Saturday, June 12, 2010

Short Film Showcase - On Your Mark (1995)

On Your Mark, 1995.

Written and Directed by Hayao Miyazaki.
Music by Chage and Aska.

Produced by Hayao Miyazaki and his animation company Studio Ghibli, On Your Mark is a seven-minute fantasy music video made to accompany the 1995 song of the same name by Japanese pop duo Chage and Aska. Partly inspired by the Chernobyl disaster of 1986, the film is set in a futuristic world where radiation sickness and disease are rampant. It tells the story of two anti-terrorist policemen who discover a winged girl (described by Miyazaki as the "bird girl") during a raid on a religious cult. When scientists come and take the girl away, the two men risk their careers as they set out to free her from a life of experimentation.

Told in a non-linear form and without dialogue, On Your Mark is the acclaimed animation studio's best-known short and received a theatrical release in Japan alongside Ghibli's 1995 anime Whisper of the Heart. For more on the works of Hayao Miyazaki, be sure to check out Trevor Hogg's comprehensive five part profile Drawn to Anime.


Embed courtesy of DailyMotion.

Related:

Movies... For Free! Howl's Moving Castle (2004)

Click here to view more short films and public domain features.

Friday, June 11, 2010

Thoughts on... The Brothers Bloom (2008)

The Brothers Bloom, 2008.

Written and Directed by Rian Johnson.
Starring Adrien Brody, Mark Ruffalo, Rachel Weisz and Rinko Kikuchi.

The Brothers Bloom
SYNOPSIS:

Written and directed by Rian Johnson (Brick), this film is about two brothers, Stephen (Mark Ruffalo) and Bloom (Adrien Brody), who are some of the best con men in the world. But Bloom wants out; he wants a life free from lies and deception. Stephen convinces him to embark in once last con, the chosen target a rich and beautiful woman named Penelope (Rachel Weisz).

The Brothers Bloom
It has been a long time since I have seen such a wonderfully written, directed and acted film. With the start of the summer blockbusters beginning this film was a refreshing and very enjoyable break and reminded me just how good a film can be when everything aligns.

The story follows two brothers, orphaned at a young age and shipped from home to home because of bad behaviour, discover their skills in deception and conning. As adults nothing has changed, they travel around the world performing cons with their assistant ‘Bang Bang’ (Rinko Kikuchi), but Bloom is growing tired of living a scripted and fake life, and wants to find something real. Stephen persuades him into one final big con to end on before retiring, the target of which is a wealthy and eccentric beautiful woman called Penelope (Rachel Weisz) who lives alone in a large estate collecting hobbies.

The con involves Bloom becoming close to Penelope and convincing her to join them on their adventures. They explain to her that they are smugglers, looking to steal a rare and valuable book which they can only accomplish with her help. By acting as though she has all the power and decision making, Penelope happily volunteers to use her money to help smuggle the book out from its location, unaware that she is being conned. However nothing ever goes as planned.

Rachel Weisz is if possible even more perfect than ever playing this charming and eccentric woman and you cannot help but love her, especially as her character begins to fall in love with both the lifestyle of a pretend smuggler and the attraction between Penelope and Bloom grows, unaware that everything she feels has been manipulated that way. The interactions between her character and Adrien Brody’s are brilliant, warming and incredibly funny to watch so that evening mundane car driving scenes are engaging. The brother relationship between Mark Ruffalo and Adrien Brody is fast-paced, witty and riveting as both brothers obviously care about each other but Bloom feeling constantly cautious about the possibility of being conned by Stephen. Considering she had next to no dialogue, Rinko Kikuchi is superb as explosions expert ‘Bang Bang’, the brothers’ literally silent partner and with just actions and a fetish for blowing things up you’ll love her character too. The smaller roles played by Robbie Coltrane as a Belgium smuggler and Maximilian Schell as a Russian set to exact revenge on the brothers were both fantastic in their absurdly hilarious characters.

It is hard to find many faults with this film, and at a stretch the only problem I can think to comment on is the ending, which feels as though it falls short in comparison with the rest of the film, and perhaps a hint of a conspiracy twist at the end might have been more in tone with the film. Nonetheless The Brothers Bloom is a near perfect film which should not be missed just because of the lack of advertising against competitors like Prince of Persia and Sex and the City 2. I cannot recommend this film enough, so find out where it’s showing near you, and go and watch it instantly.

Vicki Isitt

Movie Review Archive

Thursday, June 10, 2010

Cult Classics - Barbarella (1968)

Barbarella: Queen of the Galaxy, 1968.

Directed by Roger Vadim.
Starring Jane Fonda, John Phillip Law and Anita Pallenberg.

Barbarella poster
SYNOPSIS:

In the distant future a beautiful space-age heroine is tasked by the President of Earth with capturing an evil scientist who threatens universal peace.

Barbarella Jane Fonda
See films differently, say Volkswagen on their adverts to promote their sponsorship of independent cinema.

I have always held a view on Barbarella which might seem as if it belonged with these quirky takes.

Barbarella's cult status seems to not come because it's good, but because it's bad. We might pause to ask what makes a film bad? Barbarella has a plot; and as required with action films, new threats continually appear. It keeps to the traditional screenwriting structure in that there is an inciting incident, something to begin to story. The strip in space opening titles certainly provide a hook and conform to the notion that the opening scene should set the tone of the film; it's silly, sexy and very 1960s. There's a climatic grand battle at the end and then the story resolves.

Its type does not suggest that thrilling tension, great acting or personal development arcs are expected or appropriate. Watching the trailer, it's clear that a kind of psychedelic saucy camp piece of fun was what was intended. I would add, profundity is also not expected – but yet I believe it is there.

