determination to wait for Sophie and Jason to collect him are all accompanied by interesting visuals. I couldn’t help but feel these short scenes distracted me from the movie, however they did serve as a constant reminder of the catalyst that altered the couple’s seemingly cosy, if boring, existence together. In the production notes Miranda July says of Paw Paw’s narration “He was the only way I could describe the bittersweet vertigo of true love”, a point that validates this attempt to add depth to the story.

In truth I found it quite difficult to feel emotionally engaged by the two central characters. Sophie especially, particularly in scenes with just her and Jason, really seemed ill at ease. I found myself wondering that if July had focused her attention on either directing the movie or acting in it, but not both, I could have perhaps empathised with Sophie more.

However the same can be said for Hamish Linklater’s Jason. He seemed wooden at times although nuggets of humour did arise with some smart dialogue but that arguably has as much to do with July’s script as his delivery itself.

Addressing the always intriguing notion of mid life crisis is the saving grace of this film as I feel that this movie takes a refreshing approach to exploring the phenomenon. Instead of going through lifestyle changes because they feel they have to, Sophie and Jason decide to because they think they should. Ultimately the film lacked enough pulp to be totally engaging to the audience or rewarding to watch.

Overall I think this film is nothing out of the ordinary and average at best. I doubt it will draw the crowds at the London Film Festival but for those involved and people who like offbeat movies that try to be a little different then they may get more enjoyment out of this picture than I did.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

55th BFI London Film Festival - We Need to Talk About Kevin (2011)

We Need to Talk About Kevin, 2011.

Directed by Lynne Ramsay.
Starring John C. Reilly, Tilda Swinton, Ezra Miller, Siobhan Fallon, Ursula Parker and Ashley Gerasimovich.


SYNOPSIS:

A mother attempts to deal with her guilt and grief over her son, who is responsible for a high-school killing spree.


Having seen posters dotted around various tube stations I was very eager to see Lynne Ramsay’s third film We Need to Talk About Kevin. Adapted from Lionel Shriver’s best selling novel, it primarily tells the story of psychopath Kevin (played by three different actors at various stages of his life but in his teens by Ezra Miller). We see through flashbacks that ever since he was was a toddler Kevin had a hatred towards his mother (Tilda Swinton) and caused her no end of grief with his disobedience and often destructive behaviour. Along with his Dad (John C. Reilly) and a few years later his sister (Ashley Gerasimovich) we see how the family dynamic changes along with Kevin’s progressively abnormal behaviour.

This film is being ‘sold’ to audiences with the notion that this is the performance of Tilda Swinton’s career (to quote one promotional poster directly). Swinton, broken down expression and glass of red wine in hand throughout, does put in what seems to be a very exhausting day at the office however personally I didn’t think her performance was anything too spectacular. Yes she does portray the character of Eva well but a lot of the reviews I have seen of her performance are a little over the top.

Esra Miller is convincing as Kevin, creating a haunting and demonic a deeply disturbing teenager who is dangerously skilled with a bow and arrow (this trait makes sense in the film). John C. Reilly provides some welcome comic relief in places, however I did find that my mind wondered in parts. I felt at times the narrative was repetitive - a flash-back of Kevin causing havoc and then his mother in present time suffering as a consequence of his later horrific crime. I am aware of the need to create this back story though, and although slow sometimes it does paint the appropriate picture of Kevin’s character and the devastating effect his behaviour has on other people.

I have to admit that I have not read the novel on which this film is based, but I will get my hands on a copy as soon as I can as I’m interested in how the story is written in a book as well as played out screen. Although some of my comments may seem a little negative it is mostly entertaining and I did find myself becoming increasingly more curious as to what happens to Kevin’s father and sister in the wake of his crime. The film is poetically shot but the posters oversell this movie in my opinion. It is still worth a watch though but if I were you I wouldn’t get your hopes up. Maybe that way you will find it more rewarding and not feel slightly let down like I did.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

55th BFI London Film Festival - Headhunters (2011)

Headhunters (Norwegian: Hodejegerne), 2011.

Directed by Morten Tyldum.
Starring Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, Julie R. Ølgaard and Aksel Hennie.


SYNOPSIS:

A successful headhunter risks everything in his efforts to steal a valuable painting.


Headhunters is the first book-to-film adaptation of the highly regarded and critically acclaimed Norwegian thriller writer Jo Nesbo. Having previous refused to have his work adapted from page to screen until now, Nesbo has chosen a fitting story to have his storytelling portrayed on the silver screen.

Directed by Marten Tyldum, the story focuses on headhunter Roger Brown (Aksel Hennie). Married to Diana, he feels he is punching above his weight and struggles to afford the lifestyle he thinks will keep her interested in him. In order to make more money on the side Roger - working with his accomplice Ove - steals paintings and sells them on. A chance meeting with the sophisticated Clas Greve (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau) presents Roger with the ultimate piece of art to steal, but is Clas like all his other victims of theft? Of course not.

What ensues over the course of one hundred minutes is an ever intensifying game of cat and mouse, with each new event and revelation adding more fuel to the fire that seems likely to explode at any moment. Every twist in the tale doubles the tension, and there was a scene during which I was physically squirming in my seat, such was my anticipation for the conclusion to this one, of many, showdowns. I was hooked from the opening sequence where Roger introduces himself. A seemingly successful man with a sinister side - a mesh of ingredients to form the perfect protagonist. His duel with Clas was increasingly intriguing as the film went on, and the prospect of finding out who will come out on top kept me gripped throughout.

The script is very strong and features flecks of humour thrown in to compliment the drama. The lead role of Roger is played superbly by Hennie, and the supporting cast perform admirably too. I can confidently say that this will be one of the most engrossing films of the festival. With Curling King and Headhunters Norwegian cinema is represented very strongly in London this year, both films making sure I keep an eye out for future releases from this country. Headhunters should definitely be on the agenda for anyone attending this year’s festival.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

55th BFI London Film Festival - Dreams of a Life (2011)

Dreams of a Life, 2011.

Written and Directed by Carol Morley.
Starring Zawe Ashton, Jonathan Harden, Ki'juan Whitton and Daren Elliott Holmes.


SYNOPSIS:

The sad and intriguing story of a young woman discovered in a London flat three years after her death.


How would you feel if one day someone contacted you and told you that a former lover, an ex work colleague or an old friend's body had been found in her bedsit... but she had in fact been dead for three years and had only just been discovered?

This is what happened to the associates of Joyce Vincent, whose badly decomposed body, which upon discovery was nothing more than a skeleton, was found on the sofa of her home in 2006. Three years down the line from her death, people were flabbergasted that someone can just vanish without anyone trying to find them; as one interviewee points out "even in this twenty first century people still fall through the cracks."

