Author Archives: Jonathan Brown

HOLLYWOOD – IS IT STILL THE CENTRE OF THE FILM MAKING WORLD?

Posted on by

oscar winners 2013Following the success at the Oscars of both Argo, a big pat on the back of Hollywood, and Life of
Pi, an ‘international’ film with no recognisable big name star, Jonathan Brown looks at whether Hollywood is still the centre of the film Universe.

‘Domestic’

Hollywood is Cinema, right? After all, despite every country having its own awards ceremony, the
Oscars are still seen as the pinnacle of the film making world – at least to the studio marketing men.

Even though film wasn’t created in the US, it’s where it became what it is today. If fact, some of the
big original Hollywood studio are still around today, and, despite flagging profits, are as influential as ever. To be classified a big blockbuster, you need to take over $300m ‘domestic’ , ie in the USA.

Even if you flopped abroad, a good take at home could be enough to make a success. Even in Britain,
films like Skyfall are sold as the ‘Number 1 USA Box Office Hit’, even if they only spent one weekend at the top and just broke even.

The American box office was, and still is, the judge of commercial success, in the way the Oscars
were the mark of critical success (there’s an argument that the Oscars are way of the pulse of new
and exciting cinema, but that’s a different article).

But the tide is turning. America, as a country, is suffering more than most in the economic downturn,
and, while Hollywood continues to spend more and more on their blockbusters (the recent Twilight
movie cost £120m!), the people spending the most of their hard earned wages going to see these
blockbusters is moving.

‘Overseas’

While America still is the biggest single market for movies, and is far ahead of its closest rivals,
the ‘Overseas’ market is becoming a bigger cash cow.

Let’s have a look at the numbers. The usual ratio for a movie is around 40% of its takings from the
US and 60% from overseas – roughly. Ten years ago, in 2002, just four of the top ten highest grossing
movies took more than 60% of their box office from overseas, with two films (Signs and My Big Fat
Greek Wedding), taking less than half.

In fact, My Big Fat Greek Wedding took 76% of its taking from the US. And I’m assuming the other
24% from Greece.

Skip forward ten years, to 2012, and seven films took over 60% from overseas with Ice Age 4 taking
82% from overseas. Compare this to the first Ice Age move, which took only 54% from ‘foreign’ box
office and the swing becomes hugely noticeable, and important.

It’s the same if you compare 2011 and 2001. In 2001, there were just two films making over 60% of
its box office from foreign markets, while in 2011 there were nine films.

In 2009, box-office behemoth Avatar took 72% of £2.7bn from overseas. Ten years earlier, The
Phantom Menace, the new Star Wars movie the world had been waiting for, took just 54% from said
world.

If we go even further back, to the days of ET and the original Star Wars, the take is even slimmer,
with overseas counting for just 45% and 40% respectively.

Some of the shift can be accounted for by long term word of mouth, or even self-fulfilling prophecy.
Many of the big sequels, especially animations, have made huge amounts overseas, while their
domestic take, while still massive, hasn’t grow as fast.

When a film has been classed as a hit in the US, companies are a lot happier pushing the sequels
overseas. Also, while many overseas viewers might not have caught the original at the cinema, the
may have bought the DVD, seen it on TV, or downloaded it.

However, you don’t need to be a hit in the US to be a hit abroad. A textbook example of how foreign
markets can make a film a success is the recently released, and hugely divisive, Cloud Atlas. Directed
by the Wachowskis and Tom Twyker, the film has been classed a huge flop. On a budget reported to
be around $100m, it opened to just $9m in the USA.

As the US is so opening weekend focus (film takings tend to drop off by around 40-60% per
weekend), the chances of it making its budget back in America were pretty slim. It went on to earn
just £27m in total – domestic.

However, the film, set across various countries with a cast from across the world, has made a very
decent $80m overseas – so far. The $80m take does not include the UK, France, Japan and Australia.
This could easily add another £10-20m to its take.

Some of this change, especially from the 70’s/80’s, is the arrival across the world of the multiplex
cinema – meaning more films, more showings, and more attendees in the foreign markets. Factory
cinema, if you will.