Before discussing the profound, I'd like to spend a moment on the sexuality portrayed in Barbarella. It takes place in a warped world of no sunlight or plant life, often in cramped rooms. What makes Barbarella strange is that the sexuality is juxtaposed with innocence. She recalls Bettie Page in that mix. Barbarella might also be the transition of the 1950s girlhood into the swinging sixties woman. SoGo, the debauched planet she visits, sounds very much like Soho, the epicentre of London's sex industry at the time. Barbarella frequently shows body parts but covers the ones so freely shown in the French comic from which she is based. There is plenty of nudity – such as the bodies trapped in the labyrinth and in the city - but the sex is cut out. The scenes that most disturbed me are when innocence and terror mix with sexuality. Dolls symbolise childhood and yet these are turned into demons who eat at Barbarella, exposing more flesh - and then blood. Budgies are sweet birds, kept as pets, yet here they swarm and peck her – to the same result. It is also disturbing that the children enjoy preying on adults for pleasure - who are more innocent than they - as if child molesting is reversed. Now the most important segment of society, these children are wild, to be rounded up – with a hint of child labour ('servicable age'). It recalls the child catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, also of the 1960s, and Philip Pullman's Golden Compass. But the child catcher in Barbarella is not the villain and our sympathies not with the children, and nor is this written for children.

Barbarella's innocence and naiveté is what wins her the day. Her willingness to step into a chute that leads her into the bird torture or to allow the children to capture her - expecting the best – means she is always rescued from the various near deaths. Her resignation to rather than relish of sexual encounters hardly makes her the predatory nymphomaniac that some commentators have made her.

To Barbarella, sex opens eyes as some have suggested of the Garden of Eden. She has hers opened by a man, but then opens another's – not literally, for Pygar remains the blind angel – but his will to fly returns. A form of what the Hindus call Shakti – feminine force – helps her to better the orgasmatron machine and ruffle the hair of a revolutionary. Interesting she uses both forms of making love – the way that earth rejected and the way it is now done with pills.

Her comment – only the poor do it the old way – shows that sex is a money industry and that even that came be something which has economic ramifications. The Pill of the cartoon cleans up the messy, distracting act into a few moments hand touching. It involves charts and measurement – the psychocardiogram – and official sanction, though it does also imply compatibility and foreknowledge - none of which Barbarella's encounters involve. Barbarella's last encounter is not with a person but a machine – a hint to self sufficient sexuality. Reproduction is not mentioned and in citing why earth gave up physical love, it is about self esteem and reliable pleasure.

Academics have discussed how Grace Kelly and Kate Winslet have been action heroines, saving men. Jane Fonda is saved by men but she also saves – Pygar whom she then guides in flight, and it is her sent to rescue Durand Durand, alone, representing earth. The men – and Queen – want sexual favours but Barbarella's first thought is always to offer money from the government as a reward.

The magma under the city feeds on evil. Law of Attraction believers say that the universe feeds on our thoughts and therefore Barbarella's purity means she escapes the fate of Durand Durand because he is given over to the force of the planet while Barbarella resists it. Pygar says more than once that an angel doesn't make love; an angel is love – as if love is something you are rather than something you do. It is often asserted that the Highest Being is Love, personified. And the last line of the film (and first comic) is when for once Barbarella questions why an evil person is treated in a way they don't deserve. Pygar's reply: "An angel has no memory." The wedding speech passage of the Bible, 1 Cor 13 states that "love keeps no record of wrongs." Margaret Attwood's book on debt, Payback, says that for a debt to continue, a memory of what is owed (in the widest sense) is needed. The ultimate act of mercy is to wipe not only what is owed but the record that such obligation and shortfall ever existed.

As the three fly over the Sodom and Gomorrah like city as it destroys itself, there is also a hint of Cold War/ning, a world destroyed by greed but reclaimed by free love – the dual themes of that decade. Thus Barbarella ends on Liberty and forgiveness – and in all its dystopian silliness, the film becomes a worthy one after all.

Elspeth Rushbrook
www.myspace.com/elspethr

Movie Review Archive

For the Love of Trailers - The Documentary Edition

Louise-Afzal Faerkel on What To Look Forward To... Or Not...

8: THE MORMON PROPOSITION

To anyone who’s been following the news in the last year or so, this movie will come as no surprise. 8 (2010) deals with the Californian proposition on same-sex marriage that was voted for and accepted in the Constitution – only to be taken away from the people in less than a year. This documentary explores why this happened, and it seems to be pointing in one direction: the Mormon Church’s hatred for homosexuals.

The movie is presented in a straightforward, traditional manner: background, subject-matter, plot. It’s a very traditional structure, but it does the job. And how else should they make it? There’s nothing particularly provocative about the subject and thus just exposes itself as what it is: an investigation into the role of the Church of Latter Day Saints’ involvement in the abolition of the right to same-sex marriage.

Anyone who knows anything about the Mormon Church (anything) will not be shocked at the revelation later on in the trailer that the Church’s members allegedly forked out money to convince the Senate to go back on their decision. A shocking decision - granted, but the set-up here does not make me believe I should pay money to see this documentary. Unless you are extremely passionate about the cause.

It looks more like a BBC documentary than anything else. This is all good and well but not sellable. The trailer does not ask you to expect a lot and so why should you bother? It is essentially an open dialogue invitation, not a cry for revolution or to riot the streets. If I dare say so, 8 will probably turn out to be this year’s Michael Mooresque look-I’ve-exposed-the-bad-guys documentary.