So who exactly was Joyce Vincent? Director Carol Morley went about answering this question by speaking to reporters of the story, old friends and acquaintances and ex boyfriends, who all had very positive things to say about the deceased woman but who also agreed that she must have been hiding some hidden troubles from them.

The documentary is very interesting, and the mystery surrounding Joyce's death is a hugely intriguing subject matter. Through character references and personal stories and anecdotes we are given a picture of what Joyce was like as a person. Fun, outgoing and the centre of attention she attracted a lot of interest. But as the documentary progresses we are highlighted to the darker realms of Joyce's life.

The interviews are very passionate, honest and moving, and the reconstructions of Joyce's actions help paint a picture of her for the audience. Towards the end I personally tried to come to my own conclusions as to why, and perhaps more astonishingly how, a seemingly happy-go-lucky woman's corpse goes unnoticed for several years. I'm sure I wasn't alone in this, and by the end you really feel like you knew Joyce personally. The last shot of the film is footage of the real Joyce, as opposed to the actress in the reconstructions, at a Nelson Mandela rally, which was a fitting tribute to a very moving and thorough investigative documentary.

Morley has made here a subtly powerful film about what it's like to have a place in this world. It will make you ponder, search within yourself and feel grateful for those that are closest to you. And on the way home you may find yourself inclined to call someone you haven't spoken to for a while, just to see if they are ok and to let them know you are thinking of them. This is a thoroughly involving documentary.

Dreams of a Life is released in UK cinemas on December 16th. Visit the official site here.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

55th BFI London Film Festival - 360 (2011)

360, 2011.

Directed by Fernando Meirelles.
Starring Rachel Weisz, Jude Law, Anthony Hopkins, Lucia Siposová, Ben Foster, Vladimir Vdovichenkov and Moritz Bleibtreu.


SYNOPSIS:

A look at what happens when partners from different social backgrounds engage in physical relationships.


360 is a fitting opening night movie for a prestigious international film festival such as LFF. Featuring narratives that take us to Vienna, Bratislava, Paris, London and Denver, just to name a few, this multicultural character cocktail has an intriguing taste.

The movie focuses on characters from all over the globe, in what screenwriter Peter Morgan (The Queen) described as “romantically multicultural” stories. We have Blanka (Lucia Siposová), a Slovakian woman who wants to make more money by becoming an escort; Rose (Rachel Weisz), who is having an affair with a work colleague; John (Anthony Hopkins), a man on his way to America to identify a body that may be his long lost daughters’; Tyler (Ben Foster), a convicted sex offender fresh out of prison and Sergei (Vladimir Vdovichenkov), a Russian associate whose boss gets involved with Blanka, thus completing the full circle of events and coining the title of this film.

Morgan says when he first had the idea for this film he knew he ”wanted a story that began with a prostitute and ended with a prostitute”. What we have in between is essentially a love story, however it features a hell of a lot of adultery. I have seen several films at the festival this year, each one featuring someone in a relationship cheating on their partner. Is that what people (well, film makers in this case) perceive to be true love in the 21st century? Or maybe people’s desire for one another and lack of self discipline simply makes for intriguing stories. In this case I agree with the latter but only because even the smallest of actions by one character in this film has an effect larger in scale on those who fall victim to the knock on affects.

Director Fernando Meirelles (City of God) said in the post screening press conference that he is intrigued by intricate details and how people can “look left or right”. He then used the example of Jude Law’s character changing his mind when he arranged to meet Blanka only to be blackmailed by a rival businessman. Had he not changed his mind, the whole film would have played differently, which highlights the intricacies of the storytelling. It is of the same ilk as the film Babel in terms of its global scope.

The screenplay comes together extremely well. In the press conference the German actor Moritz Bleibtreu said he agreed to his role in the film before even reading the script, such is Peter Morgan’s reputation as a writer. And Meirelles excels in getting the best from every actor involved, no matter how much or little screen time they have. It is a highly delicate cluster of narratives that you, as an audience member, feel can tilt either way at any given moment. A fitting opening to this year's London Film Festival.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

Thoughts on... The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (2010)

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, 2010.

Directed by Michael Apted.
Starring Georgie Henley, Skandar Keynes, Ben Barnes, Will Poulter, Tilda Swinton, Liam Neeson (voice) and Simon Pegg (voice).


SYNOPSIS:

Reunited with newly-anointed King Caspian (Ben Barnes), Lucy (Georgie Henley), Edmund (Skandar Keynes) and cousin Eustace Clarence Scrub (Will Poulter) embark on a quest to find the seven Lost Lords of Narnia.


Lucy (Georgie Henley) and Edmund (Skandar Keynes) return in the third installment of The Chronicles of Narnia film series, this time bringing their up tight cousin Eustace (Channel 4’s School of Comedy actor Will Poulter) along for the ride, or should I say sail, through the world of Narnia.

Lucy and Edmund are staying with their aunt and uncle during the war and are not getting along too well with their cousin Eustace. Treading on each others toes the kids squabble between themselves until a painting of a ship sailing across the sea starts to fill their bedroom with water. Before they know it they are catapulted back into the world of Narnia, a familiar place to Lucy and Edmund, a world made up by “people that read books about fairies” to Eustace. There they are reunited with Prince Caspian (Ben Barnes) and set out to retrieve the seven Lost Lords of Narnia. Their quest takes them to several islands, each with an obstacle the protagonists have to overcome. Reepicheep is also along for the voyage and strikes up an interesting relationship with Eustace, who seems completely unsure of everything that happens in this unfamiliar world.

One thing that surprised me a little was the pace in which we are introduced back to the Narnia environment. Within the first major scene we go through the painting with Lucy, Edmund and Eustace and learn of the quest they must undertake with Caspian and his crew. On a negative note, it was from the beginning of the film I felt slightly annoyed - not by the film itself but by the character of Eustace. Or to be more specific the actor who plays him, Will Poulter. Poulter is a lead actor in Channel 4’s School of Comedy, which in my opinion only teaches people that those who act in it can’t do comedy at all! For the best part of an hour the character of Eustace has a grimace across his face like someone has made him sit on a sparkler. Only when he gets turned into a dragon does the sparkler become unlodged. When he returns to his human form Eustace has learned a lot and shows genuine emotion when he has to leave Narnia along with Lucy and Edmund. Maybe that’s a sign that Poulter should knock comedy on the head and try more serious roles. But he is only seventeen after all.

The narrative is very good. It’s well paced, the action sequences are interesting to watch and the search for the Lost Lords of Narnia is pretty compelling. Unfortunately I would have to recommend seeing this film in 2D. I saw it in 3D and unfortunately I felt it didn’t benefit the film at all. The action sequences would have been just as impressive in 2D and it took a while for my eyes to adjust to some of the settings. I have no doubt kids will enjoy it, and in general I did too, but there a few elements of this film that distract the audience enough to lose concentration in some spells.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

Movie Review Archive

54th BFI London Film Festival: The King's Speech Q&A

Coverage of the Q&A for The King's Speech from the London Film Festival...