However, this doesn’t account for the change in the past ten years. These changes are partly due to
two main factors – one is the new middle classes in the emerging markets like India, China and South
America, where people are starting to get some Rupees, Pesos or Yuen in their pockets, and having
the free time to spend it.

Secondly, is the move in America away from cinema to home viewing. Companies like NetFlix are
drawing people away from the multiplex and into the living room, despite desperate Hollywood’s
attempt to keep them with the introduction of the ultimate cinema experience – 3D.

This has seen cash intake increase slightly, due to higher ticket prices for 3D films, but attendances
are still dropping.

And why wouldn’t they, when you’ve had vast improvements and reduction of costs of home cinema
systems, or just a decent TV, and the reduction in time it takes for a film to go from the cinema to
online. People are realising they’d rather wait a couple of months and watch it on their home 3D
system, instead of paying $20 for a cinema ticket.

The Future

So, what does this mean for the future of blockbusters? I can see two possible outcomes.

The Hollywood studios could start to tailor their films more for foreign markets, using casts,
locations and directors from across the globe.

While Hollywood is keen on using foreign actors, they always tend to be the bad guy – maybe we’ll
see a few more leading actors from across the globe in mainstream Hollywood movies.

Or, more cynically, it could mean that distributors start to buy up more screen space in foreign
cinemas, pushing out locally made films.

However, on the evidence, especially in the foreign markets with an established film industry, this is
not the case. In 2009, four of China’s top ten grossing films where from China. China does however
limit the number of foreign movies able to be released a year.

In India in the same year, seven where from India (and one of the other ones was Slumdog
Millionaire).

So, maybe there is a balance to be struck. Maybe Hollywood can start to look outwards, taking
influence from a world of cinema, while still pumping in the big bucks to bring the big spectacle.

BUNAKEN – WHERE WATER IS AIR by JONATHAN BROWN

Posted on by

In Bunaken, water is air – literally and metaphorically. Literally, as the word for water in Indonesian is
Air. Metaphorically, because this is one of the world’s greatest diving sites. They live and breath water.
It is their life – their food source, play ground, and office. In the warm waters in this protected Marine
Park, there are more species of fish than in the entire Caribbean sea.

So, what was I doing there? I’m scared of deep water.

The sea deep. Very deep. Teenage-Emo-kid deep. You know how high mountains are? Well, the sea is
deeper. When people say they are scared of heights, that’s fine, understandable. You could trip and fall
after all. But deep water – that’s kid’s stuff. You grow out of it like you grow out of socialism. You realise
that Jaws was just a film.

But let me paint you a picture. Imagine you’re on, say, the edge of a tall building – the world’s tallest.
Like Tom Cruise in Mission: Impossible. Perched precariously, the wind and sense of vertigo let you know
that you’re high. You can see the edge of the building dropping straight down.

Now imagine that 30metres below are clouds. And the clouds are all around you. A 30m zone where
you can see. Add to this picture flocks of birds, flying around. But they’re not scared of you – they come
close, explore, nibble. Then, you see something else, just in the clouds – flying snakes, flying spiders,
and, maybe, why not, an 18ft flying tiger. All swirling around you, above your head, almost out of view –
ominous shadows. Everywhere. For miles around you. Species in the sky that have yet to be discovered.
Aliens, essentially.

This is how I feel about deep water. Floating in space surrounded by nothing – emptiness filled with
dangerous animals.

So why then am I on a plane heading to this small island? Because my girlfriend suggested it? Yes, a bit.
To overcome my fears? Maybe. Because I haven’t really thought this through? More than likely.

Snorkeling

To warm up we decide that some light snorkeling would be a good idea. How this is different from diving
I do not know. I was, literally, in deep water. Some of my fears are allayed by the dive masters. Bunaken,
he boldly claims, is perfect for snorkeling. The reef, and thus fish, is just five metres below the surface.
And visibility is remarkably high. Perfect.

So, after two hours hunting for dolphins (two spotted though I’m informed there are hundreds of them
around the islands), we picked a spot and readied ourselves for some serious snorkeling action.