Just like with Capitalism: A Love Story (2009), patiently wait for it to pop up on your telly. You’ll appreciate it more.


LIVING IN EMERGENCY: STORIES OF DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS

Living In Emergency (2008) follows the daily struggles of the Doctors Without Borders and their work in Africa.

The workers of the organisation do great work, but this trailer doesn’t exactly do wonders to further promote them. It doesn’t focus on a number of main characters, anyone one or two events. It is simply a mess. The traditional red line is missing from the trailer, which is a shame, and turns the trailer into a shambles.

Having said this, the more I ponder on what I just watched, the mission of this film seems to be less about structure and a beautifully made documentary; and more about delivering to the common people pictures of a reality far from their own, and expose the organisation’s work further through a medium most people enjoy in order to promote or even just celebrate their efforts.

You expect the trailer to show a lot more shocking images, but it’s all glimpses of poverty, death, guns and medical equipment. Not impressed. Except by the choice of music, which is surprisingly different. No use of strings to make you cry, no horns to represent the epic proportion of the doctors’ work or xylophone moments to represent a sense of urgency. A gloomy, creepy, dark soundtrack enhances the sad, disturbing, hopeless atmosphere represented in the film.

Other than that, I am not sure how to make sense of it. Let’s hope the film will be a success. Otherwise, let’s wait for Doctors Without Borders: The Movie (starring Josh Hartnett, Eva Mendes and Harrison Ford, directed by Steven Spielberg – any takers?).


RESTREPO

Fans of anti-war films, I salute you! Restrepo (2010), winner of this year’s Sundance Film Festival Grand Jury Prize, depicts honestly and hands-on a year in the life of American soldiers at work in Afghanistan.

Now, you may think “Oh God, another one of those”. I’m not one for lying to my readers, so yes. It’s another one of those. But it looks like a good one of those. It takes on look at how it is to be so close to an enemy you instinctively want to kill, but shouldn’t. It investigates how one is mentally unprepared for the many surprises ahead. It infiltrates itself into the lives of the soldiers and we’re lucky (?) enough to even catch a good glimpse at the Afghans, which increases our desire to watch the film itself – or at least my desire.

As one of the soldiers says, you “hope for the best”, for both the locals and the GIs. Although it basically looks like a Jarhead (2005) with unprofessional actors set in Afghanistan, it manages to entice you with its use of direct interviews entwined in the real-life footage. This may sound like a lot of unnecessary talking heads, but in fact works to its advantage, giving it a more accomplished look, not unlike the style of American news magazine 60 Minutes.

The only risk I can see so far, not having read any interviews with the crew or reviews of any kind, is that it might lack a steady storyline. The trailer presents the film as a series of action-packed shots of soldiers in battlefield, negotiating with the Afghans and the interviews. I don’t think it will be a problem for those spectators who know what they’re getting into, but it might require a lot of concentration and hard work from the average viewer.

Let’s see what happens.


AFTER THE CUP: SONS OF SAKHSIN UNITED

This misleading title hides a most likely brilliant sport documentary. After The Cup (2009) deals with the problems of Bnei Sakhsin football team – a team of Arab players in the state of Israel. Once a successful football team, they are now trying to simply survive the trouble that comes with being outcasts in a state where war and mayhem are part of daily life.

For once a sports film everyone can relate to. Tackling a subject as human as football players combined with a fight for coexistence brings it down to a level the majority of people can comprehend. Thus the filmmakers manage to bring out in the light a subject as delicate as this one without taking sides or being judgemental. Being a sports film that goes beyond the beauty of the sport itself is a breath of fresh air.

Watching the trailer filled me with exactly what I expected: a sense of optimism and hope. Subjects like this one are made to uplift and enlighten us and if they don’t do that at the trailer stage, they’ve failed.

There’s something incredibly moving about the struggle of these athletes. Not only are they pushing themselves physically to get to places most of us can only dream of, but they are dealing with being a minority in a country torn by war since God remembers when. But still, there is the belief that through sport, peace is obtainable- and is that not what sports are about anyway?
Even if this is merely a fantasy, it’s a pleasant one, and an illusion we don’t mind taking with us.

This film could prove that the bridge between Israelis and Arabs is ready to be mended.


Louise-Afzal Faerkel

Wednesday, June 9, 2010

The Frustrated Ramblings of an Aspiring Filmmaker

Aspiring screenwriter and filmmaker D.J. Haza discusses 'Original Voice'...

The lights go down. The curtain opens. Cue orchestral music score. The screen shines with glowing stars of a galaxy similar to our own. Then a deep, male voice reads the bold yellow words that scroll up the screen - ‘In a galaxy not too far away… in a time not too different from our own… there lives a young man, fuelled with ambition and determination… who’s one and only aim is to… make it in the film industry! His name… Daniel Harris. No, not the writer of Superman Returns. Nor the other 11 Daniel Harris’s on IMDB Pro. Okay, let’s call him D.J. Haza. Why? Long story. But, that’s his nickname.’

I think that would indeed be the opening scene to the film of my life so far –hopefully there are many more chapters full of success, sex and controversy still to come, but at present it’s waiting for greatness! Although it does seem a little uninspiring at present. I was born Daniel James Harris, but my friends have called me Haza since my infamous stint as a club DJ began at age sixteen. The majority of friends call me Haza still and it’s not very often I hear it called in a bar and turn around to find that someone else was being called. In my opinion it definitely stands out more than the birth name that I share with thousands of people worldwide and therefore gives me a slight edge in standing out from the masses.

