The Founder Volume 5 Issue 4

More documents

Recommendations

Info

18 The Founder | Thursday 4 November 2010 E X T R A Film Review: The Social Network At the age of sixteen, a young man named Hugh Hefner was rejected after pursuing a crush. That young man “made up for it” by starting Playboy Magazine, a crucial component of the sexual revolution of the 60s that ultimately changed the face of gender and sexuality in the western world forever, with both admirable and tragic consequences. All because one young man wanted a lover. In 2003, a young man named Mark Zuckerberg was also rejected; this led to the creation of the social networking site we now know as Facebook. A wonderful website that enables people from Nathaniel Horne **** all over the world to form connections with each other, many would argue that Facebook has led to the formation of important relationships, an advanced development of the human brain and even several deaths. All because one young man wanted a friend. The Social Network tells the parallel story of how Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg) established the website, along with the drama of how his friends and fellow students sued him for stealing their idea. At first glance this story doesn’t sound all that compelling but thanks to the brilliant script by Aaron Sorkin, The Social Network becomes what is by far the most compelling film of the year. Sorkin writes Zuckerberg’s story as a kind of epic tragedy, emphasising the themes of friendship, betrayal and power. The film has a lot of snappy, funny and genuinely clever dialogue that always complements both the story and the characters. Whilst Sorkin probably deserves most of the credit, director David Fincher (Fight Club, Se7en) does a fantastic job too. He presents the halls of Harvard University as a delightfully dark catalyst to the hopes and ambitions of the students. Aside from one self-indulgent set piece at the Henley Royal Regatta, Fincher appears to sit back and allow the actors and their dialogue to create the drama. The actors themselves are all revelations in this film. Jesse Eisenberg should certainly shake off that ‘Michael Cera 2’ tag after his work here. He manages to nail all of Zuckerberg’s mannerisms while still managing to create a nuanced and very moving character. As cocky Napster creator Sean Parker, Justin Timberlake gives the kind of spot-on turn that will probably enable him to move further into establishing himself as an actor, and Armie Hammer is most amusing playing both the Winklevoss twins, who claim that Facebook was their idea. The best performance comes from Andrew Garfield as Zuckerberg’s best friend (and later worst enemy) Eduardo. Garfield has been a regular in the industry for a few years now but his bravura performance here singles him out as a real acting talent and one to watch for the future (he is replacing Tobey Maguire for the next Spiderman movie due for release in 2012). The film starts with the rejection scene, after which Zuckerberg goes back to his room to create ‘facemash.com’, a website that collects photos of girls from the University and enables the males to vote for which one is hotter. Such silliness has caused the film to come under criticism for being sexist, and whilst it is true that none of the female characters in this movie are well developed, it all seems relevant to the ideas the film wants to communicate. The Social Network illustrates how the bitterness within these men has helped lead them to the billionaire status they have today. Sean Parker raises Zuckerberg as a kind of apprentice, reminding him over a drink (with Victoria’s Secret models at his side) that they aren’t to be treated like kids anymore, because it’s these kids that are running the world we live in from behind their laptops. The Social Network is the kind of film you should see not only because it is ‘relevant’, but because it is a well crafted piece of cinema all round. It has already generated $85 million for its producers, produced performances from which its stars can build glittering careers, and even caused me to consider deleting my own profile. The Social Network will surely become known as the definitive film of the Internet Generation and just may go on to be known as the classic movie of this age. You can bet it will receive some Oscar attention come January too. All because one young man wanted a friend... Review: RED Hannah Riekemann My friends will regularly attest that I am an annoying person to watch a film with. Scratch that. I am probably the most annoying person to watch anything with because I suffer from a horrible tendency to fidget after only a few moments, and when I say fidget, I do mean the full works. It means that I can only get the most hardcore film fans (and some very good friends) to watch a film with me. On this occasion, I had to resort to some heavy bribery to get my sister and father to tag along to the latest Hollywood offering and put up with a couple hours of my moving and shifting about. As per the usual formulaic Hollywood smorgasbord, we have the boy (or in this case, very older man) meets girl, he happens to be an ex former Black ops CIA agent, she works in a call centre, he has a hit squad after him, she tags along (he does kidnap her to be fair), they get the old gang together and lead the fight