Now, another reasons that Bunaken is so good for diving and snorkeling is that, although the reef is
shallow and close to the coast, it has a ‘wall’. Not a barrier stopping me being swept out to sea as I
hoped but a sheer drop to, in some parts, 1,500metres. This is the kind of drop Wile E Coyote would

hover over comically for a few seconds,feet still running, before dropping to his death (what,he survives
– but how?)

I’m told that the currents of cold water from the deep, and warm water on the surface, are perfect for
fishes. We cautiously (well, I was cautious, the rest of the boat were excited – and a bit disappointed
by the lack of dolphins) approached our drop off point. I looked down over the edge of the boat. It was
dark – the kind that swallows you up.

The boat slowed to one engine -still we hovered over the dark abyss. I turned back to the boat – brave
face only skin deep. This was it – there was no going back. Not in a boat full of people who’d brought
their own snorkeling gear. So, I turned back to see my final resting place, and there it was – a Huge
Shark! Not really- it was the reef, just there below the surface.

It looked mere feet away -touching distance and in sparkling HD. I could see everything and, combined
with the unbearable heat in the boat, this stunning view seemed to draw me in. My legs were over the
edge of the boat and I was getting prepared to leap in. I’d be first in as well. Well, maybe but not quite.
My bravado failed me for a moment allowing my girlfriend to overtake me and jump in. But I followed
soon after.

And, moments later my head was below the surface. It was like swimming with an aquarium strapped to
my face. Every colour, shape, size and species of fish was there. But snorkeling was just a small step. The
Frito Misto starter to my Tuna Steak main.

The Dive

Organizsd by the Bunaken Beach Resort , I was to go on a Discovering Scuba dive, which teaches you the
basics (clearing your mask, how to go up and down, a few hand signals), and has a dive master drag you
around the reefs. There was no secret tricks on how to beat a shark in hand to fin combat but, after my
snorkeling success, I felt confident.

But, this wasn’t snorkeling. I wouldn’t be floating happily on the surface, boat in sight. We were going
over the top, off the cliff and into the abyss.

The funny thing is, it didn’t scare me and I can’t explain why (sorry for anyone looking for answers).
Just as I found it hard to explain why I was (and still am) scared of deep water (see rambling opening
paragraphs), it’s just as hard to explain why I didn’t panic. Even stranger is that, if I think about deep
chasms of water now, I’ll still get that tightness and panic in my chest. I think it’s like a big old house in
the middle of nowhere. When you imagine it dark, creaky and full of ghosts it’s scary. But when you see
it during the day, you can’t remember why you were scared.

And so, I was able to enjoy my first ever dive. More than enjoy, I feel Bunaken has spoiled me for future
dives, as it was one of the most beautiful sights that not only I, but they aforementioned experienced
divers, had seen. Thousands of fish seemed to fall from above like multi-coloured snowflakes. Huge sea
turtles floated along without a care for my awe and, fortunately not seen by me, a white tipped reef
shark did not suddenly turn and devour the divers, but ignored than, probably realising that we weren’t
worth the hastle.

But it wasn’t just fish – there were coral, anemones, sea slugs, sea cucumbers, sea scorpions, lion fish,
parrot fish (people need to come up with some better ways of naming aquatic life forms other than
the ‘land animal plus sea/fish technique). The Marine Park has around seven times more genera of coral
than Hawaii, and has more than 70% of all the known fish species of the Indo-Western Pacific. That’s a
lot of fish.

Bunaken opened a whole new world for me, and while I’ve not been back diving yet (for reasons of cost
and the fact the snorkeling in Bunaken is as good as diving), I can now go into any trendy East London
pub and join in with chats about ‘diving with sea turtles off the coast of Indonesia.’ I’m now one of those
people. And for that, I apologise.

By JONATHAN BROWN

Shame Review

Posted on by

When talking about a film like Shame, I guess you have to address the controversy head on. This film has a lot of sex in it. And so it should. It’s a film about sex addicts – how else would you film it. To have the sex off screen would go against main intention of this film – to bring this addiction to the public. To stop it from being seen as shameful.

And so the film does. While the sex scenes are many and explicit, they are undercut by a sadness, which stops them ever feeling sexy or exploitative.

