Showing posts with label scare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label scare. Show all posts

Thursday, August 13, 2009

Things learned during the Melbourne International Film Festival

1. Spending about 1000% more time than usual watching movies really shakes things up, let me tell you. I ran out of food, I grew out my hair, I changed my brand of anti-perspirant. Heck of a fortnight all over.


2. If you see a film which has an awesome twist in it, but the only reason the twist works is because you aren't even slightly expecting it, you're in a pickle: how can you convince people to go see this film without hinting at the twist's existence? If you describe the film's premise and people just say "aw, that doesn't sound that interesting, can you lend me five bucks?" – how do you convince them that the story isn't as dull and obvious as it sounds, without making them think that there might be something unusual and twisty about it? Ah, it's a pickle...

Moral: if I say a film is great but I can't convincingly explain why, you should go see it anyhow.

3. Subtitles (in English) for actors speaking in thick accents (in English): insulting to the (English-speaking) audience, an overreaction, or just incredibly distracting? Okay, okay, in the end I guess it wasn't as distracting as it might have been, and I'm sure those audience members unfamiliar with the Yorkshire patois were appreciative, but holy cats! Subtitles Were Annoying.
Films were pretty fine, though.


4. Australian Horror Films. I've been seeing a lot of them lately, I should really do a whole post on the topic. But instead I'll just shut up and tell you this: you should see Lake Mungo. The only modern Australian horror film that might rival it for quality would be Wolf Creek, but that's a really inappropriate comparison – the two films could hardly be more different. Lake Mungo is a ghost story (which is rare), and it's a horror that goes for deep chills rather than shock-jolt scares (which is even rarer). I saw it in a dead silent, almost-deserted cinema: the perfect viewing environment for non-jokey horror. It's excellent.

Lake Mungo did not play in the 2009 Melbourne International Film Festival. It has had only a limited cinematic release in Australia, and that within this last month or so, but it was picked up for an American remake nine months ago. Somebody needs a bigger marketing budget, okay.

5. Latauro is surprisingly recognisable. The guy is everywhere.

6. Is Korean cinema in some kind of a golden age for creepy, off-kilter films this past decade, or what? Park Chan-Wook has been doing absolutely brilliant stuff for a while, but I was really doubtful that anyone could do anything worthwhile or new with vampires, anymore. I was totally wrong. I also thought that while The Host was a great monster film, it was probably a one-off; I didn't imagine that it had been made by any especially brilliant filmmakers. Again, I was wrong.

Anyhow, the films "Thirst" and "Mother": I recommend them.

7. Nazi Zombies. Exactly what you were expecting, but in a very satisfying way.



That's a lot of points related to horror films, isn't it? I did see a bunch of artsy intellectual movies, too. In other words:

Oh, Catherine Breillat, you crazy kidder! Good one.


So, hey, Michael Haneke, are you extremely clever? In all seriousness, I honestly can't tell. I think so? Probably? I think so. But I'm going to have to think about it some more. And this is not a bad thing. I think.
(I'm not being sarcastic, here, btw...)



And that's not everything I saw, but it's enough to be bothered writing about, I think.
--the Cinematic Thoapsl

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Rage Roundup @ 28 March '09

Bit of a quiet Rage this past week, and I've been busy and away from home (and hence late with this post), but here we are anyhow. Music videos of some description, described somewhat:


I anticipated this one in my last post, so I didn't want to leave it out, but now I find I've nothing much to say. I'm not sure if there's anything too substantial here? But I think I'm still looking forward to the new album? Hmm. Judgment: deferred.


With the cats & flannel, it's almost like they're ripping off Ladyhawke's aesthetic. Or is that just a bit of cultural synergy? Very '00s, either way.