against the bad guys. Throw in a few big smooches, several big booms and a lot of guns and you have the plot of RED (or Retired: Extremely Dangerous). *** Bruce Willis must have it written into his contract that in every film he is in, he has to be the one to get the girl. In this case Mary Louise Parker, which is a cute coupling but in a very odd and somewhat uncomfortable sense. It seems to be less about the relationship and more about Brucie proving that he is still a testosterone-laden macho man. Add to the mix for the final hurrah, Morgan Freeman as the team’s analyst, Helen Mirren as an ex MI6 agent, John Malkovich as the acid head, alongside Brian Cox and Karl Urban, and you have an actor for every single member of the audience. There is a camaraderie between them that just hints at the level of fun they had making the film. And yet...I don’t know. Don’t get me wrong. They are intensely gripping and insanely good actors, from their quick one liners to the tension in their relationships; maybe they’re just having too much fun came at the cost of development of their characters. Even Helen Mirren acting all sophisticated wielding a sniper rifle lacks the je ne sais quoi. Robert Schwenke is a good director and understands the individual characteristics of each of the actors but maybe lets them get away with being themselves for too long, and it ends up feeling like a bit of a lost opportunity. The cast seems to be the string holding this film together and the big flashy bangs and gun battles are too frequent and monotonous to be of interest. There are moments of side-splitting humour, but however good the comedy, the sheer amount of running about (funny in itself given the amount of geriatrics on board) does mean that locations are blitzed through at a rather alarming rate. In fact, the only reason the audience does know where the action is taking place is through visual clues and the place names appearing in rather large letters. RED should have focused more on the comedy than trying to be something it isn’t. Regardless of these flaws, however, what shines through in the film’s apparent ethos that life doesn’t end at 50. Sure, it isn’t a particularly intelligent sort of film, but it is incredibly enjoyable. My father was thrilled that he could potentially be one of the ‘gerries’ running around and being James Bond. You do feel that this is almost a film for the older generation, especially those males going through the midlife crisis. Yet in spite of this, I enjoyed myself. And strangely enough, I didn’t fidget at all.
The Founder | Thursday 4 November 2010 E X T R A 19 Film Review: Easy A Every few years there is a new adolescent generation experiencing its own journey through cinema. The current female adolescents, groomed in their tween years by Hannah Montana, are now besotted with Robert Patterson in that sparkly-vampire-saga-thing or that speccy goody two shoes wizard. But with each generational change comes a defining teen comedy: Fast Times at Ridgemount High; Clueless; 10 Things I hate About You. Easy A attempts to fill this quota, and doesn’t do too bad a job of it. Much like Tina Fey’s Mean Girls, Easy A strives to be the teen comedy with a difference. And like the aforementioned bitch-fest it triumphs through its sharp writing and characterisation. There isn’t such a cartoonish feel to the characters here. The teen hallmarks are there, but they are more humanised or merely referenced to in passing: the obligatory gaybest-friend is more or less a plot device, the adults present are flawed and unbelievable, even the main protagonist is neither ‘the new girl’ nor popular or unpopular, more a quiet yet confident girl not taken in by the broad strokes of the classroom ‘jock or geek’ politics. A cute little nod to the John Hughes school of teen drama doesn’t prove it as particularly different or self aware, but rather places it amongst those very same thoughtful 80s teen dramas, and will hopefully turn its target audience on to discover the aforementioned Hughesian gems. Unfortunately, the film is so conscious of being a self-reflective teen movie that it never quite accepts its true place as a well-balanced and sweet personal drama about the contradictory affair of sex and growing up. The honest and identifiable story is tf Features Sam Gridley *** ultimately carried by the charming performance of its central actress. Ultimately, this is the Emma Stone show, but for all the right reasons. She is given free reign to exploit all the qualities she has under her belt: funny, likeable, attractive and yet smart. She also holds great versatility, showing that, unlike a male equivalent like Michael Cera, Stone could be perfectly comfortable in a straight drama. A one trick pony she is not. This is surely partly owed to the current ‘Apatow’ age of American comedy, with a meld of Farrelly Brothers and Woody Allen that allows for intelligence and hilarity to come hand in hand, and Stone is an exemplary alumnus of this philosophy. Stone is also surrounded by an impressive supporting cast. Patricia Clarkson and Stanley Tucci are the immensely funny and endearing parents, a change to the usual ‘kind, yet blissfully unaware’ parents of other teen-com fare. Thomas Haden Church, as nuanced as ever, plays the cool and grounded teacher. However, Amanda Bynes, although adequate, is