The film centre on Michael Fassebender’s sex addict, Brandon, who gets a surprise visit from his sister, Sissy (Carey Mulligan). Something has happened to the both of them in the past (there are suggestions of incest) that has sent them down very different, but equal damaged, paths.

Carey’s Sissy is also suffering, but she’s ‘regular crazy’ – crying on the phone to her boyfriend, self harming, needy, unreliable. She’s the kind of person who comes seeking help, because she has socially acceptable issues. And so she turns to big brother Brandon, hoping he’ll help, because, from the outside he seems like a dependable sort of guy. He’s well dressed, successful, charming and very likeable.

However, this is only the surface. Beneath lies someone in need of help as much as his sister. Yet, while his addiction is just as harmful to his life, almost costing him his job, damaging his relationships with women, and getting him a good beating, he cannot seek help because sex addiction is not something people can comfortably talk about.

In fact, I’m sure there’s many of you reading this now saying, ‘So what, he like’s sex – who doesn’t?’ But what Fassebender’s excellent portrayal shows is that he doesn’t like sex. He enjoys himself while in the act, but as soon as he’s finished, he’s thinking about the next, bigger, more exciting hit.

Shame is not necessarily a film many will want to watch again. It’s not harrowing in the way many drug dramas are, or hard hitting, but it is undeniably sad. Not miserable, more melancholy. It’s almost like Brandon agrees with the public – that his problem shouldn’t be an issue. That he should just deal with it.

But instead, he just hides it. While his boss cheats on his wife, sleeps with Brandon’s sister, and is in general a bit of a sleaze bag, Brandon, to all intents and purposes, is a good guy.

This is the beauty of Fassbender’s performance. You believe the switch from nice guy on a date, to tortured addict during a threesome. But it’s no Jekyll and Hyde. These aren’t too sides to a personality, they are one man. Everything he does in his life is based around sex. Every look on the tube, every time he gets home to his flat, every toilet break at work.

While the subject matter might not be to everyone’s taste, this film should be seen. In a genius piece of marketing, the poster for Shame is a mirror. For we all have our secrets – and this film shows that we need to confront those demons, or have them take us over.

Midnight in Paris – Review

Posted on by

It’s hard to go into a film fresh, viewing it as a single work, as opposed to comparing it to similar films or previous films from the creator. Especially when it comes to Woody Allen.

 

He is a writer/director who has had, in many critics’ eyes, a very specific golden age. There’s been many calls of a ‘return to form’, but these are often followed up by huge flops.

 

Sweet and Lowdown was followed by Small Time Crooks, Match Point by Scoop and Casandra’s Dream, Vicky Cristina Barcelona by Whatever Works.

 

Everyone wants to see him hit his heights again, and so are constantly comparing his recent output to early greats like Annie Hall and Manhattan. However, this is unfair to Allen, and it’s a point he makes well in his most recent ‘return to form’.

 

While many could see Midnight in Paris as a love letter to a bygone era, it can also been seen as a dig at critics who are always looking for something greater in the past.

 

After all, it’s about a screenwriter who has been successful in the Hollywood system but who is trying to break out in writing something real, a true work of art, his great American novel.

 

Allen has been doing this his whole career – yet he’s been trapped by mainstream success. Even in Annie Hall, Alfie suffered a similar problem.

 

Like the critics who endlessly long for the days of Hannah and her Sisters, Owen Wilson’s Gil longs for Paris in the 1920’s. And, through one of the most simple time travel devices ever, he manages to find it.

 

Hemingway, the Fitzgerald’s, Dali, Picasso and many more all happen to be holidays in Paris and Gil takes a tour of his dream world with the greatest hosts he could imagine. However, it’s when he meets Marion Cotillard’s ‘art groupy’ that things start to get real for him.

 

Not only does she highlight the problems he’s facing with his soon-to-be wife in the real world, she, too, also longs for a different era, declaring Paris in the 20’s to be boring.

 

As a movie, it’s the most fun Allen has been in a while. While not really touching upon some of the bigger issues Allen has handled in the past, it doesn’t matter as its so funny, charming, and beautifully shot.