Originality is very important in the film industry, and also very rare. Identifying yourself from the crowd seems vital and everyone bangs on about your own original voice and being different. The film industry is full of hundreds and thousands of people all writing the same scripts, making the same films and possessing the same qualities and skills. Every man and their dog went to film school - I graduated from the International Film School, Wales with about 100 others in my year. Everyone has made a few shorts - Behind Lock and Key, A Change of Tune and various others that will never see the light of day. Many have now set up their own production company - mine is Scratched Print Productions. However, when questioned most have never won any prizes at even the remotest film festivals, have not had any paid work, some have never even seen a film set since university and a lot quote their website as their Facebook page. To make a name for yourself you need to stand out, and a stand out name seems a good place to start. Okay, it’s not quite Seymour Butts or The Rock, but it’s better than what I started with. Daniel Harris’ are ten a penny. D.J. Haza is original.

However, a name that differs from any other doesn’t guarantee you success. So how do you get ahead? I must state at this point that I am not ahead at present, but I am doing everything within my powers to try and get ahead. These thoughts are my logical conclusions on what I can do to get ahead without having to lower myself to wearing nothing except a gimp mask, mankini and clown shoes in order at any networking event or screening. You wouldn’t forget that guy, especially if you sat next to him for lunch and he produced a wallet from somewhere!

So, what am I doing to stand out? First and foremost my ambition is to be a screenwriter. Every single writing seminar, class, lecture or How To book always bangs on about the writer’s original voice. I used to think yeah whatever, there is no original voice, film is just everyone ripping everybody else off and whoever rips the best gets the credit. Nothing seemed new. It was all “borrowed” from French New Wave or Russian Montage, and those were the films that bored the pants off me. Tarantino was a filmmaker who appeared to have his own style so I thought, but as soon as I dared voice that opinion in the halls of IFSW I was swiftly corrected by those anally retentive about their cinema that he is in no way original. They would then reel off what shots he stole from what Kung Fu B movies and smugly chuckle that he is not innovative. Those people made me want to poke them in the eye with a DVD or a sharp piece of 8mm film just for ironic cinematic effect.

Then I watched In Bruges by Martin McDonagh and something rung home. The story was so simple, yet so brilliantly done. The characters had a quirk to them and the way they interacted seemed to be uncinematic, yet brilliantly authentic. No big prophetic speeches. No flicks of their hair as they stand on the edge of the world’s tallest building or the greatest ship to ever sink. No masterminds or geniuses. No pretentious nonsense. Nothing too special. These characters were just so authentic and real, the walked as people walk, looked as people look and spoke the same as everybody else. A rarity in cinema I feel. Then I wondered why the name, McDonagh, rang a bell. I IMDB’d the film immediately and realised mastermind behind the film was indeed the writer/director of the Oscar winning short, Six Shooter. A film I had caught the final moments of one time, was totally intrigued by, but had never watched in its entirety. So I bought it, and again it was simple yet so very effective. My brain started to think. Martin McDonagh has his own original voice!

No matter how many people agree with that statement someone will always disagree. Cinema is a medium that relies heavily on the audiences’ experiences and interpretations resulting in everyone having their own individual opinions. And some people are just arses. However, I was thinking about my original voice. Not the horrific Newport twang that spills out of my mouth every time my lips separate, but the voice that results from my fingers bashing the keys of my Mac book. Am I actively trying to make my writing original? Am I writing in a style that I have picked from reading other people’s scripts, newspapers or any number of How To books on screenwriting? Can I add little changes to my writing in order to create my original voice? Am I rehashing old stories or do I have something truly original to say?

On reflection I concluded that I was not writing in the same manner as I spoke. No, not my twang! But, freely. Confidently. Me! If I were sat in my local pub festering away on a Saturday night I would not hold back on what I say or how I said it. So, why don’t I write like that? I now make a conscious effort to try and write like I talk. To use my original voice. Say exactly what I want without fear of judgement or repercussions. And, I hope my writing benefits as a result. Holding back from what I really want to say is only short changing my audiences and myself. You do not get many chances in this industry, so when you get them it better be your finest selection of words that spring from the page rather than something you were only half-heartedly pushing.

So why don’t I write like I talk? Perhaps my lack of cinematic knowledge in university and my early opinions being frowned upon had conditioned me to hold back slightly through fear of ridicule. After all, I did think Nick Love and Guy Ritchie were cinematic geniuses. A statement I have since retracted and refrain from repeating. We all live, learn, grow and then cringe whilst reminiscing I suppose.

So, what does a once chavy Newport boy like myself have to say that is original? And will people want to hear it? Hopefully. I’ve acquired a wealth of world experience for my 26 and a half years on this planet and I’ve always been good for a story. However, the ability to make your mates’ chuckle after ten pints in your local establishment is not the same as international acclaim in the film industry. So, what do I have to offer the world that no one else does? If I can’t offer something different then I’m not going to get my chance to shine! I’ve been trying to add my own humour, my own slant, my own words and way of structuring a sentence to create my own voice and I think it’s bringing my writing to life. But………. What if no one likes it? What if people think your original voice makes you sound like a tw*t? What if every film critic on the planet slates every line of dialogue that spring from the lips of your beloved and long suffering characters? They sounded great in your head though! Didn’t they?

They did, yes. I’m sure they did. No, they definitely did. If people don’t like them then it’s their problem. I’m a proud, confident screenwriter with an original voice and no one is going to tell me any different. If people are bad mouthing you at least they are talking about you. You are gaining column inches. People are hearing your name mentioned. Free advertising! I convince myself.

