Showing posts with label Alex Garland. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alex Garland. Show all posts

Tuesday, 13 March 2018

Annihilation
Dir: Alex Garland
2018
****
Annihilation is a lot of things. First and foremost it is a great piece of sci-fi, but it has also kicked off a debate – two debates in fact -  that have been simmering for some time. It was always intended that Annihilation – an adaption of the first book of Jeff VanderMeer’s Southern Reach Trilogy – be released in cinemas. However, Paramount struck up a deal with Netflix and the film ended up having its premiere on the small screen. It all started after a test screening was received poorly at Paramount. David Ellison, a financier at the studio, stated that he thought the film was ‘too intellectual’ and ‘too complicated’ and demanded changes to be made so it would appeal to a wider audience. The big thing he wanted to change was the ending. However, director Alex Garland and producer Scott Rudin both refused and fought Ellison all the way. Thanks to a shift in Paramount’s leadership and the ongoing clashes between Rudin and Ellison, the studio decided to release it quickly and made a deal with Netflix. Garland expressed his disappointment by saying: "We made the film for cinema. I've got no problem with the small screen at all. The best genre piece I've seen in a long time was The Handmaid’s Tale, so I think there's incredible potential within that context, but if you're doing that – you make it for that medium and you think of it in those terms. Look... it is what it is. The film is getting a theatrical release in the States, which I'm really pleased about. One of the big pluses of Netflix is that it goes out to a lot of people and you don't have that strange opening weekend thing where you're wondering if anyone is going to turn up and then if they don't, it vanishes from cinema screens in two weeks. So it's got pluses and minuses, but from my point of view and the collective of the people who made it – it was made to be seen on a big screen.” I really feel for Garland because he has been wronged. I have issues with the streaming of new films – I love the cinema experience and I don’t want to see any more beautiful picture houses shut down and turned into Bingo Halls. However, like Garland says, it is a great way for more people to see a film. This is a debate that will continue for some time but if there is one thing that Annihilation will prove, it is that studios get it very wrong and it isn’t just ‘not quite good enough for the big screen’ films that make it to television. Annihilation deserved a big screen outing. It has some glorious cinematic scenes and amazing sound that justify a 90 x 30 foot screen, 2.35:1 aspect ratio and a 118dB sound system. Paramount panicked and sold it at discount – more fool them. The thing is, Paramount panicked for one reason and one reason only – they think you and I are stupid. Good sci-fi is supposed to be challenging, I get that big film studios are a business and need to make money but at the end of the day, financial experts should not make creative decisions. It’s why so many big chain restaurants are closing down everywhere, head office are writing menus instead of the chiefs. Annihilation is ambiguous at times but it is the audience’s interpretation that make it what it is. It is the sort of film that will split audiences down the middle, indeed, the sort of film people would have to see for themselves after hearing all the hype. Paramount probably did themselves out of more money then they realise, but seriously, it makes me want to avoid their films from now on, now I know they think so little of me and my intellect (or lack of). If audiences have dumbed down, it is only the fault of the big studios themselves, and actually, if that is the case then I’d rather the creatives stream the good films to my home, if it means they save money and don’t have to bother with the big studios then all the better. The ones really missing out are the cinemas – all of which will close unless they branch out into the home cinema market and pop corn delivery. I like the comfort of my own home but I will be heartbroken if the cinemas go. The thing is, I only really go to the cinema to watch big-screen-worthy pictures. Annihilation is the most worthy big-screen picture I’ve seen for a long time. It is criminal that it was only shown on the small screen for most people. As I watched, I felt genuinely gutted that the amazing stuff I was seeing was clearly smaller than was intended. The begins mysteriously and reveals itself like a slowly peeled onion. The first part of the film felt familiar, I wasn’t immediately drawn into it but it slowly grew on me. I did like the subtle rationale of sending an all-female team into the shimmer, it is one for the girls but without being forced. The turning point for me was the discovery of what has got to be the most colourful horror scenes ever conceived. I wasn’t convinced by monster number one but I won’t forget monster number two in a hurry. The wonderful thing about this peculiar horror though is that it isn’t really a horror. The audience paints the horror into the story, the events are basically reflections of nature, which can be both beautiful and horrific. The climax of the film is something quite profound, again, I’m gutted I didn’t see this on the big screen. The story and imagery may seem familiar and might have elements in common with other films (Andrei Tarkovsky’s Stalker springing to mind) but the climax is totally original, quite spectacular and also rather profound. It’s Natalie Portman’s best film since Jackie and her chemistry with Oscar Isaac is both electric and disjointed enough to keep the audience alert and intrigued. It was great to see Tessa Thompson again and in a totally different role since she was last seen stealing scenes in Thor: Ragnarok but the real success in the casting was Jennifer Jason Leigh as Dr. Ventress. Garland’s direction is perfect, if you like his other work then you won’t be disappointed. I think the cinematography could and should have been as strong in the early segment of the film as it was at the end and I do wish the score had been as strong as the sound effects but other than that I thought Annihilation was bordering on 2001: A Space Odyssey epicness. I wish it was longer, that they’d taken more time over it and that the introduction was a little punchier. Other than that, it’s one of the best sci-fi films I’ve seen in ages, original, compelling and it has left me wanting more.

Monday, 2 November 2015

Ex Machina
Dir: Alex Garland
2015
*****
Ex Machina is the most intelligent sci-fi film made in quite some time. Following Neill Blomkamp's woefully underrated CHAPPiE,it's 2015's second big movie that deals with the idea of artificial intelligence. Both films are the complete opposite to one another but both work well as companion pieces. While CHAPPiE deals with whether society could ever accept artificial intelligence, Ex Machina explores the decisions that A.I. would likely make, what their behaviour would realistically be like and just how human they would be and/or seem. The film explores what the possible outcomes could be should a Turning test (a test that finds whether A.I. exhibit intelligent behaviour equivalent to or indistinguishable from that of a human) be performed. It's a little like a modern retelling of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein in many respects, although the ethical question is different. It questions the notion of artificial intelligence too, suggesting that not all humans are intelligent, which is of course true. So would A.I. be intelligent or animalistic, would they have instinct and if so, what would it be and if A.I. has to pass as human, surely this includes all the negative traits that come with it!? The experiments are set in a high-tech facility but the film isn't as clinical as you'd expect from the genre. This and the fact that this A.I. is created by a C.E.O. of the world's leading search engine, a genius programmer, rather than a science guy or government lab dude, is quite refreshing. It's like if Mark Zuckerberg created A.I., a terrifying thought, especially when you realise that this A.I. was created illegally based on the patterns of the world's internet search history. It's clever stuff. It's certainly more of a noir-thriller than what you'd expect from a sci-fi/sci-fi horror. The special effects are minimal but superb when used. It's astonishing really when you realise it's basically a three person show within the confines of a few rooms. The conclusion is as troubling as all good sci-fi should be, as whether or not it is a happy or sad ending is completely subjective depending on how you look at things. It's a future classic, I have no doubt.