REVIEW: THE DEEP BLUE SEA

Posted on by
Tom Hiddleston and Rachal Weisz

 

Director: Terence Davies
Starring: Rachel Weisz, Tom Hiddleston and Simon Russell Beale
Running Time: 93mins

DEEP BLUE SINKS ON THE BIG SCREEN

There’s an exchange at the start of Terence Davies’ adaptation of Terence Rattigan’s stage play where unfaithful Rachel Weisz says to her cuckolded husband, ‘It’s a tragedy’. To which stage super-star Simon Russell Beale replies, ‘No, that’s such a big word. It’s just sad.”

And this is the film’s main problem – it’s not a tragedy, it’s just a bit sad.

The story of a young pretty wife who cheats on her Judge husband with a young pretty pilot, only to have him be a bit of a bastard might have been relevant and boundary pushing in the 1950’s but now it feels prudish, small and out of touch.

While it does have moments or genuine intimacy and insights into relationships that would not be out of place in a modern drama, it’s when the film’s stage roots show that it suffers.

Stage actors are allowed to be bold and brassy, vocalising their emotions to the back rows, but apply that to cinema and it feels melodramatic. Where things should be told with glances, looks and clenched jaws, they are often told with screaming speeches.

There are, however, a handful of stand-out beautiful moments in Deep Blue Sea. An uptight Tom Hiddleston trying to hold his anger at bay in a lively pub, a joke in an art gallery that’s taken in wrong way or a muted exchange in the back of a car – however, these scenes all are ruined by the inevitable burst of anger and melodrama.

You feel that maybe Davies was a bit in awe of the material. After all, not only was this one of Britain’s best-loved playwrights’ best-loved plays, but it’s also being released in the year of Rattigan’s 100th birthday. Maybe Davies felt a major reimagining, or reboot as its called these days, of the play would have been sacrilege.

Which is a shame, as with three such excellent lead actors, this would have made a great stage play.

First Supper Review – Theatre

Posted on by

The Expeditionary Force presents The First Supper @ The Etcetera Theatre, Camden as part of the Camden Fringe Festival.

Sketch shows, especially ones on the fringe, are often filled with either gurning comedians constantly winking knowingly at the audience or a bunch of students throwing catchphrases and ‘wacky’ characters against the wall in the hope that one of them sticks and they’ll become the next Fast Show or Little Britain.

The First Supper by The Expeditionary Force fortunately avoids both stereotypes by assuming something rare in comedy – that its audience is as intelligent as they are. However, even if the audience was as clever as Mike Shephard, Jack Baldwin and Luke Sutherland, they’re probably not as verbose.

This sketch show happily wallows in obscure historical references, literary puns and fast talking absurdity. And, fortunately, it’s well written enough that you don’t need to know, for example, that the people who lived in the ancient Greek city of Byzantium did not refer to themselves as Byzantium to get the joke.

The gags and sketches are not your typical set up, catchphrase, punchline. First Supper often has no distinct ‘gag’ but instead, finds humour in the situation and performances. When Baldwin’s Anubis, the jackal–headed god, is introduced to the parents of his new girlfriend, it is his stoney-faced delivery of lines like: “I held her bloody heart in my hand and judged her,” that get the laughs.

The quality of the sketches does rely heavily on the performances of the three actors. Shephard brings huge energy and verve, while Baldwin, often playing the group’s straight man, offers beautiful comedy timing. Sutherland, however, often feels misused. He has an innocence that fits perfectly in some sketches, but when called upon to provide energy, they feel a bit flat.

And this highlights one of the main problems, not with the show, but with fringe show audiences. If the energy is not in the room, comedy like this suffers. It works on the premise that, even if the audience doesn’t get every reference, the energy will carry them along. If the energy falls, so does the comedy.

But these are minor quibbles. The First Supper is brilliantly written, laugh out loud funny and intelligent comedy.

However, this means that no one will probably ever see it past the sell-out audiences at the Camden Fringe. It’s too clever for mainstream audiences and too absurd for the Radio 4 crowds. But we can hope that this does break out from the fringe and into the mainstream.