No matter what role within the film industry you aspire to make your career your best chance of doing so is by doing things differently to others. It may not necessarily be better, but different. Different stands out. Different gets recognised. If you talk to a producer in the same dull tone that the last ten screenwriters have as they too have approached him whilst he tries to eat his dinner in some fancy Cannes restaurant you will be dismissed. You will then join the other rejects standing open mouthed at the window berating yourself and wondering why he didn’t want to talk to you. If you are telling the same story as hundreds of other screenwriters your script is unidentifiable from the hundred others sitting on the floor of some producer’s office in Soho or LA. Be different! Not just in your writing but your methods and your personality. Don’t be shy, speak up and get involved with people, events and productions. Always remember that obnoxious isn’t different in this industry, but make yourself heard somehow. If you don’t talk to any other filmmakers how do you expect to get ahead? If you don’t talk to these people how can they hear your original voice? One saying of mine is that a writer who sits in a dark room all day staring at his laptop will soon have nothing to write about other than writer’s block.

I do my best to meet as any filmmakers as I can; admittedly I don’t attend absolutely everything as work commitments hinder my appearances, and try and make as many contacts as possible. I try to engage people into an intellectual conversation on film, but always add my own humour to the discussion and hope to make them laugh. My sense of humour tends to be memorable and I use it as often as I can. A joke can stick with people for years. And if you supplied the joke, you go with it. It doesn’t have to be a joke you created yourself, but you could have a unique way of delivering it. If you have any unique skill, trait or prop of any sort - use it! It could be the difference between falling into the endless abyss of faceless names that producers brush aside every day and that call of a job offer that begins your journey. And when they call and ask you what you have to offer…. You know to use your own original voice.

Follow my new blog at http://djhaza.blogspot.com/

D.J. Haza – Scratched Print Productions

Tuesday, June 8, 2010

Drawn to Anime: A Hayao Miyazaki Profile (Part 3)

Trevor Hogg profiles the career of Japanese animated filmmaker Hayao Miyazaki in the third of a five part feature... read part one and part two.

Hayao Miyazaki“At Studio Ghibli we currently conduct what we call “product study meetings,” where we select a scenario and all read it,” stated Japanese filmmaker Hayao Miyazaki in reference to the animation company he formed in 1985 with colleague Isao Takahata and producer Toshio Suzuki. “Anyone in the studio, regardless of job title, can participate, but they absolutely must read the scenario. Everyone can voice opinions on it at the meeting, taking into account three issues: if the scenario was made into the film, would the film be interesting, worth making, and possibly profitable?”

For the debut production of the fledgling animation studio, Hayao Miyazaki wrote in the original story proposal dated December 7, 1984 that, “If Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind [1984] is a film for older audiences then Pazu is targeted mainly at elementary school-aged children. If Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind was designed to be cool, clear, and vivid, then Pazu will aim to be a fun, intensely thrilling classic action film.” The project was rechristened, Tenkû no shiro Rapyuta (Laputa: Castle in the Sky, 1986) in honour of the “floating island in the sky, depicted in the third part of Gulliver’s Travels.” Summarizing the story which takes place around the time of steam engines, the animator stated, “A man [Muska] schemes to get hold of the levitation crystal, becomes the head of an empire in the sky, and thus lords it over the world. A girl [Sheeta], a descendent of ancient Laputa royalty, finds herself pursued by the man. And a boy [Pazu], an apprentice mechanic who dreams of becoming an inventor, becomes entangled in the struggle over the mysterious levitation crystal.”

Laputa Castle in the SkyTo research the setting of the tale, an international scouting expedition was deemed necessary. “Isao Takahata said that if we were going to set the film in the days of the Industrial Revolution, we probably should go to England. We got all exited about the idea of going to see the coal mines in Wales and the apple blossoms in Sussex along the coast south of London, and we decided to actually go.” The trip occurred while Britain was engaged in an infamous mining strike under the reign of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. “In the film there is a somewhat forced scene showing Pazu’s boss and Charles getting into a fight and involving the whole town, and I don’t think we would have included a scene like that if we hadn’t visited the area. I felt a real sense of solidarity with the mine workers!”

“I personally find airplanes cool and I love flying scenes. But despite Castle in the Sky being set in the sky, it really has few real flying scenes,” acknowledged Hayao Miyazaki who has himself a major supporter in John Lasseter, the Chief Creative Officer for Disney and Pixar. “In all of his films he gives us an incredible sense of scale,” admired Lasseter. “Castle in the Sky, especially, is a masterpiece in this way. Take another look at those flying ships. There is no question that they’re huge. And you can just tell that they weigh an enormous amount too. I mean, look at them, you can feel their weight. It’s not just perspective. It’s movement, it’s size, it’s weight.”

“I wanted to show the military as large-as-life as possible, because no matter what Pazu tried, there was no way he could ever have won against them,” said Hayao Miyazaki. “We had to draw them as solidly as possible. Even Dola and her gang could never have beaten the military head-on. Pirates don’t argue with the military, and besides, in this case our pirates only had flaptors. I don’t like the military, so I drew their nastier side.” As for the portrayal of robots in the picture, the animator observed, “Humans make machines the extension of their own hands, but at the same time we make something that will give us unlimited devotion. It’s too simplistic to consider them living beings, but I feel that we are making things that could be prototypes for living creatures.” Miyazaki added, “I think that honour and bravery are very important in the relations of people. But I’m sure that these qualities are not exclusive to human beings.”