let down by the nature of her character: an über Jesuslover with a dedication to teen abstinence, the kind of character we’ve all seen before. Subsequently, the film cannot decide whether the fundamentalist Christian teens are a comment on the concerning growth of right wing evangelism in young Americans or simply an easy target for jokes. Easy A hits all the teen-com notes while still remaining fresh. If only it would realise it had higher aspirations that it could quite easily have reached. It won’t prove much for a post-cinema pint discussion, but it will leave you salivating for more Emma Stone performances. Seen a film so bad that it makes you want to eat your own face recently? Before you swallow, contact our film editor at: film@thefounder.co.uk Review: Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole Alexander Hyde *** You can’t beat a good epic fantasy adventure, with a plucky young hero, amusing sidekicks, inspiring mentors and chilling villains - especially if they’re all talking animals. And especially if they’re voiced by a light selection of acting elite. Legend of the Guardians fits this formula to the last detail, but unfortunately I suspect it wouldn’t take a lot to be beaten. An epic fantasy adventure set in a (suspiciously Antipodean) kingdom of owls and their anthropomorphic brethren, the film plays all the usual cards in the hope of a hit, producing a mediocre effort at best. Plucky owlet Soren (voiced by Jim Sturgess) is catapulted onto a daring crusade when he and his brother are snatched from their home and taken to what essentially is a brainwashing labour camp run by what amount to Nazi owls. While his less-than-likable brother is indoctrinated into the bizarre cult, Soren is inspired to seek out the Guardians of Ga’Hoole and thus rescue all his friends. Along the way he gathers a raggedy bunch of misfits and learns how to master all the skills necessary to finally face his wayward bro. It’s a paintby-numbers plot, with even more factory-made characters, but it’s not all entirely bad eggs. We’re flying on dark skies here, with some scenes bordering on the genuinely disturbing. Herein we find one of the film’s problems: who exactly is it aimed at? It’s not stimulating enough for adult audiences but a little too scary for younger viewers. The result is more than a little confusing. There is some compensation, however. Every frame is resplendent in glorious animation; each feather remains distinct on our flying heroes as they soar through a variety of fantastical landscapes, from rocky canyons to writhing waves. The only thing preventing it from being entirely breathtaking is the fact it’s all been seen before. Vocal talent is top notch though, with the likes of Geoffrey Rush, Sam Neill and Miriam Margoyles pulling out compelling ‘eeks’ and ‘aahs’. Kudos to the studio for predominantly casting a host of Australian talent – it made a refreshing change to the usual line-up of voice-over stars. Having said that, if you want to cast a good villain make them a Brit, and Helen Mirren certainly carries the imperial baton well as the steely queen of the ‘Pure Ones’. There seemed real potential for moving performances, though any hope of achieving it was scuppered by the fact we were watching a drama about a bunch of owls. This brings up the second big problem with the film. Based on a series of books it may be, but beyond this there seems to be no genuine, concrete reason the protagonists should be owls and not flying humans, or any other species for that matter. Orwell proved that anthropomorphism can tell a powerful story that resonates in our reality as strong as it does in the fiction and since then several films have proved this to be true at various levels. Fox and the Hound is as stirring a tale of friendship as there is; Disney’s version of Robin Hood removes the menace of the Prince of Thieves by transposing the action to a charming world of foxes, bears and rabbits. Every time there is a definite reason. Here though the allegory is thin and in a situation where the owls wear armour, fight with swords and even record their own history, it seems to me something wholly more satisfactory could have been achieved by simply making them human beings. It’s very difficult to dislike anything particular about the film and overall it’s an inoffensive exercise that, a few plot holes aside, is fairly enjoyable but never once truly excites. It’s visually pleasing but it doesn’t stun. It’s emotional but it doesn’t stir. It’s entertaining but it doesn’t change your world. That being said, with half a dozen more entries in the book series there is plenty of material for a sequel and if enough money is made I’m sure we’ll be seeing the guardians fly again sometime soon. Let’s just hope that this time they iron out the creases and then maybe the result will be something that properly captures the imagination.
Page 1 and 2: The Social Network reviewed on page
Page 3 and 4: The Founder | Thursday 4 November 2
Page 7 and 8: tfComment & Debate Solidarity is th
Page 11 and 12: E X T R A
Page 17: The Founder | Thursday 4 November 2
Page 22 and 23: “eNovella has a genuine sense of
Page 24 and 25: 24 The Founder | Thursday 4 Novembe
Page 32: SUNDAY 7th NOV FORMER ROYAL HOLLOWA

The Founder Volume 5 Issue 4

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?