In attendance:

• Tom Hooper (Director)
• Colin Firth (Prince Albert/King George)
• Geoffrey Rush (Lionel)
• Helena Bonham Carter (Elizabeth I).

Did you have concerns with representing characters in this film, the main concern being that some of the people are still alive?

Tom: Yeah. I was very careful about the accuracy of the film and I did a lot of research, and so did the actors. That [part of] history does matter to me and facts matter to me. At the same time it was a balancing act between verifiable historical truth and dramatic shape and that relationship is one we have constantly discussed. The great excitement of this film was the discovery, nine weeks before the shoot, that Lionel Logue’s grandson had all these papers in his aunt’s attic which were never before seen, unpublished diaries, fragments of autobiography, even King George VI’s medical report cards describing his rather weak diaphragm. To have these insights into this relationships was really incredibly exciting, particularly nine weeks before the shoot.

Is there a message for the challenges people with disabilities and their families face?

Tom: One I thing I would say that I think’s important in the film is that this film isn’t about the miracle cure. I had a screening in Mill Valley, San Francisco recently and a man came up to me very moved. His mother was disabled, had watched the film and wanted to pass on to me the fact that she was very grateful that we hadn’t made a film about someone that has an ‘I can walk!’ feeling at the end of the film. When Colin [Firth] and I listened to King George VI making his final broadcast he was still clearly a man coping with a stammer. We wanted to avoid any Hollywood climax where suddenly he was completely liberated and was Lawrence Olivier! I think for most people who deal with disabilities it’s not about a cure but working with it and I think that’s an incredibly important part of the movie.

Colin: I don’t really feel competent to address this [question] satisfactorily but the first question, did we feel a responsibility to the living members of the Royal Family is absolutely yes. But I think equally we were trying to address the disabilities that I tried to enact and to try and do it as honestly as possible and like Tom says I think good story telling is never about trying to provide answers. It’s about being honest, it’s about issues and problems and how we seek to eradicate them.

Colin, you gave a great performance in the film. How important is it for you on a personal level and collectively as a film, to be recognised with a flock of awards next year?

Colin: Thank you. I don’t know what’s going to happen next year. The fact people are talking that way is a sign of how positively they’ve responded to it, which is incredibly gratifying. This certainly wasn’t a walk in the park by any means We exhausted every option available to us. But that’s happened to me many many times but then you just get a load of old cabbages thrown at you! There is no justice to appeal to in that respect, people don’t owe you gratitude just because you’ve tried very hard. On this occasion it’s wonderful to see the fact we care as much about something and so far we’ve been getting a lot of awards.

Question for Colin. As a person who suffers from a stammer myself I felt you did a very good job as portraying the King. How much research did you do in order the achieve the performance?

Colin: A lot! What was interesting for me was that you don’t just pull out your stammer from the draw, it really doesn’t work that way. That was an education for me because I thought I could!

Helena: All that hard work!

Colin: It’s not the same, it’s not going to be the same for everybody. It won’t feel the same. What you’re doing every time of course, what you’re really playing is not stammering and that’s really what you’ve got to arrive at. I researched it as an issue and I’ve spoken to people who’ve experienced it, including our own writer [David Seidler] who was probably out best source of all. He’d overcome a stammer himself and he talked to us about it. He was incredibly eloquent. It’s not so much what’s happening physiologically, which I had to try and find in my own way. Tom [Hooper] sculpted it a great deal, ‘how much do we need at this point?’, that sort of thing. There was a lot of very deliberate technical plotting of it, but then you have to do something that’s far more visceral than that, and what interested me the most, rather than what’s going on in a man’s muscles, was talking to David [the writer] about what the fears are. David would say for instance that when it was bad [the stammer] it was all he would think about. In a restaurant you don’t order the fish if you can’t say ‘F’, and your life can be like that, be dictated by that fear. It doesn’t matter what else is at stake in what you have to do that day and those things were very helpful to me in understanding the terror that this man felt. If you look at footage of him making that speech there’s kind of a little narrative to what he’s going through, or how to interpret what he’s going through. He gets to a word, and you can see he gets to a moment when he realises that word is not going to come out. You see the dismay. When you watch that you find out about him, that’s something heroic, there’s something epic going on. The you see him come back at it and carry on with the same desire, there’s nothing to do but move forward. I found that fascinating in understanding his character.

I was wondering if your views of the British monarchy changed at all during the making of this film?

Helena: No! I wouldn’t say that I was unaware to the extent and how chronic it was [the event of Prince Albert becoming King George VI] so it gave me a fresh angle on a very important piece of British history for us, the abdication. We came very close to a proper crisis in our monarchy. The pressure on this man was totally new to me. Also the story about a man who doesn’t want to be King just emphasises the hugeness of the job. I certainly would never want to be a Royal, although I seem to think I am at times! That’s entirely why I played this part because I knew I could play the Queen! I found the part really enjoyable. It was enjoyable you know just to pretend, and then you can take your crown off and not be like that anymore. The Queen Mother was extraordinary because she was a professional public figure and an expert at it. But she had character and confidence. She married a man who was not born to be King and wasn’t really constitutionally meant to be King, so you have to do a job that you’re not suited to. Luckily I think he drew upon her confidence where he lacked it. It was really a true partnership, and also about the woman behind the man. Sadly it wasn’t called The Queen’s Speech! The King’s Speech is about the man behind the man. In the background I’m just there!

Geoffrey you’re from a country that has mixed feelings about monarchy [Australia]! Does this film warm you more to the monarchy? You play the most unknown character yet possibly the most key character in bringing George VI to life.

Geoffrey: I’ve always had an intriguing fascinating obsession with the whole dynasty of British royalty. I find the complexity and history and shaping of their image interesting. And I suppose the House of Windsor which is still with us is to me the first sort of reality TV show. They became a family. I remember the first time they left the cameras in the palace in the late 60’s early 70’s was a sort of ‘At Home with the Windsors’, which was probably the beginning of demystifying them. I just find all that intriguing. I’d like my country to be a bit more adult and independent but I do find the presence of royalty and monarchy still intriguing.

It’s a wonderfully witty script with some fantastic characters, especially Lionel Logue. How much of it is true, how much did you have to fill in the blanks and how did you fill them?