There are a lot of interesting elements here. The video and the music both employ a kind of '80s-referentialism that seems to evade nostalgia, in some strange way. It reminds me of Freaks and Geeks, maybe: there are notes toward a sort of 1980s underground antipop, cues to things that weren't actually emblematic or memorable or even distinctively 1980s at all in the first place. But there's something there. And for all the '80s-like synths & drums, I guess the music also evades any obvious emotional cues: it's not nostalgic, but it's also not explicitly sad or sexy or romantic or funny. It's alluding to another kind of mental state, something more subtle: "so what, so what? so fine, so fine / so what, so what? be mine, be mine." (I love the way the chorus does that – the vocal delivery is superbly appropriate, on the edge of laconic but not. It's a great fit for the lyrics.)

So what, so what? I'm paying attention and I'm thinking about it. I like it. It's good.


Good stuff. There's nothing really new or awesome about this, but there's something wonderfully bloody-minded & punk about the vocal delivery that I really like. The singer has a great baritone drawl: he sounds like he could croon in perfect key if he really wanted, but instead he's being expressive and twisted for the sake of the lyrics. Especially with the distortion over the chorus, it works really well.

The music is solid, raw but not too raw; some of the guitar parts are actually almost funky or dance-like, but the whole arrangement feels resolutely underground and dark blue. If their songs are varied and compelling enough over a whole album, these guys could be really interesting.


I really didn't like this group's breakout hit, Young Folks – it felt horrible to me, like the musical equivalent of something I'd forgotten to do but can't do, as if something's wrong but I can't get away from it, a feeling subtle but utterly nightmarish in the most terribly actual way. But if not the mournful whistling, maybe that was just the Concretes guest vocal? I found her vocal melody quite off-putting, for some reason...

Anyhow. PB&J have clearly become something very different since 2006. (Apparently no guest vocalists, for one thing.) Here, from their new album, a tuneful hook that's not annoying at all: it's great. The interlocking rhythms of melody-vs-bass-vs-percussion are excellent. And the way the song choruses around what sounds like an unusually tuneful schoolkid chant? There's something incredibly fun & punchy about the whole thing. I like this a lot, and if it isn't a big hit I'll be surprised.

The video is pretty neat, too – a bunch of Tokyo rockabillys with awesome hair and awesome dance moves hanging around Yoyogi-koen (looks like, I think). So yeah, this is yet another video set in / fetishising / exoticising / possibly-making-fun-of-in-a-mildly-patronising-racism-lite-kind-of-way Tokyo, but it's still entertaining enough that I want to assume its heart is in the right place. I hope. See what you think.


Is anyone else just annoyed when a sample-based song doesn't exactly sample, it actually rips off an entire other song wholesale (and yet, it's not a cover version)? And it's not like this is sampling from something obscure here, this is that Cure song that everybody knows because it's been consistently all over the place, for years. So that at every moment, I'm so distracted by annoyed recognition that I don't even want to evaluate the song on its own merits. Come on, Lady! Compared to what you've done here, Ice Ice Baby owes nothing to Under Pressure.

Actually, okay, let's say I can be bothered evaluating: it's not that interesting, and it's not that good.
(Sorry, Lady. I reckon you can do better than this.)


The Woman Next Door — The Midnight Dailies
Where "The Midnight Dailies" are Gareth Hudson & Matt Aubrey, a duo so new they're apparently without a unique myspace (although songs are up on Hudson's site, at least) and they're also too slack to post the video on youtube. Poor effort, fellows! And that's a real shame, because this is decent stuff.

The standout here is the aggressive acoustic guitar. It's a playing style that's used very rarely, for some reason (maybe "aggressive" players usually just go electric, instead?), but I really like it here. The music delivers some nicely interesting & uncommon textures, overall; there's some lovely cello with a great rhythmic bite. Also, this is one of those incredibly rare songs that incorporates a didgeridoo without being astoundingly awful. It takes some real craft to make acoustic guitar, vocals, cello & didgeridoo – and, what else? was that an occasional castanet, or something? – sound as punchy and as interesting and as together as this. Clearly, more musical talent is at play than usual. Here's hoping they can get organised enough to do something substantial. (And, um, actually post their videos somewhere on the web, for a start.)


This time was this time, so next time is now next time. Thanks!
Until next time –

--the Musical Thoapsl