Laputa Castle in the SkyThe anime artist wanted to break movie genre conventions when depicting the levitation crystal. “In science fiction stories, the core section of an object like this would often be depicted as something like a nuclear reactor,” explained Miyazaki. “We agreed that wouldn’t be very interesting, though, and eventually wound up with the design seen in the film. Then we began discussing the idea of having a levitation crystal with tubes running out of it, but that seemed weird too. So we wound up with tree roots wrapping themselves around the crystal.” Another major story element had to be addressed. “Right around the time we were trying to come up with a good ending, and we were afraid that if Laputa flew off into the sky that children watching the film would be afraid that the little animals like the foxes and squirrels would all die. So that settled how we decided to end the story the way we did. We told ourselves it was okay because the story is set in an age before people went into space in the Apollo program, so nobody really knew what the view would be like from what is in effect an artificial satellite.”

Laputa: Castle in the Sky served as significant influence on the 1998 sophomore effort by Pixar Animation Studios. “In A Bug’s Life,” began John Lasseter, “the character Flick assembles all the bugs together in an attempt to save a little ant named Dot. For reference, we sat down and studied the rescue sequence in Castle in the Sky very carefully. We didn’t copy it, but we tried to pick the scene apart to identify why it worked so well. I know what’s going to happen. Of course, she [Sheeta] gets rescued. I know that. But every time I see it, I get the chills. It inspired us.” Admired by film critics the movie established Studio Ghibli’s international reputation though the modest box office returns meant that the company had yet to achieve financial independence when developing future projects.

My Neighbour TotoroHaving trouble to secure financing for the movie deemed to be childish and lacking in conflict, a compromise was reached when Studio Ghibli agreed to also adapt the semi-autobiographical Naoki Prize-winning Hotaru no haka (Grave of the Fireflies,1988) by Japanese novelist Akiyuki Nosaka. In the project plan dated December 1, 1986, Hayao Miyazaki wrote, “My Neighbour Totoro aims to be a happy and heartwarming film, a film that lets the audience go home with pleasant, glad feelings. Lovers will feel each other to be more precious, parents will fondly recall their childhoods, and children will start exploring the thickets behind shrines and climbing trees to find a totoro.”

Explaining the storyline, the animator stated, “Satsuki, a third grader, and Mei, five years old, move to the outskirts of town. They are awaiting their mother’s release from the hospital in a house where the air is clean. Kanta, a boy from the neigbouring farmer’s house, tries to frighten Satsuki by claiming that the house is haunted. And he is right. While playing in the yard, Mei is surprised to find a pair of strange creatures about her height, walking in front of her. Goblins… Mei follows them.” Nicknamed by Mei, totoros are mysterious beings that can live for a thousand years and grow over two meters tall; the creatures as described by Miyazaki are “covered in fluffy fur, they look like giant owls or badgers or bears. You can say they are goblins, but they don’t frighten people as they live an easygoing, carefree manner. They inhabit caves and hollows of old trees in the forest and cannot be seen by humans. But for some reason they are spied by the young sisters Satsuki and Mei.”

“I didn’t have a close relationship with my mother like Satsuki,” revealed Hayo Mizayaki. “I was overly self-conscious, and my mother was that way too. When I went to see her in the hospital, I couldn’t rush to hug her. It’s natural for Satsuki to feel a bit shy and not go directly to her mother’s side. Then what would Satsuki’s mother do? She might brush Satsuki’s hair or something. That’s one way she could show physical affection. That is what gives Satsuki support.” Regarding the scene in which Mei disappears and her older sister goes looking for her, the moment was derived from an actual event. “Once we went to a festival and my little brother didn’t make it home with the rest of us; fearing that he had been taken by someone, we all split up to search for him…I still recall how I felt when I thought we might not find him…It’s episodes like this that make up this film. There’s no need for a plot. I wish I could have made a ninety-minute film. If I could have, I would have expanded the section on Satasuki and Mei’s everyday lives.”

My Neighbour TotoroIn a 1987 director’s memo outlining the characters in the picture, Satsuki Kusakabe is described as being “a girl bursting with vitality” and “in a family whose mother is absent, she is filling the role of homemaker.” The document goes on to add, “In contrast with Satsuki, who is reliable and quick-witted, Mei is a single-minded, persevering child…Mei is a bold happy girl, without any dark shadows in her personality.” John Lasseter observed, “One of the basic elements in defining the personality of an animated character is to show the same action performed by two separate characters.” For Lasseter, the film executes the fundamental principle brilliantly. “There’s one scene in Totoro when Mei and her older sister Satsuki are exploring their new house. Satsuki is running around and opening random doors. Then Mei comes in and does the same thing, but does it like a young child. This scene tells the audience that Mei is the younger of the two girls.”

John Lasseter uses the 1988 picture as an instructional tool when lecturing animators. “One of the greatest scenes in all of Miyazaki-san’s films is the one when the cat bus first appears in Totoro,” said Lasseter. “It’s just pure cinematic magic. To me, what makes it so special is the pacing of it. It’s something you don’t normally see in a film. The bus arrives at the bus stop, but the father is not on it. The kids then have to wait in the rain. You feel the waiting and it’s not tedious. It’s beautiful. Mei is getting sleepy, and believe me, being a father, I know how kids get bored and sleepy. So Satsuki puts her on her back under the umbrella and the waiting continues. And then Totoro arrives and it’s just so special. By the time the cat bus arrives...I couldn’t believe what I was looking at.”

“The only time I saw the film at a movie theatre was for the test screening,” confessed Hayao Miyazaki. “There were a few young children there, and when they were happy the adults near them became happy. That kind of emotion is contagious.” The anime artist proudly stated, “I was delighted to hear that when the film was shown at a kindergarten, the children hid under their chairs when they saw Mei go into Totoro’s cave. For children, what is scary and eerie is mixed with what is cute and fun.” Often compared to E.T.: The Extraterrestrial (1982), My Neighbour Totoro became a merchandising phenomenon in Japan, making the title character the de facto mascot for Studio Ghibli.