Tom: I’m sure everyone knows about the Royal family and that their ability to control the flow of information from the palace is pretty formidable. I’m sure any press that try to get anything from the Royal family will have discovered that. So that affects our abilities to tell their story even when it’s decades later. The most valuable source for us was the diaries. Lionel only started writing them when Albert became King. When he was the plain old Duke of York I don’t think Lionel realised that this was particularly note worthy, which is quite interesting in terms of the sense of the Duke of York standing. I think when he became King the penny dropped and Lionel thought “I better start keeping a diary” so we had an account of that. But even in the diaries, which are being published later in the year, he’s still incredibly careful not to to talk too much about the detail of what’s happening in the therapy, and for me the things I got out of it were dialogue. At the end of the speech when Lionel says to the King “you still stammered on the ‘W’” and the King says “well I had to throw in a few [mistakes] so they knew it was me” is a direct quote from the diary. That was last spoken out loud by King George VI and Lionel Logue. In terms of where the therapy comes from, the content of the therapy comes out of David’s [the writer] imagination. He has a strong claim of understanding therapy in that period because he was born in 1937, he had a terrible stammer as a child and he went through therapy initially in England and also in America in the 40’s early 50’s, so it was ten or fifteen years after the period that Lionel Logue was practicing. Things like the swearing technique, which I’m often asked if that would have actually happened, we don’t actually know if it was used but the interesting thing is that it was a technique used with David in the 40’s. It was a breakthrough and that’s an incredibly powerful and important thing. In terms of the B plot, the therapy plot, I think the film is a personal exploration of the way David overcame stammering because we don’t have intimate details about Logue and the King. But the A plot, the historical plot, is obviously well documented. The key shift in the script is to compress the chronology because Logue and Bertie met each other a while before the abdication in reality and we compressed it in order to create the ticking clock of the abdication. I did force David to rewrite the script to obey historical chronology and it had a first act with absolutely no pressure that he would ever have to be anything other than the Duke of York, and I turned round to David and said “I just made your script worse! I’m very sorry!” But I had to do it to see if a more historical chronology would work. So it’s a mixture of imagination and fact.

How are you guys with public speaking? I know you’re actors and get attention but it’s not always the case that you like it. Do you ever get stage fright or anything like that?

Helena: I don’t like making speeches. It’s not my idea of complete joy being up here [at the press conference], as much as you are all lovely! I’m the kind of introvert actor, completely crazy. But at times I go for extroversion! But no, I’m not an extrovert. I’m not very good at public speaking, I have absolute sympathy for anyone that does have to do it.

Geoffrey: I’m asked a lot to speak at film festivals and I’m the ambassador for the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra and more public things like that. I’ve discovered now that I prefer to prepare notes or actually write the speech so I can really hone it down to be hopefully entertaining, I try and get a laugh by at least the second line and they say what you need to say. In the early 90’s when I was working in the theatre I did go through a very bad period for about 3 or 4 years of dread inducing panic attacks before going on stage. But then I got an international film career and they sort of disappeared! Someone said to me on a plane flying over Toronto “do you realise more people have a fear of public speaking than death?” Then he said “at a funeral most people would want to be the one in the coffin!”

Colin: I got appalling stage fright last time I went on stage actually. We had a show on the Thursday night, we had only had two weeks rehearsal, we hadn’t had a proper dress rehearsal and there were no prompts. I had to open with a two page monologue and I locked myself in the toilet! I wasn’t planning on doing that! I kept thinking ‘just take a deep breath’ but I couldn’t do it. I went out for some air out the fire door, which closed behind me, so I had to go round the front, through the audience, the very people I was terrified of! I had to walk past them one by one with full body contact on the way. And I couldn’t remember the pass code to get back, I had to beg to be let back in! Then I was told I had to go straight on stage and wierdly I remembered the lines and got on with it. It was like a car crash. So when this does happen there is that tension that can be debilitating and there’s a tension that you can, god willing, convert into something functional.
Was there a moment, especially during the swearing scene, when you thought ‘was the Royal at the film premiere?’ and ‘what will the Queen make of it when she rents the DVD?!’

Colin: It’s crossed my mind! It’s something we have sort of touched on on several occasions. I don’t know, I really don’t know. I think it’s highly unlikely we’ll get anyone to verify this as inaccurate. I just like it too much and it’s quite a significant moment [when the swearing helps combat his stammer]. He goes from almost a complete relapse in front of his brother to a feeling of actual rage. It’s an expression of general panic and also the breakdown of this relationship. You can’t really get that arc without that feeling. Had I had my script version of it the swearing would have been worse! There was a moment when the producers kept running in saying “you can say and that, but you can’t say that! You cannot finish it with that word if you want it to be shown anywhere in the country!” It was frivolous, we weren’t directing it at anybody, we actually felt it had a genuine place as part of out story and as part of the therapy.

Geoffrey: Did you say “poo bum” for the airline version?

Colin: We haven’t got there yet!

So what will the Queen make of it when she gets the DVD?

Colin: I can’t possible comment!

Geoffrey: I can’t imagine Her Majesty has her laptop on and puts that scene on a loop!

Colin: I’m not convinced that there was anyone alive that didn’t know those words.

I particularly enjoyed the comedy of the children and it’s a shame mine won’t be able to see it in the cinema because of the rating. I was wondering what your thoughts were on the decision by the BBFC [to rate it 15] considering that more violent things have lower ratings.

Tom: My head is in my hands with that. I go to see Salt where a tube is shoved down Angelina Jolie’s throat and a water is then poured down to simulate drowning, that’s not a problem. The Daniel Craig scene in the last Bond where his bollocks are smashed in by a chair with no bottom, another torture scene, that doesn’t get a [age restriction rating of] 15. This extraordinary division between language and violence and sex and violence I find hugely uncertain.

Colin: Especially in the context of this language [used in this film].

Tom: Those two scenes I just mentioned are still in my head and I don’t want them in my head. There troubling me. The context of the swear words [in this film] is a) this was done in the 1940’s, we’re now 2010, b) it’s therapeutic, c) it’s not being used to describe anyone, it’s not being used in a sexual meaning... I’m just bemused by it.

Colin: It would be very interesting actually for someone to do a study to whether people would complain about that stuff [swearing in this film] before they complain about violence. I’d actually like to find out.

THE KING’S SPEECH HAS SINCE BEEN GIVEN A 12A RATING

Helena, when you’re playing a real character like this do you delve into the research or do you just go by the script? And also do you try these people out at home to see how they’re going to play?

Helena: It’s only when you’re playing a real person that you feel a real sense of responsibility. I did read William Shawcroft a bit but then it got a bit ‘vainy’ to be honest. I read an unorthorised biography [about the Queen mother]. I didn’t actually have that long, I had about two and a half weeks. I think I was playing a witch in Harry Potter at the same time. My son who’s six used to say “do you have to be a witch or the Queen tomorrow?” Anyway, you do all the reading and I took what was relevant and I watched a bit [of footage]. Normally I don’t look like her, I hope... I don’t mean that in a bad way, I meant her last years, actually... oh dear! Well, Colin doesn’t really look like him [King George VI] but you try and capture some kind of essence.

Colin, what did you know about King George VI before you took on the role and do you think he is underrated and Helena, did you ever meet the Queen Mother and if so did it affect your role?

Colin: I didn’t know much. My parents were children during his reign and I think I heard my mother talk about his reluctance to take the throne and about what a crisis that would have been for him personally. I have admiration for him. I remember my mother telling me about the stammer and that’s as much as I can remember. That would be about it, I knew nothing else at all.

Helena: I did meet the Queen Mother. I think she came to premiere of A Room with a View. I got what i think most people got from her. She had this great faith, was great at being gracious. I think underneath it, having read about her, she had a huge amount of inner strength. Someone once said she was a marshmallow but made by a welding machine! I tried to get that duality.

As we move into the future without the UK Film Council is there a need for leading British film actors playing more important roles in supporting British cinema?

Geoffrey: I think they should!

Helena: I agree, I mean we don’t create our own roles. If people wrote good parts and offered them all to me...

Colin: If you get good material and we do it justice then we’re more likely to give it a go. It’s basically the whole business together working as hard as possible. That’s presuming we can even get off the ground. I think the Film Council will just have to be remade in another name. Something like will have to exist.

Read our review of The King's Speech here.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

54th BFI London Film Festival: 127 Hours (2010)

127 Hours, 2010.

Directed by Danny Boyle.
Starring James Franco, Kate Mara, Amber Tamblyn, Clémence Poésy and Lizzy Caplan.


SYNOPSIS:

The true story of mountain climber Aron Ralston, who found himself trapped by a boulder for five days in May 2003.


Slumdog Millionaire had phenomenal success, winning eight Oscars and seven BAFTA’s to name just a few awards it picked up. So how do the same filmmaking team follow up a movie that has literally won everything? Danny Boyle (director) and Simon Beaufoy (writer) give you... 127 Hours.

Based on Aron Ralston’s book Between a Rock and a Hard Place, the film details his horrific ordeal whilst climbing a canyon in Utah. He falls down a crevasse and his right arm gets trapped by a loose boulder that pins him down in the crack of an awesomely desolate valley. Aron, being a self-confessed ‘hard nut’, goes on his adventure without notifying anybody of his whereabouts, something that it quite humourously dealt with at the end of the film: “Aron now leaves a note letting people know where he is going”.

Boyle expertly takes the audience in to the ‘situation’ Aron (played very well by James Franco) finds himself in. In a few films that are quite claustrophobic audiences feel threatened by the scenarios, but as well as that in 127 Hours I found myself constantly thinking ‘what would I do in this situation?’ after every attempt Aron makes to try and free himself. His final option, which many already know, is still done in highly dramatic and real fashion. There have been reports that several people have fainted during the scene where he frees himself, and in an interview with TXT Movie Club Boyle says “The danger is that it becomes the be all and end all of seeing the movie. What follows is a moment of redemption where he enters into the sunlight. People should see it in that context. I hope it doesn’t put people off who feel that they might get too distressed by it. It’s not distressing in that sense, but it is intense.”

The film has a similar feel to the recent released Buried starring Ryan Reynolds. Both protagonists find themselves trapped in seemingly inescapable positions, the only difference is that Boyle mixes things up a bit. I’m not taking anything away from Buried, I thoroughly enjoyed that film, nor am I comparing it directly to 127 Hours. But Boyle uses flash backs, hallucinations and a range of creative camera angles to liven up what has the potential to be a boring sequence of events. Seeing someone trapped for a long while, there is only so much you can do with a brief like that to work from, but Boyle’s flair is tried and tested here - and it passes with flying colours.

Another interesting dimension added to the dilemma is Aron’s humour. He has with him a camcorder and a digital camera (which he uses to take a photo of an important possession he leaves behind when he escapes). He records videos for his family should he not make it back and makes funny remarks to help keep his spirits up. Either through humour or insanity he also mock interviews himself, even saying “you didn’t even tell anyone where you were going? Oops!” If these video recordings are indeed based on the Ralston’s actual messages then it really does show his inner strength.

Danny Boyle teams up with two cinematographers on this film, one of whom he has worked with before on Slumdog. Slumdog had a dazzling array of bright colours in a lot of scenes that were captured beautifully, and in 127 Hours there is one colour that is dominant - orange. Rich orange covers the terrain that Aron explores and although it is a dominant feature it is not over baring. The battle of man vs nature is portrayed excellently and the aerial shots of the canyon really emphasise its beauty, vastness and unpredictability.

Overall the film is gripping, more funny than I thought it would be, thought provoking and it has a powerful ending with shots of the real Aron and his young family. Boyle can again add another film to his consistently great filmography.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

Movie Review Archive

Special Features - A conversation with producer Daniel Pleacoff

Jon Dudley interviews Daniel Pleacoff, producer of Treasure of the Black Jaguar...


Tell us a little about this project.

Daniel: The project originally started with Masayuki Imai who was doing a film out in L.A. and the production wasn’t going really well, it was just kind of a mess. Cameron Van Hoy, who is the producer of this Treasure of the Black Jaguar project and an actor in the film, was an actor in [Masayuki Imai’s original film] as well. Basically he went to them and said “look, we want to make a better film for you guys, this film doesn’t do Masa justice.” He went to them and raised the money and we made Treasure of the Black Jaguar.

Treasure of the Black Jaguar was originally a script Cameron [Van Hoy] had come up with a few years back, and it was an homage to Treasure of the Sierra Madre. It’s about three guys that go out into the desert also looking for something valuable and realising that their greed actually turns the three characters against each other. So we have the same thing with a new directing style and a new way of telling the story from maybe a younger perspective, a younger point of view - on a more indie kind of scale.

What was the reception of the film after it was screened at Raindance?

Daniel: We were very surprised. We were very happy to have a very warm reception to the project. We didn’t really know what to expect when we first went in to the project and so we were happy to find out that people really enjoyed it. So far what we’ve gotten [as feedback] is the directing of the film is very stylistic and that they are a lot of cool moments, a lot of cool shots. The geography we had was absolutely beautiful and that really added a lot to the production value. It was just an amazing journey the whole way through, from the point of view of the story, from the point of view of us a film makers because we had a little crew out in the middle of the desert, in the middle of nowhere, not knowing if anybody was ever going to see it, and here we are! We have been very grateful for the reception so far and it’s been very kind.

Has the positive feedback enabled you to secure distribution for the film?

Daniel: Just from the U.K. we have already started to get a lot of interest. After last Saturday’s screening at The Apollo Cinema we had a bunch of meetings set up for this last week. We went to Sony, Paramount, Warner Brother’s, so now we’re talking, we’re announcing, we’re sending out screeners and negotiating, just to understand what options are available to us. I personally just flew back from Rome just before this screening. I came straight from the airport here. I met with some Italian distributors who are very interested. They are yet to see the film, I’m sure they will love it but in the mean time it’s just the trailer which has gotten us a pretty long way so far.