Questioned on why camphor trees frequently appear in his movies, the Tokyo-native answered, “When I’m making a film starring a young boy, I think of many things that I have felt or imagined,” explained Miyazaki. “But I actually remember very few things from my own childhood, so instead I tend to remember scenes of children I have seen as an adult. I think of my own children, the neighbours’ children, my relatives’ children. As a result, my films often depict what I would have felt if I had been a boy at that time. Giant camphor trees, for example, are something that I began fantasizing about when I was more than thirty years old and developing a strong interest in the natural world.”

Kikis Delivery ServiceInitially, Hayao Miyazaki was only going to produce a cinematic adaptation of an acclaimed book but he came to realize that the most appropriate director was himself. “Eiko Kakuno’s Majo no takkyûbin [Witch’s Special Express Delivery or Kiki’s Delivery Service, 1989], published by Fukuinkan Shoten, is a wonderful work of children’s literature,” said Miyazaki, “one that sensitively depicts the spirit and hopes of contemporary girls, especially those straddling the line between dependence and independence.” The moviemaker added, “The starting point was wanting to film the story of a girl in adolescence. Moreover, she would be one of the ordinary girls who come to Tokyo from the countryside. I wanted to depict the situations faced by such girls in our current society.”

“Kiki, the thirteen-year old protagonist of this story, is a witch with only one particular strength: her ability to fly through the air,” remarked Hayao Miyazaki. “ In her world, witches are not unusual at all. The real challenge Kiki faces is that, as part of her training, she must live for a year in an unfamiliar town and get its inhabitants to recognize her as a full-fledge witch.” The main character is not left entirely alone as she attempts to successfully complete her assignment. “Kiki is protected by her mother’s cherished broom, cheered by the transistor radio her father bought her, and always accompanied by her faithful black cat, but she is nonetheless seized by loneliness and homesickness. There is a similarity here with young women who dream of the bright lights of the big city and hope to make it there on their own, while still depending on the emotional [and often economic] support of their loving parents. Kiki’s naïve resolve and lack of awareness thus reflects the state of our world today.”

Kikis Delivery ServiceUnlike the book where “Kiki overcame obstacles through the strength of her own goodness”, the film sought a more realistic approach by having her experience “even more loneliness and frustration.” Hayao Miyazaki believes that, “What’s most important for Kiki is not that her business succeed – though of course that is no doubt important – it is how she herself can become acquainted with many different people. While she rides on her broom accompanied by her cat and flies around the sky, she is free. That’s because she’s at a distance from people. But to live in town, in other words, to train for a profession, requires her to confront herself in an honest way.” To make the persona of Kiki three-dimensional, Miyazaki followed a simple human truth that no one treats everyone in the same way. “The hallmark of this film is the expression of the many faces of a person. In the presence of her parents, Kiki is childish, but on her own she thinks things over with a serious expression. She may speak roughly and bluntly to a boy her own age, but to her seniors, especially to people important to her, she acts politely.” One thing the animator wanted to avoid was a tidy conclusion to the picture. “I didn’t want it to have a happy ending with her business becoming a success or her becoming the town’s sweetheart. I wanted to give her the sense that she will repeatedly become dejected and then regain her cheery vitality…I was careful from the start to avoid making it a career success story.”

“For us, the continuity sketches are the screenplay,” admitted Hayao Miyazaki. “With continuity sketches, you have the drawings in the frames and next to each frame a description of the content in the frame, with stage directions on the left side and dialogue on the right. When you look at the page, therefore, you can get a pretty good idea of what’s going on, so it’s what the animators use to base their drawings on. For Whisper of the Heart [Mimi wo sumaseba, 1995], we had planned on a ninety-minute film, so we wound up with nearly 450 pages of continuity sketches. With Kiki’s Delivery Service, it was about 550 pages. For Castle in the Sky, it was around 650 pages. This is frankly a huge amount of work. There’s no way in the world that I could possibly have the time to write the original story, turn it into a script, and then draw all the continuity sketches. So we find ourselves in the ridiculous situation of trying to simultaneously create the story, the scenario and the continuity sketches, and then, when the film is actually finished, we actually do have a story and a screenplay.”

Porco RossoWhat was originally intended to be a forty-five minute in-flight program for Japan Airlines grew into a ninety minutes feature film. In an April 18, 1991 directorial memo, Miyazaki wrote, “Kurenai no buta [The Crimson Pig or Porco Rosso, 1992] is designed to be a work that businessmen, exhausted from international flights, can enjoy even if their minds are dulled by the lack of oxygen. It must also be a work that boys and girls, as well as aunties can enjoy.” Captain Marco Pagot, otherwise known as Porco Rosso, is an adventure seeking-aviator who lives on an island retreat; with the aid of his bright red plane he attempts to clear the air of pirates. Addressing how the cast of the picture should be portrayed, the anime artist stated in the memo, “All the main characters – including Porco, Fio, Donald Curtis, Piccolo, the hotel madam, the members of the Mamma Aiuto gang, and the various other air pirates – must have a seasoned realism about them. They engage in foolish antics because they also must endure hardships, and the simplemindedness they exhibit is the result of their lifestyles. We must treat every character respectfully.”