Masa Imai is a rather [well] known actor in Japan so for us we’re very lucky to have him. So we know, just through him alone, we’re pretty confident we’re going to have a good trail in Japan and the people of Japan are going to get to see it. Basically the idea was that if we had him we could get at least one market for sure! We also actually have a follow up movie also with Masa Imai called Miracle Man. That’s the next movie, we’ve shot, completed, we’re in the post [production] process right now, just picking up the colour and sound. Hopefully we’ll be screening it next year, maybe even as soon as January.

Does that mean you will enter it to the Sundance Film Festival?

Daniel: We’ve submitted to Sundance, we’ve submitted to Slamdance, we’ve submitted to Tribeca. We’re confident about Tribeca, Sundance and Slamdance we’re still waiting on where we’ll probably find out in November. We don’t really know. Just out of this last week from the last screening we’ve got a lot of indication from the festival. Now we’re just deciding on the best strategy for us. In a year from now we expect to have it worldwide as fast as we can, explore our market potential and follow that up with our second movie, also starring Cameron Van Hoy and Mike Dreyer and Masa Imai.

They [Van Hoy and Michael Dreyer] both put in great performances in Treasure of the Black Jaguar. The performances helped keep the audiences attention. We had a lot of problems along the way, things we didn’t expect. This was collectively our first feature film that we have all worked on together. We’re really excited to know that it’s possible, that we were able to do it, that we can move forward from here and have our second follow up film.

Are you able to reveal the budget at all?

Daniel: I want everyone to see it first.

Of course. You don’t want people to judge the film against the budget?

Daniel: We don’t want people to judge it against the budget because at the end of the day it all came down to people. There was a lot of relationship and at the end of the day it just came down to people working really hard. The value of the film is more of the hard work put in to it and not so much the actual hard dollar. I’d love to tell you [the budget]!

You’re a very young producer in this business. What did you do prior to this project?

Daniel: Well, I’m twenty five years old. I’ve been making movies since I was twelve years old with my buddies. It’s always been a passion of mine even though my parents hated it. They wanted me to be a lawyer or a doctor or something! And this is a very risky business. But I’m alive only once in my life, I get one chance to do what I really want to do.

When I was nineteen I was very lucky. I got an internship working on Saturday Night Live for two years in New York. So I was at NBC for two years and I really got to go around the block and I got to understand what it was like to be in the industry. I made a lot of great relationships while I was there. Then after that I just worked my way up. I PA’d [personal assistant] for a number of years, I was a script supervisor, I was a boom operator. I’ve done everything there is to do in film so for me now as a producer, all those elements of ‘how can we put together a film’, when I’m on set I know what everyone else’s job is. I also know the problems they might expect and now I’m in a better position to expect problems and try to avoid them. Each time around I always try to be better and better and better, look at the mistakes I’ve made in the past and fix them for the next project.

So in that sense was this film a learning curve for your second project [with Masayuki Imai]?

Daniel: Treasure of the Black Jaguar was absolutely a learning curve. There were a lot of things we didn’t really expect and that was maybe my own ignorance really, I just didn’t know certain elements and what to expect. So the second time around I was a lot more prepared, a lot more organised because at the end of the day I was really like a one man army. I did the job of maybe twenty people and so that meant three or four months with three or four hours of sleep a night and I was traumatised at the end of it! At the end of the whole process I just wanted to be gone and thought ‘never again will I do it this way!’ I hope to continue building and raise more awareness of the project. It will reach a time when it will just be smooth sailing.

What is it in particular about Treasure of the Black Jaguar that you think will attract and engage audiences?

Daniel: The performances themselves are very good. The actors that we had are studio actors, they had already been vetted. Mike Dreyer has been in The Sopranos, Cameron Van Hoy has been in several films and worked with Academy Award winning actors. He was in the TV show Crash with Dennis Hopper which was the TV version of the film. Timothy Murphy has been in a number of films himself. Right now he has an amazing commercial out in the US that has gotten him a lot of awareness which could put this [film] on the map even more. He’s an Irish actor so all these things come together. At the end of the day the story is about the treasure of the Black Jaguar, a real story from ancient Mayan history. The whole 2012 thing has been an issue, people don’t know what to expect, they don’t know if it’s the real thing. Either way people seem to be enchanted, myself included, in the idea that something might happen on that day and so anything that has to do with a mysterious object that brings about greed will intrigue [audiences], especially in the middle of the desert.

We shot about four hours outside of L.A. and so we had this amazing geography, mountains and canyons and cliffs. It was a hard thing to shoot because we were out there with very little luxury. We were sending down our equipment on a rope! Down forty or fifty feet into a canyon, and it’s expensive stuff! We had to be very careful.

Yes I can imagine! I saw on the end credits that the film was shot entirely on location in California, like you mentioned. What was it like organising locations and sets?

Daniel: Well the only design elements were the interior locations, the brothel sequence for example. We literally shot that in a bar and we had our set designer who really did a great job in bringing to life the room, the feel, the look, the colours, the entire ambience of what we were trying to get. But as far the exteriors go the desert really spoke for itself. We shot in a little town called Lone Pine where John Wayne did all his movies. Stage Coach was filmed there and a lot of other famous western films, so we were very proud to be a part of that. This movie in my opinion is a classic American independent film and I’m very glad with the reception we’ve had from a European perspective. But like I said, we really didn’t know what to expect.

Treasure of the Black Jaguar trailer:


Read our review of the film here.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

Thoughts on... Treasure of the Black Jaguar (2010)

Treasure of the Black Jaguar, 2010.

Directed by Mike Bruce.
Starring Cameron Van Hoy, Michael Drayer, Timothy V. Murphy and Masayuki Imai.


SYNOPSIS:

Two boys discover that easy money is just a mirage when their desert-based caper takes a murderous turn.


Treasure of the Black Jaguar is an American independent film that received a positive reception after being screened at Raindance. Having now seen the film myself I honestly feel that after its theatrical release it has the potential to be accepted as a real gem of indie cinema.

The story focuses on two friends, Anthony (played by co-writer Cameron Van Hoy) and Shlomo (Michael Drayer) who end up in prison after failing with a ‘get rich quick’ scheme. Whilst inside they meet treasure hunter Blake West (Timothy V. Murphy) who helps them escape and takes them on an expedition to retrieve a mysterious artifact - along with the fame and fortune that comes with it. Unfortunately for the trio a former colleague of West’s, Katsu Taka (Masayuki Imai), is also after the same prize.

One of the film’s strong points is how the two lads have the audience’s emotional support throughout the movie. I have seen many road trip/traveller films and often find myself just waiting to see what happens and wondering, but not caring, how the protagonists will overcome the obstacle in front of them. Even before they encounter any problems themselves I was urging Anthony and Shlomo, led by Blake, to get to their target successfully... but of course if everything had gone smoothly it wouldn’t have made for an entertaining movie.

Whilst on their adventure I couldn’t help but be reminded of the Burt Reynold’s film Deliverance - partly because of the similarities between the character’s situations (they set out to achieve something but encounter trouble along the way) but also because both films give the audience a visual feast with American back-country settings.

The ‘mission’ in Treasure of the Black Jaguar was filmed solely in Lone Pine, in the Californian desert. It’s the perfect location - the desert is an isolated environment but also represents perhaps the naivety of the two boys who aren’t entirely sure of what they are searching for or what will happen if they find it. Which leads me to my next point...

One of the charms of independent films is that they are not afraid to take their stories down less obvious, crowd pleasing routes. Without trying to give too much away, one of the plot points delivers quite a vicious and unexpected outcome, something that may not have been allowed had this been a studio production. And the good thing about it is that it grabs the audience with an emotional hook and doesn’t let go.

Treasure of the Black Jaguar is a strong independent film blending themes such as friendship, ambition, inner strength with a dose of vulnerability together to create a smooth yet punchy story to audiences. I genuinely believe this can get the right reception it needs to be an underdog indie hit.

Be sure to check out our exclusive interview with Daniel Pleacoff, producer of Treasure of the Black Jaguar, which you can find here.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

Movie Review Archive

54th BFI London Film Festival: West is West Q&A

Coverage of the West is West Q&A from the London Film Festival...

In attendance:

• Ayub Khan-Din (Writer)
• Lesley Nicol (Anne)
• Ila Arun (Basheera)
• Aquib Khan (Sajid)
• Emil Marwa (Maneer)
• Om Puri (George)

It’s been eleven years since the first film (East is East) which was very successful. It seems an extraordinary long time for a sequel when in general sequels tend to get rushed out. Explain a little why it’s taken so long.

Ayub: Before I was writing I was an actor and writing was just something I did as a hobby between jobs. I had written East is East in around ’82/’83 when I was at drama school and again much later, I think it was ’89/’90, I wrote a film called Riffle Was Here which was basically West is West. It was the follow on from East is East. After East is East came out I didn’t think about writing a sequel to it. Riffle Was Here was around. The “huge-ness” of the success of East is East was off putting. Also, having seen lots of other sequels that didn’t quite capture the original of that author was a stumbling block for me. But then a couple of years ago I stared looking a the script for Riffle Was Here and I just kind of thought what was important was to create a film that was a story in itself. You wouldn’t have to refer back to East is East, it had to be a stand alone story for me. And also for me, the worst thing about sequels is they do try to go back and do the same kind of gags and things that the earlier film did. So for me this film had to move forward, both emotionally and with the comic stance as well.

The film started off very light hearted and then developed well into a deeper area. When is the next part of the trilogy going to be?

Ayub: The thing about trilogies is that people always look at the first and second films. I don’t know probably this year or next year. I’m thinking about it now.


Three of our guests here are returning from the first film. Om, you return as the fearsome George. It must be strange coming back to a character after so long. How did it feel?

Om: It feels normal to me. The way George Khan gradually develops in East is East, I look at him at the end of the film as a mellowed person. When he’s about to hit his wife, Emil (Mandeer) grabs his hand and looks straight into his eyes and that’s where I tried to interpret that in George Khan’s eyes, the feeling is that his empire is over. He can’t take the children for granted any more and therefore he has to change his perspective and he has to behave himself. He spends the entire night in the chip shop. In the morning when Ella finds him sitting there on a chair and she asks him if he wants a cup of tea he says “I’ll have half a cup”. In this film he’s a much mellowed George Khan who’s matured, who’s full of guilt, embarrassment, awkwardness, especially when his British wife, without announcing it, lands in Pakistan and he’s totally dumbfounded. He doesn’t know how to react and how to handle this enourmous situation.

How much research did you have to put in for the script [for growing up in a mixed race household]?

Ayub: East is East is pretty autobiographical. The parents were directly drawn from my own parents. In my family there were ten kids, but unfortunately with the play [East is East was originally a stage play], and also with the film, we couldn’t afford to have a bigger cast so it was all kind of condensed down. All the arguments, like the children arguing in East is East, I formed in my own head over a period of time. it’s not something you think about when you’re a kid, you just duck. With my Dad basically you just ducked down quick and let the next one get it! So you don’t really think in those kind of terms about the wider argument, it’s only later on when I started writing East is East that I tried to understand his perspective on life, who he was, how he thought our lives should be. It was only at that time, much later, that those arguments kind of formed, and I automatically started drawing on experiences and situations that happened to me. West is West again is based on my experience. I got sent to Pakistan when I was twelve years old. I was wagging school, doing a bit of shop lifting, just being a horrible teenager. My brother was already out there and my parents thought it might be a good idea to get rid of me for a year for me to look at a different life outside of Salford. I did go there and I ran riot for a year. My Dad’s first wife and family weren’t keen on me, I wasn’t keen on them and we were just kind of knocking heads all the time. But again much later when I came to start writing West is West, after East is East there were a lot of unanswered questions. People wanted to know more, people wanted to specifically know more about that woman in Pakistan and about the daughters and about the children. For me I thought I want to know more. All I knew was the antagonism that we had, but I really wanted to explore how that woman felt. After thirty five years suddenly he [George] sends two boys who turn up on her doorstep. It enabled me to try and get into her skin and to try and tell her story.

Emil: Well I was first part of the stage play and being mixed race myself I drew from my own experience. What was nice was reading West is West and actually seeing that my character had a nicer journey if you like, a more mature journey. He becomes a man, he is standing up to his father which he doesn’t have the opportunity to do in East is East. It was great for me as an actor to take that character on further and develop him in such a way. Ayub wrote it in such a way that it gives Maneer [his character] a chance to sort of develop out of this religious zone where he’s desperately trying to please his father. He goes to Pakistan in order to find a wife but at the same time he learns that things aren’t the way his father told him they were, and that’s what gives him the strength to stand up to him. And eventually, luckily enough, he finds himself a wife.


Aquib, this is your first acting experience and you’re taking over, if you like, a character [Sajid] that was rather well loved first time around. That must have been quite a challenge?

Aquib: Yeah, nearly everyone I know has seen East is East so I knew it would be pretty challenging but I thought I’d relate myself towards him because I am an annoying little teenager! So actually it was pretty easy!

So some experiences you have in the film, are they from real life too?

Aquib: Yeah there were some experiences from real life. I have lived in some areas around where I live, in Bradford, which were pretty racist and me being British Pakistani I could draw from those experiences and add it towards this film. He [Sajid] experiences racism from both sides not just from the white culture but the Pakistani culture as well. When he goes there they say “who’s this little English boy?”

What were the challenges, if any, when scripting this film to make it appear as a stand alone film?