“The staff members who worked on Porco Rosso had to burn the midnight oil all the time, and some didn’t even get to rest on Sunday,” said Hayao Miyazaki. “There are a lot of reasons for this, of course, and it’s an area where I need to make improvements, but I personally enjoy it when I become so absorbed in something that I completely forget about myself.” Acknowledging the strenuous conditions that he and his employees endure, the animator declared, “Working hard for a corporation and working hard for the sake of one’s own profession are totally different things in my view.” The work place attitude found at Studio Ghibli is mirrored in the picture. “I think that the whole film really reflected the fact that to me, passion and effort are what working is all about. In the film, there’s a scene where Grandpa Piccolo says, ‘Please forgive us, oh lord, for we are guilty of employing women’s hands to build this fighter plane,' and then he laughs out loud, adding with joyful expression, ‘Well, then, let’s load up on the grub so we can work like bees!’ That’s it to me. I think there’s a universal excitement that people experience when working.” Thinking about his comment, Miyazaki confided, “I never want to lose the excitement I experience when I’m working. When I do, I think it’ll be all over for me.”

Venturing into the realm of music videos, Hayao Miyazaki created a seven-minute science fiction-fantasy for the Japanese pop duo Chage and Aska called On Your Mark (1995). “The title is from the phrase ‘on your mark, get set, go!’ but I have purposely distorted the meaning of the phrase in making this movie,” revealed the anime artist. “I made it a story set after the end of the century. It’s set in a world where radiation proliferates and sickness spreads. I think this time will actually come. I made this film when I was wondering what it would mean to live in a place like that.”

Featuring gunfights, chase sequences, cruel experiments, and moments of quiet reflection, the story centres around two renegade policeman who risk their lives as they attempt to save a winged girl in a futuristic city. Asked about the strange countryside building which appears in the opening, Miyazaki responded, “You can interpret it anyway you want. I just hope people will have some general recognition when they see the truck with the nuclear hazard sign that comes up just after that scene. Radiation has permeated the ground, making it impossible for humans to live there. But it is surrounded by greenery, like the area around Chernobyl. It has transformed into a nature sanctuary. The human beings have built a city underground where they live. In reality, I don’t think we could live that way, so we’d probably be living above ground and getting sick.” Not one to succumb to a nihilistic view, the animator stated, “Even in a chaotic, ruined world there will always be good and exciting things. As in Nausicaä, ‘We are like birds, forever going beyond that morning, spitting out blood as we fly.’”

Starting Point Hayao MiyazakiAn indication of his growing international reputation, Hayao Miyazaki published in 1996 a collection of essays, interviews, and conversations titled Shuppatsuten 1979 to 1996 (Starting Point: 1979 to 1996). In the same year, a merger with its parent company Tokuma Shoten resulted in a new chapter commencing for Studio Ghibli; a distribution deal was signed with Disney to dub and release the animation company’s films in the U.S.. The first picture to benefit from the landmark agreement was a retelling of the classic fairy tale Beauty and the Beast.

Continue to part four.

Starting Point 1979 to 1996 - a collection of essays and sketches by Hayao Miyazaki.

For more, visit
Studio Ghibli fansites Online Ghibli, StudioGhibli.net and GhibliWorld.com, along with the GhibliWiki.

Short Film Showcase - On Your Mark (1995)

Trevor Hogg is a freelance video editor and writer who currently resides in Canada.

UK Box Office - weekend commencing 04/06/10

UK box office top ten and analysis for the weekend of Friday 4th - Sunday 6th June 2010.

Despite a heavy drop in takings of 60% from its debut last weekend chick flick Sex and the City 2 remains firmly in control of the UK box office and leads an unchanged top three along with StreetDance 3D and Prince of Persia.

In taking top spot SATC2
adds another £2.5m to push its two-week gross to £13.6m, which means it's currently outperforming its 2008 predecessor - although there's still a considerable way to go yet before the critical disaster surpasses the £26.5m haul of the original. However, midweek takings are strong and with females looking to escape the beautiful game over the coming weeks that feat does remain a possibility.

With the studios holding back on their big summer blockbusters in the wake of the World Cup the leading new release this week is ensemble comedy piece Death at a Funeral, with the American remake of the 2007 Brit comedy taking fourth place with £696,280. Noel Clarke's latest Brit thriller 4.3.2.1 has to settle for seventh with just a third of the opening of his 2008 hit Adulthood, while rom-com She's Out of My League manages a miserable £400k despite showing on more screens than its fellow new releases.

Filling out the remaining spots in the chart are Robin Hood and Tooth Fairy - both down one place from last week - along with sequels Iron Man 2 (which crosses the £20m mark after six weeks on screens) and Space Chimps 2 3D, tumbling three apiece to ninth and tenth respectively.

Number one this time last year: Terminator Salvation
















































































Pos.FilmWeekend GrossWeekTotal UK Gross
1Sex and the City 2
£2,473,0432£13,652,052
2StreetDance 3D£1,144,2393





















































£8,964,747
3Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time£821,6613































































£6,362,459
4Death at a Funeral£696,2801































































£696,280
5Robin Hood£647,1954











































































£13,532,135
6Tooth Fairy£538,3662£2,440,474
74.3.2.1£433,2181

























































£433,218
8She's Out of My League
£400,5541















































































£400,554
9Iron Man 2£226,3146









































































£20,686,508
10Space Chimps 2 3D£220,9892













































































£1,257,130


Incoming...

The studios continue to hold back their big releases with just three new films to choose from as the action gets underway in South Africa...

First up is romantic drama Letters to Juliet (cert. PG) which opens on Wednesday, while on Friday moviegoers can look forward to historical supernatural thriller Black Death (cert. 15) from Brit director Christopher Smith (Creep, Severance), along with comedy drama Greenberg (cert. 15).

U.K. Box Office Archive