Ayub: I think the major challenge for me, even before I started writing it, was thinking about Ella and the first wife in Pakistan. It was one of the most important issues in the film, that these two people have to communicate in some way. Every time I started thinking about it I was coming up against a brick wall because technically one spoke English and one spoke Punjabi so to have a third party in that scene that they have together in the film would have been taking away from it. And then it suddenly dawned on me that it didn’t matter that they didn’t speak the same language because they were talking about the one person they both loved, in a different way, but it was the one person they were both focusing on at that point. They communicate through the gestures they make. I wanted to be really clear when I was writing about that, about the way they both touched things and touched each other. Until I got that, that was the most difficult part of the project for me. Once that had happened so many different things started falling into place. I wanted to tell Basheera’s story well, without just being about this angry woman who had been abandoned thirty five years before. I wanted to make her a rounded character so you could understand exactly who she was and the decisions that she was going to make about this relationship and this man. A lot of the groundwork had gone in when I wrote Riffle Was Here so it wasn’t just jumping in to something that was completely new. I had a rough outline from the original script I started to write that I could follow. I was also trying to follow on from East is East so I had to decide to take only two of the boys. It was hard to discard those other characters because they were fantastic and needed to have a voice as well but I thought at this point the two most important were Sajid, the youngest boy, an Maneer the religious boy. Both those characters had to have a Road to Damascus moment.

Ila, you are new cast member is this potential saga. When you read the script how truthful did you feel it was from when you first saw it?

Ila: Like Ayub said, my character was genuinely a very well written role, and I can see thousands of such women who are forced to be silent. I could see their pain, so for me to get into that role it’s emotional, for any woman not just Pakistani. So for this fantastic role I can give what a woman can give, all the emotions. I [as the character] was told be silent for all those years, I don’t just want to speak for two minutes now.

Ila and Aquib, what was it like joining an already established cast, and also for everyone, what challenges did you face shooting in India?

Aquib: At first I found it pretty hard to blend in to the family, but I just thought ‘I am Sajid’, he is me now, and pretended the character hasn’t changed. Going to India was fantastic, it was the first time I’ve been there, I love the climate obviously, coming from rainy Britain! I stayed there for six or seven weeks. I’ve been to Pakistan before so it’s a lot like that, I could speak the language so it was great.

Ila: I always felt I was part of the family as Mrs Khan number one! So I’m shocked when [speaking in character] my husband comes back with these two sons who will take their own time to adjust. I felt absolutely at home. I think it was a difficult job for George (Om Puri) who ignored me, left and created his own world. I was waiting for them to come back and for me it wasn’t a problem.


Lesley you are another returning character [as Auntie Annie]. What were the challenges you faced in India?

Lesley: To be honest there weren’t really any challenges. It was one of those dream jobs. I’ve been a part of this whole East is East project, and West is West, for fourteen years. We did the stage play together, it’s been a family affair for a very long time. Weirdly Ayub [writer] and I had been working together in a television drama when he handed me the script and said ‘do you want to have a look at this?’ It’s been a project very close to our hearts, still is. India is beyond wonderful and I can’t wait to go back. All the crew their, the Indian crew, and to have Ila there was a great privilege and everyone was wonderful as always. It was a very very happy job and I feel lucky to have been there.

Ayub, were you conscious to portray a more positive image of Pakistan than we often see in the media over here , and were would you take the trilogy in the third part? Would we be following them once they [the Khan family] got back to the UK?

Ayub: So many things happened after East is East, like the bombings in London. No matter what I did people were going to refer back to that. I was writing about the Pakistan I saw in 1974 when I was there. You can’t make references to what’s going on today and what’s happening in Pakistan now. I didn’t attempt that, I just wanted to portray what I saw at the time and put my characters into that period. In terms of what’s going to happen next I can’t really say yet! George has got an understanding with his younger son and at the end of East is East there was a kind of ‘live and let live’ situation that was going on with the older sons. He hasn’t really come to turn with his older sons and his older sons haven’t really come to terms with him yet. There has to be a situation that brings those people together. Even being brought together by an emotional situation, whether or not they’ll walk away with any further understanding of each other I’ve yet to kind of develop.

Om, if you could chose what Ayub wrote about you [as George] for the third film what would you like him to do with your character?

Om: I want to live with both the women!

Aquib, this is your first film, and a major role, how did that feel? And on the subject of this being a trilogy is it going to be set in the 70’s/80’s again or are you going to bring it to 2010/2011?

Ayub: No it’s going to be around the time I left school so ’77, ’78, late seventies, early eighties.

Lesley: Well the clothes are fabulous!

And Aquib, how did this first major role feel and did anything go wrong at all?

Aquib: I wouldn’t say anything went wrong, it was all smooth. I just tried not to think about it because I knew if I thought about it there’d be pressure and I might break down! I just thought ‘this is my new family for six weeks’ and to just blend in. I just thought ‘I’m Sajid now’, it’s pretty easy to play, that’s it!

It’s been eleven years now, and I remember when East is East came out and it felt like a landmark, a chance to see Asians in a great British film. There have been more representations since so I wondered what the panel thought of the intervening years, whether we’ve [Asians] been represented more on screen.

Om: I’m not really familiar because I don’t live here.

Emil: I’m thinking off the top of my head, Slumdog Millionaire. Well actually that’s set in India isn’t it. We’re talking Bend It Like Beckham, It’s A Wonderful Afterlife, Gurinder [Chadha]’s films. Basically I can only think of Gurinder’s films, so in answer to that I would have to say not really.

Ayub let me just come to you with this. I remember talking to you a few years ago and you saying that there had been a very limited representation, an almost patronising wave of Asian characters. I think you yourself were in something like London Bridge, a television series, then things perked up a bit. What’s your observation?

Ayub: It changes. When I came out of drama school, the only representation we [Asians] had in the media was we either played shopkeepers or were beaten up by skinheads, or we were just being allowed to be doctors. But it gets better. Without My Beautiful Laundrette [a British film from 1985] there wouldn’t have been Brothers in Trouble [another British Asian film from 1995, also starring Om Puri], without those two there wouldn’t have been East is East. Every generation moves it on a little step more. It’s hard enough getting films made whether you’re Asian or not, the money isn’t there. There’s even less money there now because of the cut to the UK Film Council, which was a major mistake. They kind of supported young black filmmakers, and I include everyone in that [Asian, Indian, Pakistani filmmakers]. It was a place where young black filmmakers were helped, were encouraged. We’ve still got Channel 4, Film 4 and the BBC but it much smaller ways. But it helps every time a film like East is East or Bend It like Beckham comes out, it just pushed to the fore that black stories are mainstream, it doesn’t just have to be specifically about black problems. Emotions are universal. Every film that comes along helps that.

Read our review of West is West here.

Jon Dudley is a freelance film and television journalist and his 17-minute short film Justification was shown at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.